Introduction to Crime and Justice (HAS131) – Lecture Notes
What is crime?
There is no single, universally agreed-upon definition of crime among criminologists.
Key definitional approaches:
Legal definitions: crime as acts prohibited, prosecuted, and punishable under criminal law. Only acts in criminal law count as crimes.
Limitation: this is a label, not an explanation, and may miss harms regulated by other laws (regulatory/administrative breaches).
Illustrative cases: civil/regulatory harms such as health and safety breaches that harm communities or workers.
Example: Johnson & Johnson talcum powder cases. In Feb 2016, a Missouri jury awarded to a woman’s family for ovarian cancer allegedly linked to talcum powder; internal memo from 1997 suggested some employees acknowledged risk signals. Despite evidence, research on the link is inconclusive according to some authorities, yet J&J has won some related trials too.
In 2018, J&J was ordered to pay to 22 women who claimed talc products contributed to ovarian cancer. Leading counsel argued J&J had hidden asbestos risks for over 40 years.
Other similar cases: Jakarta airbags, Roundup weed killer, and Teflon (Dark Waters film). Four Corners documentary links provided in slides.
Takeaway: breaches of civil or regulatory law are not necessarily criminal; legal definitions can miss broader harms.
Social construct definitions: crime as a product of culturally bound social interactions; no act is inherently criminal.
Consensus view: crime is recognized when a behavior provokes a widely shared negative response (social morality).
Examples where intent to harm is clear (e.g., taking a life) but the status as a crime can be context-dependent:
War (combat under rules of engagement), self-defence, termination of pregnancy, euthanasia.
This perspective raises questions: whose morality is being reflected (general society, political elites, or powerful groups)? Is there broad or narrow consensus?
Why define crime at all? To set the scope of criminology and determine what is studied and acted upon.
How law varies across time/place:
What is criminal in one jurisdiction or era may not be criminal in another (e.g., Tasmania’s decriminalisation of homosexuality by 1997; marriage equality in Australia in 2017).
Changes in social attitudes often precede or accompany legal reform, sometimes slowly.
Despite criticisms, many criminologists still use the law as a practical framework for classifying crimes (e.g., assault, burglary, theft) because these terms have broad, reliable usage across populations.
Crime as a social construct: implications for criminology
If crime is a social construct, there is no objective act always criminal in itself; criminality is attributed through social judgments and state practices.
The consensus approach helps explain why some acts elicit punishment in some contexts but not in others.
Debates about consensus raise questions: whose morality matters (the public, politicians, or the powerful)? Does this reflect all or only some segments of society?
The concept of consensus is used to frame debates about controversial issues (euthanasia, hate crimes, etc.).
Historical context of crime definitions
Before the 17th century: crime defined by the church as sin/evil; church and state intertwined in defining wrongdoing.
Spiritual explanations involved trials and tests (e.g., witch trials, belief in possession).
Common methods included trials involving torture or tests (e.g., blessed water tests to determine witchcraft).
The penitentiary era (Quakers, 17th–18th centuries): isolation with Bibles and labor; penitence as reform; term “penitentiary” persists in corrections.
Emergence of classical theory (18th century): crime as rational, voluntary behavior; criminals are rational actors who weigh costs and benefits; crime occurs when benefits outweigh costs.
Positivist theory (19th century): crime as abnormal/defective behavior rooted in biology or environment; scientific methods needed to understand and treat offending.
Both strands influence today’s criminal justice system; the field remains unsettled about the causes and meaning of crime.
Classical vs. positivist theories of crime
Classical criminology (18th century):
Humans are rational, free-thinking actors.
Offending is a choice made after weighing costs and benefits.
Policy implications: deterrence, proportionate punishment, and rational systems.
Positivism (19th century):
Crime is not simply a matter of choice; it reflects biological/psychological/environmental abnormalities.
Emphasizes empirical research to understand and treat offending; medicalization of responses to crime.
The modern criminal justice system remains influenced by both traditions, though neither fully explains all crime or offender types.
Beyond the legal definition: Sutherland and white-collar crime
In 1939, Edwin Sutherland argued that crime definitions focused only on interpersonal offenses miss broader harms.
White-collar crime includes wrongdoing by individuals in powerful positions (corporate fraud, embezzlement, concealment of poisons or hazards).
Excluding these harms from legal definitions can obscure greater societal harms and maintain inequality (criminalizing the poor while letting the wealthy/governing elite escape strong accountability).
Example: Karen Sarah Gelon (Credit Suisse) prosecuted for mortgage fraud related to a massive loss; yet such criminal cases against high-level executives were relatively rare given the widespread misconduct in the financial sector prior to the 2008 crisis.
Westpac case (Australia): penalty in 2020 for breaches of money-laundering and terrorism-financing laws; billions in illicit transactions involved, but few executives penalized or jailed.
Response: regulatory reforms such as the Financial Accountability Regime (introduced 2021) to hold key personnel in banking/insurance/superannuation accountable.
Important takeaway: criminal liability is not guaranteed by the existence of a crime; enforcement depends on law, policy, and institutions.
The processes of criminalization and labeling theory
Criminalization power: who gets to label acts as crimes and who gets labeled as criminals is contested and uneven.
Labeling theory (no intrinsic criminality): crime emerges when social judgments label behavior as deviant and the system processes offenders accordingly.
The role of discretion and policy: enforcement depends on context, policing priorities, and administrative directives.
Example (transport fare evasion):
On a train to Sydney with no valid Opal card, whether individuals receive a caution or a penalty can depend on:
Personal factors (age, gender, ethnicity, language, demeanor, appearance).
Policy context (a crackdown on ferry evasion on a given weekend).
This demonstrates how breach of the same rule can lead to different outcomes, i.e., criminalization is influenced by social judgments and institutional choices.
Why the process matters: criminalization affects who is punished, reinforces or challenges social inequities, and shapes perceptions of justice.
Why define crime broadly? Implications for policy, research, and society
Narrow definitions risk excluding harmful behaviors from study and intervention; harms may go unnoticed or unaddressed.
Domestic and family violence gained recognition in criminology during the 1970s due to feminist critiques; bullying gained attention with laws like Brodie’s Law (Victoria, 2011).
Broad definitions raise resource concerns: a vast number of acts may be criminalized, potentially taxing the criminal justice system and public funding.
Risks of over-criminalization: an overly expansive crime category could lead to repression and social control; may make it harder to respond effectively to real problems.
Harm normalization risk: some harmful behaviors may go unchallenged if they are not framed as crimes; e.g., debates around use of certain substances or emerging harms like certain drug use.
Consequences for victims: clearer definitions help victims seek help and recognition; unclear definitions can leave harms unaddressed and victims unheard.
Criminology as a discipline: its aims, scope, and orientations
Multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary: combines perspectives from public health, psychology, sociology, political science, law, and more.
Example: CCTV and mental health; public health lenses on security/public space design; psychological impacts on well-being.
Theoretical and empirical: uses large-scale data (e.g., victimization surveys across countries) and qualitative data (biographical narratives, frontline officer interviews).
Helen Simpson's research examples include:
Surveys of local attitudes toward domestic and family violence in communities like Rila and Lake Illawarra.
Mixed-methods work combining police data on domestic violence walk-ins with interviews of police officers and victims.
Critical orientation: seeks to understand good practices, constraints, and challenges in institutions like prisons and policing, and to think about reforms.
David Garland’s two strands of criminology (as applied in the UK, useful here):
The governmental project: empirical studies on administration of justice, policing, prisons, and crime measurement.
The Lambros (Lombroso) project: early criminology focusing on the characteristics of criminals to understand crime.
In the 20th century, these strands were increasingly integrated.
Changes in criminology: balancing broad vs narrow definitions has resource and policy implications, including potential over- or under-criminalization.
Lombroso and early criminology
Cesare Lombroso (often called the father of criminology) published Criminal Man (1876) and Female Offender (1895).
He treated criminals as biologically/physiologically distinct from non-criminals and linked criminality to primitive traits.
Physiognomy and physical markers: large jaws, large or small ears, wrinkles, rib counts, etc.
Specific attributions: thieves with flat noses and wandering eyes; murderers with beak-like noses and cold, bloodshot eyes; sex offenders with thick lips and protruding ears.
Core claim: being criminal is born, not made; special physical traits mark criminals.
View on women: portrayed as more primitive and morally predisposed to evil (quote: "Women are big Children. Their evil tendencies are more numerous and more varied than men's…").
Modern criminology rejects these ideas as scientifically unfounded; today’s field emphasizes complex social, economic, and structural factors.
Contemporary focus areas in criminology
The subject covers a wide array of questions and issues, including:
Processes of criminalization and labeling: who gets labeled and why; how policy shapes enforcement.
Victimization: understanding who is harmed and how harm occurs.
The meanings of crime: exploring different definitions and their implications for research and policy.
Causes of crime: examining individual, relational, social, economic, and cultural determinants.
Responses to crime: police, courts, corrections, rehabilitation, and reentry; effectiveness and fairness.
Representations of crime in popular culture: media portrayals and their effects on public perception.
Critical thinking: evaluating what criminology studies, what it omits, and what it should pursue.
The subject will cover these themes across weeks, including weekly lectures and tutorials (with pre-recorded content and linked resources).
Summary and key takeaways
Crime definitions are contested: legal definitions are useful but limited; crime as a social construct highlights cultural and moral dimensions.
Law does not equal crime in practice: acts can be harmful but not criminal; laws vary across time and place; enforcement is selective.
Historical perspectives show a move from sin/theology to rational choice (classical) and then to science-based accounts (positivist), shaping modern criminal justice.
White-collar crime and corporate harm show that serious wrongdoing can escape traditional criminal penalties without broader reforms.
Labeling theory emphasizes discretion, power, and social judgments in determining who is criminal; the same act can be treated very differently depending on context and policy.
Expanding the definition of crime has both benefits (better recognition and prevention of harms) and costs (resource demands and potential over-criminalization).
Criminology is inherently multidisciplinary, empirical, and critically oriented, with ongoing debates about its aims and methods.
The field continues to evolve through scholarship, policy changes, and societal debates about justice, equity, and safety.
References to course context and implications for your study
This first compulsory subject introduces core ideas about what criminology studies, how crime is defined, and how power and policy shape crime and punishment.
Expect to encounter discussions of real cases (e.g., talcum powder litigation, corporate fines) as illustrations of legal vs. regulatory frameworks and the politics of accountability.
Prepare to analyze both theoretical perspectives (classical vs. positivist vs. labeling) and practical implications (criminalization, enforcement, and social impact).