DOES CRIME JUST MOVE AROUND THE CORNER? A CONTROLLED STUDY OF SPATIAL DISPLACEMENT AND DIFFUSION OF CRIME CONTROL BENEFITS*

Recent studies point to the potential theoretical and practical benefits of focusing police resources on crime hot spots. However, many scholars have noted that such approaches risk displacing crime or disorder to other places where programs are not in place. Although much attention has been paid to the idea of displacement, methodological problems associated with measuring it have often been overlooked. We try to fill these gaps in measurement and understanding of displacement and the related phenomenon of diffusion of crime control benefits. Our main focus is on immediate spatial displacement or diffusion of crime to areas near the targeted sites of an intervention. Do focused crime prevention efforts at places simply result in a movement of offenders to areas nearby targeted sites—“do they simply move crime around the corner”? Or, conversely, will a crime prevention effort focusing on specific places lead to improvement in areas nearby—what has come to be termed a diffusion of crime control benefits? Our data are drawn from a controlled study of displacement and diffusion in Jersey City, New Jersey. Two sites with substantial street‐level crime and disorder were targeted and carefully monitored during an experimental period. Two neighboring areas were selected as “catchment areas” from which to assess immediate spatial displacement or diffusion. Intensive police interventions were applied to each target site but not to the catchment areas. More than 6,000 20‐minute social observations were conducted in the target and catchment areas. They were supplemented by interviews and ethnographic field observations. Our findings indicate that, at least for crime markets involving drugs and prostitution, crime does not simply move around the corner. Indeed, this study supports the position that the most likely outcome of such focused crime prevention efforts is a diffusion of crime control benefits to nearby areas.     

概念的系统性完善——论犯罪的方面与犯罪构成的要件、要素的关系

犯罪的方面包容相应的犯罪构成要件,犯罪构成要件由犯罪构成要素组成,对三者的定位涉及到坚持用科学系统论分析犯罪构成的问题,应当弥补传统刑法理论在概念上混淆三者的疏漏,科学构建完善作为理论大厦基石的概念,另外,对犯罪各方面下犯罪构成具体相应要件和要素纵向深入的剖析,进一步印证了对三者上述关系的分析。     

心理应激与故意犯罪心理产生的关系

心理学的发展为预防和打击犯罪这一课题的研究提供了新的思考方向。心理应激是心理学的一个基本概念 ,可以从心理应激与犯罪心理产生之间的关系展开初步探讨 ,并进一步以案件为例加以印证。     

Crime Victimization: Assessing Differences Between Violent and Nonviolent Experiences

Experiencing a criminal victimization is among one of the most stressful human experiences. A cross-sectional study of victims of violent crime and victims of nonviolent crime suggests that there are statistically significant differences in experiences in the initial aftermath of the crime event and a few common effects. This article describes the common effects that are associated with criminal victimization in the context of intense distress and discusses the theoretical implications of well-being in the coping process. One hundred seventy-five victims of violent or nonviolent crime were interviewed. Implications for social work practice and theory and future research are delineated.     

掀开法律的男权主义面纱——对中国当代性犯罪立法的文化解读与批判

我国当代的性犯罪立法中还残留着许多男权主义的印记,具体表现为:受男主女从的文化影响,把强奸罪的实行主体限定为男子,受害人限定为女子;受生殖文化的影响,将强奸中性交的概念定义为男女生殖器的媾合;由于将强奸视为对男人权利的侵犯,因而对其引起的纠纷由国家垄断处理权.现行立法与社会现实存在着一定的矛盾,因此,立足中国现实,借鉴西方经验,改革我国现行的性犯罪立法是当务之急.     

诈骗犯罪中被害人过错研究

被害人过错是诈骗犯罪既遂的重要条件。被害人自身素质低、社会风气不正及社会管理上存在漏洞是滋生诈骗犯罪被害人过错的重要原因。减少被害人过错是防控诈骗犯罪的重要措施。为此须健全法律制度,严密社会管理措施,提高社会成员的整体素质,加强社会预警等,才能有效减少诈骗犯罪。     

农村犯罪黑数问题的法律思考

农村社会中存在的犯罪黑数是建设社会主义和谐社会的阻碍因素之一。农村犯罪黑数较高的原因有多种。要降低农村社会的犯罪黑数，必须加强社会主义法治教育，遏制、打击宗族势力在农村的发展，充实农村的警力配置以及消除受害人自身对刑事案件隐匿不报的错误认识。     

贪污罪量刑基准体系的构建及回归分析

根据刑法规定,通过贪污罪的犯罪结果与处刑数量之间的线性关系,把定量分析方法应用于贪污罪的处刑实践,并依此建立了贪污罪的量刑基准体系,以准确确定被告人应当承担刑事责任的数量,以减少司法实践中法官个体之间对贪污罪行为处刑的差异。     

经济犯罪侦查体制亟待改革

由于经济犯罪的复杂性和侦查工作的易受干扰性 ,使得现有的经济犯罪侦查工作体制受到挑战。“关系网”、“保护伞”的存在 ,使经济犯罪侦查工作面临重重障碍 ;地方保护主义的泛滥 ,使经济犯罪侦查工作的协作配合显得步履维艰 ;利益驱动 ,使经济犯罪的暗数急剧上升 ;打击不力 ,致使经济领域的违法犯罪活动更加猖狂 ;加入WTO后 ,经济全球化 ,变“条块管理 ,以块为主”为“唯条管理”势所必然     

反思帕卡的犯罪控制模式与正当程序模式

美国学者帕卡的犯罪控制模式与正当程序模式对我国的理论研究和立法实践都产生了深远的影响。但帕卡的学说还是有不足之处 :忽视了被害人的存在 ,也没有意识到对犯罪除了运用国家的刑罚权外 ,还有大量的私力救济以及官方的非正式惩罚与预防行为 ;在诉讼模式与具体制度的设计上 ,犯罪控制模式与正当程序模式学说过于强调了二者之间的对抗 ,而没有注意其相互统一和兼容之处。帕卡学说对我国的启示体现在 :学界过于强调了职权主义与当事人主义之间的差异 ,对它们在侦查制度上共同之处的研究失之准确 ;刑事诉讼法的再修改应该以职权主义模式为主 ,适当借鉴英美当事人主义中的合理因素 ;对犯罪嫌疑人、被告人与被害人的利益应该同等尊重 ,保障被害人参与诉讼过程并影响判决结果的权利