CONVICT CRIMINOLOGY

I. Introduction
Convict criminology (CC) is a relatively new and controversial
perspective in the practical field of criminal justice and the academic
field of criminology. It provides an alternative view to the way crime
and criminal justice problems are usually seen by researchers,
policymakers, and politicians—many of whom have had minimal
contact with jails, prisons, and convicts.

In the 1990s, CC started because of the frustrations that a group of ex-

convict professors felt when reading academic literature on crime,
corrections, and criminal justice. For example, much of the published
work on prisons reflected the views of prison administrators or
university academics and largely ignored what convicts knew about the
day-to-day realities of imprisonment. These former prisoners, who had
since obtained higher university degrees, along with some allied critical
criminologists, wanted research that reflected the observations and
critical assessments of men and women who had done real time.

The emerging field of convict criminology consists primarily of essays,

articles, and books written by convicts or ex-convicts studying for or
already in possession of PhDs, some of whom are now employed as full-
time academics. A number of other scholars sympathetic to the CC view
also contribute. Convict criminologists often critique or challenge
existing precepts, policies, and practices, thus contributing to a new
perspective in the general field of criminology.
II. What Is a Convict Criminologist?
Some areas within the academic study of crime and corrections have
shifted little from the pre-20th-century perspectives of Bentham,
Beccaria, and Lombroso. These scholars of criminology’s “classical”
period saw crime as pathological and failed to consider the social and
political contexts within which criminal behavior is defined. Although
many academic criminologists today hold more enlightened theoretical
views, there is a tendency to identify with state-sponsored anti-crime
agendas that target marginal populations for arrest, conviction, and
incarceration. The result of such traditional approaches is that, of the
approximately 2.2 million Americans currently behind bars, the majority
belong to ethnic or racial minority groups and are disproportionately
poor. Notwithstanding Edwin Sutherland’s breakthrough research
into white-collar crime in 1940, the monumental crimes against
property, the environment, and humanity that are committed by
corporations and governments still go largely unprosecuted and
unpunished. Identifying, explaining, and critiquing class-based
inequalities of this type are of considerable interest to members of the
CC group.

A state-sponsored anti-crime agenda within the

framework of convict criminology would likely involve policies and
initiatives aimed at addressing the root causes of crime, reducing
recidivism, and promoting rehabilitation rather than solely focusing on
punitive measures. Convict criminology, as a field, emphasizes the
insights and experiences of those who have been incarcerated, viewing
them as valuable resources for understanding crime and its prevention.

Here are some components that such an agenda might include:

1. Rehabilitation Programs: Investing in education, vocational training,

and therapy programs within correctional facilities to equip inmates with
the skills and support necessary for successful reintegration into society
upon release. This could include job training, substance abuse treatment,
mental health services, and programs addressing underlying issues such
as trauma or childhood adversity.

2. Community Reintegration Support: Providing support services and

resources to help formerly incarcerated individuals transition back into
their communities. This might involve assistance with finding housing,
employment, healthcare, and reconnecting with family and social
support networks.

3. Alternatives to Incarceration: Exploring alternatives to traditional

incarceration for non-violent offenders, such as diversion programs,
restorative justice initiatives, or community-based rehabilitation
programs. These approaches aim to address the underlying causes of
criminal behavior while reducing the reliance on incarceration.

4. Collaboration with Formerly Incarcerated Individuals: Involving

individuals with lived experience in the development, implementation,
and evaluation of anti-crime policies and programs. This could include
creating advisory boards or councils comprised of formerly incarcerated
individuals, as well as incorporating their perspectives into research,
policymaking, and advocacy efforts.

5. Addressing Structural Inequities: Recognizing and addressing the

systemic factors that contribute to crime and incarceration disparities,
such as poverty, racism, and lack of access to resources and
opportunities. This might involve policy reforms aimed at reducing
socioeconomic inequality, improving access to education and
employment, and addressing biases within the criminal justice system.

6. Restorative Justice Practices: Promoting restorative justice practices

that prioritize healing and reconciliation between offenders, victims, and
communities affected by crime. These approaches focus on repairing
harm, holding offenders accountable, and addressing the underlying
causes of criminal behavior through dialogue, mediation, and
community involvement.

7. Evidence-Based Policy: Implementing evidence-based practices and

interventions supported by research findings and evaluation data. This
includes regularly assessing the effectiveness of anti-crime initiatives
and making adjustments based on outcomes and feedback from
stakeholders.

A monumental crime against property by a

corporation, particularly in the context of the environment or
historical sites, can have significant and far-reaching consequences.

1. Environmental Destruction: A corporation may engage in activities

such as illegal logging, toxic waste dumping, or oil spills that cause
extensive damage to ecosystems, water sources, and wildlife habitats.
This destruction can have long-term ecological consequences, including
loss of biodiversity, soil degradation, and disruption of local
communities' livelihoods that depend on the environment.

2. Violation of Cultural Heritage: In some cases, corporations may

disregard regulations or cultural sensitivities regarding historical sites or
indigenous lands. Construction projects, mining operations, or
infrastructure development undertaken without proper consultation or
respect for cultural heritage can result in irreversible damage to
archaeological sites, sacred areas, or culturally significant landmarks.

3. Human Rights Violations: Corporate crimes against property often

entail human rights violations, including displacement of communities,
exploitation of labor, and disregard for indigenous rights. In cases where
corporations operate in developing countries with weak regulatory
frameworks, these violations can be particularly egregious, leading to
social unrest, conflict, and suffering among affected populations.
4. Legal and Reputational Consequences: When corporations commit
crimes against property, they face not only legal repercussions but also
damage to their reputation and brand image. Public outcry, boycotts, and
media scrutiny can result in financial losses, erosion of consumer trust,
and increased regulatory oversight, impacting the corporation's bottom
line and shareholder value.

5. Environmental and Social Justice Movements: Incidents of corporate

crime often galvanize environmental and social justice movements,
mobilizing activists, NGOs, and affected communities to demand
accountability and systemic change. These movements may advocate for
stricter regulations, corporate responsibility initiatives, and restitution
for affected communities.

6. Global Governance and Accountability: Corporate crimes against

property highlight the need for stronger global governance mechanisms
to hold corporations accountable for their actions across borders. This
includes initiatives such as the United Nations Guiding Principles on
Business and Human Rights, which outline the responsibilities of
corporations to respect human rights and remedy any harm caused by
their activities.

7. Long-Term Remediation and Restoration: Addressing the

consequences of corporate crimes against property often requires long-
term remediation and restoration efforts. This may involve cleanup
operations, habitat restoration projects, and compensation for affected
communities to mitigate the environmental and social impacts of the
corporation's actions.
The criminal justice system in the pre-20th century era
differed significantly from modern practices, and understanding its
context provides valuable insights into the development of convict
criminology. Here's an overview of the pre-20th century criminal justice
system and its relevance to the emergence of convict criminology:

1. Punitive Approach: In many pre-20th century societies, the criminal

justice system was primarily punitive, focusing on punishment rather
than rehabilitation. Penalties for crimes often included corporal
punishment, public humiliation, imprisonment, or even execution. The
goal was to deter individuals from committing crimes through fear of
punishment rather than addressing underlying causes of criminal
behavior.

2. Harsh Conditions in Prisons: Prisons in the pre-20th century era were

often characterized by harsh conditions, overcrowding, and inadequate
facilities. Inmates endured squalid living conditions, forced labor, and
brutal treatment. Prisons served primarily as places of punishment and
containment rather than institutions for reform or rehabilitation.

3. Emergence of Convict Criminology: The experiences of individuals

within the criminal justice system during this period, particularly those
who had been incarcerated, laid the groundwork for the development of
convict criminology. Convict criminology emphasizes the perspectives
and insights of current and former prisoners, viewing them as experts
whose experiences can inform our understanding of crime, punishment,
and the criminal justice system.

4. Influence of Classical Criminology: The pre-20th century era also saw

the emergence of classical criminology, which focused on rational
choice theory and the idea of deterrence through punishment. Scholars
such as Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham critiqued the harshness of
punishment in the criminal justice system and advocated for more
humane and rational approaches to crime prevention and punishment.
5. Shift towards Rehabilitation: Towards the late 19th century, there
were growing calls for reforms in the criminal justice system, including
a shift towards rehabilitation rather than strict punishment. This period
saw the emergence of early reform movements advocating for
improvements in prison conditions, education and vocational training for
inmates, and alternative sentencing options.

6. Impact of Industrialization and Urbanization: The rise of

industrialization and urbanization during the 19th century led to
significant social and economic changes, including increased crime
rates, poverty, and social dislocation. These factors contributed to
debates about the causes of crime and the role of the criminal justice
system in addressing social problems.

21st century,
In the context of convict criminology in the
individuals within the criminal justice system can be
categorized into different groups based on various factors
such as their level of education, experience, and status within the prison
community. Here are four potential categories:

1. Senior Members: These are individuals who have spent a significant

amount of time within the prison system and have acquired extensive
experience and knowledge about its inner workings. They may have
been incarcerated for long periods, possibly due to repeated offenses or
involvement in serious crimes. Senior members often play leadership
roles within the prison community, providing guidance, support, and
mentorship to other inmates.

2. Newly Graduated: This category includes individuals who are

relatively new to the prison system, having recently been incarcerated.
They may lack experience navigating the complexities of prison life and
may be more vulnerable to exploitation or victimization. Newly
graduated inmates may include individuals who have been sentenced for
the first time or those who have recently entered the criminal justice
system due to a recent offense.

3. Ph.D. Candidates/Graduate Students: These are inmates who possess

higher levels of education, including college degrees or advanced
degrees such as Ph.D.’s or master's degrees. Despite their educational
achievements, they find themselves within the prison system due to their
involvement in criminal activities. Ph.D. candidates or graduate students
in prison may have unique perspectives on crime, punishment, and
rehabilitation, and their experiences can contribute valuable insights to
the field of convict criminology.

4. Men and Women: This category emphasizes the gender diversity

within the prison population. Men and women experience incarceration
differently, and their needs, experiences, and challenges within the
criminal justice system may vary. Women, for example, often face
distinct issues such as reproductive health care, childcare, and histories
of trauma or abuse. Recognizing the gender-specific dynamics of
incarceration is essential for understanding and addressing the needs of
all individuals within the prison system.

By categorizing inmates into these four groups based on factors such as

experience, education, and gender, convict criminology can provide a
more nuanced understanding of the diverse experiences and perspectives
within the prison population. This approach recognizes the complexities
of incarceration and highlights the importance of considering individual
differences and backgrounds when developing policies and interventions
aimed at promoting rehabilitation and reducing recidivism.
In the context of convict dealing with
criminology,
discrimination and finding moral support is essential for
individuals who have experienced incarceration. Discrimination against
formerly incarcerated individuals is pervasive and can manifest in
various forms, including limited employment opportunities, housing
discrimination, and social stigma. In such challenging circumstances,
finding moral support from fellow inmates, supportive community
organizations, and allies within the convict criminology field can be
empowering.

Peer support from individuals who have shared similar experiences can
offer understanding, validation, and encouragement. Through shared
narratives and collective advocacy efforts, formerly incarcerated
individuals can combat feelings of isolation and injustice while building
solidarity within their community. Additionally, involvement in convict
criminology research, activism, or educational initiatives can provide a
sense of purpose and contribute to positive social change.

Furthermore, seeking support from allies, including academics,

policymakers, and advocates, can help amplify the voices of those
impacted by discrimination and advocate for systemic reforms. By
fostering a supportive network and engaging in collective action,
individuals within the convict criminology community can navigate the
challenges of discrimination, reclaim their agency, and work towards
creating a more just and inclusive society.
Convict criminologists have made significant
contributions to the field of criminology by providing
unique insights and perspectives based on their lived experiences within
the criminal justice system. Some important contributions include:

1. Challenging Stereotypes and Stigma: Convict criminologists

challenge stereotypes and stigma associated with incarceration by
humanizing individuals who have been through the criminal justice
system. Through their narratives and research, they shed light on the
complex factors that contribute to criminal behavior and the challenges
faced by those reentering society after incarceration.

2. Understanding the Impact of Imprisonment: Convict criminologists

offer firsthand accounts of the impact of imprisonment on individuals,
families, and communities. Their narratives highlight the dehumanizing
aspects of incarceration, including issues such as violence, trauma, and
loss of social support networks.

3. Advocating for Rehabilitation and Reentry Support: Convict

criminologists advocate for more humane and effective approaches to
rehabilitation and reentry support. Drawing on their experiences, they
emphasize the importance of education, job training, mental health
services, and other forms of support to help individuals successfully
reintegrate into society and reduce recidivism.

4. Critiquing the Criminal Justice System: Convict criminologists

provide critical perspectives on the criminal justice system, highlighting
its flaws, biases, and inequities. They challenge punitive approaches to
crime and punishment and advocate for reforms aimed at addressing
systemic issues such as racial disparities, mass incarceration, and the
criminalization of poverty.
5. Contributing to Research and Policy: Convict criminologists
contribute to criminological research by offering insights and
perspectives that may be overlooked or marginalized in traditional
academic discourse. Their research informs policy debates and advocacy
efforts aimed at promoting criminal justice reform, reducing recidivism,
and advancing social justice.

Overall, the contributions of convict criminologists are invaluable in

advancing our understanding of crime, punishment, and the criminal
justice system, and in advocating for more humane, equitable, and
effective approaches to addressing crime and its root causes.

Convict criminologists offer several key

recommendations to improve the criminal justice system and
promote rehabilitation, reintegration, and social justice:

1. Shift from Punishment to Rehabilitation: Prioritize rehabilitation over

punitive measures by investing in education, vocational training, mental
health services, and substance abuse treatment within correctional
facilities. Provide opportunities for skill development and personal
growth to empower individuals to successfully reenter society.

2. Address Systemic Inequities: Recognize and address the systemic

inequalities that contribute to crime and incarceration, including poverty,
racism, and lack of access to resources and opportunities. Implement
policies and programs that address underlying social determinants of
crime and promote equity and inclusion.
3. Promote Restorative Justice: Embrace restorative justice practices that
prioritize healing, accountability, and reconciliation between offenders,
victims, and communities. Provide opportunities for dialogue,
mediation, and community involvement to repair harm and foster
understanding.

4. Support Reentry Services: Invest in comprehensive reentry services

and support networks to facilitate successful transitions from
incarceration to community life. Provide access to housing, employment,
healthcare, and social services to address the practical and social needs
of individuals returning from prison.

5. Include Lived Experience: Recognize the expertise and insights of

individuals with lived experience of incarceration in the development,
implementation, and evaluation of policies and programs. Ensure that
their voices are heard and valued in decision-making processes related to
criminal justice reform.

By implementing these recommendations, we can create a more just,

humane, and effective criminal justice system that prioritizes
rehabilitation, addresses systemic inequities, and promotes the well-
being and reintegration of all individuals impacted by crime and
incarceration.
Labeling criminology, also known as labeling theory or societal
reaction theory, is a sociological perspective within the field of
criminology that focuses on how societal reactions to individuals labeled
as criminals or deviants contribute to the perpetuation of criminal
behavior. Developed in the mid-20th century by scholars such as
Howard Becker, Edwin Lemert, and Frank Tannenbaum, labeling
criminology challenges traditional notions of crime and deviance by
emphasizing the social construction of these concepts.

At its core, labeling criminology argues that the application of criminal

labels or stigmatizing reactions by society can have profound
consequences for individuals' self-concept, identity, and future behavior.
When individuals are labeled as criminals or deviants, they may
internalize these labels and adopt identities consistent with societal
expectations. This process, known as secondary deviance, can lead to
further involvement in criminal behavior as individuals conform to the
roles and expectations associated with their labeled status.

Labeling criminology also highlights the role of social institutions, such

as the criminal justice system, in the creation and perpetuation of deviant
labels. The process of social control, including policing, prosecution,
and sentencing practices, can disproportionately target marginalized
groups, resulting in the overrepresentation of certain populations within
the criminal justice system.

Furthermore, labeling criminology underscores the importance of

understanding the social context in which deviance occurs and the
subjective nature of labeling processes. What constitutes deviant
behavior can vary across cultures, societies, and historical periods,
highlighting the socially constructed nature of crime and deviance.
In conclusion, labeling criminology offers a critical perspective on the
role of societal reactions in shaping criminal behavior and the
perpetuation of social inequalities within the criminal justice system. By
highlighting the consequences of labeling and stigmatization, this theory
challenges conventional approaches to crime control and emphasizes the
need for more compassionate, rehabilitative responses to deviant
behavior.

In labeling criminology, the concepts of self-perception and

others' perceptions play crucial roles in understanding the
dynamics of crime and deviance. Here's how they intersect within this
theoretical framework:

1. Self-Perception: Labeling theory emphasizes how individuals

internalize the labels applied to them by society. When someone is
labeled as deviant or criminal, they may start to perceive themselves in
accordance with that label. This process of self-labeling can shape their
identity and behavior, leading to what Edwin Lemert termed "secondary
deviance." For example, if a person is arrested and labeled as a
"criminal," they may come to see themselves as inherently deviant and
behave accordingly, conforming to societal expectations of criminality.

2. Others' Perception: Conversely, labeling theory also highlights the

role of others' perceptions in reinforcing and perpetuating deviant
identities. Once an individual is labeled as deviant or criminal, they may
face stigma and discrimination from others in society. This societal
reaction can further solidify the individual's self-concept as deviant and
increase their likelihood of engaging in further criminal behavior. For
example, someone who has been labeled a "juvenile delinquent" may
find it difficult to escape the negative judgments and social exclusion
imposed by others, which can exacerbate their involvement in deviant
activities.
In labeling criminology, deviance refers to behavior that diverges
from societal norms or expectations. Labeling theorists emphasize that
deviance is not an inherent quality of an act but rather a social construct
shaped by interactions between individuals and social institutions.
Different types of deviance can be identified within this theoretical
framework, including:

1. Primary Deviance: Primary deviance refers to the initial act of rule-

breaking or deviant behavior. It is often seen as relatively minor and
may occur sporadically without significantly impacting an individual's
self-concept or social identity. Examples of primary deviance may
include experimenting with drugs, skipping school, or petty theft.

2. Secondary Deviance: Secondary deviance occurs when an individual

internalizes the deviant label imposed on them by society, leading to a
more persistent and ingrained pattern of rule-breaking behavior. This
process is influenced by societal reactions to the individual's initial
deviant acts, such as stigmatization, social exclusion, or involvement in
the criminal justice system. Secondary deviance can result in the
formation of a deviant identity and increased involvement in criminal or
delinquent activities.
Media criminology is a subfield of criminology that focuses on the
intersection of media and crime, including how crime is represented,
perceived, and constructed through various forms of media. It examines
how media influences public perceptions of crime, criminal behavior,
law enforcement, and the criminal justice system.

Regarding medium types of crime, it's important to understand that

media can cover a wide range of criminal activities across different
mediums such as television, film, newspapers, radio, social media, and
the internet. These mediums can depict various types of crime, including
but not limited to:

1. Violent Crime: Media often covers violent crimes such as homicide,

assault, robbery, and sexual assault. These crimes are frequently
sensationalized and can have a significant impact on public perceptions
of safety and security.

2. White-Collar Crime: White-collar crimes such as fraud,

embezzlement, insider trading, and corporate scandals are often covered
in the media, especially when they involve high-profile individuals or
organizations.

3. Cybercrime: With the rise of digital media and the internet,

cybercrimes such as hacking, identity theft, online scams, and
cyberbullying have become increasingly prevalent. Media often reports
on these types of crimes and their impacts on individuals and society.

4. Drug-Related Crime: Media coverage of drug-related crimes includes

illegal drug trafficking, drug possession, and drug-related violence. The
portrayal of drug use and its consequences can influence public attitudes
towards drug policy and law enforcement strategies.
5. Terrorism: Acts of terrorism, whether domestic or international,
receive extensive media coverage due to their significant impact on
public safety and national security. Media plays a crucial role in shaping
public perceptions of terrorist threats and government responses to
terrorism.

6. Property Crime: Property crimes such as burglary, theft, vandalism,

and arson are often covered in the media, particularly when they occur in
high-profile locations or involve valuable assets.

7. Hate Crimes: Hate crimes targeting individuals or groups based on

their race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or other characteristics
are frequently reported in the media. These crimes raise awareness about
social issues such as prejudice, discrimination, and intolerance.
Critical criminology is a theoretical perspective within the field of
criminology that seeks to understand crime within the broader context of
social, political, and economic structures. It examines the connections
between power, inequality, and the criminal justice system. Here are
some key concepts associated with critical criminology:

1. Social Construction of Crime: Critical criminologists argue that what

is defined as criminal behavior is not inherent but rather socially
constructed. This means that societal norms, values, and power
dynamics influence what behaviors are labeled as criminal and how they
are punished.

2. Powers and Inequality: Critical criminology emphasizes the role of

power and inequality in shaping who is labeled as criminal and how they
are treated by the criminal justice system. It examines how factors such
as race, class, gender, and ethnicity intersect to produce unequal
outcomes in terms of who is arrested, prosecuted, and incarcerated.

3. Structural Causes of Crime: Instead of focusing solely on individual-

level factors, critical criminology examines the structural conditions that
contribute to crime, such as poverty, inequality, unemployment, and lack
of access to resources and opportunities.

4. Intersectionality: Intersectionality is a concept borrowed from

feminist theory that highlights the ways in which different social
identities (e.g., race, class, gender, sexuality) intersect and interact to
shape individuals' experiences of power and oppression. Critical
criminologists apply intersectionality to understand how multiple forms
of inequality intersect to produce differential experiences within the
criminal justice system.
5. Criminal Justice System Critique: Critical criminologists critique the
criminal justice system for perpetuating and reproducing inequalities,
often through discriminatory practices such as racial profiling, harsh
sentencing policies, and disparities in access to legal representation.
They advocate for structural reforms that address the root causes of
crime and reduce the reliance on punitive measures.

In summary, critical criminology offers a multidisciplinary perspective

that draws on psychology, sociology, and biology to analyze crime
within the broader context of social structures, power dynamics, and
inequality. It challenges conventional understandings of crime and calls
for systemic changes to create a more just and equitable society.