CRI 010
LESSON 5: IDENTIFYING THE DIFFERENT
CHARACTERISTICS OF CRIMINAL LAW
The first Code of Kalantiaw, Maragtas Code and Code
of Hammurabi, Theory of Logomacy, felony, offense,
misdemeanor and crime in general. Lastly, the teacher
will also discuss what has been written under the
concept notes, including its exceptions.
Law - It is the rule of conduct, just and made obligatory
by the legitimate authority for the common observance
and benefit. It is symbolically represented by a
blindfolded woman carrying with one hand a sword and
the other a balance.
Criminal Law - It is a branch or division of law which
defines crimes, treats of their nature and provides for
Act No. 3815- The primary source of criminal law in the
Philippines. It is otherwise known as the Revised Penal
Code and it took effect on January 1, 1932. The Code
Committee was chaired by Anacleto Diaz, with its
members, namely: Quintin Paredes, Alex Reyes,
Mariano de Joya and Guillermo Guevara.
(GENERAL)
The law is binding to all persons who live or sojourn in
the Philippines.
Exceptions:
1. Head of the state or country
2. Foreign diplomats
3. Ambassadors who are duly accredited to a country
4. Foreign troops permitted to in arch within a territory
The law is binding to all crimes committed within the
National Territory of the Philippines.
(TERRITORIAL)
Terrestrial- jurisdiction exercised over land Fluvial-over
maritime
Aerial-over the atmosphere and interior waters
EXEPTION:
It can still be applied under the following conditions:
1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship
or airship.
2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note
of the Philippine Islands or obligations and securities
issued by the Government of the Philippine Islands;
3. Should be liable for acts connected with the
introduction into these islands of the obligations and
securities mentioned in the presiding number;
4. While being public officers or employees, should
commit an offense in the exercise of their functions; or
5. Should commit any of the crimes against national
security and the law of nations, defined in Title One of
Book Two of this Code.
PROSPECTIVE
Criminal law cannot make an act punishment in a
manner in which it was not punishable when
committed: it has no retroactive effect.
EXEPTION:
1. When a new statute dealing with the crime
establishes condition more lenient or favorable
to the accused, it can be given a retroactive
effect.
EXEMPTION TO THE EXCEPTION: IF THE ACCUSED IS
HABITIAL DELIQUENT.
LESSON 6: DESCRIBING THE DIFFERENT APPROACHES
IN THE EXPLANATION OF CRIME
MAIN APPROACHES IN THE EXPLANATION OF CRIME:
1. Objective Approach: Criminal behavior is explained in
terms of factors extraneous to the offender which are
social, sociological, cultural and economic.
2. Subjective Approach: Criminal behavior is explained
in terms of factors within criminal, i.e. physical,
biological and mental traits.
DIFFERENT APPROACHES IN THE EXPLANATION OF
CRIME
1. Biological Approach: It proposes that human beings
commit crime because of internal factors over which
they have little or no control.
2. Causal Approach: This is a study of the causal link that
exists between the defendant's action and the plaintiff's
injury. It is observation of facts in relation to
phenomenon of crime interpreting them in relation to
the possible causes of criminal behaviour. A cause may
be necessary or sufficient. If result B invariably follows
cause A without any other factors being required, and
cause A cannot be replaced by any other alternative,
then cause A is both sufficient and necessary cause.
3. Deficient in Probity Approach: The criminals deficient
in probity, says Dr. Maurice Parmellee, commit crimes
against property.
4. Descriptive Approach: It describes the phenomenon
of crime and those who commit it. It covers all aspects
such as personal traits of criminals and the various
forms of criminal behaviour.
5. Organically Inferior human traits Approach: This
study was carried by Eavert A. Hootan and William H.
Sheldon. Hootan stated that criminals are organically
inferior. Hootan had studied 13,873 male criminals and
3023 persons of control group. The study was
conducted in various American States. To Hootan the
criminal is an inadequately developed runty fellow,
while to Sheldon the criminal is husky and athletic type
fellow.
6. Economic Approach: It studies external economic
factors.
7. Endemic Approach: It studies those factors that arise
from local conditions or belong to a particular period of
the year, or the specified area that make a man
criminal.
8. Environmental Approach: It seeks to explain the
phenomenon of criminal behaviour with reference to
factors outside the personality of the delinquent. 9.
Functional Psychosis Approach: As to mental quality an
offender is either normal or abnormal. The
Psychotics are of two types, having psychosis of
organic origin and having psychosis of non-psychosis
origin or functional psychosis.
10. Organic Psychosis Approach: General paralysis of
the Insane (Patients of this abnormality commit
offenses with astonishing openness and silliness);
Traumatic psychosis (Patients of this abnormality
commit crimes of violence):
Encephalitis Lethargic (Patients of this abnormality
commit crimes of explosive and sexual Snature);
Senile Dementia (patients of this abnormality are of old
age and commit varying crimes); Epilepsy (Patients of
such abnormality commit crimes of sudden violence).
Schizophrenia (Patients of this abnormality suffer split-
mindedness.
11. Heredity and Criminal Familles Approach: Studies
were conducted by Arthur Dugdale in the United States
of America on the Jukes (1877) and by Henry Herbert
Goddard on the Kallikaks (1912).
12. Individualistic Approach: It focuses its attention on
the biological, mental and other characteristics of the
offender to explain the cause of his delinquent
behaviour.
13. Physiological Approach: It is an approach to
criminology made by endocrinologists who found that
glandular malfunctioning caused the delinquent
behaviour.
14. Social Approach: Man may live in isolation but
generally he lives in society.
15. Therapeutic Approach: This approach is of recent
origin. It considers the criminal as a victim of
circumstances and a product of various factors within
the criminal and the society.
16. Twin Research Approach: Violent due to
environmental influences as prejudices of honor,
politics and religion, approach.
LESSON 7: COMPARING THE DIFFERENT SCHOOLS OF
THOUGHTS
SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT IN CRIMINOLOGY POSTED BY:
BRIAN NEESS
1. Classical School
The classical school developed during the
Enlightenment in response to excessive and cruel
punishments to crime. Cesare Beccaria argued for more
humanitarian forms of punishment and against physical
punishment and the death penalty. He believed that
punishment should fit the crime and not be excessive.
A primary premise of the classical school was the
fundamental equality of all people, which meant that
every person should be treated equally under the law.
Criminal behavior would be subject to similar
punishment, and people had to know what categories
of conduct were punishable. Punishable conduct would
only be that which encroached on someone else's
freedom in violation of the social contract. No longer
would status be a factor to receiving favorable
treatment or more favorable punishment.
Central to the classical school was the presence of
freewill. All people act within reason; conduct results
from the conscious operation of a person's will after
reflection and choosing among alternatives of action.
People know the difference between right and wrong.
Awareness of right and wrong combined with crime as a
choice played into how the classical school thought of
punishment. Because crimes are chosen through free
will, they should be punished swiftly and proportionally
to the crime. This is the most effective deterrent to
crime.
2. Neo-Classical School
The neo-classicist school emerged, in large part, to
remedy some of the problems created by the classical
school.
According to Taylor, Walton and Young, contradictions
in classicism presented themselves in universal penal
measures and in day-to-day practice. "It was impossible
in practice to ignore the determinants of human action
and proceed as if punishment and incarceration could
be easily measured on some kind of
universal calculus: apart from throwing the working of
the law itself into doubt (e.g. in punishing property
crime by deprivation of property) classicism appeared
to contradict widely-held commonsensical notions of
human behavior.
Classicism concentrated on the criminal act and ignored
individual differences between criminals. Neoclassicism
still held that freewill is important, but that it can be
constrained by physical and environmental factors.
Thus, neo-classicists introduced revisions to account for
problems presented in classicism:
Allowing for mitigating circumstances by looking at the
situation (physical and social environment) in which the
individual had been placed.
Some allowance was given for an offender's past record.
A court needs to take into account an offender's
criminal history and life circumstances when making a
decision about someone's sentence.
Consideration should be given for factors like
incompetence pathology, insanity and impulsive
behavior Also, certain individuals, such as children and
the mentally-ill, are generally less capable of exercising
their reason.
3. Positivist School
The positivist school opposed the classical school's
understanding of crime. All people are different, and
thus vary in their understanding of right and wrong, this
needed to be a barometer for punishment. The person
and not the crime should be punished.
"Positivism saw its role as the systematic elimination of
the free will metaphysics' of the classical school-and its
replacement by a science of society, taking on for itself
the task of the eradication of crime," lan Taylor, Paul
Walton and Jock Young wrote in "The New Criminology:
For a Social Theory of Deviance." This new,
deterministic movement was consolidated by Enrico
Ferri, who championed the approach then being
employed by an Italian military physician, Cesare
Lombroso.
The "positive" method consisted of carefully observing
the characteristics of criminals to gain insight into the
causes of antisocial conduct or behavior. Ferri did not
endorse all of Lombroso's conclusions, such as that
some people are born criminals and that some physical
features, like the shape of a person's head or the
placement of one's cheekbones, can predict criminal
behavior. However, Ferri adopted the inductive method
and set out to create a science that would explain the
causes of crime within society and the individual
offender.

The school started by considering crime a product of

heredity and environment. Instead of criminal
"conduct," criminal "behavior" became the focus.
Environmental factors such as societal conditions and
pressures interact with hereditary factors in a person to
cause that individual to be predisposed to criminal acts.
The deterministic school was more concerned with the
actual or would-be criminal rather than criminal
conduct.

Positivism's focus on the individual may have been the

greatest contribution to criminology and the criminal
justice system. It led to classifications of offenders, such
as habitual criminals, as well as categories between
insanity and sanity. It also led to the use of psychology
in studying offenders, opening the way for different
kinds of sentences and treatments that fit the criminal
and not the crime.