crime and deviance - social groups Flashcards
What is official statistics
Official statistics on crime represent only those crimes known to the police and recorded by them. This is not a simple and straightforward process.
What 3 things must occur before a crime can become a statistic
- attention
- reporting
- recording
Explain attention in relation to official crime statistics
Attention - it must come to someone’s attention that a crime has taken place. Due to the nature of certain crimes, some offences are more likely to come to people’s attention than others (some crimes are more visible than others) :
- obvious visible crimes - theft, burglary, drugs, vandalism, rape, ABH, assault
- non visible - illegal downloading, scams, fraud, corporate crime, verbal, streaming, domestic violence, stalking etc
Explain reporting in relation to official crime statistics
Reporting - It must be reported to the relevant agency - the police. However, few crimes that come to people’s attention are actually reported to the police. Box (1995) identifies a number of reasons for non-reporting behaviour:
- rape/domestic violence mays feel their issue is too sensitive to report
- rape/domestic violence victims may not report their crime out of fear from their abuser or fear police will not take the issue seriously/unable to have the power
- witnesses may feel reluctant to report as they may not want to get involved or it is not that big of deal/trivial, or does not warrant reporting and do not want to report
- witnesses may fearful of reprisals if they were to ‘snitch’
- no faith or confidence in the police as they may report due to feeling antagonist and may not feel it could be resolved
- unaware that a certain act is a crime/ignorance of law/crime
- people may deal with the issue themselves
How does reporting and non-reporting behaviour have implications for official statistics and the picture of crime that emerges from them
Changes in patterns in trends may not always be indicative changes in the extent/incidents of that crime but of reporting behaviour coming forward e.g Jimmy Saville - sexual abuse
- not more crime will be committed but more reports may be gained
According to Bottomley and Coleman, where do majority of recorded crime result from?
Bottomley and Coleman (1981) state that over 80% of all recorded crime results from reports made by the public to the police. Therefore, the police are largely dependent on the public. Yet the 1998 British Crime Survey (BCS) found that approximately only 44% of crimes are reported to the police.
The police are dependent on the public and yet only a small proportion of crimes are reported to them which shows a problematic nature of OS.
In other cases, where the police independently detect crimes, the number of offences of a particular kind that they discover fluctuates depending on a number of factors including:
- their priorities e.g. what type of crime/criminal they want to crack down on
- where and who they target? e.g. Brixton riots (Swamp 81)
- resources/technology (as equipment develops - can have impact on crime)
Explain recording in relation to official statistics
Recording - the police must be willing to accept that the law has been broken and record it as such. The police have a statutory duty to record all crimes that either they detect or that are reported to them. However, many crimes reported to the police are never recorded and this has massive implications for the official statistics and the picture of crime that emerges from them.
MAYHEW et al (1992) argue that whilst the police have a statutory duty to record all crimes, they exercise discretion as to whether a certain offence is serious enough to warrant their attention. Given that the police create statistics of their own efficiency, this will impact on their recording behaviour as it will less likely to record crime if it will impact their detection rate.
They found:
- only 40% of offences reported to the police are then recorded by them
- crime rates therefore reflect police practices e.g their recording behaviour
- recording practices/behaviour vary from force to force and from year to year invalidating comparisons
- Sanderson (1994) argues that the processes involved in recording crime are subjective rather than objective - decisions, judgements, and priorities all impact on the official statistics which are not so much the facts of crime but the end product of a complex series of decisions
Clearly then in relation to points 1,2 and 3 - all crimes are not discovered, reported or recorded and a number of variables other than the amount of crime committed impacts on the official statistics. This leads many critics to argue that the statistics on crime are socially constructed
How are official crime statistics understood
The criminal statistics are understood, as being not so much the facts about crime as the end product of a complex series of human decisions. The statistics are then, socially constructed. The police are perceived as being the ‘gatekeepers’ of the law and they play a significant role in determining what crimes eventually become a statistic.
state the 3 important ways that actions of the police impact the production and construction of the crime statistics
- Dispersal
- Differential Enforcement
- Discretion
Explain Dispersal in relation to the police’s production and construction of crime statistics
DISPERSAL -
The police operate with clear ideas of the areas where trouble is most likely to occur - generally believe to be inner-city areas and large council estates and they allocate their resources accordingly. This means that there is a greater likelihood that crimes committed in such areas will come to the attention of the police.
Not only are there variations in the number of officers despatched in different areas but the type of policing practised in areas varies. The style of policing is likely to be more consensual in more affluent areas with the police seeing their role as a support to the community, whereas in inner-city areas there is likely to be a greater police presence and research has shown that they see their role as controlling the population. Lea and Young (1984) refer to this as a ‘military role’
Explain differential enforcement in relation to the police’s production and construction of crime statistics
DIFFERENTIAL ENFORCEMENT -
Police forces prioritise some crimes over others. This reflects a number of factors relating to the force and area as well as the priorities of the senior officers. The significance of this in terms of the crime statistics is that the concentration by one force on particular crimes may generate apparent high level of crime for those particular offences
Explain discretion in relation to the police’s production and construction of crime statistics
DISCRETION -
The most important way in which the police influence the official statistics is through the use of their discretion. This involves the police acting on their ideas and assumptions regarding what type of people are likely to engage in crime. The result is that young working class males (particularly black) are most likely to be stopped and approached by the police. It could be argued that this increases the likelihood of such persons becoming a statistic
How did the Home office research and planning unit attempt to overcome the problems with crime statistics
In 1983, the Home Office Research and Planning Unit published the first British Crime Survey (BCS). This represented an attempt to overcome some of the problems and limitations associated with the official statistics (OS). Instead of relying on police records the BCS was based on victimisation studies.
These involve (a) asking a sample whether they have been a victim of crime in the previous year.
(b) whether they had reported the crime and
(c) whether the police had recorded it. Any disparity between the figures produced by the OS and BCS was taken as evidence of the unreliable nature of the OS.
All BCSs conducted have confirmed that the OS are highly unreliable and have revealed that approximately 44% of crimes had been reported to the police and of these an estimated 54% were recorded by then.
Explain the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW)
From 2012, the survey was renamed as the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW). The Home Office asserts that the CSEW can provide a better reflection of the true level of crime than police statistics since it includes crimes that have not been reported to, or recorded by, the police. The Home Office also claims that it measures crimes more accurately than police statistics since it captures crimes that people may not bother to report because they think the crime was too trivial or the police couldn’t do much about it. It also provides a better measure of trends over time since it has adopted a consistent methodology and is unaffected by changes in reporting or recording practices
Explain Key findings 2013 from the CSEW
Key findings 2013 -
- Latest figures from the CSEW estimate that there were 8.6 million crimes in England and Wales, based on interviews with a representative sample of households and resident adults in the year ending March 2013. This represents a 9% decrease compared with the previous year’s survey. This latest estimate is the lowest since the survey began in 1981 and is now less than half its peak level in 1995
- The CSEW also estimated that there were an additional 0.8 million crimes against children aged 10 to 15 resident in the household population.
- The police recorded 3.7 million offences in the year ending March 2013, a decrease of 7% compared with the previous year. This is the lowest level since 2002/03 when the last major change in police recording practice was introduced
- Victim-based crime accounted for 83% of all people recorded crime (3.1 million offences) and fell by 9% in the year ending March 2013 compared with the previous year. The volume of offences recorded in this category is equivalent to 55 recorded offences per 1,000 population
- other crimes against society recorded by the police (402,615 offences) showed a decrease of 10% compared with the previous year
- within victim-based crime there were decreases across all the main categories of recorded crime compared with the previous year, except for theft from the person 9up 9%) and sexual offences (1% increase). The latter increase is thought to be partly a ‘Yewtree effect’ whereby greater numbers of victims of sexual offences have come forward to report historical offences to the police.
Explain Key findings from CSEW in 2021
Key findings in 2021 -
- patterns of crime in the year ending March 2021 have been significantly affected by the Covid pandemic and governments instructions to limit social contact. While there was decreases across a range of individual crime types, particularly theft offences these were offset by rises in fraud and computer misuse offences, resulting in no change in overall levels of crime.
- the TCSEW indicated a 36% increase in fraud and computer misuse decreased by 19% compared with the year ending 2019 TSCEW/
- The largest decreases in recorded crime were seen during the three-month period that coincided with the first national lockdown, with a 19% decrease in April to June 2020 compared with April to June 2019.
Although, the TCSEW indicated no change in the total number of violence incidents, with the total number of victims of violent crime decreased by 28% compared with the year ending March 2019, largely driven by falls in violence where the offender was a stranger
- Police recorded crime gives more insight into the lower volume but the higher harm violence that the survey either does not cover or does not capture well. These date show that compared with the year ending March 2020:
- the number of homicides decreased by 16% to 600 offences
- there was a 14% fall in the number of police recorded offences involving firearms
What did Billy Garzard state when looking at statistics from the ONS centre for Crime and Justice
Billy Garzard largely commented on the fact that the COVID 19 Pandemic had a significant impact on patterns of crime. There were large decreases in theft offences, such as domestic burglary and theft offences, such as domestic burglary and theft from the person as more people stayed at home and limited their social contact.
At the same time, there were substantial increases in fraud and computer misuse offences such as hacking, as fraudsters took advantage of behavioural changes during the pandemic such as increased online shopping. The number of people who become victims of violent crime also fell, driven by decreases in violence where the offender was a stranger. This likely reflects a decrease in violence taking place in public spaces during national lockdown restrictions.
What do official statistics show in relation to social class?
The official statistics show a clear relationship between social class and crime, insofar as the majority of convicted offenders are drawn from the working class
Explain the clear correlation between the type of crime and social class
There is also a clear correlation between type of crime and social class.
For example, crimes involving violence, theft from property etc are mainly associated with the working class and fraud, embezzlement are mainly middle class crimes, corporate crime (involving things such as insider trading, environmental crimes, market rigging etc.) is mainly an upper middle class phenomenon.
This relationship is hardly surprising given the idea of different opportunity structures in our society. However, simply because more members of the working class are convicted of crimes than members of other social classes does not mean that we can automatically assume that the working classes are somehow ‘more criminal’ than the middle and upper classes
State points in relation to official statistics on social class
- The working class tend to commit crimes that are highly visible. In situations, where there are clear victims and little attempt to hide criminal behaviour. It follows that detection, arrest and conviction rates are likely to be higher.
- Working class people and communities may be more routinely targeted by the police
- Crimes such as fraud, insider dealing etc tend to be much less visible to the police and the public. Since the police do not routinely involve themselves in companies and corporations, greater opportunity exists for this type of crime. In this respect, the policing of these types of crime is much more difficult - policing the reactive (that is, responding to a report of a crime) rather than overly-active (policing an area where crime is likely to occur)
- Many forms of middle class crime may not be defined as crimes at all. These include many forms of ‘petty’ theft (making personal phone-calls at work, using the company’s photocopier for personal work etc), as well as more complex serious forms of crime such as tax evasion. Computer crime, tends to be underestimated in crime statistics because, even when it is detected a company may prefer to sack the employee rather than involve the police because the attendant publicity surrounding a major fraud may be considered more damaging to the company than the crime itself!
Explain how official statistics depict social class differences in rates of offending
OS show social class differences in rates of offending, with the working class more likely to commit offences than higher social classes.
Some theories accept the OS at face value and the picture of crime that emerges from them - that crime is largely a WC phenomenon. However, others critique this and question the validity of the OS
Marxist and neo-marxist theories fully address the relationship between class and crime but other theories provide other explanations
Explain the functionalist perspective on social class official statistics crime
FUNCTIONALIST -
Functionalists recognise that not everyone is equally well socialised into society’s shared culture - different groups and classes may develop their own separate subcultures
Conforming to subcultural norms can clash with those of mainstream culture and this can lead to crime as a result of (a) status frustration and/or (b) class norms and values
An imbalanced society where everyone does not have equal access and opportunities to their cultural goals could lead to innovative utilitarian crime
Explain the interactionism perspective on crime official statistics
Interactionists reject the view that OS are a useful resource that provides a valid picture of which class commits the most crime.
They focus on how and why WC people come to be labelled as criminal. They emphasise the stereotypes held by law enforcement agencies that see WC as typical criminals and the power of those agencies to successfully label powerless groups such as the the WC
They see crime statistics as a topic whose construction must be investigated - by studying the power of social control agencies to label the WC as criminal
Explain the left realist perspective on social class crime statistics
Left realists recognise the problems with the OS. However they argue that they do provide a broadly accurate picture of crime.
Given how the OS are constructed, they reject the view that the higher rates of offending amongst the WC, both black and white, can be attributed to biased policing
They see crime as a largely WC phenomenon as a result of the WCs being more likely to suffer from relative deprivation and marginalisation
Explain the marxist perspective on social class crime statistics
Marxists fully address the relationship between class and crime - the theory is based on explaining this
They believe that crime is not confined to the WC, people from all different social classes commit crime, however, in a capitalist society, crime is successfully presented as a WC phenemon
They seek to illuminate the reasons for this and at the same time, expose the nature and extent of crimes committed by the powerful.
Why does Heidensohn identify as the most significant feature of recorded crime in relation to Gender
According to HEIDENSOHN (1996) the most significant feature of recorded crime is that most crime appears to be committed by males. She believes that gender is the best indicator of criminality.
There are striking gender differences in the patterns of recorded crime. Females appear to:
(a) commit fewer crimes than males and when they do offend,
(b) females tend to commit different kinds of crimes from males
State official crime statistics in relation to Gender
4 out of 5 convicted offenders in England and Wales are male;
By the age of 40, 9% of females had a criminal conviction compared to 32% of males;
A higher proportion of female than male offenders are convicted of property offences (excluding burglary);
A higher proportion of male than female offenders are convicted of violence or sexual offences;
Males are more likely to be repeat offenders, to have longer criminal careers and to commit more serious offences. For example, men are about 15 times more likely to be convicted of murder.
What four questions do gender crime statistics crime raise
- Do females really commit fewer crimes or do the figures underestimate and provide an invalid picture of crime?
- If females do commit fewer crimes why are they more conforming than males?
- How can we explain why those females who do offend commit crimes?
- Why do males commit more crimes than females?
How traditional male dominated criminology interpreted female criminality
Traditionally male-dominated criminology neglected female criminality, both because females were seen as being less criminal and because their behaviour was seen as less in need of controlling.
However over the last couple of decades feminists have focused their attention on the patterns and causes of female criminality.
Furthermore, more recently sociologists have also turned their attention to the causes of male criminality, in particular there has been considerable interest in the relationship between masculinity and crime.
What view does chivalry thesis support
The CHIVALRY THESIS supports the view that the statistics underestimate the amount of female offending as a result of greater leniency within the criminal justice system (CJS).
Why does Pollack argue that official crime statistics on female criminality are misleading
POLLACK (1950) argued that the official statistics on gender and crime are highly misleading and seriously underestimate the extent of female criminality. He argued that the police, magistrates and other law enforcement officials tend to be male – brought up to be chivalrous, they are usually more protective and thus more lenient with female offenders and therefore as a consequence, fewer females appear in the statistics. This in turn gives an invalid picture that exaggerates the extent of gender differences in the rates of offending.
State Evidence and Sociologists who argue in support chivalry thesis
Evidence to support the chivalry thesis:
Court statistics provide some support for the chivalry thesis. For example, females are more likely than males to be released on bail rather than remanded in custody; they are more likely to receive a fine or a community sentence and less likely to be sent to prison and when they are their sentences tend to be shorter.
FLOOD-PAGE et al (2000) found that, while 1 in 11 female self-reported offenders had been cautioned or prosecuted, the figure for males was over 1 in 7. REINER (1992) also supports the ‘chivalry thesis.’ He claims that the reaction of the police is critical in determining whether female offenders are defined and labelled as criminal. He states that police work and police culture strongly emphasises masculinity which leads them to be more lenient towards females due to chivalry. As a result, cautioning is much more widely used for female than male offenders.
Furthermore, according to the Ministry of Justice (2009), 49% of females recorded as offending received a caution in 2007, whereas for males the figure was only 30%. Similarly, HOOD’s (1992) study of over 3000 defendants found that women were about one-third less likely to be jailed in similar cases.
State arguments and evidence against chivalry thesis
Evidence against the chivalry thesis:
However, there is considerable evidence against the chivalry thesis. FARRINGTON and MORRIS’ (1983) study of sentencing of 408 offences of theft in a magistrates’ court found that women were not sentenced more leniently for comparable offences. Additionally, BOX‘s (1981) review of British and American self-report studies concludes that women who commit serious offences are not treated more favourably than men.
He argues that the lower rate of prosecutions of females may reflect the reality that the crimes they engage in are often less serious and less likely to go to trial. Female offenders are also more likely to show remorse and this may help explain why they are more likely to receive a caution instead of going to court.
Furthermore, drawing on evidence form self-report studies, HALES et al (2009) found that males were significantly more likely to have been offenders in all major categories.
Additionally the chivalry theses ignores the fact that many male crimes go unreported. For example in 2012, only 8% of females who had been the victims of serious sexual assault reported it to the police and YEARNSHIRE (1997) found that a woman typically suffers 35 assaults before reporting domestic violence. Crimes of the powerful are also under-represented in the official statistics and these are more likely to be committed by men
Why do some feminist sociologists argue against the idea that women are treated nicely by the criminal justice system as argued in Chivalry thesis
many feminist sociologists and criminologists point out that in many cases women are treated more harshly by the CJS than men – it is biased against rather than in favour of them. HEIDENSOHN (1996) argues that the courts in particular, treat females more harshly than males when they deviate from gender norms. For example:
(a) Double standards – courts punish girls but not boys for premature or promiscuous sexual activity: SHARPE (2009) found from her analysis of 55 youth workers records, that 7 out of 11 girls were referred for support because they were sexually active, but none out of 44 boys. ‘Wayward’ girls can end up in care without ever having committed an offence.
(b) Women who do not conform to accepted standards of monogamous heterosexuality and motherhood are punished more harshly: According to HEIDENSOHN the CJS is influenced by attitudes to gender in society as a whole. They are based on dual and confused assumptions about women, which see women as a ‘virgin or whore, witch or wife, Madonna or Magdalene.’ This is known as the virgin/whore dichotomy.
What does Heidensohn mean by the criminal justice system having double standards
(a) Double standards – courts punish girls but not boys for premature or promiscuous sexual activity: SHARPE (2009) found from her analysis of 55 youth workers records, that 7 out of 11 girls were referred for support because they were sexually active, but none out of 44 boys. ‘Wayward’ girls can end up in care without ever having committed an offence.
What does Heidensohn mean by the women not conforming to accepted standards
Women who do not conform to accepted standards of monogamous heterosexuality and motherhood are punished more harshly: According to HEIDENSOHN the CJS is influenced by attitudes to gender in society as a whole. They are based on dual and confused assumptions about women, which see women as a ‘virgin or whore, witch or wife, Madonna or Magdalene.’ This is known as the virgin/whore dichotomy.
What do Stewart and Carlen argue about magistrates and judges perceptions of female defendants
Supporting this, STEWART (2006) found that magistrates’ perceptions of female defendants’ characters were based on stereotypical gender roles. CARLEN (1997) put forward a similar view in relation to custodial sentences. She argues that when women are imprisoned, it is less for the ‘seriousness of their crimes and more according to the court’s assessment of them as wives, mothers and daughters’. She found that Scottish judges were much more likely to jail women whose children were in care than women they saw as ‘good’ mothers.
Why do feminists argue that the criminal justice system is full of double standards
Feminists argue that these double standards exist because the CJS is patriarchal. Nowhere is this more evident than in the way the CJS deals with rape cases where male offenders are sometimes treated more sympathetically than their female victims.
SMART (1989) argues that rape trials frequently celebrate notions of male sexual need justifying such crimes by reference to masculinity and a critique of inappropriate female behaviour. There are too many cases of male judges making sexist, victim-blaming remarks, a few she quotes are included below:
- ‘It is well known that women in particular and small boys are likely to be untruthful and invent stories’ (Sutcliffe 1976)
- ‘Women who say no do not always mean no. It is not just a question of how she says it, how she shows and makes it clear. If she doesn’t want it she only has to keep her legs shut’ (Wild 1982)
- ‘It is the height of imprudence for any girl to hitch-hike at night. That is plain, it isn’t really worth stating. She is in the true sense asking for it’ (Richards 1982)
Why does Walklate argue that female victims end up on trial in rape or domestic violence cases
WALKLATE (1995) believes that in effect, it is the female victim rather than the male defendant who ends up on trial. Women have to establish their respectability if their evidence is to be believed.
She agrees with SMART that rape trials continue to see things from a male point of view, which accepts that men become unable to restrain their sexual desires once women give them any indication they might be available for sex.
ADLER (1987) argued that women who are deemed to lack respectability, find it difficult to have their testimony believed by the court.
Why does Allen argue that explanations for female criminality are dominated by mental health explanations
ALLEN (1987):
Allen reviewed explanations for female criminality and concluded that invariably mental health explanations dominate. She states that crimes committed by females are often interpreted as a symptom of emotional or psychological crisis. Male crimes are explained in terms of greed or aggression – a rational response to a particular situation, whereas female crimes are perceived as being much more difficult to understand – as females are viewed as inherently less deviant or criminal than males.
As a consequence of this assumption, when females commit crime there is often a search for underlying reasons (PMT, hormonal imbalances etc.) reflecting the idea that ‘normal’ women conform and ‘abnormal’ women do not. Consequently courts are more likely to order reports on female offenders in the search for ‘underlying psychological problems’.
There is therefore a real difficulty in viewing female crime as a rational response and explanations tend to reinforce sexist ideologies of women as irrational, emotional and hysterical. What can be interpreted as evidence of chivalry and leniency by the courts could also be seen as disadvantaging women and reinforcing traditional and sexist notions of femininity and masculinity.
Explain how the first explanations of female criminality are based on biology
The first explanations of gender differences in crime were biological rather than sociological. For example, LOMBROSO and FERRERO (1893) argued that criminality is innate, but that there were very few ‘born female criminals’. Some more recent psychological explanations have also argued that biological factors such as higher levels of testosterone in males can account for gender differences in violent offending. However, sociologists take the view that social rather than biological factors are the cause of gender differences in offending.
