IS JUSTICE “COLLAR-BLIND”?: PUNISHING MEDICAID PROVIDER FRAUD*

The question of punishment of white-collar criminals is addressed in this paper through an examination of sanctions imposed on health care providers convicted of defrauding California's Medicaid “Medi-Cal” system. Quantitative data were collected from Medi-Cal case files and, for comparative purposes, from a statewide data base maintained by the California Bureau of Criminal Statistics for grand theft arrestees. Qualitative data comprising interviews with Medi-Cal enforcement personnel supplement the analysis. The analysis of criminal sanctions reveals greater leniency in the punishment of Medi-Cal offenders than in the punishment of similarly charged non-white-collar offenders. The findings are related to recent debates regarding the severity of punishment for white-collar offenders.     

"CLUB FED" AND THE SENTENCING OF WHITE-COLLAR OFFENDERS BEFORE AND AFTER WATERGATE

This paper counterposes the common assumption that criminal justice systems are resistant to reform with the widespread belief that the sentencing of white-collar offenders became more severe after Watergate. It is argued that readjustments may be more more common than actual reforms in criminal justice systems. This paper provides an example of how such processes of readjustment can be explored in the context of sentencing decisions made before and after the unique historical experience of Watergate. It is shown with data from one of America's most prominent federal district courts that changes did occur in sentences imposed before (in 1973) and after (1975) Watergate, but with offsetting results: after Watergate, persons convicted of white-collar crimes were more likely to be sentenced to prison, but for shorter periods of time, than less-educated persons convicted of common crimes. Using a technique that corrects for sample selection processes, these effects are shown to cancel one another out. Examples are provided of the token kinds of prison sentences assigned after Watergate to white-collar offenders in several highly publicized cases and areas of enforcement.     

Criminalizing white-collar misconduct

In this article we examine three explanations for the differential treatment of white-collar offenders by the legal system: (1) an organizational advantage argument in which offenders in “organizationally shielded” positions receive more lenient treatment, (2) an alternative sanctions argument in which civil sanctions replace criminal sanctions in the response to white-collar crime, and (3) a system capacity argument in which the legal response to white-collar crime is driven primarily by resources and caseload pressures. These three theoretical arguments are tested through an analysis of data on individuals suspected of having committed serious crimes against savings and loan institutions in the 1980s. We seek to determine the factors that influenced prosecutors to file criminal charges against some of these suspects and not others. We conclude that all three models may be limited in their ability to explain low rates of prosecution in cases involving white-collar crimes of the sort examined here, and suggest that these limitations may have to do with the circumscribed levels of analysis at which these explanations have been pitched.     

Dissecting White-Collar Crime: Offense Type and Punitiveness

It is commonly asserted that the public is indifferent toward white-collar crime and hence is reluctant to “get tough” with more “respectable” criminals. However, such a contention fails to consider that there are many varieties of upperworld criminality and that the punitiveness of the public may differ markedly according to the type of offense involved. Based on a 1981 survey conducted in Galesburg, Illinois, we have attempted to investigate whether the criminal sanctions prescribed by citizens will vary when the broad category of white-collar crime is “dissected” into its component types. The data suggest that (1) there is considerable variation in punitiveness by type of offense; (2) while street crimes are generally given the harshest sentences, violent forms of white-collar illegality are accorded severe sanctions that exceed those meted out for some F.B.I, crimes; and (3) there is little support for the notion that the public responds leniently to upperworld crime.     

Violent Street Crime Versus Harmful White-Collar Crime: A Comparison of Perceived Seriousness and Punitiveness

Recent studies have challenged traditional wisdom regarding public apathy about white-collar crime by revealing equal or greater perceived seriousness of these offenses among respondents relative to traditional crime. Nevertheless, subjects in those studies were generally asked to contrast white-collar crime scenarios with a non-violent street crime baseline vignette. Perhaps a violent street crime would have invited lower perceived seriousness for the white-collar offenses. Participants in the present study were asked to (1) read vignettes describing violent street crimes and physically harmful white-collar crimes, (2) compare their seriousness, and (3) determine appropriate sanctions. Subjects perceived the violent crime scenarios presented to them to be more serious than the harmful white-collar crime vignettes. Further, they were less punitive toward white-collar offenders compared with street criminals. Implications of these findings are discussed.     

Class, Status, and the Punishment of White-Collar Criminals

The treatment of white-collar offenders by the criminal justice system has been a central concern since the concept of white-collar crime was first introduced In general, it has been assumed that those higher up the social hierarchy have an advantage in every part of the legal process, including the punishment they receive as white-collar criminals. In a controversial study of white-collar crime sentencing in the federal district courts, Wheeler, Weisburd, and Bode contradicted this assumption when they found that those of higher status were more likely to be imprisoned and, when sentenced to prison, were likely to receive longer prison terms than comparable offenders of lower status. While they argued that results were consistent with "what those who do the sentencing often say about it," their analyses failed to control for the role of social class in the sentencing process. In this article we reanalyze the Wheeler et al sentencing data, including both measures of socioeconomic status and class position. Our findings show that class position does have an independent influence on judicial sentencing behavior. But this effect does not demand revision in the major findings reported in the earlier study.     

Can general strain theory explain white-collar crime? A preliminary investigation of the relationship between strain and select white-collar offenses

Agnew's (1992) general strain theory (GST) had been tested across a wide range of populations and on numerous criminal and analogous behaviors. The ability of GST to predict white-collar offending, however, had yet to be explored. Using data from convicted white-collar offenders, this research examined the ability of GST to explain white-collar offenses. The results revealed that GST was useful for predicting a select group of white-collar offenses, but might not be generalizable to individuals committing corporate-type crimes. Additionally, the findings suggested that the types of strain and negative emotion at work for white-collar offenders might vary from those found in other criminal populations. Implications for white-collar crime studies are discussed and ideas for future research are presented.     

Sentencing white-collar criminals: when is shaming viable?

When does shaming work as an alternative to incarceration and fines in sentencing white-collar criminals? In the light of recent economic downturn and highly publicised instances of white-collar crime, public opinion has demanded harsher sentences for white-collar criminals. In order to appease this demand, as well as consider the pressing problem of prison overpopulation, alternative sanctions, such as formal shaming, have been increasingly studied. Through examination of the costs and consequences of incarceration and shaming, this article will explain that since the costs of shaming sanctions are largely fixed, shaming sanctions are most viable when used in conjunction with alternative sanctions so that courts can impose sanction bundles of costs commensurate with the level of offense committed by an offender.     

Do perceptions of punishment vary between white-collar and street crimes?

Much has been learned about the relationship between sanction threat perceptions and criminal activity, yet little remains known about the factors that are associated with sanction threat perceptions. Moreover, because most researchers had studied deterrence within the context of street crime, even less is known about the factors that relate to sanction threat perceptions for white-collar crime. This study used data from a national probability sample to examine whether the determinants of perceived sanction certainty and severity for street crime were different from white-collar crime. Using robbery and fraud as two exemplars, the findings indicated that while public perceptions of sanction certainty and severity suggested that street criminals were more likely to be caught and be sentenced to more severe sanctions than white-collar criminals, respondent's perceptions of which type of crime should be more severely punished indicated that both robbery and fraud were equally likely to be perceived ‘on par.’ Additional results indicated that the correlates of certainty and severity were more similar than different, but that the results differed according to whether respondents were asked about the punishment that white-collar offenders were likely to receive as opposed to what they should receive.     

Deciding to prosecute white-collar crime: A national survey of state attorneys general

In the past decade, academic research on white-collar crime has reemerged. Most of this inquiry has focused on three general issues: (1) public attitudes toward the seriousness of white-collar crime; (2) the use of government sanctions to control white-collar crime; (3) the differential and often beneficial treatment afforded white-collar criminals in comparison to traditional offenders. Little of this research has examined the prosecutorial link between occurrences of white-collar crime and the imposition of sanctions on white-collar offenders. In this study, an attempt to focus on the link that exists at the level of state attorneys general, a survey of the 50 state attorneys general was conducted. The results suggest the following: (1) state attorneys general prefer to use criminal sanctions, but use them most in cases involving individuals; (2) when organizations are involved in white-collar criminality, civil intervention is preferred; (3) the most crucial factor in the decision to prosecute and investigate white-collar crime is the seriousness of the offense; (4) the least important factors in the decision to investigate and prosecute white-collar violations are publicity aspects and political considerations; (5) state attorneys general may play an important part in the prosecution of white-collar crime because of the limited resources available in most local prosecutors' offices.     

Recent New Zealand efforts to combat environmental crime

Conclusion The question is what legal tools are the most effective to deal with significant and continued attacks on finite environmental resources. Is there a risk that environmental statutes and monetary sanctions imposed thereunder will be seen merely as tiresome regulations carrying nominal penalties, the payment of which is no more than a legitimate cost of doing business? Will the fact that such statutes include, as an ultimate sanction, imprisonment alter this perception? Will resort to prosecution under the traditional criminal law of fraud on the public provide a substantial disincentive to environmental offending, where corporate officers can anticipate a criminal conviction and the loss of liberty in the event of detection?If the statement of the Court of Appeal in Walters is a guide, then the trend in New Zealand is likely to be imprisonment of offenders convicted of environmental crimes. Prosecutions under the Crimes Act will brand transgressors as criminals, and not as risk-taking entrepreneurs. The tools are available--which will the community use, a traditional criminal prosecution of environmental criminals, or prosecution under specific environmental statutes?This note is a revised version of a paper originally presented at the eighth international conference of the Society for the Reform of Criminal Law, Hong Kong, December 4–8, 1994.LL.B., Victoria University of Wellington 1971.     

Street justice: Some micro-moral reservations: Comment on sykes

Research on the use of incapacitation strategies to reduce crime has increased rapidly in the last decade. Estimates of the crime reduction potential are numerous and variable, reflecting different assumptions by researchers. This paper reviews and synthesizes studies of collective and selective incapacitation. Sentencing practices in the 1970s and early 1980s prevented an estimated 10 to 30 percent of potential crimes through collective incapacitation strategies. Greater use of incarceration, such as through mandatory minimum sentences, would prevent additional crimes, but prison populations would increase substantially. Selective incapacitation strategies target a small group of convicted offenders, those who are predicted to commit serious crimes at high rates, for incarceration. These high-rate serious offenders, however, are difficult to identify accurately with information currently available in official criminal history records. Preliminary research, assuming moderate accuracy, suggests that selective incapacitation may prevent some crimes, such as 5 to 10 percent of robberies by adults, but increases in prison populations would result. The future of selective incapacitation is discussed in light of current research and knowledge about serious criminal activity.     

Public perceptions of white-collar crime and punishment

Although financial losses from white-collar crime continue to exceed those of street crime, the criminal justice system has traditionally focused on the latter. Past research suggested that citizens are more likely to support punitive sanctions for street offenders than white-collar offenders. Recent corporate scandals have increased public awareness of white-collar crime, but whether public attitudes have been altered remains to be determined. Using a 2005 national sample of 402 telephone survey participants, the current study examined citizen perceptions of white-collar and street crime, as well as attitudes regarding apprehension and punishment. This research extended prior studies by also considering the influence of sociodemographic characteristics as well as perceptions of white-collar crime and punishment on the public's support for increasing resource allocation. Implications for future research and development of more effective white-collar crime control policy are discussed.     

Early criminal recidivism among mentally disordered offenders

Criminal recidivism was studied during 2 years in a Swedish population-based cohort (N = 318) of mentally disordered male offenders who had undergone a pretrial forensic psychiatric investigation, been convicted in subsequent trials, and been sentenced to forensic psychiatric treatment (FPT; n = 152), prison (n = 116), or noncustodial sanctions (n = 50). Recidivism was analysed in relation to index sanctions, levels of supervision, diagnoses, and criminological factors. Significantly lower recidivism in the FPT group was related to lower crime rates during periods at conditional liberty in this group alone, and recidivism was significantly more common among offenders with at least one of the two diagnoses of substance abuse disorder and personality disorder than among those with psychotic or other mental disorders alone. Age at index crime and number of previous crimes emerged as significant predictors of recidivism. The results of this study suggest that the relapse rates depend as much on level of supervision as on individual characteristics.     

Revisiting the Special Sensitivity Hypothesis: The Prison Experience of White-Collar Inmates

Despite recent increases in the use of incarceration for white-collar offenders, little is known about the prison experiences of these individuals or how they adjust to imprisonment. Although empirical evidence is lacking, a widespread view has prevailed that white-collar offenders have a “special sensitivity” to imprisonment—that they experience more pains and cope less well within the society of captives. Based on a sample of 366 federal prison inmates, we assessed the special sensitivity hypothesis. The analyses revealed that white-collar inmates are not more likely to experience negative prison adjustment. In some regards, white-collar inmates had fewer institutional problems and were more likely to cope with prison life successfully. Results thus call into question the merits of the special sensitivity hypothesis and are consistent with the view expressed earlier by Michael Benson and Francis Cullen that white-collar offenders may possess attributes and resources sufficient for their successful adaptation to life in prison.     

Court Sentencing Patterns for Environmental Crimes: Is There a “Green” Gap in Punishment?

Objectives

This study examines sentencing patterns for environmental crimes and tests the assumption that “green” offenders receive more lenient treatment from criminal courts than non-environmental offenders.

Methods

We present two sets of analyses. First, we present an empirical portrait of environmental felony offenses convicted in a single state (Florida) over a fifteen-year period and the resulting criminal sanctions. Second, we use a precision matching analysis to assess whether environmental offenders receive more lenient treatment when compared to non-environmental offenders with the same characteristics and offense severity scores.

Results

Findings indicate that an overall small percentage of felony convictions in state courts stem from environmental crimes. We also find that punishments for environmental crimes are more lenient than sanctions assigned to comparable non-environmental offenses when the environmental crime is ecological, but that punishments are sometimes harsher when the environmental crime involves animals.

Conclusions

The findings provide general support for the argument that courts and other formal institutions of social control treat environmental crimes more leniently than non-environmental crimes. This paper also raises important questions about citizen and state actors’ perceptions of crimes against the environment and, more generally, about the ways in which theories of court sentencing behaviors apply to environmental crime sanctioning decisions.

     

DENYING THE GUILTY MIND: ACCOUNTING FOR INVOLVEMENT IN A WHITE-COLLAR CRIME*

This study of convicted white-collar offenders treats their explanations for involvement in criminal activities. It focuses specifically on the techniques that are used to deny criminality. The strategies used to accomplish this end are detailed. It is suggested that the accounts developed by white-collar offenders to explain involvement in criminal activities are structured by the mechanics, histories, and organizational formats of offenses and by the requirement that they defeat the conditions of successful degradation ceremonies. In conclusion, some preliminary observations concerning the causes of white-collar crime are made.     

Exploring the Positive Punishment Effect Among Incarcerated Adult Offenders

The vast majority of offenders released from prison will re-offend, about two-thirds will be re-arrested with three years, most current prison inmates have prior prison experience, and many repeat offenders are devoted to what has been termed a criminal lifestyle. Findings from a survey of over 700 incarcerated adult offenders explore the effect of different measures of past punishment on inmates’ perceptions of the certainty and severity of future sanctions, and self-reported likelihood of re-offending after release. Results are mixed, with measures of current imprisonment being associated with a deterrent effect, while measures of past imprisonment (juvenile and adult) and experience with alternative sanctions being associated with a criminogenic effect. Recognizing that the data are not longitudinal and contain no measures of actual re-offending, the implied positive punishment effect is explained by applying social learning dynamics and insights from ethnographic studies. Specifically, a) non-social reinforcers-particularly affective costs and benefits experienced through offending, b) association with criminal reference groups in and out of prison, and c) a lack of legitimate, reintegrative opportunities upon reentry all serve to promote re-offending. Findings have implications for the study of offender decision-making processes, and speak to the efficacy of imprisonment as a deterrent to crime.     

Views from the Top and Bottom: Lawmakers and Practitioners Discuss Sex Offender Laws

The perceptions and attitudes that policymakers and criminal justice practitioners have about sexual offending and sexual victimization affects how state lawmakers respond to sex crimes, and how practitioners implement sex offender legislation. Policymakers continue to create new sex offender laws and, as such, the number of convicted sex offenders continues to rise. Thus, policymakers and criminal justice practitioners are increasingly important players in the public policy response to sexual criminals. To better understand the motivation, rationale, content, and purpose of statewide sex offender laws, and their role in the day-to-day management of convicted sex offenders, a non-probability sample of policymakers (n?=?61) and criminal justice practitioners (n?=?25) from across the country were interviewed. Results indicated that nearly all respondents from both groups were familiar/very familiar with their state-level sex offender laws. Policymakers and practitioners also mentioned the influential role that specific victimizations play in creating a perceived need for more sex offender legislation. The politicians and the practitioners view the laws as effective public safety mechanisms. Still, both groups noted serious problems with the laws. Furthermore, policymakers had a more negative attitude about the efficacy of sex offender therapy than criminal justice respondents. Suggestions for future research and policy implications are offered.     

RISK PERCEPTIONS AMONG SERIOUS OFFENDERS: THE ROLE OF CRIME AND PUNISHMENT*

Previous research on the perceived certainty of punishment indicates that individuals with experience in committing crimes perceive arrest as less certain than do those without such experience. Studies assessing the influence of experiencing formal sanctions on perceptions of risk have produced mixed results. Most studies however, have not considered the experience of sanctions in conjunction with the frequency of criminal behavior. With a sample of 1,046 incarcerated felons, we examined relationships among perceived risk of arrest, arrest history, and frequency of committing crimes. Our findings suggest that it is important to measure the ratio of arrests to crimes and that perceptions of risk are formed in a manner consistent with a rational choice perspective, even in a sample of serious offenders.