Apply a police strategy to a crime problem
Select a crime or disorder in neighbourhood
Required to select a strategy lecture 6-10 define describe how it work
Provide explanation of how n why it might be implemented n useful in dealing with the particular crime or disorder problem…
This paper will analyse the level of ** crime in the neighbourhood of **( Charnwood, Northwest Canberra). In this particular neighbourhood, the above mentioned crimes are prevalent, and in addition, armed robberies have also taken place.
Anti-social behaviour in neighbourhoods can cause numerous issues and disruptions in society. There is a strong association between alcohol and anti-social behaviour in our society. Within the local neighbourhoods, this may include drunkenness, clubs serving alcohol after hours, inappropriate use of public space, graffiti, abandoned vehicles that may have been stolen, excessive noise coming from business and organisations, inconsiderate and violent behaviour, as well as malicious communication and verbal abuse.
Problem oriented policing (POP) would be a good strategy to counter anti-social behaviour in this neighbourhood. This strategy would be particularly useful in cases where such issues are already present and a long term solution is required, such as is the case here. Community policing in the neighbourhood could do better with the supplement of problem oriented policing. POP is also the problem solving approach adopted by the police. This approach is widely practised in many policing communities.
The POP model
The SARA model is the key to the problem solving process. This four stage model serves as a guide for the problem solving approach adopted by the Newport News Police Department.**(why Newport – say what’s significant about this police dept) . The SARA model involves the following elements:
1. Scanning: This - refers to how the officers identify the cause of a crime or issue in the community.
2. Analysis: This process includes how officers investigate and identify all key members who are part of the problem. It also involves analysing actions taken to solve the problems.
3. Response: This is a process of an officer developing a proactive solution according to the results of a careful analysis of the issues that were the source of the problems. The solution will be more effective in eliminating or reducing the problem. It could reduce or eradicate harm, hence dealing with the problem more effectively.
4. Assessment – This action is to evaluate the process the officer has gone through in scanning, analysis and responding. It is an important step to evaluate if the intervention of the problem solving has resulted in a success. This ensures time and resources used are accounted for by the police to the community.
The Case:
Reason for POP
As iIt would not be cost effective to provide this suburb with additional random or directed patrols. Therefore, the POP approach is highly recommended. The appointed beat officer would be able to implement the four-stage problem-solving process of the SARA model. The POP approach requires police officers to take ownership of an issue to intervene, manage and solve (Dr. Mazerolle, L. 2001). It requires an objective outlook at the issues in the patrol beat and addressing the root causes of the problems.
Scanning
The Charnwood residence complained that the groups of youth and young adults loitering in the neighbourhood are a nuisance. Residents of the town houses surrounding the main shopping area started complaining about their mails being stolen from mailboxes earlier last year, in 2006. Mails that were targeted were those that looked like they particularly those containeding cheques or money orders were often targeted. As the issue was not addressed, more serious crimes started surfacing.
From 2006 until this present moment, there werehave been at least 3 arm robberies reported by the media at the Charnwood shops. Gangs of youths have started to instil fear into shop owners and residences by hurling verbal abuse and threats.
The goal of POP is to prevent/deterremove these groups of children and young adults or gangs loitering around residences and Charnwood shops who are contributing to the fear of anti-social behaviour in the area from loitering around residences and Charnwood shops. It also aims to educate shop owners and the labour club on how to avoid armed hold ups.
Analysis
Mail box crime occurs in the afternoon when most residents are not home and are usually still at work. By observation, the school children start loitering at the hotspots after school hours, which is around 3pm. The older youths and gangs normally start to appear in the evenings and loiter around the shopping areas until late. In the evenings, the Charnwood shops are normally quiet and most shops are closed by 7pm. The only open businesses are Woolworths, Video Ezy and the labour club. There are normally not many visitors to the area after 8pm. Charnwood shops are extremely deserted with poor lighting, making it easy for crime to take place.
Response
By holding meetings with the residents, the residents are encouraged to keep an eye out on those who loiter around the area. They are also encouraged to make their presence known to the children and youths during the evenings between 4pm and 6pm. Random patrols are still conducted on a frequent basis. The police officers will also visit homes of children and youths caught in the act of stealing mail or in fights and serve them a warning in front of their parents. In addition, the police officers will meet with business owners who were victims of armed robberies and encourage them to hire security officers and have security companies patrol the Charnwood shops after hours to provide a presence to deter any criminal intent. Police officers have also encouraged residences and business owners to call crime stoppers if they notice any suspicious activities or individuals around.
Assessment
As a result of the police guiding the business owners through ways of crime prevention, security companies were contracted by the businesses. The security companies were mainly present during after hours at business premises which had later trading hours and random patrols were carried out by the security companies, between 12 midnight and 7am. This move has seen promising results in previous months where no robberies occurred. Residents have noticed a decline in mail box theft. Residence and business owners are also more alert to any anti-social behaviour and have contacted the police in the instance of such cases.
Conclusion
The reason POP worked in Charnwood is because as the police provided sufficient support to the community in identifying issues and their root causes. Residents and business owners were proactive, open to suggestions, and were keen to eliminate the fear of crime threats of robbery and anti-social behaviour. However, common citizens are not experts in the criminal field. Hence, they sometimes require guidance or suggestions which are what the police could provide. Crime prevention requires the participation of all parties. Third party policing is commonly used in POP. In this instance, security companies were contracted as observers, reporters and to provide a uniform presence to deter of criminal activities. POP is specific and targeted towards problem solving. POP is proactive, rather than reactive policing strategy and as such, would be the recommended approach that police should use where possible.
References
Bennett T. (1990) Evaluating Neighbourhood Watch, Gower Publishing Company Limited, England.
Rosenbaum D. (1994) The Challenge of Community Policing, Sage Publication, London.
Dr. Mazerolle, L. Policing in the 21st century: What works and what doesn’t, (2001) 4th National Outlook Symposium on Crime in Australia, New Crimes or New Responses, convened by the Australian Institute of Criminology
Australian Institute of Criminology, http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/other/2004-03-policingt.html, viewed 1 May 2007
Australian Federal Police, http://www.afp.gov.au/act, viewed 3 May 2007
Belconnen Community, http://www.belconnen.org.au/chs.htm, viewed 9 May 2007
Nature vs Nurture
Does an “evil gene” exist, a hereditary disorder that causes crime? There are numerous debates about what causes crime. Some people assume that criminal behavior is due to a person’s upbringing and life experiences (“nurture”). Others suggest that criminal behavior is more complex and involves a person’s genetic makeup (“nature”). Are people just born that way? Is criminal behavior pre-determined at some point in people’s lives? This paper will present how crime behaviors can be hereditary but most criminals are shaped by their environment factors instead. As the theories of genetic influences in crimes are undeniable; it should only be seen as an inclination of crime rather then the cause of crime (Raine, A. 1993 pg50). Hence, a criminal can be born but shaped and influenced by the society to cultivate the criminal traits in them.
Social scientists have argued the nature-nurture debate for many years, both in the popular press and professional literature. Nature proponents argue that biological factors and genetic composition explain much of human behavior. Nurture proponents contend that environmental factors, such as family, school, church and community, are paramount in the development of behavior patterns. Besides, some traits, such as human intelligence, depend upon a complex combination of both hereditary and environmental influences. According to Pollak, that there is a new way of looking at these different experiences that turn different genes on or off (Pollak S. 2002). New research reveals that life experiences can alter the biochemistry of many genes- our moral development later in life changes our genes and is this could be hereditary.
Cesare Lombroso, a 19th century Italian physician, reminded students that nurture, not nature, is responsible for criminal behavior. In contrast, Freudian psychoanalysis and the depth psychologies of Alfred Adler, Erik Erikson, Erich Fromm, Karen Horney, Carl Jung, Melanie Klein, Otto Rank and Harry Stack Sullivan focused on the dynamic unconscious (the natural instinct of a human), theorizing that the depths of human psyche integrates with the conscious mind to produce a healthy human personality.
Nevertheless, many researchers show that criminal behaviors can be hereditary. Human genes carry many personality traits inherited from their ancestors and even from their parents. Lombroso, regarded by many as the father of criminology, is convinced that people are born criminals as it is in an individual’s nature to commit crime. Criminals have been found to carry a few certain features and personality traits. According to Darwin and him, we evolved from animals. In this theory, genes mutate and get passed on to each descendant, concluding that some people are predisposed to criminality and they are not the same species as humans (AllAboutScience.org, 2005).
According to Sigmund Freud, all humans have criminal tendencies. However, the process of socialization curbs these tendencies by the developing of inner controls that are learned through childhood experience. Freud hypothesized that the most common element that contributed to criminal behavior was faulty identification by children with their parents. Improperly socialized children may develop personality disturbances that causes them to direct antisocial impulses inward or outward. The child who directs them outward becomes a criminal, and the child that directs them inward becomes a neurotic.
In Freud’s theory of the Defense Mechanisms, he finds the cause of individual behavior in the unconscious mind (Freud, S. 1930). Sociobiology attributes “genetics as the only factor of behavior”. The mankind uses each one of them in everyday life. One clear example of man being biological is that at sometimes man can have animal drives and desires. This drive is driven by the idea and of free will that is taken for granted.
Another theory Freud developed included the Id, Ego, and Superego (Freud, S. 1923). Here, personality has a definable structure with three basic components. The most primitive part of the personality, present in the infant is the Id, meaning “it” in Latin. The Id is an unconscious, irrational and immoral part of the personality that exists at birth (by nature), containing all the basic biological drives: hunger, thirst, self-protection, and sex. A component of personality, the id seeks immediate satisfaction of natural urges through primary process, without concern for the morals and norms of society. Ego and Superego deals with how the mind works conscientiously and unconsciously. It describes the behavior of the human body and motives of our actions. Freud was a pessimist when it came to human nature. He identified man’s weaknesses in saying that man is a biological creature with biological drives. He reflected these ideas from Darwin’s original ideas.
In Freud’s views, the three parts of the psychic structure – id, ego, and superego are always in dynamic conflict. We are always unaware of the conflicts between the id, ego, and superego. According to psychodynamic theory, when a threat becomes especially serious, it may lead to intense inhibitions and defenses. These may be expressed as violence and aggression- inhibiting reaction. According to Freud, humans are defensive. This defensive mechanism is part of everyday speech and action. The lack of basic need stimulates the unconscious id and impels a person toward aggression which may later express itself in a tendency toward criminal behavior.
If moral and social values are instilled from day one, an individual is given ‘will power’ as a tool for survival as well as the ability to practise self control. For example, Socrates, a Greek philosopher was analysed as brutal, sensuous and inclined to being a drunkard by a physiognomist. By admitting that the examination revealed his inner self, and learning to control it, he managed to overcome the negative side (Vold, B., Bernard, J. & Snipes, B. 2002, pg32). The ability to control negative desires or mens rea is a natural thing.
If we said that criminals are made by their surroundings and their social factors, we could safely say that criminals are shaped by bad influences or social status. According to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, when the basic need for an individual is not met or self esteem is threatened, the individual will turn on his or her defensive mechanism as reaction to this perceived threat (Maslow, H. 1943). Some resort to robbing and stealing food and necessities as a way of survival. Another basic need of humankind is the need for belonging and acceptance by others. Some might feel forced into criminal activities to enable them to live certain lifestyles that will achieve this aim.
Because defensive mechanisms are unconscious, they are difficult to control. However, the psychologists of the 1950s and 1960s rejected this theory. Nevertheless, in recent years, the cognitive revolution has again made defensive mechanisms the subject of scientific investigation, and cognitive, developmental, and personality psychologists have found some evidence for their existence (Cramer,P. 2000).
Carl Jung and Freud shared the same ideas and even theoretical concepts, including psyche, ego, consciousness, and unconsciousness (Somerfield, R. & McCrae, R. 2000). But Jung greatly expanded the concept of the unconscious. Jung argued that the mind of the newborn infant is not blank slate, but is imprinted with forms from the past experiences that are common to all humans in the universe.
One major challenge of our time is to discover the underlying causes of crime and to develop new techniques for preventing it. Although we should not ignore poverty, racism, joblessness, and other environmental factors which do influence criminals, biological and genetic factors may prove to be powerful predictors of criminal behavior. It is hoped that genetic tendencies toward crime, if they do prove to exist, can be modified by early intervention with such methods as psychotherapy, classes in effective parenting, and improved preschool education. Additional research on both genetic and environmental factors is necessary if we are to prevent the emergence of criminals like the serial killer Ivan Milat – “the backpacker murderer” in future generations.
According to Lombroso and Ferri, there are four basic types of criminals. The first type is those who are born criminals. According to Ferri, this group constitute a third of all criminals. They are morally underdeveloped and epileptic. The second type is the insane criminals. This insanity is caused by a defect in their brains which causes them to be incapable from differentiating right from wrong. Intoxicated people are included in this group, since over consumption of alcohol has a similar effect on the brain. The criminal by passion is the third type, where according to Lombroso, these criminals are more likely to be females then male. They are usually urged by emotions or the need for revenge because of something or someone. For example, a mother who murders her husband who was found out to be the serial rapist of daughter. The strong emotions of betrayal and revenge for the overwhelming hurt done to her daughter would have driven her to the murder of her spouse. The fourth type of criminal is the occasional criminal. They comprise of a few categories. Firstly, the pseudocriminal who kills in self defense. Secondly, the criminaloid who are influenced by situations and circumstances to commit crime. Thirdly, the habitual criminals who are normally offenders of the petty crimes such as white collar criminals and last but not the least harmless, the epileptoid criminal who suffers from epilepsy.
In conclusion, theories of genetic influences in crimes are reliable, but are only factors influencing crime, rather than its cause. Environment and parent care, peer pressure and human needs play a large part unearthing the underlying motives and causes of crime, because humans are intelligent creatures that learn from experience. Hence, crime is a human act that can develop as a reaction to one’s surroundings and nurture.
References
Maslow, H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review 50, 370-396
Freud, S. (1923). The ego and the id, S.E., 19, 12-66
Freud, S. (1930). Civilization and its discontents. New York : Jonathon Cape and Co.
Erikson, E (1980) Element of a psychoanalytic theory of psychosocial development. Greespan, S. & Pollock, G. (Eds.), The course of life Vol 1
Erikson, H. (1959). Growth and crises of the healthy personality. Psychological Issues 1, 50-100
Cramer, P, (2000). Defense mechanisms in psychology today. American psychologist, 55(6), 637-646.
Somerfield, R., & McCrae, R. (2000). Stress and coping research: Methodological challenges, theoretical advances, and clinical applications. American Psychologist, 55(6), 620-625.
Vold, B., Bernard, J. & Snipes, B. (2002). Theoretical criminology. (5th ed). New York: Oxford University Press
Pollak S. (2002). Experience alters how we perceive emotion, University of Wisconsin-Madison. Viewed on 16th June 2007, 2007 by AAAS, the science society.
< http://www.eurekalert.org/ >
Viewed on 16th June 2007, AllAboutScience.org < http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/ >
Raine, A. (1993).
The psychopathology of crime: Criminal behavior as a clinical disorder
Debate whether judges make new laws & whether they should have the power to do so.
Judges are able to make new laws thanks to the common law system. The common law is a system of law in which the courts decision forms a binding statement and represents how statutory law is represented. The system is heavily based on the idea of “precedent” or “case law”, that is, judgments from previous cases constitutes a source of legal and therefore binding rules. As time passes and new cases are brought to court, judges are thus in a position to not only interpret the law to suit the situation but also refer to previous similar cases for judgments so as to come to a ruling.
Although this means that courts should base decisions of current cases based on previous decisions of similar cases, there may still be a situation in which no similar case has ever been brought up before (Chisholm and Nettheim, 2002). A judge would then be required to interpret any available statute and then make a judgment. His judgment would then be the precedent for similar cases that might come in future. In effect, his judgment constitutes a new legal rule.
In the case of Mabo and Others v. Queensland (No. 2) (1992) 175 CLR, the judges decided that the Meriam people, who were here before the English settlement in Australia had native title over the disputed land and rejected the notion of terra nullias. The judgment gave the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 a proper standing in the Mabo case. As a result, the Native Title Act of 1993 was passed. In this instance, we can see how the judges threw out a long held legal view that contradicted with the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 and finally culminated in the making new laws.
Should judges be given the power to make new laws in accordance with their rulings? In my opinion, the power of interpreting laws should still be left to the judges. There are many instances where statutory law is so ambiguous that the right interpretation by a learned authority is imperative to solve disputes or effect public and private sanctions. Furthermore, the system of common law allows for situations where the law is ambiguous be met with precedent so that future cases can be resolved in the same manner as previous similar cases.
Judges therefore, do make new laws and we have seen how the system has worked so far and justice served for all. Each case in the court needs to be heard on its own merits. This is where judges are put on the spot and will have to be discerning as every case is different and every outcome should be relevant to the case. More importantly, the ruling on each case constitutes a binding legal rule that is applicable to all future similar cases.
In conclusion, I agree that the role of a judge is to interpret laws, but in the process they make relevant laws and judgement to individual cases heard. This is particularly important to accommodate the constantly evolving common law in regards to the current era.
Reference List
CHISHOLM, R. & NETTHEIM, G. (2002) Understanding Law Australia, LexisNexis.
WARD, I. & STEWART, R. G. (2006) Politics One, Australia, Palgrave Macmillan.
Discuss whether or not there should be uniform criminal laws for all Australian Jurisdictions (i.e. State, Territory and Commonwealth jurisdictions)
Should there be uniform criminal laws for all Australian Jurisdictions as we see much confusion between jurisdictions in Australia’s history of criminal proceedings? The situation which exists now is that there are different criminal laws for each State and Territory. There are nine different systems of criminal law in six states, two territories and the federal jurisdiction; each with its own criminal laws to follow in Australia, and keep in mind Australia is large country consist of a relatively small population of 18 million only. Added to that each state in this country have different set of traffic codes, road rules, different property laws, tax laws, family laws and etc. These different laws lead to inequalities, complications, and unnecessary duplication of time, people, money and other resources. The question in many cross border crime between states that has always been the debate is: whose jurisdiction is it or in which state will the accused be trial?
Police statistics indicate that, on a per capital basis, violent crimes tend to be more prevalent in the Northern Territory while Western Australia had the highest crime rates for property-related offences. The statistics show that most habitual offenders in most cross border crimes between states would pick the less tough sentencing state to commit the crime. For example: the age to consent for any sexual act in different states varies and the penalty for sexual penetration of a young child varies significantly in different states too. A punishment for crime of sexual penetration of a young child (under the age of 10) in Victoria carries a maximum penalty of 25 years imprisonment but in ACT, the same crime only carries a prison term of 17 years. In this case, the intelligent serial rapist will know where to commit the act. The person will definitely choose the lesser punishment between the 2 states in case of being caught.
The Australian Institute of Criminology has collected data on homicides in Australia since 1989. The latest figures indicate that there were 288 incidents and 305 victims of homicide in Australia during 2003-04 {http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/cfi/cfi108.html} , an average of about one a day. A number of homicide incidents in Australia have involved multiple (two or more people are murdered) killings. This multiple killing crimes could be a result of Criminals knows that, every state in Australia has their independence laws. If they are found committing a crime in a different state to where they previously committed a crime in; they will probably not be sent back for prosecution or the state they are currently in won’t be able to prosecute them as the offence did not take place in that state.
Firearm has become a common weapon for arm robbery while robbing financial institute, corporate and shops which contain large amount of cash. Bear in mind that a propelled bullet can travel a long distance to reach a target. It can cross borders too. If bullet can travel across border, shouldn’t there be a uniform criminal law for all state? In another scenario in Ward v The Queen (1980) 142 CLR 308 where the accused was standing on the Victorian bank of the Murray River, shot and killed the victim who as on the opposite bank in New South Wales. In such case, which state will trial the accused and persecute the convicted criminal? With the territorial theory, each states has obligation to not interfere with the affairs of other states but to control crimes taking place within its own borders (McSherry and Naylor, 2004). But, as long as crime involve firearms is concern there is no border.
The ‘Roads Policing Strategy’ to accompany the National Policing Plan clearly stated that road policing is “an important and visible element in the police’s commitment to protect the public” It includes: excessive and inappropriate speeding; drink and drug driving; failure to wear seat belts; and careless, dangerous or threatening driving. However, this plan can never be effective as long as there are still different laws in every state and territories. We see how New South Wales issued traffic infringements for exceeding the speed limit but in Australian Capital Territory’s, Drivers with ‘P’ plates who exceed the speed limit brought to court and the case was thrown out in the ACT magistrate courts. It is confusing for the citizens and residences of Australia to have different laws applied to them in different states while staying in the same country. Knowing the differences of laws in different states, intelligent habitual criminal will choose the state with the least penalty terms to commit their wrong doing. This causes problem for the prosecution at a later stage as the defendant could claim the absence of mens rea where they did not know the laws of New South Wales, as they are residence of the Australian Capital Territory.
In this twentieth century where computer is readily accessible by young and old, cyber crime become a norm for Australia: Internet-initiated Sex Crimes against Minors juveniles became victims of sex crimes committed by people they met through the Internet. Victims in these crimes are usually 13- through 15-year-old teenage girls who met adult offenders in Internet chat rooms. Most victims met and had sex with the offender on more than one occasion. Some of these offenders even use violent to achieve their sexual desires. Another serious cyber crime is fraud, while new technologies allow easier and cheaper access to a much larger pool of prospective victims. In this modern age we see scams of Identity-related Fraud, Internet Fraud, Credit Card Fraud, and Advance Fee Fraud. All these white collar crimes are borderless; all the more we see the need for a uniform criminal law to bring immediate justice without incurring further expenses of legal proceeding pending the jurisdiction of offence committed to decide on the venue of prosecuting the offender. Corporations and businesses are able to move and conceal its activities in different states easily without jeopardize the economy of the country and loosing out foreign investor when large fraud relating to banking institute is concern. But why is the delay and why the hesitation on the implementation of a uniform criminal law?
Some arguments that could be that:
· State government might consider the implementation of a uniform criminal law as a threat to loss their power in governing their own state laws.
· Some states are reluctant to consider new laws as they think the current laws are sufficient.
· It is also probably impossible for the commonwealth government to know exactly what happens in the states and territories to implement laws properly for them.
· The uniform criminal law is still up to interpretation of each state and territory’s law enforcement units.
· In the implementation of a uniform criminal law, the commonwealth government should be making decisions with the states and territories government.
But those arguments shouldn’t stop Australia from implementing a uniform criminal law. One country, one system is much easier and convenient for the citizens and residences of Australia. After the implementation of a uniform criminal law, the governments and law enforcer officers can better educate the people from childhood to adulthood to one single system without confusing them when they travel from state to state while struggling for their living. With this single system the people have no ways to claim that their ignorance of the law.
The political debates and arguments between jurisdictions would come to a halt in criminal law matters and proceed to better serve the communities. Crime justice system will also benefit from it as all large organized cross border activities would be able to run smoothly without any hurdles. The instances where convicted criminal (i.e. child molester or rapist) will know that wherever they commit the offence, the penalty are the same, thus deter them from committing the act. Criminals cross state borders after serving their sentences could be monitored and would assist in providing a better crime justice system.
A Model Criminal Code draft release in July 1992 was the first step to conformity of the criminal laws that is much needed in the country. States and territories have the option of adopting the code or use it as a guideline to form their criminal laws although they do not have to take it into consideration. The model code called for adoption by the states and territories. It is not the intention is not to remove the state and territories’ powers in regards to law making that is given to them by the constitution but to unite this country to the one uniform law to curb crime that would harm the nation, confuse the citizen. Sadly, this model has not been adopted across the country since it was released.
With different laws and penalties in different states and territories that causes the unnecessary waste of time for law enforcement officer. When the police were to detain an offender the police has to laid charges before a criminal court, determines the guilt or innocence of the defendant, hearing of the charges, imposed sentences include imprisonment, community service orders of various kinds, fines or bonds, home detention or work outreach camps that are administered by correctional agencies. But with the implementation of one system, the police will be able to charge the offender in court immediately and with a short spent of time the offender will be sentence or imprison. Thus, shorten the time of prosecuting and save resources.
In a recent article on January 9,2007 spelled by The Sydney Morning Herald: ‘The federal Attorney-General, Phillip Ruddock, said yesterday that there was a need for harmonization but the states seemed reluctant to adopt new rules with any degree of urgency’ (Herald, 9 January 2007). The thought of how harmonization would only occur if something really bad had already happen (i.e. terrorism) is almost absurd. Intermittent focus on the aspect of different laws should cease. Every law in Australia should have some sort of uniformity. The idea of having one commonwealth government over the states and territories is to bring forth the one nation and one identity, this includes believes and practices of the country. Either the call for adoption of the model criminal code to conformity of the criminal laws or the implementing of one uniform criminal law, this has to be done for the benefit of the country and the people.
In conclusion, we see the rapid change of the world that we live in. The modern technology that is advancing daily, crimes involving high thecnology are common nowaday. Cross broder is done within second with modern transportation and electronic equipement. Thecnological developments have changed our lives, and criminal activities. Shocking senerios like the shooting across the state and the credit card fraud by hacking the internet is no way to be seen in the old days. We have to move swiftly to keep up to date with the current crime situations. I believe the implementation of uniform criminal laws for all Australian Jurisdictions is inevidable. Cross border and borderless crime is increasing so as the number of cases of hearing piling up because of the different set of laws and penalty imposed by different state. How long can the court hold on to these cases? How much resouces and time we must waste? What are the authority waiting for? I believe it would be a major advantage for Australia to have a uniform law policy in this present era.
Reference list
MCSHERRY, B. & NAYLOR, B. (2004) Australian Criminal Laws: Critical Perspectives, Melbourne, Oxford University Press.
Essay title: Compare and contrast crime “myths” and “facts”
There are many definitions of crime. One of the definitions is the legal definition. According to Tappan (1947) , crime is “an international violation of the criminal law committed without excuse and penalised by the state”. There is also a human rights definition of crime where anything that is done to another person in violation of the code of human rights constitutes a crime. But that is a vague and too broad of a definition of crime.
Myth is regarded as a traditional or a half-truth story told of some event or happenings. It distorts our views of crimes, criminals and the criminal justice system set by the government. Graber (1980) stated, “the public lives in a world of unreality when it comes to criminals, victims, and the criminal justice system”.
Who is involved in the myths making of crime?
We find that most of the time, the media is the main culprit in contributing and encouraging the creation of crime myths. Journalists and media stations have responsibilities to update us on the happenings domestically and internationally. They also have an obligation to the media companies to ‘sell’ stories. Stories or reports have to grab attention of viewers. The media’s objective is to obtain and retain viewers; with that the advertising rate is increased when the rate of viewers goes through the roof as well. To achieve that, they use methods such as dramatising and sensationalising of stories. Most often times, journalist would choose and pick topic that is of potential to create a build in interest by public or create responses from the governments. Their opinions and reviews of situations are based on their personal opinions and sometimes bias reviews.
Crime through the mass media has become an entertainment more than just news reports. One of the latest stories on the television was how the neighbourhood of Dubbo is havoc. Crime spree, violent behaviours and looters found themselves on camera as the television presenter discussed crime rates that had heightened. The media was only trying to portray an image on the television for the public to react and the government to pay attention to. In reality, according to a few residences in that area, things in Dubbo were not what it seemed to be on the television at all.
The government plays a significant role in preventing myths. They have responsibilities to uphold the truth, sharing true facts to prevent public fear, culling crime myths, supporting and researching on crime prevention. In Australia, the Australian Institute of Criminology is established to play a role in conducting research on crime and criminology, and disseminating information to the Australian Government and public.
The irony is that the government is also a culprit for creating crime myths. The government itself controls and leads the mass media and is known to be a media entity of it’s own. It even has its very own media, publicity and marketing division. The government is able to suppress and release information when they feel necessary or want to. Take for example the news on a gunman in Canberra recently who shot himself after being intercepted by the Police Special Response and Security group. The newspapers had sketchy reports on the whole incident. The police had little to say about what had happened and only concentrated on how they were only protecting the public; describing that the young gunman killing himself as a tragedy.
The government knows it is able to get the media to focus on stories to be told and the attention of the public on social issues.
As a matter of fact, source of myths are so wide that we are not able to keep track of. This is particularly the reason that the government and media cooperates on a level where they would have selected myths, reports or incidents that they clarify or explained to the public via mass media.
Obtaining facts
A fact is normally derived from statistics and reports obtained by research, surveys and police records. The reliability of statistics, research, reports and police records are often questioned. These data are accumulated over the years by individuals and organisations that might not have proper training or standardized research methods. The reports or records might also be bias and based on individual perception or opinion.
Yet the argument is, how else can we gather data that is turned into facts? Thus, the methods of research have gone through years of improvement. The government setup Australian Institute of Criminology for the very purpose of gathering and reporting information on criminology for their knowledgebase. Law enforcement officers are trained to obtain information and prepare reports in a standardised manner. The Australian Bureau of Statistics is also part of the big scheme of things in the research, statistics, reporting and an influence of decision making of the government. Although the research methodologies are of high quality and standard; it cannot be denied that errors and misinterpretation of data still happens. This is unavoidable in the big scheme of things.
Common Myths
The society has this perception that all criminals will eventually be put in prison. This is often not true. We all know that not all crimes are reported. According to Graycar, A and Grabosky, P (2002), ‘Not all reported crimes are recorded, not all recorded crimes are investigated, not all investigated crimes are solved, not every investigated crime yields a suspect, not all suspect is apprehended, not every apprehended person is charged, not every charged person is brought before the courts, not every person brought before the courts is convicted, and not every convicted person is imprisoned’.
Another one of the most common myth is in regards to the arrest of crime related to drug ring crackdowns is that people who sell drugs are normally arrested. The facts according to the publication ‘Crime & Justice in Australia’ published by the NSW Department of Corrective services “80% of people arrested for drug related matters are classified by the courts as ‘consumers’ and not suppliers of drugs” pg 3.
There is this recent myth that crime is ever increasing and the only way to curb the problem is to increase the number of police in the state. The police force is like any other organisations. They need to prove to the people and the government that they need more funding and more staff. To do that, they will have to arguments and prove that the need exist and without it, people are not safe on the streets or at home as crime is on the wide spread. It is amazing how reports of crimes are low when elections are coming up and high when the budget is up for an allocation for the government sector.
The white collar crimes
The myths about how a criminal should look; and people with day jobs and dress up in suits do not commit crime doesn’t stand. Not all criminals look rugged, sluggish, dirty, and sick. Stereotyping the way criminal look and behave is not possible anymore. As technology is taking over the future, crime is also changing. Crime is no longer being committed just by youth, homeless, drug and alcohol influenced people and immoral people. White collar criminals are becoming more evident these days and they hurt people. Such crimes are committed ‘intelligently’ leaving obvious evidence behind is becoming common. Yet white collar crimes abide by the same principles in criminal law. They are as violent as rape, murder, burglaries, robbing, theft and etc. People lose their jobs; they lose their identities, families break up, they cause emotional and psychological traumas and etc.
The few common white collar crimes we normally hear about are tax evasion, computer and internet fraud, bribery, telemarketing fraud, embezzlement, bankruptcy fraud and insurance claiming fraud. Regulatory agencies cannot prevent white collar crimes and these crimes are normally complicated and have no eyewitnesses. The government has been equipping their law enforcers and employing new personnel with the skills needed in policing and cracking down these white collar crimes. Either way, all the government needs are these resources to apprehend or put a stop to white collar crimes as we could say that ‘there are no smart crimes or intelligent criminals’.
Conclusion
We cannot stop crime myths from surfacing into our everyday lives. But we can choose to believe, not believe, to react or not react to crime myths surrounding us. As much as the government release and holds information from the public on crime justice, they are also trying to curb myths for the public’s sake by setting up research agencies, councils and launch campaigns to get our facts right. As Sir Arthur Conan Doyle once quoted this; ‘Crime is common. Logic is rare.’
In the book titled ‘Myth that causes crime’ Harold E pepinsky and Paul Jesilow mentioned that “Police cannot take care of crime. Crime can be taken care only if we move beyond myth”. This is particularly true if we want to curb the widespread of myth that could affect the social psychology of our community.
References
O’Toole, S., 2005, Crime & justice in Australia : the myths- the facts, Eastwood, N.S.W. : NSW Dept. of Corrective Services.
Hall Williams, J. E., 1969, Crime--myths and reality: four lectures given at an I.S.T.D. autumn weekend conference held at Eastbourne, 8th to 10th November 1968 [by] J. E. Hall Williams [and others], London, Institute for the Study and Treatment of Delinquency.
Rylands, L. G., 1984, Crime, its causes and remedy, New York : Garland Pub.
Howitt, D., 1998, Crime, the media, and the law, Chichester [England] ; New York : Wiley series in the psychology of crime, policing, and law.
Goldsmith, A., Israel, M. and Daly, K., 2006. Crime and Justice : A Guide to Criminology (3rd edition). Sydney: Law Book Company
Gaycar, A. and Grabosky, P., 2002, “Trends in Australian Crime and Criminal Justice”, in A. Graycar and P. Grabosky (eds) The Cambridge Handbook of Australian Criminology. Melbourne: Cambridge University Press, pp 9-13
Kappeler, V., Blumberg, M. and Potter, G., 1993, The Mytholody and Crime and Criminal Justice, Chapter 1, “The Social Construction of Crime Myths”, pp 1-20. Prospect Heights, IL : Waveland Press.
Cowdery, N., 2001, Getting justice wrong : myths, media and crime, Crows Nest, NSW : Allen & Unwin
Senator the Hon Amanda Vanstone, 25-27 February 1998, Paper presented at the conference Partnerships in Crime Prevention, convened jointly by the Australian Institute of Criminology and the National Campaign Against Violence and Crime and held in Hobart.
Posts
