crime and deviance case studies

Moore, atkin and chapman (2000)

police act as filters for society; how response to a crime being reported depends on:

1- seriousness of the crime (in their minds) so will dismiss the ‘frivolous’ crimes. hence why historically ‘it’s just a domestic’ and neglecting of sexual offensnces occurred.

2- social status of the victim as if homeless, poor, POC, less likely to have been given attention (less dead theory).

3- the criminal’s intelligence level, politeness and cooperation levels with the police all either increase or decrease likelihood of arrest.

lombroso

19th century doctor who said that criminality could be detected though physcial characstics which distniniush them from the rest of the population e.g. big ears or large jawbones (more ‘primitive’ humans).

davies (1973)

minor crime allows people to blow off steam in a relatively harmless way to ensure they stay functional members of society avoiding bigger crimes.

• prostitiuies used by fathers in nuclear families to remove deviant tendencys (less dead theory).

clinord (1974)

crime prompts gov change as society’s social order broken- DBS and Sarah’s law.

Durkheim

“because yesterday’s deviance must become today’s morality”

Newborn (2013)

Durkheim is the first to suggest crime is both positive and normal; links crime to society’s values while also suggesting how to improve.

Taylor, Walkward and Young (1973): boundary maintenance

• Marxists

crime is only fuctional for the public punishments, as for society creates suffering only. additionally,