Criminology

CRIMINOLOGY 1
Criminology
Professor
Name
Institution

CRIMINOLOGY 2
Hypothetical for Module 3: Classical School (250 words)
Using a classical theoretical perspective, how might you explain why the offender
committed this crime
According to classical theoretical perspective, Mr. Chaplin committed these crimes out of free
will and rational choice. This theory mainly did not seek to explain why people committed crimes
but was a strategy of administering justice according to rational principles. Given that Mr. chaplain
is a rational being, he possess free will and can make choice on what he chooses to do. This theory is
based on the assertion that a human being knows how to distinguish right from wrong and are
entitled to make their own choices (Hagan, 2010). Mr chaplain did not commit these crimes under
duress but he did so willingly. Mr. chaplain might have committed these crimes to gain money,
excitement or something else he values. According classical theory, factors like poverty may
override reasoning.
Do you think that the sentence imposed is appropriate? What alternative, if any, would you
propose?
The sentence imposed to some extent is appropriate considering other factors involved in
sentencing but deterrence should be the main aim. The punishment should always fit the crime.
Judges should avoid discretion and further focus on the act not the person. The law must be followed
to the latter. Some people commit crimes in order to gain worldly pleasures, therefore the pleasure-
pain principle should be applied to outweigh objective pleasure as this would discourage some
people from committing similar crimes (Roth 2010).
The alternative that I would propose in this particular case is; Mr. Chaplin should be given a more
deterring sentence considering the grievousness of the crimes he has committed. Many people suffer
especially the youths who would have bright futures but waste their lives doing drugs; therefore Mr.
Chaplin should serve at least a maximum of 5 years imprisonment taking into account the two

CRIMINOLOGY 3
crimes.
Hypothetical for Module 4: Positivist School (250 words)
Using a positivist perspective, how might you explain why the offender committed this
crime?
According to the positivist perspective, Mr. chaplain could have committed the crime because he
did not possess free will and was motivated by factors he had no control over. He could have
probably engaged in all these crimes because he could not choose between what is right and wrong
owing to the reason that he was motivated by external factors that he had no control over (Heidt and
Wheeldon 2014). . Therefore, this theory emphasizes on the importance of understanding why one
committed a crime rather than only focussing on the punishment. This theory attributes various
factors such as the environment as causes of committing crime.
Ulster County Jail, Dugdale in 1895 found 6 members of the same ‘Juke’ family: Of twenty nine
male ‘immediate blood’ relations fifteen had been convicted of crimes. He claimed that environment
tends to produce criminal habits which to some extent may become hereditary (Kelly 2015). Just
like in Mr. Chaplin’s situation, he was brought up while undergoing child abuse and his childhood
experience was not one of the best considering what he went through. All these experience could
explain why he ended up in crime given the nature of his past experience.
Do you think that the sentence imposed is appropriate? What alternative, if any, would you
propose?
Yes the sentence imposed is appropriate. Considering factors such as environment that can
influence the reasons as to why one commits crime, the sentence by the honourable judge was
appropriate. The judge took into account various factors of the offender’s past life before making
final decision.
The other alternative I would propose is cleaning of various places under watch of probation