INTRODUCTION TO

CRIMINOLOGY
Prof. Kristine C. Dolloso, MSCA, CSP, RCrim
 SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT IN CRIMINOLOGY
 Criminology as a discipline is recent, but its foundation date back to centuries ago built by people
who may be called early criminologist. To better understand current criminological theories, it is essential
to be familiar with these people’s contributions and earlier approaches.
 Classical Criminology
 Classical Criminology
 By the middle of the 18th century, social philosophers studied, argued and began to look for a more
rational approach in imposing punishment. Social reformers sought to eliminate the barbaric system of
law, punishment and justice. They stressed that the relationship between crime and punishment should
be balanced and fair.
 CESARE BECCARIA
 One of the social reformers who worked on the implementation of said reform was Cesare Beccaria. He
pioneered the development of a systematic understanding of why people committed crime. According to
him the crime problem could be traced not to bad people but to bad laws, that a modern criminal justice
system should guarantee all people equal treatment before the law.
 Hedonism
 Beccaria believed that the behavior of people with regard to their choice of action is based on hedonism,
the pleasure-pain principle: Human beings choose those actions that give pleasure and avoid those that
bring pain. Moreover, punishment should be assigned to each crime in a degree that results in more pain
than pleasure for those who commit the forbidden acts.
 Beccaria and the Classical Criminology
 Therefore, “the punishment should fit the crime.” The writings of Beccaria and his followers form the core of what today is
referred to as Classical Criminology, with the following basic elements:
 In every society, people have free will to choose criminal or law solutions to meet their needs or settle their problems.
 Criminal solutions may be more attractive than lawful ones because they usually require less work for a greater payoff; if
left unsanctioned, crime has greater utility than conformity.
 A person’s choice of criminal solutions maybe controlled by his fear of punishment.
 The more severe, certain and swift, the better able it is to control criminal behavior (Siegel, 2004)

Beccaria’s book On Crimes and Punishment supplied the blue print, which was based on the assumption that people freely
choose what they do and are responsible for the consequences of their behavior.
 Jeremy Bentham and utilitarianism
 Another classicist was Jeremy Bentham, a contemporary of Beccaria. He devoted his life to developing
scientific approach to the making and breaking of laws. Like Beccaria, he was concerned with achieving
“the greatest happiness of the greatest number.” Bentham referred to his philosophy of social control as
utilitarianism. Utilitarianism assumes that all human actions are calculated in accordance with their
likelihood of bringing happiness (pleasure) or unhappiness (pain). People weigh the probabilities of
present and future pleasures against those of present and future pain
 Concept
 The Classical School of Criminology’s concept of human nature as governed by the doctrine if “free will”
and rational behavior, upholds the following principles:

1. All human beings, including criminals, will freely choose either criminal ways or non-criminal ways,
depending on which they believe will benefit them.
2. Criminals will avoid behaviors that will bring pain and will engage in behaviors that will bring pleasure.
3. Before deciding which course of action to take, criminals will weigh the expected pains.
 Concept
4. Criminals are responsible for their behaviors. They are seen as human beings who are able to interpret,
analyze, and understand the situations in which they find themselves.
5. Criminals act over and against their environment. They are not victims of their environment.
6. Criminals go through a thinking process whereby they take a variety of factors into account before they
make a final decision on whether or not to commit a criminal act.
7. Criminals are totally responsible for their behavior.
8. Environmental forces do not push, pull or propel individuals to act. An individual act willfully and freely.
9. Offenders are not helpless, passive, or propelled by forces beyond their control.
10. Each criminal act is a deliberate one, committed by a rational, choosing person who is motivated primarily
by the pleasure-pain principle.
 NEOCLASSICAL CRIMINOLOGY

 The neoclassical school which flourished in the 19th century, had the same basis as the classical school
belief in freewill. But the neoclassical criminologist, most of whom were British, saw the need for
individualized reaction to offenders. They believed that the classical approach was too harsh and unjust.
This school of Criminology is a modification of classical theory; it believed that certain factors such as
insanity will inhibit the exercise of free will.
 Neoclassical Period
 Perhaps the most shocking aspect of harsh penal codes in early times was that they did not provide for
separate treatment of children. One of the changes of neoclassical period was that children under seven
(7) years of age were exempt from the law because they were presumed to be unable to understand what
is right or wrong. The reason to exempt a suspect from conviction too. It was seen as a sufficient cause of
impaired responsibility, and thus defense by reason of insanity crept into the law. Any situation or
circumstance that made it impossible to exercise freewill was seen as a reason to exempt a person from
legal responsibility from what otherwise might be a criminal act.
 Today’s modern law
 Although the neoclassical school, unlike the classical, was not a scientific school of Criminology, it began
to explore the causation issue. Its proponents made exceptions to the law and implied multiple causation.
Even today much modern law is based on the neoclassical philosophy of free will tempered by exceptions
(Reid, 1997)
 Positivist Criminology
 Positivist Criminology
 The positivist school originated in 19th century in the context of “scientific revolution”. The positivists
rejected the harsh legalism of the classical school and substituted the concept of free will with the
doctrine of determinism. They focused on the constitutional approach to crime, advocating that structure
or physical characteristics of an individual determine that person’s behavior. Since these characteristics
are not uniform, the positivists emphasized a philosophy of individualized, scientific treatment of
criminals, based on the findings of the physical and social sciences.
 Auguste Comte
 Auguste Comte (1798-1857) is considered the founder of the positivist school and sociology. He applied
scientific methods in the study of society, from where he adopted the word sociology. He wanted a
society in which all social problems will be solved by scientific methods and research. He believed that
large groups of people such as society, being a subject of scientific study, can lead to discovery of specific
laws that would greatly help them.
 Holy Three of Criminology
 The positivist school was composed of several Italians. Generally, it is associated with Cesare Lombroso
(Who founded the Italian School of Thought), Enrico Ferri, and Rafaelle Garofalo. They were called the
“unholy three” by the religious leaders during the time of positivism because of their belief in evolution
as contrasted to biblical interpretation of the origin of man and woman. Eventually, they have been called
the “holy three of Criminology” because of their emergence symbolized clearly that the era of faith was
over and the scientific age had begun.
 Source of Criminal Behavior
 The positivist school presumes that criminal behavior is caused by internal and external factors outside of
individual’s control. The scientific method was introduced and applied to the study of human behavior.
Positivism can be broken up into three segments which include biological, psychological and social
positivism.
 Key assumptions
 The following are key assumptions of the positivist school of thought:
1. Human behavior is determined and not a matter of free will.
2. Criminals are fundamentally different from non-criminals.
3. Positivist search for such differences by scientific methods.
4. Social scientist (including criminologist) can be objective, or values-neutral, in their work.
5. Crime is frequently caused by multiple factors.
6. Society is based on consensus, and not on social contract.
 Cesare Lombroso
 Cesare Lombroso
 Cesare Lombroso was an of the Italian criminologist, scientist, university professor, prison doctor, and
founder of criminal anthropology. He was one of the largest contributors to biological positivism and
founder and founder of the Italian School of Criminology. Lombroso is widely known as the father of
modern criminology, although most of his ideas has been discredited today.
 It is interesting to examine the sequence of events that made Lombroso, not Beccaria or Bentham,
deserve this title.
 “Born Criminal”
 Lombroso’s work closely followed Charles Darwin’s theory of man’s evolution. Lombroso contended that
just as human beings developed from the nonhuman animal forms, the criminal was a throwback or
mutant to a primitive stage of human evolution. The criminal was a product of biology and not much
could be done for this “born criminal”.
 Criminal Anthropology and Lombroso
 After completing his medical studies, Lombroso served as an army physician, became a professor of
psychiatry at the University of Turin, and later on in his life accepted an appointment as a professor of
Criminal Anthropology. His theory of “Born criminal” states that criminals are a lower form of life, nearer
to their apelike ancestors than non-criminals in traits and in dispositions. They can be distinguished from
non-criminals by various non atavistic stigmata, which refers to the physical features at an earlier stage of
development, before they become fully human beings.
 Physical attributes
 The criminal’s distinct physical and mental stigmata include deviation in head size and shape from the
type common to the race and region from which the criminal came.; asymmetry of the face; excessive
dimensions of the jaw and cheek bones. Eye defects and peculiarities; ears of unusual size, or occasionally
very small, or standing out from the head as those of chimpanzee; nose twisted, upturned or flattened in
thieves, or aquiline or beak-like in murderers, or with a tip rising like a peak from swollen nostrils; fleshy
lips, swollen and protruding; pouches in the cheeks like those of animal toes: and imbalance of the
hemispheres of the brain. Lombroso’s work supported the idea that the criminal was a biologically and
physically inferior person.
Lombroso’s major contribution to Criminology
 Among Lombroso’s major contributions to positivist criminology are the following:
1. The theory of atavism. Lombroso had the opinion that criminals were developed from primitive or
subhuman individuals characterized by some inferior mental and physical characteristics such as receding
hairline, forehead wrinkles, bumpy face, broad noses, fleshy lips, sloping shoulders, long arms , and pointy
fingers. He called this condition atavism.
2. The application of the experimental or scientific method to the study of the criminal. Lombroso spent
endless hours measuring criminally insane persons and epileptics’ skulls.
3. The development of a criminal typology. Although Lombroso’s system of classification is considered crude
and not adopted today, he still attempted to categorize criminals. They are as follows:
 Criminal Categories

a. Born Criminals- These refers to individuals who are born with a genetic
 predilection toward criminality.
b. Epileptic criminals- These are criminals who commit crime because affected by epilepsy.
c. Insane criminals- these are those who commit crimes due to abnormalities or psychological disorders.
These criminals are not criminal from birth; they become criminal as a result of some changes in their brains
which interfere with their ability to distinguish between right and wrong.
d. Occasional Criminals- These are criminals who commit crime due to insignificant reasons that push them
to do at a given occasion.
 Types of occasional criminals
 Lombroso also identified the various types of occasional criminals as:

a. Pseudo Criminals- These individuals are not real criminals. They have neither any inborn tendency
towards crime nor are they under the influence of any bad crime-inducing habit.
 They do something criminal on account of acute pressure of circumstances that leave them with no
choice. An example would be persons who kill in self-defense.
 Types of occasional criminals
b. Criminaloids- The term “criminaloids” (sometimes called criminaloid) means “like a criminal” or having
resemblance with the criminal”. From this, it can be said that criminaloids are not born criminals but non-
criminals who adapted criminal activity due to pressure of circumstances and less physical stamina or self-
control. The nature of their crimes is not very grave.
 Types of occasional criminals
c. Habitual Criminals- They have no organic criminal tendency, but in course of their lives they have
developed some foul habits that force them into criminality. Some attributing factors are poor parenting and
education, or contact with other criminals.
 Types of occasional criminals
d. Passionate criminals- these are individuals who are easily influenced by great emotions like fit of anger.
Lombroso’s major contribution to Criminology
4. The belief in the indeterminate sentence. Penalties should be indeterminate so that those other “born”
criminals who are incorrigible could be worked with and rehabilitated.
5. The application of statistical techniques. Although crude and with use of questionable control groups,
statistical techniques were used by Lombroso to make criminological predictions.
 Enrico Ferri
 A student of Lombroso, Enrico Ferri is the best known of Lombroso’s associates. But, although he
agreed with Lombroso on the biological bases of criminal behavior, his interest in socialism led him to
recognize the importance of social, economic and political factors in the study of criminal behavior. His
greatest contribution was his attack on the classical doctrine of free will, which argued criminals should be
held morally responsible for their crimes because they did not choose to commit crimes but rather were
driven to commit them by conditions in their lives. He, however stressed that society needed protection
against criminal acts and that it was the purpose of the criminal law and penal policy to provide that
protection.
 Ferri claimed that strict obedience to preventive measures based on scientific methods would eventually
reduce crimes and allow people to live together in society with less dependence on the penal system.
 Rafaelle Garofalo
 Just like Lombroso and Ferri, Rafaelle Garofalo rejected the doctrine of freewill and supported the
position that the only way to understand crime was to study it by scientific methods. Influenced by
Lombroso’s theory of atavistic stigmata, which he found to have many shortcomings, he traced the roots
of criminal behavior, not to physical features, but to their psychological equivalents, which he called “
moral anomalies.” According to this theory, nature crimes are found in all human societies, regardless of
the views of lawmakers, and no society can disregard that.
 Classification of Criminals
 According to Garofalo, natural crimes are those that offend the basic normal sentiments of probity, which
mean respect for the property of others, and piety or avoidance of causing infliction of suffering to others. An
individual who has an organic deficiency in these moral sentiments has no moral force against committing
such crimes. Influenced by the theory of Darwin, Garofalo suggested that the death penalty could rid the
society of its maladapted members, just as the natural selection process eliminated maladapted organism.
Clearly, Garofalo was more concerned and interested in protecting society than individual rights of offenders.
Garofalo classified criminals as:
1. Murderers: Those who are satisfied from vengeance or revenge
2. Violent criminals: those who commit very serious crimes
3. Thieves: those who commit crimes against property
4. Lascivious criminals: Those who commit crimes against chastity.