White-collar criminals--a homogenous offender population? Reflections on typical and atypical "white-collar criminals"

Little has been written in German scientific literature on the personality structure of white-collar criminals. Often, the relevance of this level of investigation has downright been denied. Conventional psychopathology does not seem to be an appropriate approach to these character problems since there are not only deficits but also competences to be found which are useful while making a professional career. The author points out the inhomogeneity of this offender population and presents a case report of an atypical white-collar criminal. Over and above that, he introduces two psychological concepts which are apt to better describe the peculiarities of these individuals: Machiavellian intelligence is often the core competence when it comes to rising in hierarchies, whereas the newly defined psychopathy concept according to R. D. Hare makes plausible the moral and ethical failure of these offenders in their professional settings.     

Sentencing: Must justice be even-handed?

The question considered is whether a convicted criminal has been treated unjustly if the only reason he receives a much heavier sentence than another criminal convicted of the same crime is that he came before a different judge. The answer offered is that such a criminal would not be treated unjustly. The principle of equality in punishment, properly understood, does not forbid even such gross disparities in sentence (though it also does not require them). The paper discusses the 1978 Model Sentencing and Corrections Act in detail and has important consequences for the current movement to reform punishment to assure just deserts.Work on this paper was supported in part by a Summer Research Grant from Illinois State University, 1981.     

A pretty pass: when is there a right to die?

This paper, the 2002 Fison Memorial Lecture, reflects on the state of the law on the right to die, following the cases of Mrs Pretty and Ms B. Particular attention is drawn to a number of developments in the European Court of Human Rights.     

America’s most wanted criminals: comparing cybercriminals and traditional criminals

Reports of cybercrime have escalated over the past decade. While these crimes have increased, our understanding about the dynamics surrounding cyber offenders has not kept pace. Few studies have considered the characteristics of serious cyber criminals in comparison to other types of criminals. To fill this void in the literature, we examine a sample of cybercriminals appearing on the FBIs Most Wanted List and compare the characteristics of these offenders to other most wanted offenders. Results suggest that the most wanted cyber offenders are similar to other offenders in that it is a male-dominated offense category, but they are different from other offenders in that they are younger and more likely to exhibit certain types of physical and lifestyle characteristics. Implications for policy and future research are provided.     

Questioning Blackmun's Thesis: Does Uniformity in Sentencing Entail Unfairness?

It is commonly believed among criminal justice scholars that sentencing guidelines increase uniformity in sentencing at the cost of fairness. They reason that guideline systems rarely take all relevant case characteristics into consideration, and as a result, impose sentences in particular cases that are biased relative to the ideal or best sentence. This bias effect is one of the primary theoretical and practical challenges faced by courts and sentencing commissions in the last 30 years, and provides one of the strongest arguments against mandatory sentencing guidelines. This article identifies a second effect of guidelines on fairness, which has not been sufficiently acknowledged by the scholarly literature: the variance effect increases the fairness of sentences directly by increasing uniformity. This article uses statistical simulation to examine the relationship between the variance effect and the bias effect. The results provide substantial evidence that the variance effect is comparatively large, and that it may often outweigh the negative effects of bias. Under these conditions, sentencing guidelines will both increase uniformity and increase fairness.     

An analysis of outlaw motorcycle gang crime: are bikers organised criminals?

ABSTRACT

Outlaw motorcycle gangs (OMCGs) are identified in Australia and internationally as being heavily involved in organised crime and/or as being criminal organisations. However, academic studies have shown that OMCG members are involved in organised crime to varying extents; this differs between clubs and across jurisdictions. To date, Australian studies of OMCGs are rare. Despite this, Australian governments target OMCGs as key players in organised crime. This study contributes to the existing literature by analysing OMCGs’ criminality in one Australian jurisdiction – Queensland. It draws on rich qualitative data to determine whether and to what extent Queensland’s OMCGs are involved in serious crime, organised crime and/or are operating as criminal organisations. The study finds that Queensland’s OMCG members participate in serious crime at a higher rate than the general public, but that there are few examples of organised crime. There is little to no evidence of OMCGs acting as criminal organisations.     

Actuarial Sentencing: An “Unsettled” Proposition

This paper discusses the concerns associated with the introduction of, and increased reliance on, actuarial risk tools in sentencing in order to: (1) stimulate cross-disciplinary dialog and research about the impact of incorporating actuarial risk logic into sentencing processes and (2) identify questions requiring further empirical examination. In this article, I recognize that actuarial risk logic offers managerial and organizational benefits, but I also demonstrate that the application of actuarial risk when sentencing offenders is not without important consequences. First, I provide a brief outline of the emergence, logic, and entrenchment of probabilistic reasoning within criminal justice decision-making, and the more recent extension and application of actuarial risk logic to sentencing. Then, I use the following themes to define the limits of using risk sciences in sentencing: (1) the logical structure of risk; (2) the slippage between risk prediction and individual causation; (3) current methodological limits of risk science; (4) the potential for gender and race discrimination; (5) the legal relevance and transparency of risk-based sentencing; and (6) the jurisprudential and organizational impact of various risk technologies. Importantly, the nature and severity of these complications will vary by, and within, the jurisdiction (or sentencing regime) because current sentencing practices are influenced by local jurisdictional needs and sentencing laws.     

Why Should Remorse be a Mitigating Factor in Sentencing?

This article critically examines the rationales for the well-settled principle in sentencing law that an offender’s remorse is to be treated as a mitigating factor. Four basic types of rationale are examined: remorse makes punishment redundant; offering mitigation can induce remorse; remorse should be rewarded with mitigation; and remorse should be recognised by mitigation. The first three rationales each suffer from certain weaknesses or limitations, and are argued to be not as persuasive as the fourth. The article then considers, and rejects, two arguments against remorse as a mitigating factor in sentencing: that the crime, not the offender, is the focus of punishment; and that the truly remorseful offender would not ask for mitigation. The article concludes with a brief consideration of whether a lack of remorse should be an aggravating factor.

Is Terrorism a Crime or an Aggravating Factor in Sentencing?

Common law systems, in criminal cases, distinguish between theguilt/innocence proceedings and the sentencing stage. This isnot the case in civil law systems where criminal trial consistsof a single phase, combining the inquiry into guilt with sentencing.Under common law practice many facts relevant for sentencingare considered irrelevant at the stage of finding guilt forthe commission of the crime. Aggravating elements, therefore,address a fundamental distinction of substantive criminal lawbetween guilt and dangerousness: guilt is a determination ofresponsibility for a prior wrongdoing; dangerousness is a speculativefuture determination. The intensification of terrorist activityin the past few years has made terrorism one of today's mostpressing problems. But is terrorism a crime or an aggravatingfactor in sentencing? In this article, the author challengesconventional wisdom regarding the meaning of ‘terroristcrimes’, by providing a conceptual understanding of ‘terrorism’,as well as articulating a theory of guilt. Terrorists seldomexpress ‘guilt’. The word ‘terrorism’describes, instead, an overriding motivation, a way of acting,rather than the objective circumstances of acting. Terrorismis nothing but common crimes although committed with an overridingmotivation of imposing extreme fear on the nation as such. Theauthor presents the conceptual grounds of the phenomenon ofterrorism as it has evolved through history, before enquiringinto the meaning of ‘terrorist crimes’: the overridingmotivation associated with the concept of terrorism constitutesthe degree of cognate dangerousness of terrorist crimes.     

Policies and Imprisonment: The Impact of Structured Sentencing and Determinate Sentencing on State Incarceration Rates, 1978–2004

Research has begun to systematically assess the relationship between sentencing policies and state incarceration rates. Prior studies, however, have examined policy‐based relationships in isolation, failing to consider the impact of combinations of policies. Using a pooled time series design, this article examines interactions between structured sentencing, determinate sentencing, and state incarceration rates between 1978 and 2004. Results show that constraining release discretion through determinate sentencing matters more than constraining sentencing discretion through structured sentencing. Consistent with prior research, determinate sentencing was associated with lower incarceration rates independent of other policies. Contrary to prior research, however, the presence of presumptive sentencing guidelines was associated with lower incarceration rates only when combined with determinate sentencing. These findings suggest that while a state may effectively insulate sentencing decisions from outside social forces, if it fails to insulate release decisions from those same forces, they will continue to affect imprisonment levels.     

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.

     

Can criminals create opportunities for crime? Malvertising and illegal online medicine trade

Opportunity theories suggest that the occurrence of an offence depends on the presence of a motivated offender and a specific condition in the environment that presents an opportunity for crime. While offenders may be able to choose among crime opportunities, the question is whether they can create new crime opportunities. Based on a qualitative analysis of court cases, investigative reports and the news media, this article examines the genesis of crime opportunities by looking into the malicious online advertising (malvertising) of substandard, spurious, falsely labelled, falsified and counterfeit (SSFFC) medical products. While further research on this topic is needed, the findings of the article help to understand the importance of unsavoury advertising as a tool that perpetrators use to manipulate consumer demand and proactively create (or expand) criminal markets.     

Forensic botany: who?, how?, where?, when?

Plants are a good source of biological forensic evidence; this is due to their ubiquity, their ability to collect reference material, and their sensitivity to environmental changes. However, in many countries, botanical evidence is recognised as being scientifically. Botanical evidence is not mostly used for perpertration, instead it tends to serve as circumstantial evidence. Plant materials constitute the basis, among others, for linking a suspect or object to a crime scene or a victim, confirming or not confirming an alibi, determining the post-mortem interval, and determining the origin of food/object. Forensic botany entails field work, knowledge of plants, understanding ecosystem processes, and a basis understaning of geoscience. In this study, experiments with mammal cadavers were conducted to determine the occurence of an event. The simplest criterion characterising botanical evidence is its size. Therefore, macroremains include whole plants or their larger fragments (e.g. tree bark, leaves, seeds, prickles, and thorns), whereas microscopic evidence includes palynomorphs (spores and pollen grains), diatoms, and tissues. Botanical methods allow for an analysis to be repeated multiple times and the test material is easy to collect in the field. Forensic botany can be supplemented with molecular analyses, which, although specific and sensitive, still require validation.