Crime control and harassment of the innocent
Ken Gallant1997, Journal of Criminal Justice
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Abstract
Crime control thro11gh lmr enforcement is generally considered to be a two-part process of appre hending and incapacitating or rehabilitating the gLtilt y , and deterring the innocent f r om crime by the ihreat of punishment. The analysis presented here slwws that the protection of the innocent from harass ment-detention, arresr. p11nishment, and other inrrusions by the criminal justice system-is important in deterring crime. Spec(fically, the analysis shoH·s that deterrence from crime is weakened and then lost /or a rational indii·idual ,,·ho holds the majorit y arritude roward risk, if the levels of rightful punishment and -..,, 1-rongfLtl harassmem are increased, as in a war 011 crime, and the likelihoods of wrongful and right ful pLtnishment are reasonably close. The analysis is employed ro show how the perceived likelihood of harassment may be a comributing factor to the disproponionarely high representation of minoriry groups in the U.S. prison s y stem. © 1997 Elsevier Science Ltd 3 -· r _)
Figures (4)
Related papers
CRIMINOGENIC INFLUENCE OF PENITENTIARY INSTITUTIONS
Facta Universitatis: Series Law and Politics, 2017
Referral to serve a sentence of imprisonment in a penitentiary institution is a very stressful experience for all convicted offenders. They are obliged to put an end to their former lifestyle and continue living in a penal institution of a closed type, governed by strict rules of conduct and featuring very diverse population of inmates. Due to the loss of freedom, many convicts are deprived of numerous privileges they used to have outside prison. In reaction to these " deprivations " , they commit new crimes while serving their prison sentences. For this reason, time spent in prison can be an important criminogenic factor. In the first part of the paper, author discusses the forms of deprivation in penitentiary institutions and their impacts on prisoners' life. Then, the author points out to the criminogenic impact of the prison environment and the necessity to conduct empirical research in this area. Finally, the author underscores the need to find effective measures to reduce the criminogenic impact of the prison environment and turn penitentiaries into facilities for genuine rehabilitation and re-socialization of prisoners.
The role of prior punishment in preventive detention decisions
Psychology, Crime & Law, 2019
Preventive detention legislation allows for ongoing detention or supervision following completion of an offender's sentence. Consideration of public protection should drive the administration of preventive detention, however research has indicated retributive concerns also drive decision making. Two studies were conducted to examine the motives driving preventive detention decisions, and how contextual variables affected the balance between retributive and public protection motives. In Study 1, participants were presented with information about an offender's remorse, prior punishment, and risk of re-offence. In Study 2, participants were presented with information about an offender's prior punishment and offence type, and the relative strength of various potential mediators was tested, to determine factors driving effects of prior punishment information. Overall, results demonstrated participants were driven by both retributive and public protection motives, as well as personal characteristics (e.g. political orientation, prejudice against offenders) when making preventive detention decisions. Findings are discussed in terms of their implications for preventive detention legislation.
Human Dignity, Crime Prevention, and Mass Incarceration
Federal Sentencing Reporter, 2014
Victimization Inside Prison Walls
This paper will dig deeper into the reality of prison victimization from inmate-to-inmate victimization to staff-to-inmate victimization. Statistics that are used in this paper are 100 percent real and taken from the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Multiple factors play a role in prison victimization, such as lack of supervision by prison staff, intimidation tactics used by other inmates, and in some cases inmates engage in this behavior because of "situational conditions". This paper will examine the affects after an inmate is victimized.
The effects of detention on crime suspects
This research is based on the effects of detention on crime suspects... it has discover that crime suspects are adversely affected socially, psychologically and otherwise.
Prison Use and Social Control
Over the past 20 years, the United States has experienced a massive increase in imprisonment. The number of people incarcerated and the clustering of that incarceration in the inner-city black population raise the prospect that incarceration may be undermining less coercive institutions of social control such as families or communities. The long-term result of this incarceration policy, then, would be increases, rather than the expected decreases, in crime. There is some empirical evidence to support this position. Increases in incarceration have been clustered in groups and places and have been of the magnitude that could affect less coercive institutions in those areas. Large proportions of the imprisoned population are involved in families and communities at the time of their imprisonment. Incarceration has been shown to reduce family formation for blacks but not for whites.
Crime, Justice, and Social Control
PREFACE X CRIME, JUSTICE, AND SOCIAL CONTROL focused more specifi cally on the diff erent areas of the formal system discussed in the introduction. Th e articles raise key questions being discussed by criminal justice academics, policy makers, and elected offi cials today. Th e articles allow students to understand the complexity and range of challenges faced by all those involved in the criminal justice process, give them an opportunity to think critically about the alternatives, and formulate their views about social control, taking into consideration research and policy analyses presented by experts in the fi eld.
Gender Differences and Perceived Sanction Threats: The Effect of Arrest Ratios
2004
Piquero, my committee chair, for the dedication he has shown me throughout the process of completing this thesis and the many other projects that I have encountered since I came to the University of Florida. I consider Dr. Piquero to be a role model and friend who inspires me to always keep my goals high and my head up. I would also like to thank Dr. Lonn Lanza-Kaduce, who provided much insight and guidance that really helped to put this thesis in its current form. I feel extremely fortunate to be able to work with these two extraordinary scholars and individuals. I would also like to show my appreciation to other members of the Criminology and Law Department who have supported me and my colleagues throughout the graduate school experience. Their open doors and willingness to get involved have made all the difference in the world. Finally, I would like to thank my friends, both near and far, who have been the most fun and greatest support group that a girl can have. At the top of that list is Steve Miller, who has been by my side for six years of nonstop school and stress and has kept me sane through all of it.
Butler, M. & Maruna, S. (2009) Disrespect and Distortion: Experimentally Inducing Neutralisations Among Prisoners. Psychology, Crime and Law, 15(2&3): 235-250.
Self-report research suggests that much violence is triggered by perceived insults and disrespect. This may be particularly true in the context of a prison or another environment of acute deprivation, whereby individuals have little other recourse to means of reputation enhancement. This paper presents the findings of two studies conducted with prisoner volunteers inside a Category C (minimum security) prison in England. In the first study, the authors randomly assigned a sample of 89 prisoners to one of two conditions: the experimental group were asked to discuss times they have been disrespected by authority figures inside and outside the prison; the control group were asked more neutral questions. Both groups then completed several measures of cognitive beliefs, distortions, and hostile attribution biases. None of the measures differed across the two groups except the measure of excuse and justification acceptance. Controlling for other factors, the experimental group endorsed these rationalizations at a significantly higher rate than the control group. This finding suggests that raising the salience of disrespect -reminding prisoners of times they have been made to feel unworthy of consideration -may raise the risk that prisoners will engage in violence by providing prisoners with justifications or excuses for actions they might not otherwise endorse. These findings received some additional validation in the second study, a qualitative analysis of offender accounts of violence and aggression within the prison. Implications for reducing violence within prisons are discussed.
Related topics
Related papers
THE CRIMINOGENIC EFFECTS OF IMPRISONMENT: EVIDENCE FROM STATE PANEL DATA, 1974?2002
Criminology & Public Policy, 2007
The heavy reliance on the use of incarceration in an attempt to address the crime problem has resulted in a dramatic growth in the number of state prisoners over the past 30 years. In recent years, however, a growing concern has developed about the impact that large numbers of offenders released from prison will have on crime rates. Using a state panel data set for 46 states from 1974 to 2002, this study demonstrates that although prison population growth seems to be associated with statistically significant decreases in crime rates, increases in the number of prisoners released from prison seem to be significantly associated with increases in crime. Because we control for changes in prison population levels, we attribute the apparent positive influences on crime that seem to follow prison releases to the criminogenic effects of prison.
Deterrence and Crime Results
New Criminal Law Review: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal, 2007
This article offers a comprehensive study of the merits of the legal practice of punishing accomplished crimes more severely than attempted crimes all other things being equal (differential punishment)vis-àà-vis the alternative of punishing them with equal sanctions (equal punishment).Unlike the overwhelming majority of the literature on the issue--which focuses on which practice better mirrors the offenders' relative moral deserts--the article evaluates both practices from a consequentialist, deterrence-based point of view. In particular, it shows first that traditional economic theories of the criminal law should yield the conclusion that differential punishment is not superior to equal punishment.The few arguments that the economic literature offers against such conclusion, the article shows, are mistaken. Secondly, drawing on social and psychological findings, the article advances three new arguments showing that, under some likely social and psychological conditions, differ...
Punishment and the Wild Beast of Prey: The Problem of Preventive Detention
The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (1973-), 1996
Of course, the moral education theory says nothing about whether the execution of criminals might be justified not as punishment but as a method of "legitimate elimination" of criminals who are judged to have lost all of their essential humanity, making them wild beasts of prey on a community that must, to survive, destroy them. Whether such ajustification of criminal execution can be morally tolerable is something I do not want to explore here.'
Punishment and Prison bibliography (with addendum on policing)
is where I became an artist,' Alfredo Santos says now, more than half a century after he painted the mural at top and five others in the dining hall while an inmate there." Preamble "When we return to the search for a more humane and rational response to crime, we must keep in mind that the prison is tied to other social and political arrangements that limit what changes are possible. The criminal justice system in general is at least partially involved, directly and indirectly, advertently and inadvertently, in repressing groups and classes of people and in maintaining unfair social, political, and economic relationships. Fundamental changes in its operation are impossible unless some higher degree of social justice has been achieved and the criminal justice system is relieved of these tasks. [….] One of the important obstacles that must be removed is the public conception of the prisoner. Presently, this conception is formed from the rare, but celebrated and horrendous crimes, such as mass murders by the Manson cult, Juan Carona, or the 'Hillside Strangler.' Whereas prisoners like George Jackson, viewed as a heroic revolutionary fighting back from years of excessive punishment for a minor crime (an eighty dollar robbery), shaped the conception of the prisoner in the early 1970s, persons like 'Son of Sam' do so today. These extraordinary cases distort the reality. Most prisoners are still in prison for relatively petty crimes, and even those convicted of the 2 more serious crimes must be understood in the context of society in the United States. What we need is a new theory of crime and penology, one that is quite simple. It is based on the assumption that prisoners are human beings and not a different species from free citizens. Prisoners are special only because they have been convicted of a serious crime. But they did so in a society that produces a lot of crime, a society, in fact, in which a high percentage of the population commits serious crime. Those convicted of serious crimes must be punished and imprisoned, because it is the only option that satisfies the retributive need and is sufficiently humane. Knowing that imprisonment itself if very punitive, we need not punish above and beyond imprisonment. This means that we need not and must not degrade, provoke, nor excessively deprive the human beings we have placed in prison. It also means that we must not operate discriminatory systems that select which individuals should be sent to prison and, once incarcerated, who should be given different levels of punishment. Since we assume that convicts are humans like us and are capable of myriad courses of action, honorable and dishonorable, we also assume that they will act honorably, given a real choice. This means that we provide them with the resources to achieve self-determination, dignity, and selfrespect. This theory continues to be rejected not because it is invalid, but because it challenges beliefs and values to which large segments of the population comfortably cling. [….] In pushing this theory, I admit that many prisoners, like many free citizens, act like monsters. But they are not monsters and often choose to act like monsters when their only other real option is to be totally disrespected or completely ignored, while being deprived, degraded, abused, or harassed." [emphasis added]-John Irwin, Prisons in Turmoil (1980)
Criminality and Social Interaction
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2000
Taking into account the scope of the factors, which may have influence over crime, is not most reasonable strategy to approach this point under a restricted view. The approach which gives us the support on this research, parts from the foundation that crimes have diverse nature, not only for its type but, primarily on its determinants. Therefore, there should be a demarcation line which limits these different categories of crimes, when it is regarding to the nature of the motivation for committing a crime. Such motivation may be associated to economic factors or social interaction.
Crime, protection, and incarceration
Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 2008
Criminals impose costs on society that go beyond the direct losses suffered by their victims; crime casts a shadow of uncertainty over our daily economic and social activities. Consequently, individuals and society as a whole choose to direct resources to crime prevention. In this study we analyze a virtual society facing such choices. Individuals, neighborhoods, and cities make crime prevention decisions and adjust their decisions over time as they attempt to balance the cost of crime with the cost of fighting it. The society that ultimately emerges exhibits aggregate criminal characteristics that mimic patterns of crime observable in the natural world. We then use this virtual society to conduct a series of anti-crime policy experiments, the results of which illustrate how different approaches to crime protection and incarceration can vary in their efficiency at reducing crime. As expected, more effective anti-crime measures tend to reduce crime, but the impact of prison is less clear. The model suggests that throwing more criminals into prison may reduce crime in the short run but may actually increase it in the long run.
Punishment and Security
Policymakers and the public widely believe that punishment can reduce crime and therefore improve security. Empirical data, however, prove the preventive effect of punishment to be very limited at best. Especially, the assumption that imposing longer sentences will reduce crime rates seems erroneous. In our opinion, this misconception is due to a confusion of time perspectives: Criminal law necessarily looks back to the past, as it reacts to a deed. Security, on the other hand, means preventing dangers, and its focus must be the future. Hence, time orientation of criminal law and the logic of protection clash. Criminal law cannot provide the security wished for. The same mistake is repeated in the prevalent theories of punishment, notably the relative or unified theories of punishment. Security cannot be achieved or fostered through harsher punishment or punishment threats. On the other hand, one means of decreasing crime is increasing the number of policemen.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.