Jump to content
Invision Community


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


Community Reputation

0 Neutral
  1. Charles Manson was an infamous American criminal. He was the founder of Manson Family, a hippie group, involved in several high profile murder cases like Hinman murder case, murder of film actress Sharon Tate and supermarket executive Leno LaBianca. The son of a prostitute, he became involved with a number of burglary cases when he was very young. During his stay in Washington, D.C’s National Training School for Boys, a caseworker perceived him as aggressively antisocial. He spent a major part of his life at different juvenile centres and prisons for his connection with offences like burglary, federal crime, act of pimping and murdering several persons. He used to preach his philosophy of Scientology among his hippie followers who used to consider him as their ‘guru’. After his meeting with Dennis Wilson, the founding member of The Beach Boys, Wilson used to pay for studio time for the recording of Manson’s songs. Through Wilson, he made acquaintance with personalities like Gregg Jakobson and Terry Melcher. After his conviction for his crime, his recorded songs were released commercially and bands like White Zombie, Guns N’ Roses and Marilyn Manson have covered some of his songs. He started his criminal activities by committing a burglary at a grocery store. After that, he was involved in several case of burglary of other stores. When police arrested him, he was sent to an Indianapolis juvenile centre. Later, he was sent to Washington, D.C’s National Training School for Boys where he spent four years. In October 1951, on recommendation of a psychiatrist, he was transferred to Natural Bridge Honor Camp from where he was again transferred to the Federal Reformatory, Virginia for his antisocial activity. Due to his undisciplined behaviour, he was transferred to the Federal Reformatory at Chillicothe, Ohio in September 1952. There he became a model resident with good behaviour and improved educational level that resulted his May 1954 parole. In the next year, when he reached Los Angeles in a car that he stole in Ohio, he faced charge of federal crime and was given five years’ probation. In March 1956, police arrested him in Indianapolis for his failure to appear at a Los Angeles hearing of another charge of federal crime filed in Florida. In September 1958, he received five years’ parole. In September 1959, he faced a charge for his attempt to cash a forged U.S. Treasury check. But he received 10-year suspended sentence when Leona, a woman who claimed to be in love with him, plead for his release before the court. But police detained him on his way from California to New Mexico with Leona and another woman for violating the Mann Act. He disappeared shortly after his release. The police caught him in Laredo, Texas. After his return to Los Angeles, he was sentenced to 10-year imprisonment on the check-cashing charge. In 1961, he was transferred from the Los Angeles County Jail to the United States Penitentiary at McNeil Island. After his release from jail on March 21, 1967, he moved to Berkeley, California where he earned his livelihood by begging. Here he met Mary Brunner, a library assistant at University of California. Later he moved in with Mary. By establishing himself as a ‘guru’ in San Francisco’s Haight-Ashbury, he organized a group of members to whom he used to preach his philosophy of Scientology. Along with some of his followers, he traveled to several places in the US in an old school bus decorated in hippie style. Later, the group shifted to musician Dennis Wilson’s house. In 1968, the group relocated to Spahn’s Movie Ranch. After a brief period, they moved to Death Valley in Eastern California. Due to the Manson Family’s involvement in a number of murder cases, he went through legal wrangle for several years. In a 1971 trail, he was given a life sentence due to his role in the murders of Gary Hinman and Donald Shea. In 1997, he was transferred from Corcoran State Prison to Pelican Bay State Prison for his involvement in drug trafficking. He was denied parole on April 11, 2012. According to prison officials, as a patient of several health and mental problems like schizophrenia and paranoid delusional disorder, his release from jail will prove dangerous. Currently he is imprisoned at Corcoran State Prison in California. On January 1, 2017, Manson was taken to Mercy Hospital in downtown Bakersfield from California State Prison in Corcoran as he was suffering from gastrointestinal bleeding . He was considered him too weak for surgery so he returned back to prison by January 6. On November 15, 2017, it was reported that Manson was admitted to a hospital in Bakersfield due to health complications. He reportedly died of natural causes at the hospital on November 19. thefamouspeople.com
  2. Jeffrey Lionel Dahmer was an American serial killer and a sex offender. Nurturing animal fascinations since childhood, he was always attracted by animal anatomy especially bones. Coming from a disturbed family, his youth was plagued by excessive drinking and drugging thereby making him a loner and giving rise to such instincts. Having committed heinous crimes, he is believed to be inflicted with necrophilia and came to known as the “Milwaukee Cannibal”. Abandoned by family for his weird habits and behavior, he resorted to such nerve wrecking practices. Exhibiting homosexual instincts, he is believed to have murdered and dismembered seventeen males in a span of 13 years; the majority of them being African-Americans. His residence housed the remains of the dead, packed and stored in jars and even in refrigerators. Evidences such as photographs of the victim and the murder scene prove schizotypal personality disorder in Dahmer. He was also held for child molestation cases but he managed to escape. In spite of exhibiting the traits of a psychotic disorder, he was not pitied upon and was declared sane and sentenced to fifteen terms of life imprisonment. Post his graduation in 1978, Dahmer got addicted to alcohol due to which he had to give up his education at Ohio State University in 1979. In the year 1978, he committed his first murder of a hitchhiker, Steven Hicks whom he took home, made him drink and hit his head with a barbell when he tried to escape. He stored his body in plastic bags after dismembering it. On his father’s recommendation, he joined the Army in 1978 and moved to Germany. His alcoholism couldn’t take him further in the Army too and he was discharged in 1981. His unruly behavior landed him in prison a couple of times, because of which he was sent to live with his grandmother in Wisconsis who also could not take his habits and threw him out in September, 1988. Dahmer’s second victim, Steven Toumi was murdered in a hotel room post drinking whose corpse was moved to his grandmother’s basement in a suitcase. It is believed that Dahmer sexually abused the body before dismembering; although the body was never discovered. Just two months later Dahmer lured another 14 year old male prostitute, James Doxtator into his residence with the usual ulterior motives. After some sexual activities the victim was drugged and killed. Post this, Dahmer set out on a killing spree that continued for almost 13 years wherein he usually targeted African-American men. His victims were first taken to a drunken state and killed, after which he used to have sex with their dead bodies. He used to store the victim’s genitals and skulls as remembrances. He would put the victim’s head in the refrigerator and later treat with bleach. His house would stink of the remains of the dead and neighbors also complained of weird sounds that came from his apartment but he always got away with excuses. For Dahmer, murdering was an experience which was evident by the photographs he clicked at various stages of murder. He was accused of child molestation in 1989, which was defended by his counsel on grounds of seeking medical help for him. Although he escaped with a “day release” and five year probation, he showed no change in attitude. In the next 15 months, he committed 12 more murders. He became a Necrophilia wherein he dominated the victims. He also became a flesh eater, drilled into living victim’s skulls and discovered new ways of disposing bodies. Dahmer was smart in selecting his prey. He chose criminals of lesser degree whose sudden absence from society was less perceptible. It was on July 22, 1991, that Dahmer failed to escape when Tracy Edwards, an African-American man was found handcuffed in a drugged state on the streets. Going by the victim’s claims, the police searched Dahmer’s apartment where all evidences included heads, skulls, dismembered bodies, preserved genitals were found. Dahmer confessed of his gruesome acts but his defence counsel pleaded mercy on the grounds of insanity which was not taken by the jury. On February 17, 1992, Dahmer was declared guilty but sane and sentenced to 15 consecutive life terms or 957 years of imprisonment.
  3. Andrew Cunanan was an American spree killer, who committed suicide after killing five people in a span of three months including the fashion designer Gianni Versace. He was a brutal murderer which is quite evident from the way he took the lives of his victims. His aggressive temperament and unpredictable behavior resulted in the horrible acts of murder he committed. He was an intelligent but dishonest child who grew up to be an unstable teen because of the dysfunctional relationship between his parents and his confusion regarding his own sexual orientation. With growing age he was drawn towards a lethal combination of sex and drugs; he took up the profession of a prostitute exploring his sexuality with older gay men and became addicted to drugs. He was an impulsive and jealous person, and his obsessive nature provoked him to execute the monstrous acts of murdering five people one after another without any sympathy or remorse. Some of his victims were his friends while some of them were just at the wrong place at the wrong time who became the victims of his madness. His motive behind claiming five lives still remains a mystery. His life was an unfortunate journey filled with unresolved desires and criminal activities which eventually ended with his suicide. After opting out of his graduation, he settled down in San Francisco’s gay Castro district. He became a male prostitute targeting wealthy older men and also started committing thefts to provide for his drug addiction. He was also obsessed with violent pornography and also featured in some films. His appearance changed over the years and he was transformed into an insecure and aggressive person. Most of the older wealthy men and his lovers left him and he exhibited symptoms of having AIDS, although it was later confirmed he was HIV negative. Slowly, he turned into a maniac which eventually gave rise to his murderous instinct. In 1997, he committed his first murder by killing of one of his former lovers - Jeff Trail. It is believed that he became quite certain of the fact that Jeff was having an affair behind his back with another one of his lovers - David Madson. He confronted both of them and while they tried to convince him of their loyalty, he was overpowered by a fit of anger and obsessive jealousy and smashed Jeff’s head with a hammer. After some days, he shot Madson in the countryside with Jeff’s gun which he had stolen. His body was recovered from the east shore of the Rush Lake near Minnesota with gunshot wounds to his head. Police also recovered Jeff’s body from Madson’s apartment and was able to make out a connection between the two murders. His third victim was a 72-year old real estate developer of Chicago, Lee Miglin. He tortured him brutally and took his Lexus after running him over with it. He reached Pennsville, New Jersey, and shot his fourth victim, a 45-year old caretaker, William Resse, and took his truck. After committing his fourth murder, he reached Miami Beach, Florida and hid for two months in a hotel. He claimed his fifth and most well-known victim, Gianni Versace, the world famous fashion designer, by shooting him down with the same gun he used to kill Madson and Reese. This killing made him notorious and pressurized the police to arrest him. Eight days after committing his fifth murder, he was located living in a houseboat in the Miami-beach harbor and the police surrounded his houseboat. Unable to run away and unwilling to be caught at the hands of police, he pulled the trigger of the gun on himself and ended his miserable life.
  4. Pablo Emilio Escobar Gaviria often referred as the ‘King of coke’ was a notorious Colombian drug lord. He was considered as the most flagrant, influential and wealthiest criminal in the history of cocaine trafficking. The ‘Medellin Cartel’ was formed by him in collaboration with other criminals to ship cocaine to the American market. The 1970s and 1980s saw Pablo Escobar and the ‘Medellin Cartel’ enjoying near monopoly in the cocaine smuggling business in the U.S. shipping over 80% of the total drug smuggled in the country. He earned billions of dollars and by the early 90s his known estimated net worth was $30 billion. The earnings sum up to around $100 billion when money buried in various parts of Colombia are included. In 1989 Forbes mentioned him as the seventh wealthiest person in the world. He led an extravagant life with the fortune he made. His empire included four hundred luxury mansions across the world, private aircrafts and a private zoo that housed various exotic animals. He also had his own army of soldiers and seasoned criminals. While his vast empire was built on murders and crimes, he was known for sponsoring soccer clubs and charity projects Pablo Escobar was born in on December 1, 1949, Rionegro, Colombia, to Abel de Jesús Dari Escobar and Hermilda Gaviria as their third child among seven. His father was a farmer and his mother was an elementary school teacher. His criminal activities began on the streets of Medellin in his teens when he used to steal gravestones and sell them to smugglers after sanding them. Reberto Escobar, his brother on the contrary claimed that the stones were from owners of those cemeteries where the clients failed to pay for site care and that one of Escobar’s relatives were in the monument business. He studied in the ‘University Autónoma Latinoamericana of Medellín’ for a short period. Since childhood he had a strong desire to become a millionaire by the age of 22. His criminal activities along with Oscar Bernal Aguirre included selling fake lottery tickets, stealing cars, selling contraband cigarettes and operating petty street scams. He became a bodyguard and a thief in early 1970s and kidnapped a Medellin executive to earn a quick $100,000. His next step up in the criminal world was to work with Alvaro Prieto, a contraband smuggler. In ‘The Accountant's Story: Inside the Violent World of the Medellín Cartel’ Roberto Escobar discussed how an obscure and simple middleclass Pablo Escobar rose to become one of the richest men under the Sun. Roberto Escobar used to keep track of all the money earned by Pablo Escobar as his accountant. At its peak when ‘Medellin Cartel’ smuggled 15 tons of cocaine daily to the U.S. worth over half a billion dollars, Pablo and his brother purchased rubber bands worth $1000 per week to wrap the cash bundles. About 10% of the money stored in their warehouses was lost every year due to spoilage by rats. Pablo entered the drug trade in the 1970s and developed his cocaine operation in 1975. He himself used to fly a plane between Colombia and Panama for smuggling the drug to the U.S. In 1975, after he returned to Medellin from Ecuador with a heavy load, he was arrested along with his men. Thirty-nine pounds of white paste was found in their possession. He failed in an attempt to bribe the judges of his case and later killed the two arresting officers resulting in dropping of his case. Soon he started applying his tactics of either bribing or killing to deal with the authorities. Earlier, he used to smuggle cocaine in old tyres of planes and a pilot would receive $500,000 per flight. Later when its demand in the U.S. escalated, he arranged for additional shipments and alternative routes and networks including California and South Florida. In collaboration with Carlos Lehder he developed Norman’s Clay in the Bahamas as the new island trans-shipment point. Between 1978 and 1982, this point remained the main route of smuggling for the Medellin Cartel’. He shelled out several million dollars and purchased 7.7 square miles of land which includes his estate ‘Hacienda Napoles’. The mid-1980s saw him at the peak of his power smuggling about 11 tons of cocaine per flight to the U.S. According to Roberto Escobar, Pablo Escobar also employed two remote controlled submarines to smuggle cocaine. In 1982, the ‘Colombian Liberal Party’ elected him to the ‘Chamber of Representatives of Colombia’ as an alternate member. He represented the Colombian government officially at the swearing ceremony of Felipe Gonzalez in Spain. Another allegation against Escobar was that he backed the left-wing guerrillas of the ‘19th April Movement’ (M-19) who stormed the Colombian Supreme Court in 1985. Many of the judges on the court were murdered and files and papers were destroyed at a time when the court was considering Colombia’s extradition treaty with the United States The treaty would have allowed the country to extradite drug lords to the United States for prosecution. As his network expanded and gained notoriety, he became infamous worldwide. By that time the ‘Medellin Cartel’ controlled a major portion of drug trafficking covering the United States, Spain, Mexico, Dominic Republic, Venezuela, Puerto Rico and other countries of Europe and America. Rumours that his network reached Asia were also doing the rounds. His policy to deal with the Colombian system that encompassed intimidation and corruption was referred as ‘plata o plomo’. Though literally it means ‘silver or lead’ in his dictionary, it meant either accept ‘money’ or face ‘bullets’. His criminal activities included killings of hundreds of state officials, civilians and policemen and bribing politicians, judges and government officials. By 1989 his ‘Medellin Cartel’ was in control of 80% of cocaine market in the world. It was generally believed that he was the chief financier of the Colombian football team ‘Medellín's Atlético Nacional’. He was also credited for developing multi-sports courts, football fields and aiding children’s football team. Although he was considered an enemy of the Colombian government and the U.S., he was successful in creating goodwill among the poor people. He was instrumental in building schools, churches and hospitals in western Colombia and also donated money for housing projects of the poor. He was quite popular in the local Roman Catholic Church and the locals of Medellin often helped and protected him including hiding him from authorities. His empire became so powerful that other drug smugglers gave away 20% to 35% of their profit to him for smooth shipment of their cocaine to the U.S. In 1989, he was accused of getting Luis Carlos Galan, a Colombian presidential candidate, assassinated. He was also accused of the bombings at the ‘DAS Building’ in Bogota and at the Avianca Flight 203. After the murder of Luis Carlos Galan the Cesar Gavitis led administration acted against him. The government negotiated with him to surrender on condition of a lesser sentence along with favourable treatment during his imprisonment. In 1991, he surrendered to the Colombian government and was kept in La Catedral that was converted into a private luxurious prison. Before he surrendered the newly approved Colombian Constitution prohibited extradition of Colombian citizens which was suspected to be influenced by Escobar and other drug mafias. On July, 1992, after finding that Escobar was operating his criminal activities from La Catedral, the government tried to shift him to a more conventional jail. However, he came to know of such plan through his influence and made a timely escape. The U.S. ‘Joint Special Operations Command’ and ‘Centra Spike’ jointly started hunting him in 1992. ‘Search Bloc’ a special Colombian task force was trained by them for this purpose. The ‘Los Pepes’ (Los Perseguidos por Pablo Escobar, "People Persecuted by Pablo Escobar") a vigilante group aided by rivals and former associates of Pablo Escobar executed a bloody carnage. This resulted in killing of around 300 relatives and associates of Escobar and destruction of huge amount of property of his cartel. Co-ordination among ‘Search Bloc’, the Colombian and U.S. intelligence agencies and ‘Los Pepes’ through intelligence sharing so that ‘Los Pepes’ to bring down Escobar and his remaining few allies. Pablo Escobar married Maria Victoria in March 1976. The couple had two children - Juan now known as Juan Sebastián Marroquín Santos and Manuela. On December 2, 1993, after a fifteen month manhunt by ‘Search Bloc’, the Colombian and the U.S. intelligence agencies and the ‘Los Pepes’, he was found from his hiding and shot by the ‘Colombian National Police’. It still remains a mystery as to who shot him in his head as the relatives of Escobar believe that he shot himself to death. Around 25,000 people attended his burial including most of the Medellin’s poor who were extensively aided by him. His grave rests at Itagui’s ‘Cemetario Jardins Montesacro’.
  5. Nick Name: Lady Killer, The Campus Killer, Ted Birthday: November 24, 1946 Nationality: American Famous: Murderers Serial Killers Sun Sign: Sagittarius Died At Age: 42 Also Known As: Theodore Robert Bundy, Theodore Robert Cowell Born In: Burlington Famous As: Serial Killer Height: 1.78 M Family: Spouse/Ex-: Carole Anne Boone Father: Johnny Culpepper Bundy Mother: Eleanor Louise Cowell Died On: January 24, 1989 Place Of Death: Florida State Prison Cause Of Death: Execution Ted Bundy, also known as Theodore Robert Bundy, was an American serial killer and rapist, who was active across the Unites States of America during the mid and late 1970s. He confessed to carrying out 30 killings besides committing other crimes, such as kidnappings, rapes and necrophilia. Born to a single mother, was raised by his grandparents and was known to be an introvert and very timid by behavior as a child. However, family members also recall instances where his actions seemed weird and disturbing. During his growing years, Ted Bundy preferred to remain isolated as he failed to understand interpersonal relations and had stated that he had no knowledge regarding developing and nurturing friendship. Most of the victims considered him to be highly attractive, a trait he used to win their attention and trust. Ted Bundy was born Theodore Robert Cowell on 24 November 1946 at Vermont, United States of America. His mother’s name was Elanor Louise Cowell and his father’s identity remains unknown. Ted Bundy was brought up by his maternal grandparents Samuel Cowell and Elanor Cowell as their own child to avoid the social stigma of their daughter Louise being a young single parent. In 1951, when his mother married Johnny Culpepper Bundy, a military cook, he was adopted by Johnny Bundy and simultaneously his surname changed from Cowell to Bundy. The couple had four other children of their own. Ted Bundy completed his high schooling in 1965 from Woodrow Wilson High School and spent the following year in the University of Puget Sound. In 1966, he got transferred to the University of Washington in order to learn Chinese. However, he dropped out of college in 1968. Sometime after, he enrolled in the Temple University, Philadelphia for a single semester. Later in 1970 he re-enrolled in the university and got honors in psychology. In 1974 Ted Bundy had enrolled in the University of Utah to study Law. After dropping out of college in 1968, Ted Bundy went on to take up several odd. During this time he was also a volunteer for the Nelson Rockefeller’s presidential campaign at Seattle. In 1971, Ted Bundy was employed at a Suicide Hotline Crisis Centre in Seattle. Here he worked alongside Ann Rule, a well known crime writer. Ted Bundy’s first known murder attempts began in January 1974 when he assaulted and attempted to kill an 18 year old girl in her sleep. A few weeks later, he broke into the house of another woman who was beat in the head and carried away. She was later found with no head. Within six months, eight more women in Washington had been killed by him. During this time, Ted Bundy was working at the Washington State Department of Emergency Services and was dating his colleague Carole Ann Boone. In June that year there have been two cases of kidnappings. However, this time he did it during the day among public. There is some debate about when he started his murderous spree but it is generally accepted that he began his murderous rampage around 1974. On January 4, 1974, he sexually assaulted and attempted to kill an 18-year-old girl but she survived. In the fall of 1974 Ted Bundy moved to Utah and enrolled at the University of Utah to study Law. He then began his murders by October 1974 when he kidnapped and killed three girls of which one was the daughter of a police officer. The next month, he kidnapped a girl by tricking her to believe he was a policeman. However, the girl escaped. The same day he committed another murder and the body of the girl was never found. By the beginning of 1975, Ted Bundy had killed five more women—four from Colorado and one from Utah. In August 1975, Ted Bundy was arrested by the police for disobeying traffic rules and not stopping his car. The police found equipment in the car that included handcuffs, masks and a crowbar and found out that the car matched the description given by the attack survivor the previous year. Ted Bundy was then sentenced to fifteen years of jail on 1 March 1976 for kidnapping. But he escaped from prison twice in 1977 even before he could be charged for the several murders committed by him. After escaping from jail the second time, Ted Bundy was on the loose for several months. In early 1978 he went to Florida where he continued his killings by murdering two women and injuring three others. His last murder was of a twelve-year-old girl before he was arrested on 15 February 1978. During the trial he confessed to committing 30 homicides. But the true number is still unclear. In July 1979, he was convicted for the two Chi Omega murders and was sentenced to death. He was sentenced to death by electric chair. He was able to delay his execution for nearly 10 years through the long appeals process and tried to take his case up to the U.S Supreme Court but ultimately he couldn’t overturn his death sentence.
  6. Criminal Behavior The average person may ask: Why would anyone even want to commit a crime? This question is at the root of crime and psychology. Criminal psychology is a study of intentions and behavior. Legal practitioners require a grasp of human motivation at its most basic and most debased in order to render fair judgment. Forensic psychologists as well as other mental health professionals are often called upon to help clinically evaluate the mental states of people who cross the law. Criminal profilers are often well studied in the science of human behavior, trying to understand the mind at its most degenerate. Sometimes the profiler happens to be a forensic psychologist or even a criminal anthropologist. Law enforcement uses these experts for the job of getting inside the headspace of a culprit. Profiling uses crime-scene analysis, investigative psychology, and the behavioral sciences. They try to assess the perpetrator's personality type, lifestyle habits, quirks, and other gritty details. The Role of Forensic Psychology Criminologists are not only concerned with profiling, but also with the possibility of an alleged offender committing additional crimes down the road. They also try to ascertain whether or not the the offender suffers from a psychological disorder. Psychologists and psychiatrists participate in the assessment and rehabilitation of offenders, determining what type of treatment can be recommended. Many psychologists in this field also help research a case, or act as advisors and consultants to law enforcement throughout an investigation. You will find forensic psychologists in the wings of any number of resolved and unresolved high-profile murders and other criminal misdeeds.
  7. Religion and crime Different religious traditions may promote distinct norms of behaviour, and these in turn may clash or harmonise with the perceived interests of a state. Socially accepted or imposed religious morality has influenced secular jurisdictions on issues that may otherwise concern only an individual's conscience. Activities sometimes criminalized on religious grounds include (for example) alcohol consumption (prohibition), abortion and stem-cell research. In various historical and present-day societies, institutionalized religions have established systems of earthly justice that punish crimes against the divine will and against specific devotional, organizational and other rules under specific codes, such as Roman Catholic canon law. Military jurisdictions and states of emergency In the military sphere, authorities can prosecute both regular crimes and specific acts (such as mutiny or desertion) under martial-law codes that either supplant or extend civil codes in times of (for example) war. Many constitutions contain provisions to curtail freedoms and criminalize otherwise tolerated behaviors under a state of emergency in the event of war, natural disaster or civil unrest. Undesired activities at such times may include assembly in the streets, violation of curfew, or possession of firearms. Employee crime Two common types of employee crime exist: embezzlement and wage theft. The complexity and anonymity of computer systems may help criminal employees camouflage their operations. The victims of the most costly scams include banks, brokerage houses, insurance companies, and other large financial institutions. In the United States, it is estimated that workers are not paid at least $19 billion every year in overtime and that in total $40 billion to $60 billion are lost annually due to all forms of wage theft. This compares to national annual losses of $340 million due to robbery, $4.1 billion due to burglary, $5.3 billion due to larceny, and $3.8 billion due to auto theft in 2012. In Singapore, as in the United States, wage theft was found to be widespread and severe. In a 2014 survey it was found that as many as one-third of low wage male foreign workers in Singapore, or about 130,000, were affected by wage theft from partial to full denial of pay
  8. Reports, studies and organizations There are several national and International organizations offering studies and statistics about global and local crime activity, such as United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, the United States of America Overseas Security Advisory Council (OSAC) safety report or national reports generated by the law-enforcement authorities of EU state member reported to the Europol. Offence in common law jurisdictions In England and Wales, as well as in Hong Kong, the term "offence" means the same thing as, and is interchangeable with, the term "crime", They are further split into: Summary offences Indictable offences Causes and correlates of crime Many different causes and correlates of crime have been proposed with varying degree of empirical support. They include socioeconomic, psychological, biological, and behavioral factors. Controversial topics include media violence research and effects of gun politics. Emotional state (both chronic and current) have a tremendous impact on individual thought processes and, as a result, can be linked to criminal activities. The positive psychology concept of Broaden and Build posits that cognitive functioning expands when an individual is in a good-feeling emotional state and contracts as emotional state declines. In positive emotional states an individual is able to consider more possible solutions to problems, but in lower emotional states fewer solutions can be ascertained. The narrowed thought-action repertoires can result in the only paths perceptible to an individual being ones they would never use if they saw an alternative, but if they can't conceive of the alternatives that carry less risk they will choose one that they can see. Criminals who commit even the most horrendous of crimes, such as mass murders, did not see another solution. Crimes in international law Crimes defined by treaty as crimes against international law include: Crimes against peace Crimes of apartheid Forced disappearance Genocide Piracy Sexual slavery Slavery Waging a war of aggression War crimes From the point of view of state-centric law, extraordinary procedures (usually international courts) may prosecute such crimes. Note the role of the International Criminal Court at The Hague in the Netherlands.
  9. Classification by mode of trial The following classes of offence are based on mode of trial: Indictable-only offence Indictable offence Hybrid offence, a.k.a. either-way offence in England and Wales Summary offence, a.k.a. infraction in the US Classification by origin In common law countries, crimes may be categorised into common law offences and statutory offences. In the US, Australia and Canada (in particular), they are divided into federal crimes and under state crimes. Other classifications Arrestable offence U.S. classification In the United States since 1930, the FBI has tabulated Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) annually from crime data submitted by law enforcement agencies across the United States. Officials compile this data at the city, county, and state levels into the UCR. They classify violations of laws based on common law as Part I (index) crimes in UCR data. These are further categorized as violent or property crimes. Part I violent crimes include murder and criminal homicide (voluntary manslaughter), forcible rape, aggravated assault, and robbery; while Part I property crimes include burglary, arson, larceny/theft, and motor-vehicle theft. All other crimes count come under Part II. For convenience, such lists usually include infractions although, in the U.S., they may come into the sphere not of the criminal law, but rather of the civil law. Compare tortfeasance. Booking arrests require detention for a time-frame ranging 1 to 24 hours.
  10. Categorisation by type The following classes of offences are used, or have been used, as legal terms of art: Offence against the person Violent offence Sexual offence Offence against property Researchers and commentators have classified crimes into the following categories, in addition to those above: Forgery, personation and cheating Firearms and offensive weapons Offences against the State/offences against the Crown and Government/political offences Harmful or dangerous drugs Offences against religion and public worship Offences against public justice/offences against the administration of public justice Public order offence Commerce, financial markets and insolvency Offences against public morals and public policy Motor vehicle offences Conspiracy, incitement and attempt to commit crime Inchoate offence Juvenile delinquency Victimless crime Categorisation by penalty One can categorise crimes depending on the related punishment, with sentencing tariffs prescribed in line with the perceived seriousness of the offence. Thus fines and noncustodial sentences may address the crimes seen as least serious, with lengthy imprisonment or (in some jurisdictions) capital punishment reserved for the most serious. Common law Under the common law of England, crimes were classified as either treason, felony or misdemeanour, with treason sometimes being included with the felonies. This system was based on the perceived seriousness of the offence. It is still used in the United States but the distinction between felony and misdemeanour is abolished in England and Wales and Northern Ireland.
  11. History Some religious communities regard sin as a crime; some may even highlight the crime of sin very early in legendary or mythological accounts of origins – note the tale of Adam and Eve and the theory of original sin. What one group considers a crime may cause or ignite war or conflict. However, the earliest known civilizations had codes of law, containing both civil and penal rules mixed together, though not always in recorded form. The Sumerians produced the earliest surviving written codes. Urukagina (reigned c. 2380 BC – c. 2360 BC, short chronology) had an early code that has not survived; a later king, Ur-Nammu, left the earliest extant written law system, the Code of Ur-Nammu (c. 2100 – c. 2050 BC), which prescribed a formal system of penalties for specific cases in 57 articles. The Sumerians later issued other codes, including the "code of Lipit-Ishtar". This code, from the 20th century BCE, contains some fifty articles, and scholars have reconstructed it by comparing several sources. The Sumerian was deeply conscious of his personal rights and resented any encroachment on them, whether by his King, his superior, or his equal. No wonder that the Sumerians were the first to compile laws and law codes. Successive legal codes in Babylon, including the code of Hammurabi (c. 1790 BC), reflected Mesopotamian society's belief that law derived from the will of the gods (see Babylonian law). Many states at this time functioned as theocracies, with codes of conduct largely religious in origin or reference. In the Sanskrit texts of Dharmaśāstra (c. 1250 BC), issues such as legal and religious duties, code of conduct, penalties and remedies, etc. have been discussed and forms one of the elaborate and earliest source of legal code. Sir Henry Maine (1861) studied the ancient codes available in his day, and failed to find any criminal law in the "modern" sense of the word. While modern systems distinguish between offences against the "State" or "community", and offences against the "individual", the so-called penal law of ancient communities did not deal with "crimes" (Latin: crimina), but with "wrongs" (Latin: delicta). Thus the Hellenic laws treated all forms of theft, assault, rape, and murder as private wrongs, and left action for enforcement up to the victims or their survivors. The earliest systems seem to have lacked formal courts. The Romans systematized law and applied their system across the Roman Empire. Again, the initial rules of Roman law regarded assaults as a matter of private compensation. The most significant Roman law concept involved dominion. The pater familias owned all the family and its property (including slaves); the pater enforced matters involving interference with any property. The Commentaries of Gaius (written between 130 and 180 AD) on the Twelve Tables treated furtum (in modern parlance: "theft") as a tort. Similarly, assault and violent robbery involved trespass as to the pater's property (so, for example, the rape of a slave could become the subject of compensation to the pater as having trespassed on his "property"), and breach of such laws created a vinculum juris (an obligation of law) that only the payment of monetary compensation (modern "damages") could discharge. Similarly, the consolidated Teutonic laws of the Germanic tribes, included a complex system of monetary compensations for what courts would now consider the complete range of criminal offences against the person, from murder down. Even though Rome abandoned its Britannic provinces around 400 AD, the Germanic mercenaries – who had largely become instrumental in enforcing Roman rule in Britannia – acquired ownership of land there and continued to use a mixture of Roman and Teutonic Law, with much written down under the early Anglo-Saxon kings. But only when a more centralized English monarchy emerged following the Norman invasion, and when the kings of England attempted to assert power over the land and its peoples, did the modern concept emerge, namely of a crime not only as an offence against the "individual", but also as a wrong against the "State". This idea came from common law, and the earliest conception of a criminal act involved events of such major significance that the "State" had to usurp the usual functions of the civil tribunals, and direct a special law or privilegium against the perpetrator. All the earliest English criminal trials involved wholly extraordinary and arbitrary courts without any settled law to apply, whereas the civil (delictual) law operated in a highly developed and consistent manner (except where a king wanted to raise money by selling a new form of writ). The development of the idea that the "State" dispenses justice in a court only emerges in parallel with or after the emergence of the concept of sovereignty. In continental Europe, Roman law persisted, but with a stronger influence from the Christian Church. Coupled with the more diffuse political structure based on smaller feudal units, various legal traditions emerged, remaining more strongly rooted in Roman jurisprudence, but modified to meet the prevailing political climate. In Scandinavia the effect of Roman law did not become apparent until the 17th century, and the courts grew out of the things – the assemblies of the people. The people decided the cases (usually with largest freeholders dominating). This system later gradually developed into a system with a royal judge nominating a number of the most esteemed men of the parish as his board, fulfilling the function of "the people" of yore. From the Hellenic system onwards, the policy rationale for requiring the payment of monetary compensation for wrongs committed has involved the avoidance of feuding between clans and families. If compensation could mollify families' feelings, this would help to keep the peace. On the other hand, the institution of oaths also played down the threat of feudal warfare. Both in archaic Greece and in medieval Scandinavia, an accused person walked free if he could get a sufficient number of male relatives to swear him not guilty. (Compare the United Nations Security Council, in which the veto power of the permanent members ensures that the organization does not become involved in crises where it could not enforce its decisions.) These means of restraining private feuds did not always work, and sometimes prevented the fulfillment of justice. But in the earliest times the "state" did not always provide an independent policing force. Thus criminal law grew out of what 21st-century lawyers would call torts; and, in real terms, many acts and omissions classified as crimes actually overlap with civil-law concepts. The development of sociological thought from the 19th century onwards prompted some fresh views on crime and criminality, and fostered the beginnings of criminology as a study of crime in society. Nietzsche noted a link between crime and creativity – in The Birth of Tragedy he asserted: "The best and brightest that man can acquire he must obtain by crime". In the 20th century Michel Foucault in Discipline and Punish made a study of criminalization as a coercive method of state control.
  12. Natural-law theory Justifying the State's use of force to coerce compliance with its laws has proven a consistent theoretical problem. One of the earliest justifications involved the theory of natural law. This posits that the nature of the world or of human beings underlies the standards of morality or constructs them. Thomas Aquinas wrote in the 13th century: "the rule and measure of human acts is the reason, which is the first principle of human acts" (Aquinas, ST I-II, Q.90, A.I). He regarded people as by nature rational beings, concluding that it becomes morally appropriate that they should behave in a way that conforms to their rational nature. Thus, to be valid, any law must conform to natural law and coercing people to conform to that law is morally acceptable. In the 1760s William Blackstone (1979: 41) described the thesis: "This law of nature, being co-eval with mankind and dictated by God himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at all times: no human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this; and such of them as are valid derive all their force, and all their authority, mediately or immediately, from this original." But John Austin (1790–1859), an early positivist, applied utilitarianism in accepting the calculating nature of human beings and the existence of an objective morality. He denied that the legal validity of a norm depends on whether its content conforms to morality. Thus in Austinian terms a moral code can objectively determine what people ought to do, the law can embody whatever norms the legislature decrees to achieve social utility, but every individual remains free to choose what to do. Similarly, Hart (1961) saw the law as an aspect of sovereignty, with lawmakers able to adopt any law as a means to a moral end. Thus the necessary and sufficient conditions for the truth of a proposition of law simply involved internal logic and consistency, and that the state's agents used state power with responsibility. Ronald Dworkin (2005) rejects Hart's theory and proposes that all individuals should expect the equal respect and concern of those who govern them as a fundamental political right. He offers a theory of compliance overlaid by a theory of deference (the citizen's duty to obey the law) and a theory of enforcement, which identifies the legitimate goals of enforcement and punishment. Legislation must conform to a theory of legitimacy, which describes the circumstances under which a particular person or group is entitled to make law, and a theory of legislative justice, which describes the law they are entitled or obliged to make. Indeed, despite everything, the majority of natural-law theorists have accepted the idea of enforcing the prevailing morality as a primary function of the law. This view entails the problem that it makes any moral criticism of the law impossible: if conformity with natural law forms a necessary condition for legal validity, all valid law must, by definition, count as morally just. Thus, on this line of reasoning, the legal validity of a norm necessarily entails its moral justice. One can solve this problem by granting some degree of moral relativism and accepting that norms may evolve over time and, therefore, one can criticize the continued enforcement of old laws in the light of the current norms. People may find such law acceptable, but the use of State power to coerce citizens to comply with that law lacks moral justification. More recent conceptions of the theory characterise crime as the violation of individual rights. Since society considers so many rights as natural (hence the term "right") rather than man-made, what constitutes a crime also counts as natural, in contrast to laws (seen as man-made). Adam Smith illustrates this view, saying that a smuggler would be an excellent citizen, "...had not the laws of his country made that a crime which nature never meant to be so." Natural-law theory therefore distinguishes between "criminality" (which derives from human nature) and "illegality" (which originates with the interests of those in power). Lawyers sometimes express the two concepts with the phrases malum in se and malum prohibitum respectively. They regard a "crime malum in se" as inherently criminal; whereas a "crime malum prohibitum" (the argument goes) counts as criminal only because the law has decreed it so. It follows from this view that one can perform an illegal act without committing a crime, while a criminal act could be perfectly legal. Many Enlightenment thinkers (such as Adam Smith and the American Founding Fathers) subscribed to this view to some extent, and it remains influential among so-called classical liberals and libertarians
  13. Criminalization One can view criminalization as a procedure deployed by society as a preemptive harm-reduction device, using the threat of punishment as a deterrent to anyone proposing to engage in the behavior causing harm. The State becomes involved because governing entities can become convinced that the costs of not criminalizing (through allowing the harms to continue unabated) outweigh the costs of criminalizing it (restricting individual liberty, for example, to minimize harm to others). States control the process of criminalization because: Even if victims recognize their own role as victims, they may not have the resources to investigate and seek legal redress for the injuries suffered: the enforcers formally appointed by the State often have better access to expertise and resources. The victims may only want compensation for the injuries suffered, while remaining indifferent to a possible desire for deterrence. Fear of retaliation may deter victims or witnesses of crimes from taking any action. Even in policed societies, fear may inhibit from reporting incidents or from co-operating in a trial. Victims, on their own, may lack the economies of scale that could allow them to administer a penal system, let alone to collect any fines levied by a court. Garoupa & Klerman (2002) warn that a rent-seeking government has as its primary motivation to maximize revenue and so, if offenders have sufficient wealth, a rent-seeking government will act more aggressively than a social-welfare-maximizing government in enforcing laws against minor crimes (usually with a fixed penalty such as parking and routine traffic violations), but more laxly in enforcing laws against major crimes. As a result of the crime, victims may die or become incapacitated. Labelling theory The label of "crime" and the accompanying social stigma normally confine their scope to those activities seen as injurious to the general population or to the State, including some that cause serious loss or damage to individuals. Those who apply the labels of "crime" or "criminal" intend to assert the hegemony of a dominant population, or to reflect a consensus of condemnation for the identified behavior and to justify any punishments prescribed by the State (in the event that standard processing tries and convicts an accused person of a crime).
  14. Definition England and Wales Whether a given act or omission constitutes a crime does not depend on the nature of that act or omission. It depends on the nature of the legal consequences that may follow it. An act or omission is a crime if it is capable of being followed by what are called criminal proceedings. History The following definition of "crime" was provided by the Prevention of Crimes Act 1871, and applied for the purposes of section 10 of the Prevention of Crime Act 1908: The expression "crime" means, in England and Ireland, any felony or the offence of uttering false or counterfeit coin, or of possessing counterfeit gold or silver coin, or the offence of obtaining goods or money by false pretences, or the offence of conspiracy to defraud, or any misdemeanour under the fifty-eighth section of the Larceny Act, 1861. Scotland For the purpose of section 243 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, a crime means an offence punishable on indictment, or an offence punishable on summary conviction, and for the commission of which the offender is liable under the statute making the offence punishable to be imprisoned either absolutely or at the discretion of the court as an alternative for some other punishment. Sociology A normative definition views crime as deviant behavior that violates prevailing norms – cultural standards prescribing how humans ought to behave normally. This approach considers the complex realities surrounding the concept of crime and seeks to understand how changing social, political, psychological, and economic conditions may affect changing definitions of crime and the form of the legal, law-enforcement, and penal responses made by society. These structural realities remain fluid and often contentious. For example: as cultures change and the political environment shifts, societies may criminalise or decriminalise certain behaviours, which directly affects the statistical crime rates, influence the allocation of resources for the enforcement of laws, and (re-)influence the general public opinion. Similarly, changes in the collection and/or calculation of data on crime may affect the public perceptions of the extent of any given "crime problem". All such adjustments to crime statistics, allied with the experience of people in their everyday lives, shape attitudes on the extent to which the State should use law or social engineering to enforce or encourage any particular social norm. Behaviour can be controlled and influenced by a society in many ways without having to resort to the criminal justice system. Indeed, in those cases where no clear consensus exists on a given norm, the drafting of criminal law by the group in power to prohibit the behaviour of another group may seem to some observers an improper limitation of the second group's freedom, and the ordinary members of society have less respect for the law or laws in general – whether the authorities actually enforce the disputed law or not. Other definitions Legislatures can pass laws (called mala prohibita) that define crimes against social norms. These laws vary from time to time and from place to place: note variations in gambling laws, for example, and the prohibition or encouragement of duelling in history. Other crimes, called mala in se, count as outlawed in almost all societies, (murder, theft and rape, for example). English criminal law and the related criminal law of Commonwealth countries can define offences that the courts alone have developed over the years, without any actual legislation: common law offences. The courts used the concept of malum in se to develop various common law offences.
  15. Crime In ordinary language, a crime is an unlawful act punishable by a state or other authority. The term "crime" does not, in modern criminal law, have any simple and universally accepted definition, though statutory definitions have been provided for certain purposes. The most popular view is that crime is a category created by law; in other words, something is a crime if declared as such by the relevant and applicable law. One proposed definition is that a crime or offence (or criminal offence) is an act harmful not only to some individual but also to a community, society or the state ("a public wrong"). Such acts are forbidden and punishable by law. The notion that acts such as murder, rape and theft are to be prohibited exists worldwide. What precisely is a criminal offence is defined by criminal law of each country. While many have a catalogue of crimes called the criminal code, in some common law countries no such comprehensive statute exists. The state (government) has the power to severely restrict one's liberty for committing a crime. In modern societies, there are procedures to which investigations and trials must adhere. If found guilty, an offender may be sentenced to a form of reparation such as a community sentence, or, depending on the nature of their offence, to undergo imprisonment, life imprisonment or, in some jurisdictions, execution. Usually, to be classified as a crime, the "act of doing something criminal" (actus reus) must – with certain exceptions – be accompanied by the "intention to do something criminal" (mens rea). While every crime violates the law, not every violation of the law counts as a crime. Breaches of private law (torts and breaches of contract) are not automatically punished by the state, but can be enforced through civil procedure. Overview When informal relationships and sanctions prove insufficient to establish and maintain a desired social order, a government or a state may impose more formalized or stricter systems of social control. With institutional and legal machinery at their disposal, agents of the State can compel populations to conform to codes and can opt to punish or attempt to reform those who do not conform. Authorities employ various mechanisms to regulate (encouraging or discouraging) certain behaviors in general. Governing or administering agencies may for example codify rules into laws, police citizens and visitors to ensure that they comply with those laws, and implement other policies and practices that legislators or administrators have prescribed with the aim of discouraging or preventing crime. In addition, authorities provide remedies and sanctions, and collectively these constitute a criminal justice system. Legal sanctions vary widely in their severity; they may include (for example) incarceration of temporary character aimed at reforming the convict. Some jurisdictions have penal codes written to inflict permanent harsh punishments: legal mutilation, capital punishment or life without parole. Usually, a natural person perpetrates a crime, but legal persons may also commit crimes. Conversely, at least under U.S. law, nonpersons such as animals cannot commit crimes. The sociologist Richard Quinney has written about the relationship between society and crime. When Quinney states "crime is a social phenomenon" he envisages both how individuals conceive crime and how populations perceive it, based on societal norms. Etymology The word crime is derived from the Latin root cernō, meaning "I decide, I give judgment". Originally the Latin word crīmen meant "charge" or "cry of distress." The Ancient Greek word krima (κρίμα), from which the Latin cognate derives, typically referred to an intellectual mistake or an offense against the community, rather than a private or moral wrong. In 13th century English crime meant "sinfulness", according to etymonline.com. It was probably brought to England as Old French crimne (12th century form of Modern French crime), from Latin crimen (in the genitive case: criminis). In Latin, crimen could have signified any one of the following: "charge, indictment, accusation; crime, fault, offense". The word may derive from the Latin cernere – "to decide, to sift" (see crisis, mapped on Kairos and Chronos). But Ernest Klein (citing Karl Brugmann) rejects this and suggests *cri-men, which originally would have meant "cry of distress". Thomas G. Tucker suggests a root in "cry" words and refers to English plaint, plaintiff, and so on. The meaning "offense punishable by law" dates from the late 14th century. The Latin word is glossed in Old English by facen, also "deceit, fraud, treachery", [cf. fake]. Crime wave is first attested in 1893 in American English.
  • Create New...