Theories and Crime Causation

Chapter I
Introduction: Crime its Concepts

Crime in its legal sense are defined as acts or omissions. forbidden by law that can be punished by
imprisonment and/ or fine. While in its behavioral definition of crime focuses on criminality, a certain personality
profile that causes the most alarming sorts of crimes. The explanation why crime was committed or the causes of
crime is not an easy thing to do because there are so many factors and circumstances to consider thus making it
complex. This statement is supported by SCCJR emphasizing that "There is no one 'cause of crime. Crime is a highly
complex phenomenon that changes across cultures and across time." Crime does not evolve from any single source
and there are several reasons behind a person's criminal behaviour (Pratap, 2016). Scholars pointed out their own
views on the causes of crimes and it has been observed that there are agreements and disagreements which would
give an idea of confusion to everyone. Many theories have common traits, but differences among them still exist.
Understanding these differences is key to understanding the often contradictory views of crime and deviance they
purport to explain (Akers, Sellers, See and Kieser, 2013).
New generations of criminology scholars brought new insights based on what they observed in their society
and the outcomes of crime commission. The pioneers in the field of sciences and criminology established the
foundation and served as a basis of having further studies on crime causation. Their contributions had been
appreciated and had shown relevance in the modern society more specifically in dealing with crimes.
Theory: Its Concepts and Relevance
According to Okada (2015), Theory is a series of statements that seek to understand and explain a particular
phenomenon. Theoretical explanations are very significant in providing a clear and wider understanding of criminal
behaviour. It also provide a framework in coming up with new policies in response with crimes like the development
of political and social policies and treatment programs for dealing with criminals and their victims.
In criminological perspectives, theories help us to understand the workings of the criminal justice system and
the actors in the system. It suggests the way things are, not the way things ought to be. They are not inherently good
or bad; however, they can be used for good or bad purposes. It also explains crime in its macro or micro level
(Akers, Sellers, See and Kieser, 2013).
Crime as a Problem
Crime is an aspect of life that all citizens must deal with as it seems to have been around as long as
civilization itself. According to Escareno, crime overpowered communities for centuries and becomes more
prevalent in poor inner-city neighborhoods than those who are rich which is also in agreement with the report of the
Secretary General on the state of crime and criminal justice in 2015 because people living in low-income countries
suffer the biggest threats to their security and well-being.
Crime has high and diverse costs. The direct physical, material, mental, and emotional injury suffered by
victims of crime is deplorable. Perhaps even more tragic, however, is the indirect damage to society. Attempts to
control crime through the criminal justice system increasingly intrude in our private lives. Personal freedoms are
threatened as we repeatedly choose between public order and individual rights. Moreover, crime amplifies mistrust,
feeds prejudice, and generally degrades social cohesion (Vila, 1994). People become more fearful, often imprisoning
themselves in their own homes. Guns are kept within reach, a knock on the door evokes terror, a stranger in need of
assistance is ignored.
As regards to the international crime trend it has shown stability or a slight decrease in violent crime like
homicide, robbery and rape however the killing of women by intimate partners is becomes prevalent. UNODC
estimates that 43,600 women were killed by their intimate partner or a family member in 2012, which is 47 per cent
of all women killed that year. There was a significant increase on homicide rates in Central America and Carribean
after 2007 but it declines after 2011.
Developing countries experienced the most serious crime problems (Natarajan, 2016). However based on
official statistics or victim surveys, crime rates in most developed countries have been falling for many years (Farrell
et al. 2011; Elonheimo 2014), but there is limited evidence that developing countries have enjoyed these same
benefits. Many developing countries are plagued not just by ordinary volume crimes, but also by culturally-
sanctioned violence against women and gays and serious forms of transnational crime such as sex trafficking, drug
trafficking, murderous incursions by militias, and theft of natural resources including valuable minerals, endangered
animals, fish stocks and timber. Most of the serious crime problems of the world are now to be found in developing
countries, but these problems have received only scant attention from criminologists and crime scientists, who
mostly work in developed/Westernized nations. Crime scientists have a special role to play in studying these crimes
because their work is oriented to solutions and it is this kind of practical help that the developing world most needs.
In the Philippine setting, based on the 2017 Crime & Safety Report, crime remains a significant concern in
urban areas throughout the Philippines. The most common crimes reported are theft, physical assault, and robbery in
2016 based on police records. Other common criminal acts include pickpocketing, confidence schemes, and credit
card fraud. Date-rape drug use has also been reported. Carjacking, robberies, and violent assaults also occur
occasionally. There was a decline on robberies by taxi drivers in 2016 and individuals using stolen taxi cabs also
decreases from 2015. Drug related crimes became prevalent up to present.
Crime is present in various forms in the Philippines, and remains a serious issue throughout the country
Illegal drug trade, human trafficking, murder, corruption and domestic violence remain significant concerns. The
Philippines has a high rate of murder cases, which is the highest in Southeast Asia as of 2014. Security problems are
not new to the Philippines - kidnappings and bombings have plagued the south of the country for decades. Few
crimes hit closer to home than those in malls, the place where residents of the capital love to shop, eat and hang out.
A Systems Perspective on Crime
Criminal behavior is the product of a systematic process that involves complex interactions between
individual, societal, and ecological factors over the course of our lives. It explains that from the beginning onward
the intellectual, emotional, and physical attributes we develop are strongly influenced by our personal behavior and
physical processes, interactions with the physical environment and interactions with other people, groups and
institutions.
These systematic processes affect the transmission from generation to generation of traits associated with
increased involvement in crime. To have a better understanding as to how they work together the following are
discussed below.
1. Ecological Factors
 It involves interactions between people and their activities in a physical environment. It pertains to physical
environment like geography and topography, crowding, pollution, and recreational opportunities which influences
the physical and emotional development of people over their lives as well as the level of hostility, fear, or well-being
they feel from moment to moment as they experience, for example, a crowded subway, dark lonely parking lot, or
serene park.
It also determine what opportunities for crime exist because they include interactions between people and the
ways physical environment channel those interactions. The routine activities of people in a physical setting can have
important effects on when and where opportunities for crime occur. A crime is not possible unless a motivated and
able offender converges with a victim, property, or illicit substance or behavior in the absence of capable
guardianship (people or physical barriers to prevent the crime).
2. Societal or Macro level Factors
It deals with systematic interactions between social groups which describe the ways society is structured. It
includes the relative distribution of the population among groups and the flows of information, resources, and people
between groups. It also encompasses the variety and heterogeneity of racial/ethnic/cultural/productive groups, their
behaviors and beliefs, and economic relations.
3. Motivation and Opportunity
Individuals actually commit the crimes. Individual factors always intervene between any descriptions of the
causes of crime. Individual or microlevel factors describe how a person becomes motivated to commit a crime.
What is motivation?
Is it just the driving force behind our actions? In this discussion, motivation is more than the "I want."
portion of the equation. It includes "I could." "What will it cost me compared to what I think I'll get?" and "Is this
right and proper?"
Motivation is the outcome of a process in which a goal is formulated, costs and benefits are assessed, and
internal constraints on behavior are applied. Individual motivation varies, sometimes a person's motivation is
influenced more by rational decision making, other times by emotions such as anger, greed, or lust. To some extent
there are similarities wherein some people tend to be more motivated by cost/ benefit calculations more of the time
than others.
Can motivation stand alone?
No. Motivation alone cannot cause a crime to occur; opportunity also is required. Opportunity itself may
influence motivation (Katz 1988).
In effect the interactions between biological, socio cultural and developmental factors affect how motivated a
person is to use force, fraud, or stealth to obtain resources when an opportunity is presented. If motivation is
sufficiently high in the presence of an attractive opportunity, a crime may occur so long as the person has the ability
required to commit it.
Crime Causation: Its Historical Overview
 Antique Philosophy (4th century BC)
Aristotle offers a philosophical standpoint on crime causation who stated that the crime is poverty related
describing poverty as a mother of all revolutions and crimes.

Medieval Philosophy (17th century)

According to Francis Bacon, criminality will depend on social situations. He described his standpoint in this
sentence: "Opportunity makes a thief." Bacon pointed out that human behavior will depend on situations.
Introduction to Criminological Theory
Criminology is the study of why individuals commit crimes and why they behave in certain situations. By
understanding why a person commits a crime, one can develop ways to control crime or rehabilitate the criminal
There are many theories in criminology Some attribute crime to the individual, they believe that an individual
weights the pros and cons and makes a conscious choice whether or not to commit a crime. Others believe it is the
community's responsibility to ensure that their citizens do not commit crime by offering them a safe and secure place
in which to live. Some ascertain that some individuals have latent traits that will determine how they will react when
put in certain negative conditions. By studying these theories and applying them to individuals, perhaps
psychologists can deter criminals from repeating crimes and help in their rehabilitation.
There is no one cause of crime. Crime is a highly complex phenomenon that changes across cultures and across time.
Activities that are legal in one country (eg alcohol consumption in the UK) are sometimes illegal in others (eg strict
Muslim countries). As cultures change over time, behaviours that once were not criminalised may become
criminalised (and then decriminalised again- e.g. alcohol prohibition in the USA). As a result there is no simple
answer to the question what is crime?" and therefore no single answer to what causes crime? Different types of crime
often have their own distinct causes.
Theory
A theory is said to be a set of assumptions, propositions, or accepted facts that attempts to provide a rational
explanation of cause and effect (causal) relationships among a group of observed phenomenon. In short, a theory is
an idea or set of ideas that is intended to explain facts or events.
Criminological Theory
A proposition/assumption that attempts to exploin criminal behaviour (crime), and behaviours of key actors (eg
police, attornevs, prosecutors, judges/magistrates social welfare officers, victims/witnesses, accused and etc.) in the
criminal justice system. Basically, theories about the causes of crime are based on religion philosophy, biology,
politics, economy, and social forces.
Crime
"Crime" is an act that the law makes punishable, the breach of a legal duty treated as the subject-matter of a criminal
proceeding. Generally, a crime is a violation of societal rules of behaviour as interpreted and expressed by the
criminal law, which reflects public opinion, traditional values, and the viewpoint of people currently holding social
and political power Individuals who violate these rules are subject to sanctions by state authority, social stigma, and
loss of status.
Note: The concepts of Mala in se and Mala prohibitum
In the mid-18th century, criminology arose as social philosophers gave thought to crime and concepts of law. Over
time, several schools of thought have developed There were three main schools of thought in early criminological
theory spanning the period from the mid-18th century to the mid-twentieth century: Classical, Positivist, and
Chicago. These schools of thought were superseded by several contemporary paradigms of criminology, such as the
sub-culture, control, strain, labeling, critical criminology, cultural criminology, postmodern criminology, feminist
criminology and others discussed below.
The traditional Chicago School of Criminology refers to work conducted by faculty and students at the University
of Chicago that utilized a macro sociological theory called "social disorganization to understand why crime and
delinquency rates are higher in some neighborhoods than others.
A. DEMONOLOGY THEORY
Demonology is the study of demons or beliefs about demons, especially the methods used to summon and control
them Demons, when regarded as spirits, may belong to either of the classes of spirits recognized by primitive
animism. That is to say, they may be human, or non-human, separable souls, or discarnate spirits which have never
inhabited a body. A sharp distinction is often drawn between these two classes, notably by the Melanesians, several
African groups, and others. The Islamic jinn, for example, are not reducible to modified human souls. At the same
time these classes are frequently conceived as producing identical results, eg diseases.
The word demonology is from Greek daimon, "divinity, divine power god".
School of Thought Demonological / Pre-scientific School
Origin: Demonology is the most ancient theory of crime and dates back to pre scientific age.
Ideas:
 Criminals are possessed by some evil spirit that force them to commit evil deeds.
 A Crime is not a product of free will, but rather [it]) is determined by forces beyond the control of an
individual le deterministic approach.
 A crime is perceived as a sin, thus a handiwork of the devil/Satan.
 There are Godly and Satanic forces in the World.
 The Godly forces keep a man away from crime and help him to do good, whereas the devilish forces distract
man from the right pathie makes him commit crimes.
 The devil/demon takes possession of the soul of a man and makes him think and do wrong i.e. he becomes
reckless and is unable to foresee the consequences of his action.
 In that state, a man can be regarded as a passive agent only; the active agent (the demon) is a force external
to soul but which somehow enters a man and take possession of his soul.
Crime control:
To drive away the evil spirits/demons from the mind and/or body of a perceived criminal, the following approaches
may be adopted- exorcising[1], lacerating. macerating, fasting, praying, repenting (contessing), trephining[2] beating
and burning of the possessed individual.
Strength: it was an early effort to explain criminal behavior as a social problem.
Critique: the theory's claims cannot be testable/proved scientifically, since it is based on faith Again, those who
persist in claiming innocence were often thought to be completely under the control of evil spirits, thus unable to tell
the truth Punishments imposed on criminals are said to be arbitrary, irrational, cruel and barbaric.
Four distinct groups of theories will be examined: classical theories, biological theories, psychological theories,
and sociological theories of crime causation.
The Classical School of Criminological
There were two main contributors to this theory of criminology and they were Jeremy Bentham and Cesare de
Beccaria. They are seen as the most important enlightenment thinkers in the area of 'classical thinking and are
considered the founding fathers of the classical school of criminology. They both sought to reduce the harshness
of eighteenth century judicial systems, even though coming from different philosophical stances.
Bentham's contribution to 'classical theory is based on the fact that he was a utilitarian, interested in the happiness
and well-being of the population and therefore believing that punishment, in the form of the infliction of pain, should
always be justified in terms of a greater good. At the heart of Bentham's writing was the idea that human behaviour
is directed at maximising pleasure and minimising pain, (the pleasure-pain principle).
Bentham believed that crime was committed on the outset, by individuals who seek to gain excitement, money, sex
or anything of value to the individual.
Beccaria (1764/1963 93) stated that; 'It is better to prevent crimes than to punish them'.
Findings of Beccaria
1. Beccaria believed that laws needed to be put into place in order to make punishments consistent and in line with
the crime.
2. That crime prevention in its effectiveness is down to three main ideas, these being the certainty of the crime and
how likely it is to happened, the celerity of the crime and how quickly the punishment is inflicied and also the
severity of the crime, and how much pain is inflicted.
3 Beccaria thought that the severity of the penalties given should be proportionate to the crime committed and no
more than what is necessary in order to deter the offender and others from committing further crimes
4. In Beccaria's writings, he believed that rather than the judiciary being the ultimate source of law, the legislative
branch should serve that role. In addition, he suggested that the judiciary's role was not to assess punishment but to
determine guilt on a case by case basis Classical theory brought to the table the emphasis of a criminal justice system
that included police and courts, as well as correctional facilities. It postulates that more prisons and stricter laws with
stiffer penalties are the best ways to combat and reduce crime.
Classical theories on criminal justice, and in particular the writings of Beccania, influenced the framers of the Bill of
Rights and the U.S Constitution It helped to solidify the concepts of a right to a speedy trial, and rules against cruel
and unusual punishment. It also aimed to eliminate torture as a form of punishment.
Classical thinking says that criminals make a rational choice, and choose to do criminal acts due to maximum
pleasure and minimum pain. The classical school says criminals are rational, they weigh up the costs and
therefore we should create deterrents which slightly outweigh what would be gained from the crime. This is the
reason behind the death penalty being viewed by classical thinkers such as Beccaria and Bentham as pointless,
because there would be no deterrent. However when considering manslaughter, as Bentham also believes, if the
severity of the punishment should slightly outweigh the crime then surely capital punishment should be used, there
doesn't seem to be any stronger a deterrent to other criminals thinking of undertaking the same criminal behaviour,
than seeing another eradicated due to their actions.
Classical thinking has had a significant impact on criminological thinking in general and perhaps a greater impact on
criminal justice practise.
In Europe and America the idea of punishments being appropriate to the nature of the crime has become a
foundation for modern criminal justice systems.
Since the introduction of the classical school of criminology and classical thinking. the use of capital punishment,
torture and corporal punishment has declined. Neither Beccaria nor Bentham believed in the death penalty, apart
from, Bentham argued, in the case of murder.
The second half of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries also saw the establishment and growth of the prison, as a
major system of punishment, the idea and concept of prison was to take punishment away from the body and instead
punish the mind and soul, and these are the keys to changing a person's outlook and views of their criminal
behaviours.
Many elements of classical ideas are very useful in modern society and these show the strengths that the theory does
have. Deterrence continues to underlie all judicial systems and indeed underpinned the principles of the first
commissioners of Sir Robert Peel, in the creation of the Metropolitan police. Prisons are also used as major
deterrents and also to try and reduce rates of crime.
However a great weakness of the classical school of criminology is, the idea stemming from classical thinking that
all criminals are rational is not generalisable to the whole population nor is it entirely valid, due to the fact that
there may be biological factors stopping an individual from being able to think and behave rationally. Therefore it
may not be the particular choice of the individual as they may have been born that way, they may not have the ability
to make a rational decision due to a mental illness such as schizophrenia. They may be disorientated or even drugged
which affects the brain functioning and therefore any behaviours resulting in an individual becoming irrational. Also,
if people act due to principles of rationality and free will then why is it that the poor are predominating in the
criminal justice system, classical thought doesn't include factors of necessity in order to survive. As Jeffrey Reiman
(1979) said, "the rich get richer and the poor get prison".
3 main challenges to classical school according to White and Haines
Firstly, how to make such ideas serve the interests of justice and equality when faced with a particular defendant in
court. (Not all criminals appear to be acting rationally and of free will)
Secondly, that for criminal justice bureaucracies such as the police, growing efficiency may not always be
compatible with an emphasis on equal justice, as their gain is to decrease crime rates.
Thirdly, a power issue, the rationalisation of the legai system potentially means some reduction in their power,
which may backfire in terms of being a deterrent.
Neoclassical Theory
The neoclassical school of thought was first incorporated into the French Code of 1791 and remained the cornerstone
of criminal justice policy, but did not receive much attention until the 1980s and 1990s. It experienced a resurgence
of popularity in response due to the failure of rehabilitation and a public outcry for a return to harsher punishment:
longer prison sentences, a return to corporal punishment, and even a reinstatement of capital punishment. The
demand was for the punishment to fit the crime - a concept that keeps in line with the classical school. Neoclassical
theory can be thought of as a 'just desserts' model.
A Look at the Neoclassical School of Criminology
Imagine that you have been out of work for six months and are running low on money. You are sitting on the bus
and traveling to a job interview A woman sitting next to you has placed her purse on the floor of the bus In that
purse, you see a large amount of cash. It is within easy reach, and you notice that the woman is distracted by a
conversation she is having with the bus driver. Your stop is coming up next What would you choose to do?
Did you choose to take the money? Why or why not?
If you chose to take the money, you would have committed a crime. In criminology we are interested in studying this
type of behavior. Some people might argue that you simply made a decision to steal because you needed the money,
the money was easy to take, and the risk of getting caught was low. Simply, it was a rational decision.
But, is there more to it than that? Neoclassical criminologists think so.
Neoclassical criminology can be defined, simply, as a school of thought that assumes criminal behavior as
situationally dynamic and individually-determined. Neoclassical theories of crime assert that deterring, reducing, or
eliminating crime can occur through stricter child-rearing practices, enhanced punishments, and/or an increase in
surveillance and security. Neoclassical thought is typically linked to politically conservative crime control policies
This is primarily because these theories advocate for an increase in more aggressive forms of policing, zero tolerance
parole and probation practices, and increased prison sentences for all crimes.
Throughout the remainder of this lesson, we will explore the basic theoretical assumptions of the neoclassical school
of criminology and its potential to help us understand criminal behavior and appropriate punishment responses. You
will also be given an example of neoclassical thought by exploring the assumptions of routine activities theory.
Neoclassical School of Criminology
Positivism refers to the neoclassical school of criminology, which came after the classical school. Neoclassical
criminology focused on individual rights, due process, alternative sentencing and legal rights. Derived from the late
1800s, the neoclassical thinkers focused on the nature of the crime more than the individual. Later, neoclassical
believers relied on scientific proof, the motivation of crime and consequences. Furthermore, individuals have no free
will when they commit crimes So, neoclassical theory suggests crimes need due process of the law. Many of the
rights in modern times derive from neoclassical thinking. For instance, liberty, search and seizure, imprisonment,
trials, sentencing, self-incrimination and interpreters are part of the criminal system today.
Limitations of Classical and Neoclassical Criminology
While classical criminology depicts deterrent measures as a way to prevent crimes. neoclassical criminology studies
the scientific evidence to determine a just punishment for crimes. Both schools of thought don't recognize the
socioeconomic impact of crimes Humans make a decision based on rationale, but the reason is more complicated
when an individual commits a crime. Modern criminology describes the crime as an individual making impulsive
decisions without considering consequences. Studies suggest socioeconomic status and lack of job opportunities
increase crimes in society Individuals with low economic status and fewer education opportunities and career
options are prone to commit more crimes. Either school of criminology limits the impact of socioeconomic factors in
society and crime prevention.
Crime Control:
* Under a biological perspective, deterrence is of little value. This is because there is an inherent defect or
abnormality within the individual, deterrence or the threat of punishment will not affect behaviour.
* Therefore, criminality can be fixed through medication, treatment, or therapy. deportation, sterilisation, and etc.
Critique:
* The theory ignores the process by which behaviours are made illegal
* It assumes that most people agree about most things, most of the time.
*Theorists believe that action is determined by causes independent of a person's free will.
Biological Theories of Crime
Biological theories within the field of criminology attempt to explain behaviors contrary to societal expectations
through examination of individual characteristics. These theories are categorized within a paradigm called positivism
(also known as determinism), which asserts that behaviors, including law-violating behaviors, are determined by
factors largely beyond individual control. Positivist theories contrast with classical theories, which argue that people
generally choose their behaviors in rational processes of logical decision making, and with critical theories, which
critique lawmaking, social stratification, and the unequal distribution of power and wealth.
Positivist theories are further classified on the basis of the types of external influences they identify as potentially
determinative of individual behavior. For example, psychological and psychiatric theories look at an individual's
mental development and functioning, sociological theories evaluate the impact of social structure on individuals (eg..
social disorganization, anomie, subcultural theories. opportunity, strain) and the impact of social function and
processes on individuals (eg, differential association, social learning social bonds, labeling).
Biological theories can be classified into three types:
(1) Those that attempt to differentiate among individuals on the basis of certain innate (i.e., those with which you are
born) outward physical traits or characteristics:
(2) Those that attempt to trace the source of differences to genetic or hereditary characteristics; and
(3) Those that attempt to distinguish among individuals on the basis of structural, functional, or chemical differences
in the brain or body.
Biological positivism
If Charles Darwin's Theory of evolution was scientific as applied to animals, the same approach should be applied to
"man" as an "animal".
Physical characteristics
Historically, medicine became interested in the problem of crime, producing studies of physiognomy (see Johann
Kaspar Lavater and Franz Joseph Gall) and the science of phrenology which linked attributes of the mind to the
shape of the brain as reveal through the skull. These theories were popular because they absolved society and any
failures of its government of responsibility for criminal behavior.
The problem lay in the propensities of individual offenders who were biologically distinguishable from law-abiding
citizens This theme was amplified by the ltalian. School and through the writings of Cesare Lombroso. The Criminal
Man and Anthropological criminology) which identified physical characteristics associated with degeneracy
demonstrating that criminals were atavistic throwbacks to an earlier evolutionary form.
Charles Goring (1913) failed to corroborate the characteristics but did find criminals shorter, lighter and less
intelligent, i.e. he found criminality to be "normal" rather than pathological" (cf the work of Hooton found evidence
of biological inferiority) William Sheldon identified three basic body or somatotypes (.e. endomorphs, mesomorphs,
and ectomorphs), and introduced a scale to measure where each individual was placed. He concluded that
delinquents tended to mosomorphy. Modern research. might link physical size and athleticism and aggression
because physically stronger people have the capacity to use violence with less chance of being hurt in any retaliation.
Otherwise, such early research is no longer considered valid.
The development of genetics has produced another potential inherent cause of criminality, with chromosoine and
other genetic factors variously identified as significant to select heredity rather than environment as the cause of
crime (see nature versus nurture). However, the evidence from family, twin, and adoption studies shows no
conclusive empirical evidence to prefer either cause.
Biological theories are a subtype of positivist theory. Positivism evolved as instrumental in explaining law-
violating behaviors during the latter part of the 19th century as a response to the perceived harshness of classical
school philosophies. Classical thought, which emerged during the Age of Enlightenment (mid 1600s to late
1700s), asserted that man operated on the basis of free will and rational thought, choosing which courses of action to
take According to classical theorists, individuals would engage in behaviors that were pleasurable and avoid
behaviors that were painful. Punishment (of the right type and in the right amounts) would deter an individual from
committing an act if that punishment resulted in pain that outweighed the pleasure. Classical theorists, for the most
part, denounced torture as a type of punishment because it was more punishment than was necessary to prevent a
future occurrence of the act; they believed that punishment should be proportionate to the crime to be effective as a
deterrent.
Positivist school of criminology
Classical views were not very concerned about the causes of behavior. Behaviors were seen as the result of choice
rather than as the result of inherent or external factors largely uncontrollable by the individual. The significant
progression of scientific thought and method, however, led to the application of science in the study of human and
social behavior. The central focus of these new ideas was that the aim of any social action toward individuals who
violated law should be curing them. not punishing them.
In the late nineteenth century, some of the principles on which the classical school was based began to be challenged
by the emergent positivist school.in criminology. led primarily by Criminology Holy Three: Cesare Lombroso,
Enrico Ferri, and Raffaele Garofalo. It is at this point that the term 'criminology first emerged, both in the work of
Italian Raffaele Garofalo (criminologia) in 1885 and in the work of French anthropologist Paul Topinard
(criminologia) around the same time.
Cesare Lombroso born Ezechia Marco Lombroso; 6 November 1835-19 October 1909), was an Italian
criminologist, physician, and founder of the Italian School of Positivist Criminology. Lombroso rejected the
established classical school. which held that crime was a characteristic trait of human nature. Instead, using concepts
drawn from physiognomy, degeneration theory, psychiatry and Social Darwinism, Lombroso's theory of
anthropological criminology essentially stated that criminality was inherited, and that someone "born criminal could
be identified by physical (congenital) defects, which confirmed a criminal as savage or atavistic.