Suchergebnisse

Since its first use in criminal investigations in 1987, DNA profiling has become the new gold standard for investigations and prosecutions. Academics, politicians and law enforcement officials have presented DNA evidence as a scientific hero that is capable of solving crimes and preventing miscarriages of justice. However, in spite of this reputation, few studies have explored the impact of this technology on criminal justice practitioners, or on the process of investigating and processing criminal offences. This dissertation provides a comparative study of the use of DNA profiling in two jurisdictions: New South Wales (NSW) in Australia and the Thames Valley in the United Kingdom (UK). Interviews canvassed the perspectives and experiences of police officers, scene of crime officers (SOCOs), forensic scientists, criminal lawyers, and judicial officers from these areas. These interviews were analysed in conjunction with appeal judgments and police statistics to reveal how DNA evidence has been used in the NSW and Thames Valley. The research presented in this dissertation indicates that DNA profiling is having a number of far-reaching effects on both criminal justice systems and is seen as a reliable forensic tool by criminal justice practitioners. Practitioners routinely use DNA evidence throughout the various stages of the criminal justice process and are actively changing their practices to utilise the technology more effectively. One of the main impacts of the introduction of DNA evidence into criminal investigations has been the need to provide substantial resources and infrastructure for the collection, analysis, and storage of samples. Both jurisdictions encountered a number of problems because they provided insufficient resources to effectively use DNA profiling. This study also offers insight into how criminal justice practitioners perceive the dangers of using DNA evidence and how miscarriages of justice can occur. Finally, through an analysis of the combined experiences of criminal justice ...

Joan Didion famously described the 1960s as ending abruptly on 9 August 1969 when word spread of the murders of seven people including Hollywood actor Sharon Tate. Fifty years on and the 'Manson murders' remain a focal point of interest in American popular culture and media. Netflix's recent true-crime drama Mindhunter (2017–19) and Quentin Tarantino's Once upon a Time in
Hollywood () represent but two popular examples invoking the crimes. What is consistent across most popular renderings of the murders is the representation of the Family, and of their leader Charles Manson especially, as monstrous, warranting investigation. Utilizing both Jeffrey foundational text 'Monster culture (seven theses)' and Natasha Mikles and Joseph Laycock's () 'Five further theses on monster theory and religious studies', this article examines the creation and representation of Charles Manson as a serial killer, a cult leader, but especially as a monster, in the popular culture context.

The public is a powerful political actor when it comes to the question of what is to be done about law and order. Therefore, public attitudes towards punishment are of central importance to criminological inquiry. Research in this area has tended towards national (comparative) accounts of 'punitive attitudes' and, in an effort to explore correlates of punitive attitudes, particular sub-groups have been examined often based on certain demographic characteristics such as, for instance, race, gender and/or age. However, very little research exists exploring urban and rural variations in punitive attitudes. Yet, considering that populations may be widely dispersed from central metropolitan and urban areas to rural, regional and very remote areas, it is reasonable to assume that ecological factors and aspects of cultural geography impact upon punitive attitudes. To comparatively examine punitive attitudes across geographical areas, this study draws on cross-sectional data (2004-2015) derived from the Canadian Elections Study (CES). Specifically, the research employs a multidimensional measurement of punitive attitudes by exploring geographic variations in respondents' attitudes towards: (i) the goals of punishment; (ii) the intensity of penal sanctions; and (iii) specified forms of penal sanctions. The sum of the data is then drawn together to develop an index of punitivity, thereby providing a more holistic understanding of punitive attitudes. The findings indicate that on each measure the rural holds significantly greater punitive attitudes than the urban. The article concludes by considering theoretical explanations for these differences, of which future research should attend, with particular attention to the shared political logic between penal populism and political populism and how this contributes to the urban/rural divide as one of the greatest political fault lines in present day politics.

The public is a powerful political actor when it comes to the question of what is to be done about law and order. Therefore, public attitudes towards punishment are of central importance to criminological inquiry. Research in this area has tended towards national (comparative) accounts of 'punitive attitudes' and, in an effort to explore correlates of punitive attitudes, particular sub-groups have been examined often based on certain demographic characteristics such as, for instance, race, gender and/or age. However, very little research exists exploring urban and rural variations in punitive attitudes. Yet, considering that populations may be widely dispersed from central metropolitan and urban areas to rural, regional and very remote areas, it is reasonable to assume that ecological factors and aspects of cultural geography impact upon punitive attitudes. To comparatively examine punitive attitudes across geographical areas, this study draws on cross-sectional data (2004-2015) derived from the Canadian Elections Study (CES). Specifically, the research employs a multidimensional measurement of punitive attitudes by exploring geographic variations in respondents' attitudes towards: (i) the goals of punishment; (ii) the intensity of penal sanctions; and (iii) specified forms of penal sanctions. The sum of the data is then drawn together to develop an index of punitivity, thereby providing a more holistic understanding of punitive attitudes. The findings indicate that on each measure the rural holds significantly greater punitive attitudes than the urban. The article concludes by considering theoretical explanations for these differences, of which future research should attend, with particular attention to the shared political logic between penal populism and political populism and how this contributes to the urban/rural divide as one of the greatest political fault lines in present day politics.

Public attitudes towards punishment have been a key area of research in criminology. Criminologists are interested in the attitudes of the general public towards the punishment of those who have committed crime. This is especially important information because the public has a powerful political voice when it comes to the determining how we deal with and control crime. Research in this area has tended towards broad national examinations of punitive attitudes and has even looked at differences based on gender, age, class and education.

The key reference guide to rural crime and rural justice, this encyclopedia includes 85 concise and informative entries covering rural crime theories, offences and control. It is divided into five complementary sections: • theories of rural crime; • rural crime studies; • rural criminal justice studies; • rural people and groups; • rural criminological research. With contributions from established and emerging international scholars, this authoritative guide offers state-of-the-art synopses of the key issues in rural crime, criminology, offending and victimisation, and both institutional and informal responses to rural crime