Drugs, Crime and Prohibition

Do drugs really cause crime, or is it our governments way of controlling the communities? Many people blame drugs for every problem in our society, but is it the true evil in our society? No one person can answer that question. There are only opinions and supposed theories on this issue. We have been taught over the years that drugs were bad and that they only affected the poor and less fortunate, and turned them into crazy criminals, but this isn’t true to any extent. The laws controlling and prohibiting drugs are the true culprit.

Would our crime levels decline if drugs were legalized to some extent, or would we just increase the destruction of our country? Over the past fifty years, prohibition has been proven to actually increase crime and drug use instead of its intended purpose, which was to extinguish the use of illicit drugs in the United States. We constantly here of prison over crowding, and why is that? Most of our prisons are filled with drug offenders, ranging from use to distribution of supposed illicit drugs. What is our country coming to?

The purpose of this research paper is to view the advantages and disadvantages of the legalization of illicit drugs in the United States. I will examine each side of this major problem plaguing our fine country from past to present. People wake everyday to their normal and monotonous life without even thinking about what they are doing. They do not realize that they have been conditioned by the government and its laws to obey and follow the supposed norm of society. What is the norms of society, and who set the guidelines for them?

No one can explain how these norms came about, they only know that they must follow them, or they could get in trouble with the law. We are going into the twenty first century, and we still follow laws that were passed hundreds of years ago. Why is this? We are a highly advanced country, but we spend time, lives and money on abiding by laws that were around before the automobile was even invented. I will begin with the history of our drug control policies, which have failed miserably, and examine the drug-crime connection. Policy History

Drugs have been in this country since the beginning of time in some shape or form, which was used for personal and medicinal use. Usage of marijuana has been reported to date back to the founding of Jamestown (1). George Washington himself cultivated and used to relieve the pain of an aching tooth. Opium was accessible to anyone who wanted to purchase it, as Tylenol is today. People were able to obtain these drugs at any pharmacy or grocery store that stocked them. It was socially acceptable to use and sell drugs, but the addictive properties were not known at this time in history.

In the beginning of the twentieth century, the Progressive movement wanted some form of drug regulation (1). There were a few factors that affected the change in public opinion. First, the US acquired the Philippine Islands, which gave the US a legal supply of opium to supply addicts. Second, was the concern over the affects that drugs had on people. Journalist at that time, who were highly influenced by the government, published many fictional articles about crazy drug addicts, who raped and killed because of their drug use.

Third, drugs were associated with blacks and Chinese immigrants, and this caused panic through the white communities( 1 ). In the early 1900’s, President Roosevelt appointed three men, Rev. Charles Brent, an Episcopal bishop, Dr. Hamilton Wright, and Charles Tenney, a China missionary, to represent America at The Hague International Opium Convention of 1912. At this conference, the modern movement for abolitioning narcotics trafficking was began with the US involvement in the Philippines (2). Although there was regulations abroad, there was no legislation protecting the United States.

In 1913, New York Representative Francis Harrison introduced two bills into Congress. One was to prohibit use and importation of opium, and the other was to regulate the manufacturing of smoking opium within the US. It was recognized as a revenue bill, but was not intended to produce revenue. A few months after the bills were introduced, President Wilson signed the bills, which took affect March 1, 1914. Under the Harrison Act, the maximum sentence that could be imposed was a five year prison term or a $2,000. 00 fine or both.

The average term was one-and-a-half years, which was considered too low by many. The Harrison Act did not prohibit the use of narcotics, but rather regulated the distribution of them. Any one connected to the manufacture or distribution of narcotics had to be licensed and pay a graduated occupational tax. Doctors were no longer allowed to supply addicts with drugs. This began a controversy over the question, were drugs an addiction or a crime, and should an addict be treated as a sick person or an addict (2)? Eventually, the Harrison Act caused more drug use than it prevented.

A committee was formed to investigate this problem, which found that illicit use of narcotics had increased dramatically while the act had been in affect. Instead of improving the act, they only stiffened penalties. In 1918, the Volstead Act was passed, even over President Wilson’s veto. It provided legislation for the enforcement of prohibition. Headed by Levi Nutt, a pharmacist, a special Narcotics Division was formed within the Prohibition Bureau, due to the problems with the Harrison Act. The narcotic officers within this division were hired by strict guidelines according to the Civil Service (1).

Through the 1920’s, various studies and investigations were conducted to see if drugs were addicting and crime causing. Dr. Lawerence Kolb’s research supposedly proved that addicts and normal people will have different effects to the same drug. He believed that excessive amounts of opium would not induce criminal tendencies, but inhibit it, which would show no connection between drugs and crime. By now, the Harrison Act was back on line, closing maintenance clinics, which shut down 44 of them by the end of 1921. Addicts could no longer obtain drugs legally and addicts were denied ambulatory treatment.

Addiction was not categorized as a crime, so it was not constitutional to arrest every addict and imprison them. As it is now, prison space was limited and prisons already housed double their capacity. In 1922, supporters of the Harrison act were relieved when Congress passed the Narcotic Drugs Import and Export Act (1). This act gave the Surgeon General power to regulate the importation of crude opium and coca leaves, which were restricted to medicinal and scientific use. The Federal Bureau Board was created to enforce sentencing and fines for unlawful importation.

This new act was accused of doing nothing to stop illegal import, but was associated with the increase in prices on the illicit drug market. In 1929, the Porter bill was passed, which was for the construction of two prison hospitals. These hospitals were for treatment of addicts, who were either assigned by court or by voluntary participation. These facilities were capable of treating one thousand addicts. The next logical step was to form an independent Bureau of Narcotics, which would be separated from the Prohibition Bureau, so it could be more effective.

In 1930, the bill was passed, and President Hoover’s signature formed what we know as the Federal Bureau of Narcotics. Harry Anslinger was appointed to the head position of commissioner. His main responsibilities were to enforce the Harrison Act with the powers provided in the Jones-Miller Act (4). The major problem with enforcement was detecting and preventing illegal importation of narcotics. Anslinger manipulated the media over his years in office. The media reported false reports of crime connected to drug use, which would gain him political benefits.

Even though Ansliger admitted that marijuana wasn’t addictive, he categorized it with heroin. He said it was “ about as hellish as heroin”. The Harrison Act had been under review five times since it was passed, and was published as a failure in the St. Louis Post. In 1937, a new bill was introduced that would impose a transfer and occupational excise tax on dealers. In August of 1937, President Roosevelt signed the bill, which would ban marijuana, and it took affect on October 1, 1937 (1). A dollar transfer tax was charged for registered users, and a one hundred tax for those not registered.

Naturally, no illegal dealer would register with the government. Violations were punishable by a $2,000. 00 fine, 5 years imprisonment, or both (1). World War II interrupted the normal patterns of international drug distribution, which created a “starving time” for addict’s (1). In 1942, Anslinger was convinced that Japan had started the war on western civilization ten years earlier by using narcotics as weapons (1). He then realized the political advantages of identifying global spots of international distribution.

In October 1938, the New York Academy of Medicine established a special committee to conduct a citywide investigation in the effects of marijuana. The report was released revealing that marijuana had no irregular or criminal effects of human beings, nor was it related to crime and juvenile delinquency. Next came the enactment of the Boggs Act, which further stiffened penalties for drug offenders. The Boggs Act enforced a two-year minimum sentence for first time offenders, and five to ten years with no chance for probation for second time offenders.

Third time offenders really felt the impact of this act by getting a mandatory twenty years with no chance for probation. Opposers of the bill argued that the wording of the bill fell primarily on addicts and traffickers, not the dealers and distributors. They also argued that these strict jail sentences would not stop importation, because the profit was too fruitful. Even though there was much opposition to the Boggs Act, it was approved and signed into affect on November 2, 1951 by President Truman.

Even though there was supposed decline in illicit drug use, Anslinger started to push for even stiffer penalties. Instead of approving a new bill, the American Bar Association created a committee that was in charge of investigating the Harrison Act and the first nationwide investigation of illicit drugs. Arising from this investigation was the Narcotic Control Act, which was the most severe antidrug legislation put into affect(3). The NCA doubled the lengthy sentences of the Boggs Act, and added the death penalty in some cases. These laws also failed in extinguishing the drug epidemic.

By now, most states specified that marijuana and heroin penalties should be identical, and consequently marijuana penalties were adjusted upward every time heroin sentences were increased. During the sixties, marijuana became the most popular drugs, particularly among college students. Due to the rise in usage, the federal government attempted to cut off the supply at the Mexican border. This was known as Operation Intercept, which consisted of closer automobile inspections and over eighteen hundred strip searches in its first week.

In 1963, Anslinger ended his long tenure as head of the FBN, and the Presidential Commission on Narcotics and Drug Abuse reversed the harsh penalties of the mandatory minimum sentences. They then created the Bureau of Drug Abuse Control(BDAC) to deal with the increase in drug usage among young people. In 1968, the FBN merged with the BDAC to become the new Bureau of Narcotics and Other Dangerous Drugs(BNDD). During President Nixons’ time in office, he wage war on drugs and created the Office of Drug Abuse and Law Enforcement(ODALE) and the Office of National Narcotics Intelligence(ONNI).

In 1973, he also initiated Reorganization Plan No. 2, which changed the BNDD into the Drug Enforcement Administration. The Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 created five schedules that categorized drugs according to their effects and availability by prescription (1). The Omnibus Drug Enforcement, Education, and Control Act of 1986 was introduced to stiffen penalties for pushers, increased customs and border patrols, outlawed synthetic drugs, and improved treatment and prevention programs.

Even though all of these drug control policies have been in affect for many of years, all of them have failed (2). Drug use continues to increase and will continue if we do not do anything about it, either in legalization or legislation. Imprisonment or Rehabilitation We are constantly building more and more jails every year, why? We do this because it is easier to put drug offenders in jail than it is to try and help them. As Americans, we have an obligation to help our fellow Americans, no matter what color, race or economic background.

Many think our drug laws are too strict and offenders should be dealt with by treatment, no incarceration. One million seven hundred thousand Americans are incarcerated in our prisons for drug offenses. The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse reported that 80% of all prisoners are drug offenders, no wonder our jails are over run. Since 1965, ten million people have been arrested for marijuana alone, which doesn’t include other illegal drugs. Most of these people imprisoned are non-violent drug offenders, who get longer sentences than most violent offenders.

This doesn’t sound right, does it? Nearly one half of our police resources are devoted to stopping drug trafficking, instead of preventing violent crimes(The Libertarian Party). Past legislation to control drug use has failed miserably over the years and new legislation will do the same. We are spending hard-earned money out of our own pockets to support prisoners. According to the Federal Bureau of Prisons, total sentenced drug offenders went from 3,384 in 1970 to 55,624 in 1998 because of the stricter penalties enforced by the government.

This shows that drug arrests are inclining, but according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, crime has been decreasing over the past few years. How can this be when crime and drugs are so closely related. The economic cost of the states on criminal justice are more than the federal government. We, the tax payers are spending thousands of dollars on the support of each prisoner each year. Most of the drug offenders in prison are low-income people who were trying to support their family the only way they knew how, selling drugs. Is this a crime that should have such a strict penalty attached to it?

Why should we have to pay such a high price to house people that were committed of doing such a non-violent crime? If an addict or occasional user is convicted of simple possession of a small amount and sentenced to the five year mandatory minimum sentence, the cost to the public of prison alone is $110,00. 00. For the same price, we could give the offender one year in prison, one year of residential drug treatment, and three years of supervised probation and outpatient drug treatment, and still have $62,500. 00 left over. The nation spends about 100 billion dollars a year on crime control.

We could surely spend this money on something more useful, like schools and poverty. Since 1980, we have tripled our prisons population even though crime rates have been declining since the seventies. In all reality, incarceration does little to deter a criminal from committing another offense when they are released. There are many other programs that would provide drug addicts with the treatment they need to go “straight”. Prisons aren’t solving our drug problems, but rather adding to it. After these people are released, they are labeled as ex-cons, and that is why most return to jail.

Legislation has proven to add to drug use and crime, instead of its intended control of drugs. We should end prohibition of drugs, which has proven its effectiveness on another drug, alcohol. Is there a solution to our overcrowded prisons, or are we fighting a losing battle? Is legalization the answer? Do you use drugs now? Would you use them if they were legal? Would drug use increase if they were legal? These are just some of the questions that plague our society on legalization. Why should other drugs be legal, even though they cause more deaths than all illegal drugs combined.

Tobacco kills 390,000, alcohol kills 80,000, while cocaine and heroin only kills about 4500. Marijuana has never been recorded of causing death at any time in US history, according to The Drug Project. America is living through a drug epidemic. Drug related murders and violent assaults are on the rise, but this isn’t caused by drugs, rather by the laws that prohibit them. By prohibiting drugs, we are only causing the prices of drug to rise, which means addicts must cause crimes to support their habit. The illicit drug trade market is the second largest business in the world, bringing in over 500 billion dollars a year.

Opposers of legalization argue that tobacco and alcohol kill more because of its legality and availability(3 ). The solution in their eyes is in education and early prevention. Drug use among America’s children in on the rise, and education is a perfect logical way of lowering their usage. Children need to be taught the effects and dangers of drugs when they are young. Children are the future drug abusers if something isn’t done. Violence and drugs are thought to be one in the same in most peoples eyes, but is this true. Drugs do not turn people into monsters, but rather bring out their criminal tendencies.

No one argues that legalization would end violence that is associated with drugs, but it would simply end the violence associated with the black market. Many dealers become dealers due to the profit associated with drugs. If drugs were legalized, the profit would no longer be there. Another hot topic in today’s society is the War on Drugs, which is failing. We should not give up on the usefulness of this program(5). We are not just fighting drugs, but the society of drug users. What would our society come to if drugs were legal? Would it improve our society?

No one can say for sure unless legalization is given a chance. In my opinion, legalization would solve more problems than it would create. Drugs have been a part of our society for hundreds of years for medicinal and recreational purposes. Legalization would also mean less crowded jails, which would cost tax payers less each year in housing costs. According to a report done by the National Institutes of Mental Health, reported thirty seven billion dollars in savings every year, which would give us money for other things, such as poverty.

Before the governments involvement in drug control, no one ever had a problem with drug use. Many of the drugs that are considered illegal are still used in medicinal purposes. So, why is it such a supposed problem today. The laws that regulate drug controls are too strict, and affect everyone, not just the user. We should reconsider prohibition on drugs that are considered to be dangerous. I don’t think all drugs should be legalized. The most harmful one to our health should be controlled on some level. Lets not give up on our society, but try to improve our way of living, for ourselves and our children.

Computer crime and terrorism

Almost every major political candidate in recent history has used, and often exploited, on of the many facets of crime to attempt to convince American voters that they can feel secure and safe with the candidate at the leadership helm, coveted feelings in a tumultuous world. As a result, we have more policemen patrolling the streets, laws such as the death penalty and three strikes your out, proposed increases to defenses spending for both the latest weapons and more armed service men, beefed up airport security measures, and catchy candidate slogans such as tough on crime.

And yet, the one facet of crime that no one is talking about is the one issue that has the potential to destroy the American economy, the American political system, and the lives of the American citizens. As new cops patrol the streets at night and technologys most advanced weapons sit ready to deploy in order to protect our land, some of the worlds most vicious and dangerous criminals invade our homes and our countrys borders each day almost without a trace. Computer crime and terrorism are plaguing our nation, and our leaders continue to march the nation into the criminals hands.

Today, more and more, computer crime has made its way into the headlines, the evening news, and major newspapers. In recent years, we have seen attacks on major websites such as Yahoo, America Online, the FBIs home page, and many others. These attacks, known as hacking, have ranged from defacing web pages to shutting down entire sites, costing thousands and sometimes hundreds of thousands of dollars each time (Quinn, 1). In other areas of computer crime, individuals use credit card fraud to buy items online in an environment where they are not checked by anything more than a card number, expiration date, and billing address.

In a one year period, it is estimated that computer crime causes hundreds of millions of dollars in damage (Carter, 3). These crimes and attacks have become so prevalent that a name has been given to the perpetrators: hackers. Hackers, and the crimes that they commit, have become a very serious threat to the well being of society in the United States. Hacking is defined by the CCI Online Computer Dictionary as using ingenuity and creativity to solve computer-programming problems, and to overcome the limitations of a system and expand its capabilities (CCI Computing).

Though by this definition, hacking seems harmless, and maybe even useful, the act is more commonly associated with negative actions and aggressive crimes. The PC Webopedia defines hacking as modifying a program, often in an unauthorized manner, by changing the code itself (PC Webopedia). The term hacker references the latter definition, and refers to the person who invades the affected computers. Perhaps the most threatening aspect of hackers, though, is that anyone with more than a cursory knowledge of computer programming can quickly begin wreaking havoc.

The average person tends to think of hackers as malicious, professional computer criminals who spend all of their time writing destructive computer viruses to break into the most secure and important computer systems to steal information or money (Hayward, 2). However, hackers are more often the guy next door, young teenagers or college students, or men and women that work for technologys leading firms. Even more frightening is the fact that home computers are just as susceptible to becoming the next victims of computer crime as the Pentagons computer systems.

David Dunagen, a resident of Dallas, Texas, knows this threat all too well. Dunagen, a computer security expert, was a victim of computer hacking fraud. A computer criminal stole his identity and credit card number, and then used them to order a notebook computer over the Internet. The Dallas police refused to look into his case, claiming that they did not have the time or the resources to track down the individual (Riggs, 1). Dunagen was left without recourse for the damages of the disconcerting crime (2).

The most concerning groups of hackers are those that are using computer crime as a terrorist tool. As American society grows closer to complete computer and technological dependence, terrorist groups have begun to discover new ways to attack organizations and countries without using physical means. Terrorist groups can bring this countrys economy to a total standstill simply by hacking into the computers that control the major commerce and trading systems. Even our national defense and security systems are not invincible to attacks by hackers.

Worse yet, computer terrorists are virtually untraceable; they can invade American computer systems without setting foot in the hemisphere, while never disclosing their location. In fact with portable computer technology, terrorists can commit their crimes literally on the move. This makes it extremely difficult for organizations like CERT, the FBI, the CIA, and other state and local crime fighters to track down, let alone prosecute, the criminals or terrorists involved. The United States Government seems to be taking the threat seriously; already the FBI is working hard to keep up with technologys top criminals.

The U. S. Department of State is anticipating even greater numbers of attacks on computer systems in the future (Campbell, 1) and the FBI claims that there has already been an increase of over one hundred percent in computer crimes committed in the United States last year (Anderson, 1). This anticipation is well founded: it is a simple fact that as greater numbers of computer systems are developed, there will be more opportunities and areas for terrorist and computer criminals to invade (Parker, 11). The FBI has been developing its technology crime fighting unit for several years now.

Other Federal and State law enforcement agencies, however, have fallen behind. Unfortunately, criminal hackers definitely have the upper hand when it comes to computer crime. Today, this crime is still new enough that federal government lacks sufficient laws to put an end to the reign of technological terror plaguing American Society (Parker, 97). Furthermore, law enforcement agencies lack the manpower necessary to utilize existing laws in their efforts to fight computer crime. In addition to the concerns of non-physical hacking attacks, terrorist groups have found other ways to delay or completely shutdown the flow of information.

Cyber terrorists have not limited their attacks to the digital side of computers; they have realized that a small bomb or fire at a computer facility can do more damage in a shorter amount of time than hacking into whole systems. Terrorist groups have followed through on this approach: as of 1992, they had attacked more than 600 computer facilities using bombs and other physical means to destroy the computers (Campbell, 1). While most of these attacks have occurred over-seas, the threat of an attack happening in the United States is very real.

Many of the largest computer facilities in the United States are virtually unprotected physically; though their computer systems are guarded by the most secure systems know to the world. It would b easy for a terrorist group to conduct bombings on computer facilities and cause extensive damage to computer information systems in the United States, that Campbell claims in his paper A Detailed History of Terrorist and Hostile Intelligence Attacks against Computer Resources That a well directed attack against 100 key computer facilities could bring the American economy to its knees (Campbell, 2).

Computer crime and terrorism has indeed become a grave concern for the United States and the global community. The society of the world is in a serious transition time in which every area of our lives is being affected, and quickly controlled, by computers. Most of these computers remain unprotected, while even those that are secured by top-notch security systems are still penetrable given the skill and desire.

A major attack on these systems could cause society as we know it to completely change: personal financial accounts could be drained of all funds, communication systems could be severely disabled or incapacitated causing a complete communication blackout, and emergency service computer systems could be attacked making it extremely difficult for police and firemen to respond to emergencies, all with the quick execution of a simple program.

The effects of computer crime and terrorism penetrate into almost every single aspect of society. A successful attack on any major computer information system will have a tremendously negative impact on both the United States and the global society as a whole. It is extremely important in the future that everything realistically possible is done to protect the valuable resources that we call computers and the sensitive information that they store.

This countrys leaders need to start to take notice of the negative effects computers could have on our society. Perhaps, instead of scrambling to assume credit for creating the internet which is becoming Americas Achilles heel, our next leader should take the bold step of slowing our technological dependence, a policy that has thus fare been virtually absent in Americas history of progress. But then again, the internet is not the demise of America, people are.

Commercial Vices

The commercial vices are gambling, prostitution, and drugs. The appeals of the commercial vices are so strong and widespread that attempts to prohibit them in western countries have always failed. The evils of these vices are threefold: Those who practice them suffer, the criminals who sell them prosper, and the enforcement organizations are expensive, unsuccessful, and often corrupt. Two commercial vices have been accepted as unstoppable, but there evils have been minimized by legalization and regulation.

These are the particular drug, alcohol, and gambling. Ethyl alcohol, the drug in beer, whiskey, and wine does more harm is causing accidents, overdose deaths, job failures, broken homes, and violence than all other drugs combined. The United States attempted to prohibit alcohol and failed. The Mafia made its money by bootlegging alcohol. The gangsters of the twenties and thiries were in the alcohol business just as the drug peddlers of today are in the drug business. Both settled trade disputes with gun fire.

When lcohol prohibition was repealed and sale by licensed dealers was instituted, the Mafia went out of the liquor business and the revenue agents assigned to stop the illegal business went out of business too. The quality of regulated liquor became assured and taxed, not high enough to motivate bootlegging, became a source of public revenue. Consumption of legal alcohol became only slightly greater than the consumption of illegal alcohol had been. If we follow the alcohol example with all other drugs, the benefits will obtain.

Much more than that, the temptation of the forbidden fruits will disappear. The jailing of petty drug pushers will stop, together with their training as future serious criminals in the crime schools which are jails. If we transfer the huge sums wasted on efforts and on punishment to serious education and rehabilitation programs, the drug problem will retreat to the trivial level it was fifty years ago. At one time all but private gambling at home was illegal. So the Mafia ran the numbers rackets and secret games and the bookmaking where law biding citizens did their unstoppable gambling.

Now governments run lotteries and license and supervise casinos so the gangsters are largely out, cheating in minimal, and governments earn revenue instead of paying police. Prostitution is an even more emotional problem. Addiction to sex is genetic, permanent, and deprivation has many more penalties. Prostitution is the worlds oldest profession. Here, again, legalization and regulation in Nevada was already eliminated the pimps and gangsters and reduce the police force.

With medical examinations and licensing of the practitioners, there will be a radical reduction in the spread of venerel diseases, including aids. For those already diseased there can be a matching of buyer and seller by coding there license cards. In conclusion, the government will take any law they can’t enforce and turn it around in order to make and save money. But they are also making less jobs for the police and other law enforcement agencies. I believe that in the end this way of doing things will more than likely hurt us overall.

Organized Crime

Organized Crime has for nearly one hundred years held an unseen control over the United States. Running both illegal and legal businesses they have captivated the lives of the country. Here is an overview of the history of this power that knows everything and everyone that has power or wishes to rise to power.

The beginning of organized crime goes back to the 13th century. The Mafia was formed in Sicily to help farmers from being terrorized by French and Spanish looters (Waller, p.16). It was not until the 19th century that the Mafia began to show up in cities like New York and New Orleans. By World War I, every major city had powerful local gangs, not necessarily a Mafia group.

The Mafia’s discipline held all of the gangs together. The Mafia had only two major objections dealing with crime. There was to be no drug dealers in the Mafia and prostitiution was not allowed. The cheif weapons of the Mafia were death threats and the code of omerta'(the code of silence). When omerta’ was broken, the police cleaned up the mess while the rival gang took over.

Prohibition brought the birth of organized crime to the United States. Prohibition was ratified on January 29, 1919 but didn’t take hold until 1920 (Compton’s,p.1). Prohibition, which was the 18th Amendment of the Constitution, made it illegal to buy, sell, or transport alcoholic beverages. It also opened a new market for illegal booze to those who would risk it. Prohibition also proved to be filled with murder and corruption. Men like Lucky Luciano, Dutch Schultz, Al Capone, Meyer Lansky, and Vito Genovese got started during this time.

Prohibition began with the sale of foreign booze that was smuggled into the country. After several raids and many thousands of dollars lost, the mob turned to more producing of their own illegal alcohol. Bootlegged whiskey was known as “white lightning” (Waller,p.29). Illegal alcohol was sold two ways: you could put it in bottles or it was sent to the taverns in tin cans.

The highly violent city of Chicago had been divided up into five different turf areas for bootleggers. This agreement would have worked out except that one major bootlegger was excluded from the deal. The O’ Donnell brothers had controlled the southern most area of Chicago but had not been allowed to join the meeting. This group of brothers eventually met their match after many years of war.

The city of Chicago had been split up between six gangs. It was an agreement over areas of control. The noth side of Chicago was divided between Al Capone and Dion O’Banion. O’Banion was to control the beer while Capone controlled the hard liquor. This eventually led to the death of O’Banion. The south side of the city was ran by the Genna family. The west side was controlled by the Valley Gang while the southwest side was ran by the Saltis-McErlane Gang. To the far south side the Ragen’s Colts controlled the bootlegging industry (Waller,p.31).

During this time, a new weapon came into play. The Thompson submachine gun, also known as the tommy gun or chopper, became a major factor in criminal activity. This machine gun also became known as the Chicago violin because of its heavy use in the city.

It was a sad day for several organized gangs when Prohibition was repealed. On December 5, 1933 the 21st Amendment was passed making it legal to buy, sell, and transport alcoholic beverages. The fourteen years of Prohibition had made the mob and Mafia grow powerful and rich.

One of the most famous mobsters of all time was Al Capone. Born Alphonse Capone in Brooklyn, New York, he was the son of immigrants from Naples, Italy (Waller, p.27). Although Capone was of Italian descent, he was never a member of the Mafia.

As a teenager Al Capone was involved with crime. His first crime job was as a bouncer in a mob bar called Harvard Inn (Waller, p.27). In 1918, Capone married a woman of Irish background. Then in the early part of 1919, Al Capone moved to Chicago with John Torrio to work for Torrio’s uncle.

Once Capone got his bootlegging business running he came in contact with his first rival, Dion O’Banion. After several problems with the Chicago police, Capone moved to a near by town of Cicero, Illinois (Waller, p.32). There Capone rigged elections to control local politicians.

Capone quickly rose to power in the midwest. He controlled most of the criminal activities the happened outside New York. Capone even made friends with the head of the New York Mafia, Lucky Luciano. Together they attempted to calm the blood shed and secretly increase the underworld’s power. By the age of 26, Al Capone managed over 1000 employees with a pay roll of more than $300,000 a week (Compton’s, p.1).

One of the largest incidents that Al Capone was tied to was that of the mass slayings of six mobsters on Febuary 14, 1929. This notorious even became known as the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre (Compton’s, p.1). Although Capone was suspected of this crime, he was in Florida at the time of the killings. He later told police that he had over 300 witnesses to his story but he was still considered the main suspect.

Unfortunately for Capone, his days of living the high life were headed down hill. A man by the name of Eliot Ness, who headed the Special Investigation Squad, went after Capone looking for any reason to put him behind bars. Eliot Ness and his men were dubbed “The Untouchables” for their resistance to accept bribes or threats from the mob (Jacobs,p.44).

Capone’s time in the sun ran out on March 13, 1931 when he was indicted for tax evasion. Capone received a quick trial and was found guilty on October 17, 1931. He was sentenced to eleven years in prison, $50,000 in fines, and $30,000 for court costs (Jacobs, p. 50).

Al Capone was sent to Atlanta Federal Penitentiary on May 4, 1932. While there, a rumor of a maximum security prison being built off the coast of California surfaced. It was said that this prison was to house the most infamous criminals and the most deadly killers. In August of 1934, Al Capone was moved to the “Rock” (Jacobs, p. 52). Known as the “Rock”, Alcatraz Island was soon to be the most famous prison ever to be built.

Capone’s days of happiness were far gone when in Febuary of 1938 he had began to show symptoms of advanced syphillitic disorder (Jacobs,p.52). Upon hearing the seriousness of his condition in the prison infirmary, Capone confessed his sins to a priest. Capone was also dubbed no longer able to run his operations back in Chicago.

Al Capone left Alcatraz on January 6, 1939 and was transfered to a prison near Los Angeles (Jacobs,p.52). There he received an operation to attempt to cure his illness. On November 16, 1939 Al Capone was released on good behavior. He lived the remainder of his life in seclusion fearing being hunted by fellow mobsters.

Al Capone died January 25, 1947 of a brain hemorrage. He was burried in Chicago’s Mount Olivet Cemetery without full rites of the Catholic church. Capone died a penniless man (Jacobs, p. 53).

Another man who started his rise to power during the Prohibition era and also later controlled the national network of organized crime was Lucky Luciano. Luciano’s birth name was Salvatore Luciana but went by such names as Charlie Lucky, Charles Luciano, and Charles Ross (Waller, p. 24). He moved to the United States in 1904. Luciano became a member of the Mafia as soon as his late teens. He never liked publicity and never lost his temper.

Lucky Luciano was the right hand man for Giuseppe Masceria, also known as Joe the Boss. Luciano eventually wanted his turn at power so he had Masceria murdered. With the death of Masceria and the respect Luciano received from the killing, he soon became the head of the Masceria crime family. Soon Lucky Luciano planned the murder of all the Moustache Petes, the old time Mafia bosses (Waller, p. 51).

With the old leaders dead and the new ones in place, Luciano was crowned the “Boss of Bosses” without his own wanting (Jacobs, p. 70). Also during this time, the formation of an organization known as the Syndicate was happening. Luciano had attempted to gain control of the political figures but had to deal with a group of investigators trying to tie him with organized crime.

In an effort to get the investigation team off his back, Luciano came up with a plan. New York’s governor, Franklin Roosevelt, was running for president and needed the primary votes of his own state. To do so he must win the votes of Tammany Hall which was controlled by Luciano and his associates. Roosevelt had agreed to get the investigator off Luciano’s back for the votes but the deal turned bad (Jacobs, p. 72).

As soon as Roosevelt had secured his winning of New York, he immediately turned against the mobsters to win a public appeal. Luciano soon afterwards became public enemy number one. Now he was in the public eye which was against his own wishes. Luciano then redirected his criminal activities to less violent measures.

The mob was soon highly involved with gambling, both legal and illegal. Luciano saw an untapped market in the Caribbean and Cuba where he set up casinos. Until he was ran out of Cuba by a new head of power, Fidel Castro, Luciano was without many troubles (Jacobs, p. 74). All the while, Special Procecuter Dewey continued to try to tie Luciano with the Syndicate.

Although Mafia law refused it, Luciano was quickly being identified as having a part in many of New York’s prostitution cases. In an attempt to get witnesses against Luciano, an offer was made to all criminals that they would receive their freedom if they would testify against Lucky Luciano (Jacobs, p. 75). Soon after, a Grand Jury indicted Luciano for heading a prostitution and criminal ring. Luciano fled to his resort in Hot Springs, Arkansas where he felt he would be safe.

Luciano was eventually picked up by federal marshals but the sheriff of Hot Springs refused to extradict him (Jacobs, p. 75). The sheriff was forced to give Luciano up and he arrived in New York to face 90 counts including being involved with compulsory prostitution. Lucky Luciano had the chance to face up to 1950 years in prison if convicted (Jacobs, p. 75).

There were 68 witnesses against Luciano and their testimony took over three weeks. Upon being questioned at his trial, Lucky Luciano proved himself to be liar. On June 7, 1936 Luciano was found guilty on all counts. Being an immigrant, Luciano was exiled back to his native country of Sicily in 1946 (Jacobs, p. 78).

Lucky Luciano’s luck had ran out. His old time partner Vito Genovese wanted Lucky gone but not killed by his men. Instead Genovese set Luciano up for a huge drug bust by the Sicilian police. The presure of knowing of Genovese’s plan and his problems by the Italian National Police caused Lucky Luciano to have a fatal heart attack on January 25, 1962 (Jacobs, p. 78). An era of bootleging mobsters had drawn to an end.

During World War II, the United States were under mob rule. Many gambling outfits were started to help ease the pain of loved ones going to war. Besided, the police were not effective since many of the best police were fighting Germany. Heroin was rapidly imported from Europe at this time (Waller, p. 65). Vito Genovese was even a close friend of Italy’s dictator, Benito Mussolini.

As a huge way to make money, the mob controlled the black market. They sold everything from blankets to radios. They even sold illegal alcohol because so much was needed for the war (Waller, p. 66). The mob was very thankful for the war because while men were fighting, the mob grew rich.

Also during this time, there was a large expansion of the mob. A nation wide network was developed called the Syndicate. The mob bosses were spread from California to Florida instead of mainly being around New York. They started peddling drugs, mainly herion, against Mafia law. Through their expansion, the head of the F.B.I., J. Edgar Hoover, denied the existance of a coast to coast criminal organization (Waller,p.87). Also the mob began to move their casinos just miles off the coast of the United States to avoid problems with the police.

In 1960 John F. Kennedy was elected president. He appointed his brother, Robert Kennedy as Attorney General. Robert Kennedy then quadrupled the number of Justice Department people assigned to fight organized crime (Waller, p. 91). This was the beginning of a down fall for many of America’s most notorious mobsters.

Robert Kennedy received his big break when a man who was scared for his life in prison decided to become a government witness against organized crime. This man, Joe Valachi, soon after had a $100,000 bounty on his head to any mobster able top take him out (Waller, p. 93). Joe Valachi had been involved with the mob for several years and knew enough to put many people away for life.

Between the years of 1960 and 1963, more members of the mob from the New York\New Jersey area went to jail than in the thirty years before then(Waller,p.94). Robert Kennedy also went out to get men like Jimmy Hoffa who were involved with the mob through professional organizations like unions. Jimmy Hoffa was truely involved with the mob and his death was the cause of his own stupidity.

Jimmy Hoffa was sent to jail for misusing union pension funds that were developed for the use of the Mafia. He was released from prison on a pardon from President Nixon and wished to return to being the head of the Teamsters Union. This was not possible so he began to cause problems. Hoffa, while in prison, disrespected a mobster by the name of Tony Provenzano, known as Tony Pro, by hitting him in front of inmates. This proved to be the beginning of the end of Jimmy Hoffa.

When Hoffa wasn’t allowed to return to power he made a serious threat to the mob. He said, “Before I lose the union… I’ll go to the Grand Jury” (Hoffman,p.207). Very soon after that Anthony “Fat Tony” Salerno, the boss of the Genovese crime family, gave the orders to have Hoffa killed. The Deroit mob had told Hoffa to cool it but he kept on coming (Demaris,p.296). As Tony Pro had promised, Jimmy Hoffa was going to disappear.

The Detroit mob had to dispose of Jimmy Hoffa quickly before he rose too many questions they didn’t want to answer. One very large one was about the fact that money from the Teamsters pension fund had helped build Caesar’s Palace in Las Vegas. At one time it was even stated that Jimmy wouldn’t be running anywhere because he would soon be dead (Hoffman, p. 216).

On July 29, Donald Frankos got furlough from prison and was to return on August 1, 1975. Being in prison was a perfect alibi so he was used as a hit man in Jimmy Hoffa’s disappearance and death. The others men involved in the murder were John Sullivan, Jimmy Coonan, Salvatore (Sally Bugs) Briguglio, and Chuckie O’Brien who was Jimmy Hoffa’s adopted son. On July 30, 1975, Chuckie O’Brien and Sally Bugs met Hoffa at the Red Fox in the Bloomfield Township and that was the last time Jimmy Hoffa was seen alive.

Jimmy Hoffa was escorted to a house up in the mountains where his killers were waiting. Donald Frankos and Jimmy Coonan were poised and shot Jimmy Hoffa on sight. Hoffa was then carried downstairs and his body was dismembered. Before Hoffa’s head was distroyed, Frankos took a lock and gave it Coonan as a good luck charm. Originally they had planned to take the body to Central Sanitation Services, a garbage disposal company, to be crushed in old cars (Hoffman, p. 221). When suspition arose of there wereabouts of Hoffa’s body the sanitation company refused to keep the body.

In December of 1975, Joe Sullivan moved the remains of James Hoffa in oil drums from Michigan to New Jersey (Hoffman, p. 224). There Hoffa’s body was placed in the Meadowlands in plastic bags, the home of the Giants (Hoffman, p. 225). There was construction being done on the stadium by mob ran companies so it left an easy disposal of Hoffa’s body. Donald Frankos was paid $60,000, Coonan and John Sullivan were each paid $55,000, and Joe Sullivan was paid $30,000 for burying the body. Maybe in the future this can be shown to be a solid fact instead of several men’s stoties.

Organized crime in America has evolved over this century. It now deals more with legal businesses than ever before. There are still killings but with a large crackdown on organized crime there is a new sense of panic. There is no knowing how many of the businesses we work for are owned by the mob and we may never know. I do not believe that any one person could comprehend the vast empire of organized crime in our country.

Female Juvenile Crime

Traditionally, there has been little research on or interest in the impact of female crime in modern society. In addition, juvenile crime rates are on the rise, which combine for a void of research or information on female juvenile offenders. In general, crime rates for women offenders have risen since the 1990’s. Increasing numbers of young women are also offending at higher rates. In a 1996 U. S. Department of Justice Report, the number of arrests of young women had doubled between 1989 and 1993. Twenty percent of all juvenile arrests were committed by girls, an increase of 87 percent.

However, according to The National Study of Delinquency Prevention in Schools, males are far more likely to admit to criminal involvement than are females. For example, 12 percent of males and 4 percent of females reported carrying a hidden weapon other than a pocketknife in the past year (Wilson, p. 150). There are several theories for this rise in crime proposed by modern feminists, including that the introduction of women into traditional male roles prompted women to commit increasingly dangerous and violent crimes. However, this paper will rely on Meda Chesney-Lind’s theories from The Female Offender.

First, Chesney-Lind points out that research on female offenders in general is lacking, and that victimization plays a key role in the offending of women. “Responses must address a world that has been unfair to women and especially those of color and poverty. ” (The Female Offender). She also stresses that therapy and rehabilitation programming should be gender specific. Chesney-Lind believes that women are faced with special issues, including the prevalence of abuse that female offenders endure.

The American Correctional Association found that A) 61. ercent of female inmates were physically abused B) 50 percent were physically abused 11 times or more C) 54. 3 were sexually abused, and D) 33 percent were sexually abused 11 times or more. This environment creates a group of young women that are running away from home and breaking curfew to escape the abuse in the home. Unfortunately, these young women are then punished by the juvenile justice system for escaping this harmful situation. Since 1985, status offenses of young women have risen by 18 percent and curfew by 83 percent (FBI, 1995).

These same young women are often placed in treatment facilities, only to escape shortly before they are to be released, to avoid returning to the abuse. Women may also turn to gangs as a surrogate family, only to engage in ever increasing levels of dangerous crime. This lifestyle often leads to substance abuse, and girls and boys use drugs for different reasons. Women are most likely to use drugs as an escape or self-medication. What are the problems facing the treatment of female juveniles? First, treatment have been develop and implemented using the same techniques for both men and women.

This type of general approach does not take into consideration the different responses of men and women. Women may need more emotional support and therapy due to years of abuse, as opposed to the need for discipline and structure that men might need. Women may need time to form a bond with a male staff member that is not seen as an abuser or as a sexual target. Sexuality is an important component of gender specific treatment programs. Young women must address pregnancy, STD’s, birth control, and normal sexuality.

It is vital to help these young women understand that they have the right to say no to sexual relations, yet it can be a healthy part of a loving relationship. Gender specific programs should address a variety of other issues, including anger management, substance abuse, vocational/life skills, and overall self esteem. Although Chesney-Lind theorizes that young women face unique hardships before entering the juvenile justice system, they still must be held accountable for their crimes. The Restorative Justice Model is an example of treatment/responsibility that allows young women to make strides in their life.

This model combines the offender, victim, and the community. This gives the offenders (both male and female) a chance to address the harm they have caused. Restitution, victim apology, and mediation are all examples of strategies used in restorative justice. This allows for the verbal expression that is so important is gender specific treatment programs. However, most programs fail for young women because the importance of relationships is ignored. The same approaches cannot be used for both women and men. The need for a strong emotional bond is often overlooked in the pursuit of punishment .

Juvenile Delinquency Essay

The current statistics of juvenile delinquency are astounding. I will look at the most recent statistics and a few of the programs implemented to reduce or prevent delinquency. Before delving to deep into juvenile delinquency it is important to consider the definitions of “juvenile” and “delinquent”. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary gives two definitions of “juvenile”: 1. Showing incomplete development, and 2. A young person; one below the legally established age of adulthood (1997). Merriam-Webster defines “delinquent” as: offending by neglect or violation of duty or law (1997).

As a complete definition of juvenile delinquent it is safe to repeat “a person below the established age of adulthood that offends by neglect or violation of duty or law (1997)”. The history of juvenile delinquency had harsh beginnings. Children were viewed as non-persons until the 1700’s(Rice 1995). They did not receive special treatment or recognition. Discipline then is what we now call abuse. It was believed that life was hard, and you had to be hard to survive. The people of that time in history did not have the conveniences that we take for granted.

For example, the medical practices of that day were primitive in comparison to present-day medicine. Marriages were more for convenience, rather than for childbearing or romance. The infant and child mortality rate was also very high. It did not make sense to the parents in those days to create an emotional bond with children when there was a strong chance that the children would not survive until adulthood (1995). At the end of the 18th century, “The Enlightenment” appeared as a new cultural transition. People began to see children as flowers, who needed nurturing in order to loom.

It was the invention of childhood, love and nurturing instead of beatings to stay in line (1995). Children had finally begun to emerge as a distinct group. It started with the upper class, who were allowed to attend colleges and universities. Throughout all time there has been delinquency. It may not have had the delinquency label, but it still existed. In ancient Britain, children at the age of seven were tried, convicted, and punished as adults. There was no special treatment for them; a hanging was a hanging.

Juvenile crime is mentioned as far back as ancient Sumeria and Hammurabi, where laws concerning juvenile offenders first appear in written form (1995). Industrialization set into motion the processes needed for modern juvenile delinquency. The country had gone from agriculture to machine based labor intensive production. Subsistence farming quickly turned into profit making (1995). People who were displaced from their farm work because of machinery were migrating to the city to find work. This led to urbanization in such places as Chicago, which in turn caused the cities to burst at the seams (1995).

There was also a huge increase in the amount of movable goods that were produced and these moveable goods were easy to steal. The stealing of these goods made property crime rise tremendously in these urban centers. The wealth of the upper class increased, and stealing became a way of living (1995). These large urban centers also created another problem. The work place was now separated from the home and during the hard times both parents took jobs. There was also very little for the youths to do, especially when school was not in session. It was then that youths were becoming ncreasingly unsupervised.

These youths were largely unemployed and without supervision, and with movable goods easily available, stealing became a way of life. The huge influx of people to these urban areas overwhelmed society (1995). The factories could not keep up, and unemployment became a factor, which led to widespread poverty. Poorhouses were created to keep youthful offenders away from trouble. The idea behind them was to take the children of the “dangerous (1995) ” classes out of their “dangerous environment (1995). ”  Kids who were thought to be salvageable needed to be saved.

The majority of these children were rounded up for the crime of being poor, not because they committed a crime. These houses, sometimes referred to as reform schools, were very harsh. This was contradictory to the ideas that they needed nurturing and love. In New York, houses of refuge were created to do the same. The houses eventually became overfilled, and children were sent out West as indentured servants. As many as 50,000 children were shipped out (1995). Some of the children were never allowed to have contact with their parents again.

Industrialization and urbanization played a tremendous role in the modern era of juvenile delinquency. A lot of these factors are true today. Many more farms are going bankrupt. Unemployment is still a factor with the youth of today. We are a culture that values material wealth over and above all (1995). Youth who have no money to live the way they want will often turn to crime as a way to satisfy themselves. As our nation changes, the way in which juveniles are treated will also have to change. The current trends in juvenile delinquency have an impact on how we view the problem.

The number of juvenile arrests has been declining. In 1971, 21% of all arrests were juveniles. A lot of this change has to do with the declining teenage population. There are 6 million fewer teenagers today than 20 years ago (1995). Property crime in the United States has been fairly stable; there has been a 3% increase between 1982 and 1991. Violent crime has seen a tremendous increase. Since 1965, juvenile arrests have doubled for rape (11:100,00 in 1965 to 22: 100,00 in 1991). Crime is generally a young person’s game. Property crime peaks at age 16, violent crime peaks at age 18.

All crime drops off dramatically at about age 30. There are some disturbing trends such as: More than 500 kids under age 12 were arrested for rape in 1991. These statistics should be viewed with caution. For example, some of these figures were estimated, the official numbers may be less disturbing, or even underestimated (1995). With an increased emphasis on juveniles, more enforcement and less discretion equal higher figures. There is also a problem with data being “fudged (1995)” in order to justify an increase in resources.

Falcon Baker writes that “…crime statistics are at best only educated guesses, and all too often are tainted by political expediency, sloppy record keeping, and outright deception” (1991). Contrary to the “negative publicity, relatively few children come before the juvenile court” (Downs, Moore, McFadden, Costin, 1991). Of the 29. 9 million youths aged 10 through 17 in the United States in 1995, only 2. 7 million, or less that 10 percent, were arrested for delinquent acts, including status offenses. Violent crimes (murder, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault) accounted for 5 percent of all juvenile rrests.

The ages of youths at the time of arrest for all crimes were as follows: 23 percent were 17 years of age; 68 percent were 13 through 16 years of age, and 9 percent were less than 13 years of age. The racial composition was 69 percent white, 28 percent black, 1 percent Native American and 2 percent Asian (1991). In doing research on juvenile crime one will find the body of evidence overwhelming. It is at times contradictory and often confusing, but there are some statistics that jump out at you as you sift your way through reports and books.

Often the most compelling statistics are not the ones that appear in newspapers, or on television, radio and speeches that seem to take place almost continuously. According to a report issued last year titled Violent Crime Increases, and prepared for the National Report on Juvenile offending and Victimization shows that between 1965 and 1992 law enforcement agencies reported a 423% increase in the four crimes that make up the FBI’s Violent Crime Index (assault, robbery, rape and homicide) (Abruzzese 1997). The report also includes that in the period from 1983 to 1992 it increased only 54%.

A few additional points are that in 1992 law enforcement agencies in over 92% of all jurisdictions reported that 45% of violent crimes, as measured by the index, were “cleared” (1997). However, more than half (55%) were not “cleared” (1997), so half of all violent crimes were not solved. Also 19% (or 128,000) of the violent crimes committed between 1983 and 1992 is attributable to juvenile offenders (1997). In a report titled “Person Offenses in Juvenile Court” from the October 1994 OJJDP some interesting statistics were given.

From 1985 to 1994, person offenses including assault, robbery, rape and homicide, increases by 93% with juvenile courts handling an estimated 336,100 person offense cases. Person offenses also accounted for a larger proportion of cases, 22% in 1995 compared with 16% in 1985. And, finally, of the 336,100 person offenses handled by the juvenile courts in 1994, over half were dismissed, 3 percent were processed as adults, 24 percent incarcerated and the remainder were on probation or some other alternative program.

When reading over these statistics and trying to fathom the numbers of juvenile delinquents and their crimes, it raises a few important questions. What is being done to prevent this? And what are our governments (local and federally) doing to help? Money makes the world go round and without government help the many social workers, psychologists, counselors and doctors trying to help this situation would not be able to do their part. The juvenile justice system is funded by multiple sources (McNeece & Roberts, 1997).

Almost no federal money is expended by juvenile courts to support ongoing operations, but demonstration projects are funded with grants from the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) and the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services. This appears to be changing somewhat under the Violent Crime Control Act of 1994, with $377 million available in Fiscal Year 1996-2000 for crime prevention programs sponsored by local governments (1997). This money will also be administered by OJJDP. Other provisions of this act may also make federal funds vailable to courts for general administration ($150 million).

Another $36 million has been authorized for “delinquent and at-risk youth” programs. A few private foundations also fund innovative programs for short periods of time. Juvenile justice operations are financed primarily by a combination of state and local dollars, and the amount contributed of each varies by state and locality (1997). The biggest problem of funding programs for juveniles is the fact that local and state governments are now handling the huge responsibility of welfare programs. This puts a burden on funding new programs that relief from the federal level could improve.

The report on the fiscal year 1998 published by the Children’s Defense Fund indicates “no [federal] increases in funding for the child welfare service areas of: runaway and homeless youth, child abuse state grants, child abuse discretionary activities, child welfare services and family violence” (Wilber 1998). With an estimated growth of 23% in the total population of youths from ages 15 to 19 by 2005, it is imperative that we find effective and low cost solutions. Many such prevention and intervention programs already exist and several are worth mentioning (1998).

Educational programs come in many forms. One of the most prevalent is Conflict Resolution Education. The programs contain components of process curriculum, peer mediation, peaceable classroom, and peaceable school with programs often combining elements from these approaches. Such programs can exist in schools and in the community. The New Mexico Center for Dispute Resolution’s Youth Corrections Mediation Programs starts within the facility and continues in community mediation centers in more than 600 ommunities.

This provides skill development and assistance for both juveniles and their families (1998). Most communities also have some form of parenting classes available because parents have a tremendous influence over their teenagers. Michael D Resnick, a sociologist at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis, in the September 1997 issue of The Journal of the American Medical Association, published the results of the most comprehensive survey ever done of American adolescents.

It found that the health and well being of adolescents “still rests in that strong feeling of being cared for by parents” (1998). In fact, the more loved they felt and the more comfortable they were in school, the less teenagers were likely to engage in problematic behaviors, including committing violence. Supporting parents through this very difficult stage of parenting and ensuring they have the skills necessary to help their children and support pro-social behaviors is money well spent.

Advocacy programs are also effective and fiscally sound. One such program is the Court Appointed Special Advocates, which utilizes trained volunteers, each of whom follow one child under the conservatorship of the state regardless of where the child lives and makes recommendations to the judge (1998). CASA organizations exist throughout the United States but unfortunately, they often can only serve as few as one-third of the children who need the service and do not serve children who are not under conservatorship.

This leaves the abused sixteen-year-old, for example, on his own and far too often the first intervention an abused adolescent will see is punishment (1998). The Juvenile Justice System has many treatment options to choose from. Besides the usual jails and correctional centers, there are specialized Youth Centers, Group Homes, and Foster Care Programs. These are just a few examples of what is available. Peter Greenwood and Susan Turner (1993) assessed the Paint Creek Youth Center in Ohio. The main goal of this center is to provide high quality tailored programming.

There was a three-day orientation program and an aftercare program to assist in the transition back to society. The youths received classes and formal counseling instead of locked up in a cell. They were part of a community. While at the center youths earned privileges as they progressed. Among the privileges were being allowed a paying job, family visits at the center, and weekends at home. The uniqueness of this program was the emphasis on tailored treatment. Instead of being lumped into groups, the youths are counseled individually.

This allowed the counselors and youths to benefit from the program. Greenwood and Turner concluded that the aftercare program had a modest effect on post-release arrests and behavior. More cognitive/behavioral effort was needed in the aftercare. They also determined that this alternative shows promise, and that more attention should be paid to the youths’ prosocial behavior when they return to the community. Haghighi and Lopez (1993) evaluated the success/failure of group home treatment programs for juveniles.

The two factors used in the analysis were evaluations from program staff and the reappearance of the juvenile in the juvenile justice system after release. Haghighi and Lopez found that 62. 5% of the juveniles were rated as successful. The rest either failed, were sent to another facility, or committed another delinquent act after release. Juveniles with prior treatment, such as probation, were more successful than those with no treatment or with time spent in a juvenile detention center. Galaway, et al. 995) wrote an article that claimed family homes for emotionally or psychiatrically impaired youth might have hidden benefits for delinquents.

Family care providers were said to be able to manage delinquents in a home setting and that their behavior will improve. The study was composed of 220 U. S. , 18 Canadian, and 28 U. K. programs. Less than half of these programs served delinquents. It was reported that 41% of delinquent youth completed the programs, 12% were administratively discharged, 14% showed no progress and the rest were discharged due to breakdown of the youth or foster family.

The average length of stay was 7. 5 months. They determined that foster family care may be a viable alternative for delinquents and could be used more often. It is sometimes the case that youth are placed in the wrong setting (jail) because there is no alternative. In closing, we are all aware of after school programs and community based services such as Boys and Girls Clubs. They provide a safe haven for children to go where they can build self-esteem, pro-social values and productive futures.

Communities and organizations do what they can, some with the help of Title V grants under “Delinquency Prevention Programs. ”  However, as long as a disproportionate amount funding goes to deal with problems after they have occurred, there will remain limited resources to prevent their occurring (Wilber 1998). “Let us not in our concern about juvenile violence forget that they are just that-children. These are our children and they need our attention and concern before they get into serious trouble, as well as after” (1998).

Accordion Crimes: Dismal Reality Checks

Accordion Crimes is a difficult book to place in a single time period because the story takes place over about 100 years, originating in a small Sicilian village, but the main setting and focus is the United States. The various settings introduced in the book influenced the characters in various ways, but one instance of influence was great enough to cause his death. The accordion maker was literally ruled over by his setting. The setting around him was one of oppression that worked against him because he was Sicilian.

The accordion maker saw the approaching men with searing clarity, the loose hread on a coat, mud-spattered trouser legs, a logging chain in a big hand, the red shine of the engorged faces, a man with one blue eye and one yellow eye. Even then he hoped to be saved. He was innocent! Pinse held his revolver loosely in his hand, had lost his staff in the rush up the stairs, so crowded it had been, looked at the Sicilians knotted in the corner, their wicked eyes glittering, some of them pleading and praying – the cowards! He thought of the rat king, fired. Others fired.

A barrage of bullets and shot of every caliber and weight tore the Sicilians. The accordion maker reared twice and fell back. A character that has a great deal of intrigue is the accordion maker. The most interesting fact of this character is that he has no name, only an occupation. This is symbolic of all the millions of faceless immigrants that came to America in search of their dreams, but very few found them waiting, much less at all. … He had his theory, his idea of the fine instrument; with the proof of this one, he planned to make his fortune in La Merica.

The accordion maker himself was a large man, but more sensitive that most like him. He despised working through problems and simply let his wife handle them when she could. Once in La Merica, the accordion maker had to deal with squalid living conditions, but when one man wanted an accordion like the one he had made for himself, the accordion maker readily agreed. Despite that squalid living conditions, the accordion maker still had high hopes, … He was fortunate to have the room – many slept in the streets and docks and every morning lifeless forms were carried away, throats slit and pockets turned inside out, even young children.

All around him ere men who had to piss in their nettles. The accordion maker is a sort of introduction to the rest of the characters in the story in that they all live lower-middle to lower class lifestyles, with barely any income, and one finds that there is no epiphany or catharsis for the character, sometimes simply because you have the feeling he is ignorant of the truth, other times he dies before any resolution can be reached. One must remember that Accordion Crimes is a group of short stories that are bound together by an old accordion, with no character overlapping into two stories.

The plot of Accordion Crimes is a difficult one to describe as it is rather a collection of short stories and there is only one thing constant in every story, which is the accordion. Therefore, I have decided to write not of the overlying story, but of the journey of the accordion. The story begins with a Sicilian accordion maker and his dream of making a fortune in La Merica. All he had is a green, two-row button accordion and some money. He takes his son, Silvano, with him so that there might be enough money for them to eat decently.

The accordion maker ends up in the worst of onditions along with having his pockets as good as empty, almost makes some money by selling an accordion, but is killed with 10 other innocent Italians by a lynch mob, and the accordion is stolen by a black dockworker who goes down the Mississippi and sells the accordion to a Mr. Smith who owns a lumber shop in North Dakota for some food money. The accordion is bought from the now late Mr. Smith by Hans Beutle, who, along with Ludwig Messermacher and William Loats, founded the town of Prank with their farms.

Soon after, their children began to row up and some married and some changed their names because of the difficulty of having a foreign name. The town prospered and Beutle took his money and bought a better accordion and gave the old two-row to Messermacher, but not before half of their families died of infinite causes ranging from mysterious diseases to rape to insanity to catching parachuting Japanese bombs to having goat glands transplanted so as to increase libido at around age 60 (Hans Beutle’s fate).

Messermacher puts the accordion in the bottom of a trunk and moves to Coma, Texas to grow cotton after losing everything in the stock market rash. Soon, the accordion makes its way to a barber shop window where it is bought by a young Mexican boy named Abelardo who goes on to have four children, three of which learn to play the accordion, while the fourth died at war. The daughter, Felida, ran away from home at 17 and became one of the best folk accordionists ever.

Chris loved to play the accordion but was killed in a courtroom by a furious father-in-law after being arrested for dope smuggling. Years preceding his death, Abelardo hid 12 thousand dollars inside the accordion. Abelardo died of a spider bite that made him delirious and he played ike a madman on the accordion for the last 20 seconds of his life. Baby came to own the green accordion, but left it on the floor of a cab and couldn’t remember anything about the cab. The accordion was found by a man named Charles Gagnon who was abandoned during his childhood and grew up in an orphanage.

After some time in the service, he returned to his hometown of Random. Not finding anything of his parents he meets an old friend from the orphanage, Wilf. He eventually gets a house and makes a three man band with Wilf and his wife, Emma, whom Charles secretly lusts after. One day, Charles mysteriously looses all use of his legs a couple months after Wilf died in a horrendous truck accident.

At a wedding that Emma gets Charles to go to, he meets Delphine, who takes him to a statue of St. Jude in the middle of nowhere that supposedly has healing powers. Almost immediately, Charles is returned the use of his legs, and after careful consideration, kills himself, and his accordion is sold to a place called The Little Boy Blue Pawnshop to pay for the gravemarker with his name and lifespan that is destroyed in a plane crash 10 years later. The accordion is hen bought by Ivar Gasmann who collects antiques and has a little store in a town called Old Glory where he puts it for sale.

Dick Cude buys the accordion for the daughter of Conrad Gasmann, Ivar’s brother. The daughter’s name is Vela and had the unfortunate accident of having her arms severed just below the elbow by a flying piece of sheet metal, and after she comes home, finds solace in Lawrence Welk for a while. After receiving the Accordion and the hundred or so tapes that Dick had, she is mortified and hates them all, and so they are thrown away, accordion and all.

The accordion is rescued from the dump truck by he drivers, who end up pitching it out the window anyway, and the accordion is then found by some kids who pull out one of the thousand dollar bills, are tricked into thinking it is a one dollar bill by the old lady at the soda/gas stand, and buy a few sodas with it. The Accordion Crimes was a fantastic book and I enjoyed reading it immensely because of the detail and amount of pictorial usage used all throughout the novel. Although there were only words in the book, at some points it was almost as if I was looking through a small mirror to the world in which all these things took place.

I was also thoroughly impressed at the style Proulx uses in describing the disasters that befall the characters, as if they aren’t important. There were times that I had to double check a page to see if a certain character actually did die, which brings us to where I believed the book was lacking. I sometimes had the feeling that everything had been said and done, but the truth of the action was still in the obscured mind of the author, and I could not comprehend what was going on. I must admit though, that this in its entirety did actually add to the novel as the whole entire story wasn’t old by the author.

A good deal of it is written by the reader. Another criticization of the book would easily be about the gloom of the entire thing. Many stories about immigrants in the 20th century tend to be uplifting, but not Proulx’s. If one may criticize Accordion Crimes ever so milidly, it is only for its relentless existential bleakness. Theme was an element that the book seemed to lack as a whole, unless you consider possibly that the accordion represents how we have no control over our lives, but how other people react to us decides our path.

Computer Crime Essay

The technological revolution has taken full swing . If a business doesn’t have some form of e-commerce, or if a person does not have some form of an e-mail address, they are seen as living in the stone age. This new world of virtual life, where with the click of a button a person can travel millions of miles in a few seconds, millions of new opportunities have arisen. However, someone has to always ruin the good things in life. Very similar to Hawthorne’s \”The Scarlet Letter,\” where the second thing built in a Utopia was a prison, the advent of computer crime is only becoming more prevelant everyday.

The whole idea of a computer crime is rather absurd indeed. Really, who wants to go around spray painting on computers anyway? Though the definition of computer crime varies from source to source, the most common being,\” any illegal act which oinvolves a computer system\” (\”What is a computer… \” p. 1). This holds true even if the computer contains something as simple as a threatening e-mail. Computer crime in nature ranges from relatively small things such as software piracy to magnificent crimes like fraud. Computer crime itself has metamorphasized from its mere infancy.

In the late 1970’s, a would-be criminal would need direct access to the actual computer terminal. This is because the most computer crime of that time actually involved hardware sabotage and theft, rather than a more software oriented problem. In the late 1970s and early to mid 1980s, computer crime had elevated a notch with the advent of the inter-schiool network. This network was a connection of several major universities through modem lines. Educated computer users were now changing each others ideas and information, but not for the malicious, but instead for the better.

The mid to late 1980s saw the rise of computer \”hackers\” such as Kevin Mitnick. kevin Mitnick was caught at least a half dozen times, with the charges ranging from criminal tresspassing to fraud. Mitnick had broken into several corporations’ servers,n one being the well reknowned Sun Microsystems. When he was arrested Mitnick became a martyr and a heron to many teenage computer enthusiasts. These teens would be determined to carry on the symbolic spirit, or what they thought to be, of Kevin Mitnick.

However, the computer crimes that thses users perpatrate cost small businesses and corporations millions each year, put restraints on legitimate computer users and still remain an extremely dangerous, costly and virtually unstoppable crime. (\”A Brief History of… \” p. 2) Information technologies (IT) specialists walk into work almost every morning only to find one of their servers on the fritz. Now, these problems can arise for several different reasons, ranging from security breeches to mere software conflicts. However, businesses report losses ranging from $5 to $40 billion each year.

The causes for these losses range from having to hire new IT and IS (information systems) specialists to fix a problem, to theft of product and software piracy. Software piracy is by far the largest problem. (\”Latest Web Statistics\” p. 2) An IT specialist’s worst nightmare is a renegade \”hacker\” loose in the system. \”Hacker\” is a slang name given to a person who has knowledge enough to compromise the security of a system. Although less than 11% of all complaints filed in 1998 were of hacking, the extreme danger of a hacker still remains.

Hackers possess the powers to compromise valuable system security features and possibly destroy or alter any data that they have access to. In the year 2000, a projected 773 complaints will be filed in which at least 10% will be of hacking (\”Latest Web Statistics\” p. 1). However, a hacker may only affect a company with internet access, unless of course, they work for the company. Corporate employees would be the least expected people that would harm an employer’s network or systems.

The truth behind this is, that in fact most security breeches that occur, happen because of curious enmployees \”just looking around. Many of these employees do not cause any real harm to anything at all. It just seems that curiosity gets the best of them and they just have to look. However, there are cases where a disgruntled employee will take his/her frustrations and anger out on the corporation or business’s network. At the event that this should happen, the IT department has a very serious problem indeed. This is such a major problem because an employee’s access, in some networking architectures, goes unnoticed and therefore unchecked.

The idea of almost entirely unchecked access makes an angered employee a hundred times worse than any would-be \”hacker,\” which gives employers all the more reason to be nice to everyone, because they never know when someone could rip down there multi-thousand dollar network. The cost of these in-network security breeches and other crimes costs businesses an estimated $3 billion. (Coutourie p. 1) With the advent of both \”hackers\” and disgruntled corporate members, corporations dread everyday. Computer criminals see these large corporations as a prime target because less than 2% of reports lead to convictions.

Companies lost \”roughly\” $2 billion in revenues due to software piracy, much of which was stolen through the internet. Companies such as Sun Microsystems, have had prototype plans and such stolen from them and sold to the competition. Many companies are now hiring convicted computer criminals, and many are paid to bring down the systems of the compettition. (\”Latest Web Statistics\” p. 2) To fight back corporations can only try to prevent such attacks. Using operating system security featurers, especially with the Novell system, corporations can invoke some control over what happens in their network.

Many software manufacturers, such as Norton, make network utility suites that maintain and manage a network, constantly keeping a watchful eye over the precious network. These computer criminals cause terrible problems for legitimate users. \”Hackers\” and \”crackers\” are the reason for the numerous raids on bulletin board systems and their operators. The old saying is that possession is nine tenths of the law, taking that into consideration, most bulletin board owner/ operators, especially those that are members of the \”Underground,\” are guilty of software piracy as well as several other crimes.

This is because hackers often store their stolen information on another public server, and bulletin boards are the perfect target. These computers are massive in power, in size and are definately capable of storing and processing the thousands of requests to download the stolen material. Despite the seemingly negative nature of these bulletin boards, they are the backbone of the internet. Many of the thousands that are out there, exist with no real malicious intent. However, the federasl government has found it necessary to cerack down on almost all bulletin board systems, by issuing search and siezure warrants.

In March of 1990, the 2 year governtment investigation called Operation Sun Devil, executed 27 search warrants (Sulski p. 1). Equipped with these sources of power, Federal agents storm homes and sieze only computer- related equipment. All of this is so that the system can be analyzed under the virtual microscope of more federal agents. Because of these siezures, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) was formed to protect the 1st Amendment rights of legitimate computer users (Sulski p. 4). Hackers do more than just cause bulletin boards to be raided, but they cause the restriction of access to normal users.

Information that would normally be readily available for the public eye, is now locked tightly behind some virtual door, never to be seen again. All these security measures are a result of fear. The fear that only \”hackers\” can create. These criminals make people afraid of everything that they could say. Shipping addresses and phone numbers cannot be given over the internet for fear that some rogue hacker will steal them and use the new-found information for some malicious purpose. Just like anything, companies must play on the fear of inexperienced users, making them the true fools.

They sell programs that are no more recent than 1 year behind the \”average hacker\” pace, and consumers buy it up thinking that somehow it may protect them and make everything safe and secure. This isn’t the case by far, and hundreds of thousands, if not millions, are spent each year on useless software. To understand how a \”hacker\” can compromise a system, one must know how and why. Through all the stories told about these Jesse Jamess of the computer world, it is hard to differentiate what a hacker is and what a hacker does. A hacker is no more than a computer punk.

Soemtimes smart and intelligent a hacker does no more than compromise a system because they feel they should have free access to ALL data. These usually experienced users often break into systems, steal data and often will destroy data. Recent years have brought utilities and tools to make hacking a point and click event. The essentials of hacking are still baseed around a few norms. Hackers must have a computer and a modem. This is it! \”Working with less than $300 worth of equipment\” hackers sasyt hey can break into systems, snoop through files and make long distance calls and bill them to your own home.

With no more than a computer and a modem , a hacker could be an individual or company’s worse nightmare. By using methods which won’t be named in this paper, hackers can use valid username and passwords to access, often times, restricted or hidden information. In this manner a hacker can take anything from simpl,e programs to entire identities. With all this power, it is a wonder that hackers don’t get a \”God complex. \” To be honest, many do. Many hackers will elevate their crimes, each one growing more and more severe and equally as challenging.

The question still remains, are there any real ethics, a set of rules that these renegades abide by? The answer for those that consider themselves \”true hackers\” is yes. Many of these hackers believe that there are 5 real rules as follows: 1. Never damage any system 2. Never alter any system files aside from logs. 3. Never leave your handle (screen name) on computers you hack. 4. Do NOT hack government computers. 5. Be paranoid. (Revelation p. 4) Hackers have to live by the 5 rules above, if they don’t, their lives as they know it could result in 5 – 15 years in a lovely state or federal prison.

All five of these rules are all preventive maintenenvce type things that will prevent the arrest of hackers. The general public wonders that if so much information is available, why aren’t any of these characters arrested? Well the answer is because there is no proof of wrongdoing. Mere text files that explain what hackers do, how they do it, and how to do it without getting caught are not criminal in nature. Now seeing that hackers obviously do have a set of standards and rules, why does the federal government spread the fears they do and why does Hollywood glorify hacking the way it does?

Well the answers are often unclear. The federal government, just like anyone else, is afraid of what it does not understand. Hollywood seems to glorify it, just for the simple reason that it is a major part of pop-culture and it has no idea what it is talking about. Movies such as \”Hackers,\” \”The Net,\” and \”Mission Impossible\” are all perfect examples of inaccuracy blown to a whole other proportion. The movie \”Hackers\” angered some many \”true hackers\” with its inaccuracy that the web site that supported the movie and advertised was defaced horribly on several occassions.

In fact, in Hollywood it is hard to find even a valid looking e-mail program in a movie! To fight back against these hackers corporations have devised several schemes. Many have invested thousands into new security features for there systems. Where many have beefed up security systems, many corporations have beefed up there legal teams. These legal teams are on the look-out for anyone who can be seen as a computer criminal perpetrating crimes against a company. These head hunters are the cause for, often times, the wrongful convictions of users.

In fact, these legal teams had Kevin Mitnick jailed for 3 years before he was even allowed to see the evidence against him. Since this is the electronic age, all the evidence against him was on electronic media, and being that he was not allowed to use any form of computer, Mitnick was not allowed to view any of this evidence. Whether right or wrong, corporations will spare no expense in protecting their investments, and noone can really blam e them either. The federal and state governments have also taken actions against hackers; however, the governments have the upper-hand in these battles.

With the power to pass laws and restrict all sorts of access, the federal government has decided to bully all computer users by restricting access to certain information and other perhaps questionable items. In fact, Congress has had a bill recently proposed that would make it a crime to publish any unauthorized information on narcotics, especially marijuana. Is this right? Of course not! This itself is a direct violation of the 1st Amendment rights of everyone who would like to publish information on this topic.

This is exactly the type of action the federal government took with the Communications Decency Act, which was later declared unconstitutional on June 26, 1997. This act made it illegal, as do several other laws, to send malicious or threatening information over the internet. There was a case where a gentleman had written a story to post on a BBS (bulletin board system) that depicted sick and disgusting sexual acts and mutalation. This in itslefv is not worng, but he used a fellow classmate’s name and the story was seen as malicious and violent.

The whole ordeal was misconstrewed and it was made to believe that this gentleman had every intent on harming and injuring his classmate. The gentleman was convicted of sending threats across state lines and has just recently been released of his lovely stay in federal prison. However, the Communications Decency Act was not the first attempt of the Federal Government to regulate telecommunications. In fact, the Communications Act of 1934 was passed and was the first attempt to regulate telecommunications at the federal level.

The federal government isn’t the only one getting in on the act, state governments are no better. Many states have initiated there own communications laws banning the obvious, things such as breaking into systems, etc. , But also regulate the type of data and information that can be sent across state lines. Many of these laws have clauses that make a user not only prosecutable by federal laws, but also by state laws. Many question the fairness of it all. Is it really right to try to regulate the American public like this?

No it really isn’t. However, the federal and state governments are trying to protect their backers, large corporations and businesses. To regulate speech and information, that is unconstitutional and should be dealt with in that manner. So the question remains, what is the proper way to deal with computer crime? Is it to take the world off of phone lines and the internet? The answer to that is obviously no. The internet is the fastest growing phenom in the world today, and the end does not appear to be coming any time soon.

Then is the answer to be harsher and more strict with the way we punish computer criminals? No, we as a society can’t be any more harsh. There are computer criminals that will spend more time in jail thatn most convicted murderes and rapists. Kevin Mitnick has received a 35 year sentence for the crimes he perpetrated, as well as millions in restitution. Where as a person convicted of manslaughter has a maximum term of 15 years. In most cases this person can be peroled after 5. Is that fair? No. The real solution is that there is no real solution.

The economy is up, and litlle kids still haven’t stopped stealing bubble gum. The problem is that we have a group of millions that feel that all information and all data should be free to anyone who can use it, and perhaps in this manner, society can improve everything together. On the other side, we have corporations and businesses fighting to make their deserved dollars. They see things that if they just give their information away, can they really make any money? Computer crime is here to stay and almost doubles each year.

The only solution for those corporate entities is to stay away from your main servers being on the internet. Many projects do not require ther internet, so why have that information tied to it at all? There is no reason. Corporations can onmly try to keep their vital information away from the internet and try to beef up their security features. No matter what actions people take to protect themselves, there will always be at least one, one that will break that barrier and crumble the walls that are your blanket of security.

An Unlikely Murderer

One would think that crimes with such a gruesome nature would be committed by a hatchet-wielding maniac as put by Russell Aiuto (1). But rather, the suspect was that of a church-going, Sunday-school-teaching, respectable, spinster-daughter(Aiuto 1). The young woman, Lizzie Borden, was charged with the killing of her father and stepmother, a crime worthy of Classical Greek tragedy (Aiuto 1). Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to research the life and trial of Lizzie Borden in order to determine if she was innocent or guilty of parricide, the murder of ones parents.

It was on the 19th of July, 1860, that in Fall River, Massachusetts Lizzie Borden was born (Radin 268). She grew up there alongside her father, Andrew Borden. He was a very prosperous man, starting out as the towns undertaker and ending up investing his profits into the textile industry. When Lizzie made it in to her teens, Mr. Borden was worth $500,000 (Paton 432). Being as prosperous as he was, he only had to places to spend his money: his two daughters, Lizzie and her older sister Emma (Paton 432). Andrew Borden also had a wife, Abby Borden.

She was the stepmother of Lizzie and Emma and a hated one at that. Whenever Lizzie and Abby were together in the house, which happened a lot, the atmosphere was electric (Paton 433). Abby was called Mrs. Borden, and Lizzie did not eat when Abby was around. Their relationship was so distant, that Lizzie only spoke to her when it was needed (Paton 433). Lizzie first despised Abby when Andrew decided to purchase Abbys sisters home and have it in his wifes name. This prevented his sister-in-law from getting evicted, but Lizzie saw it as a chance for Abby to take advantage of Andrews money (Paton 433).

What most people do not know, is that Lizzie had somewhat of a criminal record before she was charged with the murder. The first was committed in her own home. She had reported to her father that some of Abbys stuff had been stolen by a thief. Andrew called the police but stopped them in the middle of their investigation because he noticed that the only person that could have committed the crime was Lizzier herself (Paton 433). Perhaps the only reason Lizzie may have had any hate for her father was when he laid her pigeons to rest.

Intruders had broken into the garden of the Bordens, where Lizzies pigeons were held. Mr. Borden assumed that the intruders were after the birds and therefore, decapitated the birds with and ax (Paton 434). Could this be a sign? 1892 was a year of record breaking heat. It seemed to have been 12 months of total summer (Paton 434). That summer, Lizzie bought small doses in several visits of prussic acid, a lethal drug. The drugstore owners started to notice, which caused her to make her visits more discreet (Paton 434).

The day of August 4th was a day that would make history. It started out normal. Emma was not in town, and there was a guest staying in the house, Uncle John Morse. Bridget Sullivan, the maid, was up with Uncle John as she did her daily chores. She stopped short, however, because of a sickness she had had recently (Paton 435). Then, with John gone into town and Bridget cleaning the windows, the murders happened. At 9:00 AM, Abby Borden was killed. With nothing more worse happening, Andrew Borden was then killed two and a half hours later, at 11:30 AM (Sams 1).

There were 20 wounds from a sharp instrument on Abby and only 10 on Andrew (Paton 432). Lizzie supposedly saw only her father dead. She ran to the neighbours and cried that her father had been killed. She said her mother had gotten a note, asking her to go aid an ill person. So obviously, Lizzie did not know that Abby was in the house dead. The police got there, and they found Abbys corpse in a bedroom. Then for some odd reason, Lizzie remembered that she may have heard her come back in to the house earlier (Paton 436). Lizzies alibi was rather odd.

She said she had went out in to the outbuilding to get a piece of metal to mend a window screen, but the police found no broken window screens. She also said she went out there to get some lead for fishing weights, but there was no lead to be found. She said that she went into the loft and remembered eating pears. However, Lizzie had a touch of the Borden sickness also, and therefore her stomach was too queasy at the time (Paton 436). The weapon was found not to far from the body. There was an ax handle on the floor, and its blade was up on a shelf (Paton 436).

There was not any way to connect it to Lizzie because fingerprinting had not yet been used in Fall River up until the early 1900s (Paton 436). However, it did look as if it had been altered. There was ash smeared all over it and of course the fact that it was broken (Sams 2). Lizzie was not apprehended at first. They went through all possibilities before coming to Lizzie as a suspect because they had no evidence against her (Paton 436). They ran through the possibility of another suspect. It was found very reasonable because of the way the house was set up for someone to just to walk in that morning.

Uncle John had gone into town, Emma was away on short notice, Bridget had been outside washing the windows, and Lizzie was in the outbuilding long enough for two murders (Paton 436). Lizzie and Emma Borden were now being comforted by Alice Russell, a friend, when the police notified them of another search. They were convinced that Lizzie was now the likely suspect (Paton 436). The absence the puzzled everyone the most was the fact that there were no bloodstained clothes in the house. In the murder, Lizzie would have been soaked by both victims if she had killed them.

In the search, all of Lizzies clothes were found spotless (Paton 436). Another piece of missing evidence was the note that Lizzie said Abby had received to go visit an ill friend. The writer of the note was never heard from again, and there was no record of a delivery. The conclusion came to be that there was no note, and Lizzie had made it up to stall the discovery of Abbys corpse (Sams 2). There were four processes that happened thereafter in the investigation. During the first, the inquest, Lizzie gave a testimony. The next was the grand jury hearing and then the preliminary hearing.

The final step was the murder trial (Sams 2). The date of the inquest was August 10, 1892. It was the sixth day after the murders and was suspended by Judge Blaisell the next day because he supposedly had heard enough information for Lizzie to be arrested that evening (Sams 4). Immediately after, Blaisell held a preliminary hearing to determine if there was … enough circumstancial evidence to warrant having the accused [Lizzie] stand trial (Sams 5). One the 7th of November, 1892, the grand jury was put together. They proceeded with a hearing that lasted thirteen days.

After hearing the testimony of Lizzies friend, Miss Alice Russell, three indictments were put on Lizzie. The first was the Andrew Bordens murder, the second Abbys murder, and the third the murder of both Andrew and Abby (Sams 5). Alices testimony was quite revealing, alongside with Emma. They stated that before there was the second search, Lizzie destroyed and burned a dress, saying Because it was all faded and paint-stained(Paton 436). Alice then later said that she no paint on the dress before Lizzie destroyed, then implying that it was not smart to let them see her burn it (Paton 436).

The last testimony, and perhaps one of the most damning, was of Inspector William H. Medley. He had gone up into the loft and said the only thing that was up there were his own footsteps lying in the dust (Sams 6). Lizzie, who did not ever testify, said only a few words the entire trial. She looked at the jury and said, I am innocent. I leave it to my counsel to speak for me(Sams 7). The jury then went back for only and hour and a half. The decision was then stated in the court room that Lizzie Borden was not guilty, an acquittal on the first ballot (Sams 7). Just because the trial was over, did not mean that it was forgotten.

Books such as The Trial of Lizzie Borden, in which she was proclaimed guilty, and Lizzie Borden, The Untold Story, whereas she was found innocent. The case was also made into plays, a ballet, a musical revue, and an opera (Radin 268). But perhaps the most reknown one is the childrens nursery rhyme, Lizzie Borden took an ax/ And gave her mother forty whacks;/ When she saw what she had done,/ She gave her father forty-one (Radin 268). The purpose of this paper is to research the life and trial of Lizzie Borden in order to determine if she was guilty of parricide, the murder of ones parents.

Lizzie Borden hated her stepmother, whom she saw as a plot to take her fathers fortune. Her father had also killed her beloved pigeons. Lizzie had also been making secret trips to buy lethal drugs. After the murders, Lizzie burned clothes that may have had her parents blood. In the trial, Lizzie was acquitted because of the lack of evidence. Perhaps this was because she did not committ the crime, or was it because she was smart in covering her tracks? The researcher of this paper believes Lizzie Borden to be the true murderer. This is concluded because of the fact that Abby Borden was so greatly despised by Lizzie.

The question is, was it enough to kill her? The researcher says yes because she was obviously not in her right mind. She had stolen her step-mothers belongings and tried to claim it as someone elses wrongdoings. The researcher believes that Andrew walked in and saw what she had done. Lizzie paniced, and in a rage, killed her father without thinking of it. She then covered her self up and tried to forget about it, thinking it would go away. But it did not. It stayed in a place in history, a place that would be remembered forever.

Computer Crime Is Increasing

Computer crime is generally defined as any crime accomplished through special knowledge of computer technology. Increasing instances of white-collar crime involve computers as more businesses automate and the information held by the computers becomes an important asset. Computers can also become objects of crime when they or their contents are damaged, for example when vandals attack the computer itself, or when a “computer virus” (a program capable of altering or erasing computer memory) is introduced into a computer system.

As subjects of crime, computers represent the electronic environment in which rauds are programmed and executed; an example is the transfer of money balances in accounts to perpetrators’ accounts for withdrawal. Computers are instruments of crime when they are used to plan or control such criminal acts. Examples of these types of crimes are complex embezzlements that might occur over long periods of time, or when a computer operator uses a computer to steal or alter valuable information from an employer.

Variety and Extent Since the first cases were reported in 1958, computers have been used for most kinds of crime, including fraud, theft, embezzlement, burglary, sabotage, spionage, murder, and forgery. One study of 1,500 computer crimes established that most of them were committed by trusted computer users within businesses i. e. persons with the requisite skills, knowledge, access, and resources. Much of known computer crime has consisted of entering false data into computers. This method of computer crime is simpler and safer than the complex process of writing a program to change data already in the computer.

Now that personal computers with the ability to communicate by telephone are prevalent in our society, increasing numbers of crimes have been perpetrated by omputer hobbyists, known as “hackers,” who display a high level of technical expertise. These “hackers” are able to manipulate various communications systems so that their interference with other computer systems is hidden and their real identity is difficult to trace. The crimes committed by most “hackers” consist mainly of simple but costly electronic trespassing, copyrighted-information piracy, and vandalism.

There is also evidence that organised professional criminals have been attacking and using computer systems as they find their old activities and environments being utomated. Another area of grave concern to both the operators and users of computer systems is the increasing prevalence of computer viruses. A computer virus is generally defined as any sort of destructive computer program, though the term is usually reserved for the most dangerous ones. The ethos of a computer virus is an intent to cause damage, “akin to vandalism on a small scale, or terrorism on a grand scale. ” There are many ways in which viruses can be spread.

A virus can be introduced to networked computers thereby infecting every computer on the etwork or by sharing disks between computers. As more home users now have access to modems, bulletin board systems where users may download software have increasingly become the target of viruses. Viruses cause damage by either attacking another file or by simply filling up the computer’s memory or by using up the computer’s processor power. There are a number of different types of viruses, but one of the factors common to most of them is that they all copy themselves (or parts of themselves).

Viruses are, in essence, self-replicating. We will now consider a “pseudo-virus,” called a worm. People in the computer industry do not agree on the distinctions between worms and viruses. Regardless, a worm is a program specifically designed to move through networks. A worm may have constructive purposes, such as to find machines with free resources that could be more efficiently used, but usually a worm is used to disable or slow down computers. More specifically, worms are defined as, “computer virus programs … [which] propagate on a computer network without the aid of an unwitting human accomplice.

These programs move of their own volition based upon stored knowledge of the network structure. ” Another type of virus is the “Trojan Horse. ” These viruses hide inside another seemingly harmless program and once the Trojan Horse program is used on the computer system, the virus spreads. One of the most famous virus types of recent years is the Time Bomb, which is a delayed action virus of some type. This type of virus has gained notoriety as a result of the Michelangelo virus. This virus was designed to erase the hard drives of people using IBM compatible omputers on the artist’s birthday.

Michelangelo was so prevalent that it was even distributed accidentally by some software publishers when the software developers’ computers became infected. SYSOPs must also worry about being liable to their users as a result of viruses which cause a disruption in service. Viruses can cause a disruption in service or service can be suspended to prevent the spread of a virus. If the SYSOP has guaranteed to provide continuous service then any disruption in service could result in a breach of contract and litigation could ensue.

However, contract rovisions could provide for excuse or deferral of obligation in the event of disruption of service by a virus. Legislation The first federal computer crime law, entitled the Counterfeit Access Device and Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1984, was passed in October of 1984. The Act made it a felony to knowingly access a computer without authorisation, or in excess of authorisation, in order to obtain classified United States defence or foreign relations information with the intent or reason to believe that such information would be used to harm the United States or to advantage a foreign ation.

The act also attempted to protect financial data. Attempted access to obtain information from financial records of a financial institution or in a consumer file of a credit reporting agency was also outlawed. Access to use, destroy, modify or disclose information found in a computer system, (as well as to prevent authorised use of any computer used for government business) was also made illegal. The 1984 Act had several shortcomings, and was revised in The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986. Three new crimes were added to the 1986 Act.

These were a computer fraud ffence, modelled after federal mail and wire fraud statutes, an offence for the alteration, damage or destruction of information contained in a “federal interest computer”, an offence for trafficking in computer passwords under some circumstances. Even the knowing and intentional possession of a sufficient amount of counterfeit or unauthorised “access devices” is illegal. This statute has been interpreted to cover computer passwords “which may be used to access computers to wrongfully obtain things of value, such as telephone and credit card services.

Remedies and Law Enforcement Business crimes of all types are probably decreasing as a direct result of increasing automation. When a business activity is carried out with computer and communications systems, data are better protected against modification, destruction, disclosure, misappropriation, misrepresentation, and contamination. Computers impose a discipline on information workers and facilitate use of almost perfect automated controls that were never possible when these had to be applied by the workers themselves under management edict.

Computer hardware and oftware manufacturers are also designing computer systems and programs that are more resistant to tampering. Recent U. S. legislation, including laws concerning privacy, credit card fraud and racketeering, provide criminal-justice agencies with tools to fight business crime. As of 1988, all but two states had specific computer-crime laws, and a federal computer-crime law (1986) deals with certain crimes involving computers in different states and in government activities. Conclusion There are no valid statistics about the extent of computer crime.

Victims often esist reporting suspected cases, because they can lose more from embarrassment, lost reputation, litigation, and other consequential losses than from the acts themselves. Limited evidence indicates that the number of cases is rising each year because of the increasing number of computers in business applications where crime has traditionally occurred. The largest recorded crimes involving insurance, banking, product inventories, and securities have resulted in losses of tens of millions to billions of dollars and all these crimes were facilitated by computers.

Computer Ethics Essay

Computer crime has increased in resent years. The book gives several examples of past computer crimes. Before reading chapter 2 I thought that computer crimes only involved crimes that where associated with hacks. But I learned that a computer crime is a crime that involved a computer in any way. Even if it was just to close a bank account. This chapter gave me a good understanding of what a computer crime is, it also made me think how could I make some money. By reading this chapter I was surprised to learn that most computer crimes are committed by people that dont have an extensive understanding of computers, but by opportunist.

In one of the cases I read about, a group of hackers figured out a way to intrude into the bank system but didnt do any damage to the bank. Then they tried to sell their knowledge to the bank and got arrested. It seemed unfair to me that for trying to help the bank they got arrested. In many cases the people accused of computer crime do it without know what they do. As in the example of the 8 year old boy that transferred 1,000,000 dollars to his account by inserting a envelope with a cartoon of cereal in it and pressing 1 many times.

I thought the book made a good point in saying that most computer crimes are kept secret from the public by the victims especially banks so people wont loose their trust in them. I think all people come to a point in their life that they have the opportunity to enrich them self illegally without getting caught and thats where a descent and ethical person is reveled. Software theft is a very commune type of crime. Crimes that all off us commit, but dont feel neither wrong in committing it nor will stop doing it for several reasons. Software companies charge unrealistically high for software packages.

Users personally wont be penalized for doing so. Nobody wants to pay for something they can get for free. But at the same time programmers want to be compensated for their work. To tell you the truth I dont understand the point of software developers that want for all software to be free. If software was free, who will pay our salaries and who is going to work for free. Their point is that, if the source code would be free that programmers could improve existing programs, but who is going to work for free in improving those programs, I wouldnt.

Its easy to say for programmers like Stallman that are financially sponsored by others, that software should be for free he is getting paid, who is going to pay us? I agree with Pamela Samuelson The existing system of patent laws is still the best vehicle for protecting software. I agree with the opinion that hacking has changed in recent years. Before hacking used to be a demonstration of knowledge of a system or of making a statement that Im smarter than most people.

Most of those attacks where not malicious, now hackers have become malicious and most of them dont demonstrate that they are smart nor demonstrate knowledge of a system. Most hacks are people that have nothing to do and go through the trashcans of corporations in hopes of finding manuals or passwords of systems or going to Tec fairs to peek over someone shoulder to see if they are dialing in into a remote system and try to get they password and username. I dont agree with laws that punish hackers that do innocent penetrations into systems.

I think thats a god thing since those penetrations make the system operators aware of their vulnerability of attack by a malicious hacker. If no malicious penetrations wouldnt be punished and companies would pay for finding loopholes in their systems the number of malicious attack would drastically descend. I agree with the point of view of IBM. I think that the best way of eliminating viruses is by educating programmers about the damage those viruses cause and that they are wrong and dont demonstrate anything except the maliciousness and stupidity of they authors.

It is amazing the amount of money spent each year on useless software that will never would be used or never work properly. As in the example in chapter 5 in which 22 US service men died because of a radio interference in its computer-based fly-by wire control system. In the first section of chapter 6 is about Database Disasters. I dont think those are Database Disasters I think those are Data entry disasters. In the past years I have heard a lot of cases of people which have had their identities stolen or people and later on in their lifes have experienced problems do to crimes committed by the identities thieves.

Even dough government is aware of that officials fail to completely remove the erroneous information from databases. One of the examples I found terrifying in this chapter was the one of the three young men that filled their car with gas and the owner became suspicious and reported them to the police so they could check on them. When police checked on their tag number a record came up that the car was stolen a few years earlier. As a result one of the young men got shot under his nose disfiguring his face for the rest of his life.

In the first example in chapter 7 where the woman died because a miss calculation of a computerized dispensing machine miscalculated the required dosage of a pain relieving drug and as a consequence the woman went into comma a died later on. Despite this error by there is more probability for a human to make a mistake that for this machine to have made the mistake. In the section where it discusses whether computers are intelligent I agree with the people that say that computers are intelligent.

As the example given by the authors where computers beat 99% off all chess players still it is not intelligent because it figures out its plays by brute computational power and not by observation and recognition of past situations. In the section of the chapter discussing id AI is a proper goal? Of course it is! Not to the extend as Donald Mishie believes since it is too dangerous. AI cant replace government and judicial systems. What if such a system would rule to kill every one that makes a traffic violation and no human could overrule that law?

Every human in his life makes a traffic violation without even noticing. What would happen? The human race would get extinct and machine would prevail. I find amusing some of the predictions made by scientists at the end of the chapter since they are so unrealistic, dangerous and crazy. I think the American work environment is the perfect one since it is not that laid back but at the same time doesnt go to the extreme of the Japanese who create stress so workers produce more or even push their workers until they break.

I think there has to be some kind of stress or no work would be done. By stress I mean pressure to do the job or no work would be done at all. Programmers are often subjected to a lot of stress during their careers since programmers always have a deadline and a problem to solve in front of them. In my opinion companies should provide counseling to workers on how to deal with stress and how to make it work in your favor.

Computer Crimes on the Internet

Its the 90’s, the dawn of the computer age. With technology changing and evolving everyday, it may seem hard not to slip behind in this ever changing world. The Information Super-Highway has been following computers throughout the past few years. Along with the Internet, an emerging group of elite cyber-surfers have turned into today’s computer hackers. Most people don’t know about them, most people don’t know they exist, but they are out there, lurking in the shadows, waiting for there next victim. It can be a scary world out there (Welcome to the Internet).

In reality it is not nearly as bad as it sounds, and chances are it won’t happen to you. There are many fields of hacking on the Internet. The most popular type of hacking is software piracy. “According to estimates by the US Software Piracy Association, as much as $7. 5 billion of American software may be illegally copied and distributed annually worldwide”(Ferrell13). Hackers “pirate” software merely by uploading software bought in a store to the Internet. Uploading is send information from point A(client) to point B(host); downloading is the opposite.

Once it is uploaded to the Internet, people all over the world have access to it. From there, hackers trade and distribute the software, which in hacker jargon is warez[AO1]. Industrial Espionage is another main concern on the Internet. Most recently, the FBI’s World Wide Web page hacked and turned into a racial hate page. Anyone can access files from a WWW page, but changing them is very hard. That is why most hackers don’t even bother with it. CNET stated “This Web site should have been among the safest and most secure in the world, yet late in 1996, it got hacked. “(Ferrell18).

To change a web page, hackers simply upload a new, modified version of the web page, in place of the original. But fortunately, almost all Internet Service Providers (ISP), the computer you dial to for Internet access, have protection called a firewall, which kicks off all users trying to gain access of change information that are not authorized. “Theft and destruction of company files is increasing faster than the ability to stop it”(Rothfeder170). Another field of hacking on the Internet is Electronic-mail hacking. A hacker can intercept Email enroute and read it with no detection.

To safeguard this, companies use encryption programs and no one but the sender and its recipient can read it(Rothfeder225). A mail bomb is another type hack on the Net. “A mail bomb is simply an attack unleashed by dumping hundreds or thousands of Email messages onto a specific address”(Ferrell20). The only way to fix this problem is to either sit there and delete each message one by one, or to call you Internet Service Provider for help. Email forgery is also common. A hacker can change the return address on any given piece of Email to anything they want, such as [email protected] com.

This is illegal because you can use someone else’s address to send false Email to people. Oracle Systems CEO Larry Ellison fell victim to forgery when a former employee accused him of sexual harassment and used a forged email message to help plead her case. And Bob Rae, the former premier of Ontario, suffered political embarrassment as a result of a forged and sexually explicit email that appeared on Usenet newsgroups. False or assumed email identities have played a part in espionage, as well. Forged email was the key to Clifford Stoll’s cracking of a spy ring, recounted in his book The Cuckoo’s Egg (Ferrell4)

On the Internet, credit card fraud is also common. Perhaps the most occurring is the ability to create false accounts on America OnLine. At one point, more than 70% of America OnLine users were using fake credit card numbers. The scary part is, that almost none of them were caught. Other people send pyramid schemes and chain letters to people by the thousands. These GET RICK QUICK!!! schemes are illegal scams designed to get your money (Ferrell10). Yet another fraud on the Net is the selling of carded merchandise.

Although is it not common, people take real credit cards numbers and by expensive electronics by phone and then sell them on the Internet for extremely low prices. “The US Secret Service believes that half a billion dollars may be lost annually by consumers who have credit card and calling card numbers stolen from online databases”(Ferrell10). When companies talk about Network Breaches, they mean that someone has gotten a login and corresponding password to the company’s information. Citibank was hacked and had $11 million stolen by a Russian hacker (Rothfeder170).

Once the hacker gets administrative access, that are free to get important, maybe even secret information from the company. They can also destroy the data or implant viruses (see below) sometimes costing companies millions of dollars a year. “Even at secure companies, a single motivated person could attack the machines of a large organization”(Rothfeder180). Another concern is online banking. It allows people to exchange information, mostly money, to and from bank accounts. “At this point, prospective customers have no way of knowing which banks can be trusted with Internet accounts.

Just because a bank is well know, don’t assume its security is air tight”(Rothfeder229). Hackers can use tools such as password sniffers which locks onto an Internet dweller’s IP address (Internet Protocol Address, it is that person’s identity online) and records the information being sent by their computer. Thus the hacker gets the password. Once this is accomplished, they use another tool called an IP spoofer. This tool will fool other computers that you connect to on Internet into thinking the hacker has some else’s IP address, making them that person.

In a sense, it changes your identity. The hacker, now with the password and with an identity change, logs on the remote World Wide Web page and modifies it to his desire. Or he can steel information only accessible through the password such as credit card information, important or secret information, or he could simply cause havoc to that person or company. Computer viruses are not colds for computers. They are destructive time bombs waiting to destroy a computer’s data. They usually attack the most common and the more important files on computers and deletes them.

Unfortunately they are very easy to get, especially on the Internet, and they are not always detectable. On the other hand, 99% percent of viruses can be detected by using an anti-virus program. Hackers often make there own viruses disguised as real programs. Viruses are also can be attached to Email messages. The Internet has many good things about it. But with all good things comes the downside of humanity. Child pornography is unfortunately easily available on the Net. As many people know, the federal courts are now in the process of determining what you are allowed to post on the Internet.

Apocalypticly, all of the tools and programs mentioned in this document are very common on the Net and can be downloaded 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and anyone can get them. Go to your favorite search engine on the Internet and type in hacking, pictures, bombs, anarchy, warez, or cracking for your query and you will find millions of documents with everything a hacker would need, all just a click away. It can be a scary world out there and if you are willing to except both the good and bad then, Welcome to the Internet.

Computer Crime Report

A report discussing the proposition that computer crime has increased dramatically over the last 10 years. Computer crime is generally defined as any crime accomplished through special knowledge of computer technology. Increasing instances of white-collar crime involve computers as more businesses automate and the information held by the computers becomes an important asset. Computers can also become objects of crime when they or their contents are damaged, for example when vandals attack the computer itself, or when a “computer virus” (a program capable of altering or rasing computer memory) is introduced into a computer system.

As subjects of crime, computers represent the electronic environment in which frauds are programmed and executed; an example is the transfer of money balances in accounts to perpetrators’ accounts for withdrawal. Computers are instruments of crime when they are used to plan or control such criminal acts. Examples of these types of crimes are complex embezzlements that might occur over long periods of time, or when a computer operator uses a computer to steal or alter valuable information from an employer.

Since the first cases were reported in 1958, computers have been used for most kinds of crime, including fraud, theft, embezzlement, burglary, sabotage, espionage, murder, and forgery. One study of 1,500 computer crimes established that most of them were committed by trusted computer users within businesses i. e. persons with the requisite skills, knowledge, access, and resources. Much of known computer crime has consisted of entering false data into computers. This method of computer crime is simpler and safer than the complex process of writing a program to change data already in the computer.

Now that personal computers with the ability to communicate by telephone are prevalent in our society, increasing numbers of crimes have been perpetrated by computer hobbyists, known as “hackers,” who display a high level of technical expertise. These “hackers” are able to manipulate various communications systems so that their interference with other computer systems is hidden and their real identity is difficult to trace. The crimes committed by most “hackers” consist mainly of simple but costly electronic trespassing, copyrighted-information piracy, and vandalism.

There is also vidence that organised professional criminals have been attacking and using computer systems as they find their old activities and environments being Another area of grave concern to both the operators and users of computer systems is the increasing prevalence of computer viruses. A computer virus is generally defined as any sort of destructive computer program, though the term is usually reserved for the most dangerous ones. The ethos of a computer virus is an intent to cause damage, “akin to vandalism on a small scale, or terrorism on a grand scale. ” There are many ways in which viruses can be spread.

A virus can be introduced to networked computers thereby infecting every computer on the network or by sharing disks between computers. As more home users now have access to modems, bulletin board systems where users may download software have increasingly become the target of viruses. Viruses cause damage by either attacking another file or by simply filling up the computer’s memory or by using up the computer’s processor power. There are a number of different types of viruses, but one of the factors common to most of them is that they all copy themselves (or parts of themselves).

Viruses are, in essence, self-replicating. We will now consider a “pseudo-virus,” called a worm. People in the computer industry do not agree on the distinctions between worms and viruses. Regardless, a worm is a program specifically designed to move through networks. A worm may have constructive purposes, such as to find machines with free resources that could be more efficiently used, but usually a worm is used to disable or slow down computers. More specifically, worms are defined as, “computer virus programs … [which] propagate on a computer network without the aid of an nwitting human accomplice.

These programs move of their own volition based upon stored knowledge of the network structure. ” Another type of virus is the “Trojan Horse. ” These viruses hide inside another seemingly harmless program and once the Trojan Horse program is used on the computer system, the virus spreads. One of the most famous virus types of recent years is the Time Bomb, which is a delayed action virus of some type. This type of virus has gained notoriety as a result of the Michelangelo virus. This virus was designed to erase the hard drives of people using IBM compatible omputers on the artist’s birthday.

Michelangelo was so prevalent that it was even distributed accidentally by some software publishers when the software developers’ computers became infected. SYSOPs must also worry about being liable to their users as a result of viruses which cause a disruption in service. Viruses can cause a disruption in service or service can be suspended to prevent the spread of a virus. If the SYSOP has guaranteed to provide continuous service then any disruption in service could result in a breach of contract and litigation could ensue.

However, contract rovisions could provide for excuse or deferral of obligation in the event of The first federal computer crime law, entitled the Counterfeit Access Device and Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1984, was passed in October of 1984. The Act made it a felony to knowingly access a computer without authorisation, or in excess of authorisation, in order to obtain classified United States defence or foreign relations information with the intent or reason to believe that such information would be used to harm the United States or to advantage a foreign The act also attempted to protect financial data.

Attempted access to obtain information from financial records of a financial institution or in a consumer file of a credit reporting agency was also outlawed. Access to use, destroy, modify or disclose information found in a computer system, (as well as to prevent authorised use of any computer used for government business) was also made illegal. The 1984 Act had several shortcomings, and was revised in The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986.

Three new crimes were added to the 1986 Act. These were a computer fraud offence, modelled after federal mail and wire fraud statutes, an offence for the lteration, damage or destruction of information contained in a “federal interest computer”, an offence for trafficking in computer passwords under some Even the knowing and intentional possession of a sufficient amount of counterfeit or unauthorised “access devices” is illegal.

This statute has been interpreted to cover computer passwords “which may be used to access computers to wrongfully obtain things of value, such as telephone and credit card Business crimes of all types are probably decreasing as a direct result of increasing automation. When a business activity is carried out with computer nd communications systems, data are better protected against modification, destruction, disclosure, misappropriation, misrepresentation, and contamination.

Computers impose a discipline on information workers and facilitate use of almost perfect automated controls that were never possible when these had to be applied by the workers themselves under management edict. Computer hardware and software manufacturers are also designing computer systems and programs that are Recent U. S. legislation, including laws concerning privacy, credit card fraud and racketeering, provide criminal-justice agencies with tools to fight business crime.

As of 1988, all but two states had specific computer-crime laws, and a federal computer-crime law (1986) deals with certain crimes involving computers in different states and in government activities. There are no valid statistics about the extent of computer crime. Victims often resist reporting suspected cases, because they can lose more from embarrassment, lost reputation, litigation, and other consequential losses than from the acts themselves. Limited evidence indicates that the number of cases is rising each year because of the increasing number of computers in business applications where crime has traditionally occurred.

Computer Crime In The 1990’s

We’re being ushered into the digital frontier. It’s a cyberland with incredible promise and untold dangers. Are we prepared ? It’s a battle between modern day computer cops and digital hackers. Essentially just think what is controlled by computer systems, virtually everything. By programming a telephone voice mail to repeat the word yes over and over again a hacker has beaten the system. The hacker of the 1990’s is increasingly becoming more organized very clear in what they’re looking for and very, very sophisticated in their methods of attack..

As hackers have become more ophisticated and more destructive, governments, phone companies and businesses are struggling to defend themselves. Phone Fraud In North America the telecommunications industry estimates long distance fraud costs five hundred million perhaps up to a billion every year, the exact the exact figures are hard to be sure of but in North America alone phone fraud committed by computer hackers costs three, four maybe even up to five billion dollars every year. Making an unwitting company pay for long distance calls is the most popular form of phone fraud today.

The first step is to gain access to private automated branch exchange known as a “PABX” or “PBX”. One of these can be found in any company with twenty or more employees. A “PABX” is a computer that manages the phone system including it’s voice mail. Once inside a “PABX” a hacker looks for a phone whose voice mail has not yet been programmed, then the hacker cracks it’s access code and programs it’s voice mail account to accept charges for long distance calls, until the authorities catch on, not for a few days, hackers can use voice mail accounts to make free and untraceablecalls to all over the world.

The hackers that commit this type of crime are becoming ncreasingly organized. Known as “call cell operators” they setup flyby night storefronts were people off the street can come in and make long distance calls at a large discount, for the call cell operators of course the calls cost nothing, by hacking into a PABX system they can put all the charges on the victimized companies tab. With a set of stolen voice mail access codes known as “good numbers” hackers can crack into any phone whenever a company disables the phone they’re using.

In some cases call cell operators have run up hundreds of thousands of dollars in long distance charges, driving businesses and companies traight into bankruptcy. Hacking into a PABX is not as complicated as some people seem to think. The typical scenario that we find is an individual who has a “demon dialer” hooked up to their personal home computer at home that doesn’t necessarily need to be a high powered machine at all but simply through the connection of a modem into a telephone line system.

Then this “demon dialer” is programmed to subsequently dial with the express purpose of looking for and recording dialtone. A demon dialer is a software program that automatically calls thousands of phone numbers to find ones that are connected to computers. A asic hacker tool that can be downloaded from the internet. They are extremely easy programs to use. The intention is to acquire dialtone, that enables the hacker to move freely through the telephone network. It’s generally getting more sinister. We are now seeing a criminal element now involved in term of the crimes they commit, the drugs, money laundering etc.

These people are very careful they want to hide their call patterns so they’ll hire these people to get codes for them so they can dial from several different calling locations so they cannot be detected. The worlds telephone network is a vast maze, there are many places to hide ut once a hacker is located the phone company and police can track their every move. The way they keep track is by means of a device called a “DNR” or a dial number recorder. This device monitors the dialing patterns of any suspected hacker.

It lists all the numbers that have been dialed from their location, the duration of the telephone call and the time of disconnection. The process of catching a hacker begins at the phone company’s central office were thousands of lines converge to a main frame computer, the technicians can locate the exact line that leads to a suspected hackers phone line by the touch of a button. With the “DNR” device the “computer police” retrieve the number and also why the call was made and if it was made for illegal intention they will take action and this person can be put in prison for up to five years and be fined for up to $ 7500. 0.

The telephone network is a massive electronic network that depends on thousands of computer run software programs and all this software in theory can be reprogrammed for criminal use. The telephone system is in other words a potentially vulnerable system, by cracking the right codes and inputting the correct passwords a hacker can sabotage a switching system for millions of hones, paralyzing a city with a few keystrokes. Security experts say telephone terrorism poses a threat, society hasn’t even begun to fathom ! You have people hacking into systems all the time.

There were groups in the U. S. A in 1993 that shutdown three of the four telephone switch stations on the east coast, if they had shutdown the final switch station as well the whole east coast would have been without phones. Things of this nature can happen and have happened in the past. Back in the old days you had mechanical switches doing crossbars, things of that nature. Today all telephone witches are all computerized, they’re everywhere. With a computer switch if you take the first word “computer” that’s exactly what it is, a switch being operated by a computer.

The computer is connected to a modem, so are you and all the hackers therefore you too can run the switches. Our generation is the first to travel within cyberspace, a virtual world that exists with all the computers that form the global net. For most people today cyberspace is still a bewildering and alien place. How computers work and how they affect our lives is still a mystery to all but the experts, but xpertise doesn’t necessarily guarantee morality. Originally the word hacker meant a computer enthusiasts but now that the internet has revealed it’s potential for destruction and profit the hacker has become the outlaw of cyberspace.

Not only do hackers commit crimes that cost millions of dollars, they also publicize their illegal techniques on the net where they innocent minds can find them and be seduced by the allure of power and money. This vast electronic neighborhood of bits and bytes has stretched the concepts of law and order. Like handbills stapled to telephone polls the internet appears to defy regulation. The subtleties and nuances of this relatively new form to the words “a gray area” and “right and wrong”.

Most self described hackers say they have been given a bad name and that they deserve more respect. For the most part they say hackers abide by the law, but when they do steal a password or break into a network they are motivated by a helping desire for knowledge, not for malicious intent. Teenagers are especially attracted by the idea of getting something for nothing. When system managers try to explain to hackers that it is wrong to break into computer systems there is no point because hackers with the aid of a omputer possess tremendous power.

They cannot be controlled and they have the ability to break into any computer system they feel like. But suppose one day a hacker decides to break into a system owned by a hospital and this computer is in charge of programming the therapy for a patient there if a hacker inputs the incorrect code the therapy can be interfered with and the patient may be seriously hurt. Even though this wasn’t done deliberately. These are the type of circumstances that give hackers a bad reputation. Today anyone with a computer and a modem can enter millions of computer systems around the world.

On he net they say bits have no boundaries this means a hacker half way around the world can steal passwords and credit card numbers, break into computer systems and plant crippling viruses as easily as if they were just around the corner. The global network allows hackers to reach out and rob distant people with lightning speed. If cyberspace is a type of community, a giant neighborhood made up of networked computer users around the world, then it seems natural that many elements of traditional society can be found taking shape as bits and bytes.

With electronic commerce comes electronic merchants, plugged-in educators rovide networked education, and doctors meet with patients in offices on-line. IT should come as no surprise that there are also cybercriminals committing cybercrimes. As an unregulated hodgepodge of corporations, individuals, governments, educational institutions, and other organizations that have agreed in principle to use a standard set of communication protocols, the internet is wide open to exploitation. There are no sheriffs on the information highway waiting to zap potential offenders with a radar gun or search for weapons if someone looks suspicious.

By almost all accounts, this lack of “law enforcement” leaves net sers to regulate each other according to the reigningnorms of the moment. Community standards in cyberspace appear to be vastly different from the standards found at the corner of Markham and Lawrence. Unfortunately, cyberspace is also a virtual tourist trap where faceless, nameless con artists can work the crowds. Mimicking real life, crimes and criminals come in all varieties on the internet. The FBI’s National Computer Squad is dedicated to detecting and preventing all types of computer -related crimes.

Some issues being carefully studied by everyone from the net veterans and law enforcement agencies to radical crimes include: Computer Network Break-Ins Using software tools installed on a computer in a remote location, hackers can break into any computer systems to steal data, plant viruses or trojan horses, or work mischief of a less serious sort by changing user names or passwords. Network intrusions have been made illegal by the U. S. federal government, but detection and enforcement are difficult. Industrial Espionage Corporations, like governments, love to spy on the enemy.

Networked systems provide new opportunities for this , as hackers-for-hire retrieve information about product development and marketing strategies, rarely leaving ehind any evidence of the theft. Not only is tracing the criminal labor- intensive, convictions are hard to obtain when laws are not written with electronic theft in mind. Software Piracy According to estimates by U. S. Software Publisher’s Association, as much as $7. 5 billion of American software may be illegally copied and distributed worldwide. These copies work as well as the originals, and sell for significantly less money.

Piracy is relatively easy, and only the largest rings of distributors are usually to serve hard jail time when prisons are overcrowded with people convicted of more serious crimes. Child Pornography This is one crime that is clearly illegal, both on and off the internet. Crackdowns may catch some offenders, but there are still ways to acquire images of children in varying stages of dress and performing a variety of sexual acts. Legally speaking, people who provide access to child porn face the same charges whether the images are digital or on a piece of paper.

Trials of network users arrested in a recent FBI bust may challenge the validity of those laws as they apply to online services. Mail Bombings Software can be written that will instruct a computer to do almost anything, nd terrorism has hit the internet in the form of mail bombings. By instructing a computer to repeatedly send mail (email) to a specified person’s email address, the cybercriminal can overwhelm the recipient’s personal account and potentially shut down entire systems. This may not be illegal , but it is certainly disruptive.

Password Sniffers Password sniffers are programs that monitor and record the name and password of network users as they log in, jeopardizing security at a site. Whoever installs the sniffer can then impersonate an authorized user and log in to access restricted documents. Laws are not yet up to adequately prosecute a erson for impersonating another person on-line, but laws designed to prevent unauthorized access to information may be effective in apprehending hackers using sniffer programs.

The Wall Street Journal suggest in recent reports that hackers may have sniffed out passwords used by members of America On-line, a service with more than 3. 5 million subscribers. If the reports are accurate, even the president of the service found his account security jeopardized. Spoofing Spoofing is the act of disguising one computer to electronically “look” like another computer in order to gain access to a system that would normally be estricted. Legally, this can be handles in the same manner as password sniffers, but the law will have to change if spoofing is going to be addressed with more than a quick fix solution.

Spoofing was used to access valuable documents stored on a computer belonging to security expert Tsutomu Shimomura (security expert of Nintendo U. S. A) Credit Card Fraud The U. S secret service believes that half a billion dollars may be lost annually by customers who have credit card and calling card numbers stolen from on-line databases. Security measures are improving and traditional methods of aw enforcement seem to be sufficient for prosecuting the thieves of such information.

Bulletin boards and other on-line services are frequent targets for hackers who want to access large databases or credit card information. Such attacks usually result in the implementation of stronger security systems. Since there is no single widely-used definition of computer-related crime, computer network users and law enforcement officials most distinguish between illegal or deliberate network abuse versus behavior that is merely annoying. Legal systems everywhere are busily studying ways of dealing with crimes and criminals on the internet.

Theodore “Ted” Bundy

Theodore “Ted” Bundy was something of a celebrity throughout the 70’s and 80’s. He allegedly killed 36 women, but by his own admission, there were at least 100 more unaccounted for. His trial was marked by alot of pomp and arrogance on his own part, and the media and public ate it up. He went out with a bang in 1989, when he was at long last, executed by electrocution. Below is the list of women he murdered. Katherine Merry Divine, 15. Disappeared: Nov 25, 1973, from Seattle Wa. Found: Dec. 6, 1973, in McKenny Park, Wa.

A couple found her body laying face first in the sodden forest. Decomposition had made it hard to determine exact cause of death, but evidence suggested she’d been sodomized, and she had been strangled. It’s possible that her throat was also cut. Before his execution, Bundy admitted to picking up a hitchhiker in 73 and leaving her body near Olympia [where Devine was found] but he couldn’t remember where exactly. Joni Lenz, 18. Attacked: early January 1974 Joni had gone to sleep in her basement room of a big house which several young people rented from.

The next afternoon, after she hadn’t appeared all morning, her housemates went to check on her nd found her lying in her bed, her hair and face matted with dried blood. She’d been beaten with a metal rod broken from the bed frame, and when they pulled the covers back, they were horrified to find the rod had been brutally jammed into her vagina. The incredible thing is, this poor girl lived through the attack. It left irreparable damage to her internal organs, and she was left with no memory of the attack. It had also left her severely brain damaged.

She was a shy, friendly girl with no enemies, and it was determined to be a random act of savage violence. Lynda Ann Healy,21 Disappeared: Jan 31, 1974 Seattle, Wa Found: March 3,1975 Taylor Mountain, Wa A tall, slender beautiful girl with long dark hair and blue eyes. Upon investigation, the police pulled back her bedcovers and found a heavily blood stained pillowcase and blood-soaked sheets. Her nightgown was found stuffed in her closet, the neck lined crusted with dried blood. The clothes she’d worn that day were missing. Not one trace of the attacker or her body could be found.

A year later, during a thorough investigation of what came to be known as Bundy’s graveyard, Lynda’s skull was found, bearing the unmistakable marks of icious battering. Bundy confessed to her murder before his execution. Donna Gail Manson, 19 Disappeared: Mar 12, 1974 from Evergreen State College, near Olympia Found: Bundy claimed a part of her was found Mar 3, 1975 at Taylor Mountain, Wa In March of 74, she was very depressed. She wasn’t reported missing for 6 days because of her habit of taking off on whims. March 12, she’d left her room around 7 pm to walk to a campus jazz concert.

She was never seen alive again. Bundy confessed to her murder before his execution and said her remains were part of those unidentified bones found Mar 3, 1975 on Taylor Mountain, Wa Susan Elaine Rancourt, 19 Disappeared: April 17,1974, Central Wa. State College, Ellensburg Found: Mar 3,1975 Taylor Mountain, Wa She never went anywhere alone. It was dark, but the campus was hopping with students. The meeting ended at 9, and she’d planned to meet a friend to see a German film. The friend finally went alone when Susan never showed. Susan was last seen leaving the advisor’s meeting.

On a rare occasion she took a chance and hurried into the dark alone. And never came back. Investigators found only her skull as they excavated Taylor Mountain, Bundy’s apparent graveyard of severed heads. It was brutally fractured. Bundy confessed to her murder before his execution. Brenda Baker, 15 Disappeared: May 25, 1974–ran away from home in Redmond, Wa Found: June 17, 1974 in Millersylvania Park several miles from where Kathy Devine was found} Her badly decomposed body was found in the park, and cause of death was impossible to determine.

She’d run away from home, and no personal info is available at this point. Roberta Kathleen Parks, 20 Disappeared: May 6, 1974, from OSU in Corvalles, Oregon Found:Mar 3, 1975 Taylor Mountain, Wa May 4th she’d had an argument with her father on the phone, and her sister alled from Spokane on May 6th to tell her their father had suffered a massive heart attack. Her sister called later with the good news that their father would recover. It’s speculated that Kathy was feeling terrible guilt over the argument and the heart attack that followed.

That night, she agreed to walk to another dorm hall to have coffee with friends. She never arrived. Her skull was exacavated with the others on Taylor Mountain, so far away from her Oregon dorm. Bundy confessed to her murder before his execution. Brenda Carol Ball, 22 Disappeared: May 31, 1974, Burien, Wa Found: Mar 1, 975 in the thickly wooded Taylor Mountain Brenda stood 5 ft 3, 112 lbs, with lively brown eyes. On the night of May 31-June 1, she’d gone to the Flame Tavern alone. She told friends that day, she would see about getting a ride to Sun Lakes, on the eastern side of the state, to meet them there later.

She stayed at the tavern till 2 am, then asked a musician for a ride, but he was going the other way. She was seen last in the parking lot, talking to a man with his arm in a sling. Because she was such a free spirit, her friends thought nothing of her absence, and didn’t become suspicious until almost 19 days after he was last seen. March 1 of 1975, college students working on Taylor Mt, discovered the first of several skulls on that mountian, and it proved to be that of Brenda Ball. Bundy confessed to her murder before his execution. Georgeann Hawkins, 18 Disappeared: June 10, 1974 UW in Seattle, Wa.

Found: According to Bundy, one of her bones was found Sept 6,1974 nearly 2 miles from Lake Sammamish State Park On June 10th, Many students were cramming for exams that night, so Georgeann was hardly the only one awake at 12:30 am. She visited her boyfriend, borrowed some Spanish notes, then headed or the street. A friend called out of a window to her, and they chatted for a few minutes. She said goodnight and walked 30 feet away before he stuck his head back in through the window. 2 other male friends remembered seeing her cover the last 20 feet before disappearing around the corner.

She only had 40 feet to go in the brightly lit alley. Georgeann’s roommate knew something was wrong when she didn’t arrive 2 hours later, and she called Georgeann’s boyfriend and learned she had left his place at 1 am. She woke the housemother, and together they waited for the girl. They called the police in the orning, and because of the other disappearances in the area, the Seattle police took action immediately. They later learned that a housemother had awaken to a high scream. She’d thought it was a few of the students hoarsing around as usual, and went back to sleep.

Bundy confessed to her murder before his execution, and though he was foggy on the details, he remembered how trusting she was. He’d asked her for help carrying his briefcase to his car because of his fake cast, and she’d trustingly obliged. He knocked her out, stuffed her into the car and sped away. She came to before he killed her, and in her onfused ramblings, said she had thought he’d been sent to help her with her Spanish exam. He knocked her out again, then pulled over and strangled her. Before his execution he claimed that part of her remains were found Sept 6,1974 nearly 2 miles from Lake Sammamish State Park.

Janice Ott, 23 Disappeared:July 14, 1974 Lake Sammamish State park, Wa Found: Sept 6,1974 nearly 2 miles from the park A newly wed of a year and a half, July 14th was a sad day for her. The job she’d worked so hard for had taken her away to Washington, leaving her husband behind in his own practice in Riverside Ca. She was missing him very much the day of her disappearance. She left a note for her roommate and told her she’d be home by 4, then biked to the park. Witnesses later said she got up to help a friendly man in a cast, and that was the last Janice Ott was ever seen alive.

Workers discovered some of her remains in a wooded area where other victims had been dumped. Bundy confessed to her murder before his execution. Denise Naslund, 18 Disappeared:July 14, 1974 Lake Sammamish State park, Wa Found: Sept 6,1974 nearly 2 miles from the park Denise was studying to be a computer programmer, working part ime in an office to pay her way through night school. She and her boyfriend of 9 months had planned a picnic that day at the park with another couple. They roasted hot dogs, then the men fell asleep in the sun. Denise walked off to the bathrooms around 4:30 pm.

She never returned. Her friends started to worry after a while, and searched for her. Denise had brought her dog and they hoped she was looking for the dog, but it turned up alone. Workers discovered some of her remains in a wooded area where other victims had been dumped along with Janice Ott’s remains} Bundy confessed to her murder efore his execution. Melissa Smith, 17 Disappeared:Oct 18,1974 Midvale, Utah Found:Oct 27,1974 near Summit park, in the Wasatch Mountains Melissa was the daughter of Midvale’s police chief and was a very cautious girl.

Midvale itself was a small Mormon town, very quiet, and though her father worried about his kids and taught them to be safety-aware, Melissa had little to fear in the tiny community. October 18th, Melissa had plans to attend a slumber party. She ended up walking to the local pizza parlor to console a friend who’d had a quarrel with her boyfriend. After this, she left to ick her overnight clothes up and go to the party. She never made it home, and she never made it to the party. The teenager who’d gone to comfort a friend in need, was found battered and nude 9 days later, far from the small town she’d grown up in.

Her head had been severely beaten with perhaps a crowbar, and her body had been battered before death. She had been strangled, raped and sodomized. Bundy confessed to her murder before his execution. Laura Aime, 17 Disappeared: Oct 31,1974, Lehi, Utah Found:Nov 27,1974 in the Wasatch Mountains Laura had stood nearly 6 ft tall and weighed a mere 15 lbs, and felt very insecure of her “awkward,” bony appearance. She’d dropped out of high school and moved in with friends while working small jobs. She was referred to as a drifter looking for something to grasp in life.

She talked to her parents daily, but wasn’t missed until 4 days after Halloween. She had gone to a cafe on Halloween night and, bored with the activity there, left around midnight and headed to a park. She was found a month later on the bank of a river in the Wasatch Mountains. Her face was beaten beyond recognition and she was found nude. She had been strangled and apparently beaten with n iron crowbar or prybar. Like Melissa Smith, she had been sexually assaulted. She had been drinking just enough to be intoxicated, but not so much that she couldn’t scream, run or fight back. Bundy confessed to her murder before his execution.

Carol DaRonch, 18 Attacked: Nov 8,1974, Salk Lake City, Utah It was a rainy day when 18 yr old Carol DaRonch left home around 6:30 pm and headed towards a Murray shopping mall. While at the mall, she ran into some cousins and visited with them for a while. Then she made a purchase and went off to Waldens Books. As she was looking through some books, a andsome, well dressed man approached her. He asked if she’d parked near Sears, and she said yes. He asked for her license number and she gave it to him. He then told her that someone had tried to break into her car, and she needed to come take a look.

Young and trusting, Carol DaRonch didn’t even wonder how he’d found her. He had an authorititave air that made her assume he was a security guard or officer. She followed him quietly out of the building, but felt a sudden apprehension as they headed out into the rainy night. She asked him for some ID, and he only laughed, making her feel stupid for bothering. They got to her car, and nothing was missing. He then told her she needed to come to the station to see if she knew the suspect. After much hesitation, she follwed him to a side building which he told her was a sub station, [it was the back door of a laundry mat].

He said the suspect must have been taken to headquearters. He then co-erced her into going to “headquarters. ” It wasn’t until they were in his Volkswagon that she smelled alcohol on his breath. When he told her to put on her seatbelt, she said no, and was ready to jump, but he’d already driven off and was going very fast. She realized he was heading way from the police station. Suddenly he screeched to a halt and tried to hand-cuff her, but in the struggle, connected both cuffs to the same wrist. As they struggled, he pulled out a small gun and threatened her with it.

She fell out of the door into the sodden earth, and got up as he came at her with a crowbar. He threw her up against the car, and in a sheer adreneline rush brought on by utter terror, Carol DaRonch broke free from her attacker and ran wildly to the road. An older couple came upon her just in time and took the terrified girl to the police station. She was their first living, breathing victim. Debby Kent, 17 Disappeared: Nov 8,1975 Bountiful, Utah Found: Never Several people who lived near the school later admitted to hearing 2 short, terrified screams between 10:30 and 11.

They described them as coming from someone in “mortal terror. ” They even walked outside and stared into the darkness, hoping to find the source. They saw nothing, and they reported nothing. Debby’s brother waited at the rink while the crowds thinned at the high school, leaving her irritated parents waiting til midnight. When they realized theirs was the only car left in the parking lot, they immediately called the Bountiful olice, who were all to familiar with the recent disappearances in nearby towns.

Later, a father told police he’d arrived late at the play and saw a light colored VW bug racing away from the school. A small hand-cuff key was found in the parking lot, one that fit the cuffs Carol DaRonch had brought in. Nothing else was turned up. Debby Kent’s family faced a tragic, heart broken Christmas, along with Melissa Smith’s and Laura Aime’s families. Bundy confessed to her murder before his execution. Caryn Campbell, 23 Disappeared: Jan 12, 1976 Wildwood Inn, Aspen, Colorado Found: Feb 18, 1975 Owl Creek Road, Aspen Colorado Caryn was a registered nurse from Farmington, Michigan.

She was engaged to a cardiologist who was 9 yrs older than her, and got along well with his 2 children. They had gone to Aspen to combine a medical seminar with a vacation. Later they ate dinner with friends, then returned to the inn where they were staying. They settled in the lounge, and Caryn remembered a magazine she’d left in their room, and went to retrieve it. After she had been gone a while, her fiancee went to find her. She wasn’t in the room, she wasn’t anywhere to be found. He searched frantically for her and oon brought the police into it. She’d simply vanished into thin air.

He had to pack and fly home with his children, but kept waiting for a call from Caryn, explaining why she’d walked away from them. She never called. On February 18th, she was found in a snowbank off of Owl Creek Rd, not far from the inn where she had been vacationing. She lay in the bloodstained snowbank nude, battered and cut. It was highly likely that she was raped. Bundy confessed to her murder before his execution. Julie Cunningham, 26 Disappeared: Mar 15, 1975 Vail, Colorado Found:Never Julie was considered to be a ery nice woman, and worked in a sporting good store while also working part-time as a ski instructor.

She had a depressing history with men, often falling for the wrong type, only to hear the “it was great, I’ll call you sometime” line she’d come to know so well. The week she disappeared, she’d had the last heartbreak of her life. She’d thought this was the right one, and had gone to Sun Valley with him for a weekend, only to learn he’d had no interest in a long term relationship. She wanted marriage and kids, and she was in the wrong atmosphere for finding a lasting relationship. She returned to Vail, crying and depressed.

On March 15th, she talked to her mother for the last time on the phone, then decided she needed a break, and left for the local tavern. She would have met her roommate there, but Julie Cunningham never arrived. Bundy confessed to her murder before his execution. Denise Oliverson, 25 Disappeared: Apr 6, 1975 Grand Junction, Colorado Found: Never The pretty dark haired woman had argued badly with her husband before she peddled off on her bike to visit her parents. Her parents hadn’t expected her, and when she didn’t return that night, her husband assumed she was still ngry with him and had stayed at their house.

He decided to give her some time to cool off, and the next day, when he called their house, was alarmed to learn she had never arrived there. Police searched the route she had most likely taken, and found her bike and her sandals under a viaduct near a railroad bridge. Bundy confessed to her murder before his execution. Melanie Cooley, 18 Disappeared: Apr 15, 1975 Nederland, Colorado Found: Apr 23, 1975 Coal Creek Rd, Nederland, Colorado Melanie could have been Debby Kent’s twin sister, and had walked off from her small town high school that spring ay, never to be seen alive again.

County road workers found her body 20 miles away. She had been bludgeoned on the back of the head, her hands had been tied, and a dirty pillowcase was left twisted around her neck. No other information is available on the victim at this moment. Bundy confessed to her murder before his execution. Shelly Robertson, 24 July 1,1975 Golden, Colorado Found:Aug 21,1975 a mine in Berthoud Pass, Colorado Shelly was given to hitchhiking for fun to other states, and when she didn’t show up for work on July 1, friends and family first thought she’d gone off on a him again.

She’d argued with her boyfriend prior to her disappearance, and no one knew exactly what she was feeling July 1. The summer passed without a word, and they realized with dread that the 24 yr old had not gone away on her own. They learned she had been last seen by friends on June 30th, and on July 1, a policeman had noticed her at a gas station with a man in a beat up old truck. August 21, her nude body was found inside a mine by 2 mining students. Cause of death was impossible to determine because of decomposition. Bundy confessed to her murder before his execution.

Treatment and The Sex Offender

The Martinson Report of the early 1970s, said that rehabilitative efforts or treatment programs in general had failed to reduce recidivism. The Report led those in control of government and the criminal justice system to say that rehabilitation does not work, and therefore focus on deterrence and punishment of offenders. Martinsons study of 231 treatment studies measured offender improvement in various areas, but recidivism is the issue here. Martinson says With few and isolated exceptions, the rehabilitative efforts that have been reported so far have had no appreciable effect on recidivism (p. 2).

Martinson says that education and vocational training in the studies he reviewed had no influence on reducing recidivism. But he admits that a correctional facility running a truly rehabilitative program that gets inmates ready for life on the outside by way of education and vocational training will have more successful persons than prisons that have no such programs (Martinson, p. 292). Martinson says that individual counseling also fails to reduce recidivism.

In terms of group counseling he admits that a study of adult offenders did show improvement in attitudes of offenders, but since it did not include information on recidivism it was discounted. Martinson is criticized because the counseling programs may not seem to work because of the institutional environment outside the program. Martinson says that even in institutional environments that control every part of the offenders environment and treatment, did show a reduction in recidivism for one year.

But he says the effects of such treatment did not reduce recidivism any more than no treatment after two years. And it had no influence on reducing the recidivism rates of young offenders (Martinson, p. 296). Prisoners with less sentences were found to have a higher parole success rate than those with longer sentences, but did not deal with the issue of offender degree of risk (Martinson, p. 299). Martinson says that since these treatment programs in prison did not work, maybe rehabilitating offenders outside an institutional setting may work.

But the studies he reviewed showed no effect in treating the client. But he says that individual psychotherapy may work in a community setting. Martinson said that their was no evidence to believe that intensive supervision of adults would reduce recidivism. But he said that a smaller case load did improve a persons chances of parole success (p. 305). But he says that intensive supervision works not because of the mechanisms of treatment or rehabilitation, but due to the mechanism of deterrence (Ibid).

Martinson says that community treatment may not reduce recidivism, but it does insure that the client will not become worse. Also community treatment is cheaper than treatment in prisons. Martinson admits that the reason why treatment has not worked is due to these reasons: he education we provide to inmates is still poor education, that the therapy we administer is not administered skillfully enough, that our intensive supervision and counseling do not yet provide enough personal support for the offenders who are subjected to them (p. 07).

Sundt et al. (1998) article says that past research has shown that the public supports rehabilitation as a core goal of corrections. They say that over the past decade, the conservative campaign to get tough on crime has grown in strength and influence. Stundt et al (1998) article replicates a 1986 study by Cullen et al that explored attitudes toward correctional treatment. They found that public support for rehabilitation has declined , but that the public continues to view treatment as a legitimate correctional objective.

A majority of the public now believes that the main emphasis of prisons should be to punish offenders or protect society. But the majority of the public still favors expanding rehabilitation programs. In terms of early release from prison for good behavior and participation in educational and work programs, half of the public opposes early release. Also 40% of the public oppose expanding treatment programs (p. 426). Sundt et al (1998) found that two thirds of the public perceived correctional rehabilitation to be very helpful or helpful.

They found that only with regard to sex offenders and violent offenders did a majority of the public perceive that treatment would be ineffective, but 40% believed that treatment would be slightly helpful for these offenders. The Sundy et al (1998) article shows that the belief in the efficacy of rehabilitation is somewhat stable. Even if the public is less confident that specific treatment programs work, most still perceive rehabilitation as being an effective way to treat offenders. They say that the decline in support from 1986 is not due to the belief that nothing works.

They say that many studies from the past decade (the late 1980s through the early 1990s) shows the effectiveness of treatment interventions is now extensive and stronger that it was in 1986. For example Palmer 1995 article shows that treatment programs do work to reduce recidivism and are effective ways to treat offenders in prison. The change in support for rehabilitation is due to the penal harm movement that wants to punish offenders, and opposing any treatment or rehabilitation due to cost and perception that criminals cannot change.

Gendreau et al (1996) article discusses effective assessment, believing that good risk measures can predict recidivism in the . 30 – . 45 range. In terms of the methods of assessment, Gendreau et al (1996) says their is two models of assessing and predicting human behavior, which are clinical and actuarial. They say that the clinical model dominates, and in the case of corrections clinical assessment consists of an expert, such as probation officer interviewing an offender for the purpose of determining their risk to reoffend.

The expert bases their decision on intuition, experience, and file information on the client to make the correct decision. The actuarial method is based on empirically established correlation\\’s between a standardized objective risk measure and recidivism, and therefore limits the experts subjective opinion in the decision making process. Gendreau et al. (1996) article says the actuarial approach is the best, since the clinical method only predicted recidivism 8% of the time (r=. 08). The actuarial method was r=. , and produced higher correlation\\’s with outcome 76% of the time.

The results apply to corrections, such as that sex offenders (Hanson & Bussiere, 1996) and violent offenders (Mossman, 1994) clearly demonstrated the superiority of the actuarial model. The Hanson & Bussiere, 1996 study of sex offenders found the actuarial model to be about three times more powerful. Gendreau et al (1996) say that there is simply no justification whatsoever for the continued use of the clinical model of assessment considering what is at stake (i. , protecting the public) in our line of work.

The static risk factors that are criminal behavior predictors are age, gender, past criminal history, early family factors, and criminal associates that predict recidivism. But their is also dynamic risk predictors, such as criminogenic needs. Simourd (1996) defined criminogenic needs as attitudes, values, beliefs, and behaviors held by an offender that support negative attitudes toward all forms of official authority and conventional non deviant pursuits (e. g. ducation, work, stable pro social relationships); deviant values that are used to justify aggression, and substance abuse; and rationalizations for antisocial behavior that free one from any moral constraints.

Gendreau et al. (1996) tested the static risk predictors by a meta-analysis of 131 studies from 1970-94 that produced 1,14f1 correlation\\’s with recidivism. They confirmed that age, gender, early family factors, adult criminal history and history of antisocial behavior as a teen, and criminal associates are reliable predictors of recidivism.

They found that dynamic predictors, especially criminogenic needs predicted recidivism (r=. 17) as well as static predictors including past criminal history (r=. 16). Gendreau et al (1996) article found that the prediction of recidivism is best accomplished by using measures that assesses static and dynamic risk factors. They recommend the Level of Service Inventory (LSI-R) (Andrews & Bonta, 1995), due to the studies that confirm its predictive validity in predicting recidivism and prison adjustment for a variety of offender populations, such as sex offenders.

The sex offender literature is complex, such as Marshal (1996) belief that assessment of the sex offender with phallometric procedures is ethically questionable, and that it is much easier to predict violent recidivism than sexual recidivism. However, Hanson and Bussieres (1996) meta-analysis of 61 sex offender studies found 970 correlation\\’s with recidivism concluding the following: a) the largest single predictor of sexual offending were sexual preference for children and deviant sexual preference as measured by phallometric methods.

The respective r values were high (. 32 and . ); b) measures of personal distress, be they anxiety, depression, or self-esteem, were not significant predictors of sexual, non-sexual, or violent recidivism; c) combinations of variables identified in their research should be able to predict recidivism in the . 30-. 40 range, that is similar to what has been found in studies of general recidivism (Gendreau et al. , 1996). Gendreau et al. (1996) says that assessments of general criminal deviance, such as antisocial personality attitudes, and non-sex offending criminal history have been under used in the sex offender area.

This is especially true of the rapist who appears to have a good deal in common with the high risk non-sex offender (Quinsey, Lalumiere, Rice, and Harris, 1995). Researchers in the area of sex offending have identified a list of other factors that should be assess in the future, such as the lack of empathy toward the victim, denial and minimization, deviant sexual fantasies, unfulfilled intimacy needs, association with other sex offenders, access to victims, and the interaction of psychopathy and deviant sexual arousal (Hanson & Bussiere, 1996; Marshall, 1996; Quinsey et al, 1995). Gendreau et al. 996) says that well-galidated measures designed specifically for use with sex offenders are rare (e. g. , Epperson, Kaul, & Huot, 1995).

Gendreau concludes that the most effective model of assessing offender characteristics predictive of recidivism is the actuarial technique, and that the realization that dynamic predictors (i. e. , criminogenic need) are crucial for the accurate assessment of offender risk. Male sex offenders in prison represent a major problem for correctional administrators in the United States, due to the public, legislative, and legal pressures to do something about these most reviled offenders.

Most correctional systems in the United States and Canada offer some form of treatment for sex offenders, ranging from individual to group counseling to highly intensive therapeutic communities that use the most recent treatment techniques (US Dept. of Justice). The responsibility for treating and supervising sex offenders has increasingly shifted from mental health institutions to corrections, as the Mentally dangerous Sexual Psychopath laws adopted by many states in the 1940s have been phased out.

In general treatment professionals have concluded that most sex offenders are not mentally ill and have not benefited from traditional psychiatric treatment. Fortunately for society, promising new approaches in corrections have been developed to help treat sex offenders that hopefully will reduce recidivism. The Association for the Treatment of sexual Abusers supports the position that treatment of sex offenders should not replace a criminal justice response, but should be one of several tools used by society to meet the needs of the offender and protect and insure public safety.

The fact is that treatment can be combined with other criminal justice responses, such as jail, incarceration in prison, probation, and community monitoring and supervision (ATSA). The U. S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Corrections article, An Administrators Overview-Questions and Answers on Issues Related to the Incarcerated Male Sex Offender, hereafter cited as (US Dept. of Justice) adapted by Barbara Krauth and Roger smith from A Practitioners Guide to Treating the Incarcerated Male Sex Offender summarizes the new treatment approach used to meet the needs of this offender population.

The Administrators Overview highlights material contained in the Practitioners Guide used by those expected to treat sex offenders and is focused at correctional administrators, who must make critical decisions with limited resources. The NIC training seminars, and the Practitioners Guide produced as a result of these seminars that began in 1986, stress the importance of a systems approach to program planning, design, and management. The approach requires the active participation and support of legislators, prosecutors, judges, mental health professionals, advocacy groups, and all segments of the correctional system.

It grew out of the belief that supportive administrators play an important role in the developing and operating effective treatment programs for sex offenders who are incarcerated to help end the vicious cycle of abuse, in which victims frequently become offenders. There is more than one type of sex offender. Sex offenders are a diverse group that cannot be characterized by any single motivation or causal factor. Typologies have been created to account for the different forms of sexual deviance.

The categories developed by the FBI, based on other typologies, are currently most frequently used in criminal investigations. The FBI categories of sex offenders are as follow: Child molesters who turn to prepubescent youths for sexual gratification. The two main types of child molester are the situational and preferential (often called the pedophile). The situational child molester is made up of persons that do not have a defined sexual preference for children. They include the following subtypes: Regressed, who is an immature, socially inept person that relates to children as peers.

This person usually experienced a brief period of low self-esteem and turned to his own kids or others for sexual satisfaction. He is morally indiscriminate, with an antisocial attitude that uses and abuses everyone. He chooses his victims based on vulnerability and opportunity and only coincidentally because they are kids. He is sexually indiscriminate, who may be developmentally disabled, psychotic, senile, or organically dysfunctional (US Dept. of Justice, pp. 2-3).

The preferential (pedophile) child molesters are fixated, in that they are attracted to children throughout their lives and have been unable to attain any degree of psycho-sexual maturity. The subtypes of this type of child molester is as follows: Seductive, having an exclusive sexual interest in children and trying to court and seduce them. He is introverted, having a fixated interest in children but does not have the social skills to seduce them. He typically molests strangers or very young children or marries women with children the age of his preference.

He may be sadistic, having a sexual preference for children, coupled with a need to inflict pain in order to obtain sexual gratification (US Dept. of Justice, p. 3). The adult sex offender is the rapist, who are usually motivated by a fusion of anger and power needs and sexuality. They are classified according to the characteristics of the assault as well as of the assailant. There is three main types of rapists, the anger rapist, the power rapist, and the sadistic rapist. The anger rape is associated with gratuitous violence and the intention to hurt, devalue, and express contempt for the victim.

This type of assault is typically opportunistic and is usually committed in response to a precipitating stress. The power rape is typically used as a way of exercising dominance, mastery, strength, authority, and control over the victim. The power rapist has little need for excessive physical force beyond what is needed to gain the victims submission. They are less physically dangerous that the anger rapist, but may be more compulsive and often engage in elaborate fantasies and plans.

The sadistic rape is the most severe pathology of rape on the part of the offender as well as the most dangerous type of assault. This type of rape has the ritual of torturing the victim and the perception of her suffering and degradation gives the offender erotic pleasure. As the rapists arousal builds, so may his sadistic acts of violence, progressing in some cases to the point of lust murder (US Dept. of Justice, p. 3). The Administrators Overview, says that just about every incarcerated sex offender in treatment is a rapists or child molesters.

Therefore I will not discuss voyeurs, exhibitionists, or obscene phone callers in jail, except to say that this misdemeanor sex behavior may be about to commit a rape, or is engaged in an escalating pattern of deviant behavior that may lead to rape. Also the sex offender may not specialize in one type of sex abuse, but be engaged in voyeurism, rape, and child molestation. The vast majority of offenders are males, with about 80% of sex offenses against children being committed by males and about 20% by females (ATSA-reducing sex abuse… ). The offender is usually know by the victim or family eighty to ninety-five percent of the time.

The sex offender is a family member in less than 50% of cases, and are identified as acquaintances, such as neighbors, coaches, teachers, religious leaders in the remaining cases (Ibid. ). Clearly intervention and treatment is very important to treat the sex offender. Sex crimes are viewed with horror by the public. Those that fear this offender population would prefer to lock them up forever. This negative public attitude has caused some corrections officials to not spend scarce resources on creating treatment opportunities for this group of offenders, thinking that punishment and deterrence are more appropriate (US Dept. Justice, p. 4).

The typical atmosphere in the usual prison tends to aggravate the problem of most sex offenders. The secrecy, negative social interactions, poor self-esteem, denigrating attitudes toward women, and deviant sexual arousal are usually reinforced in prison. Despite the criticism, without treatment, sex offenders are highly likely to re-offend. The statistical data suggests that the recidivism rate of untreated offenders is about 60 percent, while recidivism among those who have been treated is about 15 to 20 percent. Therefore, it is in the interest of society to protect potential victims by treating sex offenders.

Treatment is not a cure for sex offenders, but successful treatment does reduce the likelihood of recidivism. It does not permanently eliminate the attraction of deviant sexual acts for sex offenders, who are always at risk of repeating their deviant behavior. But, only through treatment can the offender learn to control their behavior. The sex offender must use what they learn in treatment to maintain self-control over their behavior. It can help them to recognize the situations that increase their likelihood of re-offending, and teach them techniques to control their behavior in these situations.

Kaufman, et al. (1998) discusses factors that influence sexual offenders modus operandi, including an examination of victim-offender relatedness and age. They say that the majority of research literature in this area has focused mainly on adult offenders, and offers only preliminary understanding of sexual- offending process. The general findings indicate that it may be useful to describe offense patterns based on specific variables, such as relationship of the victim to the offender.

For example, Faller (1989) found that intrafamilial offenders with close relationships to victims, such as biological and stepfathers abuse their victims more often and for a longer duration of time than do intrafamilial offenders of more distant relations, such as noncustodial fathers, or other relatives. The purpose of the Kaufman et al. (1998) study was to investigate and contrast the modus operandi (MO) of key subgroups of sexual offenders in an effort to increase the understanding of the behavioral process associated with sex offending.

Their findings support the assertion that offender age group (i. e. adolescent vs. adult) as well as victim / offender relatedness maintain victim silence following the onset of sex abuse. The study found that adolescent offenders consistently reported using MO strategies with greater frequency than did their adult counterparts. Adults larger physical size as well as their inherent power, social or parental may reduce their need to engage in MO strategies. The impact of offender / victim relatedness was found to have a major impact on some MO dimensions.

The intrafamilial offender reported the use of gifts to gain victim compliance in sexual activities more than did extrafamilial offenders. They may use gifts to maintain their relationships with victims as well as to obtain compliance in sexual activities. Extrafamilial offenders said they gave victims alcohol and drugs more than did their intrafamilial counterparts to gain compliance in sexual activities. The study suggests some prevention programs conveying simple messages (e. g. , Say no, run, and tell) are unlikely to lead to a reduction in sex offenses.

Prevention must look at the subtle nature of the grooming process (i. e. , including the involvement of prosocial behaviors), the reality that most offenders are known to the victim, and the impact of key subgroup factors (e. g. , offender age and relationship to the victim) on the offenders modus operandi. Some sex offenders cannot be treated successfully, such as those with lifelong histories of antisocial acts are not likely to benefit from treatment. Also very violent and sadistic offenders, sociopathic offenders with no empathy, and those not motivated for treatment are typically impossible to treat.

Offenders with the best prognosis for treatment have committed few sex crimes, having little history of Alcohol and other Drug dependence, are not mentally ill, and are of normal intelligence can benefit from treatment. Clearly those with a mental illness, or who are under the influence of mind altering drugs or who have less that a seventh grade education cannot possible benefit from a cognitive behavioral treatment program that requires the ability to comprehend and think on a level to overcome thinking errors, cognitive distortions, and other problems.

The Administrators Overview, says that it is difficult to determine if sex offender treatment programs in correctional institutions have been successful by reducing recidivism because experimentally based data is rare, and different treatment programs collected data in different ways and tracked divergent groups of sex offenders without the use of classical experimental design (US Dept. of Justice, p. 5). Also they say that recidivism data may vary because different definitions of recidivism exist. They do say that these problems should be resolved over the years to come, due to the improvements in keeping reliable outcome data for programs.

The approaches to assessment and treatment of sex offenders must include the following techniques to identify sex offender treatment needs. Techniques used to assess sex offenders include clinical interviews, self-reporting, psychological tests, questionnaires, and physiological methods, such as use of the plethysmograph to measure deviant sexual arousal.

All of the above information can not only identify those persons most likely to benefit from treatment, but also help to identify specific areas that need to be targeted for intervention and treatment ( US Dept. of Justice, p. 7-8). Howard E. Barbarees article, discusses the assessment and treatment outcomes of sex offenders that use denial and minimization to not accept responsibility. Denial is usually seen as a main impediment to successful therapy and as a consequence, most treatment programs exclude offenders who deny their offense. The offender use denial to conclude that he has no problems and that there is no reason for him to be treated, even if he admits to the offense, he may history the truth by minimizing the frequency severity and variety of his criminal sexual behavior.

He found that in a nonrandom survey, 114 incarcerated rapists were divided into those that admitted to the offense for which they had been convicted (41% and those who denied it (59%). Also both groups presented justifications that were used to support their denial or to minimize responsibility for the offense. They blamed the victim, by saying she had a bad sexual reputation, an by saying they it was alcohol an drugs that caused them to do it. Also some blamed a bad childhood. Denials and distortions weakens both the accurate assessment and the effective treatment of sex offenders. Therapists depend on offenders to provide truthful descriptions of the events that lead of to their offenses to help determine what behaviors need to be targeted in therapy.

Denial and minimization is the results of a psychological process involving distortions, mistaken attributions, rationalization, and selective attention and memory, which helps the offender avoid blame and responsibility for their actions. They recommend that offenders not be excluded from treatment due to denial and minimization, because such cognitions can be amenable through treatment and should be the first stage of treatment, to increase motivation for treatment and set the stage for further assessment and treatment (Barbaree). Nancy Howard and Rick Caslin (1999) says that cognitive training and not excuses is what sex offenders need to avoid recidivism. Sex offenders often show thinking errors and rationalizations to justify their actions and avoid accepting responsibility for their actions.

Sex offenders used several defensive mechanisms, such as rationalization, minimization, intellectualization, and denial to avoid the truth and reality. They may feel guilty or ashamed of their actions, but want to hide it instead of accepting responsibility. An essential element of any sex offender that works, must be to challenge an offenders thinking errors to help the offender learn responsible, non-criminal behavior. The use of thinking journals or logs of their daily thinking can be used to help them and the treatment provider identify thinking errors and become aware of how often they make them. Offenders should assist one another in recognizing thinking errors. This will help the offender to have a better decision making process, and reduce their risk of recidivism (Howard & Caslin).

Sex offender treatment can be treated by professionals from various disciplines, such as rehabilitation counselors, social workers, psychologists, criminologists, and educators. Also correctional officers, counselors, and caseworkers can be trained to facilitate group therapy and teach modules to sex offenders. Also inmates are expected to be active participants in the group process, and can assist in providing certain treatment techniques under the supervision of the treatment provider. The kind of personality of the treatment provider that works best has the ability to work in a group setting. They are confrontative in a non-defensive proactive way and have an empathetic and caring attitude. They are comfortable with their sexuality.

They must maintain a professional relationship with the offender. They must not be influenced by their personal bias, and be objective with sex offenders whose behavior may be viewed as personally repugnant. Also if the counselor has been sexually victimized themselves, must successfully resolve their own personal issues before they can best interact effectively with sex offenders. Gerber (1995) article discusses counter-transference in working with sex offenders to help treatment providers recognize their reactions to the male sex offender. Professional working with male sex offenders in treatment programs must work to enhance self-knowledge in order to protect their clients from personal bias.

They recommend the triage approach to classifying risk and need according to level of priority to more efficiently use limited resources. They say that pedophiles and more violent rapists will be prime candidates for treatment in the Regional Psychiatric Center, while other rapists will be treated at Bowden, and most incest offenders in community treatment programs. They say that each type of sex offender should be treated with the same type of offender in a treatment setting that has the specific assessment and treatment procedures to meet their particular needs (Ibid). Since, sexual deviance is a complex behavior, several treatment approaches are usua

The Insanity Defense

The insanity defense refers to that branch of the concept of insanity which defines the extent to which men accused of crimes may be relieved of criminal responsibility by virtue of mental disease. The terms of such a defense are to be found in the instructions presented by the trial judge to the jury at the close of a case. These instructions can be drawn from any of several rules used in the determination of mental illness. The final determination of mental illness rests solely on the jury who uses information drawn from the testimony of “expert” witnesses, usually professionals in the field of psychology.

The net result of such a determination places an individual accordingly, be it placement in a mental facility, incarceration, or outright release. Due to these aforementioned factors, there are several problems raised by the existence of the insanity defense. Problems such as the actual possibility of determining mental illness, justifiable placement of judged “mentally ill” offenders, and the overall usefulness of such a defense. In all, I believe that these problems, as well as others which will be mentioned later, lead us to the conclusion that the insanity defense is useless and should be abolished entirely.

Insanity is a legal, not a medical definition. Therefore, mental illness and insanity are not synonymous: only some mental illness constitutes insanity. Insanity, however, includes not only mental illness but also mental deficiencies. Due to this, there are problems in exactly how to apply a medical theory to a legal matter (Herman, 1983;128). The legal concepts of mental illness and insanity raise questions in a conflict between what are termed legalistic criminology and scientific criminology: mens rea, punishment v. treatment, responsibility, and prisons v. hospitals.

This debate seesaws to and fro amidst a grey rea between law and science. The major difficulty with a theory such as mental illness is that it is just that, a theory. To scientists theories are a way of life, but applied to the concept of law theories become somewhat dangerous. By applying a loose theory such as mental illness to law we are in essence throwing the proverbial “monkey wrench” into the wheels of justice.  At the center of the legal use of insanity lies the mens rea. Every crime involves a physical act, or actus reus, and a mental act, or mens rea, the non-physical cause of behavior.

The mens rea is the ental element required for a crime, and if absent excuses the defendant from criminal responsibility and punishment (Jeffery, 1985;49). The difficulty here lies in analyzing the mens rea. In order to do this lawyers apply one of several rules used by psychologists. These rules range from the Irresistible Impulse Test to the M’Naghten Rule. Each of these rules approach mental illness/capacity in a different way and in my opinion each falls short of actual proof. I will discuss each in detail.

The M’Naghten Rule The M’Naghten Rule, also known as the right-wrong test, arose in 1843 during the trial of Daniel M’Naghten who argued that he was not criminally responsible for his actions because he suffered from delusions at the time of the killing. The M’Naghten Rule reads: A defendant may be excused from criminal responsibility if at the time of the commission of the act the party accused was laboring under such a defect of reason, from a disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and the quality of the act he was doing, or if he did know it, that he did not know that he was doing what was wrong.

Thus, according to the rule, a person is basically insane if he or she is unable to distinguish between right nd wrong as a result of some mental disability. Criticism of the M’Naghten Rule has come from both legal and medical professions. Many criticize that the test is unsound in its view of human psychology. Psychiatry, it is argued, views the human personality as an integrated entity, not divisible into separate compartments of reason, emotion, or volition (Herman, 1983;138). Additionally, the test is criticized for defining responsibility solely in terms of cognition.

While cognitive symptoms may reveal disorder, they alone are not sufficient to give an adequate picture of such a disorder or determine esponsibility. Also, it has been shown that individuals deemed insane by psychologists have possessed the ability to differentiate right from wrong. I believe that the major weakness of this test, however, lies in the fact that courts are unable to make clear determinations of terms such as disease of the mind, know, and the nature and quality of the act.

The Irresistible Impulse Test This rule excludes from criminal responsibility a person whose mental disease makes it impossible to control personal conduct. Unlike the M’Naghten Rule, the criminal may be able to distinguish between right and wrong, but may e unable to exercise self-control because of a disabling mental condition. Normally this test is combined with the M’Naghten Rule. Many of the criticisms of the Irresistible Impulse Test center around the claim that the view of volition is so extremely narrow that it can be misleading.

Just as the M’Naghten Rule focused on cognition rather than the function of the person in an integrated fashion, the Irresistible Impulse Test abstracts the element of volition in a way that fails to assess a person’s function in terms of an integrated personality. Additionally, it has been asserted that the concept at est has medical significance in only minor crimes resulting from obsession-compulsion, and that seldom, if ever, can it be shown that this disorder results in the commission of a major crime (Seigel 1993;144).

Such a claim is subject to the objection that it cannot be conclusively proven. Interestingly, it has been shown by many psychiatric authorities that no homicidal or suicidal crime ever results from obsession-compulsion neurosis. Another criticism of this test is the difficulty, if not the impossibility, of proving the irresistibility of the impulse, which the definition of the test requires. The jury, as I said earlier, has the final decision, and is faced with deciding when the impulse was irresistible and when it was merely unresisted, a task that psychiatrists suggest is impossible to perform.

We are also able to argue that the test is one of volition. It is too narrow in that it fails to recognize mental illness characterized by brooding and reflection (Herman 1983;140). The test is misleading in its suggestion that where a crime is committed as a result of emotional disorder due to insanity, it must be sudden and impulsive. The Durham Rule The Durham Rule, also known as the Products Test, is based on the contention that insanity represents many personality factors, all of which may not be present in every case.

It was brought about by Judge David Bazelon in the case of Durham v. U. S. who rejected the M’Naghten Rule and stated that the accused is not criminally responsible if the unlawful act was the product of mental disease or defect. The primary problem with this rule of course lies in its meaning. Again it is impossible for us to define mental disease or defect, and product does not give the jury a reliable standard by which to base a decision. It is unnecessary to offer further riticism, for my purpose I believe this attempt fails at it’s onset.

The Substantial Capacity Test Another test is termed the Substantial Capacity Test which focuses on the reason and will of the accused. It states that at the time of the crime, as a result of some mental disease or defect, the accused lacked the substantial capacity to (a) appreciate the wrongfulness of their conduct or (b) conform their conduct to the requirements of the law. This test is disputable in the fact that it is not only impossible to prove capacity of reason or will, but to even test such abstracts seems absurd.

Additionally, the term “substantial capacity” lies question in that it is an abstract impossible to define. The meaning of insanity is the legal definition as put forth in a rule such as the M’naghten Rule or whatever school of thought is in use on any given day. The legal test is applied in an adversary system which pitches lawyer against psychiatrist and psychiatrist against psychiatrist. Because of this, the psychiatrist is often perceived not as a scientist but a partisan for the side which is paying for his testimony (Jeffery, 1985;56).

The major problem in this ase being that the use of a neutral expert is impossible to implement. In the end the determination of insanity is a layman’s decision since it is the jury which ultimately decides whether the defendant is sane or insane. This of course is ludicrous since professional scientists cannot agree on the meaning of mental illness. How can a layman make such a decision especially after listening to contradictory testimony which is manipulated by opposing lawyers.

I believe that the major problem that we can point out here is in the futility of asking psychiatrists to testify in terms of legal concepts f insanity. The psychiatrist finds himself in a double bind: he has no medical definition of mental illness and he must answer questions from lawyers concerning legal insanity, right and wrong, and irresistible impulses. As stated by Packer: “The insanity defense cannot tolerate psychiatric testimony since the ethical foundations of the criminal law are rooted in beliefs about human rationality, deterribility, and free will. These are articles of moral faith rather than scientific fact.

In the insanity defense we have no variable independent of the riminal behavior we are studying. Insanity refers to a class of behaviors known by observing the behavior of the patient, and criminality is a class of behavior likewise known by observing the behavior of the defendant. We are involved in classification and labels. Where we have one class of behaviors labeled as schizophrenia, and the other class labeled as crimes, what we have are two co-existing classes of behavior in the same individual, and not a cause or effect relationship (Simon, 1988;47).

A person can be Catholic and commit a robbery without a casual relationship existing; ikewise, a person can be schizophrenic and a robber without a casual relationship existing between the two classes of behavior. Coexistence does not show a casual relationship. Behavior cannot cause behavior. What we must do, in order to prove a relationship between mental illness and criminal behavior is produce some independent link between the two classes of behavior on a biochemical level. We must have a definition of mental illness independent of the behavioral symptoms in order to establish a casual relationship between crime and mental illness.

There is such a view and it is termed the Biological Psychiatric view. The view basically states that there is some defect or malfunction in the actual make-up of the brain of an individual which causes schizophrenia. This same defect then causes the criminal behavior such as robbery or murder. The problem here is that we have no actual way of mapping the brain and conclusively determining exactly what portion thereof is responsible for either type of behavior much less that one area is responsible for both. In essence even if true this theory is unprovable.

There is also a statistical relationship between crime and mental illness. Guttmacker and Weihofen ound 1. 5 percent of the criminal population psychotic, 2. 4 percent mentally defective, 6. 9 percent neurotic, and 11. 2 percent psychopathic (Jeffery, 1985:66). These figures are very unconvincing. Additionally they are based on old diagnostic categories and procedures which are most unreliable. Also, the meaning of neurotic or psychotic or psychopathic is uncertain within the context of these studies and they do not refer to modern biological categories of brain disease.

Terms such as insanity, mental illness, and mens rea have no scientific meaning, therefore we must leave as unspecified and ncertain the relationships between insanity, mental illness and criminal law. We certainly cannot conclude that mental illness bears any relationship to diseases of the brain, nor can we conclude that mental illness or insanity causes criminal behavior. Not only is there no agreement as to the meaning of insanity and mental illness, but to add further confusion, there is a school of thought that states that mental illness is a myth and does not exist.

This approach is found in the works of such persons as Thomas Szasz (1961;1963) who argues that mental illness is a myth and label applied o behavior by psychiatrists who are making political and ethical decisions, and Laing (1969;1971) who claims that labels are being used by society to impose violence and control on people. View such as these and others deny the physical and biological basis of behavioral disorders. They separate completely biology and behavior, brain and behavior, and mental and physical.

The fact that we refer to “mental” disease has been cited as evidence that we do not regard it as disease but as something outside the realm of biological science. Szasz states, for example, that the psychiatrist confuses physical disease nd neurological disorders with mental diseases. A study in evidence of this was done by Rosenhan (Ziskin, 1975:54) known as “Being Sane in Insane Places. ” Rosenhan, a psychologist, placed eight normal people in mental hospitals as “pseudo-patients. ” They were diagnosed as schizophrenic, and later on when they appeared normal, rediagnosed as schizophrenia in remission.

After one experiment one hospital challenged Rosenhan to send them “pseudo-patients” during the next several months. At the end of the period the hospital announced that they had discovered that 12 percent of their admission were pseudo-patients” from Rosenhan went in fact none had ever been sent. As we have already seen, there is much confusion dealing with the placement of insanity and mental illness, it’s definition, and even it’s very existence.

We have likewise seen the use of several of the various testing techniques used to determine mental illness and their shortcomings. This information alone would lead us to believe that the insanity defense needs at least to be revised and improved in many areas. What we have looked at thus far is what precedes the actual judgment of sanity. What we have not looked at, however, is that implementation of the actual judgment of sanity. That is to say, the actual results of the defense when successful. I believe that it is here that we will see the most heinous travesties of justice.

There are several decisions which can be reached when insanity is at last proven. These judgements include not guilty by reason of insanity (NGI), and guilty but mentally ill (GMI), with the later verdict not being implemented until the early eighties in an attempt to reform the insanity defense and decrease the amount of NGI verdicts. The NGI erdict is the more dangerous verdict and the one which I believe has the strongest argument against the insanity defense. The objection here is that it allows dangerous men to return to the streets where they commit heinous crimes.

Of the 300 persons committed on NGI verdicts 80 percent were released from mental hospitals by psychiatrists, and in several instances these mental patients went on to kill again (Jeffery, 1985;73). My belief is that psychiatrists and mental hospitals do not cure the mentally ill. This is the reality of the insanity defense which I find irrefutable; in many cases criminals re released due to loopholes such as the insanity defense to simply commit the same crime again. Even is these cases make up 10 out of 100,000, there now exist 10 crimes that need not have happened.

The guilty but mentally ill approach has three serious flaws. First it strikes indirectly at the mens rea requirement, introducing the slippery notion that the accused had partial, but not complete, criminal intent. Second, it creates a lesser and included offense that judges and juries may choose as simply a compromise verdict. They believe the accused probably did something wrong and deserves some unishment, but they are unwilling to bring in a verdict of guilty on the top charge. The GMI verdict would allow them to split the difference. Finally the GMI verdict is fraudulent on the issue of treatment.

As proposed, it makes no provision for treatment of the person who has been declared mentally ill. The GBI option has already proved to be a bogus reform. A 1981 Illinois law added the GMI as an additional verdict, retaining the traditional insanity defense. In Cook County, verdicts of not guilty by reason of insanity actually increased from 34 to 103 between 1981 and 1984. At the same time GMI ent from 16 in 1982, the first year the option was available, to 87 in 1984. There has been much evidence of a “hydraulic” effect that was contrary to the law’s intent.

In both Illinois and Michigan, GMI verdicts involved people who would otherwise have been found guilty, not defendents who would have been found not guilty by reason of insanity (Walker, 1994;155-156). The real function of the GBI option is to appease public opinion. The public has little concern for the details of what actually happens to a mentally ill criminal defendent. Basically, it wants a symbolic statement of “guilty. ” In practice, the GMI verdict has as much meaning as “guilty but brown eyes. ” How dangerous is the GMI verdict?

As we say with the NGI verdict, many extremely dangerous mentally ill criminals were simply released onto the streets where they committed the same crimes. Does the GMI verdict solve this problem? We have some “natural experiments” on this questio rising from some court decisions. A 1971 decision forced to reassessment of 586 inmates of Pennsylvania’s Fairview State Hospital for the Criminaly Insane who were placed there under the GMI verdict. Over two-thirds were eventually released. Over the next four years, 27 ercent were rearrested. Eleven percent were rearrested for violent crime.

Including some others who were rehospitalized for a violent act, a total of 14. 5 percent of those released proved to be dangerous. Abolishing the insanity defense is easier said than done for the simple reason that the mens rea requirement remains a fundamental legal principle. The proposal that “mental condition shall not be a defense to any charge of criminal conduct” could be interpreted in one of two ways. The broader interpretation would mean that absolutly no aspect of mental condition could be taken into account. In effect, this interpretation would abolish the mens rea requirement altogether.

The prosecution would not have to prove anything about the accused’s mental state. This is unneccessarry. For one thing, it would wipe out the distintions that separarte first-degree murder, second-degree murder, and manslaughter. It is doubtful that anyone againt the insanity defense would choose to take this approach. So sweeping, in fact, would be it’s effect, that it would probably be declared unconstitutuional. A more limited reading of the wording “mental condition shall not be a defense to any charge of criminal conduct” ould mean that an affermative plea of “not guilty by reason of insanity” could not be raised.

The crucial distinction here is drawn between affermative and ordinary defenses. An ordinary defense is simply an attempt to shown that the prosecution has failed to connect the accused with the crime, a defense used in everyday law. An affermative defense is raised when the prosecution has connected the accused with the crime, as in an example of self-defense. The defense argues that, yes, the accused did shoot and kill the person and did so intentionally, but because the act was commited in self-defense the ccused does not bear criminal responsibilty for it. The same is true in the case of a criminal act commited under duress.

The insanity defense, in this respect, is an affermative defense. It is this usage that needs to be abolished. In cases such as self defense it may be an adequate and totally acceptable defense, for in how many cases do you hear of a man being aquitted due to a self-defense plea returning to the streets in order to kill again? To draw a comparison between the two and argue that both defenses are neccessarry to the total order is naive and unfounded. The law of insanity involves the conceptes of mens rea and punishments, as does the criminal law in general.

Insanity is a legal concept, not a medical concept, and insanity is defined within the context of an adversary system wherin psychiatrists and lawyers battle one another over the meaning of terms such as “right and wrong” and “ability to control one’s behavior. ” Mental illness and mental disease are psychoanalytic concepts, not scientific concepts. Mental illness is defined by talking to people or by giving them written tests, and there is no agreement among psychiatrists as to the meaning of this llness or whether or not it really exists.

Some psychiatrists call mental illness a myth. The psychoanalyst has not been successful in treating or predicting mental illness. The psychoanalyst has never established a casual relationship between mental illness and criminal behavior. The insanity defense would require both a mental illness and a relationship between the illness and the criminal behavior, neither of which could be scientificly established. Of the criminals both aquited and convicted using the insanity defense, a good number have shown conclusive evidence of recidivism.

Many dangerous persons are allowed to return to the streets and many non-dangerous persons are forced into facilities due to an insanity plea adding further confusion and injustice within both the legal and medical systems. In my opinion the iunsanity defense is impossible to maintain on the basis of rules such as the M’Naghten Rule, and the relationship between law and psychiatry must be reestablished on a more scientific level, based on the neurological work now going on in the brain sciences. The insanity defense is impracticle in it’s present usage and should therefore be abolished.

The Shock Incarceration Program

In our era of high criminal activity something had to be done to eliminate the vast over crowding of today’s prisons. A military type “boot camp” was created to alter offenders’ behavior and deter them from any future criminal activity. This program is said to provide a therapeutic environment and meet the needs of offenders that can still become law- abiding citizens.

The Shock Incarceration Program meets those needs and at the same time meets its goals which are “reducing the demand for bed space in the Department of Correctional Services and treat and release selected state prisoners earlier than court-mandated minimum sentences without ompromising community safety”(Nieto). The paper will discuss the program’s origination, guidelines, eligibility, screening process, and daily activities. An interview with a shock graduate will give a first hand view on the realities of the program.

The New York State Shock Incarceration program was established on July 13, 1987. It was designed for young inmates who could benefit from an intense six month program of incarceration. The legislative bill states “the program would be provided to certain inmates institutionalized to the State Department of Correctional Services who are in need of substance buse treatment and rehabilitation. The program is an alternative form of incarceration that highly stresses discipline, considerable physical work, exercise, and drug rehabilitation therapy.

It would build character, gradually implant a sense of maturity and responsibility and promote a positive self image, so they can return to society as law-abiding citizens. ” Four facilities were established. The first Monterey Shock Incarceration Correctional Facility (SICF) received their first inmates on September 10, 1987. Summit SICF received their first inmates on April 12, 1988, and their female component began in December of 1988. Moriah SICF received its first platoon on March 28, 1989.

Lakeview SICF received its first inmates on September 11, 1978. Summits’ female portion of the program was transferred to Lakeview in May of 1992. According to the Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics 1997, There are only seven states that offer this program to women, New York is one of seven states and holds the most women with one hundred and eighty beds available. New York’s Shock incarceration program is divided into two phases. Phase one consists of an intensive incarceration program operated by DOCS.

In phase one an inmate is built around a therapeutic program called network,” which tries to obtain a positive environment to support successful reintegration of inmates into the community. Here inmates are heavily occupied with activities associated with boot camps. Phase two begins after program completion, where an inmate is intensively supervised while in the community by the Division of parole. A program called “AfterShock” assist them with housing, drug and alcohol treatment, relapse prevention, family counseling, and job training and placement.

Each state has its own criteria for inmate eligibility into the program. New York’s judges cannot sentence offenders directly to shock, hey must be legally eligible and meet the following criteria. Anyone ages sixteen to thirty-five years old; nonviolent or sex offenders are not eligible; and parole eligibility has to be less than thirty-six months; screening is conducted on general suitability (criminal history and nature of current offense) both male and females are eligible. Vermont’s is also a voluntary program it’s two criteria’s for eligibility, one is to be a male, and to be able to work.

I Tennessee judges can sentence an offender to mandatory shock incarceration, however, the Department of Corrections can also recommend an inmate. Its criteria are as follows sentenced to prison ages eighteen to thirty-five, their term must be less than six years and up to twelve for drug offenders. Offense must not involve serious injury, sex offense, or minors they must have good physical and mental health and comprehend and be able to follow instructions. Anyone that meets these criteria for eligibility can move onto the next step, the screening process.

All convicted offenders who are legally eligible for shock incarceration are sent to an orientation and screening process at Lake view Shock Incarceration Correctional Facility. At these interviews’ inmates re informed about the program and must decide whether they want to volunteer for the program instead of serving their full prison term. Participants are carefully examined for mental and a physical problem that would prohibit them from taking part in the program. As the evaluation takes place, the inmates are introduced to some of the program activities they will be faced with.

Once an inmate begins the program the first two weeks of shock are called “zero weeks. ” Here inmates learn the basics of physical training, drill ceremony and discipline, its period of orientation and initial evaluation. Since most inmate dropouts occur during zero weeks, the staff uses this period to emphasize education as a way to ease them into the program. According to Clark, their days consist of “highly structured activities including physical training, work, drug and alcohol treatment, education, recreation, and drill and ceremony.

There are no free time periods, no packages from no home, no commissary, no radios, no magazines, no newspapers, and no televisions. ” A standard day begins at 5:30 a. m. , which and inmate wakes up for standing count, 5:45-6:30 Calisthenics and Drill; 6:30-7:00 Run; 7:00-8:00 Mandatory breakfast/cleanup. :15 Standing count and company formation. 8:30-11:55 Work /school schedules. 12:00- 12:30 pm Mandatory lunches and standing count.

A 12:30-3:30 Afternoon work/school schedule. 3:30-4:00 Shower. 4:00-4:45 Network community meeting. 4:45-5:45 mandatory dinner, prepare for evening. :00-9:00 schools, group counseling, drug counseling, prerelease counseling, decision making classes. 8:00 Count while in programs. 9:15-9:30 Squad bay, prepare for bed. 9:30 Standing count, lights out. Inmates are required to work six hour days, divided in two three-hour periods, before and after lunch. Most camps are located near state conservation land, where inmates can maintain public use areas clean, they also work on the grounds of the shock facility. The staff and inmates have also helped the communities in need in the aftermath of emergencies. Moriah SICF inmates help maintain and clean up after forest fires.

Summit and Lakeview inmates help nearby community’s cleanup after tornadoes, and Lakeview inmates cleaned beaches after a large amount of fish were found dead in Lake Erie. Shock Incarceration inmates not only perform hard labor but they also provide services for Toy’s for Tots Program. They repair amaged donated toys, sort and prepare them for distribution all over the United States and Canada. The Network Program has been used by the Department of Correctional Systems since 1978, however, since recent budget cuts it is now only available to shock facilities.

Network program objective are grouped into three areas: “responsibility for self, responsibility to others, and responsibility for the quality for the quality of one’s life ” (Clark). A sense of self-worth and personal pride forms the foundation of a responsible lifestyle. This program was devised to help give a person these qualities; respect for self and others. It has proven to be successful in providing an opportunity for positive growth, it teaches that in order to make responsible decision he/she must consider their personal needs, the effect they have on others, and their own situation.

In order to be successful with the Network Program all staff, officers, counselors, supervisors, teachers, and support staff are intensively trained in Network methods so those skills are reinforced in every aspect of the Shock program. As stated earlier the Shock Program is a two-part process, the post prison part of the program is called Aftershock or Aftercare. Its goals are to continue the intense of supervision started during the incarceration phase and provide opportunities and programs in the community to avoid future incarceration.

Parole officers supervising shock graduates have reduced caseloads, for thirty-eight graduates two parole officers are assigned, to increase interaction and give more time for home visits, drug testing, and curfew checks. Graduates of this program have priority access to community services, such as educational and vocational training, increased employment opportunities, and relapse prevention counsel. In order to see how effective the Shock Incarceration Program really is an interview was set up with a Shock Incarceration graduate. Mr. Richard Roman is presently twenty-nine years old.

At the age of twenty- four he was sentenced to a two to four, for possession of a control substance and direct sale of a control substance. The state of New York offered him the program after serving four months of his term. He was sent to Moriah Shock Incarceration. His daily schedule consisted of physical workout, work, and school/drug program, (example of a schedule given previously). His contact with the outside world was limited to Sunday, very other Sunday he would have a visit, on Sunday without a visit he was entitled to a one phone with three attempts to contact someone.

This he feels one the only problem the program has, it does not provide inmates with enough contact with the outside world. He was required to attend drug rehabilitation programs three times a week alternating with school. Mr. Roman states that many of the inmates had problems with much of the staff, he says he felt they were prejudice. Out of twenty DI (Drill Instructor) maybe two did their job correctly. He also states he had continuos ‘ problem with one particular DI he later named DI-50.

The drill instructor always failed him with a grade of fifty even though his job was done correctly every single time. He feels the program is worth every single moment spent there he learned responsibility, time management, and manual labor he could one day benefit from. His program was one hundred and eighty-four days exactly, and he would do it again if he had to, but only if he had no other choice. He does feel the program is rehabilitative and the program has many tools to offer, it is effective if you want it to work for yourself, if not you’ll just end up doing the same things all over gain.

The shock program has saved the government millions of dollars throughout the years, it has also proven to be very effective in reducing the number of offenders returning to jail. The program uses several different methods to attain its goal, the interview with Mr. Roman has demonstrated how effective the program has turned out to be. Mr. Roman was never arrested again. He finished the aftercare portion of the program and probation set forth by the division of parole. These are the goals of the program, to keep young offenders out of jail and to help them become law-abiding citizens.

Megans Law Essay

In July of 1994, a little girl named, Megan Kanka, was raped and strangled. They found her body near her home in Hamilton Township, New Jersey. The story of thing young girl has shocked the nation. The man responsible for this brutal act is named, Jesse Timmendequas. He had been convicted twice prior to this attack. He also served six years in a treatment facility and had been released. Many people said that he was a quiet man, and this left them to think he was harmless. Unfortunately, this wasn’t the case.

This sex offender lived in the same town, as a matter of act, he lived across the street from the Kanka family. This man was not ready to be released at all. In fact, he shouldn’t have been released. This only left him more of an opportunity to stike again. This information brought the people of Hamilton Township to pass around a petition. The petition stated that a state law be passed informing the citizens of their community that such people live amongst them. This isn’t a rare request. In fact, there have been numerous attempts to bring this law into affect.

This should have been done from the beginning, ut some people actually think these sex offenders have rights. Well, the people of Hamilton Township didn’t agree. They felt that they should have been told that this sex offender lived within their neighborhood. “The real issue isn’t that the people of Hamilton Township were denied information on this sex offender, but why was this man released after only six years of treatment when there were two prior convictions for sexually assaulting young girls? ” Decter, pg. 1} There should be a longer sentence for these offenders.

Because it is such a terrible and scarring experience for hose who survive it, these people shouldn’t be able walk freely and live a normal life. These kids have to live with it for the rest of their lives. It causes them to lose trust in people. We want our youth to be strong and loving, not scared and traumatized. These sex offenders should never forget the crime that they committed. They should not only do the time in jail, but they should also do the time out of jail. They should feel like victims for the rest of their lives, and if the community feels like having these people exposed, then so be it!

Megan’s mother stated, “If the amily had been told that Jesse Timmendequas was their neighbor, the girl would never have been allowed anywhere near the neighbors. ” Ahearn, pg. 1} Those who commit this crime, after knowing about Megan’s Law, should face more of a penalty. They know the consequences that they must face. Those who committed the crime before Megan’s Law was enacted, are also on the exposed list. News organizations should also print or air the names and addresses of those with records of passed and present convictions. We should have no mercy on them just like they have no mercy on our oung.

This isn’t a punishment, but a service to our community. These sex offenders have three different categories that they are sorted into. Most are Tier One or Tier Two, warranting notification of local police or schools. But for the dangerous Tier Three guys, like Jesse Timmendequas, the law says neighbors should also be informed. So why do these offenders still commit the crime? Some say that this additional punishment is unconstitutional, but what people don’t realize is that they are the minority in this case. The majority of people do believe that it is onstitutional.

According to Linda Meilink, a managing editor of Paradise Post in Northern California, she states, “Too often in this country we have been in the business of salvation. We think everything can be fixed I believe people change, I believe in good things happening but I believe in protecting children. ” Sheppard,pg. 3} You see, the Post would put the “top ten” names of the sexual offenders on the front page. Linda doubted the benefits that this would have had until she saw one of her staff member’s name on the list. She was shocked. She soon fired him.

Some may say that this guy deserved a second chance, but what if he was a Tier Two or a Tier Three? A police officer told Linda Meilink that “high risk child molesters strike again 90% of the time. ” pg. 1} We can’t ignore that. This isn’t a case of discrimination. People often wonder about having children in the kind of world where people like Jesse Timmendequas can still live amongst them. According to the Bergen Record, in February of 98 alone there were 563 offenders released and 46 being Tier Three. Ahearn, pg 2} Forty-six seem like a small number, but what about the rest that are Tier Two’s?

They get to roam around the areas that our children run and play in. A place we call home is no longer a safe place because of these discusting criminals. They shouldn’t have a second chance after the first time committing this crime. Personally, I think that they should get the death penalty. To let them out after the first time is enough of a chance. It might sound cruel to some people, but I think that if they were to put themselves in the shoes of those parents who lost or had their children be victims of this crime then they can be able to see the importance of keeping our eighborhood as safe and sound as we could.

Thank God for Megan’s Law. It is fair to everyone. The only issue that bothers me is the fact that those 90 percent, as I mentioned earlier, will most likely strike again. I think we should be notified the first time. This, at least, will enable us to be more careful. It also would make the community look out for other people’s children. The one thing that Mrs. Kanka said that really stuck in my mind was, “I can say that at least with our involvement, we will have made a difference for another family out there.

The Sentencing of Juveniles

Today, we live in a society faced with many problems, including crime and the fear that it creates. In the modern era, juveniles have become a part of society to be feared, not rehabilitated. The basis of the early juvenile justice system was to rehabilitate and create safe havens for wayward youth. This is not the current philosophy, although the U. S. is one of the few remaining countries to execute juveniles.

Presently, our nation is under a presidential administration that strongly advocates the death penalty, including the execution of juveniles. The media and supporters of capital punishment warn of the “superpredator,” the juvenile with no fear, remorse, or conscience. Opponents of this view encourage the idea that another death is only revenge, not deterrence. We will examine the rights allotted to juvenile offenders, and the punishments inflicted upon them for violations of the law. Juvenile Transfers and Waivers

For those juveniles deemed dangerous, or those that have committed a serious crime, a different process would follow their initial contact with the court. This involves the removal of the offender from the juvenile system, to be transferred to the adult criminal court. These offenders are adjudicated as an adult if certain factors are present. The waiver to the adult court is often a critical step in receiving a harsh sentence for juveniles. Two Supreme Court cases have addressed the issue of juvenile waivers and transfers, Kent v.

United States and Breed v. Jones. The two cases resulted in specific requirements for transfer hearings, including a) a legitimate transfer hearing b) sufficient notice to family and defense attorney c) right to counsel d) a statement regarding reason for the transfer. However, the waiver of juveniles is often criticized by experts for various reasons. “Minors are likely to be looked upon as special persons by prosecutors, probation officers, and judges in the criminal courts.

They are younger than the main population of defendants before the criminal courtswhile a minor may be looked upon as a hardened criminal in the juvenile court, (s)he may be viewed as a mere innocent youngster in criminal court. ” (Abadinsky 72). Some research has shown that the transfer of juveniles is a waste of both time and money. Why? Because the offender often receives the same treatment or sentence as they would had they remained in the juvenile system. For example, New York’s system has been criticized on the ground that seventy percent of juvenile offenders arraigned in adult court are waived to juvenile court.

Of the remaining children who are tried in adult court, forty percent get probation; only three percent of juvenile offenders tried in adult court received longer sentences than they would have been given in juvenile court. (Allinson). There are options available when sentencing juveniles, before deciding on the ultimate sentence of death. Although, the alternatives discussed here are only applicable to less violent offenders. Traditionally, indeterminate sentencing is used in the juvenile system, which does not specify the length of the sentence, correctional officials will decide when the offender is to be released.

However, due to the trend in harsh sentencing, some states have created determinate sentencing and the sentence must be served in its entirety. Some mandatory sentences exist for serious violent offenders. However, there will be offenders we cannot identify in time, those that commit acts that cannot be attributed to a “child. ” This group of offenders will face incredible amounts of prison time, or even pay with their life for the crime they committed. Juvenile Death Penalty The U. S. is part of only a handful of countries that allow the execution of juvenile offenders.

Currently, 38 states authorize the death penalty; 23 of these permit the execution of offenders who committed capital offenses prior to their 18th birthdays. Victor Streib in his article, “Moratorium on the Death Penalty for Juveniles,” gives a picture of the young offenders on death row today. Almost all juvenile offenders (ninety-eight percent) sentenced to death were males. The four cases involving female juveniles were in the deep south (Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia) and in Indiana. The thirteen very young offenders (age fifteen at crime) were scattered across ten different states.

All sixty-nine juvenile offenders on death row were male and had been convicted and sentenced to death for murder. More than three-quarters of these cases involved seventeen-year-old offenders, and two-thirds of them were minority offenders. In contrast, eighty-three percent of the victims were adults. Two-thirds of the victims were white, and nearly half were females. The paradigm case of the juvenile offender on death row is that of the seventeen-year-old African-American or Latino male whose victim is a white adult. (Streib).

Debate about the use of the death penalty for juveniles has grown more intense in light of calls for the harsher punishment of serious and violent juvenile offenders, The cry for the death penalty is most loudly heard when referring to it as a deterrent. According to Allen Kale, “it is estimated that about 76% of the American public support the use of the death penalty as a deterrent, however that support drops to less than 9% when referring specifically to juveniles. ” (Kale). Opponents believe it fails as a deterrent and is inherently cruel and point to the risk of wrongful conviction.

The constitutionality of the juvenile death penalty has been the subject of intense national debate in the last decade. Let us examine a few of the cases that have influenced our current laws. Juveniles and The Supreme Court In the 1980’s, the Supreme Court agreed to hear a case arguing whether it was constitutional to execute a juvenile (based on age) in Eddings v. Oklahoma. Eddings was ordered to stand trial as an adult, and Oklahoma’s death penalty statute provides that in the sentencing proceeding, evidence may be presented as to “any mitigating circumstances.

In mitigation, the defendant presented substantial evidence of a turbulent family history, of beatings by a harsh father, and of severe emotional disturbance. The trial judge found that the state had proved each of the three alleged aggravating circumstances beyond a reasonable doubt and considered the defendant’s youth as a mitigating circumstance, but found, as a matter of law, that he could not consider in mitigation the circumstances of the defendant’s unhappy upbringing and emotional disturbance, and it sentenced the defendant to death.

On appeal, the Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma affirmed the sentence of death, finding that each of the aggravating circumstances alleged by the state had been present and agreed with the trial court that only the fact of the defendant’s youth was properly considered as a mitigating circumstance (616 P2d 1159). The court avoided specifically answering this question but did rule that “the chronological age of a minor is itself a relevant mitigating factor of great weight. “. (Streib, Lexis Nexis). Justice Powell, in writing for the majority, stated: “[Y]outh is more than a chronological fact.

It is a time of life when a person may be the most susceptible to influence and psychological damage minors, especially in their earlier years, generally are less mature and responsible than adults. ” Most juveniles are dealing with enormous amounts of stress everyday. These pressures affect the deterrence of the juvenile death penalty. Each juvenile deals with this stress in a different way, and because of this stress, many adolescents act impulsively at times. Henry Heft explains that “Peer pressure and family environment subject adolescents to enormous psychological and emotional stress.

Adolescents respond to stressful situations by acting impulsively and without the mature judgments expected from adults. These characteristics are shared by all adolescents… Thus, the possibility of capitol punishment is meaningless to juveniles and has no deterrent effect. ” (Heft 30) The court did not address the specific issue of the juvenile death penalty until 1987 in Thompson v. Oklahoma. The 5-3 decision vacated the defendant’s death sentence (at the age of 15, Thompson had participated in the murder of his former brother-in-law).

However, only four justices agreed that the execution of a 15-year-old would be cruel and unusual punishment under all circumstances. In sum, the boy was convicted of first-degree murder, and after a sentencing hearing the trial judge accepted the jury’s recommendation that the boy be sentenced to death. In affirming the boy’s conviction and sentence, the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals held that a minor who has been certified to stand trial as an adult may be punished as an adult, including a death sentence, without violating the cruel and unusual punishment clause of the Eighth Amendment (724 P2d 780).

On certiorari, the United States Supreme Court vacated the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals and remanded the case with instructions to overturn the boy’s death sentence. Although unable to agree on an opinion, five members of the court agreed that the imposition of the death penalty against this defendant would violate the cruel and unusual punishment clause of the Eighth Amendment because of the boy’s age at the time of his offense.

The next year, in Stanford v. Kentucky and Wilkins v. Missouri, the Supreme Court held, in a 5-4 decision, that the eighth amendment does not prohibit the death penalty for crimes committed at age 16 or 17. In both cases, the Supreme Court upheld the death penalty sentence. It is possible that juveniles see the death penalty as a deterrent as a lesson in hypocrisy. Juveniles are expected not to murder when they regularly see it being done by the government with the apparent approval of society. Streib states, “Now they see government officials struggling with a problem of their own, a person whose behavior is unacceptable to them.

How do government officials solve their problem? They kill or execute the person who is causing the problem. Is it wrong to kill someone to solve a problem?… It is akin to a lecture to children about the evils of smoking being delivered by a lecturer who is puffing on a cigarette. ” (Streib 61). Finally, the Court found that capital punishment of juveniles ages 16 or 17 did not offend societal standards of decency. Recently, the U. S. and the Supreme Court have experienced intense criticism from international agencies because of its human rights implications and violations of international law.

Since these decisions, juveniles have still received the death penalty at a steady rate, accounting for 2 to 3 percent of current sentences, although there has been a huge increase in juvenile violent crime arrests. Additionally, racism can be found both in charging, sentencing, and imposition of the death penalty. Steve Radic states, “Presently, about half the people on death row are from minority groups that represent only about twenty percent of the country’s population.

About forty percent of those who have been executed since the death penalty was allowed to resume in 1976 have been African-Americans, even though they constitute only twelve percent of the population. ” (Radic 4). Examination of arguments both for and against the death penalty gives us a glimpse of the rationale behind the juvenile system.

There are a countless number of appeals granted in every capital case. All of these cases require prosecutors, defense attorneys, and other court fees. The policies resulting from this approach are costing our society a tremendous price in money, in the corruption of the judiciary, and in diverting millions of dollars from education, drug programs, community policing, and other programs that would actually help to prevent crime. ” (Bright 6)

The opponents of the death penalty argue a) all juvenile offenders have a “terrible” childhood. because of their age, these juveniles have not had the advantage of “aging out” of their past or their crimes. c) most juveniles do not comprehend death, so therefore the death penalty cannot be used as a deterrent. d) harsh punishments are only temporary solutions; instead the societal issues should be corrected. Few studies of convicted juvenile offenders exist, however, most have troubling backgrounds. These circumstances are not always revealed in court, many juvenile offenders are presented by public defenders.

These attorneys have neither the time or the resources to complete a lengthy background history to present in court during sentencing. In 9 of 23 juvenile cases it examined, lawyers handling later appeals identified mitigating evidence that had not been presented at the trial or sentencing hearing (Amnesty International, 1991). So how are these juveniles ultimately sentenced in court? There have been recent societal and political trends in which the demand is high for harsh punishment of the juvenile offender. The majority of jurisdictions in the U.

S. allow for life without the possibility of release for those under the age of 16, it is even mandatory for some crimes. This sentence has been challenged in court, based on its unconstitutionality for being cruel and unusual. In cases involving juveniles, attempts at overturning this sentence have been unsuccessful. In conclusion, examination of the current status of the juvenile death penalty is necessary. The U. S. has imposed around 200 death sentences since 1973, with approximately 73 remaining on death row.

Texas is the primary advocate of continuing this practice, despite pressure from international human rights groups being imposed upon the jurisdictions that continue to execute juvenile offenders. Following the 1994 peak of seventeen sentences (5. 3% of all death sentences in 1994), the year 2000 saw only six sentences (only 2. 0% of all death sentences in 2000) (Streib). There are always two opposing views to any high profile issue, and in this case we are dealing with the lives of young offenders, many of which claim their age excuses their “mistake.

While society must recognize the issues that often fuel adolescent rage, we should be hesitant to withhold punishment. In death row cases, many inmates will reside on death row for more than ten years before being executed. During this time, they undergo many changes, both physically and psychologically and often feel like a different man, and certainly not a violent threat to society. Moreover, we are not executing men (and women) for the people they have become, but for the crime they committed.

Their victims did not receive a second chance, so why should we as a society grant convicted killers the chance to live, love, and grow? However, the death penalty must be examined for flaws, including incorporating DNA technology whenever possible. Age has obviously been an important factor in the debate over the death penalty, but we must realize we live in an age of violent school shootings and declining alternatives for misplaced youth. Society should not advocate the death of innocents, but vindicate a willful and deliberate loss of life.

Measure for Measure Essays: Mercy vs. Justice

Theme:
Mercy vs. Justice. Allusion to justice = eye for eye, tooth for tooth [measure for measure]; allusion to mercy = let him without sin cast the first stone [esp. sexual sin].

Summary:
Duke wants to restore the strictness of fornication/adultery laws. He sets up Angelo to do it, while he feigns that he will be away. Instead he remains to check up on Angelo and the town (Vienna). Angelo goes ahead and closes down Overdone’s brothel and the others, and puts Claudio in jail, condemned to die the morrow, for impregnating Juliet.

Isabella, Claudio’s sister and about to enter a nunnery, pleads for Angelo’s mercy on him. Lucio counsels her to be warm to him, and she is just warm enough to inspire Angelo to seduce her: seduction in exchange for Claudio. The Duke, posing as a Friar, overhears her exchange with Claudio in which he counsels her to go through with the act. He enters and sets up a plan: Angelo ought to have married Mariana but didn’t: Mariana therefore will go in Isabella’s place.

Angelo, after the deed, calls even more quickly for Claudio’s head. The Duke (as Friar) puts this off: now Angelo is two steps behind (not knowing about either Mariana or Claudio). The Duke returns, as Duke, and asks for anyone against Angelo to speak. Isabella does: finally it comes out that the Friar was behind Isabella’s suit. The Friar is called for, and so the Duke disappears and comes back as the Friar, but is revealed to be the Duke. The switch is revealed and Angelo must marry Mariana; Claudio is revealed as alive and is pardoned by the Duke. Lucio (a subplot) also gets his deserts.

Morality: mercy wins over justice, and yet there is a strong sense of justice having been done. Symbolically accomplished by the Duke (justice) taking on the habit of “a true friar” (mercy but with sense of justice) starting with I.iii.48.

II.i.17 ff, Angelo on justice without mercy: “‘Tis one thing to be tempted, Escalus,/Another thing to fall. I not deny,/The jury, passing on the prisoner’s life,/May in the sworn twelve have a thief or two/Guiltier than him they try. What’s open made to justice,/That justice seizes: what know the laws/That thieves do pass on thieves?”–this is unmitigated justice, just as II.i.30-31: “Let mine own judgement pattern out my death, [which Angelo is willing to accept once caught, in V.i.371]/And nothing come in partial. Sir, he must die.” And also cf. II.ii.81-83 and V.i.474. The Duke plans to hold Angelo to it in III.ii.260-63 and in V.i.407 ff. (eye for eye, “Measure still for Measure” in line 409).

Escalus explains one aspect of why justice is necessary in II.i.85 ff.: “Pardon is still the nurse of second woe”; Angelo seconds this in II.ii.101 ff: “I show it [pity] most when I show justice;/for then I pity those I do not know,/Which a dismiss’d offence would after gall;/And do him right that, answering one foul wrong/Lives not to act another.” This may be the idea behind Mariana’s statement in V.i.437-38: most men “become much more the better/For being a little bad.”

Lucio: the “go for it” morality, I.iv.77-79 — Lucio counsels a wrong action with the right idea: our fear of adverse consequences might keep us from taking the good action. Same as Duke (as Friar), III.i.209: “Virtue is bold, and goodness never fearful.”

Froth: puts forward notion that he is good, but that an external force draws him to the bad, II.i.110-12: “For mine own part, I never come into any room in a taphouse, but I am drawn in.” But others work from the notion that everyone commits sexual sin: e.g. Pompey, II.i.231 ff, Provost, II.ii.5, Lucio, III.ii.103, even Angelo II.iv.121,123 when trying to seduce Isabella (but Angelo and the Duke think they can cut down on it with deterrents of punishment). Also cf. Isabella’s similar pleas, II.ii.63-66 and II.ii.137 ff. Related to this is the ‘he who is without sin’–the notion that the sins of the judge justify mercy about the sins of the judged, II.ii.176-77–this spoken by Angelo once he falls for Isabella, in passion, (but then cf. II.iv.15-17: “Blood, thou art blood:/Let’s write good angel on the devil’s horn,/’Tis not the devil’s crest”) and spoken more forcefully by the Duke at IV.ii.108 ff., IV.ii.59 ff., and V.i.108 ff. (this last being aligned with reason). Franklin, “On Censure or Backbiting”: he who will always “excuse and palliate the Crimes of others, may rationally be suspected to have some secret darling Vice, which he hopes will be excused him in return,” Lemay 195. Is this not the situation of the Duke, and the reasoning of these others?

The difficultly of remaining without sin “when once our grace we have forgot”: the Pauline words of Angelo “we would, and we would not!” at IV.iv.34-35.

Claudio: the virtue of a necessary sin (see also All’s Well III.vii: “lawful deceit,” “lawful meaning in unlawful act”), III.i.131-133: “What sin you do to save a brother’s life,/Nature dispenses with the deed so far/That it becomes a virtue.” The Duke says as much to Mariana at the end of IV.i: “[fear not (be bold as virtue is bold) and] ’tis no sin,/Sith that the justice of your title to him/Doth flourish the deceit [and indeed the time is ripe]”, and likewise in V.i.533: “Th’offence pardons itself.” And compare Pompey as the “lawful hangman” in IV.ii.

But Isabella disagrees: her morality comes from spirit and truth, III.i.206-08: “I have spirit to do any thing that appears not foul in the truth of my spirit.” She recognizes, as does Angelo, that Claudio ought to be punished, but tempers her justice with mercy.

Les Miserables Themes

Les Miserables is a story, a very long story, which has been categorized as a classic. The story is about 1200 pages long. It is an epic saga, which covers about three decades in the early 1800’s of France. The film is about the fugitive, Jean Valjean, following his release from jail after doing nineteen years of hard labor for stealing bread. Jean Valjean is chased by the cruel and self-righteous Inspector Javert, in a lifelong struggle to evade capture.

The novel, Les Miserables is internationally known. That is because of its universal themes. These themes are: how society treats its outcasts, and how it views its criminals, prejudice, justice, doing what is morally right, and people can become better persons.
The theme -how society treats its outcasts- can be seen in how the poor and homeless are are treated, and that is like animals.

The rich treat them as though they are inferior and that they have no feelings or any form of intelligence. They are also not given the right to vote, which makes them not citizens of that nation.

This theme is universal because every nation in the world has some sort of outcasts in their land. In America, this theme can be related to the blacks. In the beginning of the twentieth century they did not have as much rights and oppurtunities as the whites. Another example of how this theme can be related to America is how a person with a southern accent is perceived as less intelligent, which is a false misconception.

The theme -how criminals are viewed by society- can be seen by how Jean Valjean is treated after he is released by prison. Although, he has served a sentence of nineteen years, he is still chased and wanted. In that period of time when a person commited theft it was viewed as a crime against the community and that person should be punished to the most extremes.

That theme can be seen in modern America. When a person commits a federal crime heshe cannot hold a public job or teach for the rest of hisher life. Also, when a person commits a crime, that person and that person’s career is scarred for life.

The theme -doing what is morally right- can be seen in many instances in the novel. One instance is Valjean gives money to free Cozzette. Another instance is Valjean does not kill Javert to save his life. Also, Javert lets Valjean go free. There are also times where people do something that is morally wrong, but lawful. One might be when the students are executed. Another might be the arrest of the prostitute. A present time situation might be soldiers killing other soldiers. It is legal, but is morally wrong.

In conclusion, the novel, Les Miserables, is a universal book with themes that many people from many countries can relate to. That is why it is put in the class of classics. It is also popular because it can be related with present time situations and events.

The Theory and Testing of the Reconceptualization of General and Specific Deterrence

In the May 1993 issue of the Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, the introduction of the reconceptualized deterrence theory was presented, explaining that general and specific deterrence are both functions of crime. Mark C. Stafford, an Associate Professor of Sociology and Associate Rural Sociologist at Washington State University, and Mark Warr, an Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of Texas in Austin, introduced this theory.

They argued that there is no reason to have multiple theories for general and specific deterrence. Rather, a single theory is possible that centers on indirect experience with legal punishment and punishment avoidance and direct experience with legal punishment and avoidance. 1 General deterrence includes the knowledge of criminal acts performed by others and the consequences or absence of consequences from the activity.

Specific deterrence relies upon personal experience of punishment and the avoidance of punishment for a criminal activity previously committed. Both Stafford and Warr theorized that people are exposed to both types of deterrents, with some people exposed to more of one type than the other. In addition both general and specific deterrence effects may coincide with each other and act as reinforcement. In the May 1995 issue of the Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency a preliminary test was conducted on Stafford and Warr’s deterrence theory.

Raymond Paternoster and Alex Piquero, both professors in the Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice at the University of Maryland, attempted to elaborate on Stafford and Warr’s original findings. They, Paternoster and Piquero, argued that although they could find some support for the basic features of the deterrence theory, there was still a significant component that Paternoster and Piquero could not address. Without being able to measure the consequences of the illegal behavior of their respondents’ peers, they could not separate the effects of indirect punishment avoidance from indirect punishment.

Furthermore, they claimed that the personal experience of punishment had a definite role in substance abuse, as well as leading to additional criminal activities because of formal sanctions. Stafford and War’s deterrence theory provides a valuable insight into the mind of criminal or would-be criminal for the sake of determining deterrence from criminal activities. Strong arguments and logical reasoning are the foundations that their theory is built on, bolstered with their own personal knowledge of the subject matter, making it a sound argument.

Paternoster and Piquero provide data from a well though out experiment that supports the deterrence theory. However, their insufficiency of much needed data to examine a major part of the theory, and the fact that they have only conducted a preliminary test of the theory, leave them open to the possibility of errors. Stafford and Warr’s reconceptualization of general and specific deterrence evaluates the premise that the rate of crime in any population is a function of both general and specific deterrence.

Using empirical data deprived from their own practical experience, as well as from the observations and experiments of their other colleagues in their field, they attempt to establish their theory of the reconceptualization of general and specific deterrence. First, it is important to understand the background of their work and the foundation of deterrence. There are two types of deterrence, general and specific. In analyzing the deterrent effects it is highly important to distinguish between general and specific deterrence, because they are very different. General deterrence refers to the effects of legal punishment on the general public (i. , potential offenders), specific deterrence pertains to the effects of legal punishment on those who have suffered it. 3

Both kinds of experience rely upon individuals to have some degree of knowledge or experience with the justice system’s punishment to dissuade them from committing criminal acts. For members of the general public (general deterrence) it is indirect experience with punishment (observing or otherwise having knowledge of the punishment of others) that deters, whereas for punished offenders (specific deterrence) it is direct (personal) experience.

Within general deterrence, two types of people can be found that must be taken into consideration. Stafford and Warr used the findings of J. P. Gibbs, author of “Crime, Punishment, and Deterrence” for the Social Science Quarterly, to examine these two types of people. The first are those who have never committed or have taken part in any criminal activity, excluding those wrongfully punished for crimes they did not commit. The second type of person is one who has attempted or successfully completed a crime and has avoided legal consequences.

In relation to cause and effect, while the first type of person has had no direct experience with legal punishment, the effect on the second type of person is that he or she has gained valuable insight on avoiding sanctions by the justice system. It is a factor that may lead to the possibility of committing future crimes, making it a crucial factor of the deterrence theory. Individuals who avoid punishment or have little experience with it may begin to assume that they are not susceptible to punishment. Perhaps the greatest value of the concept is that it underscores the fundamental principle that no criminal act is without consequences.

Most specific deterrence studies rely upon examining the punished offender and post-punishment offending to determine a level of deterrence from crime. A major argument, again, is that this procedure ignores the probability of someone being punished while having knowledge of punishment from the experiences of others. 6 An individual punished for one crime may know others who have: (a) committed the same crime and avoided punishment, (b) committed the same crime and received a smaller punishment, or (c) committed the same crime and received a harsher sanction.

Stafford and Warr’s argument is that deterrence from crime will rely solely upon the individual’s knowledge. The general public and punished offenders have a combination of both general and specific experience with punishment and punishment avoidance. Take, for example, an offender who is caught and punished for crime type A, but has avoided punishment for crime types B, C, and D. The effects of punishment avoidance and indirect experience with punishment must be taken into consideration when determining the offender’s future behavior.

Put quite simply, the direct experience from crime type A cannot be the only factor used to predict the offender’s future behavior. Crime types B, C, and D must also be included along with crime type A. Stafford and Warr’s reconceptualization of general and specific deterrence states that the rate of crime in virtually any population will be a function of both general and specific deterrence. 7 It provides many advantages over the system currently in use. First, both general and specific deterrence can be used on any given population of people.

Secondly, a clear distinction is made between those being punished and those avoiding punishment. Thirdly, it is compatible with the contemporary learning theory with the difference between observational/vicarious learning and experiential learning. 8 It should be noted, however, that most of their conclusions are drawn from supported opinions instead of fact. While supported opinions have more credibility than unsupported opinions; it cannot turn an opinion into fact. Most of their work is based on empirical data from their own practical experience along with the experience of their colleagues.

Most of their reasoning was based on deductive reasoning, where they began with their general proposition and established a chain of reasoning that lead to their conclusion. In the tradition of deductive reasoning, they began with the major premise that the rate of crime in virtually any population would be a function of both general and specific deterrence. Next, the minor premise, presents a specific example of the belief that is stated in the major premise, which is that people have a mixture of general and specific deterrence with punishment and punishment avoidance.

Though they used supported opinion, their reasoning is sound, so the conclusion naturally follows from the two premises. Both general and specific deterrence can operate for any given person in any given population, providing one theory of deterrence, eliminating the possibility of overlooking critical issues. The tone of the overall argument suggests a rational appeal to the reader, due to the lack of such fallacies as an argument to the people and the bandwagon effect. One fallacy that might be applicable is a hasty generalization of their theory.

Stafford and Warr’s conclusions appear to be based on too little evidence; in addition, they have not substantially tested their theory. Other than the detection of this one fallacy, their overall argument is a sound and relatively rational one. Stafford and Warr commented on a very strong variable, which is associated with crime, peer involvement. People who have friends who committed criminal acts displays a behavior that mirrors indirect experience with punishment and punishment avoidance. It may affect the certainty of sanctions, because the person will have access to the knowledge of their friends who have direct experience.

In addition, peers provide a larger wealth of knowledge on punishment and punishment avoidance to an individual than that individual would have from his or her own experiences. It is this which will determine whether or not an individual will be deterred from a criminal act or not, by allowing the individual to asses the efficiency of law enforcement. Stafford and Warr are quick to point out that their theory has shown that a complex experimental examination is needed to test the effects of indirect and direct experience with punishment and punishment avoidance. This maybe a more important issue as far at the deterrence theory is concerned.

Paternoster and Piquero conducted preliminary testing on the main components of Stafford and Warr’s reconceptualization of general and specific deterrence. Through their testing, they have confirmed many of Stafford and Warr’s speculations, on both general and specific deterrent effects on a person’s view of sanctions, and the inhibiting effect caused by them. In addition, they discovered that substance abuse was directly related to those previously sanctioned as a result of their delinquency. Unlike Stafford and Warr, Paternoster and Piquero used inductive reasoning instead of deductive reasoning to reach their conclusions.

They drew their conclusions based on specific facts and observations made from their experiments, unlike Stafford and Warr’s use of supported opinions. It should be noted that an inductive conclusion is never certain, only probable, and it relies on an inferencea conclusion about the unknown based on the known. Their data came from an experiment in the form of a questionnaire, administered to all 10th grade students in nine high schools in and around an anonymous southeastern city in the United States during the fall of 1981, consisting of 2,700 students.

Approximately one year later an identical questionnaire was administered to the same students, now juniors. It measured the student’s direct and indirect experiences with punishment and punishment avoidance as well as the risk or certainty of the threat of sanctions for oneself and for others. Students were tested on their perceived threat of sanctions, asking the likely hood of them being caught for underage drinking and marijuana use. The two delinquent offenses were combined into one scale, measuring the perceived risk to oneself.

Within the same category of perceived threats of sanctions, students were to estimate out of 100 people, the number who would be arrested in their town for the same two offenses. Again, the responses for both crimes were combined into one composite scale. The students’ experience with punishment and punishment avoidance was measured on a point system. A student started with zero points and added one point for each of the following: being apprehended by police, taken to a police station, arrested, or taken to juvenile court.

A score of zero means the student had no experience with punishment from the criminal justice system; a score of four meant the student had been apprehended by police, taken to a police station, arrested, and has been juvenile court. Punishment avoidance measured the number of times the student committed the two delinquent offenses, minus the number of times they reported being caught for such crimes. Therefore, it reflects the number of times that drugs and alcohol were used without apprehension or sanction. 10

The indirect experience with punishment and punishment avoidance variable tested the knowledge of the students’ peers in criminal activity and the punishment experiences. A major shortcoming was that the separation of indirect experience of punishment and punishment avoidance was impossible to obtain with their data. Therefore, the level of experience with a student’s peer in terms of punishment and punishment avoidance could not be calculated. Instead, Paternoster and Piquero were forced to measure only the extent to which respondent’s peers were involved in drinking and marijuana use.

It must be noted that this may cause errors in their empirical data. Peer involvement was measured by asking respondents to report the proportion of their friends who drink liquor and use marijuana. 11 As before, liquor and marijuana use was combined into one composite scale to publicize the majority of friends who use alcohol and drugs. Paternoster and Piquero attempted to expand Stafford and Warr’s theory by suggesting that three other personal experiences influence perceptions of the risk of punishment for one’s self and others.

These three experiences would be (a) the amount of informal surveillance one experiences, (b) one’s moral evaluation of each act, and (c) the closeness of emotional bonds with conventional others. 12 Informal surveillance is provided by the parents, who may or may not develop a higher perception of risk, depending upon the level of surveillance provided by the parents. The system used to test the students’ level of informal surveillance consisted of a two-item question. First, they were asked if their parents knew where they were and whom they were with outside of their home.

High scores meant there was strict supervision while low scores reflected low supervision. Moral evaluation of a criminal act asked the students to state whether they saw underage drinking and marijuana use as morally wrong. The question was based on a five point system, with answers ranging from never wrong to always wrong. Answers containing a high score reflected those students who expressed a higher level of morality. The closeness of emotional bonds to others, argues Paternoster and Piquero, will also determine the likely hood of committing criminal acts.

They hypothesized that the moral beliefs of one’s friends might constitute a kind of indirect moral barometer that would affect both the perceived risk to others and self. 13 Measuring the friends’ beliefs was based on a five point system, asking if their friends would approve or disapprove of their use of alcohol and marijuana. A high score meant there was a high degree of peer support for substance abuse, while a low score meant peer support for substance abuse was low. Approximately one year later a second questionnaire was administered to the same students, nearly identical to the first.

The students were asked the number of times they had consumed alcohol or smoked marijuana within the last twelve months. These two behaviors correspond to those referenced in the scales of measuring moral beliefs, friends’ beliefs about substance abuse, friends’ behavior, perceived risk to self, and perceived risk to others. Because the measure of self-reported substance at Time 2 was positively skewed, with a small percentage of youths reporting very high frequencies, higher frequencies were truncated to the frequency corresponding to the 90th percentile. 14

The results of Paternoster and Piquero’s testing have been divided into three segments, each discussing the various findings of the reconceptualization of general and specific deterrence. These three segments explain the findings on the operation of general and specific deterrence, the differential impact of direct and indirect experience, and the interaction of direct and indirect experience. An unexpected result was that substance abuse was directly related to those who had been previously apprehended by law enforcement and sanctioned as a result of their delinquency.

Lawrence Sherman, author of the “Defiance, Deterrence, and Irrelevance: A Theory of the Criminal Sanction” for the Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, explains what she calls the defiance effect of sanctions. This is where the offender feels that the punishment administered is unfair, either due to a procedural or substantive element. In accordance with the cause and effect relationship, the result is an offender who feels anger and shame and responds with further defiance. However, Paternoster and Piquero note, most of the juveniles in their sample who were punished did not respond with further defiance.

Other results have confirmed that punishment avoidance has a positive effect on substance abuse, which induces (a) a self-perceived reduced risk of sanctions on oneself, (b) a weakening of moral beliefs, (c) parental surveillance, (d) and emotional bonds, (e) while strengthening delinquent bonds, (f) and encouraging future use if not caught. Consistent with the general deterrent effect, a person’s indirect experience with a peer’s behavior has a reverse effect on both perceptions of risk and beliefs.

A person’s friend who uses illegal substances is more likely to start using than if his or her friend did not use drugs. It is quite conclusive that the test results confirm that deterrence involves both general and specific deterrence. Stafford and Warr are correct in suggesting that the inhibiting effect of perceived sanction threats involves both general and specific deterrence mechanisms. 15 Direct and indirect experience makes the individual’s compulsion to commit crimes strong or weak, depending upon their experiences, and how they perceive the risks to themselves and others.

The differential impact of direct and indirect experience determined the likeliness that indirect experiences will influence individuals who lack direct experience. By analyzing the data received from the questionnaires, there is enough evidence to support the idea that those who have little direct experience will have stronger amounts of indirect experience, and vice versa. Therefore, general deterrence tends to be more associated with those who have less experience, while specific deterrence is more closely associated with those who have more experience.

Stafford and Warr’s hypothesis about the differential impact of direct and indirect experiences seems to hold true. The interaction of direct and indirect experience contemplates whether or not Stafford and Warr’s theory that direct and indirect experience affect an individual’s perception of risk above their respective separate effects is correct or not. 16 The result is that if a person receives a continuos message that the risk of a crime is minimal, that person will have lower estimates of the certainty of punishment for themselves than those who receive either mixed messages, or consistent messages that substance use is risky.

Paternoster and Piquero’s overall testing of Stafford and Warr’s reconceptualization of general and specific deterrence has proved that their theory holds true to some degree. People are indeed affected by a mixture of both general and specific deterrence, with either one being used more so than the other depending upon the experience level of each individual. However, without being able to calculate the level of experience with a student’s peer in terms of punishment and punishment avoidance allows errors to develop that might prejudice their conclusions.

Those who have less experience tend to be affected by general deterrence, while those having a high level of experience are more so affected by specific deterrence. Unexpectedly they found a direct link to the substance abuse by those previously sanctioned, and concluded that they are likely to commit future acts of delinquency. These insights will shed more light into disentangling deterrence from defiance, making it a new and important area of research.

Stafford and Warr used deductive reasoning for their deterrence theory, supporting their findings with supported opinions from themselves and other colleagues in their field. While the opinions come from credible people with vast knowledge in their area of study, it does not displace the reality that an opinion can never be fact. By using a rational tone instead of an emotional one, Stafford and Warr did create sound arguments about the reconceptualization of general and specific deterrence, despite having a logical fallacy in their overall work.

By only including empirical data from personal experiences and observations from others, they lack the sufficient evidence to support their claim. This is known as a hasty generalization; when little evidence is used to defend an argument. At no point in Stafford and Warr’s conclusion did they ever use faulty analogies, stereotypes, or oversimplified the issues at hand. To do so would invalidate their work. In spite of some shortcomings, Stafford and Warr have made a convincing statement of their theory.

Paternoster and Piquero tested Stafford and Warr’s theory by using inductive reasoning, basing their conclusions on observed facts and hard evidence obtained from their experiment, unlike Stafford and Warr. The experiment was well though out, covering many diverse areas pertaining to general and specific deterrence. While examining the obtained data, Paternoster and Piquero were able to find evidence to support Stafford and Warr’s theory while discovering that people previously sanctioned are more likely to commit further acts of delinquency.

The shortcoming of the experiment was that it could not separate the indirect experience of punishment and punishment avoidance. Instead, Paternoster and Piquero measured the extent to which the students’ peers used alcohol and marijuana. This could cause the possibility of errors within their findings, making their conclusion inaccurate. In defending their finding that people previously sanctioned will tend to commit further delinquent acts, Paternoster and Piquero used an effective cause and effect scheme as well as using the works of Sherman to prove their point.

As with Stafford and Warr, Paternoster and Piquero did not prejudice their research with any faulty analogies or stereotypes. Though these are preliminary tests, their use of a rational tone supported by clear and accurate evidence suggest they are correct in their findings. Stafford and Warr presented their theory of reconceptualization of general and specific deterrence, and Paternoster and Piquero attempted to confirm it by an experiment. The conclusions of both groups were faulty in some areas, but strong in others.

However, both groups did an excellent job in determining if the crime rate of a population is a combination of both general and specific deterrence. Where one group was lacking, the other group was able to confirm this theory. Though further testing needs to establish if this theory is correct, it will provide a single theory for deterrence, eliminating the possibility of accidentally excluding essential issues, and provide more resources to those trying to distinguish between deterrence and defiance.

Computer Crime: Prevention and Innovation

Since the introduction of computers to our society, and in the early 80s the Internet, the world has never been the same. Suddenly our physical world got smaller and the electronic world set its foundations for an endless electronic reality. As we approach the year 2000, the turn of the millenium, humanity has already well established itself into the Information Age. So much in fact that as a nation we find our selves out of a service economy and into an information based economy. In a matter of only a few years almost all systems are run buy computers in some way, shape, or form.

We depend on them for everything. Even the smallest malfunction or glitch in a system could now cause unfathomable amounts of trouble in everything from riding the bus, having access to your money, to getting your prescription at the pharmacists. Furthermore, Icove suggested that with the price of home computers that work faster and store more memory going down every year due to competition in the market, it is estimated that by the year 2011 most every American home will have a PC with instant access to the Internet.

With an increase in users everyday and new businesses taking advantage of perks of an alternate electronic world, this information dimension will only get bigger, more elaborate, provide more services, and we will find society as a whole more and more dependent on it. However, even in an artificial environment such as the cyberspace, it appears mankind cannot escape from its somewhat overwhelming natural attraction to wrongful behavior or criminal tendencies. In turn this alternative dimension has been infected with the same criminal behavior that plagues our physical reality.

The information age has opened the doors to anti social, smart, and opportunistic people to find new and innovative ways to commit old crimes. These people are called hackers. What is the social Problem? Computer crime is the official name given to this criminal phenomenon driven by hackers. Although a solid definition of computer crime has yet to be agreed upon by scholars, it is described in a functional manner encompassing old crimes such as forgery, theft, mischief, fraud, manipulation or altering of documents; all of which are usually subject to criminal sanctions everywhere.

Also included in the description or computer crime is the unauthorized invasion or trespass of data base systems of private companies or government agencies. According to Schamalleger computer crime is also described as any violation of a federal or state computer crime statue. It has been suggested that the history of computer crime and hacking started in the late 1950s when AT&T first implemented its interstate phone system and direct distance dialing (DDD). Manipulation of the way that the DDD system worked, in order to make free long distance calling, was the objective of this crime.

What the early hackers did was duplicate the particularly distinguishable tones that the phone companies used in their early switching devices enabling them to fool the system into thinking that the customer has paid. A person who used any number of devices available for manipulating switch systems in order to explore or exploit is called a phone phreak. Who are the perpetrators? Computer crime, like any other criminal activity, is a product of opportunity, desire, and ability. Anyone who owns a computer or has access to a computer has the opportunity to misuse its systems to engage in criminal activity.

Researchers found that the average age of most computer crime defendants is between the ages of 21 and 23. The second highest age groups of computer crime defendants are between 18 and 20. They suggested that hackers could be classified into the following groups based on their psychological characteristics: pioneers, scamps, explorers, game players, vandals, and addicts. Among these six classifications of hackers, hard-core computer criminals are mostly found in the explorers, game players, vandals, and addicts.

Pioneers are simply captivated by technology and explore with out necessarily knowing what they are getting into or without specific criminal intent. Scamps are curious and playful hackers that intend no real harm. Explorers, on the other hand, specifically look for highly sophisticated and secured systems that are relatively far from their physical location. The further away and the more sophisticated the systems that are being broken into are, the more exciting it is for the explorer. For the game player hacker, hacking is a sport that involves the identification and defeat of software, systems, and copyright protections.

Vandals are hateful, angry hackers that strike harshly, randomly, and without any apparent personal gain other then knowledge, responsibility, and credit for such acts. Finally, addicts are your stereotypical nerdy individuals that are literally addicted to computer technology and hacking itself like an addict is to drugs. Due to these obsessive behavioral patterns it is not surprising that many of these types of hackers are coincidentally hooked on illicit drugs too. Who Does the Problem Affect? Since the 1950s, technology has skyrocketed raising the capability of computers along with it.

In turn computer crime has also evolved at the same rate from mere phone phreaking, to a complex categorization of crime all to itself. So much in fact that computer crime is now a global concern due to the financial burden that it places onto its victims. Primary victims to computer crime are the companies or government agencies database systems that are being invaded. By doing so the hacker is hoping to cause some sort of loss or inconvenience and either directly or indirectly benefit themselves or a group they belong to or have strong affiliation with.

Secondary victimization is what happens to the public when they begin to fear that no information or computer system that we rely on is ever truly safe from hackers. In short computer crime affects the entire world . Computer use, misuse, and abuse. Computer use is grouped into three categories. Those categories are proper computer use, improper computer use, and criminal misuse. Computer abuse, although not illegal, points to moral issues of concern for society as a whole. This refers to legal but restricted web sites and activities belonging to subcultures that do not share traditional value structures that the general public adheres to.

Due to the existence of these groups the information dimension has also been flooded with misuses such as sexually explicit material and sensitive information that, in my opinion, the general public should not have such easy access to. A few examples of Sensitive information are, access to bomb making blue prints, where to get materials for such a devise, and military tactical procedures that out line the process and positioning of such devises to create the most damage. In the category of computer misuse, is the creation and deployment of viruses and software piracy.

This renders all systems locked into malfunction mode and can cause permanent damage to a computers hard drive and or memory if at all the computer can be de-bugged from the virus in the first place. More than $13 billion are lost world wide to software piracy. Software piracy refers to the bootlegging of software programs available for computers. Using software of this nature not only takes business away from the makers of the software, but it also, one, takes away from the original intentions and capabilities of the software, and two, provides a greater risk of passing a virus onto the computer it is applied to.

How, When, and Where Dose the Problem Occur? In traditional criminal events, when one is looking for the roots or causation of any particular physical crime, the physical environment, social environment, psychological and mental capacity, and economics all play major roles. Likewise, physical crime happens in real time and in a physically tangible space. However, computer crime is more complicated in the sense that although real time measurements are used to record the transactions between computers, the location of the criminal offence is in cyberspace.

Cyberspace is the computer produced matrix of virtual possibilities, including on line services, wherein human beings interact with each other and with technology it self . Although physical environment, social environment, psychological and mental capacity, and economics are important factors in computer crimes, specific causation of computer crime has to be dealt with on a case by base study. What makes one person engage in computer crime can be different from what makes another person do the vary same criminal act.

However, what remains the same in all computer crimes is the dependent use of modems, telephones, and some sort of unauthorized entrance into a government, commercial, or private data base system. For example, on September 16, 1999 in Dallas, Texas, United States Attorney Paul E. Coggins was happy to report that, due to aggressive investigations done by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and later prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Matthew Yarbrough, Corey Lindsly and Calvin Cantrell were sentenced in federal court by Chief District Judge Jerry Buchmeyer.

Criminal conviction on the two was handed down for selling stolen long distance calling card numbers that were illegally obtained by hacking into computer systems of Sprint Corporation, Southwestern Bell and GTE. Calvin Cantrell, age 30, of Grand Prairie, Texas, was sentenced to two years imprisonment and ordered to pay $10,000 to the victimized corporations and Corey Lindsly, age 32, of Portland, Oregon, was sentenced to forty-one months imprisonment and ordered to pay $10,000 to the victimized corporations.

Through investigations Corey Lindsly and Calvin Cantrell were identified as two major ringleaders in a computer hacker organization known as the Phone Masters. This group of hackers, very professionally, structured their attacks on the computers through teleconferencing and made use of encryption program PGP to hide the data that they exchanged with each other.

In addition to the crimes that Corey Lindsly and Calvin Cantrell were convicted for, further evidence showed that the group had also infiltrated computer systems owned by utility providers, credit reporting agencies, and systems owned by state and federal governmental agencies including the Nation Crime Information Center (NCIC) computer. The definitive mission of the Phone Masters organization was to one day take control of all telecommunications infrastructures in the nation.

In the Phone Masters example, an on line social environment, psychological and mental capacity, and economic gain were underlying factors in the causation of the criminal acts that Corey Lindsly and Calvin Cantrell ended up plead guilty to. In this example economic gain was the centerpiece of motivation. However, economic gain is not always a reason for computer crime. Sometimes people, particularly younger people between the ages of 12 to 35, partake in computer crime due to a lack of power or control in their real lives.

These people then turn to the electronic realm as an alternative to the real world so they can over come feelings of personal inferiority by challenging machines. These people develop self worth and acknowledgment for their criminal actions from the peers of their subculture. Research found that these people refer to themselves as cyber punks and they roam independently or in groups through cyberspace in search for vulnerable systems much like street gangs in search for likely victims or opportunity to partake in any criminal action just for kicks.

For example in Boston, Massachusetts, on October 18, 1998, Federal criminal charges were brought upon a juvenile computer hacker. According to United States Attorney Donald K. Stern and Acting Special Agent in Charge Michael T. Johnston of the U. S. Secret Service, in March of 1997, in two separate accessions, the defendant deployed a series of commands from the his personal computer at home. These virus like commands made a necessary telephone company computer shut down and in turn killed telephone communications to the Worcester airport.

This caused vital services to the FAA control tower to be disabled for a total of twelve hours. He deployed the first series of commands at 9:00 am. Emergency teams scrambled franticly for six hours until they we able to temporarily fix the malfunction, but only to have in knocked down again by the defendant just as soon as it was fixed. He deployed his second series of commands at 3:00 PM. It was 9:00 PM when the Worcester airport and its surrounding communities were able to set up telephone communications again.

In the course of the investigation done by the U. S. Secret Service additional evidence showed that the defendant also electronically broke into a pharmacists computer in a Worcester area pharmacy store and copied patient records. This information was accessible by modem after hours when the pharmacy was closed so that their headquarter offices could update patient records at anytime. Even though the juvenile was in a view only program and could not alter the prescriptions, and no evidence was found that he dispersed the information, this was still viewed as a serious invasion of privacy and the nature of his actions were found to be criminal.

In result to a plea-bargained decision the juvenile received two years’ probation, ordered to complete 250 hours of community service, must pay restitution to the telephone company, and in addition, he was made to surrender all of the computer equipment used during his criminal activity. Further more, during his sentence he may not possess, use, or buy a modem or any other means of remote accessing of computers or computer networks directly or indirectly.

According to the Department of Justice the charges in this particular case are vitally important because they are the first ever to have been brought against a juvenile by the federal government for commission of a computer crime. The juvenile was not publicly named due to federal laws concerning juvenile cases. A Realistic Theory For the Future Prevention of Computer Crime Hollinger suggested that computer crime is relatively new as compared to part-one index crimes. It is often seen as a method or a medium in which to commit particular types of crimes rather than a crime all to its self.

Furthermore, because most computer crimes are executed in a non-violent manner the public unwittingly views it as a crime of less seriousness than one that involves violence. However, even if they are committed in a non-violent way, on average hackers cost the private companies and government agencies world wide billions of dollars every year. The consumers and the taxpayers are the ones left to make up the losses in the long run. Whether violence was used in these offences or not it is surely evident as to why this phenomenon concerns us all.

The problem with dealing with computer crime is that most of it is reactive instead of proactive. Also affecting the way we combat computer crime is the way that society views it and the way society punishes offenders. To me, it appears that the efforts against computer crime are following a historical view of policing and crime fighting where a lot of emphasis was put on law enforcement, dealing with the offender after the crime has been committed, instead of community cohesion, trying to set up community based organizations to try a raise awareness and impact the criminal behavior before in turns to criminal activity.

The evolution that policing has gone through over the years, from enforcement to prevention, should provide as a good model to follow in preventing and dealing with computer crime instead of just reacting to it. This prevention approach would most successful if done in three parts. Part one would involve the media, the government, and businesses or groups that have fallen victims to hackers in the past. Even though the media is often accused of damaging public perception on issues, it can also be use to help shift or steer public perception in the right direction.

The medias responsibility would be to bring the public interest message to the masses through the use of TV and radio commercials, newspaper writing, pamphlets, highway billboards, internet posting, mailing list, and series or public lectures or conferences. Primarily, the victimized companies and groups along with the government agencies involved in the pursuit and conviction of the offenders would compose the message that media would be delivering.

The message would entail an appropriate perspective on computer crime, examples of what attitudes society should or should not have toward computer crime, examples or a view of the many government agencies that are on the front line of the computer crime battlefield, and finally a heightened uniform guideline for the punishment of computer crime. Part two of my computer crime prevention approach would involve taking away much if not all the discretion involved in the sentencing of people convicted of computer crime.

I feel that because the outcomes of computer crime could can so financially detrimental, instilling harsh mandatory uniform sentencing guild lines should be enacted. This would let the offenders know that the public will not tolerate computer criminal activity and not to expect leniency if convicted of computer crimes. This method of sentencing is not liked by many judges because it takes away from their judicial powers and dose not allow the judge to decide what he/she think is best for the community, district, city, or state they preside over. Hackers like it even less because it ensures their fait if caught and convicted of computer crime.

Part three would simply be the reinforcement of part two and provide that the punishment for computer criminals be harsher and involve more time in a federal prison then the average sentence being handed down today for computer crime offenses. A perfect example of the way this three-part method of dealing with computer crime works is in the similar approach used in Project Exile where the media helps push the idea that the government will automatically give people five years in a federal institution, added to the sentence of any other crime they may be found guilty for, if they are found in possession of an illegal handgun.

Project Exile has helped drastically cut the numbers of people carrying and using illegal handguns and a similar Project for computer crime would, in my opinion, have similar results in impacting existing computer criminals and deter would-be hackers from partaking in computer crime.

Anti-Crime Programs

The basis of our justice system has learned to treat criminals with punishing sentences to jail. The problem is, our jails are beyond their intended capacity. This has forced our way of justice to shift from jail sentencing to more help type programs. This has paved the road for Anti-crime legislation and other help programs. These programs were created for people with a wide variety of problems. However, I am going to concentrate on sex crimes and violent crimes programs and laws. A sex crime program that attacks the core of child pornography is the programs ACPO (Anti-Child Pornography Organization).

This program was set up to rid the Internet of loose links. By loose links, meaning the links that transfer an online user to a site that they are not looking for. For example, if you typed in car, and were sent to a pornographic site, that would classify as a loose link. The people who shut these sites down are called net nannies. They surf the web looking for sites where average words will send the link to a pornographic site. This is especially aimed at the types of words persons younger than 18 would look for. This program has been extremely effective because it attacks the source of the problem.

Once the net nannies find a site that violates this conduct they contact the site provider, and shut it down. This penalty may be harsh, but the web providers know the rules, and if they violate those rules they should be shut down. A law dealing with the prevention of child pornography that was created in 1994, was the Cyber Law. This law protected the rights of the net nannies to shut down private sites that people could gain access to. This law strengthened the ACPO, because it gave them more power to deal with the legal ramifications of shutting down private web sites.

However, it gave the porn sites slightly more leeway, because instead of only finding one word to shut a site down, the ACPO would have to find 3 words. Meaning if the site had 2 words that a child might use, they could not shut the site down until they had 3 words. A crime that is more prominent in the US, and often more heard about is rape. Rape accounts for 60% of the sex crimes in the US. However, startling facts show that only 55% of these rapes were reported to police officials, and only 17% were by strangers. This means, that 83% of the rapists were of people the victims knew.

Various rape prevention sites concluded that you are 4 times more susceptible to get raped by a person you know then a stranger. The second aspect of anti crime programs that I am going to discuss is how do deal with violent crime. There are many programs that have grown in the past 10 years to reform past violent offenders. The ADL (Anti-Defamation League) is an anti racism organization. This program is to assist people by educating them about racial conflicts. A law that has been administered to stop children from bringing guns into school is the Cease-Fire Movement.

This movement remarkably was organized and issued to congress by children. This law was passed by a unanimous congressional vote in 1992. This law has been significant, because instead of making a direct arrest for the child who choose to bring guns into school; instead, they serve many hours of community service, and go to counseling. I have a hard time accepting the fact that the punishment is so little for such a monumental event. If a firearm is brought into a school the holder should with out a question be in custody.

The last and possibly the most effective program that was created is All Stars. All Stars is a mentoring based program. Like the ACPO for child pornography it attacks the problem at the source. It is designed to keep kids off the street and becoming gang members. This program is prominent is inner city settings, where the most at risk children live. This program is structured for children 11-14 years old. It tried to prevent the mishaps that children these ages might be coming involved in. Also, it does take 1st time offenders into the program to reform the kids.

The program deals with children that have experienced substance abuse, violent behavior, and pre mature sex. This program has been very effective so far and in turn receives a lot of money for the government. The overall effectiveness of these programs is moderate in terms of turning offenders of violent and sex crimes straight. The web sites that offer up the information are also questionable in that some of their statistics sound far fetched. A majority of them talk about what the violent crime is and how much instead of what they are doing to prevent and stop it. The same goes for the sex crime web sites.

Computer Crime Report

Advances in telecommunications and in computer technology have brought us to the information revolution. The rapid advancement of the telephone, cable, satellite and computer networks, combined with the help of technological breakthroughs in computer processing speed, and information storage, has lead us to the latest revolution, and also the newest style of crime, “computer crime”. The following information will provide you with evidence that without reasonable doubt, computer crime is on the increase in the following areas: hackers, hardware theft, software piracy and the information highway.

This information is gathered from expert sources such as researchers, journalists, and others involved in the field. Computer crimes are often heard a lot about in the news. When you ask someone why he/she robbed banks, they world replied, “Because that’s where the money is. ” Today’s criminals have learned where the money is. Instead of settling for a few thousand dollars in a bank robbery, those with enough computer knowledge can walk away from a computer crime with many millions. The National Computer Crimes Squad estimates that between 85 and 97 percent of computer rimes are not even detected.

Fewer than 10 percent of all computer crimes are reported this is mainly because organizations fear that their employees, clients, and stockholders will lose faith in them if they admit that their computers have been attacked. And few of the crimes that are reported are ever solved. Hacking was once a term that was used to describe someone with a great deal of knowledge with computers. Since then the definition has seriously changed. In every neighborhood there are criminals, so you could say that hackers are the criminals of the computers around us.

There has been a great increase in the number of computer break-ins since the Internet became popular. How serious is hacking? In 1989, the Computer Emergency Response Team, a organization that monitors computer security issues in North America said that they had 132 cases involving computer break-ins. In 1994 alone they had some 2,341 cases, that’s almost an 1800% increase in just 5 years. An example is 31 year old computer expert Kevin Mitnick that was arrested by the FBI for stealing more then $1 million worth in data and about 20,000 credit card numbers through he Internet.

In Vancouver, the RCMP have arrested a teenager with breaking into a university computer network. There have been many cases of computer hacking, another one took place here in Toronto, when Adam Shiffman was charged with nine counts of fraudulent use of computers and eleven counts of mischief to data, this all carries a maximum sentence of 10 years in jail. We see after reading the above information that hacking has been on the increase. With hundreds of cases every year dealing with hacking this is surely a problem, and a problem that is increasing very quickly.

Ten years ago hardware theft was almost impossible, this was because of the size and weight of the computer components. Also computer components were expensive so many companies would have security guards to protect them from theft. Today this is no longer the case, computer hardware theft is on the increase. Since the invention of the microchip, computers have become much smaller and easier to steal, and now even with portable and lap top computers that fit in you briefcase it’s even easier.

While illegal high-tech information hacking ets all the attention, it’s the computer hardware theft that has become the latest in corporate crime. Access to valuable equipment skyrockets and black- market demand for parts increases. In factories, components are stolen from assembly lines for underground resale to distributors. In offices, entire systems are snatched from desktops by individuals seeking to install a home PC. In 1994, Santa Clara, Calif. , recorded 51 burglaries. That number doubled in just the first six months of 1995.

Gunmen robbed workers at Irvine, Calif. , computer parts company, stealing $12 million worth of computer chips. At a large advertising agency in London, thieves came in over a weekend and took 96 workstations, leaving the company to recover from an $800,000 loss. A Chicago manufacturer had computer parts stolen from the back of a delivery van as he was waiting to enter the loading dock. It took less then two minutes for the doors to open, but that was enough time for thieves to get away with thousands of computer components.

Hardware theft has sure become a problem in the last few years, with cases popping up each day we see that hardware theft is on the increase. As the network of computers gets bigger so will the number of software thief’s. Electronic software theft over the Internet and other online services and cost the US software companies about $2. 2 billion a year. The Business Software Alliance shows that number of countries were surveyed in 1994, resulting in piracy estimated for 77 countries, totaling more than $15. billion in losses.

Dollar loss estimates due to software piracy in the 54 countries surveyed last year show an increase of $2. 1 billion, from $12. 8 billion in 1993 to $14. 9 billion in 1994. An additional 23 countries surveyed this year brings the 1994 worldwide total to $15. 2 billion. As we can see that software piracy is on the increase with such big numbers. Many say that the Internet is great, that is true, but there’s also the bad side of the Internet that is hardly ever noticed.

The crime on the Internet is increasing dramatically. Many say that copyright law, privacy law, broadcasting law and law against spreading hatred means nothing. There’s many different kinds of crime on the Internet, such as child pornography, credit card fraud, oftware piracy, invading privacy and spreading hatred. There have been many cases of child pornography on the Internet, this is mainly because people find it very easy to transfer images over the Internet without getting caught.

Child pornography on the Internet has more the doubled on the Internet since 1990, an example of this is Alan Norton of Calgary who was charged of being part of an international porn ring. Credit card fraud has caused many problems for people and for corporations that have credit information in their databases. With banks going on-line in last ew years, criminals have found ways of breaking into databases and stealing thousands of credit cards and information on their clients.

In the past few years thousands of clients have reported millions of transactions made on credit cards that they do not know of. Invading privacy is a real problem with the Internet, this is one of the things that turns many away from the Internet. Now with hacking sites on the Internet, it is easy to download Electronic Mail(e-mail) readers that allows you to hack servers and read incoming mail from others. Many sites now have these e-mail eaders and since then invading privacy has increased. Spreading hatred has also become a problem on the Internet.

This information can be easily accessed by going to any search engine for example http://www. webcrawler. com and searching for “KKK” and this will bring up thousands of sites that contain information on the “KKK”. As we can see with the freedom on the Internet, people can easily incite hatred over the Internet. After reading that information we see that the Internet has crime going on of all kinds. The above information provides you with enough proof that no doubt computer rime is on the increase in many areas such as hacking, hardware theft, software piracy and the Internet.

Hacking can be seen in everyday news and how big corporations are often victims to hackers. Hardware theft has become more popular because of the value of the computer components. Software piracy is a huge problem, as you can see about $15 billion are lost each year. Finally the Internet is good and bad, but theirs a lot more bad then good, with credit card fraud and child pornography going on. We see that computer crime is on the increase and something must be done to stop it.

Media Crime Essay

In a single generation, communications technology has turned the planet into one small global village. Within minutes television and radio relay stories across the country and around the world. The same edition of newspapers can be printed simultaneously in cities everywhere and be on the street within hours. And, as we are all aware, the future of the mass media may not be just in the traditional forms of television, radio and newspapers but in the emerging technologies like the Internet that will shape the information highway.

The Internet is an informal and rather anarchic network of computer networks spanning the globe. It has given access to the entire world for anyone possessing a computer and a modem. These new technologies and their impact on how we share information will force us to revisit fundamental issues such as freedom of expression and associated issues such as crime and crime prevention as well as cultural integrity. It is the pervasiveness and immediacy of this whole enterprise that has given mass media enormous power in shaping public opinion.

For some, the tendency has been to view the pervasiveness of the current and emerging mass media in a negative light. After all, these communications technologies are being used to spread images of crime and violence more widely. For most, the new technologies mean less control over the images that are spread, especially among young people. But there is another way to view the mass media technologies. We can see them as providing new opportunities to reach out to people. Rather than viewing the media as culprit or villain, we could begin to see it as a partner.

Police courts and prisons alone cannot effectively prevent crime. Although the criminal justice system is essential to controlling crime, crime prevention is fundamentally about the use of social resources to change the conditions that breed crime. The ultimate goal of crime prevention is to create safer communities and any crime prevention effort, therefore, must actively involve all sectors of society. The media has a role to play in crime prevention precisely because of its ability to shape public opinion.

Do the Media Help Create a Circle of Violence? In 1960, a psychology professor at Yale University, Dr. Leonard Eron, began a study on the causes of aggression among children. He questioned families about the amount of television watched by their children. Ten years later, Dr. Eron interviewed the same families. He was surprised to learn that what he called “the best predictor of aggression” among the boys who were then in their late teens, related to the amount of TV violence they had watched a decade earlier.

Findings like these have been controversial and contradicted by various authorities over the years but there is a body of opinion that contends that media violence does lead to crime. George Gerbner, Dean Emeritus of Communications, University of Pennsylvania, who is recognized by many as the dean of research into violence on television, has documented these statistics: “We have scenes of violence an average of six times per hour in prime time in the evening. In children’s programming there are between 20 and 25 times violent scenes per hour.

But even this violence is not evenly distributed in the media says Gerbner. The victims, he says are victims as well of stereotyping: “For every ten males who commit violence, there are ten males who are victimized. For every female who is written into a script to assert that kind of power, there are seventeen women who get victimized. For every ten women of color who are put into a script there are 22 women of color who get victimized. ” But stereotyping as a major problem on television is not exclusive to programs. Often the content of commercial messages inserted in programs can be just as damaging.

Research done by George Gerbner and others has shown that the average North American watches 10,000 hours of violent entertainment before the age of 21, and witnesses 36,000 murders before attaining the voting age. But whether media violence does contribute to aggressive and antisocial behavior has been open to lively debate. Since the media are part of the problem in creating our current culture of violence, the potential exists for them to become part of the solution. However, stories of community-based crime prevention programs do not often make the news.

Many community groups feel a sense of powerlessness about media and technology, and are working on becoming more effective in using communications media and cooperating with local media to crate safer communities. In addition, advertising or consumer purchase is the lifeblood of the media, and this means the public can potentially exert an enormous influence over the industry. Members of the public can regulate their viewing choices, pressure media to choose responsible programming and boycott the products of advertisers who sponsor programming that is unacceptable.

Most companies cannot afford to be callous about censure; there is a growing awareness that they will be held responsible for the programming their advertising money puts on the air. While this approach to pushing for change has the potential to be very effective, it will work best if there is no gap between public values and private consumption. At a 1994 symposium at Hofstra University, Jonathan Friedman, a professor in the Department of Psychology at the University of Toronto, made this point: “Consider the differences between countries that have equally violent television.

Children in Canada and the United States watch virtually the same television. Yet the murder rate in Canada and the rate of violence in general is much lower than in the United States. Children in Japan watch probably the most violent, the most lurid and graphic television in the world and the rate of violent crime there is minuscule compared to Canada and the United States. If television violence really had a substantial effect, these differences among countries would be unlikely. It makes it clear that if television violence had any effect at all, it is vanishingly small.

In a review prepared for the Department of Canadian Heritage on the effects of TV violence on children of different ages, Wendy Josephson pointed out that the viewing patterns children establish as toddlers will influence their viewing habits throughout their lives. Josephson noted that “children who are exposed to television violence may become desensitized to real life violence, may come to see the world as a mean and scary place, or may come to expect others to resort to physical violence to resolve conflicts.

She added that the effects of television violence lead “at risk” children to be even more aggressive than they would otherwise be. Of concern to many, might be not what television is doing but what it isn’t doing. This medium has the most powerful ability to shape our perception. It can educate its audience, combat stereotypes, provide models of pro-social behavior and attitudes. But for the most part television and other media too, have not picked up the challenge.

In a 1990 study two Canadian researchers, Julian Roberts and Michelle Grossman, carried out a systematic survey of articles appearing in Canadian newspapers and periodicals between 1982 and 1989. They wanted to estimate the number of crime stories pertaining to crime prevention that appeared in the print media. Their search revealed 17,562 stories dealing with some aspect of crime or criminal justice. Of the total, fewer than one percent dealt with crime prevention. Part of the challenge today is to get the media to assume its role in crime prevention.

Criminal law and criminology

Criminal law and criminology have, for the past several years, been confronted with a problem that reaches the very foundations and basic philosophies underlying the study and treatment of social offenders. Simply, the controversy revolves about the question; Shall the main concern underlying penal treatment be the matter of the offense committed, or the person offending? Representing the extreme positions in both points of view,– generally designated as Classical and Positive,– the conflict between the legal profession and psychiatry has later emerged.

About the middle of the 18th century there began to arise a philosophical school, led by Rousseau and Bentham, which emphasized the rationality of man, hedonism, and the social contract theories. These philosophical principles drew attention to the great injustices and inequities that prevailed in the legal system. As a result, great protest was set up, which led to what has come to be known as the Classical School of criminology. The rise of the Classical School is most closely associated with the Italian, Cesare Beccaria.

His book Crimes and Punishments, published in 1764 is usually considered the foundation-stone of the Classical doctrine of punishment. His words were motivated by a passion for human equality and liberty. His book was not a program of a contemplated new school of punishment, but was essentially a protest. A protest against obscurity and uncertainty of the law; against secret accusations and torture; against the abuse of power by the pardoning power, and against numerous minor abuses.

He urged that legislators, not judges, should make the laws; that laws should be clear, so that each man would know what punishment to expect for each crime, regardless of status; that certainty and promptness rather than severity in punishment be made the deterrent factor, and he urged that punishments be made public. Only part of Beccarias ideas were adopted by Classical penology. The French Code of 1791 attempted to apply Beccarias principle of equal punishment for the same crime.

It adopted his suggestion that crime should be arranged on a scale, that to each crime the Italian or the Positivist School, and its most distinguished representatives were Lombroso, Ferri, and Garofalo. Lombroso had been educated for medicine. As an army doctor he had used his leisure time by making a series of studies of the Italian soldier. He was struck by the fact that the vicious soldier was distinguished from the honest soldier by the extent to which the former was tattooed and the indecency of the design.

Later, while working in Italian prisons, Lombroso was designated to make the post mortem examination of a famous criminal. On opening the skull, he found on the interior of the lower back part, a distinct depression which characteristic he knew was to be found in lower animals, especially rodents. This was a revelation to him: I seemed to see, all of a sudden the nature of the criminal,– an atavistic being who represents in his person the ferocious instincts of primitive humanity and the inferior animals.

Lombrosos theories later underwent several changes, but at this early stage he considered the criminal a distinct type by birth. He said they had certain physical anomalies which showed that they were either a reversion to a savage type, or a degenerate of the epileptoid type. Criminality was thought to be inherited, and Lombroso claimed that the born criminal could not refrain from crime unless the environmental circumstances of his life were unusually favorable. Lombrosos conception of the physical criminal type was later definitely disproved by Charles Goring by an anthropological study of 3000 English convicts.

A younger member of the Italian School was Enrico Ferri, who contributed an emphasis upon the social factors, and gathered together and placed in logical form the various factors which enter into the making of a criminal. These in Ferris presentation are three; the physical factors, the anthropological, and the social factors. Garofalo, the third of the three great founders of the Italian School, stressed the study of the criminal nature, and of the circumstances under which a criminal lived.

The criminal was considered, not as a free moral agent, but the product of his traits and circumstances. Despite the vagaries which characterize the Positive School, the study of the criminal in the light of his individual characteristics played upon the environment, rather than a free moral agent who chooses to commit an act injurious to society, has greatly affected criminology. Further development of the Positive theory has led to Boners view of the economic determination of crime, and to the view of the dynamic psychiatrists.

The Positive School would not hold the individual responsibility for crime, since they are determined by forces beyond his control. The old objects of punishment have been severely altered. Criminals are to be treated, not punished. Reformation is to be applied with discrimination to the various classes of criminals. Prevention of crime by discovering as early as possible those with characteristics likely to lead to delinquency, altering the external conditions which make for crime, and throwing around each person the influences which make for social behavior, is receiving primary emphasis.

The shift from individual to social responsibility for crime has also resulted in the rise of Juvenile Courts, indeterminate sentences, probation, parole, education and recreation in prisons, and wider attempts at social control of crime. Unfortunately the actual practice in the administration of the criminal law has not followed the systems outlined above. There are three conflicting tendencies in the law today. There is a tendency toward increasing severity.

This is shown in the increased length of prison sentences for certain offenses, increased use of death penalty, increased severity toward habitual criminals, and the opposition to probation and parole laws. On the other hand, there is also a tendency toward pressure for more human treatment. This is shown in the substitution of summonses for arrests in many cases, the general improvement of prisons, and the payments of wages to prisoners. The third tendency is that toward the adjustment of treatment to individual needs, as illustrated by the results produced by the Positive School.

Our law is not opposed to all of these views, but has in effect and practice, opposed very many of them. The conflicting statutes within the law itself decrease the respect on the part of the public for the law, and rocks the foundations of legal authority. The question of responsibility need not be brought up at all, unless as a question of educability. That is, the problem for the psychiatrist to solve. What are the potentialities for future adjustment to the normal social code? There is no ultimate underlying principle behind the determination of responsibility.

It will be determined by definite criteria of social deviation, changing as dynamic society changes. The criteria of normality and the sentiment of justice are solely dependent upon the social group, and are a product of group norms. There is no value in considering abstract :responsibility per se, it must resolve itself into the problem of determining future behavior which will affect society on one way or another. If the potentialities for adjustment seem favorable, the necessary treatment will be rendered; if not, the person must be isolated from the social group.

A larger problem has now been raised. It is the problem of prognosis. It is in this larger problem that the socially useless question of responsibility must lose itself. Even though we may have a more difficult task before us, if we have lost the problem we started with, I believe something has been gained. [BACK TO MAIN PAGE] Classical criminology grew out of a reaction against the barbaric system of law, justice and punishment that was in existence before 1789. It sought an emphasis on free will and human rationality.

The Classical School was not interested in studying criminals, but rather law-making and legal processing. Crime, they believed, was activity engaged in out of total free will and that individuals weighed the consequences of their actions. Punishment is made in order to deter people from committing crime and it should be greater than the pleasure of criminal gains. Classical theory emphasized a legal definition of crime rather than what defined criminal behavior. The Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution reflect the Classical movement, thus the law of today is classical in nature.

Two famous writers during this classical period were Cesare Beccaria (1738-1794) and Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832), both led the movement to human rights and free will. Becceria thought that crime could be traced to bad laws, not to bad people. A new modern criminal justice system would be needed to guarantee equal treatment of all people before the law. His famous book, On Crimes and Punishment presented a new design for the criminal justice system that served all people. His book dubbed him the “father of modern criminology. ” Bentham’s concern was upon utilitarianism which assumed the greatest happiness for the greatest number.

He believed that individuals weigh the probabilities of present and future pleasures against those of present and future pain. Thus people acted as human calculators, he believed, and that they put all factors into a sort of mathematical equation to decide whether or not to commit an illegal act. He believed then that punishment should be just a bit in excess of the pleasures derived from an act and not any higher than that. The law exists to create happiness for all, thus since punishment creates unhappiness it can be justified if it prevents greater evil than it produces.

Nicholas Green Story

As his family’s month-long vacation to Italy approached, seven year-old Nicholas Green became increasingly excited about the trip. The rosy-cheeked second grader devoured books on Roman history. He announced that Julius Caesar was his new hero. Nicholas showed great interest in the Greek and Roman myths that his mother, Maggie, read to him, particularly the one about Persephone. She was the young goddess kidnapped by the King of the Underworld but, because of her mothers grief allowed to return to earth for a few months each year.

The idea of a sad little person below the ground and the joy of coming back again, he seemed to get the idea of rebirth in an adult way” recalled his father Reginal Green. For the Green family the tale would soon seem bitterly poignant. On September 29, 1994, as the Greens from Bodega Bay, California drove at night along a desolate highway in southern Italy with Nicholas and his little sister, Eleanor; a small light colored car overtook them. Two men inside, their faces hidden by kerchiefs houted in Italian and gestured for Reginal Green to pull over.

When Green fearing for his family, didn’t, the men open fire. Little Nicholas, who was sleeping on the back seat, was struck in the head with a bullet. He died in the hospital two days later. As a nation, all of Italy was horrified by the crime then deeply moved by the Greens unexpected response. Rather than reacting with justifiable bitterness, Reginal and Maggie Green donated their son’s organs to seven Italians. If this were your child what would you do?

Organ and tissue transplantation is one of this century’s medical triumphs. It has become a routine practice that can dramatically improve and save the lives of those suffering from vital organ failure, or those suffering from bone defects, burns and blindness. Since the first successful transplant of a human heart over 40 years ago, the demand for organs has greatly exceeded the supply. About 40,000 Americans are awaiting organ donations, but fewer than half will get them.

One of the weak links in the U. S organ transplant system is the large and growing gap between the number of people seeking transplant surgery and the number of available organs. An estimated nine Americans a day die while waiting for a transplant. But you could help. Anyone can be an organ donor. Just by making your wishes known to your family, you can become an organ and tissue donor. Old age or a history of disease does not mean you can’t donate. Organ and tissue that can’t be used for transplants can often be used to help scientists find cures for serious illness. Many organs and tissues can be donated.

The heart, lungs, kidneys, and pancreas as well as corneas, bone, shin heart valves, and blood vessels are some of the organs and tissues that can be used to help improve the quality of life for people needing transplants and other surgical procedures. Signing a donor card will not affect the care you receive at the hospital. If you are injured and brought to an emergency room, you will receive the best possible care, whether or not you are an organ donor. The organ transplant system is fair. The distribution of donated organs allows equal access for all patients awaiting a transplant in the United States.

The national Transplant Act mandated the establishment of a national computer system for organ sharing that is based on the need availability. Major religions support organ and tissue donation. Many faiths openly encourage it, seeing this as a final act of giving. The act of giving is exactly what the Greens did by donating Nicholas’ organs. “His future was taken away from him. We thought it was very important to give his future to someone who had lost theirs” said Reginal Green. In the days following Nicholas’ death, organ donation in Italy increased 400 percent.

The Country’s Consul General told the Green family, ” You made a miracle. For seven very fortunate Italians, the Greens gift may mean just that. Nicholas’ liver when to a 19-year old Sicilian woman who was within 48 hours of death. . “We’d given up on her,” said her Doctor”She is now a vivacious beauty who turns heads as she walks down the street. ” An 11-year-old boy and 14 -year-old girl each received one of Nichols’ kidneys. A 30-year-old mother with diabetes got islet cells from Nicholas’ pancreas to help her body produce insulin. The man who received one of Nicholas’ corneas said that at one time he was unable to see his children.

Now after the operation, he happily watches his son and daughter play. But the recipient most in need of a transplant was the 60-pound 15-year-old boy who received Nicholas’ heart. This boy who had spent half his life in hospitals; is now a relentless bundle of energy. In a letter to the Journal of American Medicine Reginal Green wrote ” Donating Nicholas organs, then, wasn’t a particularly noble act. But not to have given them would have seemed to us such a waste that we don’t believe we could have thought of it later without a sense of shame.

The future of a radiant little creature had been taken away. It was important to us that someone else should have that future. ” Reginal Green goes on to say ” I don’t believe Maggie and I will ever really be happy again, even our best moments are tinged with sadness. ” “But the joy in seeing so much life that otherwise have been lost, and the relieve on the families faces, is so uplifting that it has given us some compensation for what otherwise would have been just a random act of violence. ”

The most precious gift you can give someone is the gift of life itself. I’m sure most have heard this saying before that is exactly what you do when you become an organ and tissue donor. Yet the simple truth is that there is not enough people who are making this life giving choice. Every year more and more children and adults are forced to wait and hope for a chance to live a normal healthy life. But you can help, when you make the decision to become an organ donor you are providing mothers, fathers, sons and daughters with a second chance for a normal healthy life.

Murders Ted Bundy

Murder is the most vindictive crime society can commit. As individuals in society, the belief of being born a murderer is false. No one is born a murderer; society gives birth to that murderer. In Ted Bundy’s case the lack of parental guidance and constant rejection of women contributed to him evolving into a vicious serial killer. Bundy was a man who let his fantasies run his life, he believed that life was a game. All this contributed to making Bundy revengeful, bitter, and not quite mentally stable.

Bundy took countless numbers of young female lives in the 70’s. This man seemed to have a highly unstable personality and was often confused in life, some have suggested that, “Bundy was insane and that he should have been in a mental institution. ” Bundy was executed in 1989 in Florida for his crimes, but the real question is what really made this vicious man tick? Ted Bundy went down in history as one of the most brutal serial killers of the 20th century (AP 10). Ted Bundy was born on November 24, 1946 in Burlington, Vermont in a home for unwed mothers.

His 22-year-old mother Eleanor Louise Cowell felt forced by the norms of society to have her parents raise Ted as their own and she portrayed herself to be her son’s older sister. As for Ted’s natural father Lloyd Marshall, who was an Air Force veteran was unknown to him throughout his life. When Ted turned four, his mother, Louise took him with her and moved to Tacoma, Washington where she married Johnnie Bundy. Ted Bundy felt nothing towards his stepfather, he was very bitter that he was forced to move across the continent from his grandfather, the only man he looked up to.

Although, a psychiatrist had concluded after talking with Bundy year’s later, that his grandfather was an abusive brute or even worse. As a young boy, Bundy had started becoming obsessed with females and obscure sexuality, “.. as a boy, he was already roaming his neighborhood and picking through trash barrels in search of pictures of naked women” (Davis. ) This seems to be the result of very poor to no parental guidance, he stated himself that he couldn’t talk to his parents about many things.

Ted Bundy had expressed feelings during an interview that, parental involvement and security is very important in a young child’s life and that he never had that protection. Bundy was very shy as a youth and he was often bullied in junior high, as a result of he was subjected to humiliation often. Even though he was subjected to this kind of behavior he managed to maintain a high grade average throughout his education. Many say that Bundy was a very successful, pleasant student. Bundy’s focus changed in the spring of 1967, when he met the woman of his dreams Stephanie Brooks. This relationship would change his life forever.

Stephanie was Bundy’s first love and he was infatuated with her to the point of obsession. Stephanie felt that Ted had no direction in his life and that he didn’t know what he wanted and where he was going. Which is what lead to their breakup. Bundy was extremely depressed over their breakup, and to make matters worse Bundy learned the true about his “sister”, that she was really his mother. This was in an addition to turning point in Bundy’s behavior. “During this time in his life Bundy became possessed of a kind of icy resolve”(Duijndam. ) Bundy went from a shy, sweet, and naive individual, to a dominant, focused, and revengeful person.

Although, Stephanie and Bundy kept close contact after their breakup and they visited often. Around 1972 Ted’s life seemed to emerge with higher hopes. Bundy sent out various applications for law schools and became involved in politics. Bundy was looked upon as a caring and respectful individual. “He was even commended by the Seattle police for saving the life of a three-year-old boy who was drowning in a lake” (Duijndam. ) In 1973 Bundy had met up with Stephanie Brooks once again. Stephanie noticed the Ted’s transformation resulting in a reconcile of their relationship.

Just as suddenly as their relationship was rekindled, it dissipated just as quick. Bundy had been plotting his revenge against Stephanie for a long time. He wanted to reject her the way she rejected him; he became cold to her and broke all contact off with her in February 1974. (Duijndam. ) This was just the beginning of Bundy’s revenge and vicious sexual fulfillment against society. The remains of Kathy Devine were found on December 6, 1973 which the police had immediately began an investigation. Shortly after the Devine attack, Lynda Ann Healy went missing.

During the spring and summer as many as seven female students went missing from the states of Utah, Oregon, and Washington. A pattern emerged from these mysterious disappearances; all the victims were white, thin, and single. The police interviewed various college students and some had stated that they had seen a strange man in the parking lot on campus that was wearing a cast and asking for assistance with starting his Volkswagen (VW) Bug. In August of 1974 in Lake Sammamish, Washington, the two girls were found and then identified from their remains, as Janice Ott and Denise Naslund.

Duijndam. ) Similarities between the murders in Utah and Oregon caught the attention of the local police in Utah, desperately searching for the person liable for these horrendous murders. Slowly the evidence was built with every murder; investigators concluded that the man who committed these murders in Utah was the same man in the other murders. Ted Bundy, pretended to be a police officer, approached Carol DaRonch one night. Bundy stated that he saw someone try to break in her car. Bundy escorted her into his VW Bug, took her to a remote area which, he stopped the vehicle (Larsen.

He put handcuffs on her and he threatened her with a gun, she managed to get away and escape with some people passing by in a car. Police found blood on the victim’s coat, which matched Bundy’s blood type. Later that same night the police had found a key in the parking lot where Debby Kent went missing. A month later a witness called in stating they saw a VW Bug speed away from a high school the night Kent disappeared. Bundy was arrested on August 16, 1975 caught speeding away with no lights on, in the Salt Lake neighborhood.

A search was conducted of the VW. There was no passenger seat, there were the handcuffs, a ski mask, and an ice pick and tape. The was connection was made to the previous attempted kidnappings, Bundy was convicted of the attempted kidnappings and sent to prison after DaRonch and a friend of Kent’s picked Bundy out of a lineup. Ted was eventually charged with the murders of Melissa Smith and Caryn Campbell when their bodies were found, Bundy was extradited. Bundy kept protesting his innocence and a full-blown investigation was conducted on Ted Bundy. Police then approached Stephanie Brooks for information on Ted Bundy.

She told them how Ted had abruptly changed his behavior toward her, how he became cold and insensitive. It seemed Bundy was living a double life filled of lies and betrayal. The evidence was building towards Bundy’s conviction. An old friend of Bundy’s had said he saw pantyhose in Ted’s car and that he spent a considerable amount of time up at Taylor Mountains where bodies of victims have been discovered. Another old friend of Bundy’s had reported that he saw him with a cast on, but no record of him ever breaking his arm in any hospital. On February 23, 1976 Bundy was put on trial for the kidnapping of DaRonch.

Bundy felt confident that there was no hard evidence to convict him, but he was wrong. DaRonch pointed to Bundy the man who portrayed himself to be “Officer Roseland” (Mellow 10. ) The judge reviewed the case and found Bundy guilty on aggravated kidnapping. Bundy was sentenced to fifteen years with the possibility for parole. Farther investigations had found that hairs from Campbell and Smith were found in Bundy’s VM Bug. This linked him to the murders of the two females, Bundy was moved to Garfield County Jail in Colorado in April of ’77 to await the murder trial of these two girls.

Bundy was granted permission to leave the confines of the jail on occasion and utilize the courthouse library in Aspen, to conduct legal research. In order to defend himself. What police didn’t know was that he was planning his escape”(Michaud. ) On June 7th during one of his trips to the library Ted jumped out the window and escaped to freedom. In this poor attempt, within six days Bundy returned to jail when caught trying to steal a vehicle in Aspen. However, seven months later he escaped again and fled to Florida.

Bundy changed his name to Chris Hagen and settled in an apartment in Tallahassee, Florida (Reinhold. ) Ted lived off of stolen credit cards for the time being. Bundy spent a considerable amount of time at the Chi Omega House on the university campus in Florida. On January 14th, after 3A. M. two sorority sisters were dead and three severely injured at the hands of Ted Bundy. The police were called and Bundy was eventually arrested again, “a college student pointed to Ted Bundy as the man who fled the Chi Omega House the night two women were killed and three others clubbed senseless.

Bundy faced three trials, all spaced in three years, but it was the Chi Omega trail that sealed his fate forever. Bundy acted as his own attorney in the Chi Omega trail, but was fighting an impossible battle. There were two events in the trial that swayed the jurors against Bundy. The testimony of Nita Neary, who pointed out Bundy as the man who fled the Chi Omega House the night of the murders. The other event that swayed the jury was the testimony of Odontologist, Dr. Richard Souviron. While on stand he described the bite mark injuries that were on Lisa Levy’s body.

The jury was shown the photographs of the bite marks taken the night of the murder. The doctor pointed out the uniqueness of the imprints on Levy’s body and the pictures of Bundy’s teeth; they matched perfectly. On July 23 Bundy was found guilty on all counts of murder and on July 31st, he was sentenced to die in the electric chair in Florida. Ted Bundy eventually confessed to about 28 murders of women. However, society believes the number is far greater. Bundy was executed on January 24, 1989. After almost a decade since, Bundy’s execution the horror of what this individual orchestrated lives on.

Bundy was deprived of security and guidance at a very young age and was subjected to constant rejection. Through those faults, he created an individual on his own. This individual could place barriers around himself alone, which eventually drove Ted to psychopathic behavior. Bundy had built all this anger inside and turned it on his biggest frustration and obsession, women. There are many more vindictive murderers out there like Bundy. Many years before, society had a difficult time tracking these murderers down and understanding them. Bundy was one of the first serial killers that allowed society to travel in the mind of a killer.

Prohibition Led to the Rapid Growth of Organized Crime

Prohibition was a period in which the sale, manufacture, or transport of alcoholic beverages became illegal. It started January 16, 1919 and continued to December 5, 1933. Although it was designed to stop drinking completely, it did not even come close. It simply created a large number of bootleggers who were able to supply the public with illegal alcohol. Many of these bootleggers became very rich and influential through selling alcohol and also through other methods. They pioneered the practices of organized crime that are still used today.

Thus, Prohibition led to the rapid growth of organized crime. The introduction of prohibition in 1919 created numerous opinions and issues in American society. Prohibition had been a long standing issue in America, with temperance organizations promoting it since the late eighteenth century. The movement grew tremendously during the nineteenth century. The Independent Order of Good Templars, one of the major temperance societies, increased it’s membership by 350,000 between 1859 and 1869 (Behr 31).

Other societies followed a similar trend, and millions of Americans belonged to temperance societies by the end of the nineteenth century. When the United States entered World War I in 1914, there was a shortage of grain due to the large demands to feed the soldiers. Since grain is one of the major components in alcohol, the temperance movement now had the war to fuel their fight. “The need to conserve grain, the importance of maintaining some semblance of discipline and devotion …. to demonstrate the nation’s sober determination to protect its interests. Repeal .. 1933)

Thus, the war played a large part in the introduction of Prohibition. During the next five years many states enacted their own prohibition laws, and finally, at midnight on December 16, 1919, Amendment 18 went into effect. It states that, “… the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors … for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited. ” (Constitution) The public reaction to the introduction of Prohibition was largely mixed. The temperance organizations rejoiced at their victory. Over a century of work had finally paid off for them.

The rest of the country, however, was less than pleased. Many saw it as a violation of their freedom, and others simply wanted to keep drinking. It did not take long for people to begin their protest. Less than one hour after prohibition took effect six gunmen hijacked a train in Chicago and stole over $100,000 worth of whiskey that was marked for medicinal use (Gingold 28). In New York, although there were no violent protests recorded that night, people all over the city mourned the loss of alcohol at their favorite saloon or restaurant, and drank a final toast at midnight (John … Toll of 12).

The huge public demand for alcohol led to a soaring business for bootleggers. When prohibition began, people immediately wanted a way to drink. Hence, the extremely profitable bootlegging business was born. Before Prohibition gangs existed, but had little influence. Now, they had gained tremendous power almost overnight. Bootlegging was easy – New York City gangs paid hundreds of poor immigrants to maintain stills in their apartments. Common citizens, once law abiding, now became criminals by making their own alcohol. However, this posed risks for those who made their own.

The rich managed to continue drinking good liquor while less-affluent Americans often consumed homemade alcoholic beverages, which were sometimes made with poisonous wood alcohol. ” (Eighteenth … Prohibition) Thus, many died due to alcohol poisoning. There was very little enforcement to the law, since the government employed few prohibition agents, most of whom could be bribed by the bootleggers. Those in favor of prohibition “became increasingly dismayed with the efforts of the government to enforce the law. ” (Repeal … 1933) “In 1920, the government had fewer than 1,600 low-paid, ill-trained Prohibition agents for the entire country.

Speakeasies, which got their name because a password had to be spoken through the door to get in, popped up all over the country. “The number of speakeasies in New York was somewhere in the hundreds or even thousands. It was easy enough for police to close and padlock individual speakeasies, but there were so many it was impossible to keep them shut down. ” (Gingold 36) Even with prohibition in effect, the demand for alcohol never gave it a chance to work. Al Capone used prohibition to build a crime empire unparalleled in United States history.

He started as a member of John Torrio’s gang in Chicago. Torrio was a notorious gangster and bootlegger, and after he was shot in 1922 Capone became the leader of his gang. He quickly expanded the business, and by 1930 “controlled speakeasies, bookie joints, gambling houses, brothels, horse and race tracks, nightclubs, distilleries and breweries at a reported income of $100,000,000 a year. ” (History Files 1) By bribing police and prohibition agents, he was able to get away with almost anything he did. Capone was the first and last gangster to openly flaunt his crimes.

He was somewhat of a celebrity in Chicago and admitted what he did with quotes suck as: “All I’ve ever done is to supply a public demand – you can’t cure a thirst by a law … It’s bootleg when it’s on the trucks, but when your host hands it to you on a silver tray, it’s hospitality … They say I violate Prohibition. Who doesn’t? “(Michell 39) Capone also believed in killing anyone who got in his way. Throughout his career, Capone was said to have killed over 200 people, but he was never convicted of any related charge. In addition to bootlegging and his other establishments, Capone began the widespread use of racketeering.

Racketeering is when Capone would force businesses to pay him money in exchange for protection by his gang. Really, though, they were paying for protection from Capone’s gang (Letts 88). However, what goes up must come down. Capone became too famous for his own good. The American public began to hate him for being able to defy the law, and the government hated him for continuously breaking their laws and embarrassing them. After the Saint Valentine’s Day Massacre in 1929, in which seven rival gang members were executed by gunmen dressed as police, Capone was seen as a truly evil and bad man by the public.

In 1931, Capone was indicted for tax evasion and sentenced to ten years in prison along with substantial fines. At first he went to Atlanta prison, but after being able to buy better treatment there he was transferred to Alcatraz, where his money meant nothing. He was soon diagnosed with syphilis and spent the rest of his term in a hospital. After he was released Capone returned to his Florida estate and slowly succumbed to his disease until his death on January 25, 1947 (History Files 6).

After the downfall of Al Capone and the repeal of prohibition, organized crime remained largely based on the methods of Capone and the gangsters like him. Prohibition was repealed with the 21st Amendment in 1933, much to the joy of many Americans. It was repealed for two reasons – one, people had decided that the negative aspects out weighed the positive, and two, the country was entering the Great Depression, so it was thought that producing and selling alcohol would create more jobs and help boost the economy (Asbury 227).

Even some proponents admitted that the Eighteenth Amendment resulted in ‘evil consequences’. ” (McGuire 1) One of the major negative aspects of Prohibition, organized crime, failed to be eliminated by the repeal. Although bootlegging became a thing of the past, other methods such as extortion, money laundering, and racketeering continued and became more prominent. “The bootleg wars ended with the relegalization of liquor, but the mobs did not fade away … In one form or another, these mobs are still with us today.

Prohibition led to organized crime as we know it today. Men like Al Capone got their start during Prohibition and were able to develop a system whose methods led into the Mafia and other forms of modern day crime. “Prohibition produced the like of Al Capone and organized crime, speak-easies, bootleggers, bathtub gin, and a national wildness called the “roaring twenties. ” (McGuire 1) Prohibition turned the small gangs that existed in the early twentieth century into the powerful Mafia that exists today.

Computer Fraud and Crimes

In the world of computers, computer fraud and computer crime are very prevalent issues facing every computer user. This ranges from system administrators to personal computer users who do work in the office or at home. Computers without any means of security are vulnerable to attacks from viruses, worms, and illegal computer hackers. If the proper steps are not taken, safe computing may become a thing of the past. Many security measures are being implemented to protect against illegalities. Companies are becoming more aware and threatened by the fact that their computers are prone to attack.

Virus scanners are becoming necessities on all machines. Installing and monitoring these virus scanners takes many man hours and a lot of money for site licenses. Many server programs are coming equipped with a program called “netlog. ” This is a program that monitors the computer use of the employees in a company on the network. The program monitors memory and file usage. A qualified system administrator should be able to tell by the amounts of memory being used and the file usage if something is going on that should not be.

If a virus is found, system administrators can pinpoint the user ho put the virus into the network and investigate whether or not there was any malice intended. One computer application that is becoming more widely used and, therefore, more widely abused, is the use of electronic mail or email. In the present day, illegal hackers can read email going through a server fairly easily. Email consists of not only personal transactions, but business and financial transactions. There are not many encryption procedures out for email yet.

As Gates describes, soon email encryption will become a regular addition to email just as a hard disk drive has become a regular addition to a computer (Gates p. 97-98). Encrypting email can be done with two prime numbers used as keys. The public key will be listed on the Internet or in an email message. The second key will be private, which only the user will have. The sender will encrypt the message with the public key, send it to the recipient, who will then decipher it again with his or her private key. This method is not foolproof, but it is not easy to unlock either.

The numbers being used will probably be over 60 digits in length (Gates p. 98-99). The Internet also poses more problems to users. This problem faces the home user more than the business user. When a person logs onto the Internet, he or he may download a file corrupted with a virus. When he or she executes that program, the virus is released into the system. When a person uses the World Wide Web(WWW), he or she is downloading files into his or her Internet browser without even knowing it. Whenever a web page is visited, an image of that page is downloaded and stored in the cache of the browser.

This image is used for faster retrieval of that specific web page. Instead of having to constantly download a page, the browser automatically reverts to the cache to open the image of that page. Most people do not know about this, but this is an example f how to get a virus in a machine without even knowing it. Every time a person accesses the Internet, he or she is not only accessing the host computer, but the many computers that connect the host and the user. When a person transmits credit card information, it goes over many computers before it reaches its destination.

An illegal hacker can set up one of the connecting computers to copy the credit card information as it passes through the computer. This is how credit card fraud is committed with the help of the Internet. What companies such as Maxis and Sierra are doing are making secure sites. These ites have the capabilities to receive credit card information securely. This means the consumer can purchase goods by credit card over the Internet without worrying that the credit card number will be seen by unauthorized people.

System administrators have three major weapons against computer crime. The first defense against computer crime is system security. This is the many layers systems have against attacks. When data comes into a system, it is scanned for viruses and safety. Whenever it passes one of these security layers, it is scanned again. The second resistance against viruses and corruption is computer law. This defines what is illegal in the computer world. In the early 1980’s, prosecutors had problems trying suspect in computer crimes because there was no definition of illegal activity.

The third defense is the teaching of computer ethics. This will hopefully defer people from becoming illegal hackers in the first place (Bitter p. 433). There are other ways companies can protect against computer fraud than in the computer and system itself. One way to curtail computer fraud is in the interview process and training procedures. If it is made clear to the new employee that honesty is valued in the company, the mployee might think twice about committing a crime against the company.

Background checks and fingerprinting are also good ways to protect against computer fraud. Computer crime prevention has become a major issue in the computer world. The lack of knowledge of these crimes and how they are committed is a factor as to why computer crime is so prevalent. What must be realized is that the “weakest link in any system is the human” (Hafner and Markoff p. 61). With the knowledge and application of the preventative methods discussed, computer crime may actually become an issue of the past.

Juveniles committing violent crimes should be tried as adults

When one hears of a criminal who has committed a violent crime, one does not usually conjure up images of a person with whom he or she would like to spend a lot of time. This is because the person described is a criminal, one who has the mindset of committing a violent offense. No matter the age of the criminal, he or she would be nonetheless a rather unappealing companion. Violent crime is defined by the Department of Justice as homicide, rape, aggravated assault, robbery, and assault. These are all actions that sound horrible and reap even more horrible consequences.

Unfortunately, there is a growing trend of juvenile violence; even children under 16 are committing these heinous acts. It is of my assertion that anyone who commits a violent crime needs to be prosecuted in the same manner, hence that minors must be prosecuted as adults. Juvenile crime is a serious and growing epidemic. The figures for juveniles committing crimes that are serious, heterogeneous, or non-serious mirror those of offenders between the ages of eighteen and twenty (U. S. Department of Justice/ FBI fact file). Any study can show the same facts- that youth violence and criminal acts are on the rise. These must be punished.

The causes or signs of risk of teen violence can be shown in many factors: violent media, bullying, depression, being an outcast, fascination with guns or death, societys opinion, and teenage mood swings. Individuals that exhibit these qualities very often commit violent crimes. These characteristics are that of personality, not necessarily able to be changed without a serious program (such as detention or prison). Also, these individuals are usually possessing motives when committing the crimes; if he or she has the adult mentality to do an adult crime, it is only logical and fair that he or she is punished likewise.

Though a juvenile may not understand their circumstances or not have full brain development, he or she is still capable of deciding right and wrong- every human has a moral code, even toddlers know this difference. Anyone, no matter the age, should receive an equalizing punishment for a violent crime. Such acts may not go unnoticed; the criminals must be dealt with in a legal manner. Prosecuting juveniles as adults for the violent crimes that they commit gives the best chance of issuing a sentence that is in accordance with the offense. All should be fair in love, war, crime, and punishment.

Drugs and Crime

The link between drug use and crime is not a new one. For more than twenty years, both the National Institute on Drug Abuse and the National Institute of Justice have funded many studies to try to better understand the connection. One such study was done in Baltimore on heroin users. This study found high rates of criminality among users during periods of active drug use, and much lower rates during periods of nonuse (Ball et al. 1983, pp. 119-142). A large number of people who abuse drugs come into contact with the criminal justice system when they are sent to jail or to other correctional facilities.

The criminal justice system is flooded with substance abusers. The need for expanding drug abuse treatment for this group of people was recognized in the Crime Act of 1994, which for the first time provided substantial resources for federal and state jurisdictions. In this paper, I will argue that using therapeutic communities in prisons will reduce the recidivism rates among people who have been released from prison. I am going to use the general theory of crime, which is based on self-control, to help rationalize using federal tax dollars to fund these therapeutic communities in prisons.

I feel that if we teach these prisoners some self-control and alternative lifestyles that we can keep them from reentering the prisons once they get out. I am also going to describe some of todays programs that have proven to be very effective. Gottfredson and Hirschi developed the general theory of crime. It According to their theory, the criminal act and the criminal offender are separate concepts. The criminal act is perceived as opportunity; illegal activities that people engage in when they perceive them to be advantageous. Crimes are committed when they promise rewards ith minimum threat of pain or punishment.

Crimes that provide easy, short-term gratification are often committed. The number of offenders may remain the same, while crime rates fluctuate due to the amount of opportunity (Siegel 1998). Criminal offenders are people that are predisposed to committing crimes. This does not mean that they have no choice in the matter, it only means that their self-control level is lower than average. When a person has limited self-control, they tend to be more impulsive and shortsighted. This ties back in with crimes that are committed that provide easy, short-term gratification.

These people do not necessarily have a tendency to commit crimes, they just do not look at long-term consequences and they tend to be reckless and self-centered (Longshore 1998, pp. 102-113). These people with lower levels of self-control also engage in non-criminal acts as well. These acts include drinking, gambling, smoking, and illicit sexual activity (Siegel 1998). Also, drug use is a common act that is performed by these people. They do not look at the consequences of the drugs, while they get the short-term gratification.

Sometimes this drug abuse becomes an addiction and then the person will commit ther small crimes to get the drugs or them money to get the drugs. In a mid-western study done by Evans et al. (1997, pp. 475-504), there was a significant relationship between self-control and use of illegal drugs. The problem is once these people get into the criminal justice system, it is hard to get them out. After they do their time and are released, it is much easier to be sent back to prison. Once they are out, they revert back to their impulsive selves and continue with the only type of life they know.

They know short-term gratification, the “quick fix” if you will. Being locked up with housands of other people in the same situation as them is not going to change them at all. They break parole and are sent back to prison. Since the second half of the 1980s, there has been a large growth in prison and jail populations, continuing a trend that started in the 1970s. The proportion of drug users in the incarcerated population also grew at the same time. By the end of the 1980s, about one-third of those sent to state prisons had been convicted of a drug offense; the highest in the countrys history (Reuter 1992, pp. 23-395).

With the arrival of crack use in the 1980s, the strong elationship between drugs and crime got stronger. The use of cocaine and heroin became very prevalent. Violence on the streets that is caused by drugs got the publics attention and that put pressure on the police and courts. Consequently, more arrests were made. While it may seem good at first that these people are locked up, with a second look, things are not that good. The cost to John Q. Taxpayer for a prisoner in Ohio for a year is around $30,000 (Phipps 1998).

That gets pretty expensive when you consider that there are more than 1,100,000 people in United States prisons today (Siegel 1998). Many prisoners are being held in local jails because of overcrowding. This rise in population is largely due to the number of inmates serving time for drug offenses (Siegel 1998). This is where therapeutic communities come into play. The term”therapeutic community” has been used in many different forms of treatment, including residential group homes and special schools, and different conditions, like mental illness, alcoholism, and drug abuse (Lipton 1998, pp. 106-109).

In the United States, therapeutic communities are used in the rehabilitation of drug addicts in and out of prison. These communities involve a type of group therapy that focuses more on the person a whole and not so much the offense they committed or their drug abuse. They use a “community of peers” and role models rather than professional clinicians. They focus on lifestyle changes and tend to be more holistic (Lipton 1998, pp. 106-109). By getting inmates to participate in these programs, the prisoners can break their addiction to drugs. By freeing themselves from this addiction they can change their lives.

These therapeutic communities can teach them some self-control and ways that they can irect their energies into more productive things, such as sports, religion, or work. Seven out of every ten men and eight out of every ten women in the criminal justice system used drugs with some regularity prior to entering the criminal justice system (Lipton 1998, pp. 106-109). With that many people in prisons that are using drugs and the connection between drug use and crime, then if there was any success at all it seems like it would be a step in the right direction.

Many of these offenders will not seek any type of reform when they are in the community. They feel that they do not have the time to commit to go hrough a program of rehabilitation. It makes sense, then, that they should receive treatment while in prison because one thing they have plenty of is time. In 1979, around four percent of the prison population, or about 10,000, were receiving treatment through the 160 programs that were available throughout the country (National Institute on Drug Abuse 1981). Forty-nine of these programs were based on the therapeutic community model, which served around 4,200 prisoners.

In 1989, the percentage of prisoners that participated in these programs grew to about eleven percent (Chaiken 1989). Some incomplete surveys state today that over half the states provide some form of treatment to their prisoners and about twenty percent of identified drug-using offenders are using these programs (Frohling 1989). The public started realizing that drug abuse and crime were on the rise and that something had to be done about it. This led to more federal money being put into treatment programs in prisons (Beckett 1994, pp. 425-447).

The States were assisted through two Federal Government initiatives, projects REFORM and RECOVERY. REFORM began in 1987, and laid the roundwork for the development of effective prison-based treatment for incarcerated drug abusers. Presentations were made at professional conferences to national groups and policy makers and to local correctional officials. At these presentations the principles of effective correctional change and the efficacy of prison-based treatment were discussed. New models were formed that allowed treatment that began in prison to continue after prisoners were released into the community.

Many drug abuse treatment system components were established due to Project REFORM that include: 39 assessment and referral programs mplemented and 33 expanded or improved; 36 drug education programs implemented and 82 expanded or improved; 44 drug resource centers established and 37 expanded or improved; 20 in-prison 12-step programs implemented and 62 expanded or improved; 11 urine monitoring systems expanded; 74 prerelease counseling and/or referral programs implemented and 54 expanded or improved; 39 post release treatment programs with parole and 10 improved; and 77 isolated-unit treatment programs started.

In 1991, the new Center for Substance Abuse Treatment established Project RECOVERY. This program provided technical ssistance and training services to start out prison drug treatment programs. Most of the states that participated in REFORM were involved with RECOVERY, as well as a few new states. In most therapeutic communities, recovered drug users are placed in a therapeutic environment, isolated from the general prison population. This is due to the fact that if they live with the general population, it is much harder to break away from old habits.

The primary clinical staff is usually made up of former substance abusers that at one time were rehabilitated in therapeutic communities. The perspective of the treatment is that the problem is with the whole person and not the drug. The addiction is a symptom and not the core of the disorder. The primary goal is to change patterns of behavior, thinking, and feeling that predispose drug use (Inciardi et al. 1997, pp. 261-278). This returns to the general theory of crime and the argument that it is the opportunity that creates the problem.

If you take away the opportunity to commit crimes by changing ones behavior and thinking then the opportunity will not arise for the person to commit these crimes that were readily available in the past. The most effective form of therapeutic community intervention involves three stages: incarceration, work release, and parole or other form of supervision (Inciardi et al. 1997, pp. 261-278). The primary stage needs to consist of a prison-based therapeutic community. Pro-social values should be taught in an environment that is separate from the normal prison population.

This should be an on-going and evolving process that lasts at least twelve months, with the ability to stay longer if it is deemed necessary. The prisoners need to grasp the concept of the addiction cycle and interact with other recovering addicts. The second stage should include a transitional work release program. This is a form of partial incarceration in which inmates that are approaching release dates can work for pay in the free community, but they must spend their non-working hours in either the institution or a work release facility (Inciardi et al. 997, pp. 261-278).

The only problem here is that during their stay at this facility, they are reintroduced to groups and behaviors that put them there in the first place. If it is possible, these recovering addicts should stay together and live in a separate environment than the general population. Once the inmate is released into the free community, he or she will remain under the supervision of a parole officer or some other type of supervisory program. Treatment should continue through either outpatient counseling or group therapy.

In addition, they should also be encouraged to return to the work release therapeutic community for refresher sessions, attend weekly groups, call their counselors on a regular basis and spend one day a month at the facility (Inciardi et al. 1997, pp. 261-278). Since the early 1990s, the Delaware correctional system has been operating this three-stage model. It is based around three therapeutic communities: the KEY, a prison-based therapeutic community for men; WCI Village, a prison-based therapeutic community for women; and CREST Outreach Center, a residential work release center for men and women.

According to Inciardi et al. (1997, pp. 261-278), the continuing of therapeutic community treatment and sufficient length of follow up time, a consistent pattern of reduction of drug use and recidivism exists. Their study shows the effectiveness of the program extending beyond the in-prison program. New Yorks model for rehabilitation is called the Stayn Out Program. This s a therapeutic community program that was established in 1977 by a group of recovered addicts (Wexler et al. 1992, pp. 156-175). The program was evaluated in 1984 and it was reported that the program reduced recidivism for both males and females.

Also, from this study, the “time-in-program” hypothesis was formed. This came from the finding that successful outcomes were directly related to the amount of time that was spent in treatment. Another study, by Toumbourou et al. (1998, pp. 1051-1064), tested the time-in-program hypothesis. In this study, they found a linear relationship between reduced recidivism rates nd time spent in the program as well as the level of treatment attained. This study found that it was the attainment of level progress rather than time in the treatment that was most important.

The studies done on New Yorks Stayn Out program and Delawares Key-Crest program are some of the first large-scale evidence that prison-based therapeutic communities actually produce a significant reduction in recidivism rates and show a consistency over time. The programs of the past did work, but before most of the programs were privately funded, and when the funds ran out in seven or eight years, so did the programs. Now with the government backing these types of programs, they should continue to show a decrease in recidivism. It is much more cost effective to treat these inmates.

A program like Stayn Out cost about $3,000 to $4,000 more than the standard correctional costs per inmate per year (Lipton 1998, pp. 106-109). In a program in Texas, it was figured that with the money spent on 672 offenders that entered the program, 74 recidivists would have to be prevented from returning to break even. It was estimated that 376 recidivists would be kept from returning using the therapeutic community program (Eisenberg and Fabelo 1996, pp. 96-318). The savings produced in crime-related and drug use-associated costs pay for the cost of treatment in about two to three years.

The main question that arises when dealing with this subject is whether or not people change. According to Gottfredson and Hirschi, the person does not change, only the opportunity changes. By separating themselves from people that commit crimes and commonly do drugs, they are actually avoiding the opportunity to commit these crimes. They do not put themselves in the situation that would allow their low self-control to take over. Starting relationships with people who exhibit elf-control and ending relationships with those who do not is a major factor in the frequency of committing crimes.

Addiction treatment is very important to this countrys war on drugs. While these abusers are incarcerated it provides us with an excellent opportunity to give them treatment. The will not seek treatment on their own. Without treatment, the chances of them continuing on with their past behavior are very high. But with the treatment programs we have today, things might be looking up. The studies done on the various programs, such as New Yorks Stayn Out and Delawares Key-Crest program, prove that here are cost effective ways available to treat these prisoners.

Not only are they cost effective, but they are also proven to reduce recidivism rates significantly. These findings are very consistent throughout all of the research, there are not opposing views. I believe that we can effectively treat these prisoners while they are incarcerated and they can be released into society and be productive, not destructive. Nothing else has worked to this point, we owe it to them, and more importantly, we owe it to ourselves. We can again feel safe on the streets after dark, and we do not have to spend so much of our money to do it.

The Boston Strangler – Serial Killer

The Boston Strangler was probably the most notorious criminal that Boston, Massachusetts has ever known. But who was the Boston Strangler? Was he Albert DeSalvo, the person who confessed and went to jail for these crimes? Is he someone that took his secret to the grave and let an innocent man take the blame for his crime? Or is he still walking the streets of Boston, or even the streets of another city? We may never know for sure because based on all the evidence I’ve read, in my opinion Albert DeSalvo was not the famed Boston Strangler. The Boston Strangler reaked havoc on the city from June 1962 until January 1964.

He claimed the lives of thirteen women, ages ranging from 85 years old to 19 years old. The first victim had been raped and her bathrobe tie wrapped around her neck in a bow in June 1964. The next victim, was 85 year old Mary Mullen, she was not technically killed by the strangler, but rather a fatal heart attack when confronted by him. On June 30th, 1962, Helen Blake met death at the hands of the strangler. Next was 68 year old Nina Nichols. The fifth victim was 75 year old Ida Irga. On August 20th, 1962 Jane Sullivan had been raped and strangled with her nylons.

The only black woman to be killed by the hands of the Boston Strangler was Sophie Clark. On December 30th, 1962, 23 year old Patricia Bissette was killed. Then 68 year old Mary Brown met her fate. In August 1963, Beverly Samans met the strangler, she was stabbed instead of strangled and was not raped, but the police still thought it was the strangler’s work. The next victim was Evelyn Corbin . On November 11th 1963, Joann Graff was found raped and strangled in her apartment. But the Boston Strangler was getting sloppy, because he allowed himself to e seen.

A man that lived upstairs from Joann reported to police a man had knocked on the door across the hall from his and inquired about Ms. Graff, when he told the man where she lived he quickly left, but not without being seen. The final murder occurred on January 4th 1964. The victim was Mary Sullivan. She was the youngest of the strangler’s victims. Susan Kelly in The Boston Stranglers: The Public Conviction of Albert DeSalvo and the True Story of Eleven Shocking Murders makes a persuasive argument for DeSalvo being innocent of the strangling murders.

She cites a number of reasons why she and others still believed that DeSalvo was innocent. One of the strongest of these reasons is that there was “not one shred of physical evidence that connected him to any of the murders. ” Nor could any eyewitness place him at or even near any of the crime scenes. Albert had a relatively memorable face, particularly because of his prominent, beak-like nose. The Strangler (or Stranglers, since some experts believe that it had to be at least two different murderers and possibly more) was seen by a number of eyewitnesses. One was

Kenneth Rowe, the engineering student who lived on the floor above Joann Graffs apartment. He spoke to the stranger who was looking for her apartment just before she was killed. When Rowe was shown a photo of Albert DeSalvo, he did not recognize him as the man looking for Joann. Another point to make is serial killers tend to follow a pattern. The Boston strangler did not. He chose woman of all different ages and backgrounds, which leads me to believe that it was more than one person committing these crimes. No one can know for sure why DeSalvo would confess to crimes he didn’t commit, but one reason could e money.

When Albert was conferring with his lawyer, he asked him if confessing could bring money to his family by ways of books and interviews. His attorney said probably and Albert then quickly confessed. On the night before DeSalvo was killed by another inmate in prison, he called his attorney and told him he had something important to tell him and to come see him the next day. Unfortunately we will never know what Albert had to say, because he was stabbed through the heart and killed, but I think he wanted to tell his lawyer who the Boston Strangler really was.

Mafia of the 1920’s and 1930’s

Their guns terrorized the streets of New York. They were murderous, brutal thugs that killed with no feelings of remorse. They were bank-robbers, drug dealers, casino owners, hit men and pimps. They were the Mafia of the 1920’s and 1930’s. These degenerates played an important role in American history, they were more than just bank-robbers and gunslingers, and they were men that affected all facets of society. They were celebrities, some of the most recognized men in America. Their evil deeds made the front page of every newspaper.

They were some of the richest men in America, but most of all; they were the scapegoats for America’s problems. They were hated by many, respected by few and feared by all. In times of poverty and despair, they were looked upon as the “problem”, which needed to be “fixed”. The fear they imposed on America gave Americans something to unite over and fight against together. Sometimes, a person is most courageous when they are most fearful. They made America “roar” in the twenties and they took “the wrath” of thirties. They were some of America’s most dangerous men and some of its most famous as well.

In order to obtain an objective view towards the Mafia, one must know a little about its history. The Mafia was first started in the ninth century, in Sicily. At this time, Arab forces were occupying Sicily. The natives were being oppressed, so they took refuge in the surrounding hills and formed a secret society to protect against the foreign invaders. This secret society was named Mafia, after the Arabic word for refuge. The society’s intentions were to create a sense of family, based on ancestry and Sicilian heritage.

During the 1700’s, Mafia leaders began to force their way to the head positions in the Sicilian government and used government funds for their own private endeavours. In the early 1900’s, when Mussolini and the Fascists came to power, he vowed to rid the country of all the Mafia. Keeping this in mind, and the fact that there was money to be made through extortion, prostitution, gambling and bootlegging in the United States, many Mafioso’s decided to come west to America. Charles “Lucky” Luciano, the eventual organizer of the New York Mafia, was born in Sicily in 1897, and came to New York.

Luciano climbed the “criminal ladder” and by 1935, he was known as the Boss of Bosses in New York. Luciano headed Murder Inc. , the gang that ruled New York during the 1920’s and 1930’s. Everyone in America had their own opinion of the Mafia. Generally, the poor people looked up to them. During the twenties and thirties the rich got richer, and the poor got poorer. Many people were out of work and some were even on the street. The Mafia offered many jobs and paid well to the people who were loyal and hardworking. People saw working for the Mafia as an alternative to starvation, and homelessness.

Also, many of the poor respected and looked up to members of the Mafia, because they had made something of themselves. They had the fancy cars, the clothes, the homes and most of all the money. This was a very materialistic society, people were focussed on success and money, at whatever cost was necessary. These were desperate times that required desperate actions from the common man. The rich, or middle class people, were desperate, but not in the same way. These people hated and feared the Mafia, because they were most affected by them. These were the more prominent people of society.

They were the shop owners and street vendors that the Mafia offered “protection” to for a significant fee. There was no refusal to the Mafia, because if the shop-owners denied, then their shops would “mysteriously” get blown up, or they would be robbed, often by the same men that had offered to protect them. This was the ruthlessness of the Mafia, they only proposed what benefited them, and if they were refused then something real bad was going to happen. Those who did agree to the Mafia’s terms would often have to pay a hefty fee to keep running.

A strong feeling of animosity built up from the middle class towards the Mafia. Those, the brave ones at least, venders and shop owners who were being harassed by the Mafia were more likely to “rat” out the Mafia, and were often used as witnesses by police officials. The Government disliked the Mafia, and desperately wanted to stop their crime wave. Slowly by slowly, Mafia members were becoming more and more respected by the poor people and many people thought the Mafia was more powerful than the Government. As much as the government disliked the Mafia, they were grateful for them just the same.

The Government was grateful for the Mafia, because they took attention away from the growing depression and slipping economy. The Government could use all the frustration and anger they had from the Depression, and focus it on ridding the country of these violent criminals. When the government focused their attention on getting rid of the Mafia, they gained the support of the thousands of people that feared the Mafia, many of them the same people that cursed and resented the government for the struggling economy. One must remember that politics in the twenties and thirties were as scandalous, if not more than, the Mafia was.

Politicians made millions of dollars in illegal operations, weather it be land purchases or bootlegging. Politics has always been a crooked game, but during these times, most of the politicians were as corrupt as the criminals. The New York Mafia initially started out to provide services that were “unnecessarily regulated” by the government. At first, the Mafia was a group of people that made money off of bootlegging. They sold stolen or illegal goods, at a reasonable price, and made thousands of dollars. The main objective of this was to make money, but at the same time they provided an invaluable service to the poor people of the community.

By selling goods at a cheap price, less money had to be spent for basic necessities. Those who needed the product rarely cared where it had come from, as long as they got it a reasonable price. In this sense, the poor people saw the Mafia as their friend because they were saving them money, that they desperately needed. The downside to this is that by selling the goods at a cheaper price, they were causing the legitimate shops and stores to lose money. This is another one of the other reasons that the Mafia was so strongly resented by the middle-class citizens.

Along with stolen and bootleg goods, the Mafia sold illegal alcohol. The twenties and thirties was the era of Prohibition and the sale of intoxicating beverages was deemed illegal. The Mafia capitalized on the public’s desire for alcohol. They brought alcohol in from Canada, where alcohol was legal, and sold it by the gallon in New York. In some cases, they produced themselves in warehouses. This was a common practice all throughout the country at the time, but it proved very profitable for the Mafia in New York. This is another way the Mafia gained respect, by selling the thing the government deemed illegal.

Gambling was one of their most successful operations. The Mafia owned many nightclubs that were a front for their casinos. These casinos brought in millions of dollars annually, and they gave the rich a place to go and enjoy themselves. The casinos were filled with beautiful women, handsome men, great food, alcohol and most of all money. The casinos were so popular because they were something that was considered wrong. Every time people picked the dice or placed a bet, they knew they were doing something illegal. This was part of the “rush” that came with playing the game.

People were living in tough times and they were tired of listening to the Government tell them what was right and wrong. For one night, they were living dangerously, and this made them feel unique and important. The club owners capitalized on these feelings by making the clubs attractive and spectacular places, enticing the guest to stay longer and spend more money. The clubs, casinos, of the twenties and thirties were not large and commercial like the ones of today, they were more discreet and intimate. It was a place for socialization, and the Mafia used this to their advantage. The Mafia had two objectives when they ran these casinos.

The first was obviously to make money. The second was to have a semi-public place to conduct business that was easy to control. By conducting business at their clubs, they were in a semi-public contained environment, which they were in control of. So, while the prominent members of society shot craps or played black jack the owners were in the back conducting business as usual. Outside of the casino, the Mafia made a significant amount of profit with gambling. The Mafia ran “numbers”, the equivalent of the lottery of today. For a few cents, people would pick numbers for the weekly drawing.

Whose ever number was picked would receive a large jackpot. The Mafia really capitalized on human beings’ obsession with gambling, by making it available for every person in New York. Anybody from the prominent shop owner to the struggling apple-vendor could afford to gamble on a regular basis. The “numbers” were the most beneficial and popular for the people because they were inexpensive and they provided many jobs. Many of the poor neighbourhood kids made good money “running numbers” for the Mafia. The most popular and profitable “service” the Mafia provided was prostitution. Many of the Mafia leaders, started out as pimps.

Prostitution was so profitable, because it offered the most easily marketable and vendible product in the world; sex. The Mafia used the prostitutes as tools to make more business. They placed their “girls” throughout their clubs, so they could lure some high roller in the back for a drink or two. They worked the bars, and listened to lonely middle class men who needed a shoulder to cry on. They were on the streets mingling with the crowd, looking for their next perverted customer. The bosses often used prostitutes to “sweeten” deal between rival leaders or crooked politicians.

They were as dangerous as the trained killers were, because they possessed something more powerful than guns. They were just as ruthless as the men that put holes in people’s heads; they only came in a nicer package. The Mafia men of the 1920’s and 1930’s were some of the most influential men in American history. They robbed banks, killed people, stole, cheated, lied and corrupted an already corrupt country. They were not role models, and they did not aspire to be. They were businessmen, men who had only two objectives, money and power. They saw a need for something and they produced it.

Computer Fraud and Crimes

In the world of computers, computer fraud and computer crime are very prevalent issues facing every computer user. This ranges from system administrators to personal computer users who do work in the office or at home. Computers without any means of security are vulnerable to attacks from viruses, worms, and illegal computer hackers. If the proper steps are not taken, safe computing may become a thing of the past. Many security measures are being implemented to protect against illegalities. Companies are becoming more aware and threatened by the fact that their computers are prone to attack.

Virus scanners are becoming necessities on all machines. Installing and monitoring these virus scanners takes many man hours and a lot of money for site licenses. Many server programs are coming equipped with a program called “netlog. ” This is a program that monitors the computer use of the employees in a company on the network. The program monitors memory and file usage. A qualified system administrator should be able to tell by the amounts of memory being used and the file usage if something is going on that should not be.

If a virus is found, system administrators can pinpoint the user ho put the virus into the network and investigate whether or not there was any malice intended. One computer application that is becoming more widely used and, therefore, more widely abused, is the use of electronic mail or email. In the present day, illegal hackers can read email going through a server fairly easily. Email consists of not only personal transactions, but business and financial transactions. There are not many encryption procedures out for email yet.

As Gates describes, soon email encryption will become a regular addition to email just as a hard disk drive has become a regular addition to a computer (Gates p. 97-98). Encrypting email can be done with two prime numbers used as keys. The public key will be listed on the Internet or in an email message. The second key will be private, which only the user will have. The sender will encrypt the message with the public key, send it to the recipient, who will then decipher it again with his or her private key. This method is not foolproof, but it is not easy to unlock either.

The numbers being used will probably be over 60 digits in length (Gates p. 98-99). The Internet also poses more problems to users. This problem faces the home user more than the business user. When a person logs onto the Internet, he or he may download a file corrupted with a virus. When he or she executes that program, the virus is released into the system. When a person uses the World Wide Web(WWW), he or she is downloading files into his or her Internet browser without even knowing it. Whenever a web page is visited, an image of that page is downloaded and stored in the cache of the browser.

This image is used for faster retrieval of that specific web page. Instead of having to constantly download a page, the browser automatically reverts to the cache to open the image of that page. Most people do not know about this, but this is an example f how to get a virus in a machine without even knowing it. Every time a person accesses the Internet, he or she is not only accessing the host computer, but the many computers that connect the host and the user. When a person transmits credit card information, it goes over many computers before it reaches its destination.

An illegal hacker can set up one of the connecting computers to copy the credit card information as it passes through the computer. This is how credit card fraud is committed with the help of the Internet. What companies such as Maxis and Sierra are doing are making secure sites. These ites have the capabilities to receive credit card information securely. This means the consumer can purchase goods by credit card over the Internet without worrying that the credit card number will be seen by unauthorized people.

System administrators have three major weapons against computer crime. The first defense against computer crime is system security. This is the many layers systems have against attacks. When data comes into a system, it is scanned for viruses and safety. Whenever it passes one of these security layers, it is scanned again. The second resistance against viruses and corruption is computer law. This defines what is illegal in the computer world. In the early 1980’s, prosecutors had problems trying suspect in computer crimes because there was no definition of illegal activity.

The third defense is the teaching of computer ethics. This will hopefully defer people from becoming illegal hackers in the first place (Bitter p. 433). There are other ways companies can protect against computer fraud than in the computer and system itself. One way to curtail computer fraud is in the interview process and training procedures. If it is made clear to the new employee that honesty is valued in the company, the mployee might think twice about committing a crime against the company.

Background checks and fingerprinting are also good ways to protect against computer fraud. Computer crime prevention has become a major issue in the computer world. The lack of knowledge of these crimes and how they are committed is a factor as to why computer crime is so prevalent. What must be realized is that the “weakest link in any system is the human” (Hafner and Markoff p. 61). With the knowledge and application of the preventative methods discussed, computer crime may actually become an issue of the past.

Cybercrime on Computerized Systems

This situation involves a large bank that has recently installed a new software system for handling all transactions and account storage. An employee at the company developing the software programmed a “back door” into the system, and got another employee to unknowingly install it. Some weeks later, millions were stolen from a number of accounts at the bank. This situation was chosen to highlight the amount of trust that large corporations place in programmers of critical systems.

Programmers are quite capable of abusing extremely large and important systems without leaving a trace, and it is surprising that this sort of situation does not happen more often in today’s world. The paper provides an analysis of this type of cybercrime, possible ways in which such a crime could have been prevented, and the consequences of such crime in general. This paper shows that a complete reliance on a single computerized system makes it easier for such a cybercrime to occur. The focus of the Safebank investigation shifted back to the headquarters of Microsoft Corporation, reported the FBI .

The investigation had originally been conducted with the cooperation of international law agencies, in an attempt to track the location of the funds moving through accounts in Europe and the Caribbean. More recently the FBI reported, in a statement given Monday by case director Walter Navarre, that “Evidence has been collected linking the crimes to an employee of the Microsoft Corporation. ” The Safebank incident began last Wednesday, October 17, 2001, when the management at a Safebank branch in Boston was contacted by a customer of the bank reporting that his account suddenly contained no more money.

There was no record of any transaction carried out on the account, but when backup records were checked, it was determined that the account had indeed contained the specified amount. Safebank spokeswoman Alicia Delrey said, in an interview Monday that “Safebank had no indication that a transaction of any kind had taken place. The records showed a balance of approximately a half-million on one day, and the next day these funds were no longer present in the account. ” A comparison check conducted by the bank showed that similar actions had occurred on nearly two hundred other accounts.

All accounts affected in this way contained in the range of half a million to a million dollars. Problems were assumed to have been the cause of a bug in the new transaction software installed by Safebank two weeks earlier. The developer of the software, Microsoft Corporation, was contacted in relation to the problem. At this point, one of the Geneva branches of the Swiss banking giant UBS contacted Safebank with reports of fifty-two major transfers to unidentified accounts. These transfers consisted of amounts that matched exactly the amounts missing from certain Safebank accounts. An international alert was dispatched to banks worldwide.

Within hours, a listing of accounts in foreign banks had been assembled that exactly matched the amounts missing from Safebank. The FBI was called in to investigate the incident, while all accounts indicated were frozen. Initial investigations indicated that the accounts had been opened under a variety of assumed names, by a single individual. According to special investigator Shawn Murray, “although the accounts were not opened in person, we were able to determine, through reports given by bank employees and through bank terminal video recordings, that they were indeed opened by the same individual in all cases.

Investigations pointed to Wolfgang Schlitz, a former director of the Safebank transaction software project, as one suspect. According to FBI investigators, a current Microsloth employee, who is also a suspect, provided information pointing to Mr. Schlitz. Although Mr. Schlitz was unavailable for comment, the employee was identified as Bertrand Dupont, a senior programmer on the Safebank software project. Apparently, Mr. Dupont was, while programming, given a precompiled code object by Mr. Schlitz. The object was intended to be integrated into a specific part of the system handling transactions.

Mr. Dupont, in an interview yesterday, said “He told me it was a set of more optimized transaction classes that the optimizations team had produced. He was the boss, and the explanation sounded perfectly reasonable, so I didn’t suspect anything. The code worked fine, and I forgot all about it until now. ” The FBI investigation is currently centering on Mr. Dupont and Mr. Schlitz as possible suspects although, according to case director Walter Navarre, “We have not ruled out the possibility of other, as yet unidentified, collaborators. The scope of this crime is unprecedented; millions of dollars were taken without a trace.

If it were not for the size of the transactions involved, we may never have noticed anything,” commented industry analyst Lancolm Hayes. “We should take this as a strong argument for better security controls on safety-critical sectors of the development industry,” he added. The current level of reliance on computerized systems has always elicited concern from those who see this dependence as a security risk. As the recent Safebank incident demonstrates, there is indeed cause for alarm.

The fact that the bank used a completely computerized system allowed a single individual with malicious intent to steal millions. The average amount stolen through computerized means is more than twenty times higher than the average taken through more conventional, “physical,” crime [1]. Although it could be argued that banks implement safety measures such as a marker or alert for large or suspicious transactions, all these transactions are computerized. The program actually carrying out the transfer can be modified not to issue such an alert by the person who has carried out such modifications, as in the Safebank case.

A complete reliance on computers has created more opportunities for cybercrime, reduced the ability to prevent this crime, and made the potential consequences of these crimes more serious. In order to evaluate this statement, I will be discussing different aspects of computer crime, relating specifically to the idea of malicious programming in the banking sector. Although there are many different types of cybercrime, focusing on this issue relates more strongly to the Safebank case. In addition to this, the paper will cover methods of halting or preventing this crime, and possible consequences, in relation to the Safebank incident.

The crime at Safebank was a cybercrime. Money was stolen through the system itself, without any physical aspect to the crime. The crime was rendered even more effective as a result of the deliberate modification that prevented the system from recording the stolen money on its transaction records. As Mr. Hayes points out, “If it were not for the size of the transactions involved, we may never have noticed anything. ” If those committing this crime had decided to take very small amounts; a few dollars, from a large number of accounts, there may never have been an investigation.

The fact that the bank relied entirely on computerized records to keep track of transactions resulted in a reduced the ability to detect cybercrimes, and thereby makes them easier to commit. The crime is, in this case, an “inside job,” since it was an employee or employees at Microsloth responsible for the crime. This type of crime is, in the present day, growing less common in comparison with other types of cybercrime such as external attacks. Statistics used to show that over 80% of all cybercrime was the result of inside operatives [2].

At the current time, however, this is no longer true. Polls by the Computer Security Institute show that the number of businesses citing the internet as a frequent point of attack is “up from 59 per cent in 2000 to 70 per cent this year. The percentage of those reporting their internal systems as a frequent Achilles heel has dropped from 38 per cent to 31 per cent over the same period [2]. ” The survey reported that, in 2001, 70% of all cybercrime was initiated from outside, rather than inside, the target [6].

External attacks are significant because they are conducted by people who usually do not have intimate knowledge of a system. The fact that these types of crimes are becoming more common indicates that it is becoming easier for common criminals without specific links to a company to commit cybercrimes. Although Safebank received wide publicity due to the size and global reach of the theft involved, many other similar cases of fraud go unreported. In the UK, at least four large internet banks have been the subject of cybercrime attacks.

These attacks involved losses of hundreds of thousands of pounds, but were mostly not reported due to the banks’ worries that news coverage would damage their image. [5] These banks are, even more so than Safebank, completely dependent on computers for all aspects of their business. Whereas Safebank had employees and terminals, Internet banks operate almost entirely online. These banks are indeed more vulnerable than traditional banks; this vulnerability coming from their reliance on computers as a way of both carrying out transactions and storing funds.

How can these types of computer crimes be prevented? In the case of Safebank, how could the modification to the system have been detected before it was released? There are no methods to effectively ensure that this happens. Safebank has no way of verifying that the software they receive is free of malicious code, because Safebank was probably unable to view the code itself; it received compiled executables. The issue here is one of trust; Safebank assumes that software from Microsoft is free of defects, but has no way of verifying that this is indeed the case.

Microsoft could perform a final evaluation of the code itself once the program is completed, but this would be time-intensive and costly, especially for a system like Safebank’s, which likely consists of millions of lines of code. Such an evaluation would give no complete assurances of security, because employees conducting the tests could themselves insert the malicious code. Other, stricter, version-control options are available, but with each layer of protection there is additional cost and time involved.

As with almost anything, there is a point at which it no longer becomes profitable to add additional security. Building a three-meter high wall around some property will cost more than a two-meter wall, but will provide almost exactly the same security, since a determined criminal can scale a wall of almost any height. This analogy relates well to software development. Adding additional security costs money, yet determined hackers can break almost any amount of security. The goal in most projects is, therefore, to create enough security to discourage the majority of hackers from attempting to break in.

The security approach is also only effective in the specific case of Safebank. Most other types of attacks cannot be dealt with in this way. Prevention of cybercrime can be assisted through education. Training can increase awareness of the potential for cybercrimes to occur, and effective measures of eliminating or reducing losses incurred from these crimes. Safebank had no way of knowing that the program was faulty, but if its employees had been more alert to the possibility of cybercrime threats, they may have caught and reacted to the transactions more quickly.

The main disadvantage to these training courses is that they are not complete solutions, and are expensive; often costing several thousand dollars per wee[4]. Although it could have reduced losses, Safebank could not have prevented the crime through training. Another aspect of training is certification. At the current time, programmers are not required to have completed certification courses present in many other industries. [7] Programmers could be required to take courses relating to legal and ethical aspects of computers, in addition to certification for standard programming skills.

Although this would not deter a criminal set on a certain path of action, better knowledge of the potential consequences of cybercrime might make criminals think twice about committing this type of crime. Microsloth can operate with greater assurances of security if it knows that its employees are competent and informed in both the technical and ethical aspects of software creation. Insurance does not eliminate the threat of cybercrimes, but it does help cover damages. Cyberterrorism insurance is a relatively new concept.

Previously, insurance was designed to cover physical assets from damage in a fire or other similar event. Now, new forms of insurance protect specifically against cybercrime, and older insurance no longer covers digital damages. [3] Although the article does not indicate whether Safebank had cybercrime insurance, most large corporations vulnerable to cybercrimes have insurance policies that cover their losses. Again, although this method helps reduce losses for a corporation, it does nothing to prevent the attack itself. Cybercrime can mean huge losses in vital sectors such as banking and government.

The Safebank theft of several million dollars is nothing compared to the total cost of cybercrime. A survey conducted by the Computer Security Institute indicated total losses of $727 million. This represented only one-third of the interviewed; the others did not wish to reveal their losses. [6] These figures are for the United States only; cybercrime is just as prevalent in other countries worldwide. According to US Attorney-General John Ashcroft, “Although there are no exact figures on the costs of cybercrime in America, estimates run into the billions of dollars each year. 8]

A second consequence of attacks with relation to banking can be political instability. Groups with political motives may see banks as attractive targets for cyberterrorism. During the conflict between Israel and Palestine, “pro-Palestinian hackers have attacked the web sites of Israeli banking and financial institutions [9]. ” As indicated previously, the ability to hack into a system is now much more widely available than it used to be. The disruption of a country’s financial structures can be as devastating, if not more so, than a direct physical attack.

Cyberterrorism, with banks as targets, whether inside jobs like the Safebank case or external infiltrations, may become increasingly common. Other potential consequences of cybercrime are less quantifiable. Through the recent events, both Microsoft and Safebank have suffered disastrous consequences in terms of public relations. Customers will be less willing to use a bank that they know uses a faulty system. This is precisely the reason why the banks in the UK were reluctant to report their cybercrime losses. Customers of Microsoft will be less likely to purchase software that might contain such flaws.

This means a loss of revenue and potential losses of jobs at both Microsoft and Safebank. As the Safebank example shows, cybercrimes are now much easier to commit. The higher rate of outside attacks indicates that cybercrimes can now be performed those in the general public, without any insider knowledge. At the same time, dependence on computers has reduced the ability to prevent cybercrimes, because crimes can now no longer be detected as easily, and even when detected they are difficult to stop. Cybercrime causes billions of dollars in losses every year; a great cost to society. ]

This conclusion raises further questions about how much of this crime could be prevented. At what point to corporations decide that it is more profitable to invest in security than to suffer potential losses? Are the methods of combating cybercrime of this kind, as outlined in the body of this paper, sufficient? At the moment, the answer is no. As cybercrime becomes more prevalent, affects an increasingly large number of people, and causes increasingly larger amounts of damage, it is important to investigate ways of dealing with it, ways of reducing the risk associated with it, and ways of preventing it altogether.

Rape Law Essay

Only Words, by Catharine MacKinnon is a collection of three essays; each essay argues her claim that sexual words and pictures should be banned instead of Constitutionally protected under the First Amendment as free speech. In her first essay, Defamation and Discrimination, MacKinnon takes the stance that pornography is sex, and should not be treated as speech, but as a sexist act. She claims that pornography is an action, just as, a sign saying White Only is only words, but it is seen as the act of segregation that it is.

MacKinnon claims that other action words, such as death threats, are banned, pornography should be banned as well. According to her essay, pornography rapes women. First, the photographers select already victimized women to be photographed, and thereby re-victimizing them. Then each man who views the pornography uses the ideas he attains from it to force his own sexual partner to perform the acts in the pornography. In the second essay, Racial and Sexual Harassment, MacKinnon states, if ever words have been understood as acts, it has been when they are sexual harassment.

She explains how written words can have the same effects on a reader as an action. They can evoke the same fear and violation as a physical threat of rape. In her final essay, Equality and Speech, MacKinnon suggests that the words as actions that she has describes in her previous essays should be subject to a group defamation lawsuit. She states that the Constitution protects speech that promotes sexual inequality. She feels that the Fourteenth Amendment should cover the discrimination allowed in the First Amendment.

Susan Estrichs Real Rape is an essay preaching proposed changes in rape statutes. Estrich first describes, in great detail, the history of rape legislation in England. She follows pertinent cases through history, citing changes and analyzing the effects of those changes. Estrich bases her findings on summaries, dissents, and other legal documentation. She then describes the current law, and evaluates how it has changed the way in which the court views rape. Throughout her essay, Estrich makes a distinction between classic rape and simple rape.

She defines the former as aggravated rape by a stranger, and the latter as rape by a date or acquaintance. Estrich focuses on simple rape for the majority of her thesis. To conclude, she proposes changes in the current law to make a simple rape conviction easier to attain for a truly victimized woman. Throughout the years, the legal definition of rape has been reworded, revised, and reworked. Even so, the definition current to Real Rape is lacking in many aspects. To understand the progression of the law, it is important to understand its foundation.

Modern rape legislation is still based upon the outdated opinions of Chief Justice Matthew Hale of England, who lived over three hundred years ago. His opinion is that rape is a charge easily to be made and hard to be proved, and harder to be defended by the party accused, tho never so innocent. (Estrich 5) This principle requires the victim of the rape to prove that she free of guilt in order to attain a conviction for her attacker. Based upon Hales position, rape has come to require proof of physical resistance on the part of the victim. The man must have used ample force, as well.

The law required corroboration on the victims testimony. A time limit was imposed on how long after the event a woman could report it. In addition, the victims sexual history could be submitted as evidence in order to discredit her, but the exposure of a mans past was rarely allowed. Most states also included a provision that protected a man from rape charges against his wife. In practice, these limits and restraints did not affect the conviction rates of stranger rape. Simple rape, however, has been extremely hard to prove. In cases of simple rape, if the jury decided to convict, the court of appeals usually overturned the decision.

In 1889, the Supreme Court of Nebraska reversed a conviction, reasoning that, voluntary submission by the woman, while she has the power to resist, no matter how reluctantly yielded, removes from the act an essential element of the crime of rape if the carnal knowledge was with the consent of the woman, no matter how tardily given, or how much force had theretofore been employed, it is no rape. (Estrich 29) Although rape is not the only crime to permit a consent defense, it is the only crime in which the victim must demonstrate nonconsent though physical force.

To add insult to injury, the woman must also prove that she not only used physical force, but that the physical force used was adequate to express her wishes. The Supreme Court of Wisconsin overturned a conviction of simple rape because the victim, in the eyes of the court, did not meet the standard for exercising adequate force. The court stated that, Not only must there be entire absence of mental consent or assent, but there must be the most vehement exercise of every physical means or faculty within the womans power to resist the penetration of her person, and this must be shown to persist until the offence is consummated.

Or, according to the courts of Texas, if she does not put forth all the power of resistance which she was capable of under the circumstances, it will not be rape. (Estrich 31) This standard of utmost resistance allowed for an acquittal, not by judging the man and finding his behavior legitimate, but by judging the woman and finding her conduct substandard. (Estrich 32) In general, the resistance requirement was only applied in appropriate relationships.

Thus, in a case of stranger rape, the woman was not required to show that she had performed the utmost resistance. In cases of simple rape, however, the resistance requirement was implemented, making it very difficult to prove. Evidentiary rules also allowed a conviction to be overturned. Corroboration of the victims testimony was a requirement in cases of simple rape. Some court required that every detail of the womans statement be corroborated. This requirement grew out of the belief that women are inherently incredible.

In simple rape, The inherently incredible standard, clearly rooted in Hales distrust, made corroboration most important precisely in the cases where resistance was most likely do be demanded,(Estrich 44) making the simple rape almost impossible to prove, due to the two stringent requirements of corroboration and adequate force. Since there are rarely witnesses to a rape, if corroboration of every element, including nonconsent, is required, it almost inevitably must consist of the bruises and torn clothing that physical resistance would produce.

The corroboration requirement protected the defendant and focused on the womans responsibility. If the case amounted to a confrontation of conflicting accounts the corroboration requirement is an attempt to skew resolution of such disputes in favor of the defendant. (Estrich 46) In cases of simple rape, inquiries into the sexual history of the woman shed a more favorable light on the defendant as well. It has been shown that the rape of an experienced woman is not seen to be as serious as that of a chaste woman.

Courts are aware of the prejudice that may develop due to evidence of sexual history, but it is only the past of the man that the court protects. In addition, a prior relationship between the victim and the defendant almost routinely downgrades the gravity of the assault. Another requirement exclusive to rape is that, a failure of the assaulted party to make complaint recently after the occurrence, opportunity offering itself, will cast a suspicion on the bona fides of the charge. (Estrich 53) This rule explicitly implies that women frequently charge a man with rape because they are vengeful.

According to one court, this rule that requires, in some cases, that the charge be filed no later than three months following the incident, is founded upon the laws of human nature. It is so natural as to be almost inevitable that a female upon whom the crime has been committed will make immediate complaint. (Estrich 54) Under law, a husband was unable to rape his wife. Rape was defined as intercourse with a woman not his wife. A husband could use, as much force or coercion as he pleased against his wife without subjecting himself to any possibility of a charge of rape.

This provision, in some circumstances, applied to a couple living as man and wife without actually being married. This idea stems from Hales time when a woman was seen as property of her husband, and women were forbidden to enter into contracts or own property. Even after the force requirement, the corroboration requirement, and the time limit, juries are frequently told that they must be especially suspicious of the woman because her emotional involvement may lead to difficulty in determining the truth. Juries may also be reminded that the man is in a very vulnerable position.

Over time, the standard became more relaxed, and by the 1950s, utmost resistance was no longer required. Instead, the court deemed that only reasonable resistance was necessary. Although this new standard made cases of simple rape easier to prove, it still required that the woman prove that her own conduct justified a rape conviction. A womans resistance against a single unarmed attacker must be, high enough to assure that the resistance is unfeigned and to indicate with some degree of certainty that the womans attitude was not one of ambivalence or unconscious compliance and that her complaints do not result from moralistic afterthoughts.

Because of the resistance requirement, a man was free to ignore the words of a woman, but resistance signifies that the woman truly did not want to engage in sex. After looking at the history of rape law, it is evident that changes must be made. In recent years, some of the strict requirements have been relaxed. For example, corroboration is usually not required, most states now have statutes in place that protect a woman from being required to expose her sexual past, and many states that had previously imposed a time limit for complaints no longer do so.

Some courts have now concluded that, in some situations, a man can be charged with raping his wife. In some jurisdictions, the definition of rape was changed to sexual intercourse where the man, compels her to submit by force or threat of imminent death, serious bodily injury, extreme pain or kidnapping, to be inflicted on anyone. (Estrich 59) Thus, the focus was changed from the inadequacies of the woman to the wrongdoings of the defendant. However, in the new terminology, submission by force is quite ambiguous. In the end, forcible compulsion is defined, yet again, in terms of a womans resistance.

In the eyes of the court, verbal nonconsent is not adequate. While courts no longer require a female to resist to the utmost or to resist where resistance would be foolhardy, they do requite that her acquiescence in the in the act of intercourse to stem from fear generated by something of substance. She may no simply say, I was really scared, and thereby transform consent or mere unwillingness into submission by force. These words do not transform a seducer into a rapist. She must follow the natural instinct of every proud female to resist, by more than mere words, the violation of her person by a stranger or an unwelcome friend.

She must make it plain that she regards such sexual acts as abhorrent and repugnant to her natural sense of pride. She must resist unless the defendant has objectively manifested his intent to use physical force to accomplish his purpose. (Estrich 64) This dissent implies that if the woman feels threatened, she is exempt from having to use physical force to prove that the advances were unwelcome. In Wyoming, a trial judge found that a victim does not have to subject herself to a beating, knifing, or anything of that nature.

As long as she is convinced something of a more serious nature will happen she is then given by law the right to submit. (Estrich 66) However, on appeal, the Wyoming Supreme Court found that, because it would place the determination solely in the judgment of the prosecutrix and omit the necessity element of a reasonable apprehension and reasonable ground for such fear; and the reasonableness must rest with the fact finder. (Estrich 67) Another court, in a case where a woman was alone with the defendant and the woman was much smaller in size than the defendant, decided that saying no was not enough to show resistance.

It is true that she told the appellant that she didnt want to do that [stuff]. But the resistance that must be shown involves no merely verbal but physical resistance to the extent of her ability at the time. (Estrich 68) Another aspect of the law that needs to be changed but remains the same is the stipulation that a man cannot rape his own wife. In 1985, nine states still disallowed the prosecution of a husband, even in the most brutal raping of his wife. The only limit on this rule is that if a married couple is living apart and legally separated, the husband may then be charged with rape.

The supposed rationale behind this legislation is that, marriage or equivalent relationship, while not amounting to a legal waiver of the womans right to say no, does imply a kind of generalized consent the problem with abandoning the immunity in many such situations is that the law of rape, if applied to spouses, would thrust the prospect of criminal sanctions into the ongoing process of adjustment in the marital relationship. (Estrich 74) In current law, many improvements have been made. Cases are no longer decided based on the sexual history of the victim. Many jurisdictions have passed rape law reform statutes.

Provisions in these bills provide for a gender-neutral view of rape. Michigan, hailed as the model feminist reform statute, punishes criminal sexual conduct; it is addressed not to men and women but to actors and victims. (Estrich 81) Over half of the jurisdictions have now adopted this gender-neutral approach to rape. Although this change in wording expands the definition of rape in certain respects, it narrows it in others. The term criminal sexual conduct has created a new set of problems. There is some debate as to whether rape is a sexual crime or a violent crime.

The new terminology suggests that rape is more of a violent crime. The trouble is that a man can force sex upon a woman without resorting to violence. Therefore, the simple rape once again becomes no rape at all. The rape as violence approach may strengthen the case for punishing violent sex, but it may do so at the cost of obscuring the case for punishing forced sex in the absence of conventional violence, the usual pattern in the simple rape. (Estrich 83) The second problem with the new wording pertains to the specifics of what counts as sexual conduct.

To combat this, some states have redefined intercourse to include not only oral and anal penetration but also any other intrusion, however slight, of any part of a persons body or of any object into the genital or anal openings of another persons body. Many reform statutes have also redefined sexual contact as any touching that can be reasonably construed as being for sexual purposes. These redefinitions are important because they break away from the male perspective of what intercourse is and approach exactly what makes a woman feel violated.

Michigan, like other states, have also attempted to define rape in terms of the wrongdoings of the man, as opposed to the older method of focusing on the womans combative measures. The new laws can be somewhat flawed, however. For example, in Michigan, the only situation in which sex (penetration or contact) is penalized in the absence of force or coercion is where the act takes place under circumstances involving the commission of any other felony or where the actor is armed with a weapon.

The flaws in this new wording prohibit such acts as consensual sex between the kidnappers themselves. It also bans consensual intercourse of a married couple if one of the partners happens to be armed but not brandishing the weapon. The force and corroboration requirements have also been unambiguously abolished. The reformed, statute explicitly provides that the testimony of the victim need not be corroborated and that a victim need not resist the actor. (Estrich 86) Michigan outlines what threats are construed as coerced sex.

The definition includes the threat, to use force or violence on the victim, the threat, to retaliate in the future against the victim, or any other person, and when the actor engages in the medical treatment or examination of the victim in a manner or for purposes which are medically recognized as unethical or objectionable. (Estrich 86) A problem with this definition is that the immediate threat must be directly on the victim, and not, for example, on her children or family.

In addition, the proviso that prohibits unethical medical acts can be read to disallow alternative medicine, as well as controversial medical practices such as abortion. Michigan also provides that if the victim is between the ages of thirteen and sixteen, the actor is in a position of authority over the victim and uses this authority to coerce the victim to submit. (Estrich 87) This stipulation does not outlaw the coercion by authority of a supervisor or teacher over an adult woman. It is only age that the law uses as a limiting factor, not powerlessness.

After a study done in Michigan to evaluate the new reform statute, it was found that there was some improvement in conviction rates, but overall that, the law has very little impact on the systems approach to sexual assault cases. (Estrich 88) The reform did not cause more women to report rape. Classic violent rape continued to be treated more seriously than simple rape, and simple rape was not usually prosecuted. The only real improvement was the, decline in the importance attached to the victims prior sexual history.

However, although inadmissible as evidence, defense attorneys continued to investigate a womans past in order to discredit her testimony in court. Washington State also passed innovative legislation similar to that of Michigan. But Washington also, provides a third degree offense where the victim did not consent to sexual intercourse and such lack of consent was clearly expressed by the victims words or conduct. (Estrich 89) This law could be read to allow the woman to merely verbalize her nonconsent, but it has not been used in that way.

The provisions in the first two degrees of rape require that physical force or threatened bodily injury be employed. Therefore, the definition of the first two degrees preempt the content of rape 3 and render its prosecution difficult. (Estrich 89) Cases of uncorroborated simple rape are still likely to be dismissed. The only benefit of the third degree was that perpetrators of it were more likely to be convicted of rape than assault. Therefore, those convicted were labeled rapists, which carries a greater stigmatism.

Estrich proposes that, changing the words of statutes is not nearly so important as changing the way we understand them. (Estrich 91) She repeatedly suggests that the mans blameworthiness be investigated, rather than that of the woman. The also indicates that laws that allow men to be victims of rape are important symbolically because they show a change in thinking, but practically, they are of no use. She claims that homosexual rape is almost never reported because of the disgrace attached to it, and that only men rape.

Therefore, there should be no cases with male victims and female defendants, although, she adds, that if a woman were to commit a rape, she should be punished. Estrich also implores that men behave reasonably and to impose criminal penalties for those who do not. It is reasonable that a man in the 1980s should be one who understands that a womans word is deserving of respect, whether she is a perfect stranger or his own wife. (Estrich 97) She feels that the man of today should understand that no means no.

In holding a man to a higher standard of reasonableness, the law would signify that it considers a womans consent to sex significant enough to merit a mans reasoned attention and respect. It would recognize that being sexually penetrated without consent is a grave harm; and that being treated like an object whose words are not even worthy of consideration adds insult to injury. In effect, the law would impose a duty on men to open their eyes and use their heads before engaging in sexnot to read a womans mind, but to give her credit for knowing it herself when she speaks it, regardless of their relationship.

Estrich further claims that in law, consent should be defined to mean no means no. She concludes that whether rape is sex or violence, simple or aggravated, it is a sexual violation, of the most personal, most intimate, and most offensive kind Simple rape is real rape. (Estrich 104) In her essays, MacKinnon provides proposed changes in laws as well. Her changes do not directly modify rape law, but they amend what she sees as a social injustice. She asks that the First Amendment no longer protect, social dominance.

MacKinnon begs that the victims of the protected speech of Nazis, Klansmen, and pornographers be relieved of injury. She hopes for a society in which hate speech rests among dinosaur bones as ancient history. The laws governing what is and what is not rape do need to be changed to suit the needs of true victims of the crime. The proposed changes of Susan Estrich are rational and well thought out. They do not condemn those who are innocent and they empower women to seek retribution for awful heinous acts against them.

The ideas of Catharine MacKinnon, however, are not so well grounded. She recommends changes in our Constitution that retroact the ideas upon which our nation was founded. Free speech has long been a cherished aspect of our society. And although it can be used to hurt, it can also be used to bring aid and information to those in need. Imposing limits on freedom of expression would dampen our nations uniqueness and suppress the voice of the people. Her idea that pornography acts as sex and can therefore be banned because it is no longer speech is ludicrous and rash.

The repercussions of such an amendment would change our society to one of ultimate government control. The examples that she gives to relate pornography to racism are limited in scope. She suggests that because Henri Matisses The Blue Nude(Matisse) portrays an unclothed female that a man may, in her words, get off on,(MacKinnon 58) it should be banned. The line between art and explicit pornography is not one that the government should be able to draw. The government should, however, protect victims from physical acts of rape as Susan Estrich describes.

Computer Crime Essay

Advances in telecommunications and in computer technology have brought us to the information revolution. The rapid advancement of the telephone, cable, satellite and computer networks, combined with the help of technological breakthroughs in computer processing speed, and information storage, has lead us to the latest revolution, and also the newest style of crime, “computer crime”. The following information will provide you with evidence that without reasonable doubt, computer crime is on the increase in the following areas: hackers, hardware theft, software piracy and the information highway.

This information is gathered from expert sources such as researchers, journalists, and others involved in the field. Computer crimes are often heard a lot about in the news. When you ask someone why he/she robbed banks, they world replied, “Because that’s where the money is. ” Today’s criminals have learned where the money is. Instead of settling for a few thousand dollars in a bank robbery, those with enough computer knowledge can walk away from a computer crime with many millions. The National Computer Crimes Squad estimates that between 85 and 97 percent of computer rimes are not even detected.

Fewer than 10 percent of all computer crimes are reported this is mainly because organizations fear that their employees, clients, and stockholders will lose faith in them if they admit that their computers have been attacked. And few of the crimes that are reported are ever solved. Hacking was once a term that was used to describe someone with a great deal of knowledge with computers. Since then the definition has seriously changed. In every neighborhood there are criminals, so you could say that hackers are the criminals of the computers around us.

There has been a great increase in the number of computer break-ins since the Internet became popular. How serious is hacking? In 1989, the Computer Emergency Response Team, a organization that monitors computer security issues in North America said that they had 132 cases involving computer break-ins. In 1994 alone they had some 2,341 cases, that’s almost an 1800% increase in just 5 years. An example is 31 year old computer expert Kevin Mitnick that was arrested by the FBI for stealing more then $1 million worth in data and about 20,000 credit card numbers through he Internet.

In Vancouver, the RCMP have arrested a teenager with breaking into a university computer network. There have been many cases of computer hacking, another one took place here in Toronto, when Adam Shiffman was charged with nine counts of fraudulent use of computers and eleven counts of mischief to data, this all carries a maximum sentence of 10 years in jail. We see after reading the above information that hacking has been on the increase. With hundreds of cases every year dealing with hacking this is surely a problem, and a problem that is increasing very quickly.

Ten years ago hardware theft was almost impossible, this was because of the size and weight of the computer components. Also computer components were expensive so many companies would have security guards to protect them from theft. Today this is no longer the case, computer hardware theft is on the increase. Since the invention of the microchip, computers have become much smaller and easier to steal, and now even with portable and lap top computers that fit in you briefcase it’s even easier.

While illegal high-tech information hacking ets all the attention, it’s the computer hardware theft that has become the latest in corporate crime. Access to valuable equipment skyrockets and black- market demand for parts increases. In factories, components are stolen from assembly lines for underground resale to distributors. In offices, entire systems are snatched from desktops by individuals seeking to install a home PC. In 1994, Santa Clara, Calif. , recorded 51 burglaries. That number doubled in just the first six months of 1995.

Gunmen robbed workers at Irvine, Calif. , computer parts company, stealing $12 million worth of computer chips. At a large advertising agency in London, thieves came in over a weekend and took 96 workstations, leaving the company to recover from an $800,000 loss. A Chicago manufacturer had computer parts stolen from the back of a delivery van as he was waiting to enter the loading dock. It took less then two minutes for the doors to open, but that was enough time for thieves to get away with thousands of computer components.

Hardware theft has sure become a problem in the last few years, with cases popping up each day we see that hardware theft is on the increase. As the network of computers gets bigger so will the number of software thief’s. Electronic software theft over the Internet and other online services and cost the US software companies about $2. 2 billion a year. The Business Software Alliance shows that number of countries were surveyed in 1994, resulting in piracy estimated for 77 countries, totaling more than $15. billion in losses.

Dollar loss estimates due to software piracy in the 54 countries surveyed last year show an increase of $2. 1 billion, from $12. 8 billion in 1993 to $14. 9 billion in 1994. An additional 23 countries surveyed this year brings the 1994 worldwide total to $15. 2 billion. As we can see that software piracy is on the increase with such big numbers. Many say that the Internet is great, that is true, but there’s also the bad side of the Internet that is hardly ever noticed.

The crime on the Internet is increasing dramatically. Many say that copyright law, privacy law, broadcasting law and law against spreading hatred means nothing. There’s many different kinds of crime on the Internet, such as child pornography, credit card fraud, oftware piracy, invading privacy and spreading hatred. There have been many cases of child pornography on the Internet, this is mainly because people find it very easy to transfer images over the Internet without getting caught.

Child pornography on the Internet has more the doubled on the Internet since 1990, an example of this is Alan Norton of Calgary who was charged of being part of an international porn ring. Credit card fraud has caused many problems for people and for corporations that have credit information in their databases. With banks going on-line in last ew years, criminals have found ways of breaking into databases and stealing thousands of credit cards and information on their clients.

In the past few years thousands of clients have reported millions of transactions made on credit cards that they do not know of. Invading privacy is a real problem with the Internet, this is one of the things that turns many away from the Internet. Now with hacking sites on the Internet, it is easy to download Electronic Mail(e-mail) readers that allows you to hack servers and read incoming mail from others. Many sites now have these e-mail eaders and since then invading privacy has increased. Spreading hatred has also become a problem on the Internet.

This information can be easily accessed by going to any search engine for example http://www. webcrawler. com and searching for “KKK” and this will bring up thousands of sites that contain information on the “KKK”. As we can see with the freedom on the Internet, people can easily incite hatred over the Internet. After reading that information we see that the Internet has crime going on of all kinds. The above information provides you with enough proof that no doubt computer rime is on the increase in many areas such as hacking, hardware theft, software piracy and the Internet.

Hacking can be seen in everyday news and how big corporations are often victims to hackers. Hardware theft has become more popular because of the value of the computer components. Software piracy is a huge problem, as you can see about $15 billion are lost each year. Finally the Internet is good and bad, but theirs a lot more bad then good, with credit card fraud and child pornography going on. We see that computer crime is on the increase and something must be done to stop it.

Ted Bundy, a vicious serial killer

Murder is the most vindictive crime society can commit. As individuals in society, the belief of being born a murderer is false. No one is born a murderer; society gives birth to that murderer. In Ted Bundy’s case the lack of parental guidance and constant rejection of women contributed to him evolving into a vicious serial killer. Bundy was a man who let his fantasies run his life, he believed that life was a game. All this contributed to making Bundy revengeful, bitter, and not quite mentally stable.

Bundy took countless numbers of young female lives in the 70’s. This man seemed to have a highly unstable personality and was often confused in life, some have suggested that, “Bundy was insane and that he should have been in a mental institution. ” Bundy was executed in 1989 in Florida for his crimes, but the real question is what really made this vicious man tick? Ted Bundy went down in history as one of the most brutal serial killers of the 20th century (AP 10). Ted Bundy was born on November 24, 1946 in Burlington, Vermont in a home for unwed mothers.

His 22-year-old mother Eleanor Louise Cowell felt forced by the norms of society to have her parents raise Ted as their own and she portrayed herself to be her son’s older sister. As for Ted’s natural father Lloyd Marshall, who was an Air Force veteran was unknown to him throughout his life. When Ted turned four, his mother, Louise took him with her and moved to Tacoma, Washington where she married Johnnie Bundy. Ted Bundy felt nothing towards his stepfather, he was very bitter that he was forced to move across the continent from his grandfather, the only man he looked up to.

Although, a psychiatrist had concluded after talking with Bundy year’s later, that his grandfather was an abusive brute or even worse. As a young boy, Bundy had started becoming obsessed with females and obscure sexuality, “.. as a boy, he was already roaming his neighborhood and picking through trash barrels in search of pictures of naked women” (Davis. ) This seems to be the result of very poor to no parental guidance, he stated himself that he couldn’t talk to his parents about many things.

Ted Bundy had expressed feelings during an interview that, parental involvement and security is very important in a young child’s life and that he never had that protection. Bundy was very shy as a youth and he was often bullied in junior high, as a result of he was subjected to humiliation often. Even though he was subjected to this kind of behavior he managed to maintain a high grade average throughout his education. Many say that Bundy was a very successful, pleasant student. Bundy’s focus changed in the spring of 1967, when he met the woman of his dreams Stephanie Brooks. This relationship would change his life forever.

Stephanie was Bundy’s first love and he was infatuated with her to the point of obsession. Stephanie felt that Ted had no direction in his life and that he didn’t know what he wanted and where he was going. Which is what lead to their breakup. Bundy was extremely depressed over their breakup, and to make matters worse Bundy learned the true about his “sister”, that she was really his mother. This was in an addition to turning point in Bundy’s behavior. “During this time in his life Bundy became possessed of a kind of icy resolve”(Duijndam. ) Bundy went from a shy, sweet, and naive individual, to a dominant, focused, and revengeful person.

Although, Stephanie and Bundy kept close contact after their breakup and they visited often. Around 1972 Ted’s life seemed to emerge with higher hopes. Bundy sent out various applications for law schools and became involved in politics. Bundy was looked upon as a caring and respectful individual. “He was even commended by the Seattle police for saving the life of a three-year-old boy who was drowning in a lake” (Duijndam. ) In 1973 Bundy had met up with Stephanie Brooks once again. Stephanie noticed the Ted’s transformation resulting in a reconcile of their relationship.

Just as suddenly as their relationship was rekindled, it dissipated just as quick. Bundy had been plotting his revenge against Stephanie for a long time. He wanted to reject her the way she rejected him; he became cold to her and broke all contact off with her in February 1974. (Duijndam. ) This was just the beginning of Bundy’s revenge and vicious sexual fulfillment against society. The remains of Kathy Devine were found on December 6, 1973 which the police had immediately began an investigation. Shortly after the Devine attack, Lynda Ann Healy went missing.

During the spring and summer as many as seven female students went missing from the states of Utah, Oregon, and Washington. A pattern emerged from these mysterious disappearances; all the victims were white, thin, and single. The police interviewed various college students and some had stated that they had seen a strange man in the parking lot on campus that was wearing a cast and asking for assistance with starting his Volkswagen (VW) Bug. In August of 1974 in Lake Sammamish, Washington, the two girls were found and then identified from their remains, as Janice Ott and Denise Naslund.

Duijndam. ) Similarities between the murders in Utah and Oregon caught the attention of the local police in Utah, desperately searching for the person liable for these horrendous murders. Slowly the evidence was built with every murder; investigators concluded that the man who committed these murders in Utah was the same man in the other murders. Ted Bundy, pretended to be a police officer, approached Carol DaRonch one night. Bundy stated that he saw someone try to break in her car. Bundy escorted her into his VW Bug, took her to a remote area which, he stopped the vehicle (Larsen.

He put handcuffs on her and he threatened her with a gun, she managed to get away and escape with some people passing by in a car. Police found blood on the victim’s coat, which matched Bundy’s blood type. Later that same night the police had found a key in the parking lot where Debby Kent went missing. A month later a witness called in stating they saw a VW Bug speed away from a high school the night Kent disappeared. Bundy was arrested on August 16, 1975 caught speeding away with no lights on, in the Salt Lake neighborhood.

A search was conducted of the VW. There was no passenger seat, there were the handcuffs, a ski mask, and an ice pick and tape. The was connection was made to the previous attempted kidnappings, Bundy was convicted of the attempted kidnappings and sent to prison after DaRonch and a friend of Kent’s picked Bundy out of a lineup. Ted was eventually charged with the murders of Melissa Smith and Caryn Campbell when their bodies were found, Bundy was extradited. Bundy kept protesting his innocence and a full-blown investigation was conducted on Ted Bundy. Police then approached Stephanie Brooks for information on Ted Bundy.

She told them how Ted had abruptly changed his behavior toward her, how he became cold and insensitive. It seemed Bundy was living a double life filled of lies and betrayal. The evidence was building towards Bundy’s conviction. An old friend of Bundy’s had said he saw pantyhose in Ted’s car and that he spent a considerable amount of time up at Taylor Mountains where bodies of victims have been discovered. Another old friend of Bundy’s had reported that he saw him with a cast on, but no record of him ever breaking his arm in any hospital. On February 23, 1976 Bundy was put on trial for the kidnapping of DaRonch.

Bundy felt confident that there was no hard evidence to convict him, but he was wrong. DaRonch pointed to Bundy the man who portrayed himself to be “Officer Roseland” (Mellow 10. ) The judge reviewed the case and found Bundy guilty on aggravated kidnapping. Bundy was sentenced to fifteen years with the possibility for parole. Farther investigations had found that hairs from Campbell and Smith were found in Bundy’s VM Bug. This linked him to the murders of the two females, Bundy was moved to Garfield County Jail in Colorado in April of ’77 to await the murder trial of these two girls.

Bundy was granted permission to leave the confines of the jail on occasion and utilize the courthouse library in Aspen, to conduct legal research. In order to defend himself. What police didn’t know was that he was planning his escape”(Michaud. ) On June 7th during one of his trips to the library Ted jumped out the window and escaped to freedom. In this poor attempt, within six days Bundy returned to jail when caught trying to steal a vehicle in Aspen. However, seven months later he escaped again and fled to Florida.

Bundy changed his name to Chris Hagen and settled in an apartment in Tallahassee, Florida (Reinhold. ) Ted lived off of stolen credit cards for the time being. Bundy spent a considerable amount of time at the Chi Omega House on the university campus in Florida. On January 14th, after 3A. M. two sorority sisters were dead and three severely injured at the hands of Ted Bundy. The police were called and Bundy was eventually arrested again, “a college student pointed to Ted Bundy as the man who fled the Chi Omega House the night two women were killed and three others clubbed senseless.

Bundy faced three trials, all spaced in three years, but it was the Chi Omega trail that sealed his fate forever. Bundy acted as his own attorney in the Chi Omega trail, but was fighting an impossible battle. There were two events in the trial that swayed the jurors against Bundy. The testimony of Nita Neary, who pointed out Bundy as the man who fled the Chi Omega House the night of the murders. The other event that swayed the jury was the testimony of Odontologist, Dr. Richard Souviron. While on stand he described the bite mark injuries that were on Lisa Levy’s body.

The jury was shown the photographs of the bite marks taken the night of the murder. The doctor pointed out the uniqueness of the imprints on Levy’s body and the pictures of Bundy’s teeth; they matched perfectly. On July 23 Bundy was found guilty on all counts of murder and on July 31st, he was sentenced to die in the electric chair in Florida. Ted Bundy eventually confessed to about 28 murders of women. However, society believes the number is far greater. Bundy was executed on January 24, 1989. After almost a decade since, Bundy’s execution the horror of what this individual orchestrated lives on.

Bundy was deprived of security and guidance at a very young age and was subjected to constant rejection. Through those faults, he created an individual on his own. This individual could place barriers around himself alone, which eventually drove Ted to psychopathic behavior. Bundy had built all this anger inside and turned it on his biggest frustration and obsession, women. There are many more vindictive murderers out there like Bundy. Many years before, society had a difficult time tracking these murderers down and understanding them. Bundy was one of the first serial killers that allowed society to travel in the mind of a killer.

Internet Crimes Essay

The new discipline of computing and the sciences that depend upon it have led the way in making space for women’s participation on an equal basis. That was in some ways true for Grace Murray Hopper, and it is all the more true for women today because of Hopper’s work. Grace Brewster Murray graduated from Vassar with a B. A. in mathematics in 1928 and worked under algebraist Oystein Ore at Yale for her M. A. (1930) and Ph. D. (1934). She married Vincent Foster Hopper, an educator, in 1930 and began teaching mathematics at Vassar in 1931.

She had achieved the rank of associate professor in 1941 when she won a faculty fellowship for study at New York University’s Courant Institute for Mathematics. Hopper had come from a family with military traditions, thus it was not surprising to anyone when she resigned her Vassar post to join the Navy WAVES (Women Accepted for Voluntary Emergency Service) in December 1943. She was commissioned a lieutenant in July 1944 and reported to the Bureau of Ordnance Computation Project at Harvard University, where she was the third person to join the research team of professor (and Naval Reserve lieutenant) Howard H. Aiken.

She recalled that he greeted her with the words, “Where the hell have you been? ” and pointed to his electromechanical Mark I computing machine, saying “Here, compute the coefficients of the arc tangent series by next Thursday. ” Hopper plunged in and learned to program the machine, putting together a 500-page Manual of Operations for the Automatic Sequence-Controlled Calculator in which she outlined the fundamental operating principles of computing machines. By the end of World War II in 1945, Hopper was working on the Mark II version of the machine.

Although her marriage was dissolved at this point, and though she had no children, she did not resume her maiden name. Hopper was appointed to the Harvard faculty as a research fellow, and in 1949 she joined the newly formed Eckert-Mauchly Corporation. Hopper never again held only one job at a time. She remained associated with Eckert-Mauchly and its successors (Remington-Rand, Sperry-Rand, and Univac) until her official “retirement” in 1971. Her work took her back and forth among institutions in the military, private industry, business, and academe.

In December 1983 she was promoted to commodore in a ceremony at the White House. When the post of commodore was merged with that of rear admiral, two years later, she became Admiral Hopper. She was one of the first software engineers and, indeed, one of the most incisive strategic “futurists” in the world of computing. Perhaps her best-known contribution to computing was the invention of the compiler, the intermediate program that translates English language instructions into the language of the target computer.

She did this, she said, because she was lazy and hoped that “the programmer may return to being a mathematician. ” Her work embodied or foreshadowed enormous numbers of developments that are now the bones of digital computing: subroutines, formula translation, relative addressing, the linking loader, code optimization, and even symbolic manipulation of the kind embodied in Mathematica and Maple. Throughout her life, it was her service to her country of which she was most proud. Appropriately, Admiral Hopper was buried with full Naval honors at Arlington National Cemetery on January 7, 1992.

Pursuing her belief that computer programs could be written in English, Admiral hopper moved forward with the development for Univac of the B-O compiler, later known as FLOW-MATIC. It was designed to translate a language that could be used for typical business tasks like automatic billing and payroll calculation. Using FLOW-MATIC, Admiral Hopper and her staff were able to make the UNIVAC I and II “understand” twenty statements in English. When she recommended that an entire programming language be developed using English words, however, she “was told very quickly that she couldn’t do this because computers didn’t understand English.

It was three years before her idea was finally accepted; she published her first compiler paper in 1952. Admiral Hopper actively participated in the first meetings to formulate specifications for a common business language. She was one of the two technical advisers to the resulting CODASYL Executive Committee, and several of her staff was members of the CODASYL Short Range Committee to define the basic COBOL language design. The design was greatly influenced by FLOW-MATIC. As one member of the Short Range Committee stated, “[FLOW-MATIC] was the only business-oriented programming language in use at the time COBOL development started…

Without FLOW-MATIC we probably never would have had a COBOL. ” The first COBOL specifications appeared in 1959. Admiral Hopper devoted much time to convincing business managers that English language compilers such as FLOW-MATIC and COBOL were feasible. She participated in a public demonstration by Sperry Corporation and RCA of COBOL compilers and the machine independence they provided. After her brief retirement from the Navy, Admiral Hopper led an effort to standardize COBOL and to persuade the entire Navy to use this high-level computer language. With her technical skills, she led her team to develop useful COBOL manuals and tools.

With her speaking skills, she convinced managers that they should learn to use them. Another major effort in Admiral Hopper’s life was the standardization of compilers. Under her direction, the Navy developed a set of programs and procedures for validating COBOL compilers. This concept of validation has had widespread impact on other programming languages and organizations; it eventually led to national and international standards and validation facilities for most programming languages. Admiral Grace Murray Hopper received many awards and commendations for her accomplishments.

In 1969, she was awarded the first ever Computer Science Man-of-the-Year Award from the Data Processing Management Association. In 1971, the Sperry Corporation initiated an annual award in her name to honor young computer professionals for their significant contributions to computer science. In 1973, she became the first person from the United States and the first woman of any nationality to be made a Distinguished Fellow of the British Computer Society. After four decades of pioneering work, Admiral Hopper felt her greatest contribution had been “all the young people I’ve trained.

She was an inspirational professor and a much sought-after speaker, in some years she addressed more than 200 audiences. In her speeches Admiral Hopper often used analogies and examples that have become legendary. Once she presented a piece of wire about a foot long, and explained that it represented a nanosecond, since it was the maximum distance electricity could travel in wire in one-billionth of a second. She often contrasted this nanosecond with a microsecond – a coil of wire nearly a thousand feet long – as she encouraged programmers not to waste even a microsecond.

When Admiral Grace Murray Hopper died, the world lost an inspiration to women and scientists everywhere. Her outstanding contributions to computer science benefited academia, industry, and the military. Her work spanned programming languages, software development concepts, compiler verification, and data processing. Her early recognition of the potential for commercial applications of computers, and her leadership and perseverance in making this vision a reality, paved the way for modern data processing.

The Causes Of Crime

The causes of crime seem to be indefinite and ever changing. In the 19th century; slum poverty was blamed, in the 20th century, a childhood without love was blamed (Adams 152). In the era going into the new millenium, most experts and theorists have given up all hope in trying to pinpoint one single aspect that causes crime. Many experts believe some people are natural born criminals who are born with criminal mindsets, and this is unchangeable. However, criminals are not a product of heredity. They are a product of their environment and how they react to it. This may seem like a bogus assumption, but is undoubtedly true.

There is a study devoted to finding the causes of crime and what makes people criminals. This study is appropriately called criminology. There are two main theories which criminologists categorize causes of crime, and sometimes an individual would be subject to both their influences. Theories in the first group locate the causes of crime inside the individual, which focus on stress and other psychological factors. Conversely, theories categorized in the second group focus the causes of crime on factors that are out of the control of the certain individual. These influences are sociological.

Some psychologists theorize that criminals are born with a predisposition towards mental illness. Even though this is a widely accepted idea, for a mental illness to come out, it has to be catalyzed by the person’s environment. In other words, even if a person were born with the biological makings of a criminal, depending on how he was raised and how he lived life would determine if this inherent attribute would manifest. There needs to be an external cause to trigger the characteristic. Many criminologists are stuck on developing biological explanations to the make-up of criminals. These theories are often called “bad seed” theories.

They hold that criminals are born and not developed. The most recently discovered “bad seed” theory is that some men are born with an extra Y chromesone that makes them more aggressive (Adams 157). The problem with this theory is if one of these men with the extra chromosome was raised in a way that would inhibit the individual’s trait, you would never see the characteristics of this extra chromosome and it would just devalue this theory. Another problem with this theory is that there are criminals who just happen to be women and there is no way that you could tie this theory in with the behavior of women criminals.

Women do not have Y-chromosomes. They simply have a pair of X’s. The second category of explanations for criminal behavior based solely on a human’s environment is the theory that receives the most credit, and obviously is backed by the most truth. Endless examples and mountains of proof back this environment theory. To further bash the first category, all of its components are only brought out by their environment. While the level of stress a person can handle is an inherent part of their make-up, how they react to that stress is a learned attribute.

Not only reactions to the stress are varied on different social structures, but the types and levels of stress vary as well. For example, a violent minded child who is not capable of dealing with stress well could be born into a rich family and experience no frustrations. On the other hand, if a calm child were born into an abusive environment, he would have a better tendency to snap because of the levels of stress he experiences in that environment. A quite popular idea is that a person’s childhood has the greatest influence on their personality and their moral standards.

As stated by Patrick Crispen in Criminal Minds, a child’s morals are learned and set by the age of ten years old (67). Also stated in Criminal Minds, is the assumption that a sixth-grade teacher could look at a class of students and determine who will be successful, who will be a “trouble-maker”, and so forth (70). This is a deeper example of how personality traits are developed at an early age. Parents play the most crucial role in the development of a child’s life. Children learn by example. Through the examples that the parents set, criminal behavior could be either encouraged or prevented.

This “learn by example” way of development by a child could easily be mistaken for the genetic make-up of the child’s mindset. How easy would it be to say that because the child acts in the same manner as the parents do, that this is simply a product of inheritance when, in fact, the manners of a child is learned through parent’s actions rather than being passed on through genetics. This explains why adopted children still have the same moral values and standards as their adoptive parents which could be as well be much different from their biological parents.

But stubborn geneticists would still insist on the inheritance factor by finding small, insignificant personality traits that both the biological parents and the child share. In many cases, a child will have a virtually parentless upbringing. In some of these cases, both of the parents still live with the child . not necessarily abandoning them . but certain responsibilities cause them to not see much of each other. Through the lack of interaction between parent and child, the child would have to base its moral standards on another figure, such as a television show or cartoon or a teacher.

This would decrease the connection between parent and child, and further decrease the parental influence. A child who has raised himself is much less likely to listen to an authority figure. Another main influence in how a child thinks is his peers . the moral structure that they have been raised with. In desperation of fitting in, people can do things that are uncharacteristic of themselves that may land them in “deep sneakers”, but the consequences are not as important as fitting in. Eventually, a habit gets formed of living up to dares and taking more risks.

Over a period of time, this type of behavior becomes the norm and a new way of living is developed. In absence of parental figures, children will find substitute figures to latch onto. These substitute figures will form their code of ethics and moral behavior. Depending on the substitute figure chosen, the code of ethics and moral behavior is reflected. Unfortunately, in the absence of parents, children are attracted to the more exciting and daring personalities such as people who get in trouble in class and seem exciting.

So, in other words, without the parents’ guidance, the child would naturally veer toward the more daring side of life. Even though they may look up to their friends more than their parents, kids still need someone to tell them what is wrong and what is right because no one is born with a sixth sense of this. It has to be learned (Kraeplin 3). What is morally right is usually accepted as what the majority of the population around you accepts. Consequently, what is morally accepted in one environment may not be morally accepted in another environment. City living is a breeding place for criminals.

There are so many people in big cities that no one focuses on grouping individuals. People simply do what they do and everyone leaves everyone alone. The entire city has too many people in it, to worry about everyone’s moral standards. So when you do something immoral, it goes practically unnoticed. Even if someone notices it, it’s very unlikely that they could pick you out of everyone in the city and point you out as the person who did the crime. Criminals are encouraged when they see crimes go unsolved. It gives them the confidence they need to continue their criminal behavior without fear of getting caught.

And there are enough people in a city that no matter how you act; you could find people just like you. If you have a tendency to get in trouble a lot, you could easily find someone to encourage your actions. A social status, whether you like it or not, can drag you into or out of a life of crime. A dead-broke bum with no house is forced to steal food in order to stay alive, and steal clothing in order to stay warm. Of course, you could suffer and not break any laws, but the immediate need would usually outweigh the consequences.

You may not be literally forced into a life of crime, but it just might be the best choice you have. Being in such need makes stealing seem much more attractive than it would if you had no need to steal. As stated in the preceding paragraphs, criminals are influenced and not born. You can easily infer this on your own, but with the help of this report it seems much more obvious. The most obvious and consistent influence in the development of a person seems to be the environment in which they live in and the influence, or lack thereof, of their parents.

Self-defense In Criminal Cases

One of the frustrations faced by many businesses is that after the perpetrators of crimes have been identified, the District Attorney’s office will not pursue the case. One option is for victims to sue the DA in an attempt to compel him to prosecute, but this would be costly and proving dereliction of duty would be difficult. The DA is effectively immune. Other options are more promising. The law should encourage (and prosecutors’ offices should welcome) private preparation of criminal cases. Prosecutors’ budgets simply do not allow vigorous prosecution of all the available criminal cases.

Logic and evidence show that in private law, plaintiffs win about 50 percent of the cases that are tried. This is because the parties are more likely to settle lopsided cases out of court. Public prosecutors, by contrast, win far more than 50 percent of their trial cases because they have budget constraints and so elect whenever possible to go to court with only the cases they are likely to win. Victims should be allowed to hire private attorneys and other professionals to prepare cases against the accused and thereby extend public prosecutors’ resources.

The attorneys can be retained pro bono (for the good) or for compensation. This is already done in some white collar cases where financial complexities exceed the prosecutors’ expertise, such as complicated embezzlement cases, some oil and gas swindles and cases involving the misapplication of construction trust funds. At present, many cases are never prosecuted for one reason or another. For example, in about 40 percent of federal embezzlement and fraud cases, charges are dropped because of insufficient evidence to convict, given the resources at hand.

In some instances prosecutors “deputize” attorneys to try cases, too. Many private attorneys have criminal experience as former prosecutors or public defenders. A logical extension of private preparation for trial is the complete privatization of the prosecutor’s job by contracting out. Private attorneys, of course, are often appointed on a pro bono basis for criminal defense. Private attorneys could be deputized for a single trial or for ongoing prosecutor’s work, either pro bono or under contract.

The same remedies are available to finance criminal prosecution as civil litigation. Commercial insurance policies could be expanded or created for this market. Associations and community groups could cover these costs for members and subscribers. In Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), the United States Supreme Court held that because the assistance of counsel in a criminal case is a fundamental necessity, the Constitution requires appointment of attorneys to represent “any person haled into court, who is too poor to hire a lawyer. ”

Today, the promise of Gideon is threatened — in virtually every jurisdiction — by severe budget cuts resulting in understaffed defense offices and excessive caseloads. Meanwhile, prosecutors’ budgets keep escalating and law-makers keep inventing more draconian statutes. Adequate funding for indigent defense is a priority concern for NACDL, as reflected in the tireless efforts of our Indigent Defense Committee and our own full-time staff Indigent Defense Coordinator. Indigent defense is also a central concern of our Legislative Committee and our Amicus Committee.

The Association’s most recent addition, a full-time Death Penalty Resource Counsel, commits NACDL to leading a redoubled campaign opposing executions and needless and barbaric taking of human lives. The NACDL Prosecutorial Misconduct Committee is co-chaired by Hugo Rodriguez of Miami, Florida, Marvin Miller of Alexandria, Virginia, and Robert Hooker of Tucson, Arizona. The Committee serves to assist our communities and the legal system by shedding light on misconduct and abuse on the part of authorities.

The American people have an abiding faith in the fairness of our nation’s criminal justice system. Exposure of prosecutorial abuse helps to cleanse the system, impart balance and restore fundamental fairness for citizens accused of crime. Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty. We seek your assistance in helping us ensure justice and due process for those accused of crime by promoting the proper and fair administration of criminal justice.

If you were involved in or have knowledge of a documented case of law enforcement or prosecutorial abuse, share it with us by sending us the court decision, appellate decision, or other documentation. We will share verifiable cases with others so that these are no longer hidden from the public but brought out into the light of day and exposed. The Problem: Personalization of Prosecution Invites Excess: Once the phrase “prosecutorial discretion” conjured up an image of sober, reflective and mature exercise of well-informed judgment, usually characterized by a certain concern for public confidence in the system.

Now the phrase has increasingly become synonymous with the arbitrary targeting of subjects based on criteria ranging from political hardball, to prosecutorial ambition, to the allure of urgent newspaper headlines and television promos (“News at 11”) that, like magic pixie dust, can grace a faceless civil servant with instant celebrity status. To be sure, most prosecutors we encounter work long hours with little glory trying to bring about a just result. The problem is at the margins — but the margins are growing.

Increasingly, the high public profile of a target or the attention-grabbing nature of the alleged wrongdoing may have more to do with a matter’s “prosecutorial merit” than the strength of the evidence or the seriousness of the crime. It is axiomatic by now that whenever prosecutorial effort becomes more focused on “getting” a particular person than pursuing a particular, identifiable allegation, as is increasingly the case, it alters the very architecture and mission of the prosecutor’s office.

The personalization of prosecution — “let’s get this guy” — invites excess. The problem has become endemic, and the solution will need to go beyond ad hoc displays of judicial exasperation and oversight. It requires careful, synoptic analysis of the extent and nature of prosecutorial excess, especially in connection with the prosecution of relatively minor white-collar allegations covered by sweeping and overlapping civil or administrative remedial schemes.

A congressional solution is necessary to truly curb the over-breadth of discretion and power given to individual lawyers who happen to hold the job of counsel for the government. Until then, however, we believe that it is the job of a conscientious judiciary, at the aggressive urging of defense counsel, to restore traditional notions of responsible exercise of power contained in both the case law and the applicable codes of ethics that apply to government lawyers with equal or greater force than they apply to the rest of the bar.

There are many existing tools available to judges who are serious about curbing cumulative prosecutorial excess and exercising the inherent authority given to them to bring about “a just result. ” A popular myth has grown up about the way prosecutors and government civil enforcement lawyers operate when they are “doing it by the book.

The assumption is that there are “orthodox” methods of building a case that savvy prosecutors use, as though one can build a case like selecting recipes from a cookbook: isolate subjects; threaten “small fry” with “jail time” for minor infractions to obtain their “cooperation” in testifying against the “big game;” increase pressure on a defendant by targeting family members if necessary to “turn” them; wire “friends” and colleagues with radio transmitters, recorders, and video cameras; infiltrate the target’s business or organization with informers; nail down evidence of tangentially related but easy to prove “crimes” as a way of reaching elusive targets of prosecution; seek to disqualify or even investigate a defendant’s lawyer to impair or cripple an effective defense. Not to mention more conventional tactics such as wiretaps, surveillance, mail intercepts, pre-trial forfeiture, asset freezes, and broad search warrants.

It is difficult to argue against the aggressive use of these tools and tactics in connection with prosecutions aimed at breaking up terrorist bombing plots, espionage cells, massive fraud by government contractors, corrupt judges, dishonest union chiefs, big time money launderers, international narcotics operations, organized crime families, vicious racial hate crimes, widespread and violent gang activity, or the exploitation and abduction of children. From Eliot Ness to Clint Eastwood, public sympathy has always been on the side of zealous (sometimes even overzealous) law enforcement when the government operates as the citizenry’s bulwark against the sociopathic, the violent, and the rapaciously dishonest.

The past several years, however, have brought about an unmistakable sea change in how things work, both in identifying targets of prosecution and in deploying the full artillery barrage of available “by the book” tools when a 22-calibre pistol will do nicely. The use of large weaponry on small targets cheapens the law and the public’s view of those who enforce it.

What has been lost is a sense of proportionality and identification of priorities. Like most processes calling for the exercise of judgment and discretion, the decision to mobilize the vast array of weapons available to the government requires a thoughtful balancing test. Tactics must be tailored to the goal. When external factors such as publicity, ego, and ambition intrude and impact on the decision-making process, the phrase “doing it by the book” can take on a new and pernicious meaning.

The new-found role of prosecutors and defense lawyers as celebrities has brought about an entirely new level of interest in the role of lawyers in the law enforcement process and a powerful new source of external influence, on prosecutors especially. Once, even in sensational trials such as the Gotti prosecutions and the World Trade Center bombing cases, the defense lawyers and prosecutors were all but unknowns as the cases unfolded. No longer. From the Simpson case, the Kennedy-Smith case, “Baby M,” the Menendez brothers, to the advent of Court TV, with its Cochran, Rivera, and their professional siblings (to say nothing of prime time dramas based on lawyers), the lawyers have become the story.

And not only those lawyers actually involved in a particular high-profile case, but an ever-growing Greek Chorus of lawyer-experts turned talking heads who provide endless commentary ranging from sagacious to silly. Today, even independent counsel retain press agents and spin meisters. Courts should not be oblivious to the phenomenon of such prosecutorial abuse, and should use the traditional ethical and procedural safeguards that bind the conduct of all lawyers in instances when government counsel step over ethical lines. Congress has responded in a variety of ways to public concern about crime, often without a sound appreciation or even a rudimentary understanding of the relationship between the crime, the punishment, and the process.

Congress has defined ever-increasing numbers of business practices as constituting criminal conduct, often in ways that are so inartful that it is difficult to separate that which is lawful from that which is “just business. ” Slapdash revisions of complex regulatory schemes can leave prosecutors and regulatory agencies with the “discretion” to take what are essentially regulatory violations, such as issues of labeling, weights and measures, and billing classifications, and convert them into indictable offenses.

Often, the criteria are so vague that courts, let alone defendants, cannot figure out what is prohibited. Similar broad and overlapping enforcement schemes exist in connection with securities regulation, health care fraud, government contracting, and environmental compliance.

Thus, prosecutors enjoy a combination of the broadest possible set of investigatory tools and a smorgasbord of Title 18 and civil remedial measures with which to threaten targets and those around them. We have, in effect, criminalized the regulatory regimes of government such that: A 70-year-old defendant is criminally prosecuted for environmental reporting errors for alleged discharge of pollutants exceeding permit limits, based largely on the testimony of a co-employee in exchange for a more lenient sentence. A motion for a new trial based on the government witness’ statements that his testimony was false is denied, though a new trial is ultimately granted on the court’s failure to instruct the jury as to the weight it could give evidence of the defendant’s good character.

An investor is indicted for intentionally and knowingly making two false financial statements to banks; one financial statement carried a disclaimer regarding the allegedly misleading information and the other was found to be “improper” because of an accounting method the government disputed.

The defendant was prosecuted for intentional misconduct though all relevant information had been accounted for in defendant’s tax returns and through defendant’s testimony in a bankruptcy proceeding as it had been described in the financial statements. The advent of the federal Sentencing Guidelines has removed judges’ ability to restore balance and proportionality at the punitive phase of prosecutions by exercising educated judgment in fashioning flexible relief based on the qualities of the person convicted and the totality of the circumstances.

The unintended consequence has been the aggregation of enormous power in the hands of the prosecutor who can come to the bargaining table armed with unilateral ability to stack the deck by deciding how to frame and characterize the charges. While this charging power was always present, it is now accompanied by a rigid set of inexorable sentencing consequences that no amount of advocacy or forensic showing can counter. Congress has armed prosecutors and many regulatory agencies with a range of pre-hearing remedies that, as applied, are both cataclysmic –even to the innocent — and difficult to defend against. Whether in the use of forfeitures in actions against property, or pre-judgment asset freeze, the very existence of these devices gives a prosecutor an awesome in terrorem negotiating tool.

Equally troubling are the broad pre-judgment asset freeze and restitution powers given to administrative offices such as the OTS and the SEC. Courts have upheld agency pre-hearing orders that for all practical purposes pauperize a defendant before he or she has had an opportunity to mount a defense. 16

In these circumstances, “justice” depends wholly upon the government lawyers’ exercise of good faith, judicious restraint and fairness — qualities that do not necessarily come with the job. This is a lesson that more than a half dozen Justice Department lawyers learned when the Chief Judge of the Federal Claims Court, citing “old fashioned” ideas about the duty of government lawyers, excoriated them for taking positions that do “no credit to the United States.

Finally, the inherent nature of the grand jury process itself, although far from being “new,” has departed so far from its original purpose as a restraining influence on the British Crown, that it has been taken to new limits as a tool to sculpt indictments, with little critical supervision from any source. Technically, judges supervise grand juries and are available to hear motions challenging a prosecutor’s conduct.

But judges do not oversee day-to-day operation of the grand jury, and abuse is an open secret that defense lawyers are often powerless to combat. Representing witnesses before a grand jury, or the person being investigated, has become a well orchestrated, even cynical, minuet. The first and most important task may be overcoming the cynicism of so many lawyers in and out of government to whom concern for “fairness” somehow signifies weakness. It is a cynicism that government lawyers should not have the luxury of acting upon.

In reality, a commitment to fairness is a highly reliable sign of strength and confidence in the merits of one’s position, and it is usually those who fear the fairness of the forum who most fear outcomes based on merit. Recently, a controversy has erupted over whether Justice Department lawyers are bound by state codes of ethics and analogous local federal court rules of practice. The issue stems from rules that restrict contact by lawyers with parties known to be represented by counsel, including corporate parties. In essence, the government is seeking to exempt its own lawyers from state and federal court ethical restraints in ways that would go far beyond issues of witness contact. Courts, thus far, have been unsympathetic to this government effort at unilateral exemption from the rules of ethics.

Prohibition Led to the Rapid Growth of Organized Crime

Prohibition was a period in which the sale, manufacture, or transport of alcoholic beverages became illegal. It started January 16, 1919 and continued to December 5, 1933. Although it was designed to stop drinking completely, it did not even come close. It simply created a large number of bootleggers who were able to supply the public with illegal alcohol. Many of these bootleggers became very rich and influential through selling alcohol and also through other methods. They pioneered the practices of organized crime that are still used today.

Thus, Prohibition led to the rapid growth of organized crime. The introduction of prohibition in 1919 created numerous opinions and issues in American society. Prohibition had been a long standing issue in America, with temperance organizations promoting it since the late eighteenth century. The movement grew tremendously during the nineteenth century. The Independent Order of Good Templars, one of the major temperance societies, increased it’s membership by 350,000 between 1859 and 1869 (Behr 31).

Other societies followed a similar trend, and millions of Americans belonged to temperance societies by the end of the nineteenth century. When the United States entered World War I in 1914, there was a shortage of grain due to the large demands to feed the soldiers. Since grain is one of the major components in alcohol, the temperance movement now had the war to fuel their fight. “The need to conserve grain, the importance of maintaining some semblance of discipline and devotion …. to demonstrate the nation’s sober determination to protect its interests. (Repeal .. 933)

Thus, the war played a large part in the introduction of Prohibition. During the next five years many states enacted their own prohibition laws, and finally, at midnight on December 16, 1919, Amendment 18 went into effect. It states that, “… the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors … for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited. ” (Constitution) The public reaction to the introduction of Prohibition was largely mixed. The temperance organizations rejoiced at their victory. Over a century of work had finally paid off for them.

The rest of the country, however, was less than pleased. Many saw it as a violation of their freedom, and others simply wanted to keep drinking. It did not take long for people to begin their protest. Less than one hour after prohibition took effect six gunmen hijacked a train in Chicago and stole over $100,000 worth of whiskey that was marked for medicinal use (Gingold 28). In New York, although there were no violent protests recorded that night, people all over the city mourned the loss of alcohol at their favorite saloon or restaurant, and drank a final toast at midnight (John … Toll of 12).

The huge public demand for alcohol led to a soaring business for bootleggers. When prohibition began, people immediately wanted a way to drink. Hence, the extremely profitable bootlegging business was born. Before Prohibition gangs existed, but had little influence. Now, they had gained tremendous power almost overnight. Bootlegging was easy – New York City gangs paid hundreds of poor immigrants to maintain stills in their apartments. Common citizens, once law abiding, now became criminals by making their own alcohol. However, this posed risks for those who made their own.

The rich managed to continue drinking good liquor while less-affluent Americans often consumed homemade alcoholic beverages, which were sometimes made with poisonous wood alcohol. ” (Eighteenth … Prohibition) Thus, many died due to alcohol poisoning. There was very little enforcement to the law, since the government employed few prohibition agents, most of whom could be bribed by the bootleggers. Those in favor of prohibition “became increasingly dismayed with the efforts of the government to enforce the law. ” (Repeal … 1933) “In 1920, the government had fewer than 1,600 low-paid, ill-trained Prohibition agents for the entire country. Gingold 37)

Speakeasies, which got their name because a password had to be spoken through the door to get in, popped up all over the country. “The number of speakeasies in New York was somewhere in the hundreds or even thousands. It was easy enough for police to close and padlock individual speakeasies, but there were so many it was impossible to keep them shut down. ” (Gingold 36) Even with prohibition in effect, the demand for alcohol never gave it a chance to work. Al Capone used prohibition to build a crime empire unparalleled in United States history.

He started as a member of John Torrio’s gang in Chicago. Torrio was a notorious gangster and bootlegger, and after he was shot in 1922 Capone became the leader of his gang. He quickly expanded the business, and by 1930 “controlled speakeasies, bookie joints, gambling houses, brothels, horse and race tracks, nightclubs, distilleries and breweries at a reported income of $100,000,000 a year. ” (History Files 1) By bribing police and prohibition agents, he was able to get away with almost anything he did. Capone was the first and last gangster to openly flaunt his crimes.

He was somewhat of a celebrity in Chicago and admitted what he did with quotes suck as: “All I’ve ever done is to supply a public demand – you can’t cure a thirst by a law … It’s bootleg when it’s on the trucks, but when your host hands it to you on a silver tray, it’s hospitality … They say I violate Prohibition. Who doesn’t? “(Michell 39) Capone also believed in killing anyone who got in his way. Throughout his career, Capone was said to have killed over 200 people, but he was never convicted of any related charge. In addition to bootlegging and his other establishments, Capone began the widespread use of racketeering.

Racketeering is when Capone would force businesses to pay him money in exchange for protection by his gang. Really, though, they were paying for protection from Capone’s gang (Letts 88). However, what goes up must come down. Capone became too famous for his own good. The American public began to hate him for being able to defy the law, and the government hated him for continuously breaking their laws and embarrassing them. After the Saint Valentine’s Day Massacre in 1929, in which seven rival gang members were executed by gunmen dressed as police, Capone was seen as a truly evil and bad man by the public.

In 1931, Capone was indicted for tax evasion and sentenced to ten years in prison along with substantial fines. At first he went to Atlanta prison, but after being able to buy better treatment there he was transferred to Alcatraz, where his money meant nothing. He was soon diagnosed with syphilis and spent the rest of his term in a hospital. After he was released Capone returned to his Florida estate and slowly succumbed to his disease until his death on January 25, 1947 (History Files 6).

After the downfall of Al Capone and the repeal of prohibition, organized crime remained largely based on the methods of Capone and the gangsters like him. Prohibition was repealed with the 21st Amendment in 1933, much to the joy of many Americans. It was repealed for two reasons – one, people had decided that the negative aspects out weighed the positive, and two, the country was entering the Great Depression, so it was thought that producing and selling alcohol would create more jobs and help boost the economy (Asbury 227).

Even some proponents admitted that the Eighteenth Amendment resulted in ‘evil consequences’. ” (McGuire 1) One of the major negative aspects of Prohibition, organized crime, failed to be eliminated by the repeal. Although bootlegging became a thing of the past, other methods such as extortion, money laundering, and racketeering continued and became more prominent. “The bootleg wars ended with the relegalization of liquor, but the mobs did not fade away … In one form or another, these mobs are still with us today.

Prohibition led to organized crime as we know it today. Men like Al Capone got their start during Prohibition and were able to develop a system whose methods led into the Mafia and other forms of modern day crime. “Prohibition produced the like of Al Capone and organized crime, speak-easies, bootleggers, bathtub gin, and a national wildness called the “roaring twenties. ” (McGuire 1) Prohibition turned the small gangs that existed in the early twentieth century into the powerful Mafia that exists today.

Chemistry of Crime

The first images of JonBenet Ramsey that were broadcast to the world showed a pretty little girl in heavy make-up and flamboyant costumes parading across a stage. At the time, the media described her as being “a painted baby, a sexualized toddler beauty queen. ” From the day in 1996, when JonBenet was found dead in the basement of her home in Boulder Colorado, the Boulder police and a large proportion of the world’s media believed that her parents, John and Patsy Ramsey, were responsible for her death. Prior to the murder of their daughter, John and Patsy Ramsey’s life seemed almost ideal.

Patsy, a former beauty queen, was married to a successful businessman. They had moved to Boulder in 1991 where John ran a computer company that had started in his garage. The Ramsey’s readily adapted to their new life in Colorado and made several new friends. They built a large house in an elite suburb, and entertained often. Their last party in Boulder, just three days before the murder, was particularly happy. Over a hundred guests were present at a Christmas function with a difference as the Ramsey’s had good reason to celebrate.

Patsy had warded off cancer and John had been voted Boulder’s “businessman of the year. According to the Ramsey’s testimony, they drove home the few blocks from a party at a friend’s house on Christmas night. JonBenet had fallen asleep in the car so they carried her up the stairs to her room and put her to bed at 9:30 pm. Shortly after, Patsy and John went to bed as they planned to get up early to prepare for a trip to their holiday home on Lake Michigan. The next day, Patsy woke just after 5:00 am and walked down the stairs to the kitchen.

At the foot of the staircase, she found a two-and-a-half page ransom note that said that JonBenet had been kidnapped by a “small local action” and was being held for a ransom of $118,000. She was to be exchanged for the money later the same day. The letter warned that if the money were not delivered, the child would be beheaded. Patsy yelled to John as she ran back up the stairs and opened the door to JonBenet’s room. Finding she wasn’t there they made the decision to phone the police. The 911 dispatcher recorded Patsy’s call at 5:25 am.

The police arrived at the house seven minutes later. The uniformed police officers that attended were openly suspicious from the start. The Ramsey’s, treating the demand seriously, were already taking teps to raise the ransom. The note said that the kidnappers would call John Ramsey between 8-10 am but no call came. It was while the police were waiting for the call that they made several critical mistakes. They did not conduct a proper search of the house, the area was not sealed off and friends were allowed to walk in and out at their leisure.

No moves were made to protect any forensic evidence. The scale of their mistakes became apparent later. On December 27, the Rocky Mountain News quoted an Assistant District Attorney as saying, “It was very unusual for a kidnap victim’s body to be found at home – it’s not adding up. According to Charlie Brennan, the journalist who wrote the story, the police had also indicated to him that they held a strong belief that the parents were responsible. Julie Hayden, a television reporter for Denver’s Channel 7, also covered the story on the same day and drew the same conclusion.

She later explained that from her first exposure to the case, the police had made it very clear that they were not scouring the area looking for “some mad kidnapper” but instead, concentrating their efforts on John and Patsy Ramsey. While spokespersons for the Ramsey’s have contended that the Boulder police ailed to investigate anyone but the Ramsey’s, this is untrue.

There was a wide-ranging investigation. Other suspects: 1. All present and former employees of Access Graphics (and their spouses) – which had 360 employees in July 1997 – were asked to give handwriting samples. 2. People who had been in the Ramsey house on Dec. 3 were questioned and investigated. 3. The man who had played Santa on that day (for the third year running), 67-year-old Bill McReynolds, a retired University of Colorado journalism professor, provided handwriting, blood and hair samples to police. 4. His wife Janet, 64, who’d been a film and drama critic for the Boulder Daily Camera for 10 years, also gave handwriting, hair and blood samples after police learned she had written an award-winning play in 1976 about a young girl who was tortured and sexually abused for months, before being murdered in a basement.

It was based on a true story from Indiana. (Coincidentally, on Dec. 6, 1974, a 9-year-old daughter of the McReynolds was abducted and forced to watch as another young girl was molested. The two girls were then released and no one was ever arrested. ) The McReynolds told police that they both went to bed at 8 p. . the night JonBent was murdered. McReynolds, who had allowed his Santa-like beard to grow for years, eventually shaved it off and he and his wife moved to the East Coast. 5. Then there’s Randy Simons, the 46-year-old professional photographer who was a veteran of the beauty pageant circuit. In October 1998, Simons was arrested while walking nude down a rural road in Colorado.

When a deputy sheriff walked up to Simons, before the deputy said a word, Simons blurted, “I didn’t kill JonBent. ” Simons had taken some of the best-known pictures of JonBent, and told authorities he felt his career as a hotographer was ruined because he had been questioned in connection with her death. The Ramsey’s had reneged on an offer during the spring of 2000 to voluntarily submit to polygraph exams. On April 11, the Boulder Police Department had accepted John and Patsy Ramsey’s public offer with certain conditions to take polygraph exams regarding the death of their daughter.

During the next month, from May 6 through 17, they underwent “a series” of polygraph exams administered by nationally prominent polygraphists of their choosing. The first indication that all was not well at the Ramsey household took lace three days before JonBent’s murder. At 6:48 p. m. , Dec. 23, 1996, a 911 call was placed from the Ramsey home to the Boulder Police Department. The call was terminated before an emergency dispatcher could speak to the caller. Six minutes later the police called the Ramsey home, but got a voice-mail message, so a police officer was dispatched to the house.

No police report was filed, so one must presume the officer was told that the call was in error, and was satisfied with the explanation. While initially vowing they would do everything in their power to cooperate ith police so the killer of JonBent could be caught, the Ramsey’s erected barriers that would stifle the investigation to this day. The major findings of the autopsy, however, were that she died of ligature strangulation, with a furrow surrounding her neck, and cranial damage – including an 8-inch long skull fracture, with a piece of skull nearly an inch square broken loose.

However, there was no laceration of the scalp, as would be expected if she was struck with a flashlight or a golf club. The wound would be more likely the result of her head being bashed against a toilet or a bathtub. It was determined that the strangulation was accomplished by the murderer using part of the handle on one of Patsy’s paint brushes to tighten the cord around JonBent’s throat to choke her to death. There were also abrasions on her back and legs consistent with her having been dragged.

There was bloody mucus under the tape, and a perfect set of the child’s lip prints, which did not indicate a tongue impression or resistance, indicating that JonBent had not been alive when the tape was affixed to her mouth. The Ramsey’s have vigorously promoted the theory that an intruder murdered JonBent. The first fact militating against this possibility is the alleged absence of footprints in the snow around the house. Plus there was no sign of a forced entry.

One of the fact’s pointing at the family is the ransom note. The person who breaks into a house to kidnap a child is apprehensive — fearful lest any sound wake the parents. Such intruders tend to come prepared — complete with a ransom note if they intend to leave one. The police quickly eliminated John Ramsey as author of the ransom note, but after a series of handwriting samples from Patsy Ramsey (five altogether), he police refused to eliminate her as the possible author of the note.

Det. Thomas a handwriting specialist said that after studying all the writing samples “I believe I am going to conclude the ransom note was the work of a single individual: Patsy Ramsey. ” Thomas explains that his textual analysis work is based on “much more than one letter looking like another. Even the slightest things, such as the use of periods or the space before the start of a paragraph, could create a distinctive linguistic fingerprint “We can’t falsify who we are, Sentence structure, word usage, nd identifying features can be a signature,” says Det.

Thomas. Thomas had studied Patsy Ramsey’s writing samples from both before and after the murder of her daughter. According to Thomas he noted to the investigators “Not only did certain letters change, but her entire writing style seemed to have been transformed after the homicide. There were new ways of indenting, spelling, and writing out long numbers that contrasted with her earlier examples, and she was the only suspect who altered her usual preferences when supplying writing samples to the police.

These findings alone, considering they were coming from the top-most uthority in the nation in textual analysis — the same expert who had unmasked the anonymous author of the sensational best-seller Primary Colors and that the FBI had used to identify Theodore Kacznski as the Unabomber — would have been more than enough evidence for the Boulder Grand Jury to return an indictment against Patsy Ramsey, but the Boulder District Attorney’s office chose not to permit Foster to testify before the grand jury.

A year after JonBenet’s murder, police basically have two theories about the case: That someone entered the Ramsey’s house through unknown means, possibly exually abused then brutally, yet silently, killed JonBenet, hid her body, took the time to write a long ransom note, then left unheard and unseen; Or that someone who was in the house that night committed the horrible crime. However the investigation is concluded, police will have three options: make an arrest, ask for a grand jury investigation, or deactivate the case until new information is obtained.

As things stand, it is highly unlikely that anyone will ever be charged or prosecuted for the murder of JonBent Ramsey – unless someone were to come forward and confess. Time is on the Ramseys side. When the grand jury failed to indict them, they passed their gravest test. In the Ramsey’s’ book, The Death of Innocence, they describe in great detail the fear they had of the grand jury and how they expected an indictment against both of them.

They were so sure they would be indicted that they returned to Boulder in the days before the grand jury was mandated to finish its deliberations. They wanted desperately to avoid the ignominy of being arrested in Atlanta and forced to spend several days in the Fulton County Jail before being extradited to Colorado. Both had a deep revulsion to the image of their being arrested nd handcuffed. Above all, they did not want to be handcuffed.

They wanted to be able to just turn themselves in to the District Attorney’s office and have bond posted immediately for their release. Chances that the new district attorney, Mary Keenan, will convene another grand jury are not strong, but not so fast, there is another shoe that could drop. The Ramsey case is spawning a number of lawsuits, both criminal and civil, and, no doubt, more will be filed down the road. Two civil suits that are perking their way through the legal system could be of particular value in breaking the case open if they make it into a courtroom.

Forensic Science Essay

Forensic Science, also known as Forensics, is the application of science to law. It uses highly developed technology to uncover scientific evidence in a variety of fields. Modern forensic science has a broad range of applications. It is used in civil cases such as forgeries, fraud or negligence. The most common use of forensic science is to investigate criminal cases involving a victim, such as assault, robbery, kidnapping , rape, or murder.

Forensic science is also used in monitoring the compliance of various countries with such international agreements as the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the Chemical Weapons Convention and to learn whether a country is developing a secret nuclear weapons program. It can help law enforcement officials determine whether any laws or regulations have been violated in the marketing of foods and drinks, the manufacture of medicines, or the use of pesticides on crops. It can also determine whether drinking water meets legal The medical examiner is the most important individual in an investigation of a crime involving a victim.

It is the responsibility of the medical examiner to visit the crime scene, conduct an autopsy (examination f the body) in cases of death, examine the medical evidence and lab reports, study the victims history, and put all the information together in a report to be Medical examiners are usually physicians specializing in forensic pathology, the study of structural and functional changes in the body as a result of injury. Their training and qualifications most often include a medical degree and an apprenticeship in a medical examiners office. In the field of forensic science, there are many subspecialties.

They include odontology (the study of teeth), anthropology(the study of human eings), psychiatry, biology, chemistry, physics, toxicology (the study of poisons), and pathology (the examination of body tissues and fluids). The medical examiner may call upon forensic scientists who are specialized in these fields for help in a crime investigation. Toxicology is a branch of forensic science that deals with the adverse effects of drugs and poisonous chemicals found in the home, at work or in the environment. All drugs have toxic effect but the effect is most often minor.

The toxic effect of drugs may produce only a little discomfort or they may be serious enough to cause death. One of the most common cases of death by Pathology is the branch of forensic science that determines the nature and course of diseases by analyzing body fluids and tissues. Pathology is divided into clinical and anatomic pathology. Clinical pathologists contribute to the diagnosis of diseases by measuring chemicals and cells in blood, sputum, bone marrow and urine. Anatomic pathologists perform autopsies and analyze tissues taken from patients during surgery or by biopsy.

The medical examiner investigates many different types of violent crime to determine whether a violent death was an accident, a suicide, or a omicide. In cases involving gunshot wounds, the medical examiner looks for gunpowder residues on the clothing of the victim and around wounds. The information is used to determine whether the gun was fired by the victim of In the case of knife wounds, the medical examiner must distinguish between a cut (an injury that is longer than deep) and a stab wound (an injury that is deeper than long).

He must also be able to identify a defense wound which is a cut caused when a victim grabs the knife in self-defense. Cuts are associated with suicide. The body of the victim usually has numerous parallel uts which indicate hesitant wounds or repeated hesitant trials before the final cut is made. Homicides typically consist of one deep gash. Medical examiners are also called upon to investigate cases of asphyxiation or death form lack of oxygen in the blood. Asphyxiation may be caused in a number of different ways, such as hanging , which can be an accident, homicide or suicide, or strangling which is homicide.

Damage to the victims air passage by an object in the throat or compression of a victims chest by a person or an objector the replacement of oxygen in the red blood ells by another gas such as carbon monoxide poisoning. That too can be a result of an accident, homicide or suicide. In a death involving carbon monoxide poisoning a closed garage door and no marks on the body are usually taken as an indication of suicide. The presence of tools around the car and grease on the victims hands is an indication of an accidental death.

The presence of a wound caused by a blow to the head or if there is no carbon monoxide in the blood of he victim indicates a homicide that was made to look like a suicide. Forensic science uses sophisticated lab techniques to detect the resence of substances in the victim, the suspected criminal, or at the crime scene. In determining whether alcohol was involved in a crime, the amount of alcohol in the blood can be measured in two ways. The first is to measure the amount of alcohol exhaled in the breath of the person. This reveals the concentration of alcohol in the person’s blood.

Blood alcohol level can also be determined by blood tests, usually through chromatography. In this method, the blood sample is vaporized by high temperature, and the gas is sent through a column that separates the different chemical compounds present in the blood. Gas chromatology also detects the presence of barbiturates, cocaine, amphetamines, and heroin. When a body is discovered in a lake, stream, river or ocean, and the lungs are filled with water, the medical examiner must determine if the drowning occurred where the body was found or somewhere else.

A standard microscope that can magnify objects to 1500 times their size is used to look for diatoms. Diatoms are single cell algae that are found in all natural bodies of water. If there are no diatoms, it can be concluded that the drowning took place in a bathtub or sink since diatoms are filtered from tap A scanning electron microscope that can magnify objects 100,000 times is used to detect tiny gunpowder particles present on he hand of a One of the oldest techniques of forensic science is dusting the scene of a crime for fingerprints.

In one method of obtaining a fingerprint, a technician spreads fine powder over a surface with a brush or magnetic wand. The powder sticks o proteins secreted by the sweat glands on the skin ridges of the fingertip When the excess powder is removed, an outline of the contours of the ridges remains. The print may also be chemically treated to reveal the ontours. Since no two fingerprints are the same, fingerprinting is a positive Other evidence that may be found at a crime scene is blood, hair, skin, or semen. Human bite marks can also serve as evidence.

Bites can be found on the victims body or in pieces of food or gum found at the crime scene. A forensic scientist can fill the impression caused by the bite marks with a liquid plastic. The cast will form an accurate replica of the assailants teeth which is then compared with a cast of the suspects teeth. District attorneys call forensic scientists to give their expert testimony n a trial concerning what they find from an autopsy and what they write in the lab reports. Expert testimony is the statement given by a specialist who has been recognized as having expert knowledge about evidence in the case.

An expert witness is allowed to give an opinion about whether or not the evidence is valid. An expert witness may also quote the statements of other experts to support an opinion. Ordinary witnesses are restricted to giving statements about what they actually saw or heard. The medical and legal approach to dealing with crimes began in England during the 12th century. King Richard I established the Office of the Coroner. The coroners main job was to keep a record of all criminal affairs in the county and investigate all deaths that were believed to be a homicide or suicide.

The need for more scientific investigation of unnatural deaths became evident and the coroners began asking doctors for help. Over time medical schools started to prepare doctors in that specific field. In 1807, the University of Edinburgh in Scotland instituted a Department of Legal Early American colonists Bought the coroner system with them. As medical involvement in investigating violent and unexplained deaths increased, communities began requiring that coroners have specific academic training.

In 1877, Massachusetts replaced the coroners office with the Office of the Medical Examiner, which was to be headed by a physician. Soon many other states followed. In 1915 New York City established a program where the medical examiner was authorized to investigate all deaths that occurred to people who appeared to be in good health, that resulted from criminal Computer technology now allows law enforcement officers o record ingerprints digitally and to transmit and receive information for quick identification.

Recent developments in technology allows scientists o examine the deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or genetic material of blood, hair, skin, or semen to see if they belong to the victim or the suspected criminal. Using polymerase chain reaction (PCR), a lab can clone the DNA from a very small Forensic science as practiced today is a field of science medicine that uses electron microscopes, lasers, ultraviolet and infrared light, advanced chemical techniques and computerized databanks to analyze and research evidence.

Crimes of CIA and OPEC in 1975

We once again hear problems with governmental agency overly using their power and taking away rights of citizens unjustly. With these problems comes societies weary eye over the government, should society trust them or fear them. With internal problems also come international problems. Oil runs the world and the United States cant have small oil producing countries have to much power over them. However if these countries wanted they could slow the world down and create huge problems. This is what happened in the nineteen seventies, when a few of the OPEC countries decided that they wanted more money.

This caused many problems in the United States and other countries; here in the US the auto industry had to change their thinking on car and engine size. With the CIA committing illegal acts against the public and OPEC raising the price for oil, the United States had many problems to face at this time. The government caused these to happen, they allowed the CIA to go on unchecked in their performance and activities. If the US had from the beginning given the OPEC nations the right of money they deserved the price of oil might not have shot up so severely. The US could have prevented this situation if they had done this.

The Rockefeller Papers were simply a report headed by Nelson A. Rockefeller to be done on the activities of the CIA. The president had ordered a special commission to review the CIA, at the time no one had any idea how unchecked the CIA had gone on with their administration. When the report was finished the media and the public were shocked at the numerous occasions when the CIA ignored the peoples civil rights. This report brought about charges to the CIA with crimes of Plainly Unlawful acts. The report charges the CIA with using humans as guinea pigs for LSD along with numerous other crimes (Democrat and Chronicle).

An example of this testing is when a civilian of the department of the Army was given LSD in a meeting with out his knowledge. He was told about the LSD 20 minutes later when he started having severe side affects. He goes on to New York for psychiatric help where he jumps from a 10-story building to his death (Washington Post). When the public herd about these accusations they became more suspicious of the government; the public still had vivid memories of Water Gate and the hatred or dislike for Nixon and his administration.

The people were tired of the government and their continuous lies over small guerrilla warfare with South East Asia. This Report was fundamental in the some of the final large operations of the CIA. The exact crimes of the CIA are numerous; many of them have to do with the gathering of information of US citizens and using it to violate peoples civil rights. The alleged crimes were that the CIA did not have department lawyers stressed that successful prosecution would depend on proving that the defendant was acting without proper authorization from high government officials.

Democrat and Chronicle, Report Charges CIA with Plainly Unlawful acts) The Rockefeller commission also gathered information on alleged assassination plots against foreign leaders, which could not be fully disclosed to the public, the commission needed more time to fully investigate. One positive piece of information in the report said it could find no credible evidence of CIA involvement in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. (Democrat and Chronicle) One particular top-secret project called Operation Chaos that involved spying on American dissident groups in response to White House pressures-were clearly improper.

The commission however backs the CIA record and stated that no fundamental changes were needed in the spy agencys basic legislative charter. Ironically the commission suggested to President Ford that the CIA be given more authority over national issues. One example of this is to allow the CIA to gather information on persons suspected of espionage or other illegal activities relating to foreign intelligence, provided that proper coordination with the FBI is accomplished.

Washington Post) Overall though the Rockefeller commission made 30 recommendations for change in internal controls and guidelines and adoption of CIAs long sought version of an official secrets act. When oil prices started to rise, the public was severely hurt by this. Leader of the OPEC countries (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries) saw that they could get more money for their oil. He saw how the US and other nations were simply giving them the smallest amount of money for their oil. With this he raised the price of a barrel of oil quite drastically.

This forced the US and other nations to raise gas prices severely. Venezuelan Oil Minister Valentin Hernandez Acosta says that the reason for the price hike was to compensate for world-wide inflation. However there was no evidence that inflation has eroded oil revenues to the extent that some producers then wished to raise prices that had already quadrupled since 1973. President Fords response to the decision of OPECs decision to put off the price raise till fall was that any price increase should be limited to seven or eight percent and possibly the price should be reduced.

Democrat and Chronicle) In nineteen seventy four a price freeze on oil was enacted; some producers in the three day meeting in a West African capital have complained that they had a loss of thirty five percent of their purchasing power since the price freeze (Democrat and Chronicle). Some extreme members of OPEC like Iraq and Algeria have urged price increase to recover the whole of the claimed loss; this is unlike more moderate governments that were ready for a less increase to an almost lesser amount. The US hopes that the decision on the price increase is within limits.

These two events were very important in the United States; they had a large Impact on how companies ran their businesses and the power of government funded agencies. With these problems came societies unrest and a hate for the government. Society reacts quite severely when their civil rights are infringed upon or if they lose easy and unrestricted access to large automobiles. The American public has always had a love for large engines, gas-guzzling cars. When the price of oil shot up, the public was forced to economize and settle for more cost efficient cars.

Each one of these events shows society that they are losing their once closed country to problems outside and inside their home. The public did not like this situation where their civil rights were being broken and they were having to pay outrageous prices for gasoline. This did not have a positive affect on the public. This look at nineteen seventy-five brings together a lot of what we have discussed in class. We look at how the oil price has never been as low as before the price raise of the seventies and also how the CIA hasnt been in the media as much as that time.

If the US had never given the CIA so much power, if the US had provided some type of check and balance for the CIA we would have had less problems regarding their activities. The government has usually tried to provide the public with as much freedom as they could. They have just given too much power to their agencies. The public has continuously been losing their pride in the government of the United States; they will probably never have the same look at the US government as they once did.

Organized Crime Essay

Organized crime has always been occupied with a negative label. Perhaps this is due to the constantly changing environment in America as well as the social state of its homeland, Europe. Our society is convinced that the so-called Mafia is a family of pure criminals, pimps, and murderers. Whatever the opinion, there is no doubt that the Mafia played a big part in the history of America and the way Americans view crime today. “The origins of the secret society known as the Mafia are believed to be as old as the 9th century” (Mafia History).

During the 9th century, the Mafias main purpose was to strengthen themselves against enemies, which invaded their homeland in Sicily. It was supposed to create a strong feeling of togetherness between all Sicilians. “This idea of family was carried through in the structure of the organization, which had a strong hierarchical layout” (Mafia History). The Mafia is said by many to have perhaps the best system of power, than any other group or government known today. One can compare a physical representation of the family almost to a family tree dated all the way back through many generations.

Certain people operated the system, but without the help of the people with the less power, the Mafia would be very weak. To put it another way, a leader cannot lead without followers, and the followers cannot follow without leaders. This is why the Mafia was hard to overcome. Although when many think of the location of the Mafia, Chicago and New York often come to mind, but actually the Mafia has been traced back through 26 major cites in America. Within every city were many Mafia families each with its own government.

At the head of each family stood the Dons or Bosses. Next in line to the Dons was the Underbosses, who were second in command. Followed by the Consigliere or counselors. And last were the men who did the dirty work for the Mob, the Soldiers. The Soldiers were the ones who would enforce discipline over both members and non-members through the use of intimidation, assaults, and murder” (Living Large 3). All the members of the society were expected to go through a ceremony that often was compared to the baptism ceremony.

The induction ceremony is the most important day of a mobsters life, the day that they become full members of La Cosa Nostra” (Mafia Life). “The ceremony for the newcomers was something that was looked forward to by all. “The newcomer is told that the Mafia is a secret society and there is one way in and only one way out of it. You come in on your feet and you go in a coffin. Then the new members were asked if they were capable of even killing their own blood family on command” (Mafia Life).

Along with the ceremony, the mobster was told of the rules he must abide by. The most important rule in organized crime was the rule called the Omerta. ” The Omerta is a code of silence. A vow never to reveal any Mafia secrets or member under threat of torture or death” (Mafia History). Another rule was the obedience rule. “The obedience rule stated that the member must at all times be loyal to the boss or Don. A third law of the Mafia was the assistance to any befriended Mafia faction, no questions asked.

A few others included, Avenge any attack on members of the family, because an attack on one was an attack on all, and the last rule was to avoid any and all contact with the authorities” (Mafia History). There is still much we dont know about the Mafia due to the fact that the very first rule when inducted is the Omerta. Along with the many members involved with the Mafia, there were just as many ethnic families that existed if not more. “Mafia families were growing very large in 1800s” (Mafia History).

The reason for the large swelling of crime in America was because of the vicious increase in foreign immigrants during that time in America. “Three million Irish, four million Italians, and four million Jews immigrated to America. They immigrated for a number of reasons. Many of them dreamed of leaving behind their old worlds. Worlds of fear, depression and crime” (Mafia Secrets). So along with these new immigrants came much crime as well which connected brought upon many ethnic gangs. “Each gang had their own gang, there were several of them.

Chinese, Irish, Jewish, and Italian gangs were all recognized at this time”(Mafia Secrets). Every community gang was different in some way. Although Italians are considered the Mafia, the other ethnic groups have their own involvement in some way or another. The Italians were by far the biggest ethnic group, but they were not the only ones. “The Irish were instrumental in putting together the system of organized crime”(American History 260). The Irish were known as very obsessive gamblers who had control of nearly all racetracks and casinos in the early 1900s.

As sportsmen, they invested money in racehorses and promoted racetracks. Throughout this time, organized crime….. may have reached its high point in the United States in terms of the proportion of the population that constituted customers and in terms of the impact upon local police and politicians” (American History 260). The Italians, of course, already had their feet wet in America by their knowledge of the systematic ways of government for nearly 30 years in America and had control of almost every aspect of organized crime.

The Italians remained with, socialized with, and committed crimes on other Italians within the Italian Community. The Italians were involved so deep in Crime that the Sicilian Mafia had so much power that the Sicilian Mafia has been linked to the highest levels of the Italian Government. Many other groups such as the Jews had much influence in the way we look at organized crime as well. The Jewish had been highly connected with America with an elaborate sense of knowledge gained in a short time.

Each ethnic gang made up a small branch of its district which each city had many. Each district was a part of its ethnic group. Very powerful men who were respected by all of the districts soldiers, counselors, and captains led these groups. Each ethnic gang had its most high in command. In fact the Dons throughout history are single handedly responsible for all changes in the way business worked. “Vito Cascio Ferro, (1862-1945), is believed to be the one man primarily responsible for establishing the communication between the Sicilian and U. S. Mafia” (Family Tree).

Ferro is considered the father of what we know as todays Mafia. “His activities are not clear, but it was recorded that Don Vito was suspected in a brutal killing of at least one man. It was told that the man was trying to do business on his turf, which led to a very vicious death where the man was cut into tiny pieces and shoved into a box” (Family Tree). Lucky Luciano was also very influential during his control of the Irish Mafia around the 1920s in America. “After his hostile takeover, Luciano organized organized crime.

He modernized the Mafia, shaping it into a smoothly run national crime syndicate focused on the bottom line” (Time 100) Luciano was a millionaire because of his illegal distribution of alcohol and narcotics. He was later convicted and sentenced to 30 to 50 years in prison, where he soon died. Another famous mob boss who made a dramatic change in organized crime was Al (Scarface) Capone. Capone is perhaps the most famous and for a good reason. “Scarface became the leader of one of the worlds largest crime families. The family numbered over 1000 members, and the majority of the 1000 were stone cold killers as well” (Scaface).

Capone was involved in perhaps the most famous of all the Mob hits of all time, the St. Valentines Day Massacre, which changed the attitude of the public. Capone later, for a different crime, was arrested and sent to Alcatraz where he spent the rest of his life. How we know organized crime today has much to do with the way Hollywood has represented the Mafia. “The worldwide image of organized crime has had a “Made in America” label since the 1930s” (Mafia Image 1) Movies such as “The Last Don”, “Little Caesar”, and “The God Father” series are for how most of us know the way the Mafia works.

Many people are convinced that the Mafia has been wiped out for the last twenty or so years. Much of the crime activity has decreased, however not all traces of the Mafia have disappeared, as we believe. “There is still currently a mob family from Greek decent even in America today. And in the late 70s and early 80s, the Sicilian Mafia was found to be the culprit in one of the largest heroin smuggling rings in history” (Crime Groups). Because of the Omerta, people have a hard time learning the current position of the Mob, and the Mafia is known for making comebacks in a hurry.

For example, the highpoint of the Mafia was said to be in the 1920s, and slowly it decreased until the end of World War II when organized crime came back with much stronger than when the war started. This shows a good understanding of what the Mafia is capable of doing in short periods of time. The men who have tried to get rid of the Mafia time in and time out have made some progress. “Responsible groups of Americans have, at times, waged campaigns in the media to obliterate any assumption that crime is dominated by people of Italian descent, claiming that existence of an American Mafia had not been fully established” (Mafia Image).

The opinions will differ in that sense. Some say that the Mafia is a vast organization that continues to grow in power, while others say that if the mafia still exists to this day, the old ways of organized crime will never be the same as it has been in this century. The desire, need, brutality, wisdom, and style of what we know as the Mafia only exists in books and movies. No matter the opinion, the Mafia still claims the place in American History if it still exists or not.

Juvenille Delinquiency Report

Juvenile delinquency is a social problem that significantly impacts all members and processes of a social culture. Delinquency refers to behaviors that are not in line with the collective practices of the dominant social group. Essentially, these behaviors stray from societal norms and more specifically they violate established criminal codes and laws. Juvenile delinquency incorporates not only general criminal activity but conduct that is only unlawful for youths such as running away from home and skipping school.

Current research into this difficult and pressing issue reflects a vast range of theories about, and predictors of delinquency as well as a multitude of strategies to control and reduce overall delinquency. The consensus among practitioners and researchers however maintains that juvenile delinquency is a dynamic, multifaceted problem with numerous potentially causal factors.

Subsequently, investigators and professionals suggest that treatment procedures must focus on not only the immediate issue of the offender’s deviant behavior but on every element within the context of that behavior as well, including for example, family relations and social support services/networks. Conventional practice has long associated early preventive measures with positive delinquency reduction results. In particular, timely recognition of at-risk youth and correction of ineffective or minimally effective parenting techniques are critical to the prevention of future delinquency.

Numerous risk factors have been identified as indicators or predictors of juvenile delinquency and those factors represent dysfunction at several levels, specifically within the structure of the offender’s family. Some of these factors include conflict within the family, a lack of adequate supervision and/or rules, a distinct lack of parent-child attachment, instability, poor home life quality, parental expectations, out-of-home placements and inconsistent discipline.

Social service professionals who frequently come into contact with children must be especially vigilant in order to detect the presence of any of the possibly contributory conditions mentioned above and to refer families to appropriate sources of assistance as early as possible. Generally speaking, the relationship between family conflict and delinquency is significant. There are many types of family conflict but the absence of communication and the inability to solve problems are two of the most fundamental forms relative to future delinquency.

The nature of these conflicts is cyclical in that communication and problem-solving breakdowns increase the incidences of delinquency which in turn increase the stress and conflict levels within the family leading to more instances of deviant behavior (Smith & Stern, 1997). Educators, clinicians and other professionals who provide services for children should carefully evaluate reports from children regarding such things as parental fighting, abuse and/or neglect so that they may obviously address those immediate concerns but also assess the possible need for preventive intervention.

Structure is very important in the life of a developing child. Most of that necessary structure is provided by the parents/family. Rules or guidelines are inherently part of that structure and careful parental supervision is essential to the derivation and implementation of those rules. For example, children should always have to tell their parents where they are and whom they’re with. A parent should be diligent in his/her supervision to the extent that (s)he actually knows the whereabouts of his /her children at all times.

Service professionals should understand the relationship between lack of supervision/rules in the home and possible future criminal behavior among youths and should be solicitous in their observations. Parent-child attachment is also a key factor in the delinquency of a minor. Attachment refers to the process that bonds a child to a parent and is usually completed in infancy. It is generally held that children who are insecurely attached to their parents are more likely to commit crimes. However, there are some therapeutic techniques which can be employed to increase the strength of a relationship throughout childhood.

Researchers suggest that social service workers should pay close attention to a child feeling “unloved” or unimportant as these feelings can be indicative of poor attachments and may lead to juvenile criminality. Delinquency can further be related to degrees of instability in an offender’s life. Instability is generally characterized by stress, carrying out threats or promises, frequent changes of friends, dramatic changes in the family, sickness, alcoholism, absence of household routine, precarious financial situations, eviction, death, desertion, separation or divorce.

Attempts should be made by service providers to assess the extent to which a child experiences instability in the home as unchecked instability can contribute to delinquency. The quality of a child’s home life can also positively or negatively affect behavioral outcomes. A home life of poor quality can involve low levels of affection, comfort, supervision and home security. If a child’s home life is inadequate or unsatisfactory then professional intervention will almost assuredly be necessary to address all of the problem components of the home life.

Multiple strategies will have to be employed concurrently and optimally all members of the family will have to be involved in improving the overall quality of the home environment. Studies have shown that what parents expect from their children also affects the likelihood of future delinquency. Typically parents who set high but reasonable standards of conduct have children who are less likely to commit crimes. Parents must teach and encourage their children to behave within a certain set of clear and realistic expectations.

Children who underachieve in school for example may have parents whose expectations of them are comparatively lower. Child service workers may have to intervene to help parents set limits and positively reinforce appropriate behavior. The removal from the home and placement of children outside the home has been linked to delinquency among juveniles. Research has suggested that children who are removed from their homes or frequently transferred between foster homes will exhibit higher rates of delinquency.

The out-of-home placement factor has the potential to create serious problems for the child as it may exacerbate many of the other previously mentioned factors such as instability, quality of home life and attachment formation. Researchers suggest that service providers avoid removal from the home whenever possible and to minimize the frequency with which a child moves between foster homes. Inconsistent discipline has been found as a significant, contributing factor to juvenile delinquency.

Parent’s who ignore inappropriate behavior, are negligent about consistently punishing all misbehaviors with pre-established punishments or who threaten punishment but don’t follow through with it will raise children who are more likely to engage in delinquent behavior. Social workers and other professionals might need to help families establish guidelines for appropriate conduct and consequences for misbehavior. In addition to the previously discussed contributing factors, there are several theories that attempt to explain why juveniles engage in criminal behavior.

Current research suggests that delinquent behavior is learned behavior and not genetically encoded. Two of the most prominent theories are Differential Association theory and Social Control theory. The Differential Association theory relies on three fundamental assumptions. First, this theory assumes that all behavior that is not genetically derived is learned behavior. The second assumption states that the acquisition of behavior occurs in relatively small and informal groups.

The final assumption maintains that behavior develops from a person’s entire life experience as a whole as well as from particular instances and recent events. Differential Association theory posits that if a child displays deviant/delinquent behavior then (s)he ultimately learned that behavior from the people closest to him/her. Clearly this theory supports investigation of delinquency within and through the context of the family, close peer groups and close social groups. The second notable theory, Social Control theory, was proposed by Curran and Renzetti.

Social Control theory suggests that a person’s ties or bonds to social institutions such as family, church, school, etc. prevent him or her from pursuing criminal activity. This theory is based on the concept that people commit crime because it is the easiest, most efficient, most gratifying way to satisfy one’s needs and/or wants. Therefore, if children are relatively unattached to elements of their surrounding social institutions, they are more likely to become juvenile offenders.

Despite the prominence of these theories, recent studies have shown that regardless of the theory utilized, there has been little impact on the reduction of juvenile arrest and crime. Generally speaking, intervention in an attempt to understand and reduce juvenile criminality has been family centered. Several current studies employing a variety of methods have shown some promising effects. Although there has been considerable investigation into juvenile delinquency, there are no definitive answers to the questions of causation or treatment.

Literature reviews suggest that there are a multitude of causal variables and a multitude of potentially effective treatment modalities. It is clear that delinquency among minors does not exist in a vacuum and therefore solutions to this problem must take into account all of the contextual and situational elements surrounding the youth at risk. Further research is necessary in order to attain a more complete understanding of the complex nature of juvenile crime and how society can combat its detrimental effects.