Search results

AbstractA previously untested proposition from Sykes and Matza's neutralization theory is that certain types of offenders will favor certain types of neutralizing excuses. Murderers, for example. may tend toward denial of responsibility or denial of the victim. A competing hypothesis, derived from Hindelang's challenges to neutralization and drift theories, is that offenders would favor excuses keyed to offenses similar to their own. Robbers, for example, may favor excuses for robbery over excuses for other offenses. regardless of the content of the excuses themselves. The data presented in this article, based on o survey of inmates in four Florida prisons, fail to support either hypothesis. This may suggest that the two perspectives from which the hypotheses are derived are overly simplistic‐that the nature of crime and delinquency is more subtle and complex than indicated by either the subcultural or antisubcultural theoretical traditions.

AbstractFew attempts have previously been made systematically to define or interrelate the concepts of political crime, political criminal, political justice, and political prisoner. To establish a more adequate conceptual base for research, political crime and political criminals are herein defined in terms of motiwtions underlying criminal acts, regardless of the nature of the acts themselves; political justice is defined in terms of the state's reaction to perceived threat; and political prisoners are defined as those incarcerated because of either political crime (politico1 criminals) or political justice (victims of repression). Dimensions for a taxonomy of political crime are suggested.