Death Penalty Debate: UK Perspective

This assignment delves into the contentious issue of the death penalty and its potential reintroduction in the United Kingdom. Students are tasked with investigating various perspectives on this topic, including ethical considerations, public sentiment, and legal ramifications. The assignment encourages critical thinking and analysis of arguments both for and against capital punishment within the UK context.

Contemporary issues in
Criminology: Use of
Surveillance in the Police

Table of Contents
CHAPTER 1 : INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................1
CHAPTER 2 : METHODS OF SURVEILLANCE .......................................................................2
CHAPTER 3 : POSITIVE ASPECTS OF SURVEILLANCE........................................................4
CHAPTER 4 : THEORIES OF SURVEILLANCE........................................................................6
CHAPTER 5 : CASES OF SURVEILLANCE...............................................................................8
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................9
CHAPTER 7 : CAPITAL PUNISHMENT AND DIFFERENT THEORIES...............................14
CHAPTER 8 : ROLE OF JURY....................................................................................................24
CHAPTER 9 : CONTROL THEORY...........................................................................................26
CHAPTER 10 : COP CULTURE INFLUENCES POLICE BEHAVIOUR.................................28
CHAPTER 11 : DIFFERENT THEORIES...................................................................................34
CHAPTER 12 : VICTIMS OF CRIME.........................................................................................42
CHAPTER 13 : CRIMINAL JUSTICE.........................................................................................48
CHAPTER 14 : MEDIA AND CRIME .......................................................................................54
CHAPTER 15 : CESAR BECCARIA...........................................................................................57
CHAPTER 16 : POLICE CULTURE, DISCRETION AND ACCOUNTABILITY ARE
INCOMPATIBLE ELEMENTS OF THE CONCEPT OF POLICING’.......................................59
CHAPTER 17 : POLICING PROTESTS AND RIOTS................................................................64
CHAPTER 18 : CRIME AS A SOCIAL RATHER THAN INDIVIDUAL PHENOMENON.. .68
CHAPTER 19 : SOCIAL THEORY.............................................................................................73
CHAPTER 20 : YOUTH CRIME AND JUSTICE.......................................................................78
CHAPTER 21 : REFLECTIVE STATEMENT............................................................................83
REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................86
Appendix .......................................................................................................................................95

CHAPTER 1 : INTRODUCTION
The method used to monitor the activities, behaviour and other changing information of
people in order to manage, influence, direct or protect them is known as surveillance. It is used
by police for investigation of allegations of illegal behaviour by covert observation of people,
vehicles or places (1). It is one of the most vital and versatile skill that can be possessed by a
police officer. Surveillance has huge risks – it may result in death or injury when undercover
officers are unmasked of their identity and purpose. However, it is also essential for police
department to carry out criminal investigation through using surveillance method. It involves
observing individual, monitoring their cell phone location and vehicles as well in regard to know
their exact location. Thus, using such type of surveillance is crucial and thus it helps police in
identifying the location of criminal. The main objective of surveillance includes – obtaining
information, locating a subject and obtaining intelligence regarding that subject or location,
preventing occurrence of crime through covert or overt surveillance and providing protection to
undercover police officers (Larsen, Ellefsen and Sollund, 2012).
1

CHAPTER 2 : METHODS OF SURVEILLANCE
Surveillance is a complex process and a number of methods and techniques can be
adopted to ensure its effectiveness. The police uses a wide range of methods of surveillance that
are described as follows :
 Electronic monitoring : It is also known as wire tapping, it refers to the surveillance of
fax, emails, telephone communication and internet. A court order is required to carry out
this surveillance whereby it is required to show that a crime has been or is being or will
be committed. After the court grants the order, criminal conspirators can be identified by
police agencies so that the involved offenders can be deterred or punished (2.pp.451-
469). But in certain cases, where there is risk of death or severe injury, the government
would be allowed to start monitoring without the order of a court.
 Fixed surveillance : This is also referred to as stakeout in which police officers are
required to keep a surreptitious observation on people and place from a distance. This
method include two variations – one person surveillance in which officer cannot take his
eyes off the scene and do not get any relief and two person surveillance where officers
switch their positions periodically. This reduces the chances of spotting them by the
suspect.
 Stationary technical surveillance : Hidden cameras and recording equipment are
installed by the investigators in a parked car. It is also known as unmanned surveillance
because there is no need for officers to monitor the suspect round the clock. Video
images and photos can be recorded anytime and it also reduces the risk of discovery.
 Three person surveillance : This is a complex technique which reduces the possibility
of detection to a great extent (3). It is also called ABC method where officer A remains
behind the suspect, officer B follows him and officer C is on the other side of the street
who moves slightly ahead or behind the suspect.
 Undercover operations : In this method, an active role is played by police officers to
reveal the criminal activities. For instance – an undercover officer may infiltrate with the
group by adopting similar jobs or hobbies of suspects. To gain trust and acceptance, he
might create a reasonable cover story that justifies his presence in the
neighbourhood/group.
2

The surveillance methods enables the police to collect data and the content of communication i.e.
the type of device used and information transmitted with the use of different resources such as
bulk of data can be collected through the internet.
3

CHAPTER 3 : POSITIVE ASPECTS OF SURVEILLANCE
Positive scope of surveillance : Surveillance has proved to be quite beneficial for detection and
reduction of criminal activities. Through using body cams on police it helps in providing clear
picture why any police shoot the criminal. It is essential because incidents of polie shooting
black people without any reason are increasing and thus it helps in providing safety to such
people so that they are not able to affect them. It also helps in safeguarding innocent people and
thus police need to give clear justification that why they shot or murdered any person. Also,
recording through mobile phone is also the best surveillance way adopted by police. Michel
Foucault introduces the theory of freedom of people and in that he reviews that body cameras are
crucial in order to give proper judgement so that use of body cameras are effective. Some of the
positive aspects of surveillance are mentioned hereunder :
 Complaints about behaviour of police officer and use of force is minimised due to the
record of every interaction with the residents as interactions captured can be seen by
everyone. It means that each and every conversation made with police needs to recorded
using body cameras or mobile phones.
 Hard video evidences are provided by the use of cam when decisions are made by the
officers in highly intense situations on duty (4.pp.725-749).
 Video recorded by body cams helps in protecting any kind of false accusations, abuse or
misconduct against officers.
 It ensures increased accountability and transparency of the officers.
 Confrontational situations between civilians and police officers may be prevented and de-
escalated.
 It helps in providing valuable evidence to obtain victim statements and accurate
witnesses.
 The court proceeding can be conducted speedily as it provides undisputable evidence of
situations by video footages captured. Therefore, it helps to reduce the expenses of the
court due to increase in pre – trial plea bargains or increased rate of convictions. It means
that lack of evidence affects the court time, money and other resources so that all these
could be saved.
4

There are different cases which has been solved by surveillance cameras and thus it helps
police and court to be used as a main evidence. Therefore, use of CCTV footages also helps in
solving cases for police.
5

CHAPTER 4 : THEORIES OF SURVEILLANCE
Marxist theory
According to this theory, crime and deviance are determined by ruling class and used as a
means of social control. It is argued that people who are involved in petty crimes on street such
as theft and burglary are treated as criminals and whole justice system focuses on their trial
rather than white collar crimes i.e. crimes committed by powerful segment of society is ignored.
There are numerous examples and cases in the real life world where it was seen that rich and
powerful people of the society committed serious offences and nothing happened to them, just
because they have power to influence police, politics and whole justice system which is based on
bureaucracy. On the other hand, poor people have to suffer a lot even if the crimes is not so
serious and they are blamed whole their lives.
Thus, in the context of surveillance, it becomes necessary to address that there need to be
made a balance between both positive and negative aspects of it. Police should not use its force
on poor and less powerful sections of the society. Moreover, the tool of surveillance should also
be used to identify and prevent crimes committed by rich people. Only when a proper balance is
maintained, the objectives of surveillance as a tool in justice and law can serve its purpose.
A study was conducted by Cambridge university with the regard to use of body cameras
by police officers (5). According to this study, there is a 50% reduction in use of force by police
officers and public complaints reduced by almost 90% when the police officers are equipped
with body camera. It found that both the public and police officer were adjusting their behaviour.
The social theory explains the bond between individual and society which is based on four major
elements – attachment, involvement, commitment and belief. In the context of using body
cameras by officers, it can be explained with reference to social theory as when the bond
between society and individual is strengthened, the chances of involvement in delinquency
reduces.
Michele foucault theory
In the context of body cameras, Michele foucalt theory provides an understanding of
disciplinary actions. In his opinion, modern society is a disciplinary society which means that in
today's time, power is mainly exercised through disciplinary means in different institution such
as prisons, schools etc.
6

But many times, the police uses disciplinary actions such as surveillance as means of
coercion and force which does not conform to the legal and ethical principles of a society. Thus,
it is imperative that surveillance should create a balance and police should not use this as a force
on the general public.
This can be analysed from the case of shooting of Keith Lamont Scott, an African
American man who was fatally shot by a police officer. This case shows how American police
misuses their powers and harm the lives of black people without any strong reason. The use of
body cams should be done to prevent such type of cases (11). It would monitor the activities of
police officers and any misconduct on their part can be easily detected. There are various other
cases, where white police officers have mis - utilised their powers and used their guns which are
given for public safety for wrong purposes. Thus, body cams can be used as an important tool for
controlling American cops who carry guns and are happy to shoot the black people on street
whether they are involved in any malafide activities or not.
7

CHAPTER 5 : CASES OF SURVEILLANCE
Another important aspect that needs to be focused is police surveillance through
infiltration (6. p.1). In this context case of Bob Lambert can be considered who was an
undercover police officer who infiltrated political groups. His covert work that consist of
infiltration for animal rights and environmental groups was exposed by campaigner group that he
had spied. During his mission, he fathered a child with an activist of the group and then
abandoned both of them. He also had such intimate relationship with many other women.
Moreover, as a part of his undercover work, he developed his fake identity by stealing the
identity of a dead boy and appeared in court using false persona. Lambert was a key figure in
secret operations to spy on the family of a murdered teenager Stephen Lawrence.
The case of Mark Thomas is yet another important example of police surveillance
through infiltration. He worked as a police detective and investigative journalist on child abuse
and abduction cases. One of the biggest case he worked on was unmasking Jimmy Savile as a
paedophile. He was a predatory and prolific sex offender who abused many children and adults
over a long period of time (7 pp.61-86). Mark William Thomas took various efforts to unmask
him, he talked to different persons, met them and called them to collect information. He
approached ITV bosses who agreed to air his investigation that were kept secret. Jimmy Savile
was exposed by an interview with five women who admitted how he used to sexually abuse them
as teenagers. Thus, the work of Mark Thomas is quite appreciable and shows the importance of
police surveillance through infiltration.
It can be analysed from both these cases, police surveillance plays a cardinal role in
detecting and preventing the crime which would otherwise be difficult for the police. Infiltration
with the suspected individuals or groups enables to gain information and constant monitoring so
that their activities can be tracked and prevented (8. p.104).
But every coin has two sides i.e. both pros and cons and so is the case with police
surveillance. I can be seen from the case of Bob Lambert that use of surveillance proved to be a
disaster for the lives of many women. He fathered a child and betrayed the family for so many
years, which was traumatised after knowing his reality. The case of Stephen Lawrence, a
teenager who was murdered by a racist gang can also be taken into consideration regarding this
context. There are allegations on police that Lawrence family camp was planted under an
undercover officer by the Metropolitan Police (10). This case highlighted the misconduct done
8

by five police officers who have potentially undermined public confidence. Bob Lambert was
involved in the case and he arranged the meeting of the undercover officer. This shows the
misuse of powers by police while conducting their duties and how it becomes disastrous for the
lives of the innocent citizens.
The guidelines that should be followed for using surveillance are mentioned hereunder :
 It is must that cameras are employed and implemented responsibly to ensure that civil
liberties and public surveillance can co – exist.
 Surveillance is a cost effective way that can be used for documenting, reducing and
deterring criminal activities and detecting criminals (9 p.349).
 It is imperative that systems are monitored by trained staff to en sure effectiveness and
crime detected using technology are integrated into all manner of law enforcement
activities. The resources put into surveillance decide the usefulness of surveillance
technology for solving and preventing the crimes.
CONCLUSION
It can be concluded from the study that surveillance is used as a positive factor and thus it
helps in using the recording in the court room and thus punish the guilty person. It is also
majorly used as providing safety to public and thus providing them safe environment. Placing
CCTV cameras are effective and thus helps in recording so that crimes could be minimized.
While, there are some negative aspects of using surveillance by police force that they can use the
recording in negative way and due to not proper or clear vision it could protect the faulty person.
Therefore, using body cams on police is useful method and thus carry out proper surveillance
technique so that best results can be attained. However, there are some negative aspects of
surveillance as police use this it as a safeguard while they are involved in any kind of malafide
activities.
9

CHAPTER 6 : MORAL PANICS AND THE MEDIA AND CRIME
Introduction: This report will be about “Moral Panics and The Media” discussing the different
views, examining the theories on it and evaluating the views of moral panics and the media
according to Stanley Cohen and Howard S. Becker along with other criminologists/sociologists.
This topic was however, chosen for this report because I found it interesting and based on books
I have been reading I am coming to terms in learning that the media has a big role to play in the
moral panics of society in which we live in today.
What is a moral panic? - According to (Jenkins, 1992; Silverman and Wilson, 2002; Cohen,
2011) ‘Moral Panic’ indicates to the inordinate and unfavourable communal attitude between a
set of crowd and people outside of the crowd which may be classed as a threat to societal values
or the state. It does also refer to shocking stereotypical media coverage, public objection and
demands for a firm control. As the name insinuate, the panic may descend faster than it erupted.
Moral panics originated around youth-related issues, particularly subcultural expressions of
identity. For example, delinquent (Emos), raves and the wider drug addict cultures, raging
football hooligans, the re-housing of sex offenders in society, terrorism threat and knife crime
have also been the recipe to moral panic.
However according to the findings of Cohen, Moral Panic is a majority media generated action
situated on the belief that some individuals or groups (usually youths or a minority group or
sodality) is deviant and posturing a dangerous threat to public. ‘Moral’ being a challenge to the
moralistic order of society and ‘Panic’ meaning “a quick feeling of fear that is overwhelming and
may seem to be unfounded”. These Moral Panics are generally fuelled by exaggerated media
reports of social issues. In addition, according to Stanley Cohen “a division is made between
‘us’- good, decent respectable folk – and ‘them’ – deviants, bad guys, undesirables, outsiders,
criminals, the underworld, disreputable folk – between ‘we’ and ‘they’. This dichotomisation
includes stereotyping; generating ‘folk devils’ or villains and folk heroes in this morality play of
evil versus good (Cohen, 1972, pp. 11-12).
According to (Barlow,1993), a parallel can be drawn between stereotyping in moral panics and
the regular processing of criminal suspects: police suspicion of a crime committed or is being
committed is partially aroused on the basis of stereotypical characteristics such as physical
appearance, location and so on.
The Media’s role to moral panics in society- It is evident that the media are behind the vast
amount of information in which we get about what is going on within society today. For
example, the way that the media present some information may mould and shape societies
attitudes towards important issues around the world be it positive or negative. That’s because the
way the media submit news is never always true and sometimes occurs to be false. It has also
been said that the media has effects on the images of crime. Relatively, reports of news can be
full of concealed definitions and metaphor. For example, if we take a look at the sun, heat,
tabloid newspapers and daily mirror. The above issues are technically evident in those papers.
Observe how those papers use sensationalistic captions and scrupulous informing to make an
interest in majority of stories in the news.
10

The purpose is to usually amplify the truth from right. Some parties may conclude that the media
describe their ways in bad ways and this might cause a big public outcry about them. The
media’s behaviour of foreigners lately in England gives a good description of this issue. The
main issue is ‘stereotyping’ stereotyping is another typical way of delineating someone so that
our aspects of them becomes placed and might result prejudices. However interlopers/Foreigners
are frequently the subject of labelling.
For example, the representation of black people in American movies in the 20s and 30s saw them
as slaves and heathens, establishing their right in American community of that time. The
labelling illustrations boost individuals to generate a perception of obscure conditions, and a
repercussion can be that labelled initiators create a fitting self-image.
In addition the mass media’s role in labelling was examined in pioneering study by British
sociologist Stanley Cohen. In 1964, on one Easter bank holiday stories were written in
newspapers about disturbances between The Mods and Rockers at different coastal resorts
although there were no extraordinary occurrences. Additionally Cohen (1972) describes
situations where there is a fear of moral values and institutions come under attack as “moral
panic”. Young people often become the scapegoats accountable for the problem because they are
visible, powerless and defenceless. The media then over-reports and sensationalises the panics.
Cohen identifies:
 Exaggeration – Increase in numbers involved and emotive language used.
 Prediction - Leading questions about subsequent events are asked, predicting trouble.
 Symbolisation – Associations are built up around certain labels to arouse reader interest.
Cohen (1972) also stated that different forms of youth culture displaying deviant or delinquent
behaviour emerged from one common type of moral panic in Britain since the world war. These
include The Teddy Boys, The Mods and Rockers (the gang that took over Clacton on sea in
Essex), Hell’s Angels, Skinheads and Hippies. Some of these were associated with violence.
Becker (1963) argues that ‘All social groups in relation to moral panic make rules and attempt to
enforce them in some circumstances. These rules define whether an action or behaviour is right
or wrong. When an enforced rule is broken, the rule breaker is considered an outsider since
he/she cannot be trusted to abide by the agreed rules. However, the second meaning of the term
emerges that the rule breaker may feel his judges are outsiders rather than himself.
What is deviance amplification? - Deviance amplification spiral is a media hype phenomenon
defined by media critics as a cycle of increasing numbers of reports on a category of antisocial
behaviour or some other 'undesirable' event, leading to a moral panic.
Becker, H. S. (1963). Definition of deviance: The deviant outsider of the crews’ order have been
subjected to speculations, theorising and experimental research. What laymen want to know
about deviants is what makes them do it? How may society explain for their breaking of the law?
11

What is it that makes them do wrong things? Scientists have tried searching for explanations to
those question. In addition to that it has approved prudent assumption that there may be
something genetically deviant (qualitatively distinct) about performances that breach social laws.
It also accepted the good sense presumption that the deviant behaviour happens because some
characteristics of the individual who commits it make it mandatary or undeniable that he should.
It has also been said that scientist does not normally query the label “deviant” when it is added to
peculiar behaviour or individuals but rather take it as it comes. In doing that, they welcome the
values of the group making judgement.
Moreover, we should also appreciate the fact that; deviance also occurs because of some people
in society which we live today based on how they respond to social situations and so forth.
In conclusion to this report I have come to terms to appreciate what the indicators of the moral
panics are and what characterises it. The theory of moral panic is construed by five vital
components or touchstones which will be explained below.
There has to be a massive level of:
 Concern – there should be a vigorous amount of worry over the act of a particular person
or group and the aftermath that the act surely makes for the rest of public. This interest
should signify or be measurable in solid ways, though, for example, society’s notion vote,
citizen criticism in the way of the ‘Media’s scrutiny, expected by law and communal
action activity. Best (1990, p.160) differentiates worry from fear. The worry felt by
society has to not escalate itself in a way of fear, although both have one element in
relation: both are established by the people who feel them to be a fairly reply to what is
respected as very real and evident worry.
 Hostility – there must also be an increased level of hostility toward the group or category
regarded as engaging in the behaviour in question. Members of this category are
collectively designated as the enemy, or an enemy, of respectable society; their behaviour
is seen as harmful or threatening to the values, interest, possibly the very existence of
society or at least a sizeable segment of that society.
 Consensus – there should be evident substantial or widespread agreement or consensus
that is, at least a certain minimal measure of consensus in the society as a whole or in a
designated segments of the society that threat is real, serious, and caused by the
wrongdoing group members and their behaviour.
 Disproportionality – there must be a high level Public concern must be raised over the
behaviour, problems and conditions created outweigh those caused by comparable and
more damaging actions (Davis and Stasz, 1990)
 Volatility – is the characteristic of Moral panics. Moral panics are highly volatile and tend
to disappear as quickly as they appeared due to a wane in public interest or changing
news reports changing to another narrative.
12

All of the above elements must be anticipated for certain behaviours to be classed as a ‘Moral
Panic’ in society or something that threatens state/government as well as society itself
including citizens.
13

CHAPTER 7 : CAPITAL PUNISHMENT AND DIFFERENT THEORIES
Radelet and Borg (2000) suggests that the outcomes of sociological/criminological perspective
study on capital punishment within the USA and UK along with other relevant controversy have
reformed the terminology of the debate over the death penalty and will therefore add to the final
elimination in the USA. Haney (2005) suggests that capital punishment has continued in the
USA because the society is removed from its operation and result. Sarat (1999) investigated the
bureaucratic and societal structures for the death penalty; she also covered indignation on
deterrence, policy inadequacy in punishing, public viewpoint, ethnic partiality, and other features
of capital punishment.
However, until comparatively recently, nearly all states or nations applied capital punishment as
a sanction for violators of the law, betrayers, militant inmates and different individuals, who
happens to be sometimes entirely blameless of the chargers against them. In the early modernity
specifically in the early 19th century and early 20th century, a few states/nations rejected the death
penalty and therefore eliminated it due to the fact of some states appreciating and acknowledging
the fact that capital punishment is unfair and thus cruel. In addition it was only until after the
Second World War according to social scientists was when changed occurred in few other
countries regarding capital punishment and its abolition (Schabas, 1997; Hood, 2001).
Social scientist Marvin Wolfgang (1996) also reminds us that even if an individual may “merit”
to die in the scholastic, which does not mean that death is a punitive method demanded or needed
by any consistent knowledge of sanction. Particular well detailed documents of bigotry and
unfairness in the enactment of capital punishment, Wolfgang puts forth the problem of if such a
punishment can be administered in the name of “impartiality.” For Wolfgang, his query becomes
not “Who deserves to die?”, but instead, “Who deserves to kill?” unlike the dissentions examined
overhead, punishment is a non-factual justification and thus all but inconceivable to examine
with verifiable statistics. After all, there is no numerical formula obtainable or on the outlook
that can tell us exactly or even near enough how much of a given retribution a killer or any other
perpetrator “bestows”. In the end, the summing up of how much sanction an offender “needs”
becomes more and more a moral and less of a criminological issue.
Douglas and Marshall (1985) in relation to the above also argued explicitly that capital
punishment was being rather discriminatorily imposed against black minority accused. Justice
Stewart (1990) then suggests that racial bigotry has not been proved but that if any basis can be
perceived for the selection of this dew to being sentenced to die, it is constitutionally
impermissible basis of race. In addition the foregoing data researched has shown that a
defendant’s chance of going to death row has been highly affected by the race of his victim and
by his own race. Therefore, this remains the intriguing task of explaining this differential
treatment according to (Hans Zeisel, 1991).
As for my methodology part of this report, the reason why I am carrying out this qualitative style
of report on the death penalty because I would like to hear more views and opinions on
individuals agreement or different points of view for and against capital punishment. The first
half of this topic I have used the quantitative style where I have used tick boxes of closed
questions, so for this part it is only right to have a qualitative side to it with more open questions.
The people I recruited to help me with my research where staff and students from different
14

departments and walks of life. Therefore how I decided to conduct this part of my research was
to use more open answer interviews/questionnaires in order for people to answer my question in
a bit more detail of how they felt about the death penalty, and whether or not it should
reintroduced and so on. With regard to ethical issues, I must say that I thought of video recording
the interview along with audio recording, but I had to ask the permission of the participants if
they would mind if I did those things, some people or all that took part in my interview didn’t
appreciate being recorded or taped so I skipped those methods and decided to just let them fill in
the interview/questionnaires. After completing them I spoke to them further regarding the subject
and took some notes in order to prepare and write up the report and complete my research. In
conducting the research I had to be mindful of questions I asked, so it wouldn’t hurt or offend
anybody. So the ethical issues I faced were people not wanting to be recorded or taped. I do not
recall any problems encountered and that needed to be resolved apart from people not wanting to
be recorded as stated above.
The findings of my research so far on one hand the majority of participants are totally against the
death penalty. Meanwhile on the other hand, I have looked over the signed written interviews in
which my participants took part in, it came to my attention that out of the 10 people I have
spoken with and interviewed; only 30% out of the 100% expressed attitudes which are not 100%
against death penalty, as they stated “the death penalty is cruel,” but however dictate the
circumstances in which the death penalty must and should be upheld or administered if you like.
The circumstance they stated where “rape”, “child molestation,” and “murder.” From my
research it clearly show that some people in society is biased in a way in regards to the capital
punishment, because for example, things such as child abuse/molestation of children and murder
and let’s not forget rape, criminals acts such as these some people in society believes that death
should be bestowed upon violator of such crimes.
So therefore what I have learnt those crimes are intolerable and from this research it shows that
some people are totally against such criminality or act of omissions. Also from my research some
people are totally against the death penalty due to religious beliefs, these people believe life is
sacred and only God has the right to take life and give life, and therefore if the state commits the
act of inflicting death upon anyone including a perpetrator they are just as evil or bad as them
criminals committing the same atrocity. Another kind of response that I picked which came from
spirituality is the idea that “We need to have time to rectify our acts or mistakes and being
sanctioned to death is not giving us the chance to rectify ones mistake.
For discussion and conclusion I would simply say that I was encouraged to work in a group of
two collaboratively and for that reason I found it difficult to carry out the research chosen and for
that reason it took me longer do the research, so instead of giving up like I felt like to, I then
decided to do it independently on my own. The research had had strain on myself and the other
person due to both having pressures in our individual lives, where it kind of intervened in us
meeting up to carry out the work together. In regards and respect to my participants I would
recommend next time making the research even better by widening the participants where
instead of having eight or ten respondents I must have at least thousand people in oppose to ten
or eight. I am also aware of if I worked as a team with my fellow team member I would of got
even more better questions created along with the answers received, as working as a team
together everyone achieves more. In terms of handing out my surveys I personally felt that I was
15

impartially fair and that I gave people reasonable time to elaborate on their feelings and emotions
towards the capital punishment plus due to such topic remaining to be forever controversial,
emotional, complex and nonetheless sad to talk about. I also believe I could have made the
research even better by interviewing and prompting individuals in a patient correct manner rather
than individuals being given or handed surveys and letting them do it independently. So
therefore in appraisal even though I felt at least two people rushed their answers, in future I
would consider whether such question are emotional or not for individuals.
In relation obviously in the United Kingdom it’s unlikely in the UK people would be highly
affected about the capital punishment in such as the USA, people would potentially be upset
in regards to such sensitive and emotive subject. Due to some people being killed in the past
or being on death row for crimes they are totally blameless for, this topic will always be
subject to scrutiny or even debate. And also in conclusion to this I would say as a Christian
myself I do not believe in the taking of somebody else’s life, and in regards to that I am a
strong believer in the sanctity of sacred life given to mankind and only God has the power to
take life and give life.
16

Emile Durkheim (1902) provides a variety of explanations of society’s ills, like crime and
deviance, and accounts for the punishments and repercussions that follow. He asserts that man is
a product of his social environment; thus, socialization begins at birth and continues through
language and interaction with other people. The basis of his theory rests on the idea that the
“conscience collective of a society varies alongside the division of labour. In less complex and
more primitive societies, people tended to do and think alike and there was little tolerance for
difference” (Smith, 2008). According to Durkheim, one of the pivotal points in history in terms
of crime and deviance was the industrial revolution. As this revolution evolved, there was a steep
increase in immigrant migration into the United States. With this increase in immigration and the
evolution toward a more modern society came rising levels of individualism, flexibility, and
diversity amongst belief systems.
This was the first sign of problems in the new society. Although these immigrants found no
protest to their own belief systems, they failed to adapt them to the previously held norms the
American people valued. Inevitably, there was a sense of imbalance between the previously held
norms and values and the new and evolving ones. This imbalance, Durkheim deemed ‘anomie.’
According to Durkheim, anomie reflects a sense of normlessness, the lack of any societal norms
that spurs the tendency to act in a deviant way. In general terms, Durkheim’s theory
of anomie proposes that because of industrialization and the need for cheap labour in this newly
modern society, the influx of immigrants inherently brought with them their own sets of norms
and values. Thus came a temporary imbalance of norms, anomie, which enhances individual’s
propensity to commit crime in search for a stable environment. In turn, Durkheim puts forth not
just a theory for the social origins of crime, but also he theorizes about the social origins of law
and punishment.
Before addressing Durkheim’s explanation for crime and deviance, it is necessary to discuss his
theory regarding the origins of law and punishment. In its entirety, he describes “the law as a
concrete and objective indicator of morality…the law is restitution rather than simply repressive”
(Smith, 2008). From this comes the conclusion that law is a production of the collective society,
a myriad of all beliefs of society, an embodiment of everything a society holds to be right, true,
and just. This concept of the ‘collective conscience’ has everything to do with where society’s
laws, and ills, come from. Initially, Durkheim asserted that crime holds some religious qualities.
Because “religion was a reflection of the force of a shared collective conscience…early legal
codes were also religious codes,” thus providing Durkheim the ability to argue, “Offenses
against the gods were offenses against society” (Durkheim, 1964).
Crime became a deeply meaningful thing, very passionate and powerful, that ultimately
prompted for very strong emotions, anger and vengeance specifically. Because of this,
punishment was less about the offense or the offender and held more weight in regard to
restoring the cohesion and core values of society.
So what are these social origins of crime? As previously stated, the fragmentation amongst
society from the evolution to a more industrial and modern society, and the anomic division of
labour, provide the basis for crime and deviance. This division of labour emerged as a result of
the “needs of society which has become larger through an increase in population and a more
highly integrated interactive network” (Khorn, 1980). Durkheim theorised that there is a bundle
of ‘social facts,’ or empirical facts describing societal tendencies, that determine individual
qualities. Drawing on statistics, he drew a correlation between suicide rates and social variables.
17

What he deemed egoistic or anomic suicide were those that described “weak social integration
and failed moral regulation” as seen through the conclusion that protestants, intellectuals, and
single people had higher suicide rates than religious folk, specifically Catholics and Jews. In
other words, the individual and isolated people had a higher tendency for suicide than the
collective and densely networked community because of their lack of cohesion and relationship
with the collective conscience of society (Smith, 2008). Durkheim focused on the strain that
resulted at the individual levels and the decrease of societal restraint.
The the two types of solidarity, mechanical and organic, Durkheim concluded that organic
solidarity, the more complex of the two, which emphasizes a community’s interdependence upon
each other, is far stronger than mechanical solidarity in which there are common beliefs within
society solely because the individuals are alike. This “solidarity based on the functional
interdependence necessitated by and productive of the industrial revolution” would replace the
dependence on the conscience collective (Krohn, 1980).
There are various different perspectives on what anomie is and how it affects deviant behaviour.
On one hand Durkheim claims that anomie refers to the ill-formulated goals within the culture of
an industrial society. Rather than the ethos of the culture being dependent on the values set forth
by family and education, “the pursuit of self-interest, attraction to monetary rewards and
competition, become exaggerated relative to the value orientations of these institutions…
economic dominance stimulates the emergence of anomie at a cultural value” (Bernburg, 2002).
In regard to crime, the emphasis on competition and materialism combined with anomic ethic, as
theorists have termed it, spark a disregard for the moral status of the way in which one achieves
goals. This strain of anomic theory is called “Institutional anomie theory.”
 The weakness of anomie theory is that it concentrates on whole societies and it ignores
areas that are differentially affected by social disorganisation. Also the theory doesn’t
account for why individuals that are similarly affected by strain do not always adapt
similarly.
 The weakness of this theory is that it says crime is a feature of all societies not just the
individual.
 This theory also fails to explain or even acknowledge what causes the presence of
crime/deviance in the first place.
Beginning with studies in the 1930s, public opinion on capital punishment has been weighed up
in many ways; through debate, social research, legal commentary and the input of Human Rights
organisations. Until recently, however, the majority of death penalty opinions were measured by
some form of the question. “Do you oppose or agree with the death penalty for a person
convicted of murder?’’ In addition, these studies only offered yes or no opinion (Bohm, 2003).
Current research, however, is taking steps to test different methodological approaches to
measuring public opinion on this issue (Bohm; Jones, 1994; McGarrell and Sandys, 1996).
18

Cesare Beccaria was a strong non-believer of the death penalty. He believed the death penalty to
be cruel and unjust. He believed that no man has a right to take another individuals life. He
believed a person’s loss of freedom being more effective as a punishment rather than sentencing
them to death. He also believed agents in the law who takes part in the death penalty are just as
bad as the perpetrators who committed an offence be it murder or theft. In Beccaria’s days no
matter how big or trivial a crime is you will be sanctioned to death (Beccaria, 1762).
Eric Neumayer, a criminologist, considers the foundation of the global trend towards abolition
by way of quantitative cross-national analysis from the 1980s – 2002. The research also suggests
an increased concern that democracy is causing an increased global likeliness of abolition. This
will help to understand the relationship between democratic significance in UK and the
likelihood of abolitions repeat in Britain (2007).
Radelet and Borg considered the gradual movement toward the eventual abolition of capital
punishment in America and the United Kingdom. However this research also does help us to
consider similarities in arguments, also draws us closer to debate around retribution as a ground
for capital punishment. Radelet and Borg therefore shows that in the UK and US, there is a
decline in arguments for the death penalty on grounds of deterrence, for long term imprisonment
has been shown to equal deterrence (2016).
The methods I have used to conduct this research was not easy at all, I had to create
questionnaire surveys, as well as create a few pages of closed questions in order to target my
participants and make help me with my research by doing a questionnaire I handed out. I
formulated the questions from the findings from the literature reviews I have read and studied.
From the information I have read based on the death sanction, looking at question 8) on the
questionnaire form I have created, I was prompted to ask the question “Do you think eliminating
the death penalty will stop people from partaking in serious upper class crimes such as rape or
murder?” However I have been prompted to ask a question concerning anxieties about the death
penalty for example, “Do you feel that some people have been sentenced to death or executed if
you like in the past for crimes they did not commit? Thus, I sought to find out if the deterrence
was sufficient enough of a reason to reinstate the death penalty into the United Kingdom.
This module has taught and helped me to understand and know why research methods is
important as a criminologist. Therefore this module is far from one of the easiest modules to ever
complete. As for the recruitment strategy, I had to set goals to follow for example making
appropriate questions to ask people. So technically what was needed was the survey forms I
created to be completed by individuals in order to pass the recruitment strategy part. I randomly
selected participants at the University of Roehampton, some students and staff did not have time
to do it due to their own time constraints however that was not the case for some as some
participated in the questionnaires I was giving out. I also noticed that I did get a diverse amount
of people to fill my questionnaire forms rather than just one set of people.
19

Graft chart one shows us data collected from the question “Do you think eliminating the death
penalty will stop people from committing serious crimes such as murder or rape”?
Graft Chart two shows us data collected from the question asking “Do you think the death
penalty was being used efficiently in the criminal justice system?”
20

Looking at the data collected I can tell the majority participants have said to completely disagree
with the death penalty. Just over 65% of people have said that eliminating the death penalty will
not stop people from committing serious crimes such as rape and murder; just over 70% of
people also didn’t believe that the death penalty was being used efficiently within the criminal
justice system. Therefore thus, looking at the results I can clearly say that most people would
disagree with the death penalty or sanction if you like being reinstated, the strong difference
between both answers shows us that reintroducing the death sanction into the UK may cause
issues and events such as riots and protests.
In conclusion to this report, I can confidently say that I have been able my research question to
the best of my ability. Having considered different demographics has definitely allowed me to
get a more valid result due to the vast amount of different types of people I have issued
questionnaires to fill out. Also having different types of questions based on people’s opinions
and possible their historical knowledge allowed me to most probably get to more of an honest
answer rather than an answer would give without giving it a second thought.
I could argue that the question could not be fully answered due to the small sample of
participants. Having a larger sample of people probably would have allowed my research to be
more reliable than it is. Due to the fact some of my question did not have an option to refuse,
21

questions such as “have you or your family ever been a victim of crime?” or “what religious
denomination are you affiliated with?” may have been at high risk dishonesty due to it probably
being a bit personal and making some individuals feeling uncomfortable.
22

23

CHAPTER 8 : ROLE OF JURY
This report will assess the advantages and disadvantages of the use of a jury and also assess a
jury’s decision making on the guilt of the defendant. The question is what is guilt in terms of
law? In terms of law we can say someone is guilty if they have committed a minor offence or a
common law offence. For example when an accused accepts responsibility for a criminal act,
they therefore plead guilty. Similarly, a jury returns a verdict of guilty to a defendant who has
committed a crime. If a jury is not convinced that a crime has been committed, the jurors can
return a verdict of not guilty. This means that insufficient evidence has been presented. (Legal
Dictionary 2015). Therefore we can simply say that there are many advantages of the use of a
jury system in the English Legal System / Criminal Justice System.
What are the advantages of use of trial by jury or the use of a jury?
One advantage is that both members of the public and defendants have the right to be tried in
front of their peers, this is as bastion of liberty opposing the state, and is endorsed by
distinguished judges. However, jury usage is an old tradition and many people seem to have
confidence in the system, its impartiality and the fairness of the jury trial.
The term “Jury equity” means that jury members are not legal experts and which some people
who may be prejudiced against the law may take this as an advantage, because jury members are
not bound to follow the precedent of past cases or perhaps the acts of parliament if you like.
Additionally jury members do not have to give a reason for their verdict, they decide cases on the
idea of fairness, which is sometimes referred to as “jury equity”. Another advantage of jury
equity is that the jury does not feel pressured into making their decisions, as they are protected
from outside influence. This is one reason why people sit on a jury as it would be less likely for a
person to sit on jury if they knew that their reasons for a verdict would be publicly published.
Lastly on this point it is argued that the advantage of using a jury is that it is viewed as making
the English legal system or the criminal justice system more open, for example, members of
public are seen as playing a key role within the system when the entire process of public justice
is often seen to be done. The jury trial system therefore promotes public interest, and promotes
public involvement in the legal system, which is seen as a huge advantage in society today.
Making the process public also helps to keep the law clearer. This is simply because the points
must be explained to the jury and this also enables them to understand the case more easily.
What are the disadvantages of use of trial by jury or the use of a jury?
Firstly, one disadvantage is that the electoral roll is greatly criticised, as it does not always
represent a true sample of the population. It also excludes some groups within society, such as
the homeless and those people who have a criminal record. These
People cannot register to vote. Furthermore, not all persons eligible to register actually registers
and that is not taken into account. This may include young people and those
Belonging to ethnic minority groups. Another disadvantage is whether it is desirable for the jury
to be racially mixed. This can cause problems as the defendants may feel they have been given
an unfair trial because of their race. According to the Late Dennis Brown who was a singer he
sang about people should not be segregated by race says this in one of his famous songs ‘Equal
24

Rights’: “Every man has an equal right to live and be free No matter what colour, class or race he
may be” (Dennis Brown,1982).
However it is a fact that the judge has no power over electing in multi-ethnic jury. This also
relates to the fact that the jury is often criticised for being racially bias. For example, the
defendant and sometimes members of the public argue that the jury may not be representative of
the demographics of the society since not enough black and ethnic minority groups are
represented on the jury and this may deem the verdict unfair. Although it can be argued that
some members of the jury are secretly racist and often get bored with the case because they lack
legal knowledge, they may just want to hurry and get the case closed and could a verdict of
guilty even if the defendant is not really guilty. Despite there being twelve jurors they may still
have prejudices amongst them, which can therefore affect the verdict. Another example, is that
some jurors might be biased against the police, and this is one of the reasons why those with
criminal convictions are disqualified from sitting on a jury.
Lastly on this point, jury vetting is not considered advantageous also seen as a disadvantage as
checking the backgrounds of jury members could lead to only selecting jury members for the
satisfaction of the case, and court standards and may lead to another anomie or breakdown of
values. In effect, this could constitute a sway in the result of the verdict. Jury vetting cannot
therefore be correct since it goes against the grain of randomly selecting individuals from a
cross-section of society.
The Psychology of the Jury:
As with other many other legal processes, criminological psychologists has had much to say
about courtroom procedures, dynamics and, in particular, the way that juries arrive at their
decisions in determining the guilt of defendants (Peter Ainsworth, 2002). It is important to note
that due to the palpable intrinsic practical and moral difficulties of studying actual strategies of
jury decision making, a great extent of the psychological factors found in research, resulted from
experiments conducted on mock juries/trials. Summarised below are a few issues in the research
areas:
 Eye witness testimony: Research suggests that juries can ascribe great significance on eye
witness testimony when deliberating on their decisions even though counsel has cast
doubt on the veracity of the eye witness (Loftus, 1974).
 Pre-trial publicity: Clear evidence gleaned from experimental studies in this field
suggests that exposure to pre-trial publicity can sway the decisions made by juries
affecting their prejudices. This is a process that does not occur in mock trials, for
example, as it would, at least, be offset by judicial instructions.
 The confidence levels displayed by witnesses: Perhaps unsurprisingly, research indicates
that jurors tend to place most faith in witnesses who display a confident manner when
testifying. This basically tells us that sometimes the persons/accomplices who appear in
court as witnesses could be lying or committing perjury. In such a case they would also
25

be perverting the course of justice by fabricating evidence or truth whether to defend a
defendant or make a defendant guilty.
 The Jury selection procedure: In the USA the screening of jurors who counsel beyond
reasonable doubt may believe other jurors to have the wrong type of personality/persona
to try a particular case, has become a major issue and area of psychological research
according to (Kassin and Wrightsman, 1983). Indeed, this practice of such voir dire (a
preliminary examination of a witness or the jury pool by a judge or counsel) has become
a specialism of certain trial lawyers as illustrated most publicly for example, in the case
of the O.J. Simpson murder trial that took place in Los Angeles (USA) October 2nd 1995.
In conclusion there are many advantages and disadvantages of the use of jury to determine the
guilt and/or acquittal of a defendant. It’s is fair to say that trial by jury should remain how it is,
even though there are many aspects within the jury system that can be greatly improved. Not
excusing the fact that no one should be excused or deemed ineligible. Additionally juries should
be more representative of communities and it would also be good if provision was made for
particular cases where representatives of ethnic minority groups present issues. The summing up
of verdicts also needs to be more structured. On the other hand, having a jury is a good thing as it
has been a part of the legal system for a long time. Some argue that it can be considered to be the
bedrock of a democratic society.
The fact that the jury does lack legal knowledge or understanding of law is an advantage to a
degree as they should have a non-biased view towards defendants on trial and a case in general,
however, it should still be emphasised that the jury should be mixed in order to avoid accusation
of being racist or biased. However, the most important factor in determining the effectiveness of
jury decision-making on a defendant’s guilt or not is not whether they take the time out to
discuss the evidence first, but rather the extent to which they adopt a systematic structure for
gauging evidence and applying the law in general. Lastly the jury should take time to review
evidence clearly before deeming the defendant guilty.
CHAPTER 9 : CONTROL THEORY
Control theory in sociology is the idea that two control systems—inner controls and outer
controls—work against our tendencies to deviate. Control theory can either be classified as
centralized or decentralised or neither. Decentralised control is considered market control.
Unlike most criminology theories that purport to explain why people offend, control theory
offers the justification for why people obey rules. Thomas Hobbes (1957) suggests that, control
26

theory provides an explanation for how behavior conforms to that which is generally expected in
society. Some control theories emphasize the developmental processes during childhood by
which internal constraints develop. Social control theories, however, focus primarily on external
factors and the processes by which they become effective. Deviance and crime occur because of
inadequate constraints. For social control theory, the underlying view of human nature includes
the conception of free will, thereby giving offenders the capacity of choice, and responsibility for
their behavior. As such, social control theory is aligned more with the classical school of
criminology than with positivist or determinist perspectives.
Travis Hirschi (1972) argued that a person follows norms because they have a bond with society.
These social bonds have four elements: opportunity, attachment, belief, and involvement. When
any one of these bonds are weakened or broken a person is more likely to act in defiance.
For the most part, social control theory postulates a shared value of belief in social norms. Even
those who break laws or violate social norms are likely to share the general belief that those rules
should be followed. Crime and deviance are considered predictable behaviors that society has not
curtailed. Explaining conformity, particularly the process by which people are socialized to obey
the rules, is the essence of social control theory. Thus, social control theory focuses on how the
absence of close relationships with conventional others can free individuals from social
constraints, thereby allowing them to engage in delinquency. Alternatively, other prominent
criminological theories focus on how close relationships with delinquent peers or negative
relationships with others can lead or compel individuals to commit delinquency.
In conclusion I would say that the weakness of the control theory is that it gives an adequate
explanation of non-serious forms of youthful delinquency, it fails to explain adult criminal
behavior and serious instances of youth crime. Moreover, control theory is met with some
resistance for its compliance to a conservative view of the broader social order. From a control
theory perspective, children who are properly bonded to their parents would be involved in less
crime than children who have weaker parental bonds; control theory assumes that the family is a
naturally law-abiding institution. The theory's biggest weakness is that it places too much
importance on the bonds relative to an individual and society, without looking at other concepts
like autonomy and impulsiveness.
27

CHAPTER 10 : COP CULTURE INFLUENCES POLICE BEHAVIOUR
"All organisations live two lives; there is the structural life - and then there is the cultural
life. The structure is formal and represents the reality of what is supposed to happen. Culture is
informal and represents the reality of what actually does happen. Make no mistake about it, it is
the culture that runs things... The culture is at the root of the worst problems in the United
Kingdom’s policing of today. However, that culture is at odds with the mandate of consent
policing" (1994:312-3).
This essay will examine and focus on a number of key issues regarding cop culture which we
face in society today in order to answer the question, to what extent is cop culture influencing the
behaviour of our policemen in modern British society? Moreover, According to Chan, (1997)
research began on cop culture in the early 1960s and 1970s with the research by Cain (1973) and
Banton (1973) in England and Skolnick (1966) and Westley (1970) in the USA. Although the
research was not specifically concerned with police culture but rather on a sociological analysis
28

of the police officers and police work, it provided an abundance of information from observation
as well as analysis which led to the postulation of a number of theories of cop culture. The
assumed elements that characterise police culture have been made latently immobile since the
genesis of police research are significantly almost always negative.
Knowledge and insight of how our police officers view the world and the role they play in it is of
paramount importance when attempting to analyse their role. It incorporates what they do, how
and when they do it as well as the political subdivision of the complex structure of their work.
Bittner, (1974) states that the authority used by the police to dragoon the general public into
compliance is however, somehow underwritten by the fact that police officers, along with the
military, are “monopolists of the force in general civil society”. Police work is prominent and
very different from other work by its capacity to legally exercise coercive force. No other
organisational establishment or professional regulatory body possesses such a legal right. In
addition this is an important effect on police occupational culture and, subsequently, on how
police work is done. Bittner’s (1970) early studies of the police identifies how having the licence
and authority to use force means that they regularly impose vigorous strength to effectively
perform their job. On the beat working out on the streets, the police have an autonomy to use
such force which therefore might allow them to adapt to an array of tasks they are called upon to
perform. Consequently this causes contradiction and brings with it negative activities such as
malpractice, improper and/or negligent behaviour into the police force, to intervene with what
would be considered normal police practice. Bittner thus uncovers a mystery in the work of the
police - Although police are obligated by professional precedents/codes, for example, laws and
bureaucratic procedures, when on the streets these statutes and regulations are too rigid and not
adaptable to the plethora of police tasks. Officers must therefore depend on the less formal codes
of their occupational culture in order to get the work done.
According to Jerome Skolnick (1966: 44) cop culture also evolves ways to manage other
peculiarities of the job. Another sociological study, He also argues that police occupational
subculture develops in response to two principles variables, danger and authority, which should
be interpreted in the light of a constant pressure to appear efficient’. And in a most recent study
of the Los Angeles Police Department, according to Steve Herbert (1977) graphically he
describes a murky world where every day the officers face danger and dishonesty in ambiguous
conflict situations. As a consequence of that, the LAPD draws a stark line between good and
evils and right and wrong, putting themselves on the side of good. Herbert argues that they adopt
such a clear cut morality precisely because of the more ambiguities of their job and because they
cannot actually be very effective in preventing crime.
According to Reiner (2010), occupational police cultures can also be defined as assumption of
normal working practices within the police force as well as informal rules that are set in order to
help the police officers to make sense of their world and their role within it. It has also been
established that the early observational studies of policing did mainly focus on uniformed patrol
officers suggested that there was a relatively stable set of dimensions that appeared to
characterise ‘cop culture’ in a range of different societies. Skolnik, (1966) advertised how
popular tensions are linked to policing in non-partisan societies seemed to promote the
development of a shared cultural feedback. He also argued that police officers face the issue of
constant pressure from the public as well as peer pressure from other xenophobic officers within
29

the workplace. In addition to that these pressures that the police officers face result in and are
combined with the difficulty of position they have in their role and of them being figures of
authority in society. This sets them apart from other citizens in society.
Additionally Skolnik, (1966) states clearly that these structural problems within the police force
do tend to unleash a recipe and a number of characteristics within a police subculture and brings
to light suspicion, social isolation, group solidarity and conservatism. Recent research has
included other factors on the standard ‘list’ of features that are said to constitute ‘cop culture’
including a sense of mission, action, cynicism/pragmatism, male chauvinism and racial
prejudice.(Reiner, 2010). It has also been said that the notions of cop culture are often used in
expressions. It is important to comprehend the link between these features and the context of
policing. In addition, they should not always be viewed as necessarily negative in themselves
since police officers are trained and socialised to identify suspicious items or actions (Reiner,
2010).
Culture and subculture - the differences between culture and subculture is that culture is a
delineated expression of society through material things and faiths. Culture also encompasses
ideology as well as values of society and religion. Thereby Subcultures are also values and a
normal unmistakable from the bulk of society itself. Although a variety of subcultures can
however, prevail under one predominant culture. An example of such a subculture is cop culture.
Cop culture on the other hand, is a form of organisational culture containing unwritten rules and
social codes which contradict the way people work. However, it also creates strong harmony
among the group and a willingness to agree. Furthermore, cop culture refers specifically to the
behaviours and attitudes of the police within the force. Cop culture has many other
characteristics that can be evident among staff within the force. Among these characteristics are
an amplified awareness of the commitment to police work with the obligation to crime
prevention being the first priority, also a glorifying of all masculine characteristics which
excludes feminine characteristics, with a willingness to embark with force in situations thus
having an inclination for crime-based tasks as opposed to more sedentary desk-based work.
Nonetheless it is arguable whether police work can be effective or not but, it should also to an
extent be appreciated that the effectiveness of police work could result in specific individuals or
groups being unjustly stereotyped. Group solidarity tends to be affiliated with the vital
interdependence between police officers, who often meet potentially perilous situations where
they might be outnumbered by bitter, troubled, contentious community members.
For example let’s take look at the sociological study of ‘cop culture’ in the USA, it has been
stated by Carl B. Klockars, that a lot of police officers are influenced by ‘The Dirty Harry
Problem’ from the 1971 film Dirty Harry, starring Clint Eastwood as Detective Harry Callahan.
He goes a bit deeper within this topic that police officers are often faced with problems that may
often occur in which they then feel forced and therefore assume the need to take certain illegal
action in order to gain and achieve the greater good. Indeed one of the greatest and oldest ethical
questions people have often faced is, do good ends ever justify bad means? In the film Dirty
Harry a young lady was kidnapped by a complete psychopath murderer named ‘Scorpio’ who
demands $200,000 in ransom. Scorpio has buried the lady with only just enough oxygen to
30

survive a couple of hours or less. Harry then eventually comes across the psycho Scorpio and
then shoots him and tortures him to find out where he buried the girl.
Finally Scorpio decides to speak up about where the girl is, Harry then finds the girl, but
consequently she died anyway from the lack of fresh air. Let’s cut to the chase, Harry’s
behaviour towards Scorpion resulted in him finding the lady and saving her life in the end. This
would be a great Hollywood ending, but think about it. Harry had a good end in mind finding the
girl before she died and so on, but what about the illegal malpractice he used against Scorpio?
Not giving him his rights before interrogation and torturing him nearly to death? Appreciating
the fact that this is just a film but using it as an example in order to show what some of our police
officers can be capable of. In the film, Harry was wrong because he broke the police practice
rules. He violated the precepts of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. constitution which he swore
on oath to comply with. He went beyond the rules to such a point where he should have been
sacked/stricken off. He acted voluntarily and committed crimes, the most evident one was assault
with the intention to cause GBH. The question is, Is it morally wrong to torture Scorpio thus
contravening the police allegiance and legal bond but finding the girl saving her life, or act in
accordance with the system guidelines and not make every effort illegal or not, to force Scorpio
to talk and therefore permit the young girl to die? This example shows that malpractice within
police institutions is very much alive as it is in the UK.
According to (Westmarland, 2008), it is noteworthy, however, that police culture is neither
gigantic nor static, it depends on the police department styles, its leaders views the power
structure of the policed community and particular issues, patterns and problems of the policing
environment.
(Ianni and Ianni, 1983; Holdaway, 1983) also notes that some elements of occupational cop
culture is divided by front line officers (Constables) and managers (Chiefs) alike, although there
is evidence that refers to in-house contradictions and tension between knowledgeable and
experienced ‘street cops’ professionalism and that of management cops which is more
bureaucratic and education based. In a summary to literature, Robert Reiner (2000) also suggests
that cop culture is characterised by the following core features:
A commonly identified aspect of cop culture is suspicion. The police tend to be naturally
suspicious and assume everyone is a criminal obviously because a lot of people in society have
their views and opinions on the police officers and tend to continually lie to them. This might
mean the police are biased in the way they gather evidence and treat suspects. In addition,
suspicion is also the constant need to be keeping an eye out for trouble, something that it is
important for policeman to always be doing.
Another element of cop culture is a sense of isolation and solidarity. Police often feel they are
disliked by the general public. This encourages them to associate with other policemen, both at
work, for example in the canteen and in the locker rooms, as well as outside work, for example
in the pub, which therefore creates a sense of solidarity between them. This solidarity is
increased by the fact that the police need to rely on each other during their job to ensure their
safety. This isolation and sense of solidarity serves to reinforce the other elements of cop culture
that can lead to certain institutionalised views amongst policemen.
31

Moral and political police conservatism is another aspect of cop culture. According to Carrabine,
et al (2014) “80 per cent of UK police are politically conservative.” This can include negative
views of homosexuals, and strict opinions regarding law and order. This is due to several factors.
One is the nature of the job, which involves consistent negative interactions with both criminals
and left-wing activists. This tends to push policemen towards more conservative views. Another
factor is the hierarchal nature of the police force, which creates an organisation more suited to
conservative views. Furthermore, the selection process for such an organisation tends to
reinforce this, favouring people with conservative views who will, in turn, hire people with
similar views.
The police are also often accused of displaying ‘old fashioned machismo’. Another element of
cop culture is the idea of being macho. This is a male-orientated ethos that basically involves
exaggerated ideas of what it is to be a man. These include characteristics like excessive drinking,
not showing emotion, being physically strong and aggressive. According to (Reiner, 2010) it also
includes bravery and sexual promiscuity and police organisations have been identified as sexist
and male dominated. The first female chief constable was Pauline Clare, who was appointed to
run Lancashire Constabulary in 1995, 166 years after the establishment and centralisation of the
new police force).
Racial prejudice simply states that the white dominated nature of the police tends to create a
xenophobic attitude towards ethnic minorities including discrimination against gay and lesbian
individuals working within the force and in addition to that, the act of not recruiting enough
officers from ethnic minority groups into the force. This characteristic has been described
according (Crank 2003: chap.18) as a common aspect to police conservatism reason being,
because a large number of American studies have also demonstrated police suspiciousness,
hostility and prejudice towards black people and conversely. The aftermath of both the Scarman
and Stephen Lawrence Inquiry of policing sought to reduce discrimination and encourage more
constructive relationships between the police service and Britain’s black and minority ethnic
communities. Change has ensued but there are still on-going issues in police relations with ethnic
minorities.
Pragmatism is when the police tend to prioritise dealing with problems quickly and effectively.
This means they do not have time to think about philosophical issues and tend to focus on
‘getting the job’ done. The police often gets less wrapped up in long term goals and tends to be
more focused on short term goals of going home earlier. However this is the final element of cop
culture to note is very pragmatic, concrete, down to earth, anti-theoretical perspective which is
typical of the rank and file, and indeed chief constables (with a growing number of exceptions)
and in addition to this, this element is thus a kind of conceptual police conservatism within cop
culture. Lastly, it has been said recently that those in higher ranks within the force have actually
become upwardly mobile in progression and intellect, in other words, those in the police service
tend characteristically to have an action and achievement-orientated, frame of mind.
It is clearly evident that within police organisations in the UK there exists a ”cop culture” which
goes against the grain of regulatory requirements of consent policing and creates adverse
reactions from police officers themselves and also from citizens within communities. Police
32

organisations are male-dominated and operate as conservative hierarchical institutions. Elements
of machismo, isolation and solidarity, suspicion, pragmatism and discrimination and prejudices
within the “cop culture” makes for a changed attitude within many police officers towards
society. They soon begin to view typically law abiding citizens all as suspicious and as potential
criminals thus giving rise to an increase in adverse behaviours such as stereotyping,
discrimination and other malpractices being displayed by police officers in some communities.
This is a far cry from the original nine principles of policing which states that “the police are the
people and the people are the police” “Cop culture”, therefore, influences the behaviour of our
police officers to a great extent.
33

CHAPTER 11 : DIFFERENT THEORIES
“A cardinal American virtue, 'ambition,' which advertise a cardinal American vice,
'deviant behaviour.” (Merton, 1959, p12).
STRAIN THEORY
This essay will be divided into three parts. Firstly discussing what is strain theory and
secondly what constitutes a strain to society and thirdly exploring its strengths and weaknesses.
Strain Theory was coined by Robert Merton (1938). One could possibly start with the question
what is strain theory? Whilst on the other hand it could be argued in terms of understanding
criminal participation according to Robert Merton, we could suggest that he tried to explain
criminality as well as delinquency as resulting from Durkheim’s early 20th century idea of
anomie; which is created by a disjuncture or a detachment if you like, between the way people
live and the structure of contemporary society in the west, especially in the USA. Strain theory
argues that it kicks off from positivism’s approach to criminology. Strain theory also contests
that the origins of deviance may reside in our social context for example, neighbourhoods,
communities, and households, circles of friends, schools and culture.
However, Merton’s work does thus, marks a significant extension and modification of
Durkheim’s anomie theory. Strain theory also contest the fact that individuals are more certain to
partake in criminality when they cannot find any ways possible to get what they want through
legitimate means. Knowing that they can’t get what they really and truly desire for a life time
expectation they then become filled with defeat and indignation and they may try to obtain what
they want through illegal ways for example, living in the fast lane. Also people may lash out in
exasperation or make oneself feel better by the excessive use of drugs. Strain theory also
describes the types of strain that occur in society which drives people to commit crime as well as
the reasons in which may influence whether a person responds to strain with crime.
Merton (1974) suggested that individuals in America were persuaded to seek the objective of
financial achievements, but un-working people in society known as the lower class people in
society that depend welfare benefits etcetera, were hindered from gaining such wealth
legitimately- like having a decent educational background as well as graduating to get a decent
career. Therefore the restriction to achieve such economic success thus, conceives a huge outcry,
where people may react to the disapproval by taking part in criminal activities. Most notably,
they would probably try and attempt to achieve worldly riches through illegal ways like the
selling of illegal class a drugs, stealing, and self-exploitation such as prostituting/escorting. In
addition some people may also handle their anger through alcohol and drug use.
Deviance characterise behaviour which violates our norms and values within our society,
counting properly executed laws as well as unofficial infringement of social values and norms.
What are norms? One can say norms are simply societal laws that structures and guides our
society. These are often unspoked and we pick them up naturally. Therefore Robert Merton
(1950) looks at strain theory by looking at the strains to anomic cultures. Albert Cohen (1960)
therefore suggests that people who are not working class desire to be in the same league as the
people who are classed the working class, which includes respect from society and financial
status. Many people in society who are lower class, would be unable to gain status legitimately.
For instance, they wouldn’t have been schooled on the skills and attitude needed to perform well
34

in high school. As a negative result to that, they were unable to meet the forecast of the middle-
class staff, or compete with peers from higher classes. In addition we could argue and say that
these strained youths were in contact with each other, and may come up with the idea of setting
up and alternative status system in which they could successfully complete. Their hostility to the
upper class, among other negative factors would therefore thus; result in the delinquent youths to
create a status system that appreciated criminality or deviant acts like starting fights and stealing.
In relation to that, here comes the birth of a new gang in town.
Robert Merton (1959) stresses that lower classed individuals wanted to gain monetary success.
Merton also suggest that the delinquents realised that they would not achieve such success
through legal means and therefore so would be ripe for the causes of them taking part in
delinquent behaviours. We could also look at factors which constitutes a strain on individuals for
example, the loss of a positive stimuli the death of a friend, family, a break up with a
boyfriend/girlfriend, moving to a new neighbourhood and from the presentation of the negative
stimuli for example, physical assaults, verbal assaults or insults if you like as well as
unreasonable arrogances and demands. Other examples of things and factors that one could
consider as a strain in society in which some may have gone through or go through are as
follows; “I lost the work I was working on, it was on my laptop and I was nearly finished”; “My
cell mate took my food to another prison cell without asking me”; “I got myself into a brawl with
my good friend and it ruined our friendship”; lastly “My cheating ex-partner just got married to
the person he cheated on me with, like seriously oh my God how could he…?” - These problems
may not be as severe as a death within the family or a close accomplices but these are still strains
one should therefore look at and label as strain to society.
The American Dream says everybody who works hard can excel in prosperity and success.
However, the meaning of achieving the American Dream is not as limpid and accessible as
promoted. Looking at the above one must look at the structural blockages in society that might
just limit access to legitimate means, therefore it’s only right to acknowledge that some may
accomplish their dreams by legitimate or illegitimate means, for example, having the “whatever
it takes I’m going to get mentality.” Structural strain according to Robert Merton is a structure of
societal norms and principles acclaims, practically nearly above all else, some common achieved
targets for society as whole, meanwhile the communal structure forcefully deprives entry to
sanctioned route of achieving common goals for a reasonable part of the same population, that
deviance occurs on a gigantic scale (Merton, 1957: 146). One could therefore acknowledge in
some elements to strain theory, that strain theory is just a theory of jealousy and anger towards
the law and upper-classed citizens in society who worked hard for what they have. One could
have a consensus that strain theory insinuates that low classed citizens are jealous of the rich but,
also lack the means to become productive, often turn to criminality which is often used as a
pathway to gain success. Therefore anomie is constituted because people cannot achieve
society’s expectations of them, this constitutes restricted means which thus create a strain to
anomic society which leads to deviance.
Robert Merton (1966) identified 5 modes of individual responses to society in which some
people may adopt within modern society in retaliation to societal pressure, all of which, with the
exception of conformity; are deviant. Below will go into more detail relating to the 5 modes of
adaptation individuals have in order for the strain theory to be further understood:
35

Conformity is the good non-deviant character. Conformity adaptation is where people believe
and continue to accept and engage in legitimate means despite the environmental pressures
towards deviant behaviours. Therefore the conformist accepts and strives for the cultural goals of
material success by following legal institutional means in order to prosper.
Innovation is the deviant perpetrator. Innovation, is the adaptation of acceptance of cultural
goals, norms and values, but yet reject legitimate means or institutionalised means. The
innovator therefore takes part in criminality or roles that includes delinquency, which employs a
range of illegitimate means in order to obtain economic success. (Particularly characteristics of
the lower classes).
Ritualism is a non-criminal individual but is also deviant. Ritualism is the pursuit of the
dominant cultural goal of economic success which is often abandoned or rejected. Ritualism is
an adaptation which is often focused on what is important. This is often known or seen as
compulsive conformity to the dominant norms. Basically the ritualist only want to conform in
other words be like another person in particular and have the same characteristics of the middle
classes.
Retreatism is a deviant person who is described as being probably deviant with that kind of
individual you never really know where you stand. Retreatism is the rejection of both cultural
goals and institutionalised means. This adaptation involves the total complete escape from the
pressures and demands of organised society. One can say the retreatist resolves internal conflict
between morals (right) and illegitimate means (wrong) and finds ways to escape characteristics
of psychotics, outcasts and addicts.
Rebellion is another adaptation what is deviant with a substitute, such as a set of new goals and
means. The rebel rejects the goals and means of society and actively attempts to substitute them
with new goals and new means. The rebel therefore thus, use rejection to comply with accepted
laws. The rebel is not secretive about his or her deviant behaviour. He or she publicly recognises
intention to change norms and social structure according to own morals, interest, ideas and
needs. This is the characteristic of the upper class; therefore rebellion is only just a radical
alternative to retreatism.
The social structures we have looked at therefore thus, makes a strain to anomie and deviant
behaviours. The pressures of such societal orders are towards being more successful than one’s
opposition. As long as the sentiments backing up this unequal system are administered
throughout the whole range of activities and are restrained to the final outcome of success, such
as the choice of means which will definitely prevail hugely inside the scope of governmental
means. Moreover, the cultural stress moves from the contentment stemming from rivalry itself to
nearly absolute worry of the result, the resultant stress makes for the malfunction of the
regulatory structure. With this consequence of governmental laws, there then arise an
approximation to the problem erroneously held by the utilitarian philosophers to be typical of
society – for example, where an issue in which calculations of personal advantages and
nonetheless the fear of punishment are the only regulating parties.
36

The weakness of Robert Merton’s strain theory is that we do not know how much monetary
success is really valued in our society be it in the UK or USA. Merton’s theory on strain also
does not fully explain to us why lower class citizens accepts deviant or criminal acts. Laurie
Taylor (1971) rejects this theory because Merton failed to carry his analysis far enough, such as
failing to consider who create laws and who gets insight from them.
This theory only explains utilitarian crimes, whilst still bypassing reasons for crimes that are not
utilitarian. The strain theory takes an individualistic approach to almost everything and still yet
ignore group crimes. Critics also argue that this theory is to deterministic; and does not recognise
the fact that not all working class people resort to criminality, this theory ignores the people in
power who create and reinforce laws or sanctions to stop deviant adaptations like innovations,
ritualism, retreatism, and rebellion. Taylor, Walton, and Young (1973) attacked Merton’s theory
because it does not account for politically motivated perpetrators who are freedom fighters for
example, the Black Panthers who are known as (Black Activists) who sometimes commit crimes
because of commitment to their cause rather than the effects of anomie.
However, there are some strengths to the strain theory beyond all the limits of some negative
look on this theory some critics may have. The power of this theory does explains how normal
and deviant individuals can arise even whilst having the same goals for example, conformity and
innovation. The theory does talk about how society adapt to social strain along with the reasons;
for crime and deviance as a result of social strain. The theory does also explain why the working
class crime rates may be higher as well as how different positions in the social structure resort to
different adaptations.
In conclusion to this essay, one should recognise that Robert Merton created the social strain
theory building on Durkheim’s theory of anomie. However despite the criticism the strain theory
may face, this theory still happens to be one of the more plausible and appropriate in terms of
attempting to investigate criminality rates as a whole societies. (Joachim J. Savelsberg, 1995)
suggests that Merton’s strain theory can help explain the rapid build-up in the crime rate in post-
communist Poland, former Czechoslovakia eastern Germany, Russia and Europe itself including
the UK. Merton’s work however can hardly account for all criminality. Since his original work,
other sociologists have altered as well as added to Merton’s work in order to try and develop
more complete explanations for crime and delinquency. Nevertheless Robert Merton theory still
thus, manage to play a big part in the explanation of crime and delinquency.
37

FEMINIST THEORY
Female offenders rarely feature in early criminological work. It was thought that there
were three substernal reasons why women were not studied; 1) for a topic that has been so
widely researched it is surprising that it fails to explain the behaviour of half of the population 2)
there has been more sociological interest in other parts of women’s experiences 3) there are very
major differences between male and female offending yet this does not attract social scientists
like it should. Feminists merely argue that early work has a set of assumptions about both gender
and crime which at the core features men. It is argued that the type of sociology known as
appreciative sociology led social scientists to focus more on men therefore ignoring women.
Delinquency and crime is often seen as highly unfeminine.
It has been noted how recently women are leaving household roles and are becoming more
involved in violence and other forms of crime. There are five key elements underpinning
feminist work 1) gender is not a natural fact 2) gender and gender relations order social life and
social institutions in fundamental ways 3) gender relatinos and constructs of masculinity and
femininity are not symmetrical 4) Systems of knowledge reflect mens views of the social world
5) women should be at the centre of intellectual inquiry.
SMART (1967) - She suggested the thought that the separate study of men and women would
lead to further marginalisation of women in research. The increasing attention of women in
research could also lead to increasing CJS attention on such actions. Women can be seen as
being doubly deviant as they not only break the law but trangress their assumed gender roles.
Feminist criminology aims to understand the nature of female offending and the treatment of
women within the CJS. Examining the 'sex-crime ratio', the on average higher figure of male
offending.
HEIDENSOHN (1985) – argues the Four key characteristics to female offending; economic
rationality, heterogeneity of their offences, fear and impact of deviant stigma and the experience
of double deviance and double jeopardy. Economic rationality refers to how women are
sometimes motivated by economic concerns this is why we see them involved in large amounts
of property crimes. Heterogeneity of their offences refers to how women have very different
social positions to men. Due to social circumstances, differing opportunities. Socialisation and
the impact of controls this can all influence different levels of criminality. Fear and impact of
deviant stigma tries to explain how men and women get treated differently by the public after
offending. The experience of double deviance and double jeopardy is highly experienced by
women being told their actions go against their social roles but also to experience therefore
increased inversion from the CJS.
However, Many theorists emphasis the role of patriarchy in women's oppression and
marginalisation, influencing the decision to commit crimes. Recently, control theory has proven
to be effective and successful when explaining female deviance. It has an emphasis on
conformity rather than deviance which may help explain lower levels of female deviance.
In conclusion one could argue that Women commit far fewer seriously crimes than men. Women
are also informally controlled so find it hard to deviate and commit crime. When prosecuting
women they are often viewed as being mad or have been influenced by factors that are outside of
their control. A key question raised by feminists is whether women are treated differently in the
penal system than men. Also we should look at the weakness of this theory for example, some
38

feminist theories are accused of hypocrisy as they are said to over focus on gender in their
explanations of crime and deviance
 Some feminist theories are criticised for understating the issues of class and ethnicity.
 Some feminists are accused of an over focus on victimisation and of simplifying the
causes of offending.
39

LABELLING THEORY
In sociology, labelling theory is the view of deviance according to which being labelled
as a "deviant" leads a person to engage in deviant behaviour. Originating in Howard Becker
(1960) his work suggested that labelling theory explains why people's behaviour clashes with
social norms.
Instead of looking at why some social groups commit more crime, the labelling theory asks why
some people committing some actions come to be defined as deviant, while others do not.
Labelling theory is also interested in the effects of labelling on individuals. Labelling theorists
note that most people commit crimes at some time in their lives but not everyone becomes
defined as a deviant or a criminal. So how does this process of defining a person as deviant
work?
Becker H (1960) insinuates that Deviant behaviour can be defined as behaviour that differs from
the normal, behaviour that incurs public disapproval and behaviour that is usually subject to
some form of sanction. Once someone has been successfully labelled as criminal or deviant, the
label attached may become the dominant label or ‘master status’ which is seen as more important
than all the other aspects of the person. He or she becomes a ‘hooligan’ or ‘thief’ rather than a
father, mother or friend. Each label carries with it prejudices and images and this may lead to
others interpreting the behaviour of the labelled person in a particular way. For example, a
person who volunteers to stay late at work is usually seen as worthy of praise, but, if a person has
been labelled as a thief, people might be suspicious that they will steal something. For some
people once a deviant label has been applied this can actually lead to more deviance. This
happens when people start acting in the way they have been labelled.
Paul Willis (1977) examined male youth behaviour in schools and found that those labelled ‘bad’
by staff effectively lived out that label and even revelled in it. Labelling can also mould the way
someone behaves in their lives especially if they cannot shake off that label. There are many in
society who view drug taking as something that should not be done because it is medically bad
for you, breaks the law and leads an individual down what might become a dark path. Examine
the following scenario:
A 15 year old boy is caught taking drugs and is labelled a deviant by his/her immediate social
group when they find out. His parents find out and reinforce the deviant label by remonstrating
with their son about what they see as his deviant behaviour. His parents tell his school. His
teachers search his bag on a random search and find drugs. He is permanently excluded from
school and the police are informed. He is arrested and cautioned. He cannot find another school
in time to sit his GCSE exams and therefore can only find low paid work. He steals from the
shop that employs him in order to buy the drugs that give him an escape from the drudgery of
everyday life. The shop finds out and he is sacked and the police are informed. He is arrested and
charged with theft. He now has a criminal record. He cannot get another job as he has to declare
his criminal record to prospective employers. He steals from parents to get some money. His
parents throw him out of the house. He lives with friends in a flat. The police raid the flat one
day as they see known drug takers entering the flat. He is arrested, charged and imprisoned on
drug related offences. He begins taking hard drugs in prison. Once released, he turned to crime to
finance his life. He takes an overdose of heroin that has been cut with impure chemicals and dies
at the age of 21.
40

While the above may seem stereotypical to some, others would see it as a self-fulfilling prophecy
that is the result of being labelled.
Criticism of labelling theory:
Labelling theory faces the usual problem of definitions and values [including those arising from
his determination to take sides and so on]. Becker's definition ignores the defining characteristics
of deviancy in favour of suggesting that social interaction is a universal process. This is too
general, but at least it highlights ambiguities with categories like ’deviant’. However, most
people seem to know what counts as deviant activity -- it looks like a very abstract sociological
point, mere sophistry, to suggest that murder is only what is labelled as murder. Even Becker H
(1957) backs away from this problem with his category of ’secret deviancy’ which implies that
deviancy can exist without being discovered and labelled. The approach needs a tighter
definition, such as wanting to explain only ’rule violation followed by stigmatisation'. This could
be seen as general, societal or situational views only based on deviance.
The approach is often accused of having a limited focus:
 It might neglect the process of becoming deviant in the first place, or possess only a tacit
theory of primary deviance. Becker argues that labels initiate deviant behaviour and that
deviant behaviour is ubiquitous in the first place. Some critics argue that that [moral?]
choice is also important.
 Other critics point to the social determinism of the approach, which allows for no
resistance. This is not usually so, however, not for the work of Goffman, at least, and it
does not apply to recent studies which refer to the active seeking of labels [as some sort
of badge of honour, perhaps -- as in Gay Pride?] – These sorts of complex responses are
predicted best by symbolic interactionism, in fact.
 It ignores certain problem areas of deviancy, such as violent crime, physical handicap, or
sexual activity. But these are still labelled subsequently, by abstract agencies, and in ways
that involve social reaction and self-reaction.
 It neglects power, especially the power of institutions. This is a dogmatic assertion
however, and it tends to over-emphasise crime again, especially where there is a political
explanation for crime. Many ’deviants’, such as blind people, really are powerless. The
criticism very often reflects political differences -- there is an anti-bureaucratic 'alienation
problematic' in labelling theory [which became unfashionable]. Perhaps the analysis is
politically suspect, and perhaps labelling theory operates with an unduly pluralistic view
of society -- but it is not incompatible with a stratified view.
41

CHAPTER 12 : VICTIMS OF CRIME
Criminal science is a study that helps in understanding various aspects of crime and is
impact over victims. Countries have developed certain laws and policies which are to be
followed by all people who are residing in that region. Public interests and constitutional laws
must not be violated or breached by any activity of an individual or group. The existence of
crimes with no victims and their dimensional aspects has been depicted is presented in this essay.
Victim is a term that is used for referring a person that has been subjected to certain activity
which is criminal or accidental. For instance, a car is run over by a truck. Two people were
riding in the car and truck was carrying only the driver. Both passengers of car were dead but
truck driver was severely injured. Through this example, it is easy to understand that all three
people involved in the incident were victims. It is the responsibility of legal authorities to find
out whether the situation was a criminal offence or an accident (Emmanouil, 2015). It is
important to understand the procedures and facts which society considers before concluding
whether an incident is legal or not. Classification of situations and actions as a criminal offence
is based on interpretation of information gathered with reference to different subjective norms.
These can be cultural, historical, political or judicial norms. It helps in understanding critical
depth of offence and its relativity with the victims. The type of behaviour which is considered as
criminal totally depends on the actions which are initiated by one individual (Button, Lewis and
Tapley, 2014).
Victimless crimes are a situation where no victims exist apparently. The possibility of a crime or
criminal activity where no victims are present is less. Cases like drug addiction or prostitution
are considered as the victimless crimes by some philosophers while others are considered as the
act of victimisation. Generally, when a person provides his/her consent in performing a criminal
offence, then no victims are produced in this event (Hughes, 2014). Equality Act of 2010 depicts
that victimisation is an unjust activity. The discrimination of individuals on various bases is a
form of victimisation. Often prostitution, gaming and sodomy give rise to controversies that
depict two sided response i.e. either these are victimless crimes or they are an act of
victimisation.
42

Harm, injury or any sort of abuse which is caused to the individuals by any act makes them the
victims of crime. It is injustice to infer that no such crimes exist where individuals are not
victimised (Bergelson, 2013). Violation of human rights of one individual due to activities of
others is a form of victimisation. Most of the nation considers use of recreational drugs and
medicines as a victimless crime. Since, individuals opting for recreational drugs have given their
consent, then criminal law doesn't hold them victim but accuses the person himself to be guilty
of the situation. This makes this exercise as a victimless crime. There are various types of crimes
which exist in the societies. These include crime against persons, property, and morality or hate
crimes, white collar crimes, etc. Different levels are experienced in each category of crime. For
instance: white collar crimes are generally committed by people belonging to the high class
society (Youngs and Canter, 2014). The general motive behind this unfair act is to earn or gather
more monetary benefits. These cannot be classified as the victimless crime until information
regarding no victimisation is acquired.
Every victimless crime has different perspectives. The rulers of justice consider drug addiction as
a victimless criminal activity while individual philosophers and voluntary activists depict that
there are people who are victimised by such acts. Children or relatives of the person who are
involved in drugs are affected badly. There can be situations when harsh incidents may take
place in which other people may get distressed (Wyatt, 2016). For example: when a person takes
drugs and then drives the car then the probability of road accident increase. The person can hit
anyone walking on the street and as a result, the highly debated victimless crime will now be
classified as a criminal offence. Socialists consider that no such thing like victimless crimes
exists. There is always victims which are sometimes not identified after occurrence of an event.
Practical significance of victimless crimes was considered in the earlier time when judicial
practitioners considered this as a tool to reduce penalty or impact of sentence (Clinard, Quinney
and Wildeman, 2014). Distribution, selling and formulation of drugs, illegal gambling, and
prostitution as well as pornography are highly classified the victimless crime. Human rights of
individuals engaged in these activities are not violated because of their consent and agreement in
being a part of this crime. Another contradictory criminal offence which is considered as
victimless is the white collar crime. Individuals who do not pay taxes or are violating laws of
ethical governance but their activities are not having any impact over other individuals
43

(Bergelson, 2013. This causes them to commit a victimless crime. But the impact of such
offences is deep routed and there is always a possibility that some victims exists (Mayhew and
Van Dijk, 2014). For instance, a politician is exposed for a scandal regarding development of
unfit infrastructure over a place. When judicial trials were conducted, it was found that no
injuries or harm was caused to any individual. But there is a possibility that the structure might
collapse. Hence, in the eyes of law, there were no victims but local communities and different
activists considered this act as a non-victimless crime.
It totally depends on the perseverance of individuals whenever a conclusion regarding victimless
crimes has to be made. People who get involved with intake of drugs are committing a serious
offence which is causing problem to their own health. These situations of criminal offence is
categorised as victimless because of lack of responsibility towards other individuals and no
interference with rights of other people (Green, 2015). Only such cases are called criminal
offences with no victim. Criminology is the study of examining a crime situation and the
reactions which are generated through it. It is important to create an in-depth analysis for the
same so that justice can be provided to those who were affected by the incident and punishment
can be given to the guilty.
The importance of this study is felt when cases or criminal activities are examined for
understanding whether it is a victimless crime or not (Hughes, 2014). Once, the consequences
and contributing factors are completely analysed then proper conclusions can be made. Suicide is
a crime in which only the participating individual is affected. Hence, it is categorised as a
victimless crime. The behaviour of a person is the major factor that determines what kind of
crime he/she is going to commit. If an individual is depicting violent behaviour then his chances
of committing a victimless crime are minimised (Muncie, 2014). No individual is criminal by
birth. Situations or circumstances pressurise an individual to take such decisions which can cause
injury or harm to other person. For instance: a teenage girl is subjected to continuous physical
abuse and harassment by her guardian. Since, she is facing such harsh living conditions, she is
forced to find alternatives for escaping this situation. The girl finds a technique to kill her
guardian and escapes his torture. She stabbed her guardian with a knife and eventually was
caught by local police authorities.
44

In the above example, it is clearly depicted that criminal activities of guardian victimised the girl.
She was forced to address brutal living conditions and act in a deflective manner. Her action of
killing the guardian was justified in one way but it wasn't a victimless crime. The individual who
got stabbed was the victim of crime committed by the girl. Although social and philosophical
groups will support girl's decisions and they won't consider the guardian to be the victim.
Henceforth, it is concluded that judicial proceedings and actual reasons behind the occurrence of
a criminal offence may be divergent (Koff, 2015). The level of punishment totally depends on
the brutality of crime and the number of people that are affected by the offence.
It is quite complex to reach a particular subjective conclusion on whether victimless crimes exist
or not. There are situations where no single individual is affected by the crime but there are still
considered as non-victimless due to their change in perceptions. A judge from legal point of view
may considered drug addiction as a victimless crime but social activists and voluntary workers
may consider this as victimisation of the people who are in-taking drugs (Koff, 2015). Lack of
in-depth research and proper evidences is the main reason due to which appropriate conclusions
cannot be made regarding a victimless crime. But there are certain crimes which are entirely
victimless. One of them is gambling. Being a completely illegal activity, the individuals who are
involved in gambling provide their consent and do not give any other dimension to this crime
(Button, Lewis and Tapley, 2014).
Being a topic of continuous debate and criticism, it will not be inappropriate to state that
victimless crimes do exist but their quantity is too short. No other crime except the ones which
are stated above are victimless (Hall, 2016). Repeals and laws which are applicable on victimless
crimes are classified into two broad categories. The first one is to follow the legislation and
provide proper punishment to the crime while other category is minimising or neglecting the
punishment of victimless crime depending on different criteria. Drug addicts and participants of
violation of certain legal rules and policies must be given a second chance for improvement
according to different socialists. But the constitution of every country has certain level of
punishments for each crime (Jewkes, 2015). For instance, a person who breaks the traffic rules
and runs the vehicle even in red light is considered to commit a victimless crime. The intensity of
this crime is not much violent but there are certain punishments depicted for this breach of law
also.
45

Lack of complaining parties makes the judicial proceedings of victimless crimes much easier and
less complex. The people who have committed the offence do not consider themselves as
victims. The places where these acts occur are less public, in other words, people who commit
suicides or take drugs won't make an agenda that they are going to perform these activities
(Victimless Crime. 2016). Hence, there is no or minimum involvement of third parties. It
automatically reduces the probability of victimisation. But this also means that detection and
identification of such crimes is very difficult. It is quite hard to identify whether a person has
committed suicide or was murdered by some other individual unless and until there is enough
evidence with the investigating party. Many a times, several crimes remain unnoticed from the
eyes of judicial government because of lack of observation by surrounding individuals and less
interaction of the participating individual.
The controversies which take place around a criminal offence which is categorised as victimless
are many (Emmanouil, 2015). But appropriate surveillance and judicial proceedings conducted
by government with help of undercover agents, use of technological assistance, etc. can help in
coming up on a conclusion that victimless crimes do exist. Due to fluctuations in their
occurrence frequency and inefficiency of government officials in detecting such activities,
provides support to the myth of non-existence of these crimes.
From the essay it can be concluded that basic information regarding the crimes that do not
involve any victims or also known as victimless crimes. People who indulge in offensive acts but
do not cause harm or injuries to other individuals. The intensity of victimless crimes is quite less
and their judicial trails are less complex. From this essay, it is clearly understood that victimless
crimes do exist but their existence is challenged due to differing perseverance of individuals.
46

47

CHAPTER 13 : CRIMINAL JUSTICE
This essay will be looking at the ways in which the probation service has changed, since
it became official in the early year of the 20th century in 1907 by the Probation of Offenders Act
1907. Since the year of formalisation of the probation service, it has been and continued to be
one of the main leading influences of the United Kingdom/Wales criminal justice system. In
order to understand the history of the probation service, it shall be thus, appropriate for one to
understand the way the service work as well as the role and responsibility of employees within
the service and how it has changed.
Historically there is gigantic agreement that the earliest recognition of the probation officers
were the police court of ‘missionaries’ who worked in London courts in the last term of the
nineteenth century. Their job, was religiously motivated and influenced by the catholic faith
church for example, the Church of England. In 1876, when the Church of England took the role
being visible in courts, their aim was actually to promote a moral reformation of drunks and
disorderly chaotic offenders in society, by setting them on the path of redemption, winning souls
for the kingdom of ‘God’. For example young offenders in those days who were arrested and
found guilty of minor offences were then discharged and not get sent to prison if somebody
respectable within society takes the opportunity and responsibility to look after these young
insolent delinquents. The people who would take the role of looking after such troubled teens
when parents or relatives were too busy and not able to go to the police station or court, would be
the police officers, they would therefore take the time out of their original job and act as
responsible adults for these teens. Looking after the teens would include mentoring and so on.
On that note, the non-religious worldly probation officers have been a present in all criminal
cases since the Probation of Offenders Act 1907, and from the 1930s onwards, they were taught
as social workers, altered by ‘welfare’ and medical models of wrongdoing (Chui and Nellis,
2003). Looking at community sentencing or what that method of punishing perpetrators is, we
can simply say that it is a, punitive method that includes the demanding of physical work along
with certain freedom one offender may have as well as his/her free time. Community sentence is
by no means a soft option and the criminal courts for example; the crown court is given the
opportunity and authority to deal with offenders by punishing them and also offering a means for
them to reform. However, it can be argued that the term ‘probation’ has its origins from this idea
that somebody would not be put in custody but instead be given time to prove themselves.
Although, the probation service got fully formalised in 1907, it did still take a few decades for
the emergence of the salaried workers to provide a proper probation service.
However, later in the mid of the 20th century the probation service was highly affected by
psychological theories, especially the ideas about the unconscious and defence mechanism
(Raynor, 2007:1066). So basically the old mission to save somebody’s soul was now devoted to
provide a therapeutic work facilitated by the probation officer. Harris defines this as a shift from
a teleological drive to a psychiatrically driven discourse (Raynor, 2007:1067).
The probation service which is now constituent of the ‘National Offender Management Service
(NOMS) alongside the prison service and youth offending teams which also performs a key role
in the criminal justice system operation at the incarceration level in the united kingdom. It assists
the magistrates and judges in their penalising decisions by the provision of pre-sentence reports
and bail information reports. It also has the responsibility for supervising offenders in public.
48

In the area of youth justice, the crime and disorder Act 1998 made the Youth Offending team
service official, and this service involves, for instance, the police, social services, education,
probation and health services to appraise young offenders in order to minimise youth misdeeds in
an atmosphere of larger dissentions from poor parental supervision and domestic abuse or
violence, to school absence/exclusions, drug and alcohol abuse or psychological mental health
issues, and therefore to impose community sentences for young delinquents.
In relation, in the early 1950s and 1990s there were still many studies that took part in looking at
the reconviction rates of probationers, considering their actual needs, and also how their needs
are being met by the probation officers. During the 1950s and the 1990s there was a high level of
cross examination on the effects of the probation service. Scrutiny was therefore being
orchestrated by criminologists such as, (Sir Leon Radzinowicz, 1958), by (Davies, 1969) lastly
by, (Folkard, 1976). Nonetheless, as rehabilitation paragon growingly happened to be
contentious and the dispute over ‘toughened-up’ community based penalties for example,
demanding probation, inclusions of more intensive conditions, curfew reinforced in the recent
half of the 20th century, the role of the probation service in administering public protection, risk
management and ‘true indemnity’ within the community remained greatly controversial.
(Davies, 1969) looked at the effects of the work of probation officers by having control groups
and dividing the officers with a high load of cases and low load of cases. It did after a while
somehow seemed after doing that, there was not much remedy. The empirical investigation did
result in the findings that the ‘treatment’ did not make a big difference in offenders and
subsequently the service became subjective to high criticism; which escorted to the development
of ‘nothing works approach’.
Alternatives to the custody approach in the 1980s and onwards, (Raynor, 2007: 1069) argues that
‘Probation should be a non-custodial sanction aiming to increase its market thus, share and
minimise imprisonment, rather than a ‘treatment’ aiming to change individuals’. However, not
all research had a negative result and there were the ones that showed positive effects. For
example, research was only undertaken amongst those who were provided an intensive care from
the prison welfare officers. In addition, based on research even though, the probation hostels had
a firm ground in helping offenders who are released by finding them housing and whilst they still
having caring wardens checking in on them, research still said that, ‘re-offending rates were
much lower back then’. In relation, still due to the ‘nothing works approach’ that negative view
became orthodox by that time, these positive effects clearly was not seriously taken into account
and did not have any effect on the way how policies were formed.
David Smith (2005), for example, argues that under the slogan ‘Enforcement, Rehabilitation and
Protection’ the job of the probation service has been rebranded in such a way that have been
separated from social work in a way of its objectives and beliefs. By the end of the 20th century,
probation officers had to face the fact that their portrayal was to ‘accost, manage and monitor’
and not solely to ‘admonish, assist and befriend’ (Worrall and Hoy, 2005). The probation
service, exists in its current form due to the Criminal Justice and Courts Service Act 2001, but
has been around since the early 20th Century. The PS being part of the NOMS (National Offender
Management Service), under the care of the MOJ handed over from the Home Office in 2007),
49

the Probation of Offenders Act 1907 did also provide legal foundations of the probation service
which made it possible for Magistrates’ Courts to appoint probation officers who were paid by
the local authority.
In contrast, the Act did also require probation officers to ‘beseech, assist and befriend’ those
under supervision, hence why having the skill to be trustworthy as a probation officer is
essential. Organisationally, until 2001, each of over 50 area Probation Services was managed
locally, although most of the services funding came from central government. Each probation
service had its own chief probation officer and, like the police, there was no centralised
organisation or spokesperson for the service.
The home office back then, did not significantly appropriate the running of local services until
1984 when they decided to provide a Statement of National Objectives and Priorities (SNOP).
The content of SNOP was not particularly antagonistic, but the fact that it had been directed at
all, it certainly became evident to be the start of a disagreement lasting nearly two decades on the
management of probation service. It’s evident that, the probation service underwent so many
changes, some of which have been bounced back into the training plans for probation officers.
For example, most of the twentieth century, probation officers took the same professional
training as ‘social workers’ which then later on got abolished in the 1990s.
By the early 1990s, in terms of procedural changes, a National Standards document was
promulgated, stipulating how supervision had to be conducted and, by the middle of the decade,
training for probation officers which had previously constituted a specialism within social work
training courses which had been separated completely from social work, because the government
concluded that social work is not the way to understand the work of that particular public
service. However, through this procedural change, the significance of this profession which
reversed in the training curriculum, therefore changed towards enforcement and rehabilitation as
well as public protection. By the end of that decade when the decision of the government was
finally made, to abolish the name ‘probation’ altogether, the government also decided to consider
the merger of probation and prisons into one correctional service (Home Office, 1998; Raynor,
2007). This did cause a bit of problems unfortunately and the eventual compromise was the
creation in 2001 of a centralised National Probation Service with a Local director. The ratio of
areas where probation officer were located went down from 54 to 42 and, as we have already
seen, the names of the main court orders were changed. These changes both reflected and
confirmed a major change of ethos for the probation service which now affirmed its objectives as
‘enforcement, rehabilitation and public protection’ (National Probation Service, 2001). This had
considerable implications for work with offenders:
Enforcement is to ensure that offenders keep up to do the obligation of their orders. Returning an
offender to court for non-compliance with an order which is referred to as “Breaching” of court
order, which had been seen in the past as admission of failure by the probation officer, which
was then seen as essential to maintaining the credibility of orders and an act of strength
(Hedderman, 2003; Hedderman and Hough, 2004).
Rehabilitation was to digress from focusing on the welfare of the offender with some ill-defined
wish that will lead in some way reform towards the subtraction of re-offending measured by
50

subtraction of reconviction rates. Public protection was to be gained with a consensus of robust
assessment and management of risk. The level of risk became the single most important criterion
in determining the amount and type of following intervention. Every offender that goes to prison
or is placed on community order is object to scrutiny and judgment of their risk of offending
again.
However, there are different methods of calculating but the most widely used is a computerised
system called the Offenders Assessment System (OASys) (Burnett, Baker and Roberts, 2007;
Kemshall and Wood, 2007). Under the National Offender Management Model, the job with
offenders is now separated in four ‘tiers’, depending on levels of risk and dangerousness. Tier 1
offenders are to be punished; in contrast; tier 2 offenders are to be punished and helped, tier 3
offenders are punished, helped and changed; tier 4 offenders punished, helped, changed and
controlled (NOMS, 2006).
Later on, (Carter, 2003) had foreseen that the services typically provided by the probation areas
might be provided by others independent, ‘voluntary’ organisations and even by the private and
commercial sectors. It was later contested that the competitions between providers would raise
standards generally. The Offender Management Act 2007 therefore empowered the Secretary of
State (the Minister of Justice to commission services directly, with the clear implication that they
may be commissioned by other services. In 2010, 42 probation areas of England and Wales were
reconstituted as 35 Probation Trusts, who would both provide probation services and would also
themselves be commission services from others.
In January 2013, developments were therefore given a further impetus in a government proposal
to commission much more work from the voluntary and commercial sectors. A massive deal of
work that has until now been conducted by probation staff within the public sector is prone to be
given in future by other sectors who will be ‘paid by results’ (as measured by reconviction rates).
The state believes that the market competition will raise standards normally and that many less
risky offenders should be managed by independent agencies. Critics argues that, the idea impose
a triumph of ideological principle over the indication of past experiences, that the public sector
trust is already working adequately with other organisations and that the distinction between
more higher and lower risk offenders straying from the right path assumes that danger is static.
The probation service however does include unpaid work (community payback service), house
arrest, and curfew, suspended sentence, being put on electronic tag, paying fines, mandatory
treatment programmes, and apology to the victim, specific court orders and injunctions regular
reporting to someone, and having judicial corporal punishment. Mandatory treatments – is a drug
and alcoholic treatment programme where offenders who suffer with such issue must undertake
by law with psychology help as well as back to work within society programmes. Suspended
sentences – simply means that if a perpetrator break the law in any form during a community
sentence, that individual will be subject to imprisonment and further punishment.
Mandatory treatments on one hand is simply not to drink alcohol or take drugs, also not to be
seen at certain clubs or boozers, whereas specific court orders on the other hand is that the PO is
given the duty to take care offenders by supervising them, making sure that they obey court
orders and not breach court conditions. The courts have authority to decide that a community
51

sentence may be appropriate if a person commits atrocity such as damaging property, benefit
fraud and assault.
Community sentence is also decided if the court believe that a person is more likely to stop
committing crime than if they go to jail, or if it is the first time an offender have committed a
crime, lastly also if the person have a psychological mental illness or condition disease of the
brain that may affect ones behaviour this may result in a community sentence rather than jail.
Community punishment includes undertaking community payback such as, working in your local
area. Unpaid work will be removing graffiti of walls, gardening or painting and decorating public
places and buildings and clearing wastelands. As well doing the community service work, the
offenders will perform such duties with the supervision of a community payback supervisor. If
unemployed, offender have the duty to work 3 or 4 days a week as well as work 40 to 300 hours
depending on how serious the offence was.
The role of probation officers is to run specialist group programmes in order to change
offenders’ attitude and behaviours for example, anger management courses, making an offender
meet people who were affected by their offence, as part of a restorative justice programme. It’s
the duty of Probation officers to help offenders’ who are released from prison to find housing as
well as rehabilitating them and helping them find jobs and so on. The aim of the probation
service is to reduce re-offending and make sure that offenders carry out their punishment in a
proper way, plus protecting the public and making offenders understand how their actions affect
victims and society bringing forth self-conviction within the offender.
In conclusion, it is evident that the probation service have changed over the years for example,
the Offender Management Bill, was introduced in Parliament in 2006, which intended to enable
probation “areas” to become trusts as part of policy to open up the provision of correctional
services to greater completion from the voluntary, community, and private sectors. It is clear that
the criminal justice system still depends on the help and need for probation officers despite the
amount of changes the service have been through which still remains to play a key role in the
criminal justice system.
52

53

CHAPTER 14 : MEDIA AND CRIME
Monday Tuesday Wednesday
 Facebook
 Twitter
 Instagram
 Snapchat
 Read newspaper
(news of the world,
daily mirror and
evening standard)
 Facebook
 Instagram
 Snapchat
 Radio LBC News
 BBC News
 BBC news
 Sky News
 True Documentary
channel
Part 1:
Q1) – On a Monday I tend to be on my phone often because classes at university on this
particular day are less intense than Thursday and Fridays. The media sometimes is a distraction
as I have several different viewpoints appearing on my Facebook feed, as (Yvonne Jewkes,
2012) states that “the media’s role in representing reality is highly contested and often subject to
interpretation” (40) which means I spend quiet a lot of time reading these different articles, then
repost articles that touches me the most. I don’t really watch television because I never really
have the time to as I am very busy doing reports and essays, and the TV is distracting.
On Tuesday I would listen to the radio and after that gets boring whilst I am cooking I may put
on the TV and watch sky news in order to listen to what is happening as well as getting the daily
weather forecast for the upcoming week.
On a Wednesday I most likely watch the TV GMTV on ITV3 watching the news and celebrities
and so on talking about personal lives and experience and then straight after I am on my
smartphone on my social media checking for articles and reposting articles and news pages
whilst checking personal emails.
Q2) - My usage of media has changed because in my 20 years of growing up becoming a man I
have realised not everything I see on Facebook, twitter or on google is always necessarily true or
if it is true its frequently amplified by the media in order for them to make money through
twisting the truth and exposing people in the wrong way. It is often evident that sometimes the
media amplify things in order to make people by their paper by all means adding a bit of made
fantasy to the actual story of an incident.
54

Another way my media usage has changed, is based on finance; meaning I only watch television
at my mums house and when I am at university halls I refrain from watching TV because I can’t
afford a TV licence therefore I just use mainly internet sources. I also think using my phone for
particular sources I have named above I find it cheaper, quicker and more efficient for me
especially when I am in a hurry sitting on the bus or on the train.
Q3) – I use social media a lot because as a young man I find the news to be sometimes
alienating. In addition I find media sources via internet more useful because I will get up to date
information as well as watching on TV.
Part 2
Q1. – Adding sociological and criminological theory, (Sparks, 1992) argued that most common
arrangements must get looked at taking on board that indagation was found variant according to
place, time and the media of course if you like. Looking at Deviance amplification spiral, the
theory of deviance is a twisted “media” occurrence explained by media pundits in a way of
adding multitude of disclosed papers relating to a class of objectionable behaviour or another
'unsatisfying' incident, which eventually constitutes moral-panics.
The explanation of cunning deviance according Becker, H. S. (1963). Is simply that the deviant
interloper of the crowd’s laws ought to be object to opinion, speculation and fact-finding. On one
hand non ordained individuals really would like to know about deviants and what drives them to
making them perform the unthinkable. Meanwhile on the other hand Boffins have attempt to
look for answers to such antagonising questions. In relation to that it was accepted as a judicious
conjecture that there ought to be a thing intrinsically aberrant subjectively specific in terms of
behaviourism that intends to break social order, norms and values.
Jock Young (1974: 241) however argues that newspapers and the media in general chooses
occurrence that is peculiar, which exposes them in a much rather labelling trend and compares
them against a backdrop of conformity that is sometimes overstated. (Home Affairs Committee,
2008) also argues that the process of hyper-mediatisation often extends to other spheres of
criminality and criminal justice, in turn looping back to reconnect again with explaining twenty-
first century fears and insecurities. With billions of working supervision cameras, the United
Kingdom has the hesitating division of accommodating the largest ratio of CCTV cameras to
people anywhere on this earth.
(Yvonne Jewkes, 2012) states that the media tends to engage a lot in the mechanism of
personalising in a way to keep simplifying myths to give them a personal humane concern, that
consequently results in certain behaviourism getting seen as the behaviour and attitudes of
people within society.
However, (Greer and McLaughlin, 2012) have a consensus on the fact that depending on the
time a picture may be sent, it can surely dictate if or not a tale goes forward to be published or
not. The availability of the right picture can help raise a victim of crime or wrongdoer to a social
or an international exemplary reputation.
55

Criminologists (Hamm and Greer, 2011) theorised that at the global level, issues encountered
company with ecological adversity, governmental unethical conduct, police malpractice,
oppression, torment as well as economic meltdown, activist organise themselves into resistance
movements and then in result turn to social media in order to carry attention to their burgeoning
displeasure. FB (known as Facebook) is used to plan public outcry whereas for twitter, it is used
to expose and manage events, along with the world being together enlightened at the same time,
captivated and scandalised by the use of YouTube.
According to (Rojek, 2012), in line with the growth of celebrity culture; crimes are more
newsworthy if they involve a famous or notable people and of course amplifying the facts too.
Although names will normally be added where possible, one of the most compelling figures in
crime stories is the unknown predatory stranger.
(Yvonne Jewkes, 2011), contested that worry have been shown that the hugely atypical emphasis
on real vicious sexual social crimes in the BBC’s long running reality programme of crimewatch
UK might add extra height of fear in area of spectating congregations.
CHAPTER 15 : CESAR BECCARIA
Classical Reading (Cesar Beccaria):
56

This short report will be about the late classicist/sociologist and criminologist he is, Cesar
Beccaria. Beccaria was born 1738 15th March in Italy Rome, he is the founder of classical
criminology. This report will examine his views and interpretation of the legal system laws and
his views on the punishment of crime.
Beccaria starts off talking about the nature of the legal system, especially that individuals have to
sacrifice some rights off their own in order to protect other rights for example, they must give
permission to someone to potentially punish them in order that others are stopped from
committing crimes against them or anybody else within society. In order to make law you’ve got
to give up some of your own freedom and accept certain restriction the law would place upon
you. In addition criminal law’s job back then, as it is today, is to punish those who break the
terms of this social contract by committing a crime, which consequently gives them an unfair
advantage over the rest of society. It was these thoughts of Cesar Beccaria that led to his
arguments about why crime itself occurred and also how punishments for criminal activity
should be performed.
This piece of writing is simply about the problems in the legal system, for example crime and
punishment, and how they can be resolved in a civilised way. In relation to the above, he also
points out most legal systems have not been created in a logical way, with a clear philosophical
idea behind them, but sort of muddled together over time, out of necessity- the people who made
such legal systems made them in an non-philosophical way. What he is therefore, saying, is that
legal systems are often rigid, unfair and corrupt, mainly because they have not been clearly
thought out in a logical manner.
He also states that people in society are free willed, capable of rational thoughts and responsible
for their choices, including offences. Law breakers therefore made the voluntary free choice
known as the (Actus Rea) to commit criminal acts having to measure up the potential pros and
cons of doing the crime, of doing so, and decided that the pro outweighed the cons. Beccaria
describes criminals as ‘Moral calculators’ who can be stopped from taking part in criminal
activities by punishing them, known as deterring criminals. In addition, Beccaria also then
argued “that the only justified rationales for laws and punishment was the principles of utility.”
Compared to today, the legal system during Beccaria’s time was far less lenient, and involved
capital punishment.
Beccaria also used secularism to make a human theory of punishment that focused on living
human beings who were responsive to pain and pleasure, rather than traditional based ideas of
law. He then goes on to highlight some of the potential flaws in the legal system and how they
can be avoided, for example he says:
 Laws should not be individually interpreted.
 Laws should be set by a sovereign and administered by a judge.
 Laws should be clear so they do not need to be individually interpreted.
57

 Punishment should be certain. For example, (there should not be a chance to reduce
punishment).
 Punishment should be proportional to the crime it is punishing.
 Beccaria also argued that the criminal law should bind and guide society by laying out
clear, rational rules.
In summary, he says that in order for punishment for a crime to be fair, it has to be public,
prompt, necessary, just, the least possible punishment for the given crime and dictated by laws. It
was evident that he overlooked some facts that not all criminal activity is the subject of “moral
calculations”, some offences are committed accidently, or in the heat of the moment, rather than
being premeditated beforehand. For example, the offender could have been drunk from a party
(known as intoxication according to the criminal law) if the offenders case was brought before
the court he could claim one of the defences which is ‘Intoxication’ in order to dispute the case
or maybe claim insanity if he is suffering abnormality of the mind where he shall not be
convicted of an offence under the M'Naghten rules in criminal law.
However, it also can be disputed that the classicist approach does not fully explain the reason
behind people committing crime and in conclusion to this report I would definitely question
whether his concept of an ideal legal system is too rigid and inflexible and doesn't take into
account all the potential practical issues that can come up. Therefore, the majority of Beccaria’s
argument can be said to be based on philosophical ideas, rather than on the reality of how crime
works and how a society must deal with it in practice. Although, Beccaria’s theories, as
expressed in "On Crimes and Punishments," have continued to play a big role in recent times,
recent policies impacted by his theories includes the UK and U.S.A but are still not limited to,
truth in sentencing, swift punishment and the abolishment of the death penalty in some U.S.A
states.
58

CHAPTER 16 : POLICE CULTURE, DISCRETION AND
ACCOUNTABILITY ARE INCOMPATIBLE ELEMENTS OF THE
CONCEPT OF POLICING’.
Introduction
This assignment focuses on the facts that are related to the different elements that are linked with
policing. Additionally, there has been a discussion of different topics that what are the role of the
police culture, role of discretion and accountability for policing? Moreover, this assignment also
highlights the moral principles and dilemmas that have to be followed in police cultures, what
are their missions and visions, and according to that, they have to do their task. This is discussed
below.
Police culture as an incompatible element in policing
Bradford et al. (2014, p.527) opined that when police will perform their duty then they have to
follow the principles of unity. Additionally, when they will perform any job then they have to do
their job in teamwork. If they are doing their work in this manner then there remains a high
chance of success. Moreover, when the entire team have set a mission then the entire team have
to be guided proper leaders and if they are not guided in proper manner then, in that case, they
will not be able to achieve their goals.
Additionally, Carrabine et al. (2014, p.44) opined that when they are performing any job then
they have to adhere the rules and regulations that have been mentioned in policies. If they are
found liable that they are not following the prescribed rules then they will be penalised according
to the law that has been framed by the government of UK. Moreover, police culture also focuses
on the elements that can be focused to policing and they are they have to maintain a secrecy
while performing any operations. Whatever the plan the entire troop has designed, they must
disclose their plans to few selected members of the group. Additionally, if plans are being
disclosed to unauthorised persons and secrecy is not being maintained then teamwork will not
become a successful one.
Moreover, Carter, (2013, p.44) opined coordination and cooperation have to be maintained in a
group. If they are unable to maintain coordination and better communication among them then
the message cannot be communicated to others and this can lead to a problem.
Similarly, to this policing police cultures can be categorised in three different manners and they
are the
59

Police as the victims
This is one of the main facts that can be pointed out and it also highlights that police are
considered to be the victims and while doing their task they often face different problems.
Additionally, Lee and McGovern, (2014, p.44) opined that police are being misunderstood by
individuals. Moreover, when they are visiting in public places others often misjudge them.
Others think that when cops are visiting a particular place then they have the main motive behind
it. Additionally, they often get low salaries for their work and this makes them unhappy. As they
are not satisfied by the amount of money, which they are getting, they commit different
activities, which are not legal, and they are held liable for different bribery issues. Tombs (2017,
p.44) analysed that there are vindictive administration is being observed in this culture.
Additionally, the top-level management often misuses their powers also and the management
team can indulge themselves in corruption.
Cynicism
Waddington et al. (2013, p.44) opined that police observe every individual with suspicion.
Additionally, when they are observing in this manner then they can make a guess that who have
committed crimes. Moreover, police culture inculcates a judging power that who have done
mistakes. Few case studies have revealed that police have identified with the assistance of their
experience that who is the real culprit. Few of the officers have revealed that when real culprits
are caught there are few things that can be observed in them and they are there will be a change
in their body language, they will fumble and they will become nervous and this helps in proper
identification.
Force
Additionally, force can be classified into two types and this is instrumental as well as expressive.
Moreover, force is being classified as the authority and a dominance of particular officers who
are doing their task in the culture of police. Moreover, when this force is applied on citizens and
this is the most effective manner of controlling individuals.
Discretion can be considered one of the elements that are related to policing
Zander (2015, p.44), analyse police are having the authority to arrest individuals. Additionally,
when police observe that anything suspicious is going on than they are having the right to arrest
anyone they can wish. Moreover, the government have given this right to them and they have a
60

liberty to take this decision. Similarly, the main job of cops is to protect individuals from the
problems that they are facing. As they are having the authority to take decisions and they can act
on the different situation and they will apply different methods to make the situation under
control. For example in 2013, in Asian countries peoples have marched on the road, the main
reason for their movement on road is that there needs, and a government is not fulfilling wants.
In order to make their needs fulfilled they have done this act and before commencing this act
police have warned them that no one will participate in this act. Citizens have not heard what
cops have said and in spite of warning, they have done this. To control the situation police have
fired in the air, they have applied tear gas, and maximum peoples have been arrested for this
deed. Additionally, policies also reflect that whatever police will think best they can do.
Therefore, to make the situation in control they have taken these steps. When they have applied
this than those who have not participated in this activity they have been saved from trouble.
Few experts have also added that for taking any type of decision they have to take permission
from their supervisors. Additionally, this is the rules that have been designed in this policies.
There are few situations that police have not taken permission from their seniors while taking an
action. When further investigations have been commenced on this matter then they have added
that they are not having any other options in their hand for controlling the situation. At that time
they have taken permission then it would have been too late. Additionally, police also acts on the
different case and they are elaborated below
Domestic violence’s
Additionally, cops acts on domestic violence. If is analysed that there are few issues that are
going in the individual house then they can inform this matter to police. When they are
informing them then police takes their discretion power and make proper judgement and they
also find the probable solution how the conflict can be resolved. Additionally, Waddington et al.
(2013, p.44) opined that when police are taking in charge of any domestic violence then they
often misuse their powers. It also becomes difficult for them to find the one who has started the
conflict.
Traffic violence
This is also one of the most important places where they often play a vital role. While riding on
the roads of UK there are few rules that needed to be followed. If the individuals are not
following the rules then they will be penalised according to different sections. So, it is the duty
61

of the police to observe that when citizens are driving their vehicles they must follow strictly few
rules and which are they cannot overspend their vehicles, they have to wear a proper dress while
riding and they must use helmets when they are driving bikes. Additionally, they must carry
valid papers when they are driving. Moreover, if police suspect that there is something wrong
then they can use their powers at that time. They can also take the victim behind the bars or they
can drag him to the court of law. Additionally, in few cases when individuals are caught for over
speeding their cars they were warned once and they were allowed to go. However, it depends on
the situation whether they will take any legal action or not.
Role of accountability for policing
Waddington et al. (2013, p.44) observed that when police are commencing any jobs then they
have to follow the law. Additionally, if cops think that he will arrest any individual then he
cannot do according to their wish. For arresting, someone there must be a valid reason and it
must be a legal in nature. If the reason is not valid then they cannot arrest him.
Additionally, the accountability can be explained with an example. If an officer is doing his duty
in front of any shopping mall and he observes that cars are running in front of that mall and the
main entrance and exit are from the busy street. Additionally, a car comes at a high speed and
collides with the customers of the shopping mall and those peoples are injured badly. When the
duty officer is observing this scenario then he can take legal steps and these steps are he can take
that driver in his custody and he can present him in court, he can give the order to that driver that
to park his car in parking lot and proper verification of documents can be done. Alternatively, if
he wishes he can take no action. Additionally, if the officer decided that he would arrest him then
he can arrest him on different grounds and they are over speeding and not following the rules of
traffic. These reasons are termed to be valid reasons. Additionally, there are different fields for
accountability and they are discussed in this paragraph
Financial
This can be considered that police are having an accountability to inspects the books of the
organisation. Additionally, when finance department of the organisation has committed anything
wrong then they can be called from making further inspections. Moreover, when other auditors
will point out the mistakes on cross verification that have been committed then those auditors
will be called and legal action can be implemented on them. Moreover, if top level team observes
that mistakes are committed purposely then the responsible person will be penalised according to
62

law. Moreover, the court will also suggest the police and tax department investigate this matter
and the find more evidence that are linked with it.
For example, in Asian countries, there has been the establishment of different organisations and
they are the sole trader organisation and partnership business. Additionally, they have started to
earn huge profits by commencing their business. When auditors have come for inspections, then
they have given a huge amount of bribes to them and they have reflected that everything is well.
However, when other auditors they have found that they have done mistakes have done further
investigations and those mistakes are being committed purposely. When this matter has been
revealed in front of public they have lost their faith in that organisation and court have said that
books needed to be inspected.
Operational
Additionally, few experts have suggested that when rules are being framed and implemented
then the chief officer is responsible for that. Moreover, he is also liable for giving valid reasons
that why this has been framed. In addition, what will be the outcomes of these policies?
Moreover, if these policies do not become successful then what are the alternative strategies that
can be adopted at that time? Moreover, there are different case studies, which have stated that
policies have been taken and implemented. But they have not got the desired results that have
been expected. Additionally, the chief officers have also given their answers to higher authorities
and they have suggested what will be the alternative plans that can be followed.
Similarly, the Police and criminal evidence act states when any law will be designed then they
have to done in front of the officers and the workers have to strictly follow that.
Conclusion
From this study can be concluded that police cultures are the main pillars and they have to follow
the rules, which have been framed by UK government. Additionally, they are helping different
individuals to overcome their issues. Moreover, they are performing few social activities that are
also helping individuals and when they are performing this type of activities then more faith is
being created on them.
63

CHAPTER 17 : POLICING PROTESTS AND RIOTS
The role of the Police is to:
 Stop The Riots
 Protect Property
 Keep the Peace
 Disperse Protestors
 Protect life
Key themes underlying protests and riots:
 Inequality
 Disadvantage
 Deprivation
 Boredom/homelessness,
 Tensions within the community
 As well as mistrust of the police
Motivations and reasons of protests and riots:
 Anti-globalistion
 Football hooliganism
Policing protests and riots:
Preventatives measures
 Community with the demonstrators prior to the event
 Prevent intelligence collection
 Evidence collection
 Arresting some key leaders prior to the event
64

Political determinants of police strategy and tactics:
(Waddington, 2007:18) - argues that ‘In some circumstances the police often feels under a
professional obligation to resort to firm and confrontational measures’.
Police conduct in the field, Cop Culture and Cultural predisposition:
 Machismo
 Internal solidarity
 Pragmatic approach of getting the job done
 Stereotyping of groups
As well as attitudes to crowds as inherently disorderly and in need off correction and control.
Back to policing g conduct in the field:
 Too much policing might have a symbolic, unintended effect on disorder.
 Not much policing might have a similar or even more devastating effect
 Lack of coordination between the units.
It has been said that regular police was not transferable to a situation of tight control as well as
the specialist units that lacked familiarity of the local area.
Paramilitary policing debate: must research……………….
Methods of policing protests and riots:
Use of force and non-lethal crowd control.
 Use of batons
 Incapacitating sprays (Pepper Spray)
 Taser guns
Brixton Riots (1981):
OPERARATION SWAMP ‘81’:
65

 943 PEOPLE WERE STOPPED IN 4 DAYS
 118 WERE ARRESTED (MORE THAN HALF OF THESE WERE BLACK)
 75 CHARGED
 1 ROBBERY
 1 ATTEMPTED BURGLARY
 18 FOR THEFT AND ATTEMPTED THEFT
AS THE RESULT OF RIOTS 300 PEOPLE WERE INJURED (Bowling et al 2003, 4)
The official discourse of riots in the 1990s
The underlying sources of the crisis
 Self-exclusion of mainly Asian communities from the mainstream society
 An absence of credible political leadership and representation within the
communities
 Growing youth criminality
Critical points raised by academic literature:
 Role of mass media and senior police in creation of a negative impression of Asian youth
 (Oldham) police’s methods of interpreting and disseminating crime figures on ‘racist
incidents’.
 Burnley riot – misguide police tactics and strategies employed.
The critical academic discourse of riots in the 1990s
Masculinity reassertion (Campbell 1993)
 Domination of community space to compensate for the loss occupational identity and
wage status conferred on them in times of full employment.
Procedural Justice is the way police handle situations:
 Trust
 Respect
 Neutrality
 Voice
66

Recommendations:
 Critical incident management
 Communication
 Working with the community
 Intelligence
 Use of technology
 Use of force
 Training
67

CHAPTER 18 : CRIME AS A SOCIAL RATHER THAN INDIVIDUAL
PHENOMENON.
“Born Bad Or Made Bad? Do people commit crime because they are born bad or made
bad?” This particular question is very much involved in the nature or nurture debate. Theorists
that have based their own understanding on human behaviour as “nature,” focus on genetics and
our individual traits, on the characteristics that we are born with. Theorists that base their
understanding on human behaviour as “nurture,” focus more on our environment; for example,
the people we grow up with, like friends and siblings as well as the upbringing by parents or
being born in a household that constantly promotes hostility and any other kind of behaviour that
is not right.
This essay will therefore focus on the work of sociologist Emile Durkheim and later of
criminologists such as Robert Merton and also the Chicago School of Sociology to critically
examine how they explain and interpret crime as a social rather than an individual phenomenon.
Crime is the term used for any behaviour or practice that breaks the criminal law, in relation to
sociology and criminology. Crime or any sort of offending, peculiar behaviour is a deviant act
and is known as deviance. The majority of Durkheim’s work looks at what we call crime and the
way we respond to it and what crime tells us about society. Durkheim argues that crime is
defined by society in many ways. He also believed that what may be constituted as crime in one
society may not necessarily be considered a crime in another society.
Emile Durkheim (1858 -1917)
Durkheim’s normality of crime and anomie theory stated that “certain types of crime is normal
within society or some society” for example deviance. He says “deviance is to be found in all
societies and must therefore be seen as a normal part of society”, whilst some people believed
that crime and deviance introduces a new set of ideologies and therefore reinforces boundaries.
Punishment also reinforces legal and moral rules that society must acknowledge. It is believed
that in some aspects Durkheim is saying that crime is sometimes needed in order to show people
what is right and what is morally wrong. Not only was crime a normal part of society, crime is
often useful to society itself because its existence helps to define what is considered to be
acceptable or unacceptable in society today.
Looking back at the anomie and strain theory, they both provided society with universal
guidelines as to which behaviours were allowed and which were not allowed by allowing morals
and statutes to develop with society’s changing beliefs. When a society’s general beliefs on
acceptable behaviour comes under stress or breaks down completely, anomie, where there are no
ethical or social standard set and direct straight law breaking, which is actually crime, ensues.
68

Durkheim (1858 -1917), is renowned for his opinion on societal structure and the study of crime
within society. His theories were based on external aspects of society like societal norms, values
and structures highlighting the development and function of traditional and modern societies and
contrasts with theories of other sociologists in his era which are based on internal aspects such as
the motivations and desire of individuals within the society.
Different sociologists have come up with theories on crime, much of which have been criticised
and subsequently modified while some remain relevant today and form the basis of
contemporary thinking about crime. These theories are not in themselves exclusive since they
can be beneficial when consideration is given to how they relate to each other even though they
have different emphases. The basics of some of these theories are listed below and are currently
used extensively by criminologists.
Eliminating crime is not easy since it is normal in all societies and serves certain functions in
society even that of keeping society orderly. Mapping these functions may help to understand
crime.
Crime and conflict are bound especially in a class based situations where crimes committed by
the powerful who may have the capacity to influence are less recognised than those committed
by the weak. These social divisions and interest and in particular economic interest are also terms
on which crime can be usefully interpreted and understood.
Tension, stress and strain within societies bind crime and happens when there is anomie or
normlessness in society. Careful examination of this social disorganisation resulting from the
tensions and strains in society can aid the understanding of crime.
Delving into the history of people’s lives and how they learn is yet another way of understanding
crime since there is a process of cultural transmission in the ordinary, humdrum everyday
situations occurring in society.
While crime is not uniquely linked to urban life, cities are more prone to producing criminal
lifestyles with their own values and norms. Mapping out these areas and observing the dynamics
of what happens there informs the understanding of crime.
Crime results from being attached to groups or associations who place no value on law-abiding
attitudes and behaviours causing the breakdown of rules and regulations and any other controls
that may exist in society. Through the increased knowledge and awareness of this breakdown a
more useful understanding of crime can be achieved.
According to Durkheim (1858 -1917), collective consciousness, values, and rules are critical to a
functional society. Functionalism states a societal equilibrium. If something happens to disrupt
the order and the flow of the system, society must therefore adjust to achieve a stable state.
According to Durkheim (1858 -1917), society should be analysed and characterised by
examining how it works since it consists of linked component sectors which do not function
independently but are interrelated. A change in one sector impacts the entire society. For
69

example, Public education for children is provided by the state from the taxes paid by their
families. Having learnt through this system the children become law abiding citizens who are
employed and who pay taxes, supporting the state. If, however, a disruption occurs in the system
and the education is weak leading children to self- destruction, becoming dropouts and criminals;
the system then adjusts to improve the education and attempts to rehabilitate the criminals
punitively to become law-abiding, tax paying citizens.
Durkheim’s view is that delinquent behaviour and crime is normal and is a necessity in society.
Crime results in adverse reactions shared by all those in society who do not display deviance. It
is from these reactions that a consensus of moral and ethical norms are created and standards set
to be abided by leading to boundaries and rules in society.
Durkheim’s approach to crime is classified as Functionalist. Functionalism examines how
society is integrated as various aspects display vital functions. It suggests four functions of crime
and deviance in society as stated below.
In societies, the concept of good has at its base the opposition of bad. They exist and operate in
tandem, never independently. Good does not exist without evil, neither does justice exist
without crime. Deviance, therefore is a necessary part of the formation of morality and its
boundaries.
Social boundaries are drawn between right and wrong when individuals are identified as deviant.
This is seen in the case of universities where a line is drawn between academic honesty and
plagiarism by disciplinary action being taken. Focusing on the bad can bring about more good in
society.
Codes of conduct are drawn up in all aspects of life and the good is policed.
Durkheim also suggests that responding to deviance promotes social and moral unity usually
built from outrage. Deviance also encourages social change when societies’ boundaries are
pushed by deviance encouraging changes to the status quo. According to Durkheim
(1985/1988:71), “today’s deviance leads to tomorrow’s morality”.
The Functionalist theory outlines a paradox which exists with crime and deviance; while they
may be disruptive they may at the same contribute to the social system as they represent
underlying factors of the operation of society and as Durkheim suggests they will always be a
part of the social order. Anthropologist Mary Douglas (1966:161), noted ‘where there is
differentiation there is no defilement’. Ordering generates disorder. Deviance is necessary to
effect good and for social change.
Problems with functionalism occur in that it is likely that most societies have crime, but the rate
at which these occur differ tremendously. For example, in the USA crime rates are extremely
high whereas Japan and Iran have very low crime rates. The rationale behind this is not clear,
however, nor are the dynamics of social order exposed. Functionalists might argue that deviance
and crime soar when societies are under turmoil. The responses of others to crime from the
media reporting to public concern serves to strengthen the society by bringing together citizens
70

in common opposition. Thus there seems to be a strong connection here to contemporary moral
panic theory.
(Goode & Ben Yehuda 2013)
Robert Merton (1910 – 2003)
Robert Merton’s strain theory argues that societal systems are rigid and therefore encourage
deviance. Merton believed that when societal norms, or socially accepted goals, such as the
'American Dream,' they place pressure on the individual to conform, they compel individuals to
either work within the societal structure produced, or become members of a deviant subculture
in an attempt to achieve those goals. Merton termed this theory ‘strain theory’. It is believed that
Merton thought that crime occurred more when social conditions are bestowed upon individuals
in our society. Merton also states “that crime will more than likely to occur when people
accepted the goals set by society like, ‘financial success’, but could not achieve those goals due
to blocked opportunities thus lacking the means to achieve their goals.
Merton’s concern was that societies, like the United States, do not provide the means to achieve
cultural goals. For example, for citizens to achieve the American Dream, society needs to
provide access to education, employment, etc., and Merton felt that the United States wasn't
doing a good enough job. When individuals are faced with a gap between 'what ought to be' and
'what is,' they feel strained and have a choice between five modes of adaptation:
Conformity - Individuals accept the culturally defined goals and the socially legitimate means of
achieving them. Merton suggest that most individuals remain conformists.
Innovation- individuals accepts the goals of society, but rejects or lacks the socially legitimate
means of achieving them. Innovation, explains the high rate of crime committed by uneducated
and poor individuals who do not have access to legitimate means of achieving the social goals of
wealth and power.
Ritualism - the ritualist accepts a lifestyle of hard work, but rejects monetary rewards. This
individual gets an education and works hard, yet is not committed to the goal of accumulating
wealth or power.
Retreatism- involves rejecting the cultural goal of success and the socially legitimate means of
achieving it. The retreatist retreats from society becoming an alcoholic, drug addict, or vagrant.
Rebellion- a rebel rejects goals and means which are culturally set and create their own goals and
means as substitutes. For example, rebels may use social or political activism to replace personal
wealth with social justice and equality.
The innovation and ritualism modes are the clearest examples of strain, with no inconsistency
between goals and means. In other words one was accepted and on the other hand the other was
71

rejected in each case. The good thing about the strain theory is that it gives a strong foundation
off understanding why societies continue to experience crime as a social problem rather than an
individual problem even if individuals do become wealthier.
The problems with the strain theory is that it failed to account for the experience of women since
the statistics used to test the theory related only to young male offenders, and its use of official
statistics, which do not and cannot include every crime which is committed. The Strain theory
could also be criticised for being over simplistic for many reasons. The strain theory fails to
understand that:-
Not everyone in society shares the same goals particularly in relation to financial success.
Not every society has the kind of culture which is focused on financial success as a goal to be
attained, as the USA had in Merton’s time.
Not all crimes are committed for reasons related to financial gain and lastly this theory can be
criticised for ignoring ways in which values and beliefs relating to crime are developed in
groups.
The problems with the anomie theory is that Merton’s ideas are based on the assumption that
there are set goals and values. It is just possible that life was like that in 1930s America, but it is
certainly not like that now in the early twenty first century. Nor can we assume that people are
simply socialised to a common set of values. Contrary to such thinking, it is clear from a plethora
of evidence that there were different patterns of socialisation among different groups. Also the
theory tends to assume that people are driven into crime through tensions and grim necessity;
other than that, the theory is pretty decent.
The Chicago School
Influenced by the work of American sociologist, writer and Nobel Prize winner Jane Adams and
from the poverty studies of Charles Booth and Henry Mayhew from the United Kingdom,
sociologists at the Chicago School pioneered new approaches to criminology based on the
premise that crime is more prevalent in some areas of the city than others. A summary of these
follow:-
Crime may be more common in the city, not just because of greater number of people, but
because the distinctive urban lifestyle. George Simmel (1858-1918) suggests that this urban
lifestyle shows tolerance for diversity and, in making the streets less communal and more
anonymous, but generates a more criminogenic environment.
Crime exists in ‘natural habitats’ or ecological zones. The ways of life to be found in these parts
of the city could be linked to crime and deviance. Crime is basically learned in the same way as
everything else that does not come naturally. This idea of differential association was linked to
the writing of Edwin Sutherland (1833-1950).
72

Edwin Sutherland (1833-1950) and his ‘differential association theory’ is also identified with
Chicago, and among his many significant contributions to criminology, his theory developed in
various editions of his textbook ‘principles of criminology’ as it first appeared in 1939 edition.
For Sutherland, crime was a normal learning process. It is far from being genetic or biological,
moreover according to Edwin Sutherland (1833-1950), ‘crime is learned as well as criminal
behaviour is learned in interaction with other persons in a process of communication’.
The problems with the Chicago School is that they provided the foundation ideas of the
sociology of crime, which have now become dated and have not been open to much refinement.
Thus, although ‘natural areas’ of crime are prevalent in the city, the concentric zones model is
usually seen to be only one special case. There is also another problem, that of ‘ecological
fallacy’. Because criminality is more prevalent in certain areas, it is not to be assumed that the
people in those areas are necessarily criminals. This is not the case. It is clear therefore that this
theory has not successfully explained why some people become criminals and others do not.
In conclusion the theories of Emile Durkheim, Robert Merton and the Chicago School of
Sociology have been look at and critically analysed in the above pages providing knowledge and
an increased awareness of the role of crime in society. It is clear from these theories that crime is
not an individual phenomenon but rather, a social one yet there are still some questions about
crime that are left unanswered which perhaps are beyond the scope of this paper. Why do some
people commit crime while others do not? Are these theories limited in some way? Will further
research explain this?
CHAPTER 19 : SOCIAL THEORY
This essay will examine two sociologists of choice, and also will be discussing how each of these
sociology thinkers contrived sense of modern society, by looking at social theory of society. This
essay will focus more on the life, work and ideas of two of these thinkers. Emile Durkheim who
was born in France; 1858 and died in 1917and Karl Marx who was born in Germany 1818 and
died in 1883. As for Durkheim making sense of society, Durkheim was more focused on a more
structural functional unity way to understanding society. Durkheim was also a theorist of
consensus, whereas Marx was viewed as a revolutionary theorist and believed in the concept of
communism. Marx’s real addition to making sense of society was his structural appraisal of
capitalism and its human reaction.
Both Sociologists developed theories that responded to the economic, political and social
changes of that time as well as the rapid industrialisation of Europe and North America and the
effects of development of democracy on western society. In more recent phraseology, they were
73

concerned with the move of these societies into ‘modernity’; a complex concept but one which
can usefully be understood as referring to the social relations and experiences associated with
capitalism (Inglis 2012; McIntosh 1997). It is important to accept the fact that the origins of
sociological theorising were profoundly political. When Marx and Durkheim tried to understand
the nineteenth century industrialisation, they did not do it just out of intellectual interest or
scholastic indulgence; rather, they pursued to investigate the impact these differences had on the
nature of social life and to also ponder on how the changes may not improve this quality of life.
The enlightenment of society is related more too scientific proof, logics, the findings of answers
along with evidence. Whereas division of labour is more social class based for example, people
who are wealthy will not do dustbin jobs or cleaning jobs if you like. Durkheim and Marx tried
to explain how modernity came about, what its main features were, what held it together and
what keeps trying to take it apart. It is believed that just maybe we can agree that in the wake of
2008 global financial collapse such questions are the utmost contemporary relevance (Leech
2012; Stiglitz 2010). For example, Marx’s theories always relate to capitalism, his theorising and
analysis of the capitalist society, the workings of capitalism, exploitation of individuals and the
imminence of its downfall, rather than on industrial society.
Durkheim’s theories are functionalist; however, there was a general consensual approach among
these early theorists. In terms of their own individual beliefs, Marx was a political revolutionist,
whilst Durkheim on the other hand rejects the case for revolutionary politics although attracted to
socialism; Durkheim sees it as a protest against the degeneration of values.
Marx’s theories support revolution, while Durkheim regards such engagement as a betrayal of
proper scientific neutrality. Like Marx, Durkheim’s ideology is designated to advertise the
goodness of society. Like Marxism, it is a response to modernity, and, like Marxism, it is a part
of modernity. For example, contemporary beliefs suggest a transformation of society for the
better, and progression in social organisations over the operation of wisdom gained. Like Marx,
Durkheim accepts that social progress results from the development of human beings
Achievements and ability to switch within society as a whole.
Marx believed long ago societies appropriated various modes of production, which in sequential
order, are original communist, historical, feudal, capitalist communist and that both form can
edge to the next. Marx establishes seriousness of such problems around production in his account
of how societies move from one mode to another. Marx also argues that ‘primitive communist’
means that there is a broad separation of the two classes, one of which exploits the other. The
friction between these two class groups is the ruling and ruled classes which thus, make societies
move to different economic systems.
When further contrasting Marx and Durkheim, it is clear to see that Durkheim places great
emphasis on society requiring functions, whereas Marx strongly argues that the capitalist system
benefits solely from society. Durkheim argues that capitalism uses division of labour as a
functional system of change in society. On the other hand Marx believes inequality represents a
large distinctive gap between the rich and the poor. For example, the rich stays rich and become
more rich whereas the poor always remain poor as well as the cult of individuals where mankind;
becomes more self-righteous care about nobody but ones very self. Thus Marx believes that
74

although this concept or ideology should be abolished, he also argues that some elements are
good.
Karl Marx focused a lot on power and relationships between individuals in society, whilst in
comparison Durkheim was less interested in power and relationships and thus, focused his
studies around the idea of structural functionalism.
Industrial society on the other hand according to Durkheim focused on the society’s morality, its
stability and ‘social solidarity’ that holds society as a whole. He believed that social order was
maintained by a core of shared values; a view at the core of the functionalist approach in
sociology. Durkheim also argued that, without the enforcement of laws in society, people will
intend to gratify one’s own thirst and intentions without regard to their peers. A condition neatly
recounted by an early philosopher John Locke (1632-1704) as the ‘malady of infinite desires’.
Societal regulations and constraints had to be based on common and widely accepted morality.
Thus, for society to fully function it is necessary for its members to accept those shared values.
The term Durkheim used for this was the ‘collective conscience’ which he explained as the
‘entirety of belief and opinions familiar to mediocre citizens of the same society’ (Punch et al:
2013).
Looking at alienation and anomie, the main difference between the concepts is based on their
views on man in a ‘state of nature’. For example, Marx’s belief of alienation is founded upon the
belief that man is ‘normally’ good, but has been corrupted by society. In contrast, Durkheim’s
theory of anomie stems from the presumption that man is ‘usually’ an undisciplined existence,
who must be solidly controlled by the nation. He states that arrogance is produced by society.
Nonetheless, both Durkheim and Marx believe that it is modern society that brings about the
impetus to economic self-advancement.
Additionally, Durkheim is adamant that individual’s persona is affected by the society which
they remain in, as a consequence every individual struggles with self-centred impulses and those
with moral ‘learning’. Marx rejects such mental exemplary; he believes that ‘the individual is the
social being’.
Durkheim explained two distinct types of cohesion within society and that is; Mechanical
solidarity and organic solidarity. He argues that the cohesion and integration in a society
displaying mechanical solidarity stems against the similarity of its people. People form
connections through work, theological and academic schooling and through similar lifestyles.
Mechanical solidarity works in "traditional" and limited size or extent societies, and is usually
based upon affinity ties of genetic structure.
Whereas organic solidarity is communal action based on the confidence individuals have in each
other in more developed societies. It comes from the linkage that emerges from specialisation of
jobs and the appreciations with one set people that exist in modern and industrialised societies.
Social solidarity is therefore managed in more convoluted societies through the linkage of its
constituent segments. For example, farmers provides feed to give factory employees who provide
harvesters that, in the end, allow farmers to produce extra food.
75

Structural agency according to Durkheim, postulates that though we believe we choose to behave
in a certain way, the reality is that the choice was made for us to look at our action of thought
and forms of understanding which; are actually the repercussion of the isolated social world we
are born in. Durkheim then uses religion to explain this point (Durkheim 1954, P. 47). He argues
that our religious beliefs and practices are social in origin and learnt, they existed before us and if
we had been born in another society or time for that matter, we would portray different beliefs
and follow different religious practices. It does seem that Durkheim accepts religion to some
degree, for example he argues that “religion is a fused order of beliefs and tradition related to
divine stuff, that is to satisfy stuff, set apart all forbidden conclusions and practices which
combine in one state, all that comply to them (Punch et al: 2013).
Durkheim’s point here is nevertheless fundamental to the consensus approach in sociology. In
comparison to Durkheim’s view on religion that in some aspect religion does unite people as
well as it does share some values to society. Whereas Karl Marx argues that religion is an
expression of material realities and economic injustice. Thus the religious problems are
ultimately antagonistic in society. Religion is not the disease, but surely is a symptom; he also
states that “Religion is a false conciseness. Marx also believes that religion serves as a distraction
from true happiness within, with an artificial happiness. Marx argues that oppressors use religion
to make people feel better and less distressed about being poor and exploited. Whilst rejecting
spiritual evolution or religion in general so instead he then uses philosophy to explain modernity
on a more philosophical basis.
According to Durkheim, communal life among people, social order and social solidarity, are
accepted by collective standards of behaviour and values. Meanwhile, social solidarity is
decisive for society to exist, the particular type or form may change as society changes.
Durkheim et al (1997) examines transitions in the style of social solidarity from early, premodern
societies to complicated, and contemporary ones. However, Marx and Durkheim do share a
consensus that the division of labour, the social liaison within which we interrelate how we make
what we use to sustain one self, is the element of the common moral and bureaucratic
surroundings and must therefore be respected.
Classes according to Karl Marx are structurally stubborn groups that form out the structural
affairs of the capitalist system. This is where the bourgeoisie comes in and takes over the method
of production within society. Whereas the proletariat (the working class) becomes the
revolutionary class which then, therefore prevents an individual from doing what they want to do
in society. However, the bourgeoisie simply cannot exist without constantly revolutionising
production and thereby the relation of the proletarian individual as in the lower class. The
bourgeoisie, by rapid implement of all instruments of production by the immensely facilitated
means of communication which draws all together including the most barbarian nations into
civilisation.
In contrast, according to Durkheim, classes are occupational parties that form the increasing
level of divisions of labour within society. These issues are inevitable to aberrant, flawed action
such as class antagonism and trade strikes. According to Durkheim these are hazardous to the
overall smooth running of our society. In terms of looking at the individual within society, Marx
says men are species-being, creative, productive and social. Men make history, but only when
76

structural conditions give permission to such things. In comparison Durkheim rejects what Marx
says about men making history, and simply argues that individuals are much more socialised by
society itself rather than by shared norms and principles. He also argues that Individualism is
restricted to consolidate into much gigantic society.
In conclusion Marx and Durkheim gives macro level perspectives of how societies developed
and changed. Durkheim stressed the relevance and pervasiveness of balance and agreement in
societies. Whereas according to Marx, material life determines the development of an individual
and society. However, Marxist, functionalist and interpretative point of view can be applied to
any area of social science exploration. It is disputable that religion according Marx is weak in
several areas for example, he doesn’t consider gender differences, and also his evidence in
supporting his research was weak in many developing countries such as the UK. Durkheim
focused on the importance and prevalence of stability in society as well as consensus in society
back then and today. Whereas Marx he looked at society as a shape with class and group
antagonism and hardship. Lastly it is fair to say that each sociologist shaped much of social
theory in the twentieth century and also very much beyond all of that. In addition some may
argue that, “modern society” owes much to these two sociology thinkers whilst others may argue
the total opposite.
77

CHAPTER 20 : YOUTH CRIME AND JUSTICE
Critically looking at the notion of “youth” will be having a consensus approach in
believing that, the concepts of “childhood was invented in the Middle Ages, and how a range of
discoveries in Victorian England came to inform contemporary understandings of youth and
consider the idea that concomitant processes of “adultification” and “infantilisation” mean that
conventional distinctions between adolescence and adulthood are becoming increasingly unclear.
This essay will consider the implications of this life-stage dissolution for criminology and
criminal justice regarding youths or juveniles. What is youth?
Being a teenager is a moment in life when someone is in the process of blossoming before
maturing into adulthood, which regularly means the era between adolescence and adulthood.
However, youth is sometimes construed as "the persona, novelty, stamina, ethos, and the
characteristics of someone which is youthful or young.” Regarding youth, the explanations of the
exact age group spectrum often fluctuates since youth is not exemplified chronologically as a
stage which may be stringed to exact age variation; neither can its finish mark be anticlimactic to
certain exercises. For example, undertaking voluntary-work or taking part in underage sexual
activities without sanction. Being young is an experience which might mold a person’s
magnitude of protectorate that could be blatant in numerous ways according to incompatible
ethnic attitudes. For example, an individual occurrence is conspicuous by a person’s cultural
traditions, while a young person’s volume of dependency on the other hand just simply means
the width to which youths depend on their parents psychologically, emotionally and financially.
The English terminology in explanation of youth are words such as adolescents, teenagers, kids,
and young persons which are often used interchangeably with the same meaning, however, at
times different meanings are given for each word. Youth can be considered to be that time of life
when an individual is thought of as being young. This encompasses both childhood and that
stage of life of life when an individual having passed childhood but cannot yet be considered an
adult; it is that interim period between the two stages. An individual’s way of thinking and his
78

attitude may be described as that of a young person. Those characteristics also identify youth. In
statistics, particularly those used in employment, youth sometimes refers to young people
between the ages of 14 and 21.Unlike youth adolescence is not a term constructed by society, it
refers to a period of development in a young person’s life between 10 and 19.
In addition, although the term youth is affiliated to the physiology of growth, it can also be
considered as the social state of individuals between childhood and adulthood in diverse cultures
and with different meanings. As a social state, the term youth may be ambiguous as it can refer
to an older individual of low social standing not being independent of their parents or.
However we must recognise youth as a social construction, not as one based on biology.
Throughout history our definition of youth has changed. For example, historically young people
were once controlled by their parents, because they lacked the maturity so they sought the
authorisation of parents; whereas now some young people are uncontrollable by their parents.
Due to changes in law parents cannot chastise their children physically and some children are
taking that law for granted beating their parents instead. (Pallavi Aman Singh, 2016).
It is in recent times that the stages of childhood or adolescence have become distinct stages of
life or categories of society entitling them to political and social rights (Zelizer, 1994). In earlier
years the general populace and its social institutions used those who fall into those categories for
cheap labour. Cunningham (2009). In 1821, approximately half of the workforce was under 20
(The National Archives, 2012). It is worthy of note that a growing middle class stemmed from
the large number of children and adolescents forming the workforce. Many of these workers
were deeply concerned about reformation and of society’s obligation to them. After 1867, it
became illegal for factories and workshops to employ children under 8 and those employed
between the 8 and 13 had to receive 10 hours of education every week. (The National Archives,
2012).
What was known as the sentimentalisation of childhood came about. This was when the status of
children and young people saw a transformation from being economic and domestic resources to
the institution of pure childhood where children must be nurtured and protected. They were to
attend school. A new category which described those young people making the transition from
childhood to adulthood now emerged; they were called adolescents and would learn the roles and
responsibilities in apprenticeships.
Urban working class individuals were protected and became more civilized under new ideal
types which were created. (Griffin, 1993). Public schools were created for those who were
wealthy and they instilled a drive for moral improvement which produced leaders ideally
equipped to take on the duties of governing the empire. (Griffin, 1993). The knowledge,
development and behaviors displayed by young people as well as what they believed and
represented, became an issue of concern with the public and the state. This resulted in youth
becoming a moral classification. (Qvortrup, 1994).
An approach of no interference, leaving them to their own fate became seen as ammunition for
“moral anarchy” (Lesko, 2012, p75). In the late 1800s, therefore, the line between youth and
adulthood became sharper and was more intensely observed (Lesko, 2012, p74). Lesko and
79

Talburt described this period as being the era of “pastoral power” identified and characterised by
a “distributed discipline among adult authorities and youthful subjects who internalised
regulations to monitor the self” (Lesko & Talburt, 2012, p13). By the onset of the twentieth
century, youth was “under the administrative gaze of teachers, parents, psychologists, play
reformers, scout leaders, juvenile justice workers” (Lesko, 2012, p75). It could be suggested that
it is a good idea to look at self-fulfilling prophecy in terms of the notion of youth, looking at the
theory of self-fulfilling prophecy, one could possibly say that this theory is a foreseen fact which
automatically becomes reality directly or indirectly by the same terms of the prediction itself,
because of the positivity of feedback between behaviour and belief. Sociologically, this may help
us to understand the relationship between socially constructed notions of childhood and crime in
reference to labelling theory.
Looking a bit more at labelling theory as well as explaining more about that particular theory it
could be said that it centres on how youths assert themselves and develop a self- image, and how
that image of themselves is influenced by how others view them and what others think of them.
For example, the nature of labels often fixed to young people such as ‘criminal’, how they are
applied, by whom they are applied and how they actually cause crime can be a subject for study.
This theory emphasises the response the response to crime in relation to youth rather than pure
criminality itself (Cross, 2013, p107).
Professor Morgan who is the chairman of Youth Crime and Justice Board called for a radical
rethink into how unruly youths are dealt with by the criminal justice system and stated that “there
are consequences to fixing a Cain to a young person’s forehead”. He blamed “misplaced hysteria
over youth crime” and warned that the labelling of youth as contemporary folk devils could
result from issuing of ASBOS and taking young people through the court system. This would
potentially make them live up to such demonising names. Looking back at the effects of
labelling, according to Professor Morgan he also argued that, cases are tried in court relating to
children and minor offences like the use of bad language in a child’s playground or breaking the
glass pane of a window (BBC News, 2006).
With reference to delinquency, it was frequently and firmly given close association with the
working class family life conditions and also, according to McLaughlin and Muncie, was not a
part of being English. The dangerous classes now formed were referred to as ‘a class apart’ and
slum youths described as ‘street Arabs’ and ‘savages’ (Graham and Clarke 1996). Pearson notes
that the ‘hooligans’ were seen as a phenomenon which was non British” ‘Indeed we must allow
that it was most ingenious of Late Victorian England to disown the British Hooligan by giving
him an “Irish name” (Pearson, 1983, p75). While cruelty to youths was recognised, most
concerns were about young people or youths offending rather than their victimisation. Morgan
and Zedner (1992).
We could also argue the fact that the media plays a big role in demonising youths and making
them look like monsters. The media often tend to focus their attention on the drama and
expressiveness of the subcultures in society which may sometimes be far removed from normal
or typical. Additionally, there are many subcultures that do not often get involved in serious
criminal activity, if indeed they get involved at all. However, they are seen as potentially
disruptive. Furthermore, young people often complain that they are stopped by police or reported
80

on for no other reason than that of hanging around with their friends in groups. According to
Pearson (1994, 1188), this provides a reflection and also reinforcement of the popular link
between youth and criminal activity. Looking at the whole picture from a cultural context it
sometimes appears that being young is in itself forms the rationale for being considered or
regarded as one of the ‘usual suspects’; the connection between youth and crime is embedded in
social images as well as national statistics.
In summary, Pearson’s approach youth and crime simply argues that youth crime is a social
construct, and so also is crime. He also states that laws are dictated by humans which means they
are man-made and to a certain degree and these laws are put in place to shape criminals. It stands
to reason then that without laws we would not have criminals and society would be made up of
the same people, however, those people whose actions were harmful would not be seen as
criminals.
Clifford Shaw and Henry McKay (1942) two famous Sociologist/Criminologists who were both
members of the Chicago School, created a theory in sociology known as the social
disorganisation theory which became one of the most important theories developed by the
Chicago School. It is based on ecological studies. The theory links crime rates to the ecological
characteristics of a neighbourhood. A core principle of the social disorganisation theory is that
domiciliary location matters. This theory also links in with youth crime.
Delving deeper into Shaw and McKay’s theory (1942) both believed that crime caused by youths
had some bearing on the area in which they live. Rather than focusing on single physiological
factors like the delinquent’s body type or mental conflicts they may be experiencing, these
theorists studied how the different domiciliary locations of these young people created conditions
that were conducive to minor youth criminality. They both also discovered that the youth
criminality figures rejected those that were evacuated further from the centre of the city. In a
nutshell, Shaw and McKay’s social disorganisation theory postulates that run down deprived
slum areas of a city or town causes social disorganisation, which leads to cultural conflict.
Cultural conflict then bestows youth criminality which propagates to an extent that some young
people become truants disregarding their education in institutions such as schools, colleges
training providers and even universities institutions to get involved in criminality. It could even
be said that they make a full- time career of criminal activities.
Another theorist Robert Merton (1938) who is an American sociologist believed that youths who
had negative experiences while growing up, for example bad upbringing, not having enough
money, living in an area known for crime will lead to a strain in youth community. In relation,
looking at the American dream some youths grow up, gaining wealth and prosperity legitimately
by going to high school, university then after that get a job. Another way of achieving the
American dream according to some youths is rejecting the fact that the right way of getting
money is right so instead of being legitimate, forget about school or university and start roaming
the streets selling drugs; in other words going through life living in the fast lane. In summary of
strain theory youths being hindered in society from success, thus leads to deviance, which then
equals youths adopting illegitimate means to achieve the goals they cannot achieve legitimately.
For example stealing cars to fund the ‘perfect house, selling drugs or even committing robbery.
81

In conclusion to this essay we could argue firstly that youth crime is a social construct, as well as
being based on research, a proportion of youths are lashing out at parents which is indicative of a
loss of parental or social control. However it could also reveal something more significant in
terms of youth anger. Looking at the notion of youths, as this essay has done, we can perceive
such matters as complex but fundamentally we know it to be a social construct. Youths should
have a certain amount of freedom in order to develop themselves and prepare for adulthood.
Therefore young people should be treated as separate individuals with different characteristics in
order to excel.
82

CHAPTER 21 : REFLECTIVE STATEMENT
In this Assignment I chose to talk about the probation service because when I graduate, that will
be the field of the criminal justice system; I will be interested in and always was interested in as
a child growing up and now a man who have 2 years left of university.
The aims and objectives of the organisation:
The role, aims and objectives of the probation service organisation is to perform with a multitude
of organisations, to ensure firm public protection by managing offenders or perpetrators if you
like, those who presents themselves subject to harm, self-destruct or tend to cause conflict and
distress to the members of public. This will continue to be a crucial and onerous segment of the
role of the probation service.
Probation officers are established to protect the public as well as the offender, because the
offender is doing probation instead of going to jail or maybe perhaps if you like, been released
from jail on terms and conditions of being on probation. POs try to manage offenders by making
appointments where the offender must attend without fail otherwise the P.S.O will need to make
a breach of probation report and need to testify against the offender and consequently, the
offender could face going back to jail. PSOs aim is to also, reduce the risk of probationers
offending as well as making sure they carry out their punishment and:
 Supporting them in the wider community
 As well as helping offenders understand how their offences affect them and their victims;
nonetheless the state and public too
Probation officers help offenders who come out of jail who might be homeless to help them find
housing, so yes nonetheless the probation service liaise a lot with housing associations as well as
working very close to the police, prison officers and social services. In addition, as well as
providing victim support, writing reports and being involved in rehabilitation programmes PSOs
must also undertake administrative work, such as keeping case files up to date as well as keeping
in contact with other agencies. For example, voluntary organisations and housing association.
However, probation officer job is to work with high risk offenders; their main duty is to help
offenders change their ways. Court work that includes PSOs they must inform the court about the
history of the offender and, after conducting interviews with the offender and other relevant
people, write pre-sentence report to assist in decisions about sentencing and so forth as well as
maintaining case files.
Skills that is required for the job:
The most important skill I believe, that a probation employee should obtain, is the ability to
engage with and to hold to account, offenders thus to gain their trust, and yet be strategic and
authoritative when necessary. It can be difficult to get such balance right. Many offenders are
83

anxious, hostile and uncooperative. The 3 other skills I believe are vital skills to learn and that
are crucial to the workforce are:
 The ability to cope with stressful situations.
 Good organisational skills.
In order for me to be successful I’ve got to learn to organise myself properly, for example, at
university I am always stressing about where I keep certain pieces of work near to the deadline
all because I do not keep my work in order. So therefore, in order to be successful in such a
demanding job, I must learn to organise casework. Because in the job I will be dealing with a
multitude of probationers cases and I will need to keep each individual case separately and be
able to find them when I need to find them or management may assign me to work with someone
else.
I must learn to cope under stress because for example, at university I become very stress and find
it hard to work and cope at times. In order for me to achieve any goals in the probation service, I
must be able to cope under pressure and stress, be able to control my emotions as well as my
temper. For example I may come across a stressful situation offender may become violent I have
to be able to remain calm and cope by calling for back up if necessary.
Why might the job suit me?
The job will definitely suit me because; I enjoy helping people and trying to reason with people.
I believe in the voice of reason because offenders can be hostile and at times I have been in
situation where I had to mediate with individuals and used my Christians faith to help and I have
managed to calm and help a situation. In terms of being a probation officer, I feel I can strongly
help save the lives of members of public by trying to manage my probationer, stopping him from
offending and self-destructing again as well as protecting them from themselves. In addition, I
have a passion to help and work with victims of crime because I have been a victim of crime
myself.
How might my degree in criminology be relevant to my career?
My degree is relevant because, it focuses on, the mind of offenders as well as why they offend.
My Degree is relevant because my career focuses on offenders, my degree gives me opportunity
to study relevant subjects such as criminal justice and policing related to my career, so it gives
me an insight of offenders and so forth. Doing this degree is a fast track route to entry of being a
PO instead of going the non-graduate way. The next step to pursue my career is control my
temper work hard.
84

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Morgan, R., Maguire, M. and Reiner, R., 2012. The Oxford handbook of criminology. Oxford
University Press.
Hathaway, A. D., Comeau, N. C. and Erickson, P. G., 2011. Cannabis normalization and stigma:
Contemporary practices of moral regulation. Criminology & Criminal Justice. 11(5).
pp.451-469.
White, R., 2013. Crimes against nature: Environmental criminology and ecological justice.
Routledge.
Uggen, C. and Inderbitzin, M., 2010. Public criminologies. Criminology & Public Policy, 9(4),
pp.725-749.
Larsen, G., Ellefsen, R. and Sollund, R. eds., 2012. Eco-global crimes: Contemporary problems
and future challenges. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd..
Carrier, N. and Walby, K., 2014. Ptolemizing Lombroso the Pseudo-Revolution of Biosocial
Criminology. Journal of Theoretical & Philosophical Criminology. 6(1). p.1.
Walsh, D. P. and Conway, V., 2011. Police governance and accountability: Overview of current
issues. Crime, Law and Social Change. 55(2-3). pp.61-86.
McLaughlin, E. and Murji, K., 2012. Lost connections and new directions: neo-liberalism, new
public managerialism and. Crime, risk and justice. p.104.
Bontrager, S., Barrick, K. and Stupi, E., 2013. Gender and sentencing: A meta-analysis of
contemporary research. J. Gender Race & Just.. 16. p.349.
Barlow, H.D. (1993) Introduction to criminology. 6th edn. New York: Harper/Collins.
Becker, H. S. (1963). Outsiders: Studies in the sociology of deviance. New York: Free Press.
Cohen, S (1972) Folk Devils and Moral Panics: The Creation of the Mods and Rockers. London:
MacGibbon & Kee.
Critcher, C. (2009) ‘Widening the Focus: Moral Panics as Moral regulation’, British Journal of
Criminology, vol 49, pp17-34.
Goode, E., and Ben-Yehuda, N. (1994) Moral Panics; The Social Construction of Deviance,
Oxford: Blackwell.
Carrabine, E., Cox, P., Fussey, P., Hobbs, D., South, N., Thiel, D., and Turton, J., 2014.
Criminology- A Sociological Introduction. 3rd ed. London: Routledge
85

Cross, N. (2013) Law Express: Criminology. Liverpool: John Moore’s University, Pearson
Learning.
Davies, M., Tyrer, J. & Croall, H. (2009) Criminal Justice. (4th ed.) Harlow: Longman.
Hale, C., Haward, K., Wahidin, A., and Wahdin, E. (2013) Criminology 3rd edition. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Hale, C., Wincup, E., Wahidin, A. & Hayward, K.J., (2013) Criminology. (Third edition.)
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Newburn, T. (2013) Criminology 2nd Ed. Abingdon, UK. Taylor and Francis Ltd.
http://compass.port.ac.uk/UoP/file/9ae42a63-0544-40e3-8fc6-7be0e2ef9231/1/Police%20Culture
%20(s)_IMSLRN.zip/page_06.htm
[Last accessed on 12th/11/2015]
Carrabine, E., Cox, P., Fussey, P., Hobbs, D., South, N., Thiel, D., and Turton, J., 2014.
Criminology- A Sociological Introduction. 3rd ed. London: Routledge
Dempsey,J.S. and Forst, L.S.( 2014), An Introduction to Policing, 7th Edition. Clifton Park, New
York: Routledge
Hale,C., Haward,H., Wahidin, A.and Wahidin, E. (2013) 3rd ed. Criminology, Oxford: Oxford
University Press
Holdaway, S. (1983) Inside the British Police – A Force at Work. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell
Ianni R and Ianni, F.A.J., (1983) Street Cops and Management Cops – The two Cultures of
Policing in Control in the Police Organisation. Cambridge MA, USA: MIT Press
Newburn, T. (2013) Criminology 2nd Ed. Abingdon, UK. Taylor and Francis Ltd.
Reiner R (2010 [1985]) The Politics of the Police. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Becker, H. S. (1963). Outsiders: Studies in the sociology of deviance. New York: Free Press.
Carrabine, E., Cox, P., Fussey, P., Hobbs, D., South, N., Thiel, D., and Turton, J., 2014.
Criminology- A Sociological Introduction. 3rd ed. London: Routledge
Cross, N. (2013) Law Express: Criminology. Liverpool: John Moore’s University, Pearson
Learning.
86

Cohen, S. and Young, J. (1981) The manufacture of news. Social problems, deviance and the
mass media. London: Constable.
Croall, H. (1998) Crime and society in Britain: An introduction. New York: Longman.
Hale, C., Haward, K., Wahidin, A., and Wahdin, E. (2013) Criminology 3rd edition. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Newburn, T. (2013) Criminology 2nd Ed. Abingdon, UK. Taylor and Francis Ltd.
Punch, S., Harding, J., Marsh, I., Keating, M. and Harden, J. (2013) Sociology: Making sense of
society. 5th edn. Harlow: Pearson/Education.
Regoli, R.M., Hewitt, J.D. and Spears, D.M.D. (2003) Delinquency in society: Youth crime in the
21st century. 5th edn. Boston: McGraw-Hill Companies.
Bergelson, V., 2013. Victimless Crimes. The International Encyclopedia of Ethics.
Button, M., Lewis, C. and Tapley, J., 2014. Not a victimless crime: The impact of fraud on
individual victims and their families. Security Journal. 27(1). pp.36-54.
Clinard, M. R., Quinney, R. and Wildeman, J., 2014. Criminal behavior systems: A typology.
Routledge.
Emmanouil, D., 2015. Crimes, victimizers and victims in the lives of the saints hagiographical,
criminological and psychological approach.West East Journal of Social Sciences. 4(3). p.1.
Green, S. P., 2015. Vice Crimes and Preventive Justice. Criminal Law and Philosophy. 9(3).
pp.561-576.
Hall, M., 2016. Victims of environmental crime: routes for recognition, restitution and redress.
Environmental Crime and Its Victims: Perspectives Within Green Criminology, p.103.
Hughes, B.T., 2014. Strictly Taboo: Cultural Anthropology's Insights into Mass Incarceration
and Victimless Crime.
Jewkes, Y., 2015. Media and crime. Sage.
Koff, H., 2015. Survival Strategy, Victimless Crime or Challenge to Nation-states? Exploring
Informality in Cross-Border Regions.
Mayhew, P. and Van Dijk, J., 2014. International Crime Victimization Survey. In Encyclopedia
of Criminology and Criminal Justice (pp. 2602-2614). Springer New York.
87

Muncie, J., 2014. Youth and crime. Sage.
West, H., 2014. Victimless Crime.
Wyatt, T., 2016. Victimless venison? Deer poaching and black market meat in the UK.
Contemporary Justice Review.19(2). pp.188-200.
Youngs, D. and Canter, D., 2014. When is an offender not a criminal? Instrumentality
distinguishes self-reported offending of criminals. Journal of Criminal Psychology. 4(2). pp.116-
128.
Carrabine, E., Cox, P., Fussey, P., Hobbs, D., South, N., Thiel, D., and Turton, J., 2014.
Criminology- A Sociological Introduction. 3rd ed. London: Routledge
Canton, R. (2011) Probation: Working with offenders. New York, NY: Willan Publishing.
Cree, V.E. (2009) Sociology for social workers and probation officers. 2nd edn. New York, NY:
Routledge/Taylor & Francis group.
Davies, M., Croall, H. and Tyrer, J. (2009) Criminal justice. 4th edn. New York: Pearson
Longman.
Davies, M., Tyrer, J. & Croall, H. (2009) Criminal Justice. (4th ed.) Harlow: Longman.
Farrall, S. (2002) Rethinking what works with offenders: Probation, social context and
desistance from crime. United Kingdom: Willan Publishing.
Gibson, B., Cavadino, P. and Faulkner, D. (2008) The criminal justice system: An introduction.
3rd edn. United Kingdom: Waterside Press.
Gelsthorpe, L. and Morgan, R. (eds.) (2007) Handbook of probation. United Kingdom: Willan
Publishing (UK).
George, Burke, L. and Mair, G. (2011) Redemption, rehabilitation and risk management: A
history of probation. United Kingdom: Willan Publishing.
Hale, C., Haward, K., Wahidin, A., and Wahdin, E. (2013) Criminology 3rd edition. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Hale, C., Wincup, E., Wahidin, A. & Hayward, K.J., (2013) Criminology. (Third edition.)
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
May, T. (1990) Probation: Politics, policy, and practice. United Kingdom: Open University
Press.
88

Newburn, T. (2013) Criminology 2nd Ed. Abingdon, UK. Taylor and Francis Ltd.
The probation service and the prisons (1944) Probation Journal, 4(8), pp. 92–93. doi:
10.1177/026455054400400807.
Vanstone, M. (2004) Supervising offenders in the community: A history of probation theory and
practice. Aldershot, Hants, England: Ashgate Publishing.
Becker, H. S. (1963). Outsiders: Studies in the sociology of deviance. New York: Free Press.
Barak, G. (ed.) (1994) Media, process, and the social construction of crime: Studies in
newsmaking criminology. New York: Garland Publishing.
Cohen, S (1972) Folk Devils and Moral Panics: The Creation of the Mods and Rockers. London:
MacGibbon & Kee.
Cohen, S. and Young, J. (1981) The manufacture of news. Social problems, deviance and the
mass media. London: Constable; 1981.
Cross, N. (2013) Law Express: Criminology. Liverpool: John Moore’s University, Pearson
Learning.
Carrabine, E., Cox, P., Fussey, P., Hobbs, D., South, N., Thiel, D., and Turton, J., 2014.
Criminology- A Sociological Introduction. 3rd ed. London: Routledge
Hale,C., Haward,H., Wahidin, A.and Wahidin, E. (2013) 3rd ed. Criminology, Oxford: Oxford
University Press
Jewkes, Y. (2012) Media & Crime. London: Sage Publications
Chris Hale, Keith Haward, Azrini Wahidin and Emma Wahidin: Third Edition Criminology
Published on (13th June 2013) Oxford University Press 2013
Noel Cross, Liverpool John Moores (2013) Law Express: Criminology (Pearson Learning)
Bradford, B., Murphy, K. and Jackson, J. (2014) 'Officers as Mirrors: Policing, Procedural
Justice and the (Re)Production of Social Identity’. British Journal of Criminology 54(4): 527-
550.
Carrabine, E. Cox, P., Fusey, P., Hobbs, D., South, N., Thiel, D, and Turton, J. (2014)
Criminology: A Sociological Introduction. London: Routledge.
Carter, E. (2013) Analysing Police Interviews: Laughter, Confessions and the Tape. London:
Bloomsbury.
Lee, M. and McGovern, A. (2014) Policing and the Media: Public Relations, Simulations and
Communications. London: Routledge.
89

Newburn, T. (2008) Handbook of Policing (2nd edition). Willan Publishing.
Newburn, T. (ed) (2004) Policing Key Readings. Devon: Willan Publishing.
Newburn, T., Willamson, T. and Wright, A. (2007) Handbook of Criminal Investigation.
Willan.
Reiner, R. (2010) The Politics of the Police (4th edition) Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tombs, S (2017) Social protection after the crisis: Regulation without enforcement. University
of Bristol: Policy Press. (available for pre-order)
Waddington, P.A.J., Kleinig, J. and Wright, M. (2013) Professional Police Practice:
Scenarios and Dilemmas. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Zander, M. QC (2015) The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (7th edition). London:
Sweet and Maxwell.
Di Beccaria, C. marchese, Beccaria, C., Italian, the and Young, D.T. (1986) On crimes and
punishments. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company.
Franck, H.G. and Nyman, K. (2004) The barbaric punishment: Abolishing the death penalty.
Edited by William Schabas. The Hague: Brill Academic Publishers.
Hood, R.G. and Hoyle, C. (2008) The death penalty: A worldwide perspective. 3rd edn. New
York: Oxford University Press.
Maxfield, M.G. (2015) Basics of research methods for criminal justice and criminology. United
States: CENGAGE Learning Custom Publishing.
Maxfield, M.G. and Babbie, E.R. (2011) Basics of research methods for criminal justice and
criminology. 3rd edn. Boston, MA, United States: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Becker, H. S. (1963). Outsiders: Studies in the sociology of deviance. New York: Free Press.
Carrabine, E., Cox, P., Fussey, P., Hobbs, D., South, N., Thiel, D., and Turton, J., 2014.
Criminology- A Sociological Introduction. 3rd ed. London: Routledge
Cross, N. (2013) Law Express: Criminology. Liverpool: John Moore’s University, Pearson
Learning.
Goode, E., and Ben-Yehuda, N. (1994) Moral Panics: The Social Construction of Deviance,
Oxford: Blackwell
Hale, C., Haward, K., Wahidin, A., and Wahdin, E. (2013) Criminology 3rd edition. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
90

Newburn, T. (2013) Criminology 2nd Ed. Abingdon, UK. Taylor and Francis Ltd.
Di Beccaria, C. marchese, Beccaria, C., Italian, the and Young, D.T. (1986) On crimes and
punishments. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company.
Franck, H.G. and Nyman, K. (2004) The barbaric punishment: Abolishing the death penalty.
Edited by William Schabas. The Hague: Brill Academic Publishers.
Hood, R.G. and Hoyle, C. (2008) The death penalty: A worldwide perspective. 3rd edn. New
York: Oxford University Press.
Maxfield, M.G. (2015) Basics of research methods for criminal justice and criminology. United
States: CENGAGE Learning Custom Publishing.
Maxfield, M.G. and Babbie, E.R. (2011) Basics of research methods for criminal justice and
criminology. 3rd edn. Boston, MA, United States: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Nagin, D., Pepper, J., National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on Deterrence and the
Death Penalty., National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on Law and Justice., National
Research Council (U.S.). Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. and
National Research Council (U.S.) (2012) Deterrence and the death penalty. National Academies
Press.
Durkheim, É., Durkheim, E., Coser, L.A. and Halls, W.D. (1997) The division of labour in
society. 13th edn. New York: Simon & Schuster Adult Publishing Group.
Hughes, J.A., Martin, P.J. and Sharrock, W.W. (2003) Understanding classical sociology: Marx,
Weber, Durkheim. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Hughes, J.A., Martin, P.J. and Sharrock, W.W. (2003) Understanding classical sociology: Marx,
Weber, Durkheim. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Jones, P., Bradbury, L., Boutillier, S.L. and LeBoutillier, S. (2011) Introducing social theory.
2nd edn. Malden, MA: Polity Press.
Punch, S., Harding, J., Marsh, I., Keating, M. and Harden, J. (2013) Sociology: Making sense of
society. 5th edn. Harlow: Pearson/Education.
Cohen, S. and Young, J. (1981) The manufacture of news. Social problems, deviance and the
mass media. London: Constable.
Croall, H. (1998) Crime and society in Britain: An introduction. New York: Longman.
Cunningham, H. (2009). The invention of childhood (p. 320). BBC Books.
91

Griffin, C. (1993) Representations of youth: The study of youth and adolescence in Britain and
America. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.
Lesko, N. (2012). Act your age! The cultural construction of adolescence. (Second Edi., p. 232).
Oxford: Routledge.
Lesko, N., & Talburt, S. (2012). A history of the present youth studies. In N. Lesko & S. Talburt
(Eds.), Key words in youth studies (pp. 11–24). Routledge.
Muncie, J. and Muncie, P.J. (2009) Youth and crime. 3rd edn. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.
Regoli, R.M., Hewitt, J.D. and Spears, D.M.D. (2003) Delinquency in society: Youth crime in the
21st century. 5th edn. Boston: McGraw-Hill Companies.
Scott, S. J. and S. (1999). Risk anxiety and the social construction of childhood. In Deborah
Lupton (Ed.), Risk and sociocultural theory (pp. 86–108). Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Canton, R. (2011) Probation: Working with offenders. New York, NY: Willan Publishing.
Cree, V.E. (2009) Sociology for social workers and probation officers. 2nd edn. New York, NY:
Routledge/Taylor & Francis group.
Davies, M., Croall, H. and Tyrer, J. (2009) Criminal justice. 4th edn. New York: Pearson
Longman.
Farrall, S. (2002) Rethinking what works with offenders: Probation, social context and
desistance from crime. United Kingdom: Willan Publishing.
Gibson, B., Cavadino, P. and Faulkner, D. (2008) The criminal justice system: An introduction.
3rd edn. United Kingdom: Waterside Press.
Online
92

Police facing claims that senior officers knew about spying on Stephen Lawrence family. 2010.
[Online]. Available through: <https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/undercover-with-
paul-lewis-and-rob-evans/2015/jul/02/police-facing-claims-that-senior-officers-knew-
about-spying-on-stephen-lawrence-family>. [Accessed on 21st March 2017].
Shooting of Keith Lamont Scott. 2017. [Online]. Available through:
<https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Keith_Lamont_Scott>. [Accessed on 21st
March 2017].
Online Victimless Crime. 2016. [Online]. Available
Through:<http://sociology.about.com/od/V_Index/g/Victimless-Crime.htm>. [Accessed on 1st
March, 2017].
http://www.constitution.org/cb/beccaria_bio.htm (Website accessed on 04/11/2015)
http://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/criminology/born-bad-or-made-bad.php?
cref=1&session-id=89475d5ae2dd7ed2aa824a4ea3e5c0f7 accessed on 20/12/2015
http://study.com/academy/lesson/emile-durkheims-theories-functionalism-anomie-and-division-
of-labor.html accessed on 22/12/2015
http://study.com/academy/lesson/mertons-strain-theory-definition-examples-quiz.html accessed
on 22/12/2015
Boundless (2015) Durkheim’s mechanical and organic solidarity. Available at:
https://www.boundless.com/sociology/textbooks/boundless-sociology-textbook/social-groups-
and-organization-6/social-structure-in-the-global-perspective-58/durkheim-s-mechanical-and-
organic-solidarity-359-1108/ (Accessed: 26 February 2016).
The National Archives, T. N. (2012). The National Archives. Retrieved from
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/citizenship/struggle_democracy/childlabour.htm
Zelizer, V. A. (1994). Pricing the priceless child: The changing social value of children (p. 296).
Princeton University Press.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4935606.stm
http://www.newkerala.com/news/2016/fullnews-130787.html
http://socialtheoryapplied.com/2013/05/17/a-sociological-perspective-on-youth/
93

Appendix
Ethics Form and Checklist
I have read and considered the ethical issues that my research presents. I have gone through the
ethical checklist below and read and understood the British Society of Criminology’s Statement
of Ethics1 (2015).
Name of Student: Webster James Linton
Signed (student): Linton
Date: 15th February 2017
Questionnaire Survey – Should the Death Penalty should it be reintroduced into the UK?
 Is the death penalty cruel? Please elaborate in your own words.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………
 If the death penalty wasn’t abolished in the UK and still remained open, do you think the
murder rate would increase or decrease?
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………
 To what extent is the fear of punishment a factor in preventing you from committing
murder?
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
1
94

………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………
 If you were a convicted criminal would you be more afraid of life in prison or the death
penalty? Please explain below.
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………
 Do you think death row inmates thought about the repercussions of being convicted of
murder or rape?
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………
 Some reject the death penalty as punishment for moral or religious reasons. Does this
concern affect your opinion?
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………
95

96

97

98

Appendix
Ethics Form and Checklist
I have read and considered the ethical issues that my research presents. I have gone through the
ethical checklist below and read and understood the British Society of Criminology’s Statement
of Ethics2 (2015).
Name of Student: Webster James Linton
Signed (student): Linton
Date: 21st November 2016
Questionnaire - Death Penalty should it be reintroduced into the UK?
 What is your Age?
 16-20
 21-30
 31 Or over
 What is the highest level of education you have completed?
Please circle or tick below what is appropriate to you:
 BA/BSC Degree or equivalent
 Level 1 or GCSE grade D-G
 Level 2 A-C Grades GCSE
 A-Levels - Level 3
 No Formal Qualifications
 What is your gender?
Please circle or tick below:
 Male
 Female
 Prefer not to say
2
99

 Is the fear of punishment a factor in preventing you from committing any type crime for
example murder?
 Yes
 No
 If you were a convicted criminal would you be more afraid of life in prison or the death
penalty?
Please tick or circle:
a) Life in Prison
b) Death Penalty
 Do you think the death penalty was being used efficiently in the Criminal Justice System?
 Yes
 No
 Maybe
 Do you support the death penalty?
Please circle or tick:
 Yes
 No
 Do you think eliminating the death penalty will stop people from partaking in serious
crime such as murder or rape?
 Yes
 No
 Have you or your family ever been a victim of a crime?
 Yes
 No
100

 What religious denomination are you affiliated with?
Please circle relevant religion:
 Muslim/Islam
 Christian
 Jewish
 Buddha
 Spiritual
 No Religion
 Do you feel that some people have been executed in the past for crimes they did not
commit?
 Yes
 No
101

102