Understanding Crime Patterns and Theories

About to leave, already packing Come with me, I'm not really asking We'll get away, to a place where we don't know About to see the world in action What we can be, life with no distractions Don't get away, this is what we've been waiting for Take my hand, we'll make it somehow We can't miss out I'm done, baby, lights out It's on the freeway, Bonnie and Clyde A classic cliche, we're on the run This is what we waited for Take my hand, we'll make it somehow We can't miss now I'm done living life with the lies I'm done with my own doubts Be free Be free Hello and good evening and welcome to our latest live stream. I'm joined this evening by Craig. Hi Craig. Hi Duncan. How are you doing? You alright? Excellent, yeah. Looking forward to another 30 minutes of crime revision. Yeah, absolutely. So we're looking at patterns of crime today, so sort of patterns by social class, gender, ethnicity and that might be... of um offending but also of victimization as well we've got a bit bit of all those things coming up um if you're watching us live and it's lovely to see lots of you are then do um join in in the chat window answer your questions if you aren't uh subscribed to tutu do so now then you'll be able to comment and chat in the chat window um if you're watching um later on catch up as i know also many of you do um obviously you can't join in the live chat but you might be able to pause the video and have a little bit more time on some of the some of the questions okay we'll also keep a little eye out on the chat window if any of you've got questions for us um i think this is going to be our last crime one for a bit um next week and for the ones coming forward we'll turn our attention to paper one because obviously that will be starting to become imminent um And then we'll kind of go through in paper order from that point on. We are going to revisit crime later, obviously. OK, right. So we're going to go straight over to the PowerPoint now. I'm going to hand over to Craig for some multiple choice questions just to get us going. OK, thank you, Duncan. Yes, there's only a few weeks to the exams, but Alex, we won't remind you about it. So because it says here you're not trying not to think about it. OK, so in this first activity, we're going to do multiple choice questions. There is one correct answer as opposed to like a bubble quiz where we have more than one, but we have between zero and four. This section, we're going to look at ethnicity and crime. So our first question here is which report suggested the Metropolitan Police was institutionally racist? Was it the Sewell report, the Lammy report, the Scarman report or the McPherson report? And we've already got loads of answers in and I think they're all correct. They are all correct, yes. It was a Macpherson report. All of the other reports that are listed there did have something to do with ethnicity. The Sewell report, which is seen as being highly controversial, looked into social mobility and ethnicity, particularly across topics like education and employment. The Lammy review looked at the rates of imprisonment. and in prisons and young offenders institutions by ethnic minority. And the Scarman report looked at the aftermath of the 1981 riots, and looked at ethnic diversity within communities. Safa Merza has just asked, is the report in the spec? I don't remember. It's usually used when you're looking at ethnicity and reasons for higher levels of ethnic minority offending and the argument is it is institutionally racist. The Macpherson report came about after the death of, after the murder of Stephen Lawrence and it was found that the police didn't act or the police were acting in ways that put ethnic minority groups at a disadvantage. Okay so which sociologist do you associate with the term the myth of black criminality? Was it A. Phillips, B. Young, C. Hall or D. Gilroy? A lot of people going for Hall here. A little bit of a misnomer, maybe. I can see why you would go for Hall. I genuinely could see why you would go for Stuart Hall. And perhaps Stuart Hall may be the answer elsewhere. But it was actually Paul Gilroy who talked about the math. The Vibes has got it correct. It was Paul Gilroy who talked about the myth of black criminality. and the others we will come back to because there may be some other answers questions in here as well uh question number three which sociologists suggest rates of stop and search for black males did i go off then just for a second but we can see okay anyway but it was just there just cut out i'll just i'll repeat it which sociologist suggested that canteen culture ensures higher rates of stop and search for black males particularly focusing on higher rates of stop and searches quite a few sociologists who've done work on canteen cultures but was it claude nolan phillips and bowling hudson and bramall or sharp and bud vibes is saying he's not sure and this has gone for b lots of other people have gone for a i don't know if that's from the previous question or whether it's this question whether there's a slight delay people are questioning the idea of b have a little bit of confidence in yourselves because what you've said is correct uh it was phillips and bowling who talk about a canteen culture ensuring higher rates of stop and search for black males someone's asking can you explain what this is so a canteen culture um is the idea of a kind of the cultural norms and values of a workplace so so the last point was about institutional racism so that's like kind of policies and procedures um canteen culture suggests kind of cultural racism that they that the that the culture of the police force might be might tend towards racism or might include racism and therefore that might lead to people stopping and searching black black people more than than other ethnic groups yeah and then we do see that within within the rates of stop and search that particularly black caribbean males are more likely to be stopped and searched than other groups um under the suspicion of drugs uh drugs weapons or terrorism. There are three things you can be stopped and searched under the different sections. Question number four. Which sociologists examine the impacts of the crisis of hegemony on policing? Is it A. Lee and Young, B. Hall et al, C. Taylor, Walton and Young, or D. Bowling and Phillips? Crisis of hegemony, this was obviously in the 1970s where there were lots of kind of, I wouldn't quite say counterculturals, lots of disorder. um in society and there was conflict in ireland conflict um in the middle east opec oil crisis is this idea that that the um the ruling class order was kind of shaking a little bit um and as a response yep and those bees are correct it is it is um stuart hall et al and this where you come up with the idea well done james policing the crisis and the kind of stereotype of um the black mugger in moral panics. Question number five. This one might be slightly trickier. Whose theory was Hall et al.'s policing the crisis based upon? Was it Katz and Ling? Edgeworth? Was it Cohen, folk devils and moral panics? Was it C. Merton's strain theory? Or was it D. Taylor Walton and Young's fully social theory? You're saying this one might be tricky. I think these have all been quite tricky questions, actually, because the options have all been pretty plausible on most of them, haven't they, which always makes these things quite tricky. And I can see why some people... people have already gone for B for this one. I can totally see why you might. Particularly when you look at the idea... Sorry. Sorry, particularly when you look at the idea of that they created a scapegoat of the Black Mother so people sort of like will automatically go, folk devils and moral panics. It was actually Taylor Walton and Young's fully social theory. Taylor Walton and Young came up with the idea, the concept of the new criminology, critical criminology, and obviously that then links into Hall and kind of neo-Marxist ideas. and hall applied fully social theory to the to the way in which the crisis of hegemony was policed in the 1970s and so it's a useful one to use sort of like as an evaluation there to sort of say obviously it was influenced by specific theories you can counter that by saying even taylor walt and young have rejected elements of fully social theory um since then and you can call it new criminology or critical criminology vibes is asking is it better to call it new color new criminology and critical i think it originally came out as a new criminology but obviously critical is that kind of term where it's it's um can be applied to a number of different approaches really kind of if you talk about critical theories um so i'd probably yeah you could go with new criminology i know that doesn't help i think either would either would either would be seen as correct yes yeah we'd know what you meant in either case okay we've got some true or false questions now so just put in T or F is what we're seeing here, true or must it be false? These are about gender, for the most part, or related to gender. Less than 0.02% of the estimated number of domestic violence incidents in 2023 resulted in a conviction. Is that true or is it false? That seems a tiny number, doesn't it? Girl from this world has said false. Quite a few people coming through with false. Remember, you think about that idea of it's the estimated number rather than actual police recorded incidents of domestic violence. Where would this estimated number come from? Probably the Crime Survey of England and Wales. And this is true. So if you think about all the possible incidents of... of domestic violence, not just those that are reported to the police. So we're immediately cutting down the number that might be convicted because we're only getting the ones that might be reported. Then of the ones that are reported, those that are investigated. Then of those that are investigated, those where somebody's charged. Then of those where someone's charged, where someone is convicted. It does get us down to this tiny number. So that is an interesting thing to consider. And you've got to think, so the Crime Survey in England, well, I think it estimated over 2 million incidents of domestic violence. And I think there was less than 50,000 people charged. I think that's the way the maths works. There's less than 50,000 that were convicted of that. Convicted, yeah. So you've got a number of charged and then an even smaller number of convicted. So, yeah, absolutely. Okay. Obviously, that's not specifically related to gender, but it is a... crime where uh you know a significant proportion of the of the uh victims are are women and um so it starts to start us to think about some of the data and statistics that we see about gender and crime in 2023 70 of homicide victims were women is that true or false sorry craig go on your point Oh, into that. Have I cut out again? You did, but you're back. OK, obviously, we're moving into these. These stats are really useful for when you're looking at victimisation, because whilst we look at offending, we also have to potentially prepare ourselves for questions on victimisation as well. Yeah, we've had more falses than trues on this one. And you're right. Yeah. In fact, it's it's 70 percent were men. So men are much more likely to be the victim of a homicide. Well, they were in 2023 at any rate. them women um so that's uh that's an interesting stat. Incidentally, I was just going to say where if you want to get hold of some of these stats, if you go onto the 222 website, there's a crime stat pack that Craig put together that has a lot of this data in it. So it's always useful. Could there be a 30 marker on victimization? It's possible. I think anything on the spec could be asked for any tariff of question. What we have seen in the past is ones that ask for patterns of... offending and victimization so you know you could get one that was say that um evaluate sociological explanations for patterns of victimization and defending for by gender or something like that but but in theory yeah and we've seen some like 10 markers haven't we it's like where they've talked about and why different people from social class have been more likely to be a victim of crime and it's the 10 marker with an item we've seen those type of questions before as well yeah relatively recently i think and Another true or false. In 2023, 84% of the victims of sexual offences were women. Do you think that's true or false? A lot. Oh, Craig's cut out for a second again there, but I think he said... Oh, sorry. Lots of people coming through with the answer true. James, Helen, Vibes, Corey, Casey. You'd be right on that. Alex said that you think it was more than that. I can see why. Absolutely, it could have been. But that's still a pretty high percentage, isn't it? Yeah, absolutely. 96% of prisoners are male, as in people currently in prison. Bit of a mix here. Some people saying true, some people saying false. It's actually true. Very high percentage, isn't it? Yeah. And in a later activity, we might start thinking about some of the some of the explanations for that. Not just about prisons in general, but for that very large difference. OK, but I'm going to hand over to Craig first of all for a bubble quiz. Thank you, Duncan. OK, in the bubble quiz. It's a little bit like the multiple choice quiz, however, you can choose between zero and four correct answers. So any of the answers that you see up on the screen that you think are correct, type those letters into the chat window on the right hand side. Let's look at our first question. These are all focusing on social class and crime here. Which of the following can be used to explain social class differences in criminality? Left realism, right realism, strain theory and criminogenic capitalism. So social class differences in criminality. So this is why, you know, either higher rates for working class people, or why there are, you know, why there are lower rates generally for something goes from the middle and upper classes. So Paige and Vibes have both gone for all of them. Alex has suggested all but right realism. Alice has gone for all of them. So yeah, Gale from this world has gone for all of them as well. A lot going for all actually. And Georgia. Yes, George is coming over. Yeah, they are all correct. They can't all be applied to social classes in criminality. So in many ways, if you've got a nice essay on social class in criminality, there's four of the theories that you could potentially discuss. Rational choice theory would go under social class. Yeah, it kind of falls under that umbrella of right realism. And the idea would be is that, you know, you then have to apply it to... why the working class would have less to lose by committing crime or why they would perceive the costs versus benefits as being slightly different to the middle class. Just to focus on that, Alex, how would we apply right realism? A lot of right realism talks about the application of an underclass. And if we think about broken windows and sort of areas of deprivation, and you could apply that to social class, you could apply that to social class differences in offending as well. uh can i apply right realism to gender for biological differences yes i mean that there are some right realists who talk about gender and talk about biological differences and particularly i was um hernstein wilson and hernstein i think is the one that comes up um yes you could apply it the biological differences you know if you're talking about different um testosterone levels and hormone levels like within males males are perceived as being more aggressive But then you might want to counter that with a more sociological reason and evaluate this idea that the right realists say it's about the way you're socialized. But they also say it's about your biology, which kind of contradict each other. Casey has asked, is the new right type of right realism? I suppose right realism. is linked to the new right. I wouldn't say it was either as a type of each other, but they're both coming from a similar political perspective and you could certainly link them, link right realism with the sort of new right governments of the 80s and 90s. A lot of those implemented new right, sorry, right realist type policies. Often we refer to right realism when we're talking about crime, but if you were in an exam and you wrote new right ideas, then, you know, you would... it would be one of those where you would imagine you would get the benefit of the doubt for that. Let's look at question number two. Which of the following explain higher levels of victimisation of working class people? It's a question that's come up quite recently. Conflict subcultures, law creation, criminal subcultures and broken windows theory. So do spot the word victimisation there. We're not looking for why working class people commit more crimes. It's why they're more likely to be the victims. although some of the same explanations sometimes work for both victimization is quite a tough question isn't it really so because lots of students what they think in their head is we're talking about offending and so they go with reasons why there is offending but lots of them can also be applied to the reasons why people from working class might be more likely to be victims of crime lots of people going bc let's throw up the answers oh somebody's got a page d i seem AD. I think this one's caught a few people out. Let's have a look. Yes, conflict in criminal subcultures and broken windows theory. We'd see how explained the high levels of victimization of working class people. Obviously, conflict subcultures because they're in conflict with one another, maybe victims of violence. Criminal subcultures, we may see the people who the criminal subcultures focus on as being victims again. kind of turf world conflict and then broken windows theory obviously with crime happening in areas of deprivation the people who are victims of those crime also live in that deprivation is victimization not why people are more likely to be victims yes it is um raspberry yeah so all of those reasons could could also as well as being explanations why people might commit crimes it might also explain working class people could be victims of crime if you live in an area where there are criminal or conflict subcultures operating or where there are broken windows and the things that develop from that, then that would explain why they might be more likely to be a victim. Isn't law creation about how upper class create laws to benefit them and put working class at a disadvantage? Yes. So you can use it as a reason why working class people might be more likely to be. committing some crimes and also why middle-class people might be less likely to be committing crimes despite possibly doing things that other people would consider to be wrong or harmful but it doesn't really explain why working-class people would be more likely to be a victim of crime it does definitely put them at a disadvantage but not necessarily why they'd be more likely to be a victim. When you see that term victimization on the paper it's referring to are they a victim of crime rather than are they victimized by society. Yes. So that's something that that some students get get a little bit caught up in and sort of like start talking about criminals being victims. Actually, it's talking about you being a victim of a crime. And that's and that's why that difference comes in. Question number three, which sociologists do you associate with the study of white collar criminality? Is it Albert Cohen, Snyder, Claude Nolan or Sutherland? A few people gone for B and D or B. Excellent. Those who are going for B and D, you are correct. It was Laureen Snyder and I was going to say Donald Sutherland then. It's obviously not. Or Kiefer Sutherland. It wasn't him either. Yeah, it wasn't Kiefer. I can't remember Sutherland's first name. Sutherland, you looked at differential association and looked at kind of the culture. That means the culture that means that crimes are often hidden away within office workplaces and corporations. And Snyder, obviously, who looked. looks at this, the concept of selective law enforcement and law creation, how laws are created, how corporations will tend to cover up crimes. Where are we now? Question number four. Which of the following are examples of white collar crimes? Money drink, robbery, cybercrime or expenses fraud? I think this is quite an interesting one, isn't it? Because in theory, middle-class people could commit any crimes, but there are certain types of crimes that we think of as being, that become defined as white-collar crimes. It's not just any crime that might be committed by a middle-class person. Yeah. Lots of people have gone for A and D. Some people are bringing in C. I can see why that people might bring in C. I guess it depends what you mean by a cybercrime, doesn't it? Yeah. But if you're thinking about... money laundering or fraud then then i guess that you know they might be they might happen via a computer but um i guess by cybercrime we're thinking things like um phishing scams fraud and things like that i can see why with the fraud angle yes people think okay fraud fraud and obviously a lot of cybercrime is actually committed by organized criminals and not necessarily white collar workers in that traditional white collar way and often is more linked in with globalization of crime as well with um the offenders being overseas and and the uk being one of the primary targets and according to recent research for cyber crimes white collar crime is this is a smash dosh white collar crime isn't quite the same as corporate crime because corporate crime is suggesting that the that the companies themselves are that have broken the law so um it there may be some overlap so if if a corporation is committing a crime then the individuals involved may well be white collar you might say they've committed white collar crimes but often corporate crime is something where as an organization you know the organization has committed a crime whereas white collar crime is we're talking more about individuals and individual criminal activities yeah it's almost it's almost kind of a subset isn't it really of white collar crime in many ways yeah okay and question number five Here we go. Which of the following are reasons for the underreporting of corporate crime? A, it's transgressive nature. B, a reduced media focus. C, selective law enforcement. D, loss of reputation. So which of those may be reasons for the underreporting of corporate crime? James has gone for ABC. vibes has gone for bcd um so zoni has gone for b l has gone for a and c sweet's going for a and c not sure about a what's transgressive nature we will come up to that often interesting one well let's reveal the answers and then i'll explain transgressive nature it is all of them transgressive nature means that the crimes can go across borders so often it is used when we talk about things like green crime for example now with it going across borders with the idea of transgressive nature, meaning that it goes across borders, it means we're not 100% sure who is responsible for prosecuting that crime. So if, for example, corporate crime, so if, for example, a corporate corporation commits a green crime, and it has impacts on several different nations, well, where are they going to be prosecuted? So that transgressive nature has an impact. on the underreporting of crime plus if these crimes are committed in nations where there aren't quite as tight health and safety regulations or if there is bribery and corruption around this might mean that companies will maybe pay a fee or a bribe in order to get off with the thinking uh what is loss of reputation loss of reputation means that if somebody has committed a crime on behalf of the company often what they do is they won't public they won't um take action to ensure that they don't be seen to have a loss of reputation. There's a concept you might mention a little bit later on, which I'll come to as well. Companies have very good legal teams to be able to cover their own backs, let's say. OK, because the question is focusing on underreporting, not prosecution. Yes, I mean, underreporting could link. could connect to all those but you're right yeah it was about underreporting rather than prosecution yeah so you could make that distinction okay we've got some pick and mix suites now which of these concepts can be used to explain why women commit fewer crimes than men and vice versa so also why men might commit more crimes than women and I'm just going to reiterate what I said there explain why they might commit fewer crimes. Okay, I'm just being quite precise with my language. Okay, so do you pick the jars of sweets that you feel could help explain that? So Georgia said control theory and sexual theory. Very good. And Ella said sexual theory, status frustration, control theory and gender deal. Ravi said chivalry thesis, sexual theory, gender deal. and toxic masculinity. Sex role, gender deal, control from Ella. Sex role and gender deal from Raspberry. Shall we have a look? I think between you, you've got them, the vast majority of them. One or two possibly stepped onto a deliberate red herring. I was deliberate sort of, what would the word be? We had another activity, didn't we, called trapdoor or something, which I suppose is not a trapdoor. OK, we've got sexual theory, gender deal, control theory and toxic masculinity. Now, we are going to go through this and explain some of them because a few people have suggested a couple of others. So those of you suggested chivalry thesis, I can totally understand why you would. But as we've got here on the on the slide, chivalry thesis can explain statistical difference, but not the actual difference. Chivalry thesis explains why people might not charge or convict. or arrest a woman and therefore that might make it appear as though women commit fewer crimes that was Pollock's argument was that women didn't necessarily commit a lot fewer crimes than men the criminal justice system basically went easy on them out of gentlemanliness is his essential argument and so it doesn't explain the actual differences it does explain the statistical difference so if you were asked a question why why are crime rates lower for women than for men, then chivalry thesis could be one of your arguments for that because you could distinguish to whether actually they committed fewer crimes or whether it just appeared that they did so in the statistic. Liberation thesis, none of you went for that one, well done. You avoided that one. It explains why female crime has been increasing in recent years. And... Gender differences are a useful evaluation of strain theory and status frustration. Status frustration, you can say, well, why wouldn't women feel as much status frustration as men? So it doesn't, I mean, you could, you might be able to link it, you might, with a bit of work, you might be able to say, well, women are doing better in education than, you know, males are doing better in education than females, and you might be able to make a link that way. Certainly with strain theory, you could certainly argue. from a sort of feminist perspective that women would you know have is a harder route to reaching the american dream than men do and yet they are less likely to commit crimes so strange theory doesn't really help explain that i think the others we're happy enough with aren't we control theory perhaps particularly linked with heiden's own but you could also link with carlin um sexual theories are just the idea that men and women are different you could cut the lots of different ways that you could develop that i know people earlier were talking about Biological differences, we tend to look at it in terms of gender norms and socialisation and that men might be socialised to be more assertive and potentially violent and women socialised to be more passive and nurturing. The gender deal comes from Carlin and often goes alongside with the class deal. This idea that, you know, and the idea is that if those deals break down then women will commit crime but that's also why they generally don't and toxic masculinity could be an explanation for why men do commit more crimes that there's something links to the sexual theory i guess there's something about masculinity and masculinity today um and the way um men see masculinity or some men see masculinity that might lead them towards committing certain types of crimes i think you'd add to that um craig before you think you're doing politics then saying i did for a second um yeah no no that's a pretty succinct um the summary summary of those reasons one thing i would say is really look quite specifically at the questions when they when they come up because there's lots of little tricks uh in there and of course caught students out in the past particularly and when they look at the differences in gender it's a few years ago when um there was a question on female offending and lots of people started writing about reasons why males offend and um Yeah, focus on the question. When you look at that question on the paper, if it comes up, make sure that you're hitting all of those, you're decoding it properly. Yeah, are you answering exactly what it's asking? And perhaps, I mean, it's very much the case with the 30 markers as well, but perhaps almost particularly with the four markers and things like that, if you get asked two reasons why women commit fewer crimes, yeah, you would... probably come up with two different reasons for why you might get for why men commit more or why um crime rates are lower you know they could get different answers for those different depending on how it's worded and also a lot of people miss victims in those sorts of questions as well you get two questions like a four marker or six marker on victimization an awful lot of people read it as offending just because that's what they're kind of expecting so do just watch out for what's being asked chilly quiz i think these we are tricky as well you Yeah, we are going a little bit harder this week, particularly when we're focused a lot on things like corporate crime and some of those. We've got three questions in our chilli quiz. We have a mild question, a spicy question and a hot question. Obviously, we've decided the kind of level. You might think that our hot question is easy. You might think our mild question is more difficult. So let's have a look at the three of them. I think they're all quite difficult, these ones. Our mild question, who suggested the law is created to protect the interests of the capitalist classes? Might give you a hint at the kind of perspective they're coming from. Who do you associate with the concept of state corporate crime? And this one might be difficult. And the final one, who suggested the concept of delabeling? I think this one, I think, is the trickiest of the others. People are going for Snyder. Shambless, Marks... I'll start the music. Let's see what we've got here. I've had Box as well. Lots of people going for Marks. Let's see what... McLaughlin's in the right... yeah, McLaughlin's kind of the right ball part because McLaughlin does talk about the different types of state crime but it's not actually... Three, their name began with a P, according to Vibes. Tommy, when you say me, which one are you saying? Did you suggest the concept of de-labelling, or do you think that... I'm intrigued, which was your idea? But anyway. Has anyone got them? Okay. I think I've seen at least one right answer. Yeah, lots of people with the mild question, and it clearly identified it's a Marxist sociologist. It was actually William Chambliss. We're not going to put them all up. obviously they all come up at the same time our second one now um somebody did say mclaughlin that's a really good shout because mclaughlin talks about different oh you've cut out again just for a second there craig sorry you got to say mclaughlin talks about the different types of state crime uh however it was um oh well done page um question sorry question number two the answer was kramer and mikalowski talked about the impact it talks about state corporate you crime. The idea that companies who perform services on behalf of the state can potentially commit crime and so there is this idea of state corporate crime. So if they have a government contract and something goes wrong, I think the example Kramer and Michalowski use is the Challenger disaster where companies were hired to help build the Challenger and cut corners and it led to the death of seven astronauts um get it it was nelkin yeah did i cut out again you did but we got there it was nelkin for number three yeah absolutely yeah de-labeling and this is a concept we might um we might have kind of hinted at a little bit before it's when companies can avoid a negative label based on criminal activity it does it does minimal reputational damage because they have pr teams they have um i don't know if nilkin was the dentist misconduct study too i've never heard of the dentist misconduct study but i think i will go and google that just to see something like what it's about thank you sadie um the idea is that they have pr teams that they have legal teams they are able to minimize any reputational damage from a corporate crime which is why they're able to kind of carry on getting away with it if you like Does the spelling of names matter in the exam? No, it doesn't. There's no kind of components for the spelling and grammar. As long as you make it kind of clear who it is, that's fine. I think I'm coming back to the studio now, aren't I? I think that was our last... You are. I think it was our last activity. There we go. So I hope you like my Skeletor T-shirt, by the way. I wore it specially for today. Some really good answers there, weren't there? And some very tricky questions. So well done. And where you weren't getting necessarily the names, the same names that we had, don't worry and... duly about that um you won't know absolutely all the you know absolutely every name um some people will be suggesting names that you think oh i don't know that or see a study anything oh i don't i'm not sure if i've heard of that one you know you will have learned different ones different textbooks have different ones in there different teachers have different favorites the important thing is that you understand the concepts and i can see from you picking up the right perspective and the right sort of area that you do know the concepts even with those some of those very very challenging questions What if you don't vibe same? What if you don't mention any sociologists, but reference their work, e.g. a sociologist said this? If you can't remember who said something, say, if you can remember what perspective from, or even better if you can say Marxist, you know, Marxist suggested or whatever, but, you know, you absolutely don't, you know, if you know a concept, write about it. If you can't remember who said it, you're still going to get credited for the concept. If you do know it, great, say, but don't panic about that, do. And, you know, if you think you know it. give it a go you know and you'll get credit for the concept still even if you've you know you've got you're not quite the right name for it if you know don't worry about that too much do i think victimization is very likely to come up this year we never do predictions absolutely no way of knowing they could ask anything um are we doing any paper one live streams absolutely in fact next week we're going to start uh turn our attention to paper one and it'll be paper one is right isn't it yeah i've tried next two i think the next next next two wednesdays at least yes next two wednesdays at least yeah and stuff and then as we get into oh yeah and that takes us up to the exam doesn't it i think um i believe so um well there's a couple of other questions there for the paper 120 micron methods in context do i have to include any sociologist names no you don't um if to be honest the only situation where you might do is if you know a study that was done using the same method researching the same topic then you might reference it otherwise i just wouldn't worry about what anyone said about any of that you know focus on exactly what you've been asked in the question you know there's a real risk of going off on a tangent if you start talking about another sociologist use that method to study something else or another sociologist who wrote about that topic we're using a different method you get that's likely to send you yeah on a tangent the the big thing you Yeah, the big thing you might end up doing there, because if you concentrate too much on the pieces of research, you might end up describing the findings of that research, and that's not really answering the question. So don't worry too much about that. We are going to be doing what... Oh, lost Craig again for a second. Hopefully he's going to be back any second. Going to be doing something. I don't know what Craig was about to say we were going to do. Oh, he's back. He's back. We are going to be, yeah, I think I've cut out. Just I was making a big announcement that we're doing them on the Sundays before paper two and paper three. Somebody had asked about we're doing it night before. I think the paper one one is a few days before the exam. To be honest, if we can do it a little bit before the night before, I prefer it. Because obviously, you know, night before you might want to chill out. Although this is reasonably, you know, reasonably sort of a low impact. You know, you can. you can just watch and get involved to the extent that you want to but but yeah we we will do it we're going to be doing one before each exam not necessarily directly before but i think as you say paper two and three just for the timings of it we are i think it's the night before um and lots of people saying thank you and we're going to say thank you as well thank you very much if you can stick your thumbs up for a you know that helps other people find it and click on the notification bell if you haven't already and then you'll find out when my next going live thanks very much guys See you all very soon. Thanks, Craig. See you next week. Bye. Cheers. Bye-bye.

Hi Duncan. How are you doing? You alright? Excellent, yeah.

Looking forward to another 30 minutes of crime revision. Yeah, absolutely. So we're looking at patterns of crime today, so sort of patterns by social class, gender, ethnicity and that might be...

of um offending but also of victimization as well we've got a bit bit of all those things coming up um if you're watching us live and it's lovely to see lots of you are then do um join in in the chat window answer your questions if you aren't uh subscribed to tutu do so now then you'll be able to comment and chat in the chat window um if you're watching um later on catch up as i know also many of you do um obviously you can't join in the live chat but you might be able to pause the video and have a little bit more time on some of the some of the questions okay we'll also keep a little eye out on the chat window if any of you've got questions for us um i think this is going to be our last crime one for a bit um next week and for the ones coming forward we'll turn our attention to paper one because obviously that will be starting to become imminent um And then we'll kind of go through in paper order from that point on. We are going to revisit crime later, obviously. OK, right. So we're going to go straight over to the PowerPoint now. I'm going to hand over to Craig for some multiple choice questions just to get us going.

OK, thank you, Duncan. Yes, there's only a few weeks to the exams, but Alex, we won't remind you about it. So because it says here you're not trying not to think about it. OK, so in this first activity, we're going to do multiple choice questions.

There is one correct answer as opposed to like a bubble quiz where we have more than one, but we have between zero and four. This section, we're going to look at ethnicity and crime. So our first question here is which report suggested the Metropolitan Police was institutionally racist?

Was it the Sewell report, the Lammy report, the Scarman report or the McPherson report? And we've already got loads of answers in and I think they're all correct. They are all correct, yes.

It was a Macpherson report. All of the other reports that are listed there did have something to do with ethnicity. The Sewell report, which is seen as being highly controversial, looked into social mobility and ethnicity, particularly across topics like education and employment.

The Lammy review looked at the rates of imprisonment. and in prisons and young offenders institutions by ethnic minority. And the Scarman report looked at the aftermath of the 1981 riots, and looked at ethnic diversity within communities. Safa Merza has just asked, is the report in the spec?

I don't remember. It's usually used when you're looking at ethnicity and reasons for higher levels of ethnic minority offending and the argument is it is institutionally racist. The Macpherson report came about after the death of, after the murder of Stephen Lawrence and it was found that the police didn't act or the police were acting in ways that put ethnic minority groups at a disadvantage. Okay so which sociologist do you associate with the term the myth of black criminality? Was it A.

Phillips, B. Young, C. Hall or D. Gilroy? A lot of people going for Hall here. A little bit of a misnomer, maybe. I can see why you would go for Hall.

I genuinely could see why you would go for Stuart Hall. And perhaps Stuart Hall may be the answer elsewhere. But it was actually Paul Gilroy who talked about the math. The Vibes has got it correct.

It was Paul Gilroy who talked about the myth of black criminality. and the others we will come back to because there may be some other answers questions in here as well uh question number three which sociologists suggest rates of stop and search for black males did i go off then just for a second but we can see okay anyway but it was just there just cut out i'll just i'll repeat it which sociologist suggested that canteen culture ensures higher rates of stop and search for black males particularly focusing on higher rates of stop and searches quite a few sociologists who've done work on canteen cultures but was it claude nolan phillips and bowling hudson and bramall or sharp and bud vibes is saying he's not sure and this has gone for b lots of other people have gone for a i don't know if that's from the previous question or whether it's this question whether there's a slight delay people are questioning the idea of b have a little bit of confidence in yourselves because what you've said is correct uh it was phillips and bowling who talk about a canteen culture ensuring higher rates of stop and search for black males someone's asking can you explain what this is so a canteen culture um is the idea of a kind of the cultural norms and values of a workplace so so the last point was about institutional racism so that's like kind of policies and procedures um canteen culture suggests kind of cultural racism that they that the that the culture of the police force might be might tend towards racism or might include racism and therefore that might lead to people stopping and searching black black people more than than other ethnic groups yeah and then we do see that within within the rates of stop and search that particularly black caribbean males are more likely to be stopped and searched than other groups um under the suspicion of drugs uh drugs weapons or terrorism. There are three things you can be stopped and searched under the different sections. Question number four. Which sociologists examine the impacts of the crisis of hegemony on policing?

Is it A. Lee and Young, B. Hall et al, C. Taylor, Walton and Young, or D. Bowling and Phillips?

Crisis of hegemony, this was obviously in the 1970s where there were lots of kind of, I wouldn't quite say counterculturals, lots of disorder. um in society and there was conflict in ireland conflict um in the middle east opec oil crisis is this idea that that the um the ruling class order was kind of shaking a little bit um and as a response yep and those bees are correct it is it is um stuart hall et al and this where you come up with the idea well done james policing the crisis and the kind of stereotype of um the black mugger in moral panics. Question number five. This one might be slightly trickier. Whose theory was Hall et al.'s policing the crisis based upon?

Was it Katz and Ling? Edgeworth? Was it Cohen, folk devils and moral panics? Was it C. Merton's strain theory?

Or was it D. Taylor Walton and Young's fully social theory? You're saying this one might be tricky.

I think these have all been quite tricky questions, actually, because the options have all been pretty plausible on most of them, haven't they, which always makes these things quite tricky. And I can see why some people... people have already gone for B for this one.

I can totally see why you might. Particularly when you look at the idea... Sorry. Sorry, particularly when you look at the idea of that they created a scapegoat of the Black Mother so people sort of like will automatically go, folk devils and moral panics. It was actually Taylor Walton and Young's fully social theory.

Taylor Walton and Young came up with the idea, the concept of the new criminology, critical criminology, and obviously that then links into Hall and kind of neo-Marxist ideas. and hall applied fully social theory to the to the way in which the crisis of hegemony was policed in the 1970s and so it's a useful one to use sort of like as an evaluation there to sort of say obviously it was influenced by specific theories you can counter that by saying even taylor walt and young have rejected elements of fully social theory um since then and you can call it new criminology or critical criminology vibes is asking is it better to call it new color new criminology and critical i think it originally came out as a new criminology but obviously critical is that kind of term where it's it's um can be applied to a number of different approaches really kind of if you talk about critical theories um so i'd probably yeah you could go with new criminology i know that doesn't help i think either would either would either would be seen as correct yes yeah we'd know what you meant in either case okay we've got some true or false questions now so just put in T or F is what we're seeing here, true or must it be false? These are about gender, for the most part, or related to gender. Less than 0.02% of the estimated number of domestic violence incidents in 2023 resulted in a conviction.

Is that true or is it false? That seems a tiny number, doesn't it? Girl from this world has said false.

Quite a few people coming through with false. Remember, you think about that idea of it's the estimated number rather than actual police recorded incidents of domestic violence. Where would this estimated number come from?

Probably the Crime Survey of England and Wales. And this is true. So if you think about all the possible incidents of... of domestic violence, not just those that are reported to the police.

So we're immediately cutting down the number that might be convicted because we're only getting the ones that might be reported. Then of the ones that are reported, those that are investigated. Then of those that are investigated, those where somebody's charged. Then of those where someone's charged, where someone is convicted. It does get us down to this tiny number.

So that is an interesting thing to consider. And you've got to think, so the Crime Survey in England, well, I think it estimated over 2 million incidents of domestic violence. And I think there was less than 50,000 people charged. I think that's the way the maths works.

There's less than 50,000 that were convicted of that. Convicted, yeah. So you've got a number of charged and then an even smaller number of convicted.

So, yeah, absolutely. Okay. Obviously, that's not specifically related to gender, but it is a... crime where uh you know a significant proportion of the of the uh victims are are women and um so it starts to start us to think about some of the data and statistics that we see about gender and crime in 2023 70 of homicide victims were women is that true or false sorry craig go on your point Oh, into that. Have I cut out again?

You did, but you're back. OK, obviously, we're moving into these. These stats are really useful for when you're looking at victimisation, because whilst we look at offending, we also have to potentially prepare ourselves for questions on victimisation as well.

Yeah, we've had more falses than trues on this one. And you're right. Yeah.

In fact, it's it's 70 percent were men. So men are much more likely to be the victim of a homicide. Well, they were in 2023 at any rate. them women um so that's uh that's an interesting stat. Incidentally, I was just going to say where if you want to get hold of some of these stats, if you go onto the 222 website, there's a crime stat pack that Craig put together that has a lot of this data in it.

So it's always useful. Could there be a 30 marker on victimization? It's possible.

I think anything on the spec could be asked for any tariff of question. What we have seen in the past is ones that ask for patterns of... offending and victimization so you know you could get one that was say that um evaluate sociological explanations for patterns of victimization and defending for by gender or something like that but but in theory yeah and we've seen some like 10 markers haven't we it's like where they've talked about and why different people from social class have been more likely to be a victim of crime and it's the 10 marker with an item we've seen those type of questions before as well yeah relatively recently i think and Another true or false.

In 2023, 84% of the victims of sexual offences were women. Do you think that's true or false? A lot.

Oh, Craig's cut out for a second again there, but I think he said... Oh, sorry. Lots of people coming through with the answer true. James, Helen, Vibes, Corey, Casey.

You'd be right on that. Alex said that you think it was more than that. I can see why. Absolutely, it could have been.

But that's still a pretty high percentage, isn't it? Yeah, absolutely. 96% of prisoners are male, as in people currently in prison.

Bit of a mix here. Some people saying true, some people saying false. It's actually true. Very high percentage, isn't it? Yeah.

And in a later activity, we might start thinking about some of the some of the explanations for that. Not just about prisons in general, but for that very large difference. OK, but I'm going to hand over to Craig first of all for a bubble quiz.

Thank you, Duncan. OK, in the bubble quiz. It's a little bit like the multiple choice quiz, however, you can choose between zero and four correct answers.

So any of the answers that you see up on the screen that you think are correct, type those letters into the chat window on the right hand side. Let's look at our first question. These are all focusing on social class and crime here.

Which of the following can be used to explain social class differences in criminality? Left realism, right realism, strain theory and criminogenic capitalism. So social class differences in criminality. So this is why, you know, either higher rates for working class people, or why there are, you know, why there are lower rates generally for something goes from the middle and upper classes. So Paige and Vibes have both gone for all of them.

Alex has suggested all but right realism. Alice has gone for all of them. So yeah, Gale from this world has gone for all of them as well. A lot going for all actually.

And Georgia. Yes, George is coming over. Yeah, they are all correct.

They can't all be applied to social classes in criminality. So in many ways, if you've got a nice essay on social class in criminality, there's four of the theories that you could potentially discuss. Rational choice theory would go under social class. Yeah, it kind of falls under that umbrella of right realism.

And the idea would be is that, you know, you then have to apply it to... why the working class would have less to lose by committing crime or why they would perceive the costs versus benefits as being slightly different to the middle class. Just to focus on that, Alex, how would we apply right realism?

A lot of right realism talks about the application of an underclass. And if we think about broken windows and sort of areas of deprivation, and you could apply that to social class, you could apply that to social class differences in offending as well. uh can i apply right realism to gender for biological differences yes i mean that there are some right realists who talk about gender and talk about biological differences and particularly i was um hernstein wilson and hernstein i think is the one that comes up um yes you could apply it the biological differences you know if you're talking about different um testosterone levels and hormone levels like within males males are perceived as being more aggressive But then you might want to counter that with a more sociological reason and evaluate this idea that the right realists say it's about the way you're socialized.

But they also say it's about your biology, which kind of contradict each other. Casey has asked, is the new right type of right realism? I suppose right realism. is linked to the new right.

I wouldn't say it was either as a type of each other, but they're both coming from a similar political perspective and you could certainly link them, link right realism with the sort of new right governments of the 80s and 90s. A lot of those implemented new right, sorry, right realist type policies. Often we refer to right realism when we're talking about crime, but if you were in an exam and you wrote new right ideas, then, you know, you would... it would be one of those where you would imagine you would get the benefit of the doubt for that. Let's look at question number two.

Which of the following explain higher levels of victimisation of working class people? It's a question that's come up quite recently. Conflict subcultures, law creation, criminal subcultures and broken windows theory.

So do spot the word victimisation there. We're not looking for why working class people commit more crimes. It's why they're more likely to be the victims.

although some of the same explanations sometimes work for both victimization is quite a tough question isn't it really so because lots of students what they think in their head is we're talking about offending and so they go with reasons why there is offending but lots of them can also be applied to the reasons why people from working class might be more likely to be victims of crime lots of people going bc let's throw up the answers oh somebody's got a page d i seem AD. I think this one's caught a few people out. Let's have a look. Yes, conflict in criminal subcultures and broken windows theory. We'd see how explained the high levels of victimization of working class people.

Obviously, conflict subcultures because they're in conflict with one another, maybe victims of violence. Criminal subcultures, we may see the people who the criminal subcultures focus on as being victims again. kind of turf world conflict and then broken windows theory obviously with crime happening in areas of deprivation the people who are victims of those crime also live in that deprivation is victimization not why people are more likely to be victims yes it is um raspberry yeah so all of those reasons could could also as well as being explanations why people might commit crimes it might also explain working class people could be victims of crime if you live in an area where there are criminal or conflict subcultures operating or where there are broken windows and the things that develop from that, then that would explain why they might be more likely to be a victim. Isn't law creation about how upper class create laws to benefit them and put working class at a disadvantage?

Yes. So you can use it as a reason why working class people might be more likely to be. committing some crimes and also why middle-class people might be less likely to be committing crimes despite possibly doing things that other people would consider to be wrong or harmful but it doesn't really explain why working-class people would be more likely to be a victim of crime it does definitely put them at a disadvantage but not necessarily why they'd be more likely to be a victim.

When you see that term victimization on the paper it's referring to are they a victim of crime rather than are they victimized by society. Yes. So that's something that that some students get get a little bit caught up in and sort of like start talking about criminals being victims. Actually, it's talking about you being a victim of a crime.

And that's and that's why that difference comes in. Question number three, which sociologists do you associate with the study of white collar criminality? Is it Albert Cohen, Snyder, Claude Nolan or Sutherland?

A few people gone for B and D or B. Excellent. Those who are going for B and D, you are correct.

It was Laureen Snyder and I was going to say Donald Sutherland then. It's obviously not. Or Kiefer Sutherland. It wasn't him either. Yeah, it wasn't Kiefer.

I can't remember Sutherland's first name. Sutherland, you looked at differential association and looked at kind of the culture. That means the culture that means that crimes are often hidden away within office workplaces and corporations. And Snyder, obviously, who looked.

looks at this, the concept of selective law enforcement and law creation, how laws are created, how corporations will tend to cover up crimes. Where are we now? Question number four.

Which of the following are examples of white collar crimes? Money drink, robbery, cybercrime or expenses fraud? I think this is quite an interesting one, isn't it?

Because in theory, middle-class people could commit any crimes, but there are certain types of crimes that we think of as being, that become defined as white-collar crimes. It's not just any crime that might be committed by a middle-class person. Yeah.

Lots of people have gone for A and D. Some people are bringing in C. I can see why that people might bring in C.

I guess it depends what you mean by a cybercrime, doesn't it? Yeah. But if you're thinking about...

money laundering or fraud then then i guess that you know they might be they might happen via a computer but um i guess by cybercrime we're thinking things like um phishing scams fraud and things like that i can see why with the fraud angle yes people think okay fraud fraud and obviously a lot of cybercrime is actually committed by organized criminals and not necessarily white collar workers in that traditional white collar way and often is more linked in with globalization of crime as well with um the offenders being overseas and and the uk being one of the primary targets and according to recent research for cyber crimes white collar crime is this is a smash dosh white collar crime isn't quite the same as corporate crime because corporate crime is suggesting that the that the companies themselves are that have broken the law so um it there may be some overlap so if if a corporation is committing a crime then the individuals involved may well be white collar you might say they've committed white collar crimes but often corporate crime is something where as an organization you know the organization has committed a crime whereas white collar crime is we're talking more about individuals and individual criminal activities yeah it's almost it's almost kind of a subset isn't it really of white collar crime in many ways yeah okay and question number five Here we go. Which of the following are reasons for the underreporting of corporate crime? A, it's transgressive nature.

B, a reduced media focus. C, selective law enforcement. D, loss of reputation.

So which of those may be reasons for the underreporting of corporate crime? James has gone for ABC. vibes has gone for bcd um so zoni has gone for b l has gone for a and c sweet's going for a and c not sure about a what's transgressive nature we will come up to that often interesting one well let's reveal the answers and then i'll explain transgressive nature it is all of them transgressive nature means that the crimes can go across borders so often it is used when we talk about things like green crime for example now with it going across borders with the idea of transgressive nature, meaning that it goes across borders, it means we're not 100% sure who is responsible for prosecuting that crime. So if, for example, corporate crime, so if, for example, a corporate corporation commits a green crime, and it has impacts on several different nations, well, where are they going to be prosecuted?

So that transgressive nature has an impact. on the underreporting of crime plus if these crimes are committed in nations where there aren't quite as tight health and safety regulations or if there is bribery and corruption around this might mean that companies will maybe pay a fee or a bribe in order to get off with the thinking uh what is loss of reputation loss of reputation means that if somebody has committed a crime on behalf of the company often what they do is they won't public they won't um take action to ensure that they don't be seen to have a loss of reputation. There's a concept you might mention a little bit later on, which I'll come to as well.

Companies have very good legal teams to be able to cover their own backs, let's say. OK, because the question is focusing on underreporting, not prosecution. Yes, I mean, underreporting could link.

could connect to all those but you're right yeah it was about underreporting rather than prosecution yeah so you could make that distinction okay we've got some pick and mix suites now which of these concepts can be used to explain why women commit fewer crimes than men and vice versa so also why men might commit more crimes than women and I'm just going to reiterate what I said there explain why they might commit fewer crimes. Okay, I'm just being quite precise with my language. Okay, so do you pick the jars of sweets that you feel could help explain that? So Georgia said control theory and sexual theory. Very good.

And Ella said sexual theory, status frustration, control theory and gender deal. Ravi said chivalry thesis, sexual theory, gender deal. and toxic masculinity. Sex role, gender deal, control from Ella. Sex role and gender deal from Raspberry.

Shall we have a look? I think between you, you've got them, the vast majority of them. One or two possibly stepped onto a deliberate red herring.

I was deliberate sort of, what would the word be? We had another activity, didn't we, called trapdoor or something, which I suppose is not a trapdoor. OK, we've got sexual theory, gender deal, control theory and toxic masculinity. Now, we are going to go through this and explain some of them because a few people have suggested a couple of others. So those of you suggested chivalry thesis, I can totally understand why you would.

But as we've got here on the on the slide, chivalry thesis can explain statistical difference, but not the actual difference. Chivalry thesis explains why people might not charge or convict. or arrest a woman and therefore that might make it appear as though women commit fewer crimes that was Pollock's argument was that women didn't necessarily commit a lot fewer crimes than men the criminal justice system basically went easy on them out of gentlemanliness is his essential argument and so it doesn't explain the actual differences it does explain the statistical difference so if you were asked a question why why are crime rates lower for women than for men, then chivalry thesis could be one of your arguments for that because you could distinguish to whether actually they committed fewer crimes or whether it just appeared that they did so in the statistic. Liberation thesis, none of you went for that one, well done. You avoided that one.

It explains why female crime has been increasing in recent years. And... Gender differences are a useful evaluation of strain theory and status frustration. Status frustration, you can say, well, why wouldn't women feel as much status frustration as men? So it doesn't, I mean, you could, you might be able to link it, you might, with a bit of work, you might be able to say, well, women are doing better in education than, you know, males are doing better in education than females, and you might be able to make a link that way.

Certainly with strain theory, you could certainly argue. from a sort of feminist perspective that women would you know have is a harder route to reaching the american dream than men do and yet they are less likely to commit crimes so strange theory doesn't really help explain that i think the others we're happy enough with aren't we control theory perhaps particularly linked with heiden's own but you could also link with carlin um sexual theories are just the idea that men and women are different you could cut the lots of different ways that you could develop that i know people earlier were talking about Biological differences, we tend to look at it in terms of gender norms and socialisation and that men might be socialised to be more assertive and potentially violent and women socialised to be more passive and nurturing. The gender deal comes from Carlin and often goes alongside with the class deal.

This idea that, you know, and the idea is that if those deals break down then women will commit crime but that's also why they generally don't and toxic masculinity could be an explanation for why men do commit more crimes that there's something links to the sexual theory i guess there's something about masculinity and masculinity today um and the way um men see masculinity or some men see masculinity that might lead them towards committing certain types of crimes i think you'd add to that um craig before you think you're doing politics then saying i did for a second um yeah no no that's a pretty succinct um the summary summary of those reasons one thing i would say is really look quite specifically at the questions when they when they come up because there's lots of little tricks uh in there and of course caught students out in the past particularly and when they look at the differences in gender it's a few years ago when um there was a question on female offending and lots of people started writing about reasons why males offend and um Yeah, focus on the question. When you look at that question on the paper, if it comes up, make sure that you're hitting all of those, you're decoding it properly. Yeah, are you answering exactly what it's asking? And perhaps, I mean, it's very much the case with the 30 markers as well, but perhaps almost particularly with the four markers and things like that, if you get asked two reasons why women commit fewer crimes, yeah, you would...

probably come up with two different reasons for why you might get for why men commit more or why um crime rates are lower you know they could get different answers for those different depending on how it's worded and also a lot of people miss victims in those sorts of questions as well you get two questions like a four marker or six marker on victimization an awful lot of people read it as offending just because that's what they're kind of expecting so do just watch out for what's being asked chilly quiz i think these we are tricky as well you Yeah, we are going a little bit harder this week, particularly when we're focused a lot on things like corporate crime and some of those. We've got three questions in our chilli quiz. We have a mild question, a spicy question and a hot question.

Obviously, we've decided the kind of level. You might think that our hot question is easy. You might think our mild question is more difficult. So let's have a look at the three of them.

I think they're all quite difficult, these ones. Our mild question, who suggested the law is created to protect the interests of the capitalist classes? Might give you a hint at the kind of perspective they're coming from. Who do you associate with the concept of state corporate crime?

And this one might be difficult. And the final one, who suggested the concept of delabeling? I think this one, I think, is the trickiest of the others.

People are going for Snyder. Shambless, Marks... I'll start the music. Let's see what we've got here. I've had Box as well.

Lots of people going for Marks. Let's see what... McLaughlin's in the right...

yeah, McLaughlin's kind of the right ball part because McLaughlin does talk about the different types of state crime but it's not actually... Three, their name began with a P, according to Vibes. Tommy, when you say me, which one are you saying? Did you suggest the concept of de-labelling, or do you think that... I'm intrigued, which was your idea?

But anyway. Has anyone got them? Okay.

I think I've seen at least one right answer. Yeah, lots of people with the mild question, and it clearly identified it's a Marxist sociologist. It was actually William Chambliss.

We're not going to put them all up. obviously they all come up at the same time our second one now um somebody did say mclaughlin that's a really good shout because mclaughlin talks about different oh you've cut out again just for a second there craig sorry you got to say mclaughlin talks about the different types of state crime uh however it was um oh well done page um question sorry question number two the answer was kramer and mikalowski talked about the impact it talks about state corporate you crime. The idea that companies who perform services on behalf of the state can potentially commit crime and so there is this idea of state corporate crime.

So if they have a government contract and something goes wrong, I think the example Kramer and Michalowski use is the Challenger disaster where companies were hired to help build the Challenger and cut corners and it led to the death of seven astronauts um get it it was nelkin yeah did i cut out again you did but we got there it was nelkin for number three yeah absolutely yeah de-labeling and this is a concept we might um we might have kind of hinted at a little bit before it's when companies can avoid a negative label based on criminal activity it does it does minimal reputational damage because they have pr teams they have um i don't know if nilkin was the dentist misconduct study too i've never heard of the dentist misconduct study but i think i will go and google that just to see something like what it's about thank you sadie um the idea is that they have pr teams that they have legal teams they are able to minimize any reputational damage from a corporate crime which is why they're able to kind of carry on getting away with it if you like Does the spelling of names matter in the exam? No, it doesn't. There's no kind of components for the spelling and grammar. As long as you make it kind of clear who it is, that's fine. I think I'm coming back to the studio now, aren't I?

I think that was our last... You are. I think it was our last activity. There we go. So I hope you like my Skeletor T-shirt, by the way.

I wore it specially for today. Some really good answers there, weren't there? And some very tricky questions. So well done. And where you weren't getting necessarily the names, the same names that we had, don't worry and...

duly about that um you won't know absolutely all the you know absolutely every name um some people will be suggesting names that you think oh i don't know that or see a study anything oh i don't i'm not sure if i've heard of that one you know you will have learned different ones different textbooks have different ones in there different teachers have different favorites the important thing is that you understand the concepts and i can see from you picking up the right perspective and the right sort of area that you do know the concepts even with those some of those very very challenging questions What if you don't vibe same? What if you don't mention any sociologists, but reference their work, e.g. a sociologist said this? If you can't remember who said something, say, if you can remember what perspective from, or even better if you can say Marxist, you know, Marxist suggested or whatever, but, you know, you absolutely don't, you know, if you know a concept, write about it. If you can't remember who said it, you're still going to get credited for the concept.

If you do know it, great, say, but don't panic about that, do. And, you know, if you think you know it. give it a go you know and you'll get credit for the concept still even if you've you know you've got you're not quite the right name for it if you know don't worry about that too much do i think victimization is very likely to come up this year we never do predictions absolutely no way of knowing they could ask anything um are we doing any paper one live streams absolutely in fact next week we're going to start uh turn our attention to paper one and it'll be paper one is right isn't it yeah i've tried next two i think the next next next two wednesdays at least yes next two wednesdays at least yeah and stuff and then as we get into oh yeah and that takes us up to the exam doesn't it i think um i believe so um well there's a couple of other questions there for the paper 120 micron methods in context do i have to include any sociologist names no you don't um if to be honest the only situation where you might do is if you know a study that was done using the same method researching the same topic then you might reference it otherwise i just wouldn't worry about what anyone said about any of that you know focus on exactly what you've been asked in the question you know there's a real risk of going off on a tangent if you start talking about another sociologist use that method to study something else or another sociologist who wrote about that topic we're using a different method you get that's likely to send you yeah on a tangent the the big thing you Yeah, the big thing you might end up doing there, because if you concentrate too much on the pieces of research, you might end up describing the findings of that research, and that's not really answering the question.

So don't worry too much about that. We are going to be doing what... Oh, lost Craig again for a second.

Hopefully he's going to be back any second. Going to be doing something. I don't know what Craig was about to say we were going to do. Oh, he's back.

He's back. We are going to be, yeah, I think I've cut out. Just I was making a big announcement that we're doing them on the Sundays before paper two and paper three. Somebody had asked about we're doing it night before. I think the paper one one is a few days before the exam.

To be honest, if we can do it a little bit before the night before, I prefer it. Because obviously, you know, night before you might want to chill out. Although this is reasonably, you know, reasonably sort of a low impact. You know, you can. you can just watch and get involved to the extent that you want to but but yeah we we will do it we're going to be doing one before each exam not necessarily directly before but i think as you say paper two and three just for the timings of it we are i think it's the night before um and lots of people saying thank you and we're going to say thank you as well thank you very much if you can stick your thumbs up for a you know that helps other people find it and click on the notification bell if you haven't already and then you'll find out when my next going live thanks very much guys See you all very soon.

Thanks, Craig. See you next week. Bye.

Cheers. Bye-bye.

Transcript for:Understanding Crime Patterns and Theories

Transcript for:
Understanding Crime Patterns and Theories