Sunday, February 04, 2007

NCJRS Abstracts, Sunday, February 4, 2007


NCJ Number: 216815
Alicia H. Sitren ; Brandon K. Applegate
Intentions to Offend: Examining the Effects of Personal and Vicarious Experiences with Punishment and Punishment Avoidance
Journal of Crime and Justice Volume:29 Issue:2 Dated:2006 Pages:25 to 50

This study tested the applicability of Stafford and Warr’s 1993 reconceptualized theory, stating that people’s tendencies to commit crimes are based on a combination of personal experiences and vicarious experiences with being punished and avoiding punishment, through an examination of people’s intentions to drink and drive. Consistent with Stafford and Warr’s reconceptualization theory, the blending of specific and general deterrence into one theory, the studies have revealed some patterns. Punishment avoidance consistently has been found to be a significant predictor of offending. Also, vicarious, as well as personal experiences are salient factors in decisions about criminal and illicit behavior. However, the results of this study revealed only partial support for deterrence. Prior punishment experiences have been positively related to offending in past studies. In addition, core dimensions of the theory, personal and vicarious experience with punishment and punishment avoidance, have not always related to people’s perceptions of the certainty of future punishment in ways that the theory would predict. Traditionally, deterrence has been conceptualized as involving two distinct processes: general and specific deterrence (Stafford and Warr, 1993). However, more than a decade ago, Stafford and Warr proposed a reconceptualization of deterrence in which general and specific processes were brought together. They asserted that all individuals could be influenced by directly experiencing punishment and punishment avoidance (specific deterrence redefined), as well as by experiencing punishment and punishment avoidance indirectly when others are punished. Only a few studies have tested Stafford and Warr’s new propositions. This study examined this more encompassing conceptualization of deterrence theory. Tables, notes, references, and appendix

NCJ Number: 216790
Carlo Morselli; Cynthia Giguere
Legitimate Strengths in Criminal Networks
Crime, Law and Social Change Volume:45 Issue:3 Dated:2006 Pages:185 to 200

Using a case study of a hashish and cocaine importing network (the Caviar network coordinated from Montreal, Canada), this study examined how individuals involved primarily in legitimate occupational enterprises contributed to the structuring of illegal drug trafficking operations. Eighty-two traffickers were involved in planning, coordination, and physical movement of the drugs. Twenty-eight of those with roles in the network operation were nontraffickers whose primary occupational identity was as legitimate professionals or entrepreneurs. They contributed necessary resources to the operation, which included financial investments, money management, logistical and equipment supply, communication brokerage, and legitimate business fronts. They did not have any direct involvement in planning, coordination, and physical movement of drugs. Although most of the nontraffickers in the Caviar network had minor roles in the structure and operations of the criminal enterprise, a select few participated well beyond the scope of their legitimate trades. Twenty-two participants in the Caviar network were charged. Six were nontraffickers. One financial investor was considered critical in the network's resources and received one of the more severe sentences. Two of the nontraffickers were legitimate entrepreneurs who made important financial contributions to the network, but their participation was more peripheral and discrete. A few of the nontraffickers were active in bringing other participants, including traffickers, into the network; and they were influential directors of relationships with both nontraffickers and traffickers. Data on this case study emerged from a 2-year investigation. The primary data source was information submitted as evidence during the trials of the 22 participants. 2 figures, 1 table, 4 notes, and 34 references

No comments: