Punishment and Paperwork: White-Collar Offenders Under Community Supervision

This article examines how changes in penal ideology may affect the experiences of white-collar offenders under community supervision. In-depth interviews with white-collar offenders on their experiences while under federal probation are used to examine how changes in criminal punishment have undermined the traditional reintegrative and rehabilitative goals of community supervision. The analysis suggests that shifts to a more managerial, actuarial model that seeks depersonalized efficiency has unintended consequences that delegitimatize the criminal justice system, and foster sentiments of degradation. Based on these findings, considerations for future research are discussed.     

帮助犯罪分子逃避处罚罪若干问题研究

帮助犯罪分子逃避处罚罪是刑法增设的一个新罪名,关于其理解和适用都存在一些争议和难点。本文从剖析理论和实践中的分歧出发,对本罪主体范围的界定、客观方面的认定、本罪与近似犯罪的区分以及本罪认定中的一罪与数罪等问题进行了研究。     

关于短期自由刑服刑罪犯的调查报告

以实证研究考察短期自由刑的具体实施,是了解这一制度实际运作效果的有效途径。对短期自由刑服刑罪犯的基本情况、基本心态、服刑内容与效果等问题展开问卷调查,可以由此了解短期自由刑服刑人员对狱中生活及未来的期望与隐忧,探究短期自由刑的发展之路。     

Status Disparities in the Capital of Capital Punishment

Numerous studies have examined the influence of victim race on capital punishment, with a smaller number focused on victim gender. But death penalty scholars have largely ignored victim social status. Drawing on Black's (1976) multidimensional theoretical concept, the current research examines the impact of victim social status on the district attorney's decision to seek the death penalty and the jury's decision to impose a death sentence. The data include the population of cases indicted for capital murder in Harris County (Houston), Texas, from 1992 to 1999 (n=504). The findings suggest that victim social status has a robust influence on the ultimate state sanction: Death was more likely to be sought and imposed on behalf of high‐status victims who were integrated, sophisticated, conventional, and respectable. The research also has implications beyond capital punishment. Because victim social status has rarely been investigated in the broader sentencing literature, Black's concept provides a theoretical tool that could be used to address such an important omission.     

罪犯权利论

与人类权利现象的起源和内涵一样,在历史上,罪犯权利是随着以法治、平等、自由为核心的近代法观念而成长起来的;在理论上,罪犯权利则是由罪犯首先是作为人的罪犯、罪犯具有公民资格、社会对罪犯矫正的需要等所决定的.罪犯权利以不断发展的人权和公民权为主要基础,同时有着自己的确立原则和特点.我国的罪犯权利保护已初步进入法制化轨道,但许多方面的工作还需要进一步认识和完善.     

Shame,Guilt, and Punishment

The emotions of shame and guilt have recently appeared in debates concerning legal punishment, in particular in the context of so called shaming and guilting penalties. The bulk of the discussion, however, has focussed on the justification of such penalties. The focus of this article is broader than that. My aim is to offer an analysis of the concept of legal punishment that sheds light on the possible connections between punishing practices such as shaming and guilting penalties, on the one hand, and emotions such as guilt, shame, and perhaps humiliation, on the other. I␣contend that this analysis enhances our understanding of the various theories of punishment that populate this part of criminal law theory and thereby sharpens the critical tools needed to assess them. My general conclusion is that, in different ways, all of the theories we encounter in this area can benefit from paying renewed attention to the nature of the connection between the state’s act of punishing and its expected or perceived emotional effect on the individual. OB, JD, KM, FT, CEB, KKJ, ASP, JS, AD, NE and the SNF x2.     

需罚性在犯罪论体系中的功能与定位

作为对我国近年来发生争议的热点案件的一个理论回应,需罚性在犯罪论体系中的功能与定位被提出。我国目前的犯罪论体系均是以应罚性为中心展开的,缺乏对需罚性的判断,从而带来严重的理论与实践困境。犯罪论体系须认真对待刑法体系内的应罚性与刑法体系外的需罚性。从理论上,需罚性就是从刑事政策或宪法上判断有无刑罚处罚的必要性,是以预防的必要性为理论根据架设起刑事政策或宪法与刑法体系之间的桥梁,具有兼顾体系正义与个案正义的合目的性。同时,将需罚性导入我国犯罪论体系具有立法与司法基础,与我国实定法之间具有融贯性。我国应当建构应罚性与需罚性并重的犯罪论体系。     

Punishment,Accountability, and the New Juvenile Justice

The juvenile justice system has undergone radical change in the past three decades. The procedural revolution that began at the end of the 1960s with the Gault decision has more recently evolved into a substantive revolution. The changes in juvenile justice have been many and in some instances drastic, particularly in the apparent demise of the rehabilitative ideal. New theories or models have emerged, incorporating terminology such as punishment, justice, and accountability into the vocabulary of juvenile justice practitioners and the lexicon of state juvenile codes. The transformation in the philosophy and underlying goals of the system has been well-documented over the past decade or so. It is now time to ask critical questions about the significance and meaning of this transformation and to bring attention to unresolved issues. This article suggests the issues that need to be addressed in order to make both practical and philosophical sense out of the changes in the mission of “juvenile justice.”     

Retributivism,Consequentialism, and the Intrinsic Goodness of Punishment

Retributivism is commonly taken as an alternative to a consequentialist justification of punishment. It has recently been suggested, however, that retributivism can be recast as a consequentialist theory. This suggestion is shown to be untenable. The temptation to advance it is traced to an intrinsic good claim prominent in retributive thinking. This claim is examined, and is argued to be of little help in coping with the difficulties besetting the retributive theory, as well as clashing with a desert claim equally central to that theory.     

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.     

Introduction: White-Collar and Corporate Crime in Asia

In this introduction to this special issue of the Journal we broadly consider the problem of white-collar and corporate crime in Asia. Official reports from China show the pervasiveness of current problems and the inherent dangers underlying continued economic growth and reforms. We also consider evidence bearing on the idea that Japan’s remarkably low rate of common crime is likely eclipsed by the level of white-collar and corporate crime, and briefly discuss the institutionalization of economic crime in South Korea. Issues related to the lack of study of white-collar and corporate lawbreaking in Asia are also addressed. Finally, we introduce the papers and topics of this special issue, which include comparative research on cybercrime, the enforcement of intellectual property violations, accounting fraud, financial crime, and offenses in the mutual fund industry.     

Criminal Labelling,Publicity, and Punishment

This paper considers whether publicizing criminal labels is justified as a form of punishment. It begins by arguing that making criminal labels public is inevitably stigmatizing and that stigmatization is not, as is often implied, a defining aspect of censure, but needs independent justification. It argues that justifying grounds for public criminal labelling cannot be found in either the communicative account of punishment or deterrence theory. Rather, public criminal labelling should be understood as undermining of both the communicative and the deterrent functions of punishment. Recent empirical work is drawn upon to support the claims about public criminal labelling and deterrence.     

囚犯作为文化主体的问题

主体,在文化学里是一个关键词,甚至是一个最基本的概念。关于文化研究的一切问题大都是围绕主体展开的,没有主体,任何具体的技术性的设计、甚至包括文化的功能,都是无源之水、无本之木。关于主体的问题,在中国的传统文化里,普通民众或者普通公民不具备社会的主体资格,几乎没有任何的争议。在监狱文化里,在这样的背景下,就更是具有其特殊的韵味。     

Punishment,Fair Play and the Burdens of Citizenship

The fair-play theory of punishment claims that the state is justified in imposing additional burdens on law-breakers, to remove the unfair advantage the latter have enjoyed by disobeying the law. From this perspective, punishment reestablishes a fair distribution of benefits and burdens among all citizens. In this paper, I object to this view by focusing on the case of civil disobedience. I argue that the mere illegality of this conduct is insufficient to establish the agent’s unfair advantage over his lawabiding fellows, hence the imposition of additional burdens upon him through legal punishment. I articulate a broader account of citizens’ fair-play duties, able to capture disobedience as well as obedience to the law. While claiming that some law-breakers may not be treated as free-riders, I also gesture at the fact that some law-obeying citizens may not be ‘playing fair’: in some cases, a failure to engage in civil disobedience represents a failure to do one’s own part within the cooperative scheme of society.

     

建立危重犯预警管理机制初探

为有效预防监管安全和生产安全事故,应尽快把安全工作纳入规范化、科学化和现代化管理轨道。当前对危重犯预警管理是监管安全一个热点和难点问题。文章结合鲁西监狱实际,对如何建立危重犯预警管理机制进行探讨。