Summary Introduction into criminological theory
Ch2 Classical criminology
the classical theorists Beccaria
- Criminals owe a debt to society
- Punishment in proportion to the punishment
- Capital punishment unnecessary; we have deterrence
which is important
- Social contract important: individuals bound to society
with their consent
- Free will and hedonism: all human life has purpose
- Hedonistic utilitarian: pursuit of pleasure
- Law not open to interpretation
- Punishment must outweigh the pleasure achieved by
violating the law
- Law shouldn’t regulate morality but control acts harmful
to society to keep as much pleasure in society as possible
- Torture is only useful in a minority of cases
Beirne
- Rather a determined will over a complete free will
- Free choice is related to achieve the desire or need
- Free rational calculation in addition to determined action
Bentham and the Panopticon
- Bentham designed a prison to operationalize his ideas
Panopticon
- Constant surveillance would be good
- Work 16 hours a day with the profit going to the prison
- Close to city to be a reminder to all that imprisonment
would be consequences of crime
- Concerned with crime prevention instead of punishment
Foucault and Ignatieff
- Prison is a concept and a physical institution
- Used to rationalize and discipline human activity
Limitations of - Classicism in declarations of rights of man and French
classicism penal code after French Revolution
- Classical theorists ignored difference between individuals:
all people were considered equal rational creatures
- Punishment should fit crime, not criminal
- Later on the strict system was more open to look at
context and sentences became variable per case
Neo-classical Rossi, Garraud, Joly
compromise - Revised doctrine of free will
- Rational actor still responsible for their actions although
kids and elderly were less capable of exercising free choice
less responsible
- Insane ppl even less responsible
- Sentences more individualized, dependent on degree of
, responsibility
- Punishment has different effects of different people
- Rehab became more important
- Although retained central rational choice actor model of
free will, but some cases can stand out and differ from
average
Central attributes of classical and neo-classical schools in rational
actor model:
- Focus on criminal law and legal definition of crime. Legal
definitions are social construct and change over time
- Punishment should fit crime, not criminal. Ignores
differences between people
- Follow doctrine of free will and hedonistic utilitarian
philosophy that everyone seeks to optimize pleasure and
avoid pain. Criminal is not different from normal person.
Ignores the fact that people are different biologically,
psychologically and have different social circumstances
- Armchair methodology based on imaginary illustrations
instead of empirical research administrative and legal
criminology. This does not explain criminal behaviour but
only the law and punishment
Enduring influence of - We still use terms like conscious intent and choice. Mens
classicism rea
- Still use progression in penalties according to seriousness
of the offence
Four basic principles in sentencing
1. Only guilty person can be punished
2. Anyone guilty must be punished
3. Punishment must be given according to the offence and
culpability of the offender
4. Punishment can’t be less than degree in line with the
gravity of the offence and culpability of the offender
- This relates to classicist ideas
- Emphasis on free will and rationality, and proportionality
and equality + focus on offence not offender, in
accordance with pleasure-pain principle + equal
punishment for same crime
Packer
- CJS founded on balance between competing value
systems of due process and crime control
- Ideal: rule of law where state seeks out and punishes the
guilty and proves guilt of the accused + presumption of
innocence until proven guilty
1. Due process model: enforces rules governing powers
of police, admissibility and utility of evidence. OK with
power of the state but protect suspect and
defendant
, 2. Strict due process system: some guilty go free
unpunished. This is better than wrongful conviction of
innocent. Too much power of the state is bad. High
acquittal rates may look as if state fails
3. Crime control model: prioritize efficiency. Almost
presumption of guilt. Wrongful conviction is side-
effect of correctly convicting higher amount of
offenders. Interest of victim and society over the
accused
Policy implications of - Classicist sees criminal behaviour as a choice just like legal
classicism behaviour
- Policy-makers try to use institutions to influence ppl not to
choose criminality
- Classical school: there are constants of value in pain and
gain that influence to offend of not to offend
- They believed in professional and effective policing
Ch4 Contemporary rational actor theories
Main points 1. At the core of contemporary deterrence theories are
principles of certainty, severity and celerity of
punishment, proportionality, specific and general
deterrence.
2. ‘General deterrence’: the punishment of offenders is
example to the general population who will be frightened
into non-participation in criminality.
3. ‘Specific deterrence’: the apprehended and punished
offender will refrain from recidivism because they realize
that they will be caught and severely punished.
4. Imposing deterrent sentences on individuals who have
little or no control over their impulses are morally
indefensible.
5. The high recidivism rate further challenges the usefulness
of contemporary deterrence theories.
6. Earlier and less sophisticated variants of rational choice
theory compared the decision-making process of
offenders with straightforward economic choice.
7. Early variants of rational choice theory considered
offender motivation to be irrelevant, although later
variations propose that offenders choose to act in a
certain way because these actions appear to them rational
in the circumstances in which they find themselves.
8. Routine activities theory proposes that for a personal or
property crime to occur there must be at the same time
and place a perpetrator, a victim and/or an object of
property.
9. The offence can be prevented if the potential victim or
another person is present who
, can take action to deter it.
10. Ordinary people, ourselves, friends, family or even
strangers are the most likely capable
guardians.
Contemporary 4 principles at bottom of contemporary deterrence
deterrence theories 1. Certainty
2. Severity and speed of punishment
3. Proportionality
4. Specific and general deterrence
- When punishment is fast, it is proposed that ppl will think
there is more to be lost than to be gained from criminality
- The more severe punishment, the less likely to be applied
- The less certain the punishment, the more severe
punishment needed to deter crime
General deterrence
- Let people be afraid of participating in criminal behaviour
by deterring criminals
- Fitting policy: let ppl know that negative behaviour will be
punished
- Goal: reduce probability of deviance
- Control-activities: activities that aim to reduce or prevent
further crime
Specific deterrence
- Let offender know he shouldn’t repeat offending by
making them realize they will be caught and punished
- Focus: punish known deviants to keep them from
repeated offending
- Concern: intentions of offending may never become
known
Econometric version of rational choice theory
- Every execution deterred seven or eight other murders in
USA
- Other research found no effect of death penalty on
murder rate
- Abolition of death penalty was found to have no effect on
murder rate
Proponents of rational actor model
- Likelihood of detection is more important in choice of
acting than level of possible punishment
- Crime numbers heavily influenced by what definition and
criteria certain crimes are calculated
- If different levels of punishment are needed to deter
potential offenders, this will vary between people, crimes
and circumstances which may lead to a basic punishment
which may be way too high for a certain act which is
categorized under a particular crime may even be
counter productive
Ch2 Classical criminology
the classical theorists Beccaria
- Criminals owe a debt to society
- Punishment in proportion to the punishment
- Capital punishment unnecessary; we have deterrence
which is important
- Social contract important: individuals bound to society
with their consent
- Free will and hedonism: all human life has purpose
- Hedonistic utilitarian: pursuit of pleasure
- Law not open to interpretation
- Punishment must outweigh the pleasure achieved by
violating the law
- Law shouldn’t regulate morality but control acts harmful
to society to keep as much pleasure in society as possible
- Torture is only useful in a minority of cases
Beirne
- Rather a determined will over a complete free will
- Free choice is related to achieve the desire or need
- Free rational calculation in addition to determined action
Bentham and the Panopticon
- Bentham designed a prison to operationalize his ideas
Panopticon
- Constant surveillance would be good
- Work 16 hours a day with the profit going to the prison
- Close to city to be a reminder to all that imprisonment
would be consequences of crime
- Concerned with crime prevention instead of punishment
Foucault and Ignatieff
- Prison is a concept and a physical institution
- Used to rationalize and discipline human activity
Limitations of - Classicism in declarations of rights of man and French
classicism penal code after French Revolution
- Classical theorists ignored difference between individuals:
all people were considered equal rational creatures
- Punishment should fit crime, not criminal
- Later on the strict system was more open to look at
context and sentences became variable per case
Neo-classical Rossi, Garraud, Joly
compromise - Revised doctrine of free will
- Rational actor still responsible for their actions although
kids and elderly were less capable of exercising free choice
less responsible
- Insane ppl even less responsible
- Sentences more individualized, dependent on degree of
, responsibility
- Punishment has different effects of different people
- Rehab became more important
- Although retained central rational choice actor model of
free will, but some cases can stand out and differ from
average
Central attributes of classical and neo-classical schools in rational
actor model:
- Focus on criminal law and legal definition of crime. Legal
definitions are social construct and change over time
- Punishment should fit crime, not criminal. Ignores
differences between people
- Follow doctrine of free will and hedonistic utilitarian
philosophy that everyone seeks to optimize pleasure and
avoid pain. Criminal is not different from normal person.
Ignores the fact that people are different biologically,
psychologically and have different social circumstances
- Armchair methodology based on imaginary illustrations
instead of empirical research administrative and legal
criminology. This does not explain criminal behaviour but
only the law and punishment
Enduring influence of - We still use terms like conscious intent and choice. Mens
classicism rea
- Still use progression in penalties according to seriousness
of the offence
Four basic principles in sentencing
1. Only guilty person can be punished
2. Anyone guilty must be punished
3. Punishment must be given according to the offence and
culpability of the offender
4. Punishment can’t be less than degree in line with the
gravity of the offence and culpability of the offender
- This relates to classicist ideas
- Emphasis on free will and rationality, and proportionality
and equality + focus on offence not offender, in
accordance with pleasure-pain principle + equal
punishment for same crime
Packer
- CJS founded on balance between competing value
systems of due process and crime control
- Ideal: rule of law where state seeks out and punishes the
guilty and proves guilt of the accused + presumption of
innocence until proven guilty
1. Due process model: enforces rules governing powers
of police, admissibility and utility of evidence. OK with
power of the state but protect suspect and
defendant
, 2. Strict due process system: some guilty go free
unpunished. This is better than wrongful conviction of
innocent. Too much power of the state is bad. High
acquittal rates may look as if state fails
3. Crime control model: prioritize efficiency. Almost
presumption of guilt. Wrongful conviction is side-
effect of correctly convicting higher amount of
offenders. Interest of victim and society over the
accused
Policy implications of - Classicist sees criminal behaviour as a choice just like legal
classicism behaviour
- Policy-makers try to use institutions to influence ppl not to
choose criminality
- Classical school: there are constants of value in pain and
gain that influence to offend of not to offend
- They believed in professional and effective policing
Ch4 Contemporary rational actor theories
Main points 1. At the core of contemporary deterrence theories are
principles of certainty, severity and celerity of
punishment, proportionality, specific and general
deterrence.
2. ‘General deterrence’: the punishment of offenders is
example to the general population who will be frightened
into non-participation in criminality.
3. ‘Specific deterrence’: the apprehended and punished
offender will refrain from recidivism because they realize
that they will be caught and severely punished.
4. Imposing deterrent sentences on individuals who have
little or no control over their impulses are morally
indefensible.
5. The high recidivism rate further challenges the usefulness
of contemporary deterrence theories.
6. Earlier and less sophisticated variants of rational choice
theory compared the decision-making process of
offenders with straightforward economic choice.
7. Early variants of rational choice theory considered
offender motivation to be irrelevant, although later
variations propose that offenders choose to act in a
certain way because these actions appear to them rational
in the circumstances in which they find themselves.
8. Routine activities theory proposes that for a personal or
property crime to occur there must be at the same time
and place a perpetrator, a victim and/or an object of
property.
9. The offence can be prevented if the potential victim or
another person is present who
, can take action to deter it.
10. Ordinary people, ourselves, friends, family or even
strangers are the most likely capable
guardians.
Contemporary 4 principles at bottom of contemporary deterrence
deterrence theories 1. Certainty
2. Severity and speed of punishment
3. Proportionality
4. Specific and general deterrence
- When punishment is fast, it is proposed that ppl will think
there is more to be lost than to be gained from criminality
- The more severe punishment, the less likely to be applied
- The less certain the punishment, the more severe
punishment needed to deter crime
General deterrence
- Let people be afraid of participating in criminal behaviour
by deterring criminals
- Fitting policy: let ppl know that negative behaviour will be
punished
- Goal: reduce probability of deviance
- Control-activities: activities that aim to reduce or prevent
further crime
Specific deterrence
- Let offender know he shouldn’t repeat offending by
making them realize they will be caught and punished
- Focus: punish known deviants to keep them from
repeated offending
- Concern: intentions of offending may never become
known
Econometric version of rational choice theory
- Every execution deterred seven or eight other murders in
USA
- Other research found no effect of death penalty on
murder rate
- Abolition of death penalty was found to have no effect on
murder rate
Proponents of rational actor model
- Likelihood of detection is more important in choice of
acting than level of possible punishment
- Crime numbers heavily influenced by what definition and
criteria certain crimes are calculated
- If different levels of punishment are needed to deter
potential offenders, this will vary between people, crimes
and circumstances which may lead to a basic punishment
which may be way too high for a certain act which is
categorized under a particular crime may even be
counter productive
