White collar and corporate crime

Reiman and Leighton

• Argue that the more likely a crime is to be committed by high class people, the less likely it is to be treated as an offence. Also, there is a much higher rate of prosecutions for the typical ‘street crimes’ that poor people commit (such as the burglary and assault). Crimes committed by the higher classes (such as tax evasion) are more likely to get a more forgiving view from the justice system.

Explanations of white collar and corporate crime:

Box- Argues that if a company cannot achieve its goal of maximising profit by legal means, it may employ illegal ones instead.

Differential association

• Sutherland sees crime as behaviour learned from others in a social context. The less we associate with people who hold attitudes favourable to the law and the more we associate with people with criminal attitudes, the more likely we are to become deviant ourselves.

Labelling Theory

• Cicourel argues that typically, the working class are more likely to have their actions labelled as criminal.

• Middle class are more likely to be able to negotiate non-criminal labels for their behaviour.

The invisibility of corporate crime:

The media:

• gives very limited coverage to corporate crimes, thus reinforcing the stereotype that crime is a w/c phenomenon.

• Politicians’ rhetoric of being ‘tough on crime’ only applies to street crimes.

• Crimes are complex= law enforcers are often understaffed, under-resourced and lack technical expertise.

• Under reported- individuals may not realised they have been victimised.

Tombs

Notes that corporate crime has enormous costs:

• physical- death, injuries, illnesses

• Economical- to consumers, workers, taxpayers and governments.

• Environmental- pollution

Evaluation:

• Both Marxism and strain theory seem to over-predict the amount of business crime. Nelken argues that it is unrealistic to assume that all businesses would offend were it not for the risk of punishment: for example, maintaining the goodwill of other companies that they must do business with may also prevent them resorting crime.

• Doesn’t explain crime in non-profit making agencies such as the police, army or civil service. For example, state agencies in the former communist regimes committed crimes against health and safety, the environment and consumers.