Justifying lax enforcement of white-collar crime: Motivations and perceptions of harm

1. Reiman’s 3 ways that people justify lax WCC enforcement • Motivation • One who tries to do harm is more evil then another who commits crime while pursuing legitimate goals • Being victimized intentionally and directly is more painful/worse • WCC occurs as a part of productive activity that benefits everyone • Thus street crime = police, WCC = regulation • Victims of many WCC chose their occupation knowing the risks

2. Thoughts about last week group work • Incentives for filing civil (vs. criminal) cases? • Should prosecutors consider the collateral consequences of a prosecution? • WCC? • Women with dependent children?

3. Basic Concepts/Questions Developmental Theories Policy Implications Developmental Criminology

4. The Age-Crime Relationship Arrest Rate 4000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 Property Crimes, peak age = 16 Violent Crimes, peak age = 18 10 20 30 40 50 Age at Arrest

5. Is the Age/Crime Curve Misleading? • Data is AGGREGATE • It could hide subgroups of offenders, or “offending trajectories” • Data is Cross-Sectional • Doesn’t track stability/change over time • Data is OFFICIAL • Cannot tell us about the precursors to official delinquency (childhood antisocial behavior)

6. Antisocial Behavior Is Stable • COHORT STUDIES = CHRONIC 6% • Correlation between past and future criminal behavior ranges from .6 to .7 (very strong) • Lee Robins- Studies of cohorts of males • Antisocial Personality as an adult virtually requires history of CASB • CASB as early as age 6 related to delinquency • More severe behavior has more stability • “Early onset delinquency” powerful indicator of stability

7. But there is CHANGE • 1/2 of antisocial children are never arrested • The vast majority of delinquents desist as they enter adulthood (mid 20s)

8. New and Old Ideas • OLD: Crime is the province of adolescents; theories of delinquency most important • Easier to find/survey adolescents too! • New (Considering stability/development ) • Theories of adolescent delinquency are at best incomplete • Central causes of delinquency lie in childhood • Chronic offenders still may desist during adulthood • Lifecourse Questions • Why do some age out of crime while others don’t? • Why is criminality so stable over time? • What causes crime at different stages of life?

9. Terminology • “Career Criminal” Paradigm • Early roots in criminology—studies of robbers, fences, and so forth • Crime as an occupation  specialization, escalation, etc. • Empirical evidence = little specialization, crime not as an “occupation” • Developmental Criminology replaces “Career Criminal” paradigm in 1980s

10. Lifecourse Theory I • Must explain why there is stability (continuity) in antisocial behavior • Must explain childhood precursors to offending (childhood antisocial behavior) • Severe (age inappropriate) temper tantrums • Deviant/criminal behavior • Must explain desistence, or “change” • Antisocial children, but not adults • Adults that “age out”

11. Lifecourse Theory II Types of Lifecourse Theories • Continuity (Trait) Theories (G&H) • Continuity and Change Theories (Sampson and Laub) • Continuity or Change Theories (Moffitt)

12. Continuity Theories • Some “thing” that is stable over time and related to crime • Gottfreson and Hirschi  Low self-control • Becomes very stable by age 8 • Causes crime and other nastiness • Problem? • Why do people desist? Explain “childhood recoveries” or adult desistence? • G&H • People desist –it’s a “law” or “constant” like gravity, which doesn’t’ need explanation

13. Sampson and Laub • Important/Popular book: Crime in the Making: Pathways and Turning Points Through Life • First to fully outline “lifecourse” criminology • Put forth a lifecourse theory • Use “Glueck data” to test theory

14. Pathways and Turning Points • Pathways = stability • Turning Points = opportunity for change

15. Sampson and Laub Childhood Adolescence Adulthood • Context • Poverty • Neighborhood • Others • Parenting • Supervision • Discipline • Social Bonds • Family • School • Delinquent Peers Delinquency Adult Crime Length of Incarceration • Social Bonds • Marriage • Good Job • Individual • Differences • Temperament • Conduct disorder • diagnosis

16. Continuity • Stability of Trajectory • Individual differences (traits) possible • Cumulative Continuity • Delinquency/crime has effect on “adult social bonds” • Delinquency/crime can lead to incarceration, which also has effect on adult social bonds • These bonds, in turn, have effect on future crime

17. Change • Turning Points = Adult Social Bonds • Quality Marriage • Quality Employment • Why would these things reduce crime? • S&L: they increase informal control (bind individuals to society, give them something to lose) • Other explanations (spend less time with criminal friends, etc.)

18. Sampson and Laub II • New Book/Articles based on follow-up data from Gleuck sample • Followed until age 70 • Similar to original theory • Employment, marriage, military service • More complex-why a “turning point?” • Knife off past from the present/future • Supervision/monitoring (control) but also opportunities for social support/growth • Change to structure/routine activities • Opportunity for identity transformation

19. How do people desist? • Desistence by Default • No conscious decision to “stop offending” • Rather, roles, structure, social context changes • Human Agency • Vague concept that implies people have some say in the matter. • Not same as “rational choice” nor is it a “trait” • Interaction = land a good job but still must want to keep • Theoretical Importance • Lives do not “unfold” in predictable sequences • Desistence more difficult to explain than onset or persistence

20. Terrie Moffitt • A Stability or Change Theory • Argument: • There are 2 different “kinds” of offenders in the world • These types can be characterized by their unique “offending trajectories” • Failure of Mainstream Criminology? • During adolescence, these two groups look rather similar

21. Moffitt’s 2 Groups of Offenders • LCP’s • Early Start, Stable over lifecourse, 5% of general population (small group) • Therefore… • Why start so early? Why so stable? • AL’s • Late starters, desist in adulthood, very prevalent in population • Therefore…. • Why start so late? Why desist right away?

22. Explaining the LCP trajectory • Presence of “Neuropsychological Deficits” • Where do they come from? • Why do they matter? INTERACTING WITH • Ineffective Parenting • Monitoring, supervision, etc. • This “dual hazard” puts them on bad path…however…

23. Cumulative Continuity for LCP’s • What in the environment is affected? • Peer Rejection • School Failure • Parenting • THEREFORE • Cumulative continuity • Contemporary continuity (still have N.P. Deficit, personality traits)

24. Explaining the AL’s • Maturity Gap • Knifing off Bonds as “rewarding” • Mimic • Why do AL’s desist? • However, some may exhibit continuity • “Snares” as another example of cumulative continuity

25. Key Moffitt Questions • Why do we need 2 theories? • How does she account for stability and change? • Specific explanations of LCP and AL offending

26. Policy Implications • The seduction of the chronic 6% • The promise of early intervention • Theory Specific Implications • Moffitt  causes of neurological deficits, effective parenting, other? • S&L  family context, parenting, bonds (child and adult)