Suchergebnisse

This article assesses Hirschi and Gottfredson claims about patterns and explanations of White‐collar crime. It points out several flaws in their analysis and shows (1) that the UCR offense categories of fraud and forgery are not appropriate indicators of white‐collar or occupational crime because the typical arrestee in these categories committed a nonoccupational crime; (2) that the demographic distribution (age, sex, race) of these "white‐collar" crimes is not the same as it is for most ordinary crimes; and (3) that the occurrence of these "white‐collar" crimes is not relatively rare. The implications of the findings for research and theory on crime are also discussed.

Objective. This study examines Hispanic‐black‐white differences in sentences imposed on offenders appearing in state felony courts.Methods. The present study uses data collected by the State Court Processing Statistics (SCPS) program of the Bureau of Justice Statistics for the years 1990, 1992, 1994, and 1996.Results. Hispanic defendants are sentenced more similarly to black defendants than white defendants. Both black and Hispanic defendants tend to receive harsher sentences than white defendants. Also, ethnicity effects are the largest in the sentencing of drug offenders, whereas race effects are largest in the sentencing of property offenders. Furthermore, the present study demonstrates that the failure to consider defendants' ethnicity in comparing black‐white sentence outcomes is likely to result in findings that misrepresent black‐white differences.Conclusions. The results clearly demonstrate the necessity of considering not only defendants' race (i.e., black‐white differences) in sentencing but expanding our focus to also include defendants' ethnicity (i.e., Hispanic‐white and Hispanic‐black differences).

This study examines Hispanic-black-white differences in sentences imposed on offenders appearing in state felony courts. Methods. The present study uses data collected by the State Court Processing Statistics (SCPS) program of the Bureau of Justice Statistics for the years 1990, 1992, 1994, & 1996. Results. Hispanic defendants are sentenced more similarly to black defendants than white defendants. Both black & Hispanic defendants tend to receive harsher sentences than white defendants. Also, ethnicity effects are the largest in the sentencing of drug offenders, whereas race effects are largest in the sentencing of property offenders. Furthermore, the present study demonstrates that the failure to consider defendants' ethnicity in comparing black-white sentence outcomes is likely to result in findings that misrepresent black-white differences. Conclusions. The results clearly demonstrate the necessity of considering not only defendants' race (ie, black-white differences) in sentencing but expanding our focus to also include defendants' ethnicity (ie, Hispanic-white & Hispanic-black differences). 4 Tables, 40 References. Adapted from the source document.

This study uses data on Pennsylvania sentencing practices to compare the sentence outcomes of white, black, and Hispanic defendants. Besides the overall more lenient treatment of white defendants, our main finding is that Hispanic defendants are the defendant subgroup most at risk to receive the harshest penalty. This pattern is held across all comparisons—i.e., for both the in/out and term‐length decisions and for both drug and nondrug cases. These findings are consistent with the "focal concerns" framework on sentencing and with hypotheses drawn from the writings on prejudice and inter group hostility suggesting that the specific social and historical context facing Hispanic Americans will exacerbate perceptions of their cultural dissimilarity and the "threat" they pose.

Building on prior macrosocial‐crime research that sought to explain either total crime rates or male rates, this study links female offending rates to structural characteristics of U.S. cities. Specifically, we go beyond previous research by: (1) gender disaggregating the Uniform Crime Report (UCR) index‐crime rates (homicide, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny‐theft) across U.S. cities; (2) focusing explicitly on the effects of structural disadvantage variables on the index‐offending rates of females; and (3) comparing the effects of the structural variables on female rates with those for male rates. Alternative measures of structural disadvantage are used to provide more theoretically appropriate indicators, such as gender‐specific poverty and joblessness, and controls are included for age structure and structural variables related to offending.The main finding is consistent and powerful: The structural sources of high levels of female offending resemble closely those influencing male offending, but the effects tend to be stronger on male offending rates.

Criminologists agree that the gender gap in crime is universal: Women are always and everywhere less likely than men to commit criminal acts. The experts disagree, however, on a number of key issues: Is the gender gap stable or variant over time and across space? If there is variance, how may it best be explained? Are the causes of female crime distinct from or similar to those of male crime? Can traditional sociological theories of crime explain female crime and the gender gap in crime? Do gender-neutral or gender-specific theories hold the most explanatory promise? In this chapter we first examine patterns of female offending and the gender gap. Second, we review the "gender equality hypothesis" as well as several recent developments in theorizing about gender differences in crime. Third, we expand on a gendered paradigm for explaining female crime first sketched elsewhere. We conclude with recommendations for future work.

Objective. This study examines the effects of race of judge on sentencing decisions. Do black judges sentence offenders more severely/leniently than white judges, and do they use similar/different criteria in their decision making? Methods. Data are derived from two sources: (1) sentencing outcomes in Pennsylvania from 1991 to 1994 and (2) archival data on judge characteristics, such as race and time on the bench. Logit models were used to assess the effects of judges' race on the in/out or incarcerative decision, and ordinary least squares models were used to assess the effects on the length‐of‐term decision. Results. Results showed that black and white judges weighted case and offender information in similar ways when making punishment decisions, although black judges were more likely to sentence both black and white offenders to prison. Conclusions. The greater harshness of black judges suggests they may behave as "tokens" or that they have greater sensitivity to the costs of crime, in particular, within black communities. Although there were small race‐of‐judge effects, there also was much similarity in sentencing practices—suggesting that the job, not so much the individual, apparently makes the "judge."

Objective. This study examines the effects of race of judge on sentencing decisions. Do black judges sentence offenders more severely/leniently than white judges, & do they use similar/different criteria in their decision making? Methods. Data are derived from two sources: (1) sentencing outcomes in PA, 1991-1994, & (2) archival data on judge characteristics, such as race & time on the bench. Logit models were used to assess the effects of judges' race on the in/out or incarcerative decision, & ordinary least squares models were used to assess the effects on the length-of-term decision. Results. Results showed that black & white judges weighted case & offender information in similar ways when making punishment decisions, although black judges were more likely to sentence both black & white offenders to prison. Conclusions. The greater harshness of black judges suggests they may behave as "tokens" or that they have greater sensitivity to the costs of crime, in particular, within black communities. Although there were small race-of-judge effects, there was much similarity in sentencing practices -- suggesting that the job, more than the individual, apparently makes the "judge.". 2 Tables, 33 References. Adapted from the source document.

Current empirical and theoretical understanding of the relation between age and crime is based almost entirely on data from the United States and a few prototypical Western societies for which age‐specific crime information across offense types is available. By using Western databases, Hirschi and Gottfredson (1983) projected that the age distribution of crime is always and everywhere robustly right‐skewed (i.e., sharp adolescent peak)—a thesis that is both contested and widely accepted in criminology and social science writings. In the study described here, we tested this age–crime invariance thesis by comparing age–crime patterns in Taiwan (a non‐Western Chinese society) with those in the United States. In light of Taiwan's collectivist culture versus the U.S. individualist gestalt, we anticipated more divergence than homogeneity in their age–crime schedules. Our findings show robust divergence in Taiwan's age–crime patterns compared with U.S. patterns and the reverted J‐shaped norm projected by Hirschi and Gottfredson. Implications for research and theory on the age–crime relation and for studying human development or life‐course topics more broadly are discussed.