Is occupational fraud “typical” white-collar crime? A comparison of individual and organizational characteristics

Controversy over the appropriate unit of analysis plagued the white-collar crime literature. This state of affairs was a product, at least in part, of the continued development of two distinct research traditions. Researchers interested in “occupational crime” focused on individuals, whereas “corporate crime” researchers studied organizations. As a result, assumptions persisted about the “typical” offender and organizational setting for white-collar crime. Using a sample of 1,142 occupational fraud cases, the present study addressed voids in the literature by comparing differences in individual offender characteristics (i.e., age, gender, education, and position in the organization) and organizational victim characteristics (i.e., size, type, existing control mechanisms, and revenue) for three types of occupational fraud: asset misappropriation, corruption, and fraudulent statements. The analysis revealed that individuals who committed fraudulent statements conformed to the literature's “high status” image, while those involved in asset misappropriation or corruption more closely resembled D. Weisburd, S. Wheeler, E. Waring, and N. Bode's (1991) “middle-class” offenders. Moreover, organizations victimized by corruption were similar to the literature's depiction of the large, profit-making company setting for white-collar crime, while the other two types of occupational fraud occurred in distinctly different settings. Implications for future research and fraud prevention are provided.     

“Opt in” and “opt out” mechanisms in the internet era – towards a common theory

In order to provide for adequate legal protection mainly in mass-transactions on the internet, both the legislature and private parties increasingly, resort to so-called “opt in” and “opt out” mechanisms. Whether or not an “opt in” or an “opt out” mechanism is used is often decided on a case-by-case basis. The same is true regarding the circumstances under which private parties are or should be allowed to resort to “opt out” mechanisms, and if so, what restrictions should safeguard the free will of the addressees of such mechanisms. This paper argues that the existing “opt in” and “opt out” schemes should not be regarded and discussed as isolated phenomena. Rather, they should be analyzed from the viewpoint of a common underlying legal theory which builds on the common character of the underlying regulatory structure of all “opt in” and “opt out” schemes. This requires a complex matrix which comprises not only the opposites of “in” and “out”, but also of “active” and “inactive”, of “preference” and “non-preference” for the respective default rules, as well as of “ex ante” and “ex post” enforcement of the law. It also involves normative, economic, psychological and, last but not least, technical issues.     

D16S539 microvariant or D2S1338 off-ladder allele? A case report about a range overlapping between two loci

All forensic laboratories routinely use commercial kits and softwares for automated typing; in rare cases genotyping misinterpretations or mislabellings occur. This study refers to the investigation on a D2S1338 off-ladder allele mislabelling observed in DNA profile of murdered woman.The Identifiler^® revealed heterozygosity in the range of D16S539, with a presumptive microvariant allele “14.2”, based on assigned size, while PowerPlex^®16 resulted in a homozygosity of allele “11”. Singleplex amplification of D16S539 locus confirmed homozigosity. D2S1338 locus, the closest to D16S1338 in Identifiler^®, genotyped as homozigote “19”, was singleplex amplified. The off-ladder peak was gel-isolated, sequenced and designed as a rare “11” allele variant [(TGCC)6(TTCC)5]. Genotype was finally designed as D16S539 “11,11” and D2S1338 “11,19”.To avoid genotyping misinterpretations or mislabelling, ambiguous genotypes should be established by two commercial kits at least. Furthermore, off ladder alleles as well as allele microvariants should be assigned by direct sequencing. This issue should be considered in Criminal DNA database requirements, that is still under debate in Italy.     

Beyond police crisis intervention: Moving “upstream” to manage cases and places of behavioral health vulnerability

Law enforcement officers continue to serve on the front lines as mental health interventionists, and as such have been subject to a wave of “first generation” reform designed to enhance their crisis response capabilities. Yet, this focus on crisis intervention has not answered recent calls to move “upstream” and bolster early intervention in the name of long-term recovery. This paper reports on findings from an action research project in Philadelphia aimed at exploring opportunities for enhanced upstream engagement. Study methods include spatial analyses of police mental health transportations from an eight year period (2004–2011) and qualitative data from twenty-three “framing conversations” with partners and other stakeholders, seven focus groups with police and outreach workers, five key informant interviews as well as document reviews of the service delivery system in Philadelphia. Recommendations include the need to move beyond a focus on what police can do to a wider conception of city agencies and business stakeholders who can influence vulnerable people and vulnerable spaces of the city. We argue for the need to develop shared principles and rules of engagement that clarify roles and stipulate how best to enlist city resources in a range of circumstances. Since issues of mental health, substance use and disorder are so tightly coupled, we stress the importance of establishing a data-driven approach to crime and disorder reduction in areas of the city we term “hotspots of vulnerability”. In line with a recovery philosophy, such an approach should reduce opportunities for anti-social behavior among the “dually labeled” in ways consistent with “procedural justice”. Furthermore, crime and disorder data flowing from police and security to behavioral health analysts could contribute to a more focused case management of “repeat utilizers” across the two systems. Our central argument is that a twin emphasis on “case management” and “place management” may provide the pillars needed to move upstream and strengthen interventions along a continuum of engagement.     

General systems theory and criminal justice

Criminal justice agencies are organized sequentially — “output” from one agency is “input” to the next — but most scholars argue that criminal justice is not a system in a theoretical sense. In this article, it is argued that general systems theory (GST) reveals important insights into criminal justice structures and functions. Specifically, it is argued that the criminal justice system processes “cases” rather than people, and that the common goal of criminal justice processing is to “close cases so that they stay closed.” It also is argued that processing capacity progressively declines, in that at each system point the subsequent agency cannot input as many cases as the previous agency can output. Each agency therefore experiences “backward pressure” to close cases in order to reduce input to the next agency. Overall, this article highlights that criminal justice agents and agencies are best understood as operating in the context of the larger whole, thus it is concluded that criminal justice is a system in the sense of general systems theory.     

Emotions and terrorism research: A case for a social-psychological agenda

Limited attention has been paid to the intersection of emotions and the etiology of terrorism. Instead, research priorities have tended to focus on the structural (e.g., poverty; weak and failing states), sociopolitical (e.g., U.S. foreign policy; a “clash of civilizations”), or codal (e.g., madrassas; Wahhabism). The aim here is to outline an agenda which transitions discourse related to the “body” of the terrorist (i.e., his/her historical and social positioning) to one focused on intrapsychic and interpersonal emotional processes. As such, scholarship's predictive and explanatory capacities will be heightened if it adopts a perspective grounded in the emotions of terrorists and their source communities, particularly for those phenomena that suggest a fluidity of movement of actors across a continuum of zealotry. Criminology and criminal justice are well suited to assess the expressive byproducts of humiliated fury, contempt, moral outrage, and disgust and how such emotions may distillate as impulses that form a basis for terror.     

Sex offender punishment and the persistence of penal harm in the U.S

The U.S. has dramatically revised its approach to punishment in the last several decades. In particular, people convicted of sex crimes have experienced a remarkable expansion in social control through a wide-range of post-conviction interventions. While this expansion may be largely explained by general punishment trends, there appear to be unique factors that have prevented other penal reforms from similarly modulating sex offender punishment. In part, this continuation of a “penal harm” approach to sex offenders relates to the past under-valuing of sexual victimization. In the “bad old days,” the law and its agents sent mixed messages about sexual violence and sexual offending. Some sexual offending was mere nuisance, some was treatable, and a fraction “deserved” punishment equivalent to other serious criminal offending. In contrast, today's sex offender punishment schemes rarely distinguish formally among gradations of harm or dangerousness. After examining incarceration trends, this article explores the historical context of the current broad brush approach and reviews the unintended consequences. Altogether, this article reinforces the need to return to differentiation among sex offenders, but differentiation based on science and on the experience-based, guided discretion of experts in law enforcement, corrections, and treatment.     

A study of criminal justice policymakers' perspectives: The forgotten component in boot camp programs and goals

Does occupation (sheriff, prosecutor, prison administrator, or parole/probation official) influence selection of boot camp components; especially the traditional positions of “punishers,” usually sheriffs and prosecuting attorneys, and “reformers,” usually prison and probation? As part of a larger study and at the request of the Missouri Department of Corrections, 670 questionnaires were mailed to all Missouri sheriffs, prosecutors, selected prison administrators, probation/parole staff, all public defenders, selected legislatures, and judges in Missouri. Respondents were asked to rank potential boot camp goals and programs using a Likert-type preferences scale of 1 = low preference to 5 = high preference. Three hundred fifty-three were returned, for a return rate of 53 percent. Using the Missouri survey data, the research question for this article was: Did occupation influence selection of boot camp components? To test the association of occupation with selection, a shorter list was compiled from the Missouri survey data of six typical “punishment” items and six typical “reform” items as selected from the literature. Means and a t-test of significance were calculated. Results showed traditional positions of “punishment” and “reform” did not drive program choices. Preference for “reform” items by all occupations was higher than preference for “punishment” items. Results showed a potential shift away from the early military - punishment style of early boot camps. Correctional agencies thinking of reconfiguring or building new boot camps could use the results as a guide.     

Trust in the clouds

The “cloud” is not new, and its roots go back to the original plans for computing from the 1950s. Now that computing is moving back to the original cloud-based models that were envisioned more than 60 years ago, with it, consumers are realizing the increases in security and safety that accompany the move to centralized servers. Yet the perception of “trust” in this context is often still formed by views that people have from their use of computers over the past two decades, which is localized in nature (“if I can see it, I can control it”). This view is based on perception more than fact. Our paper discusses different views of trust in other contexts (such as banking and travel) and concludes that users of cloud computing should recast their view of trust in a similar way that consumers of banking and travel have changed their perceptions of trust in the last 100 years.     

A Critical Examination of the “White Victim Effect” and Death Penalty Decision-Making from a Propensity Score Matching Approach: The North Carolina Experience

Purpose

Death penalty research has rather consistently demonstrated a statistically significant relationship between defendant race and victim race in general, and for the Black defendant/White victim race dyad specifically. The bulk of this evidence has been derived from correlational studies and from cases over relatively condensed time frames.

Methods

The current study uses data from North Carolina (n = 1,113) over several decades (1977–2009) to evaluate the link between defendant/victim racial dyad and jury death penalty decision-making.

Results

Results suggest that there is an apparent “White victim effect” that can be observed in death penalty decision-making in traditional logistic regression models. Yet, once cases are matched via propensity score matching on approximately 50 case characteristics/confounders including the type of aggravators and mitigators accepted by the jury in addition to the number of aggravators and mitigators accepted, the relationship is rendered insignificant. Furthermore, these results hold for a defendant of any race killing a White victim and for the “most disadvantaged” situation for Black defendants (e.g., cases with White victims).

Conclusions

The “White victim effect” on capital punishment decision-making is better considered as a “case effect” rather than a “race effect.”     

The “process” of patenting: Why should we care about a potential U.S. Supreme Court decision in Bilski v. Doll?

In Bilski v. Doll, the U.S. Supreme Court is called to define one of the categories of patent-eligible subject matter, “process” patents. In 2008, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that the category has a narrow meaning, and that to be eligible for a process patent under 35 U.S.C. § 101, the invention must involve a machine or apparatus or involve a transformation to a different state or thing, ultimately rejecting the patent application as unpatentable subject matter. The patent applicants have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to determine two issues: first, the meaning of “process” in 35 U.S.C. § 101 and whether the lower court properly relied on a “machine-or-transformation” test, and second, the test's potential conflict with 35 U.S.C. § 273, which provides protection for “method[s] of doing or conducting business.” The Court's decision could change the way that research and business are done, and patent protection for such investments. Parts 1 and 2 of this article address Bilski directly and what is and is not in dispute. Part 3 addresses the “machine-or-transformation” test, while Parts 4 and 5 address reasons not to adopt such a test.     

Some technological implications for ascertaining the contents of contracts in web-based transactions

This paper points out some unexpected relationships between specific aspects of contract law and specific Internet-related technologies. The discussion is not about the interplay between “Law” and “Technology,” or the “Law” and the “Internet.” The aim is modest: to identify some theoretical chokepoints created by the technologies involved in web-based commerce and to point out the legal uncertainties persisting in this area. The analysis is confined to the process of contract formation, not to matters of substantive law. It is during this process that parties assume their contractual obligations and the contents of a contract crystallize.     

Hot corridors, deterrence, and guardianship: An assessment of the Omaha metro safety initiative

The purpose of this research is to describe the Omaha Metro Safety Initiative (OMSI) and assess its deterrent effects. The OMSI, a multi-agency task force, has been carrying out “hot spot” policing practices focused on traffic corridors in high crime areas. The purpose of OMSI operations is to deter crime through a highly visible “guardianship” presence that emphasizes contacts with citizens. Findings showed that a corridor approach was consistent with a “hot spot” policing strategy, in that operations occurred in hi-density crime areas. Nine crime categories were examined to assess the efficacy of 41 operations carried out in 2008. Generally, OMSI revealed a short term deterrent on crime, with the actual deterrent effect associated with the kind of crime assessed. Business crimes tended to show the most consistent operational deterrent effects. Effects also were more consistent in precincts with greater crime density. The paper concludes with recommendations concerning data gathering and operational effectiveness across a multi-agency task force.     

Rethinking the one-stop-shop mechanism: Legal certainty and legitimate expectation

This paper aims to contribute to the discussion concerning the one-stop-shop mechanism proposed in the General Data Protection Regulation (hereinafter “GDPR”). The choice of regulation as the instrument to legislate on data protection is already an unmistakable indication that unification and simplification (together with respect of data subjects' interests) shall be the guide for every legal discussion on the matter. The one-stop-shop mechanism (hereinafter “OSS”) clearly reflects the unification and simplification which the reform aims for. We believe that OSS is logically connected with the idea of one Data Protection Authority (hereinafter “DPA”) with an exclusive jurisdiction and that this can only mean that, given one controller, no other DPA can be a competent authority.² In other words, OSS implies a single and comprehensive competent authority of a given controller. In our analysis we argue that such architecture: a) works well with the “consistency mechanism”; b) provides guarantees to data subjects for a clear allocation of powers (legal certainty); and c) is not at odds with the complaint lodging procedure. Our position on fundamental questions is as follows. What is the perimeter of competence of the DPA in charge? We believe that it should have enforcement power on every issue of the controller, including issuing the fines. How to reconcile such dominant role of one DPA with the principle of co-operation among DPAs? We do not consider co-operation at odds with the rule that decisions are taken by just one single authority. Finally, we share some suggestions on how to make the jurisdiction allocation mechanism (the main establishment criterion) more straightforward.     

Drug courts for DWI offenders? The effectiveness of two hybrid drug courts on DWI offenders

The effectiveness of drug courts for illegal drug-involved offenders has been well documented (Belenko, 1998, 2001; Wilson, Mitchell, & MacKenzie, 2006), however, few studies had examined whether they work for repeat “driving while intoxicated” (DWI) or “driving under the influence” (DUI) offenders. The current study examined sixty-six offenders who had completed one of two hybrid DUI/drug courts (compared to eighty-six similar parolees) operating in two small cities in a single midwestern state. Results suggested that among non-DUI offenders, completion of the drug court program reduced recidivism, as might be expected; however, among the subsample of chronic DUI offenders no significant recidivism reduction was noted. These results add to the small, but growing literature suggesting that DUI courts (as they are currently being implemented) may not be an effective way to reduce the occurrence of repeat DUI offenses. Suggestions for DUI court implementation and future research are presented.     

Copiepresse SCRL & alii v. Google Inc. – In its decision of 5 May 2011, the Brussels Court of Appeal confirms the prohibitory injunction order banning Google News and Google’s “in cache” function

In 2003, Google made available in Belgium its online free service “Google News”, which consisted in offering Internet users a computer-generated press review. In his orders of 5 September 2006 (previously commented in [2007] 23 CLSR 82–85) and of 13 February 2007 (previously commented in [2007] 23 CLSR 290–293) the President of the High Court of Brussels found that, by offering this service, Google infringed the copyrights of Belgian press editors and authors. On 5 May 2011, the Brussels Court of Appeal upheld to a very large extent the first instance decision. The Court confirmed that Google’s “cache” function and its “Google News” service were infringing the claimants’ copyrights and that Google could not rely on any copyright limitation (such as the exceptions for quotation or for report on news events), legislation or fundamental right.     

Cursing the Cloud (or) Controlling the Cloud?

Inspired by the cloud computing hypes, this paper responds to some of the hypes, but not to all. The hype in this paper refers to the level of the adequacy of data protection and privacy in a cloud computing (the Cloud) environment. Paradoxically, this paper proffers observational insights that surround the Cloud from the perspectives of data protection and privacy. It examines briefly the efforts of January 2010 led by Microsoft and anticipating “liability” scenarios. The liability rhetorically refers to the illegal access in the Cloud. This paper does not focus entirely on the technology sophistication; however, it analyses two scenarios of illegal access. To mitigate the liability, it suggests a “Cloud Compliant Strategy (CCS)” being a proposed model to control the Cloud. The observational insights of this paper have also intertwined with the adequacy of data protection from the lenses of the European Union (EU) Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC (DPD) and Safe Harbor provisions (SH).     

Dark Knights Rising: The Aurora Theater and Newtown School Massacres and Shareholder Wealth

Purpose

This study analyzes the stock price impact of the Aurora theater and Newtown (Sandy Hook) school massacres on both domestic (US) and foreign theater operators and US gun manufacturers in an effort to document the economic effects of these tragedies.

Methods

The well-established “event study” methodology from the fields of economics and finance is employed to assess the impact of the shootings on the affected companies after controlling for risk and overall market movements.

Results

The Aurora theater shooting resulted in striking declines for Cinemark (the targeted theater) as well as major US competitors, but had no impact on overseas theater chains. Smith & Wesson (maker of the gun used in Aurora) showed no response, whereas Ruger (a competitor) exhibited large gains. Both Smith & Wesson and Ruger plunged after the Newtown shooting, although neither made the weapons used in the shooting.

Conclusions

Contrary to prior research on workplace homicides, the results show that random mass shootings have profound effects on targeted companies. In addition, the results suggest the presence of a very strong “contagion effect” (where negative events affecting one company impact others in the same industry). The negative responses of both publicly-traded US firearms manufacturers to the Newtown shooting suggests a “sea-change” in the debate over gun ownership in the US.     

Evidence on the Effectiveness of Juvenile Court Sanctions

Purpose

The past decade has been witness to a proliferation of calls for evidence-based juvenile court sanctions—including various programs, interventions, services, and strategies or approaches—that reduce recidivism and improve mental health, drug dependency, and education outcomes. At the same time, an emerging body of work has identified “proven,” “evidence-based,” “best practice,” or, more generally, “effective” efforts to achieve these outcomes. Even so, grounds for concern exist regarding the evidence-base for these and other sanctions.

Methods

This paper describes the heterogeneity of sanctioning within juvenile justice and argues that, despite substantial advances in research, the heterogeneity severely delimits the generalizability of evaluations to date. It also raises questions about how much is in fact known about the effectiveness of many juvenile justice sanctions.

Conclusion

Extant research offers grounds for optimism. Even so, explicit articulation of the limitations of this research and the need for studies that examine external validity is important for developing evidence about “what works” in juvenile justice. Implications for research and policy are discussed.     

An empirical examination of AMBER Alert ‘successes’

The AMBER Alert system was designed to recover endangered missing children through the solicitation of citizen assistance via swift public announcements. Rigorous empirical support for AMBER Alert's effectiveness has been lacking, but since its inception program advocates and public safety officials have lauded the system's ability to “save lives”, often basing their optimism on AMBER Alert “success” stories. However, in this paper quantitative and qualitative analyses of 333 publicized and celebrated AMBER Alert “successes” suggest AMBER Alerts rarely result in the retrieval of abducted children from clearly “life-threatening” situations, and that most of the publicized successes involved relatively benign abductors and unthreatening circumstances. The routine conflation of such apparently mundane cases with rare dramatic successes by AMBER Alert advocates suggests popular portrayals of AMBER Alert are overly sanguine. The potentially negative effects of this and policy implications are discussed.