Course Outline n Handout SOC 305 -Final Copy

FUGUS SOC 305
ASMaliki Lecture Notes
FEDERAL UNIVERSITY GUSAU (FUGUS)

DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY
FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT AND SOCIAL SCIENCES
SOC 305: SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME AND DELINQUENCY

COURSE OUTLINE 2022/23 SESSION
Course Lecturer: Prof. A S. Maliki (BSc, LLB, MSc, PhD)
Introduction:
This course is designed to introduce students to the broad discipline of Criminology.

In doing so it attempts to cover a wide range of Criminological subjects, some of
which constitute full semester Courses on their own in several other universities. Such
other Courses include; Theories of Crime and Delinquency, Strategies of Crime
Control, Sociology of Deviant Behaviour, Nigerian Legal System, Penology,
Sociology of law, Informal Control Mechanisms, Victimology, and so on. Since many
of these other courses are not offered separately in FUGUS, the attempt here shall be
to cover as much grounds as possible within this Course and leave the Others for
Sociology of Law in Second Semester. The Course Structure has been broken into six
major parts to cover six broad concerns of the discipline of criminology.
The first three Parts of the Outline covers the full introduction to Crime and
Delinquency, while the last three Parts shall be a necessarily summarized and general
introduction to other aspects of Criminology which constraints of space and time will
not allow us to delve deeply into here. (In fact, those latter Parts are sometimes stand-
alone full Semester Courses in some other universities).
The essence of the Course is to provide you with an opportunity to think about and
discuss issues relating to crime and delinquency as well as efforts to prevent and
control same. It is hoped that this Course will not just prepare you to actively and
purposefully engage in meaningful thought and communication about these issues, but
also make you think about policy implications of alternative conceptions,
perspectives, and policies regarding them.
PART 1: THE BASIC CONCEPTS

1(a) -The Concept of Deviance: Meaning, Types, Relativity, Functions
1(b) -The Concept of Crime: Meaning and Elements of Crime
1(c) -The Concept of Delinquency: Meaning, Characteristics, Juvenile Justice System.
PART 2: OTHER DIMENSIONS OF CRIME

2(a) - Classification of Crime
2(b) - Cost and Consequences of Crime
2(c) - Fear of Crime
2(d) - Opportunities and Facilitators of Crime
2(e) Vulnerability or Probability of being a Victim of Crime
Page 1 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
PART 3: MEASUREMENT OF CRIME

3(a) -Meaning of Crime Measurement
3(b) -Uses of Crime Measurement
3(c) -Challenges of Measuring Crime
3(d) -Crime Index and Crime Rates
3(e) -Prevalence and Incidence of Crime
PART 4: VICTIMOLOGY AND VICTIM SURVEYS

4(a) -Meaning of Victimology and Victim Surveys
4(b) -Concealment and Non-Reporting of Crimes by Victims
4(c). -National Crime Victimization Surveys (NCVS)
4(d) - Self-Report Crime Surveys
4(e) – Victimology and Restoration Theory of Punishment/Correction
PART 5: THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

5(a) - A System: The Meaning
5(b) - The police
5(c) - The Court
5(d) - Corrections and the Prison.
PART 6: EXPLANATIONS AND THEORIES OF CRIME (To be delivered

through Lectures and Seminars)
Group Seminar Presentations on PART 6

A condensed summary of many theories and their groupings have been provided
above. Due to space and time constraints the theories, which form a whole semester or
session’s course in some universities, cannot be discussed as elaborately as is
necessary. Students shall provide supplements to what has been discussed in class
with these seminars. Each group shall be required to prepare and present/submit a
maximum six-page essay (exclusive of cover page and references). The essay shall be
scored in terms of Content (10marks to be earned equally by all members);
Presentation Performance (4marks to be earned also collectively); Individual
participation and response to questions (5Marks to be earned individually); and
Attendance during presentation (1mark to be earned individually). This shall make
a grand total of earnable 20Marks for each candidate for the Group Presentation.
Group 1: The Classical/Neo-Classical Theories of Crime and Criminal Behaviour

Group 2: Positivist (Biological) Theories of Crime & Criminal Behaviour
Group 3: Positivist (Psychological) Theories of Crime & Criminal Behaviour
Group 4: Sociological (Functionalist) Theories of Crime and Criminal Behaviour
Group 5: Sociological (Conflict/Marxist) Theories of Crime & Criminal Behav.
Group 6: Sociological (Control) Theories of Crime and Criminal Behaviour
Group 7: Sociological (Labelling) Theories of Crime and Criminal Behaviour
Page 2 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
EVALUATION:
CA test: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20marks

Group Presentations----------------------------------------------------------------- 20 marks
Total CA Marks--------------------------------------------------------------------- 40 marks
Semester Examination ------------------------------------------------------------- 60 Marks
Grand total------------------------------------------------------------------------ 100 marks
Page 3 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
SOC 305: SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME AND DELINQUENCY

LECTURE NOTES, 2022/23 SESSION
(N.B: Please note that this “Lecture Notes” is largely a reorganisation of extracts and excerpts from basic
Criminological text books. They therefore do not strictly meet the requirements of anti-plagiarism/copyright
rules, and should not be cited and attributed to the compiler. The major source material include, in no
particular order: S.T. Reid (2000), S. Jones (1998), J.E. Conklin (2007), R.M. Bohm & K.N. Haley (2005), J.A.
Inciardi 2005, A.B. Dambazzau (1999), A.S. Maliki (1995, 2007, & 2008)).
PART 1: THE BASIC CONCEPTS
1 (a) - The Concept of Deviance: Meaning, Types, Relativity, and Functions
Meaning of Deviance: The concept of deviance is employed to denote behaviour or

conduct in any society that deviates from the accepted behaviour and standards of
behaviour which are common, prescribed, beneficial, and “normal”. They are usually
also moral, customary, and legal. Such accepted behavioural norms and conduct are
regarded as conforming (to the majority) behaviour. When behaviour deviates or goes
contrary to such widely accepted behaviour, they are regarded as deviance or deviant
behaviour. Deviant behaviour (also non-conformity, unacceptable or disapproved
behaviour) tend to attract negative sanctions (or condemnation and punishment) which
purpose is to ensure that the deviating individual (or deviant) adjust his behaviour
towards conformity or approved behaviour in order to avoid future negative sanctions
or to experience the good feeling of belonging. As we shall read shortly, crime is a
form of deviance. The concept of crime usually refers to those aspects of deviant acts
which society considers so socially injurious and anti-social, that they enact laws
prescribing punishment for them. In this regard deviance is much broader than crime.
So all criminal acts may be regarded as deviant acts but not all deviant acts are
criminal.
Types of Deviance: Deviance vary in terms of the extent to which they are seen as
violating community standards and the corresponding severity of sanctions attached.
Deviance may range from minor violations of folkways (e.g. a man plaiting his hair,
wearing earing, eating rice with fingers or a woman wearing a spaghetti-top, or bum
shorts) to serious infractions of Mores (e.g. armed robbery or homicide). While the
former may attract mild informal sanctions such as a frown or scolding, the latter may
attract something as severe as many years in imprisonment or even a penalty of death.
Page 4 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
The procedures for adjudging one guilty of the deviance, who adjudges one guilty and
how, may also vary from informal/relaxed methods to very formal/rigid procedures.
Relativity of Deviance: Deviance is largely in the eye of the beholder and not an
absolute quantity. It varies according to type, person, time and place.
(i) Variation according to TYPE: Some acts of deviance are more serious than others.
E.g. murder is more serious than gay dressing.
(ii) Variation according to PERSON: An act performed by one person may be seen as
normal while the same act performed by another may be seen as deviant. E.g. an
infant may scream and defecate on him/herself at anytime and anywhere and it is
normal. But when an adult does same, it is deviant and abnormal. A Christian who
practices polygamy is a deviant while a Muslim doing same thing is not.
(iii) Variation according to TIME: An act that was acceptable/unacceptable in the past
may no longer be unacceptable/acceptable today and vice versa. E.g. morality,
fashion, law, outlook, etc keep changing in the light of dynamic experiences. It
follows that many notions of normality/abnormality similarly change. It may have
been deviant for women to wear trousers and drive cars in the past, or for men to
plait/curl their hair or wear ear-rings. But these are changing. New laws have been
passed that has been shrinking the legal space within morality. Many hitherto immoral
and illegal activities in the past (e.g, gambling, prostitution, abortion) have now been
legalised (even while they remain immoral and deviant. Similarly activities have
become deviant today which were not, before. E.g teachers flogging or marrying their
students…..
(iv) Variation according to PLACE: what is regarded as deviant in one place may be
regarded as conformity in another. There are many examples that can be drawn from
within Nigeria, especially when we compare northern Nigeria with southern Nigeria.
There are even more examples when we compare across nations. Place may interplay
with person in producing this variation. For example, the fact that Northern Nigeria is
mostly inhabited by Muslims while Southern Nigeria is inhabited mostly by Christian
Page 5 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
can produce several variations or relativity in what is regarded as deviance or

conformity.
Functions of Deviance (and Crime): The issue of functionality of deviance is

essentially part of a functionalist or Durkheimian criminology, which argues that a
certain minimal quantum of crime is not only inevitable but necessary in society. In
such small number, deviance serves positive functions and contributes to the well-
being of society. According to Durkheim, crime only becomes dysfunctional when
there is too much of it. It is functionally in the following senses:
(i) SOCIAL INTEGRATION: Crime creates opportunity for people to bond as they
collectively condemn criminal behaviour. Crime or reaction to it in form of
punishment brings people together, outrage is expressed, and a sense of belonging and
commitment to norms strengthened. It thereby builds social solidarity and cohesion
which in turn decreases crime. So it is in a way beneficial as it improves social
integration and social regulation. (Recently there has been a counter argument that the
fear of crime or reaction to the fear actually constrain social interaction and thereby
undermine social solidarity. I am inclined to the former view).
(ii). SOCIAL REGULATION: This has to with a reaffirmation of the limits of

acceptable or conforming behaviour. In the course of the criminal or deviance process,
starting from accusation until sanctions are invoked, the boundaries of acceptable
behaviour is in effect being announced to everyone, and warnings are being issued and
publicised
(iii). SOCIAL CHANGE: Most social changes, whether negative or positive, begin
with a deviation from the norm. Deviance and crimes provide tests of the boundaries
of accepted behaviour. If the feelings and values of the majority is that a hitherto
unacceptable behaviour should now be performed, it signals that it is time for change
in the law and legal reform is necessary. The deviance or crime of today becomes the
norm of tomorrow through deviance that has become normalized. Notable illustrations
of this phenomenon include the fact that the two greatest religious figures that ever
lived (Jesus Christ of Christians and Prophet Mohammed of Islam/Muslims started as
Page 6 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
deviants, deviating from the accepted norms of their time. They were even treated as
criminals and persecuted for their views and actions which were a deviation from the
then prevailing norm. this is how deviance can lead to and are in fact the harbingers of
positive (could also be negative) social changes.
(iv). In performing all the basic functions above, deviance and crime help to
CLARIFY the norms and values and may in the process define collective morality and
increase conformity.
(v). it can also be argued that deviance and crime provide JOBS AND INCOME for
all those engaged in the Criminal Justice System (CJS) enterprise. This is however
subject to contestations as some argued that the resources and personnel used to fight
crime and criminality could be better deployed and utilized in more positive ways.
1(b) - THE CONCEPT OF CRIME: Meaning and Elements of Crime
Meaning of Crime: As mentioned above there are, within the unacceptable behaviour
that constitutes deviance, a huge lot of variations in the extent of their unacceptability,
the process and procedures for judging them unacceptable, and the severity of
punishment or negative sanctions that they attract. Those deviant acts that are viewed
as anti-social or so socially injurious that they negatively impact the well-being of
society and which should therefore attract severe sanctions (whether as just
desert/revenge or deterrence (specific and general) are what constitute Mores (as
against folkways) in ancient or primitive society and are called crimes (as against civil
wrongs) in modern day society.
There is however still no unanimous agreement on the meaning of crime and its
distinction from the wider category of deviance. The most general, and commonly
adopted definition in sociology, is that which sees crime as an antisocial and socially
injurious behaviour. It is however, imprecise to use the yard stick of “socially
injurious” or “antisocial” or seriousness/severity of sanctions to distinguish crime
from deviance. Though most people have an intuitive sense of what crime is, social
scientists, particularly Criminologists, try to define it in more precise terms (though
Page 7 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
not as precise as law),with a view to specifying the boundaries and domain of their
discipline.
While sociological definitions closely approximate this broad social definitions,

Criminology and Law as disciplines in search of precision tend to prefer the legal
definition of crime because it is more precise and measurable. Regardless of slight
differences, most commentators agree that crime must carry the element of negative
sanctions or punishment administered by formal and organized authorities usually in
the form of the State. The Legal understanding of crime defines it is “an act that
intentionally violates the criminal law without defence or excuse and is punishable by
the State”. The major advantage of the legal definition of crime is that it is narrower
and less ambiguous than the social one. But it may suffer, if not careful, from
problems of over-criminalization, non-enforcement, and over-generalization. In
furtherance of the need for precision, the legal definition also highlights certain
elements (sociologist will call them characteristics) that must be present before an act
can constitute a crime.
Legal Elements of Crime: There are basically seven of such elements, namely:
 Harm (external, observable, measurable);

 Legality (legally/expressly forbidden and not retroactive/ex post facto);
 Actus Reus (conduct in terms physical action or inaction);
 Mensrea (criminal intent or guilty mind even if in mere negligence to act);
 Causation (causal relationship between the harm and the actus reus, i.e act
must lead directly to harm);
 Concurrence (actus reus and mensrea must occur together); and,
 Punishment (statutory provision for punishment.
The legal definition also subsumes legal defences against criminal liability or
responsibility. They vary across jurisdiction and while some are regarded as justifiable
(totally exculpating) others are merely excusable (limited culpability) they include :
Age/immaturity/infancy; honestly held mistake of fact, intoxication, Provocation,
Private/Self Defence; Irresistible impulse; Duress/Coercion/Torture; Necessity, To
prevent a more serious crime; Insanity; Entrapment/inducement by law officer; etc
Page 8 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
1(c) -THE CONCEPT OF DELINQUENCY: Meaning, Forms, Juvenile Justice

System
Meaning of Juvenile Delinquency: Juvenile Delinquency is a concept that is

employed to denote the violation of law (crimes?) by people who are not legally adults
(juveniles). Though there is no universally acceptable definition of who a juvenile is,
the term is generally agreed to subsume such other terms as; Infant, Children, Young
persons, Teenager, Adolescent, Youth, etc. Some put the upper limit as 21years. For
our purposes here we shall stick to the more widely accepted age of maximum 18
years. They are considered not totally responsible for their criminal acts. They lack
full mensrea (criminal intention) or have diminished responsibility. Children below
seven years may be deemed not to have criminal responsibility at all, and this may be
made an irrebuttable presumption of law. In most countries, Nigeria inclusive, the
upper age limit for juvenile delinquency is 18years, while the lower limit is seven
years.
Characteristics of Juvenile Delinquencies: Juveniles could and do commit adult

crimes with same characteristics. However, there are also peculiarly juvenile
deviations which are regarded as delinquencies merely because they are committed by
juveniles. When committed by adults, such acts are not regarded as crime or deviance.
By the same token, there are offences by adults which are not regarded as offences
(i.e. offender exculpated), by virtue of the fact that they are committed by juveniles.
Status Offences are actions prohibited only to a certain class of people and most often
applied only to offences committed by minors. Status offences committed by juveniles
(because they will not amount to offences if committed by adults) include; underage
drinking, truancy, joy rides, running away from home, bullying, etc. It is noteworthy,
however that in some cases, an offence may be considered so serious or heinous that a
court will certify a juvenile as an adult, to be treated accordingly, regardless of age.
The Juvenile Justice System (JJS) is designed to protect juveniles not to punish
them. It handles both the deprived and the depraved, and employs special
terminologies and procedures in handling juveniles whether at the point of
enforcement, trial or correction. JJS is however a relatively recent development dating
Page 9 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
back to the 17th century. (They used to be tried and sentenced like adults while
mitigated punishment was in form of apprenticeship and binding-out or binding-over.
Later, house of refuge, Placing out, Reform or Approved schools, industrial schools,
and training schools, borstal homes etc).
The JJS has always adopted a parens patriae or loco parentis (latin, in place of a
parent approach. This is interest of a State in the well-being of its citizens. Literally, it
means ‘Parent of the nation” and under the doctrine, the state may intervene against a
neglectful or abusive parent/guardian and act as parent of the child needing protection.
But beginning from the 1980s it began to get tougher in response to increasing
violence and drug use by juveniles. Some highly publicised cases leading to this
change of perception include the 1993 arrest in Florida of a 12-year old boy who had
in the previous four years been arrested 12 times for car theft, ten times for burglary
and three times for armed robbery. There was also the 1996 case of two 10yrs & 11
Years old boys who had killed a five year old boy by dropping him from a fourteen-
story building in Illinois. And in 1998, two boys aged 11 and 13 years in Arkansas
killed a teacher and four girls with high powered rifles after luring them out of school
with a false fire alarm.
PART 2: OTHER DIMENSIONS OF CRIME

2(a). Classification of Crime:
i. Conventional crimes: also called ordinary or every day, common, or traditional

crimes….
ii. Violent Crimes: murder/homicide, manslaughter, aggravated assault, forcible
rape, robbery kidnapping, ipv, clergy sex abuse of children, terrorism, hate
crimes, …
iii. Property Crimes: larceny burglary, embezzlement, arson, extortion, blackmail,
receiving stolen property, fraud, forgery, counterfeiting…
iv. Moral Crimes/Offences: Adultery, fornication, seduction, prostitution, sodomy,
illicit cohabitation, bigamy, incest….
v. Public Order Crimes: Disorderly conduct, unlawful assembly, loitering, drug
offences, drunk driving….
Page 10 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
vi. Crimes against the Government: Treason, sedition, perjury, bribery, rebellion,
hindering apprehension or prosecution of a felon.
vii. Crimes by Government: Genocide, torture, police brutality, civil rights
violations, political bribe taking
viii. Hate Crimes: Crimes motivated by offender bias against a race, religion,
etnic/national origin group, or a sexual orientation group, etc.
ix. Organized Crimes: Highly organised and disciplined association of members
engaged in supplying illegal goods and services, such as gambling, prostitution,
loansharking, narcotic, and labour racketeering. It is criminal activity by an
enduring structure or organization developed and devoted primarily to the
pursuit of profits through illegal means. It has the characteristics of a formal
organisation
x. White-Collar and Corporate Crimes: Non-violent offences committed for
financial gain by means of deception by entrepreneurs and other professionals
who utilizes their special occupational skills and opportunities (e.g.
environmental pollution, manufacture and sale of unsafe products, price fixing,
price gouging, and deceptive advertising.
xi. Occupational Crimes: Offences committed through opportunities created in the
course of a legal business or profession and crimes committed by professionals
such as lawyers and doctors acting in their professional capacities.
xii. Victimless Crimes: offences involving a willing and private exchange of goods
and services that are in strong demand but are illegal e.g. gambling,
prostitution, drug law violations, abortions, and homosexual acts between
consenting adults. Some people prefer they are called “crimes without
complainants” because there are always victims and the term victimless is
misleading. (E.g. victims include the participants, their families, and the moral
fabric of society). This category is always changing. E.g. in most present day
modern societies, abortion and consensual homosexuality are no longer crimes
in some jurisdiction.
Page 11 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
Note that some crimes can be placed in more than one category, legal definitions do
vary and different jurisdictions may list different degrees, qualifications and
conditions
2(b). Cost and Consequence of Crime
Placing a monetary figure on the physical and psychological harm to the victim is not
easy. (e.g a robber steals beats a pregnant woman who loses her pregnancy and then
steals N1000 from her, uses the money to buy hard drugs which he abuses and runs
mad and is then arrested, charged to court, trialled for six months then sentenced to
two years in prison, etc etc. at every stage we can talk of computation and the costs to
victim, society, offender himself, etc etc).
There are six distinct kinds of costs of crime:
i). Direct loss of property; e.g arson /vandalism destroys/ruin property.
ii). Transfer of property, e.g. the theft of cash or property transfers the property from
the rightful owner to the thief, who then transfer it to a fence/receiver and eventually a
new owner. So while the victim may have suffered a loss, the society has experienced
a transfer
iii). Cost related to criminal violence e.g loss of productivity by incapacitated victims,
unemployment compensation paid to victims, fees paid for treatment (physical or
psychological therapy), social security payments, funeral expenses associated with
homicides, etc.
iv). Illegal expenditures; e.g. in form of money spent on illegal goods and services
(prostitution, gambling, drugs) constitute a cost because they tend to divert money
from the legitimate economy and represent a potential loss of revenue for people who
produce legal goods and services. Note however that such illegal expenditure can on
another plane be regarded As entertainment expenses often paid for by legitimately
earned income. As such they do not victimize anyone and there is no direct obvious
harm. Indeed legal expenditure on cigarettes and alcohol may produce more harm.
Page 12 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
v). Enforcement costs; e.g. money spent on n by various CJS Agencies constitute a
cost (though personnel earn it legitimately) when considered from the angle that the
money is diverted from other purposes it could have been used for.
vi). Prevention and protection costs includes the millions that people spend to secure
themselves (gates, gatemen, alarm systems, cctv, perimeter fencing, the
inconveniences faced as a result (e.g caged or self- imprisonment), as well as monies
spent on insurance premiums to cover losses thru theft.
The financial cost of White-collar crimes is in billions and several times and fold
(some say 50 times) higher than the cost of conventional or street crime. It goes
beyond direct cost to identified victims. The ramifications of a single white-collar
crime are often complex and difficult to assess. It has major social costs in addition to
the huge financial losses and physical damages it inflicts on the public.
Estimates of the financial cost of Victimless crimes is usually based on calculation of

estimates of money spent on illegal goods and services, with the underlying
assumption such would have been spent on legitimate goods and services if not for the
existence of the illegal ones. The social costs are myriad and negatively impact on the
individuals involved, their families, and the government and society as a whole.
The cost and expenses at individual-level justice vary greatly. E.g. administering
justice to people who commit capital offences cost several millions per case. In 1989,
the State of Florida spent $10 million (N8 billion at today’s exchange rate of N80o to
a USD) to bring serial killer, Ted Bundy, to justice! And the federal government of
USA spent $100 million (N80 billion Naira!) to execute mass murderer, Timothy
Mcveigh in 2001. The routine conventional crimes processed daily cost much less but
still a high cost.
2(c). Fear of Crime
Fear is a by-product of crime beyond actual physical and material loss. For most
victims it is the most enduring consequence of their victimization. A further
consequence is that this fear of crime is contagious. One does not have to have
Page 13 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
suffered victimization to be fearful, especially of violent crime. So fear of crime is

widespread. It is greatest at night when a person is alone and away from home. The
following socio-demographic variables have been demonstrated to have positive
correlation with fear of crime: females, minorities, above 50 years, (rural areas?),
lower education, higher incomes, etc.
Conversations with relatives, friends, and neighbours who have been crime victims
can generate fear. This “vicarious victimization” seems to predict an individual’s level
of fear better than his or her own victimization experiences. Fear of crime is also
associated with weak ties to a community, a sense among residents that they cannot
control what is happening in their neighbourhood, a lack of powerful local
organizations, the lack of knowledge about effective ways to prevent crime, and a
perception of disorder and incivility in the area. The general disorderliness (gang
hanging out in streets, public urinating or sex, etc.) are signs of crime which according
to the Broken Window theory (states that, visible signs of crime create an urban
environment that encourages further crimes), gives rise to crime. Note that changes in
the fear of crime do not always reflect changes in crime rates. Fear of crime is more
emotional, while perceived risk of crime involves a cognitive judgement.
Not all fear of crime is personal and not all precautions that people take are for self-
protection. Most fear of crime is altruistic, a fear that other members of one’s
household will be victimized. Hence, fear of crime is more intense than fear for one’s
safety. (Note however that while husband generally fear more for their wives safety
than personal safety, wives fear more for their own personal safety).
Some of the Consequences of fear of crime is that it causes people to lock their doors
and windows, install expensive alarm systems and bright lighting, engrave
identification numbers on properties, enrol in self-defence classes, and buy firearms,
watchdogs, electronic beepers, perimeter fencing, etc. crime, while increasing fear,
tends to reduce faith or mutual trust in others abiding by the law.
2(d) Opportunities and Facilitators of Crime
Page 14 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
Crime requires a social structure conducive to violation of the law, weakened

commitment to the law through techniques of neutralization or detachment from
conventional institutions, and the learning of criminal motives and skills.
However, crime cannot be committed unless there are opportunities to break the law.
There are large numbers of targets available for crime. What is important is the way
these targets are perceived by potential offenders. The target selected by an offender
depends on the specific skills the offender possesses. A major factor that criminals
consider in choosing targets is the vulnerability of their victims. E.g check forgers go
for shops that are seen to be more willing to accept checks from forgers, opportunistic
robbers (usually male, young, in gangs) tend to choose victims who are elderly,
female, and alone. 0obstacles to theft sometimes turn offenders away from particular
targets.
Overall, reasons for selecting a particular target by burglars, in order of importance,

include: ease of access; Appearance of affluence, inconspicuous setting, isolation of
neighbourhood, absence of police patrols, and lack of surveillance by neighbours.
Information wanted before committing a burglary includes: Whether occupants are
present, whether there is a burglar alarm, what valuables are available, where escape
routes are located, location of entrances to building, Presence of police or security
patrols.
2(e) Vulnerability or Probability of being a Victim of Crime
This results from the following factors: (a). Precipitation or provocation (i.e. victim
does or says something that causes an offender to violate the law). Victim
precipitation means that the person who suffers eventual harm from a crime plays a
direct role in causing the crime to be perpetrated. Crimes committed in self-defence
are a good example. Other examples include: victims who provoke rapists and
careless house owners who tempt burglars. The offender usually have no intent to
commit the crime but is provoked into it.
(b). Instigation or Perpetration (i.e. the victim actively encourages a crime or takes
criminal action against a person.
Page 15 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
(c). Facilitation (victim places himself at risk by deliberation, recklessness, or

negligence).
(d). Vulnerability or invitation (when personal attributes, social status, or entry into a
risk-filled situation makes one unusually susceptible).
(e). Cooperation (when the victim is a party to consensual or “victimless” crime).
(f). Attractiveness (e.g. affluence will often attract offenders).
(g). Impunity (when offenders expects that the victim will not report the offence or
testify, e.g. when the victim is also breaking the law.
In addition, Past victimization is a good predictor of subsequent victimization, often

by the same offender. The more victimization an individual has experienced, the
greater the chance that he or she will be victimized again. Whatever makes them
vulnerable the first time, continues to make them vulnerable. (The policy implications
of is that crime prevention measures should focus on people previously victimized!).
Facilitating factors increase the chances that a situation will lead to crime. They are
often present when crimes are committed but do not actually cause crimes. E.g. drugs,
alcohol, and firearms. They may be used deliberately or just happened to be present.
PART 3: MEASUREMENT OF CRIME
3a). Meaning of Crime Measurement:
Sociology and Criminology as sciences of crime must have empirical data on crime
and criminals and should be able to measure, categorize and analyse such data. Such
empirical data are collected at different points in the criminal process. For example,
the police are required to keep records of all complaints made to them (or the ones
they initiated), all actions taken thereafter; including arrest, investigation,
detention/bail, arraignment in court, prosecution, trial, and conviction, particulars or
social demographic variables relating to Complainant/witnesses/accused, etc.. The
aggregate of the empirical data so generated can be used to compile and collate types,
patterns, regularities, volumes and trends in criminality over a certain period in
Page 16 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
specified places. It should be noted however that measurement of crime is currently

becoming complicated due to disagreements on how to measure. This is arising
essentially from the fact that numerous methods (official and unofficial) exist for
collecting crime data and measurement have to vary and be sophisticated according to
the sources.
3(b). Uses of Crime Measurement
It is through measurement that we get to have an informed idea of how much crime is
committed whether crime is declining or growing, and the nature of victimization.
Criminologists often use measures of crime produced by law-enforcement agencies
(Official Crime statistics from Police, Courts, and Correctional systems). Unofficial
records could also be used by organizations; such as Departmental stores, Hospitals,
factories, private security firms, research firms, universities, etc., also generate and
utilize records relating to their activities. These records by organisations may also
come in useful to security agencies in the fighting and study of crime and criminal
behaviour. Since they do not collect such statistics, the criminologists must have a
thorough understanding of how crime statistics are produced. Changes in law
enforcement practices over time can affect how the statistics are gathered, such that a
change in crime rate may reflect a change in enforcement activity rather than a real
change in amount of crime.
3(c). Challenges of Measuring Crime:
Statistics about crime and delinquency are notoriously inaccurate and therefore
unreliable. The reasons for this include:
(1). A behaviour that is seen as crime by some may not be so seen by others. The
implication is that the same behaviour may be counted as crime in one place and not
counted as such in another.
(2) A large proportion of crimes are undetected. If they are not detected, they cannot
be recorded.
Page 17 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
(3). Some crimes are not reported to the police. If they are not, they cannot be counted
or recorded.
(4). Some crimes are reported to the police but are inaccurately or not officially
recorded by them. Such unrecorded crimes are called Dark Figures of Crime. In
practice police officers may use their discretion to informally handle incidents
reported to them; or engaged in discretionary enforcement of law, or may not
understand the law or know how to enforce it; some police officers feel too busy to fill
out and file police reports; some feel an obligation to protect the integrity of their city
or politicians by maintaining a low crime figure. The way crimes are counted may
also affect the records. E.g. when more than one crime is committed by an offender in
the course of a criminal outing, only the most serious is counted for statistical
purposes.
It is noteworthy that despite these problems, offences known to the police remain a
more accurate index of crime than other statistics. This is because, the further a crime
index is from the initial commission of crime, the more inaccurate it is as a measure of
the true amount of crime. This can be illustrated thus, in order of accuracy: Crimes
actually committed >(more accurate than) Crimes discovered > Crimes reported to the
police > Arrest statistics > Charging statistics > Trial statistics> Conviction statistics>
Imprisonment statistics.
3(d). Crime Index and Crime Rates
Any record of crimes, such as “offences known to the police” is a crime index or
mere estimate of crime. Unfortunately, no crime index is a reliable or accurate
indicator or estimate of the actual amount of crime. There is a great discrepancy
between the index and the actual amount of crime. The situation is compounded by
the reality that any index of crime varies with changes in police practice, court
policies, public opinion, and so on. E.g increased police enforcement practices will
lead to more arrest for any crime e.g. prostitution, but this does not mean that that
crime has increased. Increased awareness willingness by members of the public to
report a crime 9e.g. rape does not mean the crime has increased. In short we can never
Page 18 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
really know the true amount of crime or whether it is actually increasing or decreasing
because the crime index is an imperfect estimate that varies widely. When Crime
index are used to compare crimes, the absolute or total figures of crimes are not used
so as not to present an even more distorted picture. Rather, Crime Rates are used in
comparisons. This is a better and less inaccurate measure.
A Crime Rate is expressed as the number of crimes per unit of population or some
other base. In other words, when comparing crime figures for different years in same
place, allowance is made for changes in population. E.g There may have been 100
cases of murder in Zaria in 1950 when the total population of Zaria was 10,000. If in
2020 there were 1,100 cases of murder in Zaria when the total population of Zaria has
become 100,000, one should not be misled by the absolute figures to just conclude
that murder is 11 times higher. 1100/100000 is just 1.1 times the rate in 1950. Note
that in real terms, crime rate is calculated using a population base such as “100,000
per people”. The practice is to divide the total number of crimes for a particular year
by the total population of the country (or place) for the same year and multiply the
result by 100,000. Sociological criminology usually focuses on crime rate rather
absolute figures or individual criminal acts.
3(e). Prevalence and Incidence of Crime
These two components make up the Per Capita crime rate. Prevalence refers to the
proportion of a population that commits crime in a given time. It is measured by
dividing the number of offenders by the size of the population. Incidence is the
frequency with which offenders commit crime, or the average number of offences by
offender. It is measured by dividing the number of offences by the number of
offenders.
A more complicated way of measuring crime rate, apart from direct usage of a
population base is to use prevalence and incidence. So Crime Rate (or
offences/population) = Prevalence (Offenders/population) x Incidence
(offences/Offenders). i.e. “CR = PR x IN”.
Page 19 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
PART 4: VICTIMOLOGY AND VICTIM SURVEYS
4(a). Meaning of Victimology and Victim Surveys
Victimology is the study of the victims of crime and the psychological effects of their
experience. It proceeds with an underlying commitment to help the victims of crime
recover (mentally and materially, as much as possible. It interrogates the relationship
between victims and offenders, the interactions between victims and the CJS, and the
connections between victims and other social groups and institutions, such as the
media, businesses, and social movements.
A survey, in general terms, is a study in which a sample of people representative of

some larger population is asked a series of prepared questions. Victim Surveys have
been used to measure crime by asking people both about their experiences as victims
and about their own violations of the law. They are sources of crime statistics based
on interviews in which respondents are asked whether they have been victims of
particular crimes. The most popular form of it is America’s National Crime
Victimization Surveys (NCVS).
4(b) Concealment and Non Reporting of Crimes by Victims
“Crime by its very nature, is not easily measured. It is subject to both concealment and
non-reporting (concealment by victims and offenders, and non-reporting by
authorities) with the result that official crime statistics fall significantly short of the
volume and range of offences. There are , e.g. wide areas of criminal behaviour that
rarely find their way into official compilations. When family and other relationships
are involved, criminal code often conflict with emotions and social norms, resulting in
the concealment of adultery, sodomy, statutory rape, sexual activity among gay men
and women, illegal abortion, desertion, and non-support. in the legal and health
professions, there are unreported white-collar crimes by both practitioners and clients,
primarily in the areas of illegal adoption practices, fee-splitting, illegal prescription
and drug dispensing practices, falsification of claims, bribery, perjury, and fraud,
purchase and sale of stolen merchandise, short-changing, price fixing, and
concealment of income.
Page 20 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
In addition, employees are responsible for countless cases of embezzlement and

pilferage, while customers engage in shoplifting, tag-switching, and petty check
forgery. Within the public sector, there is extensive bribery and corruption, and to
these offences can be added the s0-called “victimless crimes” and syndicate rackets –
prostitution, procuring, commercial vice, drugs, gambling, and liquor violations,
which involve another group of non-reporting clientele. There are many victims of
other conventional crimes who fail to report crimes to the police out of fear of
publicity and reprisal, lack of confidence in law enforcement or other authorities, or
unwillingness to get involved with crime reporting and control.
Some of the reasons why victims do not report crimes are as follow:
i). Victims may consider the crime insignificant and not worth reporting
ii). Victims may hope to avoid embarrassing the offender, who may be a relative,
school friend, boss or fellow employee
iii). Victims may wish to avoid the publicity that might result if the crime were
reported
iv). Victims might have agreed to the crime, as in gambling and some sexual offences
v). They may wish to avoid the inconvenience of calling the police (e.g. filing out a
form, appearing in court, time wastage, etc.).
vi). They may be intimidated by or afraid of the offender.
vii).They may dislike the police or be opposed to the punitive policies of the CJS.
ix). They may feel that the police are so inefficient that they will be unable to catch
the offender, even if the offence was reported.
4(c). National Crime Victimization Surveys (NCVS)
These surveys are based on interviews in which respondents are asked whether they
have been victims of any of the FBI’s index offences (except for murder, non-
negligent manslaughter and arson) or other crimes during the past 6 months. If they
Page 21 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
have, they are asked to provide information about the experience. NCVSs were
created not only as a basis for learning more about crime and its victims, but also as a
means of complementing and assessing what is known about crime from the FBI’s
UCRs. From a nationally representative sample of about 50,000 households
respondents aged 12 or older are asked in interviews whether they have been victims
and to provide information about the victimization.
Note that the NCVS, like the UCR, are merely an index of crime and not an accurate
measure of the true amount of crimes committed. They have generally revealed
different results from the UCR. E.g. For nearly all offences, for obvious reasons, the
NCVS show more crimes being committed than the UCR. The problems with NCVS
include; it cannot be too legally precise in definition and counting of offences, it relies
on random sampling of victims, they are asked to recall and their memories may be
subject to some degrees of error, there may be interviewer bias or cheating,
respondents may lie, exaggerate, or answer without really understanding the
questions, and most seriously it is costly especially when it is required to be carried
out annually.
The shortcomings above notwithstanding, victim surveys have d following strengths:
i). They have meant a rediscovery of the victim as a more complete source of
information on instances of criminal activity.
ii). The materials from Victim Surveys help determine the extent and distribution of
crime in a community.
iii). The surveys target not only victimizations but also public conceptions of crime,
characteristics of victims and offenders, conceptions of police effectiveness, as well as
other data.
iv) Victim surveys can help identify overall crime trends.
They also serve the following purposes:
a). To describe the characteristics of victims and high crime areas
Page 22 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
b). To evaluate the effectiveness of specific police programs.
c). To develop better insights into certain violent crimes through the analysis of
victim-offender relationships.
d). To structure programs for increased reporting of crimes to the police. e). to
sensitize the CJS to the needs of the victim.
f). to develop training programs that stress police-victim and police-community

relations.
g). To create and implement meaningful public information and crime prevention
programs.
4(d). Self-Report Studies (or Self Report Crime Surveys)
Unlike the earlier presented sources, Self-Report Crime Surveys ask selected subjects
whether they have committed crimes. Like all the others, they are also mere indexes or
estimates of crime and do not provide an accurate figure of actual amount of crime.
Most Self-Report Crime Surveys are (for obvious reasons) administered to school
children and cover a limited number of crimes and delinquent acts. Nevertheless, the
few early Self-Report Crime Surveys (SRCS) of adults have found that there is an
enormous amount of hidden crime.
A US study (J.S. Wallerstein & C.J. Wylie. 1947 “our law-abiding lawbreakers”
Probation, 25) found that more than 90% of all Americans had committed crimes for
which they could have been found guilty and imprisoned. Other studies found that
over 99% of citizens have committed criminal acts at one time or the other. From the
foregoing, one can conclude that most people have committed crimes and it is better
to describe people in a continuum of having committed more or less crimes rather than
as criminal or non-criminal. Such studies demonstrated criminal activity considerably
more widespread than police files can even hint at.
So Self-Report Crime Surveys (SRCS) can act as a check on the limitations of

standard crime reporting mechanisms. They can also be used to determine the
Page 23 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
following information: (a). the amount of crime committed by the “normal” (typically
non-criminal population. (b) what kinds of crime typically remain unknown. (c) How
the official system of crime control selects cases to pursue. (d). whether certain
category of offenders are over- or under- selected by official control mechanism. (e).
Whether explanations and theories of crime developed for officially known offenders
apply to non-registered offenders as well.
One criticism of SRCS is that the questions tend to be limited to less serious offences
affecting juveniles. Like other surveys they also suffer from inaccuracies in measuring
crime, and tend to present different results.
4(e) Victimology and Restoration Theory of Punishment/Correction

The origins of restorative justice in many modern States lie in part in court orders for
reparation taking the form of restitution and community service. Since the 1970s,
restitution and community service have been employed as sentencing tools in criminal
and juvenile courts, and during the 1980s an expansion occurred in victim–offender
mediation programs resulting partly from interest in restitution and community service
programs. Along with the increased interest in these alternative sanctions, attention to
the interests of victims increased during the 1990s, focusing on repair and healing
influenced by the “faith community” and feminists. Today, numerous programs can be
brought under the rubric of restorative justice, but they often remain small-scale
experiments and tend to be associated with community approaches to crime control.
In considering the nature of a restorative justice approach to offenders, it is useful to
note the three core principles:
1. Justice requires the healing of victims, offenders, and communities injured by
crime.
2. Victims, offenders, and communities should be permitted to actively involve
themselves in the justice process in a timely and substantial manner.
3. Roles and responsibilities of the government should be rethought and in its
promotion of justice, government should be responsible for preserving a just order and
the community should be responsible for establishing peace.
Page 24 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
Restorative justice may be considered unique in its emphasis on not just one
component of the criminal justice system such as punishment, but as incorporating
victims, offenders, and the community in its strategies and designs.
Philosophical rationales (retribution, Incapacitation, deterrence, and
Rehabilitation/Reformation) for criminal sanctions and criminal punishment have
traditionally focused on the offender while neglecting or forgetting the victims of
crime. Beginning from the 1980s, greater effort is being made to cater to victims and
their survivors. This consist principally in trying to restore them, as much as possible,
to their previous state and to make them “whole” again. Among the rights that can be
granted to crime victims are the following:
 The right to notice of victims’ rights.

 The right to be treated with fairness, dignity, and respect.
 The right to be informed, present, and heard at important criminal justice
proceedings.
 The right to confer with the prosecutor.
 The right of sexual assault victims to be paid for forensic examination.
 The right to HIV testing of sex offenders and notification of results.
 The right to reasonable protection from the accused.
 The right to privacy (including a prohibition against compelling testimony
about personal information in open court, exclusion or limited disclosure of
victim-identifying information in criminal records, and protection from release
of addresses and phone numbers provided for notice purposes).
 The right to a speedy resolution of the case.
 The right to a prompt return of the victim’s property.
 The right to notice of offender’s release.
 The right to restitution from the offender or compensation from the State.
Judges may also be required to consider Victim-Impact-Statements (VIS) in their
sentencing decisions. Victim-Impact-Statements are descriptions of the harm and
suffering that a crime has caused victims and their survivors. Restorative justice
requires that there is equal emphasis on victims’ rights/needs with the successful
reintegration of offenders into the community. It seeks to restore the health of the
community, repair the harm done, meet victims’ needs, and require the offender to
contribute to those repairs. The criminal act is condemned, offenders are held
accountable, participants are involved in the process of restoration, and repentant
offenders are encouraged to earn their way back into society. Restitution and
Page 25 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
community service are two examples of restorative practices. Restitution is a court

requirement that a victim’s convicted offender pay money or provide services to
victims, survivors, or the community that has been victimized. It may be ordered to
cover medical expenses, lost wages, counselling expenses, lost or damaged property,
funeral expenses and other direct out-of-pocket expenses. The unfortunate problem
with restitution is that most offenders do not have the financial means nor ability to
provide adequate restitution.
PART 5: THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
Let us first examine the major concepts in this heading.

5(a). The Criminal: A criminal, at least from the legal viewpoint, is somebody who
has been found guilty of committing a crime. The debate surrounding this has been
presented in the introductory part of these notes. Justice is the notion of fairness and
justness and a believe that things should end in a satisfactory way that conforms to a
higher idea of what is right, proper, moral, and fair. Justice is the end that law and the
whole criminal justice apparatus seeks to achieve. It follows that for justice to be
achieved, the content of the law should themselves be fair, reasonable, impartial and
non-partisan. These attributes must in addition be shared by the criminal justice
agencies.
A system is a complex whole made up of interrelated, interconnected, interdependent,
and mutually supportive parts or elements. As such whatever affects one part can
potentially affect other parts. The Criminal justice system (CJS) is therefore a whole
made up of four major interacting parts. These are namely: Law making (legislation);
formal law enforcement agencies (e.g. Police, NDLEA, EFCC, ICPC, NAPTIP,
NSCDC, Immigration, Custom, etc); Justice Administration and adjudication of
disputes (Courts, Tribunals, Panels of enquiries, inquests, etc); and Corrections
(Prisons, Borstals, Remand homes, Community Service centres, etc). In less elaborate
terms, the CJS is usually reduced to three main components; Police, Courts and
Prisons. The establishment and institutionalisation of the Nigerian CJS began with the
colonial conquest of Nigeria. Hitherto reliance was on the informal justice systems
Page 26 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
based on informal socialization and non-state actors. Laws were the unwritten
customary rules and morality habits and practices of the people. Law enforcement was
by the community, age grades, and professional, hunter, and secret societies, palace
guards, etc; judicial and adjudicatory functions were carried out Chiefs, Kings, Elders,
Diviners, Oraclists, witch doctors, seers, etc.; and all the aforementioned partook in
corrections which was not a distinctly separate component of the CJS.
The CJS is not a system in the strict sense that all activities of the parts are directed
towards one goal (justice) but more in the sense that the different agencies are linked
through a process in which one agency’s outputs become the next agency’s inputs. For
example arrested offenders are outputs of the police which become input of the courts,
and after conviction becomes outputs of the courts which in turn becomes inputs of
corrections or prison agencies. Offenders are processed right from invocation of the
law in a “conveyer belt” manner using due process until they are released at a point or
processed all the way until they are released from prison or executed.
5(b). The police: It is the primary law enforcement agency, and the biggest, most
visible, and most important sub-system of the CJS. They are also the gate-keeper as it
is the entry point into the CJS through its proactive and reactive police functions. The
police is unique among the CJS agencies in providing regular direct contact with
members of the public. Another peculiarity of the police is that the exercise of
discretion by personnel increases as one goes down the hierarchy ladder. The lowest
ranking police officer, the patrolman on the street, has the greatest discretion and thus
his behaviour is of greatest concern to the police administrator. The major functions of
the police include: prevention, detection, and investigation of crime, apprehension of
offenders, preservation of law and order, protection of life and property, enforcement
of laws and regulations, performance of military duties, prosecution and participation
in court proceedings, protecting constitutional guarantees, assisting the deprived and
the vulnerable, resolving day-to-day domestic disputes, creating and fostering a
feeling of security and eliminating the fear of crime, controlling traffic, preserving
civil order, arms and liquor licensing, In discharging these functions the police may
Page 27 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
carry out activities such as arrest, investigation, detention, granting bail/pre-trial

release, search and seizure, interrogation, crowd control, etc. etc.
5(c). The Court: It is an agency set up by government to define/interpret and apply

law, order its enforcement, and to settle disputes between individuals, groups, and
organisations. It is a manifestation of the judicial organ of government and is charged
with interpretation of the law and adjudication of matters. These it usually does by
trials of cases. The main actors of the criminal courts are: the accused, the
complainant, the police, the prosecutors, the defence counsels and the judge. The court
ensures that legality, due process, and other provisions of rule of law are upheld in the
course of trial. The courts are arranged in hierarchical order according to jurisdictions
and power. They range from lower courts of first instance all the way up to the
supreme courts. In Nigeria Courts are broadly classified as inferior and superior courts
and could have original and appellate jurisdictions. Accepted or valid evidence in
court are four, namely; real, testimony, direct and circumstantial evidence. Hearsay or
evidence from incompetent people are not accepted. The trial process and proceedings
may proceed according to the adversarial (lawyers battle while judges play a minimal
role in the trial process other than correcting points of law and giving judgement) or
inquisitorial principle (judges play most prominent role in examination with lawyers
being less prominent). The examination of witnesses and evidence takes the form of
examination, cross-examination, and re-examination.
5(d). Corrections and the Prison: as the name suggests, “correction” is the term
used to denote all those aspects of the CJS that are concerned with correcting the
offender regardless of the philosophy underlying it. It could be undertaken in a
custodial or non-custodial terms and the specific objective could be any of several.
The more prominent justifications for correcting the offender who has been processed
through the CJS and found culpable include; punishment/retribution, deterrence,
reformation, and rehabilitation. Among all the correctional facilities available for
processing the convicted criminal, the prison is most prominent. The prison is
responsible for the custody of the final output of the criminal justice process.
Maintaining custody involves carrying out measures to prevent escape e.g./ perimeter
Page 28 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
fencing, armed guards, monitoring of cells, system of passes for movements within
the prison, constant surveillance, accommodation, feeding, medical needs of prisoners,
etc. It may also involve non-custodial or not strictly custodial measures (e.g. open
prisons, work release, community service, education, vocational skills). Prisons may
be classified according to the types of inmates (in terms of age, sex, gravity of offence
committed, prior record) etc, structural features, and extent of security arrangement.
Broadly, they could be categorized in order of security level as Maxi-maxi security
prisons, Maximum security prisons, Medium security prisons, and Minimum security
prisons. There could also be women prisons and children prisons (remand homes).
The general trend in prison policy and practice is towards rehabilitation and
reformation rather than the punitive retributive and deterrent cast of the past.
PART 6: EXPLANATIONS AND THEORIES OF CRIME

Background and Early Explanations
In pre-18th century Europe, it was generally believed that crime was the consequence of evil. In many cases it was
assumed that the Devil or demons had possessed individuals and was directing them to perform evil and wicked
acts. That people whose faith in God was not sufficiently strong easily yield to temptations and make pacts with the
Devil. Human behaviour was seen by many as a product of external forces.
The formal development of criminological theories, though recent, built on foundations laid by people (lawyers,
doctors, philosophers, etc.) whose primary interest was in reforming the criminal law and not in creating a science
of criminal behaviour per se. Such early approaches, which are not theories stricto sensu may be classified into two
groups namely, Classical/Neo-Classical and Positivist Explanations. The Classical Approach was primarily driven
by the concern to reform the legal system so as to effectively protect accused persons against the harshness and
arbitrariness of punishment by the State. The concern with fashioning out a theory of crime and criminal behaviour
was incidental and secondary. Such concerns were more noticeable in early Positivist Approach to explaining
crime. In the process, positivists came up with biological and psychological theories of crime and criminal
behaviour. The concern with theories of crime and criminal behaviour was even more central to the sociological
theories that followed after the positivists. These sociological theories can be categorized into two broad
approaches; the Social-Structure and Social-Process Approaches. Each of these approaches house a number of
theories.
In the pages that follow a simplified introduction to the major theories of crime and criminal behaviour is presented
under the four main approaches, chronologically. Bear in mind, however, that there is no one theory that can
explain all criminal behaviour.
Background:
6A. The Classical Approach to Explaining Crime and Criminal Behaviour
6A(a) -The Classical School
6A(b)-Neo-Classical School
6B. The Positivist Approach To Explaining Crime And Criminal Behaviour
6B(a) -Biological Theories
6B(b) -Psychological Theories
6B(c) -Cognitive Development Theory
6B(d) -Behaviour theory
6B(e) -Learning Theory
6B(f) -Conclusions
Page 29 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
6C. Sociological Explanations of Crime and Criminal Behaviour: The Social-

Structure Approach
6C(a) -Ecological (or Social Disorganization) theories
6C(b) -Strain Theory:
6C(c) -Subculture theories
6C(d) -The Routine Activity Approach:
6C(e) -The Conflict Perspective:
6C(f) -Instrumental Marxism (Radical/Critical Criminology):
6C(g) -Structural Marxism:
6C(h) -Feminist Theory
6C(i) -Conclusions
6D. Sociological Explanations of Crime and Criminal Behaviour: The Social-
Process Approach
6D(a). Learning Theory:
- Edwin Sutherland Differential Association
- Burgess and Akers concept of “Differential Association-Reinforcement
-Gabriel Tarde’s Imitation theory:
6D(b). Control Theory:
-Travis Hirschi Control Theory
-Albert Reis Control Theory
- Walter Reckless’ Containment theory
6D(c). Labelling Theory:
-Frank Tannenbaum Process of making a Criminal
- Edwin Lemart Primary and Secondary Deviance
-Howard Becker’s Outsiders
6E. General Conclusions on Theory
6A(a). THE CLASSICAL APPROACH TO EXPLAINING CRIME AND CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR
6A(a). The Classical School of the 18th century: they were reacting to the social conditions that existed in
European societies at that period. They were rebelling against an arbitrary system of law in which judges held an
absolute and almost tyrannical power over those who came before them. The law was applied unequally, and
corruption was wide spread. Confessions were obtained through torture, and death penalty was prescribed and
used for many offences. The theorists were of the libertarian ideology and drew upon the Social Contract theory
and the Rule of Law.
Their emphases were on proportionality, restraint, and logical rules in processing offenders through the criminal
justice system (CJS). Their basic assumptions include a belief in freewill and rationality which allows the person to
always seek to maximize pleasure and minimize pain. People by nature, are selfish, pleasure loving, and self-
seeking and therefore predisposed to committing crime. People have freely entered into a social contract with the
State, the laws were a crystallization of moral consensus, and individuals are equal and are responsible for their
actions. They then argued that the CJS should be built around the following principles that:
i). The individual (accused) should be allowed adequate time and resources to prepare his defence.
ii). The Criminal law should be clear, simple, understandable, and an embodiment of cherished moral values. The
true measure should be the harm done to individual’s right rather than moral standard, there should be due process
and legality in application of the law. There should be no retrospective legislation or scope for judicial
interpretation or discretion…
iii). The law enforcement agencies (though no police properly so called then) should abolish practices such as
torture to obtain confession…
iv). The Judges should be impartial, and should apply prescribed punishment consistently and without discretion….
Page 30 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
v). For Punishment, death penalty should be abolished. Ditto secret accusations and royal warrants for
imprisonment without trial. Punishment should be promptly imposed, certain and commensurate/proportionate with
offence, and severity should be curtailed. The purpose of punishment is general deterrence….
The major roots/influences on the Classical School were Montesquieu and Voltaire’s quest for equality, but the
greatest impact came from Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham. However, the latter two are best considered as
reformers rather than as than as criminological theorists, in the modern sense of the term. Their major significance
was in applying notions of reason and freewill to crime and justice
The classical school was criticised for:
i. Over preoccupation with laws and the idea of freewill.

ii. Its idea of people calculative and rationally exercising choice too simplistic,
iii. Advocating treatment of people equally and without mitigation/aggravation and no discretionary power to judges,
forgetting that people are actually different. Applying equal rules to unequal people amounts to inequality, inequity,
and injustice.
iv. Narrow conception of crime being only concerned with injury inflicted by the criminal And not his state of mind,
and taking the definition of crime for granted and unquestioning
v. Rather idealistic and proceeding largely on abstractions.
6A(b). Neo-Classical School: The criticisms against the Classical School above, gave rise to the Neo-Classical
school which was more a refinement of Classical school ideas rather than a new theory. It sought to respond to and
address the shortcomings highlighted above. It combined the Classical theory of freewill and individual
responsibility with considerations of age, mental state, and other intervening or mitigating circumstances. The Neo-
Classical theory also questioned the justness of particular laws (unlike Social Contract and Classical theories).
In conclusion both Classical and Neo Classical schools replaced the earlier view that criminals were simply the
object of supernatural forces, and claimed that humans are intelligent rational beings who are responsible for their
own decisions. Classicism resulted in extensive reforms to the CJS. It emphasized practical measures for crime
control, as opposed to pure retribution. The foregoing developments set the stage for transition into positivist
Criminology.
6B. THE POSITIVIST APPROACH TO EXPLAINING CRIME AND CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR
The beginning of the 19th century set in motion a great enthusiasm for science and witness rapid growth in scientific
knowledge and optimism in adopting the scientific method to investigate virtually every phenomenon. August Comte
the founding father of Sociology was caught in this frenzy propounding the law of three stages and declaring that
the society of that time was at the thirds stage or the Scientific/Positive stage. Adolphe Quetelet and Andre-Michel
Guerry harped on the usefulness of systematic collection of crime data. The positivists substituted the doctrine of
determinism for that of freewill. They claimed that the constitutional or physical characteristics of an individual
(biological) or inherited traits and intelligence level (psychological) are factors that determine crime.
6B(a). Biological Theories: Cesare Lombroso argued that criminals are biological reversions to an earlier stage of
evolution and are thus more primitive than law abiding individuals. In other words they are reversion to pre-human
creatures or “born criminals”. Compared to non-criminals, they are physically different, physically inferior, and
have not fully evolved. He termed them “atavistic” and claimed that research showed them to possess physical
anomalies such as: unusually-shaped jaws, ears and noses; excessively long arms; and an abundance of wrinkles.
He recognized three types of criminals: (a) the “born Criminal; (b) the Criminaloid, (a person motivated by passion
or some emotional factor which in combination with other factors lead to crime); and (c) the Insane Criminal –
(who is epileptic or psychotic and along with the idiot and the imbecile, is unfit for society). Followers of Lombroso
such as Enrico Ferri and Rafael Garofalo shared his explanation of criminal behaviour but also emphasized the
possible role of environmental or psychic factors in criminal behaviour.
Other notable ideas and studies under this school include Genetic Factors as part of the biological predisposition
to crime and criminality. Family backgrounds were studied to see if crime can be inherited, twin studies were
carried out to see if twins exhibit same criminal behaviour even if brought up in different environments, same for
adoption studies, and studies on chromosomal abnormality. There were also studies on neurological factors,
neuroendocrinology, neurochemistry, autonomic nervous system studies, and Attention Deficit Studies (ADD)
studies.
In conclusion, both the Classical and Positivist approaches view the main purpose of the CJS as the control of
crime. However, while the Classical approach considers individuals as free and rational decision makers motivated
by self-interest, positivism can be distinguish from it by the following key features: (a) as against freewill,
Page 31 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
positivism believes in determinism. A notion that crime is determined or caused by biological and psychological or
social factors, rather than from rational or free decisions. (b) Criminals are inherently different from non-criminals
(in biological/Psychological composition) and in value subscription. (c), criminals are not just different, but there is
something wrong or abnormal (pathology) with them that.
6B(b). Psychological Theories: Early psychologists attempted to study criminal behaviour in relation to
intelligence trait which they assumed to be inherited. Using twin Studies, they concluded that inherited mental
retardation was the cause of crime. Low intelligence causes crime. Demonology, the belief that individuals were
possessed by spirits which caused can also be cited as an instance of psychological explanation of crime. By the 18 th
century, the discovery of an organic basis for many physical illnesses led to similar applications for some mental
illnesses. These findings replaced the demonological theory and dominated until the early 20 th century when it was
argued that psychological problems could cause mental illness and a new view in psychiatry was created.
The psychiatric approach, especially its psychoanalysis branch based on theories of Sigmund Freud, employs a
personality theory and treatment method based on individual case study. It views each individual as a unique
personality who can be understood only by a thorough case study. To understand crime requires that we delve deep
into the individual’s background, especially his or her emotional development. We all have criminal tendencies, but
during the socialization process, most of us learn to control them by developing strong and effective inner controls.
The improperly socialized child does not develop an ability to control impulses and acts them out or projects them
inward. In the case of the latter, the child may become neurotic; in the case of the former, delinquent. Personality
theorists conclude that deviations resulting from emotional conflict and personality disorder can cause criminal
behaviour. Freud emphasised that the unconscious mind, which contains instinctive urges and repressed memories
is the largest and most powerful section of the mind. The basic drives or instincts (e.g. to eat, be comfortable, get
sexual pleasure) is the id. It is kept under control by the ego and superego. The ego restrict the id by demonstrating
the reality of what will happen (eg pain) if left uncontrolled. In doing this, the ego is led by the superego which
reflects the internalisation of parental or social standards. The superego is made up of conscience and ego-ideal.
(there are five phases of development of the instincts: Oral, Anal-sadistic, Phallic, latency, Pubertal).
6B(c). Cognitive Development Theory posits that the way in which people organize their thoughts about rules and
laws result in either criminal or non-criminal behaviour (this could also be called moral reasoning in Psychology
or Legal reasoning in Law). There are three stages of growth in MR, namely; pre-conventional, conventional, and
post conventional reasoning. They correspond to different age groups and when children fail to transit from one to
the next stage, may be considered to have arrested development of moral reasoning and may become delinquent.
6B(d). Behaviour theory (through the work of B.F. Skinner): is the thesis that all behaviour is learned and can be
unlearned. It is concerned with observable behaviour, in contrast to the traditional psychoanalytic emphasis on
deep, underlying personality problems that must be uncovered and treated. The theory is based on the belief that
what is important is not the unconscious but rather behaviour that can be observed and manipulated. People act
badly in anticipation of rewards. The undesirable behaviour can be eliminated, modified, or replaced by taking
away the reward value.
6B(e). Learning Theory: acknowledges that individuals have physiological mechanisms that permit them to behave
aggressively, but whether or not they will do so is learned, as is the nature of their aggressive behaviour. This
theory may be contrasted with behaviour theory in that the latter emphasizes performance and reinforcement,
whereas learning theory emphasizes that learning may be accomplished by using other people as models. It is not
necessary to engage in all behaviours that we learn; we engage in in the behaviour only if we have incentives and
motivations to do so. Motivations may come from biological or from mental factors, the latter giving us the ability
imagine the behaviour’s consequences.
6B(f). Conclusions: the implication of above discussion is that social, physical, and psychological sciences should
be integrated in the attempt to understand crime. The interactions between these different categories of variables
are important for a complete understanding of the origins of anti-social behaviour. The policy, and particularly,
legal implications in explaining and sanctioning criminal behaviour are serious and far reaching.
6C. SOCIOLOGICAL EXPLANATIONS OF CRIME AND CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR: THE SOCIAL-
STRUCTURE APPROACH
The Structural approach of sociological theories view crime in relation to the social organization or structure of
society and asks how crime is related to the social system. What are the characteristics of the situation or social
structure in which crime takes place? Do crime rates vary as these situations or structures changes? The emphasis
is on the environment as a determining or facilitating factor in the causation of crime. The theories here include the
following.
Page 32 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
6C(a) Ecological (or Social Disorganization) theories- attempts to explain crime as a function of social change
that occurs along with environmental changes. The Chicago School studied Chicago city’s crime/deviance,
characteristics, social change, and distribution of people and their behaviour by means of the Concentric Circle
approach. The Concentric Circle theory divides the city into five zones: Zone 1 is the centre and the central
business district. Zone 2 is the next and is the zone of transition from residential to business, inhabited by mostly
low income people but also some high cost luxury housing. Zone three is the zone of working class homes less
deteriorated than Z2 populated by workers who enjoy a measure of comfort. Zone 4, the area of middle class
dwellers is populated largely by professionals, owners of business and managerial class. On the outer edge of the
city is zone 5, the commuters’ zone. It includes suburbs and satellite towns and many occupants vacate the area
during the day and commute to the city for their employment.
Burgess and Park, well as Shaw and Mckay, found that zone2, the zone of transition becomes an undesirable place
to live and crimes will flourish there. They concluded that crime-producing factors were inherent in the social and
economic fabric of the community and constituted a normal reaction to living in a disorganized area. Research also
showed that most offenders live in or near the area where they commit crimes. Durkheim’s Anomie theory is a
further validation of Ecological theories. According to him, as societies become larger and more complex, the
emphasis of law shifts from the collective conscience to the individual wronged, and law becomes restitutive. This
shift from mechanical to organic solidarity is characterized by an increasing need for division of labour, people
become less homogeneous and the traditional norms of social control are no longer effective in controlling
behaviour. Greater loneliness, more social isolation, and a loss of identity result with a consequent state of anomie
or normlessness replacing the former state of solidarity and providing an atmosphere in which crimes and other
anti-social acts develop and flourish. The theory of Anomie was developed further by Robert Merton.
6C(b). Strain Theory: This is a theoretical approach that combines elements of the theories of social
disorganization, anomie, and subculture which major focus is on negative social structures and relationships.
According to Robert Agnew, “Strain theory has typically focused on relationships in which others prevent the
individual from achieving positively valued goals”. He has utilized this theory to explain why crime rates are higher
among men than women, as well as why women commit crime. He argued that men and women experience different
types of strain which explains the difference in their behaviour.
6C(c). Subculture theories: Anomie theory established a framework for the development of subculture theories. A
subculture is an identifiable segment of society or group having specific patterns of behaviour, folkways and mores
that set that group apart from the others within a culture or society. While subculture theorists do not agree on why
certain norms exist within subcultures, they all attempt to understand delinquent behaviour as being endorsed or
sanctioned by the subculture and influenced by its status requirements. Studies and sub-theories here include Albert
K. Cohen’s Delinquent Boys, Gresham Sykes and David Matza’s theory of Delinquency and Drift, Richard Cloward
and Lloyd Ohlin’s Differential Opportunity Structures, and Walther B. Miller’s Lower Class Delinquents.
6C(d). The Routine Activity Approach: views crime as a function of people’s everyday behaviour. The approach
proposes that crime occurs when motivated offenders are present near suitable targets that are not adequately
protected. Crime occurs when there is a convergence of three elements. These elements are: (1) likely offenders i.e.
people motivated to commit crimes; (2) suitable targets i.e. the presence of things that are valued and that can be
transported fairly easily; and (3) absence of capable guardians i.e. people to prevent the criminal activity.
It also employs Human ecology to explain how legal activities increase the probability of illegal activities. For
example, the movement of women into the workforce reduces the number of women at home during the day and
increases the “absence of capable guardians.” Two-income families have greater spending power and this may
increase the number of desirable goods or “suitable targets” for crime. If these two elements converge in time and
space with likely offenders, the crime rate increases. The theory can explain a wide variety of deviant actions as
well as aggregate crime rates. E.g. a study found that criminal behaviour is strongly associated with time spent in
unstructured socializing with peers in the absence of authority figures. It shares certain similarities with Lifestyle
theory, which proposes that individuals who commit certain crimes (violent, property, drug/alcohol) spend more
time on the street and associate with deviant peers and are themselves exposed to a high risk of victimization.
6C(e). The Conflict Perspective: All the theories reviewed above under the Social-Structure approach are
functionalist theories to the extent that they take the official definition of crime as given and see crime as a
deviation from accepted norms. Some theorists, however, believe that laws emerge out of conflict (not consensus),
and are enacted by the group in power as a means of controlling those not in power. Criminals are not different
from non-criminals, though society chooses to react to them differently. Under conflict perspective, the Pluralistic
Approach sees conflict as emerging from multiple sources. The Critical Approach of conflict assumes that conflict
reflects the political power of the society’s elite groups. The variants of the critical approach include: Marxist, New
Page 33 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
Conflict, New Criminology, Critical Criminology, Materialist Criminology, Radical Criminology, and Socialist
Criminology.
Marx and Engels saw law and its definition of crime as by-products of the exploitative class conflict and capitalism.
Frank Tannenbaum approach is less deterministic as he argued that criminals are as much part of the community
as any other person. The community therefore provides the facilitating environment for criminal behaviour. Willem
Bonger argued that the altruistic ways of primitive societies was facilitated by the mode of production which
emphasised mutual help. It was for consumption and not for trade, neither property nor wealth existed, all enjoyed
or all suffered depending on what was available, and they were subordinated to nature. The people were therefore,
not egoistic and there was social solidarity. This is in contrast to capitalist societies where people concentrate only
on themselves and this breeds selfishness, social irresponsibility, and contributes to crime.
6C(f). Instrumental Marxism (Radical/Critical Criminology): radical literally means “to get to the origin or root
of.” This approach is the study of crime and criminals that explores and verifies the connections between economic
reality and social phenomena. Most radical theorists indicate a desire to change situations for the betterment of
suppressed classes. It directs attention to how structured conditions and social inequality in class societies affect
criminal behaviour and official responses to crime. The emphasis is on social and economic conditions rather than
on the characteristic of individual criminals. According to them, capitalism as an economic system, creates a class
structure that benefits some members of society at the expense of others.
As versions of the school of Instrumental Marxism, Radical/Critical Criminology argue that the State is the
instrument used by those in power to control those that they dominate. They view the law, the State, and the ruling
class as one. This enables the ruling class to take advantage of other classes by determining the nature and
enforcement of law.
6C(g). Structural Marxism: they criticize the Instrumental Marxist approach as static, too deterministic, too
focused on economics, and inaccurate in its assumption that all law is used to the advantage of the ruling class and
the disadvantage of those ruled. They argue that although law may be explained by capitalism, it does not always
reflect the interest of the ruling class. Structural Marxist look for the underlying forces that shape law, and those
forces may create a conflict between capitalism in general and any particular capitalist. For example, some laws
(such as trade and commerce laws, working conditions, wages, consumer laws, etc) may operate against the
interest of some capitalists and may in fact have been enacted to keep the capitalist system running. (see also
integrated Structural Marxist Theory, Power Control theory).
6C(h). Feminist Theory: feminist scholars go beyond an attempt to explain female criminality; they look at female
victimization and at the treatment of women by CJS. They have been particularly important in sensitising us to the
manner in which female victims of rape and other sexual assaults have been treated by police, prosecutors, and
judges. However, there have been insufficient empirical studies to support their position.
6D. SOCIOLOGICAL EXPLANATIONS OF CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR: THE SOCIAL-PROCESS
APPROACH
The Social Structure approach, while focusing on environment as a determining or facilitating factor in the
causation of crime (why), does not really explain HOW individuals become criminals. The Social Process approach
of sociological theories, look at the process by which criminals are produced. In doing this, it is not individualistic
in focus, but look for patterns of variables and relationship that might explain how and why people engage in
criminal acts. Social Process theories developed as sociologists began to analyse the fact that not all people
exposed to the same social-structural conditions respond in the way.
It is however not possible to strictly compartmentalize all the sociological theories into categories of Social
Structure and Social Process. Many tent to straddle and shade into one another. Some theories may be considered
in both categories. E.g. Labelling theory which is essentially a social process theory has been characterized by
some as a social-structure theory that has similarities to conflict theory. Three broad types of Social Process
theories discussed here are Learning Theory, Control Theory, and Labelling Theories
6D(a) Learning Theory
The sociological version of Learning theory (as separate from its psychological variant earlier discussed), takes its
cue from prominent sociologist, Albert Bandura, who referred to “reciprocal interaction between cognitive,
behavioural and environmental determinants”.
The major sub-theory here is Edwin Sutherland’s Differential Association theory. He explained that criminal
behaviour is learned in the same way that any other behaviour is learned. His theory has nine statements or
propositions:
(i) Criminal behaviour is learned not inherited.
Page 34 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
(ii) criminal behaviour is learned in interaction with other persons in a process of communication that involves
both gestures and verbalizations.
(iii) the principal part of the learning of criminal behaviour occurs within intimate personal groups.
(iv) the learning includes the techniques of committing the crime, the specific direction of motives and attitudes.
(v) the specific direction of motives and drives is learned from definitions of the legal codes as favourable or
unfavourable.
(vi) a person becomes delinquent because of an excess of definitions favourable to violations of law over definitions
unfavourable to violation of law. This is the kernel and according to him “when persons become criminal, they do
so because of contacts with criminal patterns also because of isolation from anti-criminal patterns.
(vii) Differential association may vary in frequency, duration, priority, and intensity.
(viii) the process of learning criminal behaviour by association with criminal and anti-criminal patterns involves all
the mechanisms that are involved in other learning.
(ix) while criminal behaviour is an expression of general needs and values, it is not explained by those general
needs and values, since non-criminal behaviour is an expression of the same needs and values (e.g. not all hungry
people will steal because they are hungry). The theory has been attended by many criticism prominent of which are
that; a person can become criminal without associating with criminals, it has not be proven by research.
In an effort to provide a “more adequate specification of the learning process” required in the theory of
Differential association, Burgess and Akers developed a concept of “Differential Association-Reinforcement”.
Their purpose was to integrate Sutherland’s theory with the more general behaviour theory associated with the
work of psychologist B.F. Skinner. Their assumption was that in so doing, the differential association propositions
would be more testable and at the same time the learning process could be understood more clearly. Akers and co
conducted several tests of the theory. It was used to test smoking among adolescents, deviant drinking among the
elderly, rape, and sexual coercion. According to Akers, “The findings … demonstrated that the social learning
variables of differential association, differential reinforcement, imitation, and definitions, singly and in
combination, are strongly related to the various forms of deviant, delinquent, and criminal behaviour studied”..
Akers has compared his learning theory to rational-choice theories, which are based on the assumption that people
make rational choices regarding criminal behaviour (e.g Classical school). He however believes that learning
theory is broader than rational choice approach.
Gabriel Tarde’s Imitation theory: he argued that people are not born criminal, rather they become criminal. He
saw criminal behaviour as the result of primarily social factors. He believed that people have some freewill or
choice in their behaviour though this may sometimes be impaired and as such people should not be held responsible
for their criminal acts. Tarde’s Social Process theory of criminal behaviour is reflected in his belief that all of the
“important acts of social life are carried out under the domination of example.” Based on this belief, he
formulated his theory of imitation through which he explained the process of acquiring criminal as well as non-
criminal behaviour. In crafting his theory, he distinguished between fashion and custom, both of which are forms of
imitation. Fashion takes place in crowd/towns/cities, custom in villages/rural areas. Fashion and custom are
related to the degree of social contact. He formulated his laws of imitation; first law - “men imitate one another in
proportion as they are in close contact. 2 nd law- “the inferior imitates the superior” (peasants imitate royalty, rural
residents imitate city residents, epidemics of crime follow the line of the telegraph); 3 rd Law – the law of insertion.
“When two mutually exclusive fashions come together, one can be substituted for the other. When this happens,
there is a decline in the older method and an increase in the newer method (e.g the increase in the use of a gun
rather than a knife for murder). While Tarde’s emphasis on the social impact of crime has remained enduring, his
neglect of the physical, psychological, and economic influences on behaviour and his oversimplification of
causation have attracted much criticism.
The theories of Differential association and Imitation have been used to examine the link between mass media and
crime. Is it also possible that crime and delinquency are learned more through association with the media than
through association with other human beings? According to Psychological Learning Theorists, Albert Bandura,
research has shown that television, the most influential of the media for adolescents has four types of effects on
their social behaviour: (I). the teaching of aggressive styles of behaviour. (ii). The lessoning of restraints on
aggression. (iii). Desensitization and habituation to violence. (iv). The shaping of images of reality on which people
base their actions. Bandura claimed that television can distort people’s perception of the real world. “Heavy
viewers see the society at large as more dangerous regardless of their education level, sex, age, and amount of
newspaper reading”.
The critical question is, if TV and violent movies create aggressive conduct, why is it that not all viewers thereby
engage in aggressive or anti-social behaviour? One answer is that, “the effects of TV’s content depend in part on
Page 35 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
the extent to which contradictory messages (to reinforce or negate) are available, understood, and consistent … all
viewers may learn aggression from TV, but whether they act aggressively will depend on a variety of other factors”.
6D(b). Control Theory
According to this theory, deviance results when social controls are weakened or broken down; when controls are
strong, deviance does not occur. The problem is to try and explain what can be done in a positive way to elicit
appropriate behaviour. The question is not how to prevent criminal behaviour but how to train people to engage in
law-abiding behaviour. It is not a theory in the sense of rigorous scientific procedures of developing and testing
hypotheses (just like so many other theories of crime), rather it is an “Approach” or an “explanation”. In this
regard there are three control approaches: (i) psychological (discussed above), (ii) Containment (in work of Walter
Reckless) and (III) Attachment and Commitment (in work of Travis Hirschi. All three approaches have some
common assumptions:
(a) that the human animal requires nurturing
(b) that differences in nurturing account for variations in attachment to others and commitment to an ordered way
of living.
(c). That attachment and commitment may be described as “internal controls”, commonly called “conscience” and
recognized in guilt, and “external controls”, usually tested by the production of shame.
(d) that evidence from experimental studies, longitudinal research, comparative studies, and cross cultural
investigation tells us how attachment and commitment are developed. Conversely, such evidence describes the
situations that loosen the moral bond with others and that are, therefore, productive of crime.
Albert Reis, an early Control theorist, applied control theory to juveniles and maintained that delinquency results
from the failures of personal and social controls. According to him, the juveniles (he studied 1,100 of them on
probation from court records) had weak “personal controls” in that they could not resist satisfying their wants in
socially disapproved ways. Personal controls are internalized, while social controls result from formal controls
(e.g. Laws) and informal controls (e.g. social sanctions). Although using Freudian concepts, Reis’s views were
presented in form of a sociological theory. Ivan Nye also analysed delinquency using three social control
categories: (i) Direct control, by which punishment is imposed or threatened for misconduct and compliance is
rewarded by parents. (ii) Indirect control, by which a youth refrains from delinquency because his or her delinquent
act might cause pain and disappointment for parents or others with whom they have close relationships. (iii)
Internal control, by which a youth’s conscience or sense of guilt prevents him or her from engaging in delinquent
acts.
Walter Reckless’ Containment theory stresses that we live in society that provides a variety of opportunities for
conformity and non-conformity. Not everyone chooses the illegal opportunities. The assumption is that there is a
containing external social structures which holds individuals in line and that there is also an internal buffer which
protects people against deviation of the social and legal norms. The two containments act as a defence against
deviation from the legal and social norms, as an insulation against pressures and pulls, as a protection against
demoralization and seduction. If there are “causes” which lead to deviant behaviour, they are negated, neutralized,
rendered Impotent, or are paired by the two containing buffers.
There are two types of containment. The Outer containment (external control) is social pressure and works well in
simple societies. it is taught to new members who internalize them. But as societies become more complex they
become less effective. Inner containment (internal control) is the ability to direct oneself and is related to one’s self
concept. The person who conceives himself as a responsible person acts responsibly. Reckless emphasized that the
components of these containments are buffers not causes. They operate to help the individual refrain from
succumbing to pressures to violate laws. if the buffers are strong, the individual is law abiding. If they are weak, he
or she commits a crime.
The combination of psychologists and sociologists in control theory lends it much appeal. It is nevertheless
criticized for inability to explain why people who do the same things are labelled differently. It is limited in its
predictive ability, and it includes a questionable measure of self-concept. It is difficult to measure the strength or
weaknesses of external and internal containment and the theory does not explain why some children with bad self-
concepts are not delinquent. It has also been criticised for being too broad and its concepts too vague for testable
hypotheses for rigorous empirical research. These are the weakness that Hirschi tried to rise above by refining
control theory.
Hirschi emphasizes that it is conforming behaviour, not deviance, that we need to explain. The real question is
“why” with so many opportunities and pressures to commit crimes, most of us are law abiding most of the time.
According to him, the basic concept of control theory isd “the bond of the individual to society”. That bond has four
components: (a) Attachment to conventional persons, (b) Commitment to conventional behaviour, (c) Involvement
Page 36 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
with conventional people, and (d) Belief in conventional norms. Delinquency becomes more likely as this social
bond is weakened.
Attachment is the feeling we have towards other. If we have close ties to them we are more likely to care what they
think of our behaviour. If we do not have close ties we care less. It is the lack of attachment that is conducive to
delinquency. Commitment is the investment one has in activities, e.g education. He must measure the extent to
which that investment would be lost by deviant behaviour before he engages in that behaviour. Involvement does
not permit people sufficient time to engage in delinquent or non-conventional activities. Belief means that a person
accepts the conventional norms and rules of society, believing that its general rules and laws are correct and
should be obeyed. Hirschi concluded that young people who are not very attached to their parents and to school are
more likely to be delinquent than are those who have these kinds of attachments. He also found that youths who
have positive attitudes towards their own accomplishments are more likely to believe in the validity and
appropriateness of conventional laws and the moral rules of society, than are youths who are more negative about
their own accomplishments. Gottfredson and Hirschi claim that their theory is a general one in that it “explains all
crime, at all times, and, for that matter many forms of behaviour that are not sanctioned by the State”. They
respond to accusation that is a huge claim by asserting thaty “modesty per se is not a virtue of a theory”.
Criticisms of Hirschi’s Control theory include: (i) it underestimated the importance of delinquent friends and
overestimated the significance of involvement in conventional activities. (ii). Most tests of the theory have used
cross-sectional data at a particular time rather than measuring the relationship over variables over time. This also
limits its predictive value (iii). The four elements of the theory are not all social-psychological variables as Hirschi
suggests. E.g. Commitment is actually a social-structural variable. (iv). It does not give a complete picture, even if
more complete than Differential Association.
6D(c). Labelling theory
Labelling theory, unlike most other theories does not ask WHY individuals commit crime (cause) and how to
prevent future occurrence of the crime. Rather, it asks HOW/why was the individual designated de4viant/criminal.
So the critical issue is not behaviour itself, but why it was so labelled and why not all who exhibit such behaviour
would be so labelled. If criminal behaviour is to be explained according to the response of others rather than the
characteristics of the offender, the appropriate subject matter is the audience, not the individual; for it is it is the
existence of the behaviour, why it occurred, that is significant. Only the audience’s response determines whether
that behaviour is defined as deviant.
According to Frank Tannenbaum (1938) “the process of making the criminal is a process of tagging, identifying,
segregating, describing, emphasizing, making conscious and self-conscious; it becomes a way of stimulating,
suggesting, emphasizing, and evoking the very traits that are complained of. The person becomes the thing he is
described as being”.
Edwin Lemart distinguished primary and secondary deviance. The former is relatively unimportant; it is the latter
that is most important, for it is the interaction between the person labelled deviant and the labeller that counts.
Howard Becker distinguished between rule breaking and deviance. The former describes the behaviour, but the
latter describes the reaction of others to that behaviour. Thus rule breaking becomes deviance when labeled. Those
most often labelled are people at the margin of society. According to Becker (1963), “Social groups create deviance
by making the rules whose infraction constitute deviance, and by applying those rules to particular people and
labelling them as outsiders. From this point of view, deviance is not a quality of the act a person commits, but
rather consequence of the application by others of rules and sanctions to an “offender”. The deviant is one to whom
the label has been successfully applied; deviant behaviour is behaviour that people so label.
The effects of the deviant label extends to the self-concept of the labelled person both from the point of view of the
labeller and himself. he is thereby placed into a category that leads to stereotyping and his response may be in form
of a self-fulfilling prophesy. Once labelled, the labellee has an almost impossible task of shedding that status. The
effect may snowball such that he is stigmatized and new restrictions are placed on legitimate opportunities. The
labellees’s probabilities of further deviance are increased. Certain types of groups are more vulnerable to being
labelled: groups that do not have political power or low social status. Other contributors to this theory include:
Erving Goffman (stigma and Asylum), Harold Garfinkel (Status Degradation Ceremonies), Aaron Cicourel
(Negotiation of Justice).
Criticism of Labelling Theory include:
(i) it is not a systematic theory, but rather a perspective. The empirical assessment of a theory requires that it
produces testable propositions. Not only is this difficult with labelling theory, but the theorists are unashamed and
unapologetic about the lack. They deliberately avoid precise propositional statements in favour of sensitizing
observations.
Page 37 of 38
FUGUS SOC 305
(ii) A systematic theory cannot be created unless it has precisely defined terms that can be measured. Characteristic
of empirical research on labelling is the assumption “that the imposition of any official act of negative
classification constitutes labelling” without defining that term systematically.
(iii). It avoids the question of causation.
(iv). It views the actor or labellee as too passive and does not acknowledge the reciprocal relationship between the
actor and the reactor.
(v). it does not give attention to the personality characteristics of those who engage in deviant behaviour.
(vi). It produces only negative results.
6E. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS ON THEORETICAL EXPLANATIONS OF CRIME AND CRIMINAL
BEHAVIOUR
Although sociological theories may be classified abstractly as structural or process theories, most theories do not
fall exclusively into either category. Likewise it is not always possible to isolate sociological from non-sociological
theories. Furthermore, some sociologists attempt to develop a general theory that will explain most, if not all,
deviant or criminal behaviour, whereas others focus on specific approaches. E.g. study of persons involved in
different crimes, variables that may be linked with particular criminal behaviour etc.
All of the theories have their methodological problems. Crime is difficult to define in operational terms, samples are
limited, and follow up studies are expensive and time consuming. Some social scientists look for a general theory to
explain all crime. Others maintain that such a theory is not possible because “crime is too variable, too influenced
by moral and political entrepreneurs to be seen as a unitary phenomenon. These differences and problems do not
mean that we should abandon our efforts to develop theories that explain the causes of crime and to test theories
empirically. It does mean that we must be careful in our interpretation of the existing theories, research and data on
crime.
Page 38 of 38

Course Outline n Handout SOC 305 -Final Copy

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Course Outline n Handout SOC 305 -Final Copy

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

FUGUS SOC 305

ASMaliki Lecture Notes

FEDERAL UNIVERSITY GUSAU (FUGUS)

SOC 305: SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME AND DELINQUENCY

Course Lecturer: Prof. A S. Maliki (BSc, LLB, MSc, PhD)

This course is designed to introduce students to the broad discipline of Criminology.

PART 1: THE BASIC CONCEPTS

PART 2: OTHER DIMENSIONS OF CRIME

PART 3: MEASUREMENT OF CRIME

PART 4: VICTIMOLOGY AND VICTIM SURVEYS

PART 5: THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

PART 6: EXPLANATIONS AND THEORIES OF CRIME (To be delivered

Group Seminar Presentations on PART 6

Group 1: The Classical/Neo-Classical Theories of Crime and Criminal Behaviour

CA test: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20marks

SOC 305: SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME AND DELINQUENCY

PART 1: THE BASIC CONCEPTS

1 (a) - The Concept of Deviance: Meaning, Types, Relativity, and Functions

Meaning of Deviance: The concept of deviance is employed to denote behaviour or

can produce several variations or relativity in what is regarded as deviance or

Functions of Deviance (and Crime): The issue of functionality of deviance is

(ii). SOCIAL REGULATION: This has to with a reaffirmation of the limits of

1(b) - THE CONCEPT OF CRIME: Meaning and Elements of Crime

While sociological definitions closely approximate this broad social definitions,

 Harm (external, observable, measurable);

1(c) -THE CONCEPT OF DELINQUENCY: Meaning, Forms, Juvenile Justice

Meaning of Juvenile Delinquency: Juvenile Delinquency is a concept that is

Characteristics of Juvenile Delinquencies: Juveniles could and do commit adult

PART 2: OTHER DIMENSIONS OF CRIME

i. Conventional crimes: also called ordinary or every day, common, or traditional

2(b). Cost and Consequence of Crime

There are six distinct kinds of costs of crime:

i). Direct loss of property; e.g arson /vandalism destroys/ruin property.

Estimates of the financial cost of Victimless crimes is usually based on calculation of

2(c). Fear of Crime

suffered victimization to be fearful, especially of violent crime. So fear of crime is

2(d) Opportunities and Facilitators of Crime

Crime requires a social structure conducive to violation of the law, weakened

Overall, reasons for selecting a particular target by burglars, in order of importance,

2(e) Vulnerability or Probability of being a Victim of Crime

(c). Facilitation (victim places himself at risk by deliberation, recklessness, or

(e). Cooperation (when the victim is a party to consensual or “victimless” crime).

(f). Attractiveness (e.g. affluence will often attract offenders).

In addition, Past victimization is a good predictor of subsequent victimization, often

PART 3: MEASUREMENT OF CRIME

3a). Meaning of Crime Measurement:

specified places. It should be noted however that measurement of crime is currently

3(b). Uses of Crime Measurement

3(c). Challenges of Measuring Crime:

3(d). Crime Index and Crime Rates

3(e). Prevalence and Incidence of Crime

PART 4: VICTIMOLOGY AND VICTIM SURVEYS

4(a). Meaning of Victimology and Victim Surveys

A survey, in general terms, is a study in which a sample of people representative of

4(b) Concealment and Non Reporting of Crimes by Victims

In addition, employees are responsible for countless cases of embezzlement and

vi). They may be intimidated by or afraid of the offender.

4(c). National Crime Victimization Surveys (NCVS)

The shortcomings above notwithstanding, victim surveys have d following strengths:

iv) Victim surveys can help identify overall crime trends.

They also serve the following purposes:

a). To describe the characteristics of victims and high crime areas

b). To evaluate the effectiveness of specific police programs.

f). to develop training programs that stress police-victim and police-community