Simple Rhetoric and Complex Punitiveness: Federal Criminal Justice Responses to White-Collar Criminality

Abstract

Though criminological literature shows that the manifestation of punitiveness in the criminal justice system is complex, it rarely differentiates between responses to different kinds of crimes. This constitutes a significant gap in knowledge, as it is widely believed that white-collar crimes are treated leniently. In light of the “heating up” of political rhetoric, the expansion of federal criminal law, and the increased maximum punishments on conviction, the article aims to explore whether prosecutorial and judicial responses to white-collar crimes have become more punitive, employing rarely used datasets from the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) between 1996 and 2014. It is demonstrated that these responses are more complex and less consistently punitive than the rhetoric and policies advanced by politicians. It endeavors to capture the complexity of punitiveness in practice by measuring numerous variables and multiple points in the criminal justice process, studying punitiveness from multiple angles, using prosecution and sentencing data.     

Sentencing Parricides: Text and Context; Rhetoric and Silence

This article considers the sentencing of two eighteenth centuryparricides, one committed by a daughter, the other by a son. In eachcase the sentencing remarks are first subject to generic analysis,derived from the work of Rukiya Hasan and Susan Urmston Philips. Withinthose thematic structures there is a traditional rhetorical analysis. Bycombining both types of analysis one can demonstrate the salientfeatures of each set of judicial remarks. The focus of the article thenshifts from these texts to their contexts, and reveals features in theiroffence narratives which have been omitted in these otherwise powerfulrhetorical utterances. Explanations for these silences are given.