Contemporary forms of crime

Unit I
Concept of Crime & Criminal Behaviour

Traditional approach defines crime in terms of violation of public law, whereas modern approach
to crime emphasizes upon functional aspect of law.
Theoretical explanation to crime involves individualistic and environmental approaches to crime.
Different types of offences have different kinds of motivations and all of them cannot be
explained by the same approach. The traditional approach to crime had been to formulate a
definition of crime. Therefore all the jurists beginning with Blackstone down to Kenny attempted
to define crime. But more or less all of them failed to bring in within the narrow compass of a
definition the flexible notion of a crime which is conditioned by the changing moral values and
social opinions of the community from time to time. Moreover, the traditional approach to crime
suited a society which had not developed into a complex society. Earlier number of crimes were
fewer which could be roped in within the four corners of a definition. But with rapid
industrialisation and means of communications and modern scientific investigations crime also
have taken a new turn. They have not only multiplied in numbers but also have grown more
complex, complicated and even involve a lot of technology and science. Formerly crimes were
committed out of greed, lust and land, but now such crimes have relegated to the category of
traditional crimes.
Modern crimes committed by persons belonging to the higher social status by beguiling people
or practising fraud or misrepresentation or by adopting other known or unknown ways to a mass
money by fair means or foul have all appeared. Some new categories of crime like cyber-crime
and theft of intellectual property have appeared too. Therefore, a modern approach to combat
such crimes has become absolutely necessary.

Defining crime, being a traditional approach, has to be given up. The modern conception is that
crime is a public wrong i.e. a wrong which offends against the public generally. The modern
approach is not to bother about a definition of a crime but to lay stress on its functions. In other
words, the modern approach is functional approach to the crime. The criminal law will not
concern itself with what a man does in private unless it can be shown to be contrary to the
public good that the law ought to intervene in its functions as the guardian of the public
good. Private morality or immorality is not the concern of criminal law. It appears we are again
reverting to what Blackstone said that crime is a public wrong because the modern notion of
criminal law is concerned with behaviour which is normally reprehensible and is inimical to law
and order. A search for a definition of crime, being a traditional approach to crime, should now
in modern times be given up as being a futile approach and instead a real search should be for the
norms, ethics and practical expediency. In this sense it includes violation of conduct norms and
social norms.

Conduct norms __ Norms are the unspoken rules of right (normal) and wrong (abnormal) that
are contained in custom, tradition, ethics, religion, family, and other social institutions.
Social harm —To Sutherland (and to most criminologists), it is clearly unfair that white collar
criminals get off with civil fines rather than criminal punishments. Corporations that pollute the
environment have to pay a million dollar penalty (nothing more than a slap on the wrist to them)
while someone who shares a marijuana cigarette with a friend gets 6 years in prison for
trafficking (quite a lengthy restriction of liberty). Criminologists adhering to this sense of
unfairness tend to believe that crime is any socially harmful act or analogous social injury,
whether legally permissible or not. In this view, crime includes untimely death, illness or disease,
deprivation of food, shelter, clothing, medical care, racism, sexism, and tobacco, etc.

Human rights violation —anything that causes social injury (imperialism, sexism, racism,
poverty) is crime, but also anything that thwarts the right to a dignified human existence
(freedom of movement, free speech, a good education, employment, the right to unionise, life,
liberty, happiness, and so on). The concept of human rights has the advantage of cutting across
cultures and over time.

Deviance and Social Control — The view that crime is deviance, or norm violating behaviour is
associated most with sociological criminology. The norms can originate from any source;
religion, political belief, etiquette, fashion, or criminal law. In fact, deviance occurs whenever
there is stigmatization, isolation, rejection, segregation, punishment, treatment, or rehabilitation.
Social control can be coercive (forceful), normative (attitudinal), or an exchange solution (sets of
rewards and incentives). Not all deviant acts are criminal (and vice versa). Deviance is in the eye
of the beholder. Law is but one form of social control, a coercive, governmental solution. The
term “criminalisation” refers to the process whereby criminal law is selectively applied to certain
behaviours, and many criminalisation specialists adhere to a deviance and social control
viewpoint, asking the question if criminalisation is a neutral process or if it serves the interests of
the powerful. Other forms of social control are sometimes studied, like dispute resolution,
mediation, therapeutic, counselling, rehabilitation, reconciliation, restitution (self-help,
avoidance, negotiation, settlement, and toleration).

Nature and Scope

Rational-choice theorists suggest people commit crimes of their own free will, the consensus
among most criminologists is that sociological factors play a significant role in producing
criminal behavior. Criminological research has shown that there is no one socioeconomic factor
that has proved an accurate predictor of criminal behavior. However, there are some variables
that seem to affect the likelihood, volume, and type of crimes that occur in particular countries,
regions, and communities. For traditional street crimes, socioeconomic variables such as median
income, educational attainment and access to education, religion, family conditions (e.g., divorce
and overall family cohesion), and job availability have been correlated with criminal behavior.
Population density and the degree of urbanization, the concentration of youth in a community,
community stability (e.g., population turnover rates and commuting patterns), alcohol and drug
use, the strength of law enforcement agencies in a particular area, community attitudes toward
law enforcement, and even climate and weather have all been shown to affect the number of and
types of crime that occur. Of all of these links, the correlation between alcohol and drug use and
crime receives the greatest attention from both academicians and policymakers
To convict a person of most criminal offences the two elements are very important to prove:
Actus Reus and Mens Rea. Actus Reus refers to the physical act involved in committing the
offence described by the criminal law. Mens rea means that the accused person had the intent to
commit an offence or knowledge of what he or she did was against the law. The intention of a
person to commit a criminal act means that the person meant to do something wrong and knew
or should have foreseen the results of the wrongful act. Intent is not the same as motive. A
motive can be understood as the reason that a person commits a crime, while intent refers to that
person’s state of mind and willingness to break the law.

Just indicting that a person had knowledge of certain facts is enough to ascertain the presence of
Mens Rea. Sometimes Mens Rea is not necessary to ascertain the act as an offence. Such as
matters relating and dealing with environment protection and workplace safety, these are meant
to protect the public welfare. Here Strict Liability and absolute liability comes into picture. Strict
liability means when a person may prove that they had the knowledge of the facts and
consequences and with due diligence tries to avoid it but it was out of their power. Absolute
liability is such driving without a driving license, there is no defence possible.
In ancient time any act by a person or even an animal which caused harm to any other person
was considered as punishable crime. The punishments at earlier times were way different that it
is now. The wrongdoers were beheaded or thrown out of the country as per their acts. To punish
animals, stones were thrown at them. Crime is a changing concept dependent upon the social
development of people that is upon the fundamental interest and values dominating their
common beliefs. But as the time passed by and humans started to regularise themselves the
Nature and Definition of crime became clearer
 The changes have been noticed that people who did not committed crime, due to the
availability of knowledge and technology are tempted to commit crime seeing how easily
it can be done and various ways of avoiding to get caught.
 Drug dealing which used to be done face to face in the middle of street with the fear of
getting busted now can be done online with just some clicks of a keyboard.
 Distance is just a number now with various means of transport are available a wrongdoer
can easily commit a crime in one city and move to another city in hours.
 The lack of interaction among people, not knowing who actually lives next door makes it
easy for perpetrators to find their targets and commence their activities.
 With such changing happening in the nation the police authorities are also required to
change their methods of tracking the criminals and increase their technical ability. With
the criminals being smart the authorities are required to be smarter.
 Criminals are adapting to the measures taken by the police authorities.
 Local gang members have noticed that they can make more money, with less risk of
getting caught and smaller penalties if they do get caught, by using technology
Emergence
Crime is an act which is both forbidden by law and revolting to the moral sentiments of the
society. Crime is a relative concept and a changing one too. Approaches to crime have been
different at different stages of human civilisation and even at a given time they have been
different in various societies. Traditional approach defines crime in terms of violation of public
law, whereas modern approach to crime emphasizes upon functional aspect of law. Theoretical
explanation to crime involves individualistic and environmental approaches to crime. Crime may
be defined in terms of its attributes and characteristics by first distinguishing crime from civil
and moral wrong and secondly by critically examining definitions given by eminent criminal
jurists from time to time. If the law awards a punishment for the wrong done, we call it a crime,
but if law does not consider it serious enough to award a punishment and allows only
indemnification or damage, we call such wrong as a civil wrong or tort. It is not only important
to define crime but also important to know why crimes are committed and why a person becomes
a criminal. Theoretical explanation of crime helps in dealing with crime and criminal.
Individualistic approach to the crime for the first time paid attention to the personality of the
offender which laid the foundation of modern criminology. Environmental approach to crime
represents a socio-cultural phenomenon which is not associated with physical or mental
capacities of an individual as such. Punitive approach is very traditional approach to crime,
which is universal in nature. It regards the criminal as a basically bad and dangerous sort of
person. The object of this approach is to punish the offender so that the society may be saved
from his misdeeds. Therapeutic approach to crime is of relatively recent origin, which considers
the criminal as a victim of circumstances and a product of various factors within the criminal and
society. It regards the criminal as sick person requiring treatment. Prevention of crime and
delinquency like any other phenomenon of an unpleasant and destructive nature is much better
than their subsequent control when they occur. Programmes for the prevention of crime and
delinquency are to be directed not only to those who have already indulged in criminal behaviour
but also towards potential criminals and delinquents. Different approaches to crime provide
better basis for the determination of specific policies for dealing with crime and criminals.