CRIMINOLOGY

INTRODUCTION
Some crimes may be very violent. We may be witnesses or victims, or authors. One day, we
may be confronted tot criminality. If we may fear criminality, but we are quit fascinated by crimes,
murders…
How can we explain that in the same time people are afraid by criminality, and fascinated by?
When people are victim of violent crime, they want a particular solution. But who is
responsible for giving this solution, response? We can say that politicians may be actually responsible
for criminality. They have a particular responsibility because they create the law, and politicians do
decide what behave is a crime, and what behaves are allowed. Where there are human beings, there is
criminality. Because criminality can not disappears, scientists have decided to study why criminality
exist, the reason why certain people commit crimes. These scientists, the criminologists, were created
on the 18th century. Criminologists need the help of other scientists (doctors in psychiatry,…). Many
criminologists, help by psychiatrists, study if criminals don’t suffer of a pity mental disease.
They also try to find what is the best punishment. Prison is not always the best solution. Short period
of prison can be very bad for criminals, especially because they do nothing. In France, a month of
prison is not allowed, but working for community can be a very good answer. Criminologists also
need the help of theoreticians and research.
They had been deeply influence by the theoreticians, because they study in theory the courses
of crime behaviour. During the 19th, theoreticians noticed that the more people go to school, the less
criminals there are. School avoid criminality. So in Great Britain and France, it has been decided to
develop school.
Concerning the research, many theoretical solutions have been proposed by scientists, but the
problem is that their ideas can not be efficient if they aren’t apply. Some proposals have recommanded
treatments in a therapeutic community. These scientists researches contribute to carry on the ideas
previously develop by the theoreticians. The question is: how to deal with theories without researches?
Theoreticians have ideas, but researches find solutions. Criminologists have personal opinions, but
these opinions has to be put aside, because what is important is objectivity, because it is the only way
to deal correctly the criminality, in a useful way. Objectivity contributes to the disclosure of what is
true. The more objective you are, the best you will find.

CHAPTER 1. Theories of crime

Many theories try to explain the theories of crimes. Some theories seems to be outdated. Others are
much more updated. These theories explain why people commit crimes.
SECTION 1. Historical announces
Before the 18th century, crime was seen as the consequence of sin. It meant that the devil was
at the origin of the criminal and deviant behaviours. When people used to adopt bad manners, there are
punished by the devil, not by judge. So the State claimed the right to punish very violently and
sometimes, even cruelly. But from the 16th to the beginning of the 18th, punishment was very violent.
But during the 18th century, a very famous philosophical movement, the Enlightenment, intersperses
of the importance of reason and individualism. They were the ancestors of criminologists. They
contributed to the development of criminology.
§1 The classicist philosophers and the link with criminologists
During the 18th century, philosophers contributed to a better understanding of criminality.
Montesquieu believed in the power of human being and tried to prove that a human being actually
know what is good for him. If somebody decide to decide to commit a crime, this person has decided
to do so. Montesquieu prove that everybody is free to commit or not a crime. So this person had the
choice, so he had to be punished.

A) The traditional classicist criminology

According to the classical school of criminology, human behaviour is actually rational. People
have the ability to choose right or wrong, and when people decide to commit an offence, they decide
too become criminals. So they ready to be punish, even if the punishment is violent or sever. There
were two famous authors:
- Cesare Beccaria: On crimes and punishments → very modern ideas to understand the reasons of
crimes → criminal law was barbaric and permitted abuses and arbitrary practices → the essay was
very human, and revolutionary → it was the first time that an author said that people have rights and
people aren’t bad, they are naturally good → no link between religion and criminality → created a
modern system of law that guaranteed people equal treatment → replace the old and archaic system →
Beccaria develop 2 mains ideas:
- the social contract theory: people progressively created a state through a social contract →
at the same time, people decided to give up their naturals liberties → if people give up to their
liberties, they wanted something in return, they wanted securities, safety → but at that time, only
government can provide securities and safety → the government had to create the MPs → Beccaria
develop the idea of only MP should be creators of laws → He considered that the legislator was the
best body to give safety and security to the population because the necessity of created a legislative
body is because the legislator represent the all society, the population accept to surrender the natural
liberties → judges must punishment those oh broke the term of this contract → Beccaria also develop
the idea of no man could be called guilty before a judge had sentenced him → thanks to the new idea,
a new idea was created → innocent until proving guilty

 Pleasure, pain, and punishment

According to Becaria, punishment should be based on pleasure and pain. Why ? To him, everything
possess pain and pleasure. Our everyday life is composed of theses two elements.
According to Becarria, people are happy with the punishment, according to him people should be
happy to be punished.
Beccaria also developed another element which is the idea of free will. It means that individuals are
free will. This theory has many consequences :
-First : the free will theory means that criminal are capable of rational forced, it means that they can
thinks of the consequences of they actions. If a criminal commits a crime it means that this person has
to be responsible for his own actions. Nobody else can be held responsible for the offence committed
by a criminal. For him theses criminal choose to commit crime and so, if somebody choose to commit
a crime it means that he has done all the advantages and disadvantages of committing a crime. It
means that he will be totally responsible for the act committed. If a criminal commit a crime he must
automatically be punished and the punishment must refer to the personality of the criminal.
Notion of moral calculation is linked to the fact that nobody is obliged to commit a crime. The more a
criminal calculates to commit a crime the more severe the punishment will be.
In order to prevent a criminal from committing a crime, Beccaria developed a suggestion and many
proposals, most of his proposal are still applied today.
There are 6 proposals :
- First : he believe that punishment and penalties should be imposed on guilty according to a scale
determine by the degree of danger. Beccaria also proposed that people should know which penalties
where attached to such criminal acts.
Beccaria thought that it was very important to prevent a criminal from doing any injury to the
community, and so, criminal at the end of the 18 century was composed of two element :
-crime and punishment
-criminal prevention.
For the first time at the end of the ancient century, lawyers and philosopher noticed that criminality
started decreasing.
-Second idea : Beccaria also believed that punishment should be known more severe that deemed
necessary to refrene people from committing crimes. This second idea insist on the fact that all people
are equals.
-Third point : punishment should be prompt, effective, and certain. This was a new idea in the mid
19th century. Most of the time when a criminal belong to upper classes, generally theses criminals
where not sentenced, and if they where the trial was organized sometimes month or years after.
Beccaria thought that a criminal couldn’t be fairly sentenced when the crime was committed month or
years earlier.
In France we had to wait two centuries to applied Beccaria theory. The punishment must be very close
to the wrongful act.
-Fourth point : the rich should be punished in the same way than the poor.
For example : white/coloured crimes or crime committed by politicians. If the crime committed by a
politician was committed by Mr So and So, would this person be punished the same way than the
politician ?
-Fifth point : according to Beccaria, torture to obtain confession should be abolish. Because
sometimes, the person can confess a crime just to stop the torture.
-6th point : capital punishment should be abolish as well. France abolish capital punishment only 40
years ago… whereas Beccaria developed this idea 2 centuries ago.
According to Beccaria people are fully responsible for they action. He talk about a social contract
where every body has to give up part of they freedom because everybody shares the same values
within the same community and so, according to Beccaria it’s worthy because people would be more
protected. He believe that judges job was to punished the people who broke the terms of the contract.
Jeremy Bentham theory :
It’s also a philosopher, he was also an early classical theorist. For Bentham, punishment is efficient to
combat crime. He based his ideas on philosophical theory called utilitarianism (philosophies de
utilitarianism). Just like Beccaria, Bentham believe that people have the ability to choose right from
wrong and good from evil. But why do some people commit crimes ? For him people are basically,
hedonistic which means pleasure.
A person who is hedonistic means that this person is only conducted by pleasure. It means that the
average person always look for pleasure, and avoid pain.
So how can we explained that some people committed crimes ? Crime may be the equivalent of bad
behaviour. According to Bentham if some people look after pain it’s just because they can receive
happiness and pleasure thanks to crime they have committed. It means that crime may lead to pleasure,
crime may lead to happiness. So according to Bentham, if crime lead to happiness and pleasure, it
means that it’s important to help people to have a better life.
Bentham developed two theories :
 The idea of utilitarianism : as far as philosophy is concerned, utilitarianism is a doctrine that
all actions should provide the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. For
Bentham, people calculate actions in accordance with they probability of obtaining pleasure :
Felicitous calculus. It enable to resume the probability that a person would engage in a
particular kind of behaviour. Theses falicitous calculus is mesured thanks to a scale containing
at 10 numbers : 0 to 10.
And so, Bentham calculated the degree of falicitous concerning a criminals. Criminals committed
crimes just because crime may produce felicity. The more hapiness was important, the more severe the
punishment should be just because the crime isn’t necessary.
 Greatest happiness : commiting crime provide hapiness and falicity. In the same way,
punishment should as well provide hapiness and pleasure to the criminal. In what way  ? If a
puishment is faire it means that this punishment will be totaly accepted by the criminal.
According to Bentham this punishment will provide greteast hapines to the criminal and so if
the criminal have been fairly sentenced, it means that theses sentenced would emped the
criminal from commiting a crime.
Ex : Petty theft and the criminal is condamned to 50 years emprisonment. It’s a very severe
punishment. And so as there is no link between these two éléments, the criminal will next time comit a
more severe crime.
So Bentham tried to prove that the sentence has to be as fair as possible. For instance theses notions of
fairness have been applied between the begining of the 19th century in the french criminal law system.
To finish with the classicist, what are Beccaria’s and Betham’s theory consequences ?
Both Beccaria and Bentham, the proper objective of punishment should be to protect society and it’s
laws. The most important aim for Beccaria and Bentham isn’t to protect individuals but the society.
And honest people would be corectly protected if criminals are fairly prosecuted and fairly sentenced.
Beccaria haven’t said but the most important element is to protect society and not criminals.
Three ideas where develloped :
-The first idea is that the punishment inflicted should be just severe enought to reduce any pleasures
that could be rised of the commission of the criminal act.
-The threat of punishment should decourage the majority of people from commiting crimes in the first
place.
-The infliction of a sentence or a punishment would not encourage an offender from commiting
additionnal criminal act or others crimes.
All theses three point have been successivaly applied to our french criminal system. The problem is
that theses three points may not be sufficient enought to refrein people from commiting crimes. And
so, because some criminal carry on commiting crimes we can say that theses three points may lead to
some critics.
-Theses theories ignore that defender can be different from one another.
-There is criminals who calculate they crimes and others that don’t (insane criminals or criminals who
commit crimes just because they are drunk…).
Personality and fact should be taken into account.
B) The neo classicist
They share the same theories as the classicist but they added new elements. We will study two
philosophers of criminologist.
The first one is called David Matza, he is still alive and belong to the 20th century. He developed the
idea that the criminals drifted in and out of criminal behaviour because crimes may give offenders of
criminals. It’s the reason why some honest people will one day become criminals and stopped being
criminals another day.
That’s a very interesting idea because some people sometimes think that there is a sort of fatality due
in being criminal. Because to some people there are criminal which are born to be criminals because
there is family of criminals. Matza disagree with this idea because to him people are linked with
criminality.
According to the neo classicist this idea of free will is very important. Matza also notice that most
offenders found justifications to explain why they have committed offences. He noticed that a certain
number of criminals deny any responsibility for the crimes they have committed.
He created a method to understand why a certain number of delinquent justify theirs actions. There is
5 elements :
The first one refer to what he call the denial of responsibility, in that case, the offenders says that he
was the victims of circumstances and in the same way, the criminal can say that the criminal situation
was out of control and so he committed the crime.
The 2nd element is called denial of injury. In that case the offender insist on the fact that the crime
didn’t cause any damage, any harm, even if the victim was actually injured.
There is a 3rd categories which is called « denial of the victim ». In such a situation, a criminal
considers that the victim deserve what happened to him. In the case of denials it means that if the
victim was injured, it was due to the victim fault, which means that the victim is partly responsible for
the crime he suffered from.
4th element : The condemners, it means that for the offenders, when there are condemned or
sentenced, by people who actually don’t know exactly what crime is. When criminals are sentenced
they are sentenced by judges. But there are sentenced by people who have never committed crimes sot
they don’t know what crime is because they have never formally committed crimes.
So it would mean that criminal could only be prosecuted by formal criminals.
The last element is what he called appeal to hire loyalties. In that case offenders consider that they act
where actually done for a good purpose.
A criminal can commit a crime just for the protection of a friend or just for the protection of goods.
Criminal generally denies what they have. According to Matza because of they denials he consider
that the vast majority of criminals are cowards.
The links between Matza and the classicist are clear. Just like Beccaria and Bentham, offenders make
the choose to commit offences. Of course, offenders have the choose not to do so. And if they do so,
they have to assume they deeds, and that’s the reason why Matza try to prove that each time a criminal
commit a crime, he has to be rather severely punished because the criminal has the possibility not to
commit a crime.
Travis HIRSCHI : he is an American who lived in the 20th century. He had an enormous effect in the
field of criminology. Is influence was in the subject of what he called controlled theory. Within this
controlled theory he developed the idea of what he called social bounds and delinquency.
Delinquency arrives when social bounds are weak or absent. Why people are motivated to
commit crimes ? Why do people break the law ?
Hirschi tried to respond to theses question, he will try to identify the nature of social control in order to
determine when crime occurs. Hirschi called this social control « social bounds ». He also developed
the idea that criminality can be explained by the absence of social bounds.
What are exactly social attachment ? It means that people are linked to another category of people.
Childrens are linked naturally to they peers. It means that there is a social attachment between
children's and theirs parents.
When people accepts social norms, it means that criminality as well won’t raise. The acceptance of
social norms means that it reflex reality. If people recognise the moral validity of law, in that case
there will be less crime as well. He notice that a certain number of people refuse to behave correctly,
so he studied why people refuse to behave correctly. He notice that in a certain number of cases,
people earn much more money by being bad than by being respectful of the law.
Why a vast majority of the population do not commit crimes at all ? He tried to prove that everyone
would like to commit crime but if it’s not the case it’s because something stop us from committing
crimes. He is under the influence of classicist theory.
He developed four theories of why people choose not to commit crimes :
→ First theory is called attachment : describes the strength of the bonds and relationships that exist with an
individual’s social environment. The relationship with parents is particularly important, but other institutions and
actors such as school or friends also play a role. The attachment to the circle of friends can also prevent deviance, but
only as long as the circle of friends does not represent deviant norms.

→ The 2nd theory : there is commitment : describes the level of dedication invested in conventional standards
and goals. Hirschi assumes that someone who has already invested resources, time and energy in achieving compliant
goals has more to lose through deviant behaviour than someone who has invested little devotion in pursuing socially
accepted goals. For example, a student who has invested a lot of time to achieve good grades has more to lose through
expulsion than a lazy student who has less importance for grades.

→ The third theory is called involvement : Hirschi means that someone who is intensively involved in
conventional activities has less time and opportunity to engage in deviant behavior. Structured, socially accepted
activities such as school, work or raising children also strengthen the self-discipline needed to resist the impulses of
deviant behaviour.

→ Fourth theory : theory of belief : Hirschi sees belief as the fourth factor in social bonding. This refers to the
belief in and validity of the values and norms of the mainstream society. The more these values and norms have been
internalized, the more difficult it becomes to violate them. When the meaning of norms is questioned, the intrinsic
motivation to obey them also decreases.

The definition of crime may change. Crimes are define as act of fraud undertaken in pursuit of self
interest. And so, he proved that all crimes can actually be explained as the combination of criminal
opportunity and self control.
According to him self control may partly explain why people choose to commit crime. The child's
level of self controlled is heavenly influence by educational practices.
Self controlled depends on the influence parents may have on they children. And so, he argued that
generally self controlled stabilize around the age of 8. He identify parenting as the most decisive factor
in determining the lifelyhood that a person would commit crimes.
Hirschi prove that children will be more likely to commit criminal acts, and in the same time he gave
another example and said that educated children will be more likely to behave correctly. Hirschi
proved that theses children's suffer from situations of neglect, negligence or abuses and will probably
become criminals. He proved that socialisation within the family circle is really a big importance.
What’s socialization ? It has occurs within a person family, it’s the eternal ability to resist the
temptation to commit crimes.
For some people low self control tends to develop : insensitivity, violence, and non verbal attitudes.
Self control is very important because self control is actually develop in childhood, so it’s very
important to parents and relatives to be aware.
Nevertheless, even if theses theories contributed to a better understanding of criminality, Hirschi
theories were criticize of being Floyd. His theories contained a certain number of critics.
According to criminologist, Hirchis didn’t explain what types of crimes peoples would commit if they
would linked by social convention. The problem is that a certain number of criminologist said that the
fact that a person is not socially integrated they commit just a number of particular crimes who
concern most of the tome : manslaughter, murders…
The second criticism concern the fact that Hirschi said that people automatically commit crime if they
aren't impeded from doing so. He considers that a certain number of people can not commit crime.
There is a sort of determinism.
In the same way, this theory insisted on individual responsibility of crimes. The last element is that
punishment should always be adequate as well as the criminal prosecution.
§2 Biological positivist criminology
During the 19th century, especially with the development of various scientific disciplines, a tension
was drawn away from rationalism and punishment. All the courses where also investigated and it was
pointed out that hereditary psychologise and social factors as well could explain the roots of crimes.
They are news factors, new elements.
The world especially western world, began to change radically. Theses changes also contributed to
change the image of criminality.
Society and social changes could be stated differently, objectively and scientifically. The first
sociologist was a French one, he is called Auguste COMTE.
Auguste COMTE developed the theory that much of our behaviour is actually a function of external,
social forces which are beyond individual control. But at the same time he also consider that internal
forces for instance like mental or biological abilities may also have a very strong influence on crime
commitment.
Sociologist tried to prove that individuals was made by internal and external factors that contributed to
crime commitment.
He also develop the idea that criminals are deeply influence by social, biological and cultural causes
rather by they self control.
Three Italians created a new theory which was Positivist criminology, this positivist criminology has
been renamed Italian school of criminology.

Cesare LOMBROSO is one of the three members of the Italian school of criminology. He
focused on internal biological factors. During the 19th century many medical research were
made. All this studies had close link with criminology because thanks to theses news medical
studies, doctors will help criminologist to explain the roots of crimes.
And so, Lombroso studied both in the same time medicine and psychiatry. And progressively,
Lombroso became professor of criminal anthropology. He wrote a very famous book called « The
criminal mind ». He explained criminal behaviour on the basis of biological characteristic and on the
same time on heredity. Lombroso used various psychological and cranial measurements of particular
criminals and he developed a theory that certain persons to engage in crime are actually born
criminals. In the same way during the 19th century it’s the beginning of the development of
photography.
Lombroso took photos of criminals, he noticed a certain number of elements. Generally a criminal had
a particular physical aspect and non criminals had other physical aspects. Theses physical aspect
where actually called by Lombroso « physical features ».
Lombroso noticed that generally criminals had long lower jewels, flattened noses, and long arms. He
said that generally criminals are ugly individuals. Theses biological features, was seen as at risk and
according to Lombroso they were consider as being throw back on a scale on human evolution.
Lombroso also thought that criminals had many physical anomalies.
He wrote a book “crime discuses and relatives” at the end of the 19 th century. What about the studies
and result. He reported that economic and political development rise to a certain number of
abnormalities. He thought he was convinced by the fact that environmental factors and economical,
political factors may lead to the committing of crimes. The fact that theses external factors may lead to
criminality were actually reinforced by the fact that many criminal are used to suffer from physical
problems.
He added another element, he made a link between heredity and environment. These heredity caused
an effect on criminality.
During the 19th century there is the beginning of a particular research concerning medicine, heredity…
Lombroso was convinced by the fact that theses research could have been the reason why a criminal
commit crimes. He studied various communities and he noticed that within a particular family
community many members used to be criminals.
Nowadays everybody is convinced by the fact that heredity can not be linked to criminality because if
criminality was linked with heredity, it would mean that there is particular genes in peoples body
which could lead to criminality. Of course we know nowadays it’s impossible.
What is true according to Lombroso theory is that there is external element which may lead to crimes.

Enrico FERRI was an Italian positivist and neuro-psychopathic, he developed what he called a
scientific classification of criminals. It’s the first time that a criminologist detailed in a
particular classification the various types of criminals. And so theses classifications actually
focused on the various causes of crimes.
Within theses classification, Enrico FERRI describes various sorts of criminals. There were fives
classifications.
→ The first classification was composed of what he called the “bold or instinctive criminal” :
theses sorts of delinquent shows a propensity to crimes. A criminal can not do nothing but committing
crimes. His job is being a professional of crimes. Enrico FERRI was convinced that a certain number
of individuals could do nothing but committing crimes.
→ There is also a second classification called the “insane criminal”: infected by a mental illness.
This mental disease contributes to the committing of crime. A certain number of criminals committing
particular offences suffers from particular mental diseases.
→ The third category is composed of the “passional criminal”. Theses criminals commits crime
with passion. The criminal is in a prolonged or chronic mental state or it may also mean that the
criminal may have an explosive or unexpected behaviour.
→ The fourth classification is composed of what he called “the occasional crime”. Generally,
offenders are occasional criminals. It means that they commits crimes only from time to time or even
once in they lives. How can we explain that from time to time offenders commit crimes? Enrico
FERRI thinks that this particular type of crime is due to the product of family and social environment.
Some young offenders may commit crimes once or twice just because they have met the wrong person
at the wrong place. He also proved that the older people are, the less crimes they will commits.
→ The fifth classification is called the “habitual criminal”: it means that at the beginning the
offender was just committing crimes from times to times. Theses occasional offenders tends to
become an habitual criminal who adopts new habits which enables him to earn quite easily a lot of
money.
Generraly the habitual criminality is due to a lack of education, it’s also due to poverty and from time
to time it may also due to bad fellowship.
Thanks to theses five classifications it’s quite easy to describe the roots of crime. But of course all
criminals can not fit into theses five classifications but what is interesting with theses fives
classification it’s that they contributes to find the outlines of criminals.
Latter Enrico FERRI detailed it’s scientific research. He define much more precisely the various
courses of crime.
He depicted three new categories :
→ The first category refers to physical features. Concerning physical features it refers to the
criminals body in that way Enrico FERRI continued developing Lombroso theory concerning the born
criminal. This does not only refer of sort of body description. When Enrico FERRI refers to physical
elements he also refers to geographic occasion.
→ The second category is the anthropological condition : it argued to a certain number of factors
such as the age, body condition, illness, decease, act of something or sex as well.
In France they are only three genes which are dedicated to female criminals. Why are the vast majority
men ? Is it due to the fact that being a criminal is related to strength ? It’s quite odd that there is no that
much female criminals in society. Or is it because women are much more intelligent that men ? Is it a
question of clearness ? The problem is that we don’t know of what exactly the criminals head is
composed of.
→ The third classification is composed of the social conditions. In this category Enrico FERRI
suggest that the density of population may partly explain the roots of crime. He also added that some
religious practices may also lead to criminality and to crime. The richest of a person also can play a
role, indeed a rich person don’t know frustration.
FERRI contributed to developed the field of criminal sociology. He tried to explain that criminology
was closely link to social matters. For many years he was confided as the main representative, the
main body of the positivist school of criminology.

Raffaele GAROFALO was the third man being influenced by Auguste COMTE theories. He
went to the United States and wrote a famous book called Criminology, this word wasn’t used
until that time. He rejected the doctrine of free will. He believed that actually people didn’t
have the choice : committing or not committing the crimes. He was convinced by the fact that
crimes and especially criminal behaviours could only be explained and understood by using
scientific methods.
For the first time he was the first person to develop a scientific definition of crime. Thanks to that,
crime could be depicted in a universal way.
There was a common language concerning the description of crime.
A scientific theory contributed to a better identify of the roots of crimes. GAROFALO also made a
certain number of states concerning mental illness. He was interested in mental deceases and illness.
Thanks to his medical research he was the first one to describe the concept of a psychic and morrow
anomalies.
Previously there had psychiatric studies concerning criminal mental illness but it was the first time that
his theories developed in a rather deep way the links between deceases in the brain and criminality. He
tried to prove that particular mental illness and deceases lead to particular times of criminality. And so
he observe a certain number of criminals. And among theses criminals he observed those who suffered
from mental diseases, he observed that true criminals where up normal and he also observed that all of
them suffered from a lack a sensibility. It means that theses criminals have no feelings for victims.
Theses criminals don’t realise that theses victims could actually suffer from the criminality.
It’s only at the end of the 19th century that the notion of victim is stated by criminologist. Under the
19th century when a crime is committed the society looks for the criminal punishment.
According to Garofalo, offenders commits crimes, he proved that a certain number of external causes,
such as judicial prejudices, bad behaviour and even alcoholism have roots the crimes. At the same
time he was also convinced that internal elements could also explain offenders attitude.
According to him there were also a certain number of inheritance factors. A murderer is mainly a
man in whom altruism is most of the time lacked. Generally altruism and pity and as well probity is
most of the time absent. So, because this type of person suffer from a lack of feeling, Garofalo as
notice that these person generally kills soon as the occasion arises.
The violent criminal may commit crimes of passion. Generally his violent behaviour hasn’t been
previously organise. In the same time, violent criminals generally commit crimes because they have
alcoholism problem.
The third categories is composed of theft, they are also characterize by a lack of probity. Generally
there are characterize by the lure of profit. It can explain why they act, it’s a question of profit.

The last categories is composed of the lascivious criminal. The problem with this kind of offenders is
that they also suffer from a very low level of moral feelings.
Garofalo proposed social defence solution, ando so he suggested that as criminal demonstrate they
incapacity, impossibility and they lack of adaptation to they social environment, they have to be
eliminated from the social circle.
According to Garofalo, either the criminal is adapting of society and the society is capable of forgive
the criminal.
But if the criminal is incapable of adapted, he is unable of being adapted to the social environment and
in that case society can eliminate him.
Garofalo proposed many source of elimination,
-The first one was death for all those who are incapable of adaptation.
-The second was partial elimination.
-Transportation (banissement) was also a very good solution.
The criminals who suffered from a lack of sentiment, altruit feelings, in that case, very severe
reperaion could contribute to empeded a certain number of criminals from committing new crimes.
This type of enforce reparation may be describe in various ways.
According to Garofalo, society should never forget crimes committed by criminals. He consider that
the victim should always receive damages.
His main theory is that the criminal is totally responsible and the criminal may always pay for his
criminal actions, his criminal deeds, and for the victims. So : he has to pay his debts twice : once for
the society and once for the victim.
§3 : Modern theories
They combine elements from the classical theory and elements for the positivist theory. These modern
theories can be classified in three categories.
→ Rational choice theory : According to this theory society can achieve a very high crime prevention.
This rational choice theory, and they had a new element which is the fact that society should had
criminals not to commit crimes but criminals should be help in the way of good behaviour. And so the
way that is actually found is quite new. Criminal on they way of honesty, should be impeded from
commit crimes. In what way, in the way that solution may be found to imped criminals from doing
crimes.
There is many proposition :
-good quality locks
-alarms system installed in houses
-redesign tower blocks and housing estates because it has been observed that when people leave they
house there is more criminality. High towers have a lot a population, this concentration of population
most of the time lead to criminality. The more the population is concentrated in a small area, the most
crimes are committed.
-They propose to change the criminal routines of offenders. What does that means ? It means that
criminals should be followed by police officers. This measure should be effective in order to prevent
criminals from committing crimes. A certain number of criminals are obliged to stay at home in order
to impeded them from being free.
→ The deterrence theory : It’s a theory which is held to prevent any criminal act before it occurs. The
main idea is to prevent a criminal from committing crime before he decides to commit it. The threat of
punishment and sanction should impeach individuals from committing crimes.
In that case, people have chosen to become criminal and commit crime. But the deterrence theory
considers that if people are dissuaded from committing certain crime they won’t commit any crime at
all. Nowadays we tends to observed that this theory could have been very interesting.
Punishment nowadays is not that much feared. Young offenders won’t be send to prison because they
have notice that it’s more and more difficult to be prison sentenced. It’s more and more something
unusual.
The deterrence theory is now updated.
Punishment must be certain, swift and severe.
The severity of the punishment must be sufficient enough to artway any remorts that the criminal may
obtain from the criminal act. The consequence of the crime is that if a criminal steal money, jewels,
cars… all theses elements are confiscated so it means that the criminal can not sell the product of a
crime and if he does so the money will be confiscated.
There is very little chance for a criminal of being arrested for committing petty crime. Even if, the
criminal may believe that if he is arrested he can be punished to a severe sentence but actually most of
the time he will probably receive a rather little punishment. This is mainly due to the fact that it’s
difficult to sent a criminal to prison. And so, there is also another element. More and more crime are
committed in a very short time in two of three countries. More and more criminal are aware that
international criminality is good for them and easier for them not to be arrested because the rules are
different from one state and another.
The presence of police, in a particular community may contribute to recuse the prime rates but only for
very short time. The presence of police forces in some community may help.
The problem is that in particular suburbs there is not police stage any longer. A certain number of
maires consider that the fact that there is no police station any longer may contribute to an increasing
rate of criminality. But the link hasn’t been proved.
→ The economical theory : At first lance there is a link between the economical theory and the
classical theory. Why ? The economic modern of crime is based on the sanction that a criminal or an
individual has the choice. If a person commit a crime, this person has to support all the consequences.
The economic model assume that if a person choose to commit a crime, this person must be deprive of
the consequences of this crime.
The criminal should be punished either by a fine or confiscation. The economical theory wants to
develop theses to king of punishment.
Why fine ? If a criminal is fine it means that the criminal will have to use the product of crime to pay
the fine.
This theory can be applied only after the committing of crime. So another theory is applied before a
particular person decides to commit a crime. What is it ? In that case it’s not all criminals but some
criminals will calculate the opportunity of earning illegitimate money. And so, at the same time, this
person hasn’t yet committing crime. All crime concerning money should be more severely punished
that all other ordinary crimes.
Each time a person suffer from a loss from economic profit. A person is more interesting in the
economic outcome of being sentence. In what way can we say that ? For instance, a criminal commits
a lot of crimes but the punishment is least severe than the gravity of the crime he has committed. The
product of the stealing. In that case it’s mean that according to the judge he has to find the fair
sentence in order to impeded the criminal from having all sorts of benefit from the crime.
→ If the benefit of the crime is 10 the sentence should also be ten. Creation of the punishment of
confiscation : has first been applied in great Britain.
When the product of the crime has been hidden, the judge may said that the equivalent of the product
of the crime may be confiscated. It means that if the criminal is the owner of the flat, it will be
confiscated.
This notion is very important as far as the punishment is concerned. The aim for the prosecution
service is that the criminal has not benefit at all for the crime he has committed.
-The economic theory doesn’t explain crime in terms of money : the economic theory also develops
the idea that committing crimes may also give psychologics benefit. It’s important for judges to put an
end to theses psychologics benefits. In that case it can be imprisonment.
The average prisoner suffers from being sentence to prison. It’s the more severe punishment for
criminal.
The classical theory minimise pain and maximise pleasure. Another economic theory has merge from
classical theory : what about this other economic theory idea ? This idea is that criminal aren’t
impracticable and impulsive. Just because generally theses criminals balance the cost as well as the
benefit from committing a crime.
And so, this theory is called the routine activities theory. Because a certain number of academics has
noticed that criminality occurs in a particular place and under specific conditions. Theses academics
developed the idea that even if criminal are sure that they will have economic benefit theses crimes do
not be committed if a certain number of factors aren’t applied. They proved that close from economic
benefit the criminal needs are the factors. And if theses elements don’t exist the crime won’t be
committed.
Theses factors are:
→ The question of self motivation : it means that if criminals are absolutely convinced they will
achieve the criminal target. Many individuals are motivated to break laws, it’s part of them, it’s a
question of personal interest or because they are deeply influence by they family members. They also
commit crimes because of particular target.
→ The criminal needs a suitable victim or a suitable target.
→ The second element is that the criminal will choose a specific occasion to commit crimes. It
means that most of the time when a crime is committed, this spot isn’t choose random.
→ And, third element is that there is a lack of guardian who can prevent the crime from happening.
And so what about this guardian ? It may be a member of the family who prevent the criminal from
committing a crime. It’s a problem with minors, because most of them are outside on they own. There
is a provision in the French criminal code, in France, parents can be prosecuted if they leave they
children under the age of 18 alone outside the house.
 SECTION 2 : Contemporary analyse
§1 : Sociological and psychological explanation
A) Psychological explanation
The crime committed by an offenders generally reveals it’s personality. Academics have proved that a
particular crime may be committed by a criminal in consideration of it’s personality.
According to psychologist the definition is that personality may be define in the way has it is the
organisation of attitude. Personality is also link to habits, to beliefs and to behaviour as well. And so
this is a sort of melting pot of all that.
Thanks of theses social interaction a particular person will develop it’s proper personality. It means
that personality depend of our relations with others. According to psychologist a personality is deeply
influenced. Theses persons contribute to shape our personality and so it means in that case that people
who are at the beginning honest, because of they social interactions with other person they may be
influenced to commit crimes. It means that personality isn’t only shape by the person but also shape by
others. And so it means that society should sometimes take care of other person.
Personality is developed in the birth. Social learning is very important. Incouscious though may also
lead to crime.
Freud : links with mental illness. He was a doctor, and he was at the same time a scientist who made a
certain number of medical experiences on psychiatry and psychology. He was very interested between
the relation between parents and children because he was convinced that theses family relations
between parents and children may lead to up moral situation. For him there is some very bad attitude
between parents and children's and theses very bad relations may lead for instance parents to commit
crimes. He proved that parents may be responsible for that children’s attitude because if parents adopt
bad behaviours they children as well would adopt the same bad behaviours.
--------
People who suffer from mental diseases may commit crimes. The won't be held responsible for the
crimes they have committed.
At the same time this criminal is aware that they have adopted a criminal behaviour. This difference
doesn’t explain why some people actually commit crimes.
And so Fraud carried on this scientific explanation and he notice that criminality is the result of
oppressive society. And it is this particular oppressive society witch lead him to commit crimes.
Why ? It means that the person who suffers from leaving in an oppressive society want to get ride of,
for a certain number of people the only way of escaping this oppressive society is to commit crime
because in that case people are convict that they are free.
He tried to prove that for every body there is natural (soif) for liberty. Naturally normal people are
free. It’s not political freedom. When Fraud is referring from a lack of freedom it’s just because there
aren’t mentally free. From a psychiatric point of view, criminals are sick individuals. There are two
main categories of sick individuals.
→ The neurotics : there are the less serious mentally ill and the other categories is composed of the
psychotics who are actually much more seriously ill.
→ And generally, the psychotics commits very severe and dangerous crimes.
Freud : he notice that the development of personality was the result of personal experience as well as
social experience. He focused on the early childhood experience and he noticed that during childhood
experiences a child is very often in conflict with his family and the child is also very often in conflict
with society.
When a child is growing up, he progressively learn words. Thanks to theses words he will be able to
talk to his parents and say what he does want or doesn’t want.
He observed that the personality is divided in 3 parts who have always been in conflict from one
another:
-”It”: This is the drive pole of the personality, the most chaotic and dark part. It is entirely the domain
of the instinctive, the biological which knows no rules of time or space, nor prohibitions. Totally
unconscious, it is governed and directed by the sole principle of pleasure. As a result, the most
contradictory things can exist and coexist there.
Two aspects characterize it :
-hereditary (sexuality and aggressiveness specific to the species).
-and acquired (forms that this aggressiveness and this sexuality will take for the individual).
The infant has a mental and somatic life very close to the instinctual, that is to say governed almost
exclusively by archaic needs. His psychic life is dominated bu the pleasure principle which governs
the functioning of the id, and is therefore subject to the principle of omnipotence and the desire for
immediate and unlimited satisfaction. Of the world that surrounds him and dominates him, there is
only what he needs. Everything he believes and feels exists, because he does not allow for the real and
the imaginary.
-”Ego”: The Ego start developing in children when the child begins to realise that he may be separate
from other people. Only at that time the ego stop developing. As soon as a child go to school, it’s as
this time that he is aware is his separated from his parents and others individuals. It means that as soon
as a child is separated from his very close community then he is conscious and that one day he will
have to leave on his own. At this stage the child is aware that life may be difficult. At the stage of the
ego the child start to be aware that the reality may be different from what is dreaming on.
-”SuperEgo”: The last stage is composed of the Super Ego, it similar to a sort of social conscious, and
so, when somebody has this social conscious it mean it will have to cop with restriction and he will
have to cop with morality. And so it is at this stage of the super ego wich actually may occurs at
different moment.
It actually depends on what he had during the it and during the ego. Because the it, the Ego and the
Super Ego aren’t develops at the same time for all people and for all children.
According to Freud as soon as we are born we are it. They don’t want to be frustrated because being
frustrated means they cannot afford such thing.
External parental authority : a child have to wait some time before having the SuperEgo, as soon as a
child leaves with a SuperEgo he will have conflict with person having authority upon him. It generally
concern the parents. It’s not only a question of parents it can also be a question of teachers, who also
have authorities upon children, and so at this stage, we can’t understand that it’s normal to have
conflict with parents and to have conflict with children. Confits with parents and teachers contribute to
shape one child personality. Fraud observed that children who never face any conflicts at all are
generally children who will become criminals.
It means that in the case where the child waits? Instead of the parents it means in that case according
to Freud that a child will always be stronger than his parents and progressively the parents will loose
they family territories. Step by step the child conquers the family territories with authority. The
parents will progressively become strangers to the child.
So it’s important to notice that conflict are important. Importance of attempting school because thanks
to schools people learn how to have good behaviour.