DOCSLIB.ORG

Incorporating Restorative and Community Justice Into American

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Incorporating Restorative and Community Justice Into American T O EN F J TM U U.S. Department of Justice R ST A I P C E E D B O J C S Office of Justice Programs F A V M F O I N A C I J S R E BJ G O OJJ DP O F PR National Institute of Justice JUSTICE SENTENCING & CORRECTIONS Issues for the 21st Century September 1999 Papers From the Executive Sessions on Sentencing and Corrections No. 3 Incorporating Restorative and Community Justice Into American Sentencing and Corrections Directors’ Message It is by now a commonplace that the number by Leena Kurki of people under criminal justice supervision in this country has reached a record high. As rograms based on restorative and com- In contrast to this bottom-up approach, a result, the sentencing policies driving that munity justice principles have prolifer- recent changes in sentencing law are premised number, and the field of corrections, where ated in the United States over the past on retributive ideas about punishing wrong- the consequences are felt, have acquired an P unprecedented salience. It is a salience defined decade simultaneously with tough-on-crime doers and on the desirability of controlling more by issues of magnitude, complexity, and initiatives like three-strikes, truth-in-sentenc- risk, increasing public safety, and reducing expense than by any consensus about future ing, and mandatory minimum laws. Restor- sentencing disparities. Restorative and com- directions. ative justice and community justice represent munity justice goals of achieving appropriate, new ways of thinking about crime. The theo- individualized dispositions often conflict with Are sentencing policies, as implemented through ries underlying restorative justice suggest that the retributive goal of imposing certain, con- correctional programs and practices, achieving government should surrender its monopoly sistent, proportionate sentences. their intended purposes? As expressed in the movement to eliminate indeterminate senten- over responses to crime to those most directly cing and limit judicial discretion, on the one affected—the victim, the offender, and the There are many ways to resolve this norma- hand, and to radically restructure our retribu- tive conflict. Restorative and community community. Community justice redefines the tive system of justice, on the other, the purpos- justice initiatives could continue to confine roles and goals of criminal justice agencies es seem contradictory, rooted in conflicting to include a broader mission—to prevent their efforts to juvenile offenders and people values. The lack of consensus on where sen- crime, address local social problems and who commit minor crimes. This seems tencing and corrections should be headed is conflicts, and involve neighborhood residents unlikely, as these approaches are expanding thus no surprise. in planning and decisionmaking. Both restor- rapidly and winning many new supporters Because sentencing and corrections policies who want to extend their application. ative and community justice are based on the have such major consequences—for the Alternatively, retributive sentencing laws could premise that communities will be strength- allocation of government resources and, more ened if local citizens participate in responding be revised or narrowed. But this too seems fundamentally and profoundly, for the quality to crime, and both envision responses tai- unlikely in the near term. How precisely the of justice in this country and the safety of its lored to the preferences and needs of victims, two divergent trends will be reconciled citizens—the National Institute of Justice and the communities, and offenders. remains to be seen. Nevertheless, it seems Corrections Program Office (CPO) of the Office of Justice Programs felt it opportune to explore them in depth. Through a series of Executive Sessions on Sentencing and Corrections, begun Research in Brief CONTINUED ... 2 Sentencing & Corrections Directors’ Message likely that restorative and community justice offenders. For victims, this meant restitution values will to some extent become more insti- for tangible losses and emotional losses. CONTINUED ... tutionalized in criminal justice processes.1 For offenders, it meant taking responsibility, confronting shame, and regaining dignity. in 1998 and continuing through the year 2000, ■ ■ ■ practitioners and scholars foremost in their This notion has evolved, with the major recent field, representing a broad cross-section of What is restorative justice? points of view, are being brought together to conceptual development the incorporation of find out if there is a better way to think about estorative justice has evolved from a a role for the community. Many people the purposes, functions, and interdependence Rlittle-known concept into a term used still associate restorative justice primarily with of sentencing and corrections policies. widely but in divergent ways. There is no victim-offender mediation or, more broadly (but mistakenly), with any victim-oriented We are fortunate in having secured the assis- doubt about its appeal, although the varied services. The more recent conceptualiza- tance of Michael Tonry, Sonosky Professor uses of the term cause some confusion. The of Law and Public Policy at the University of umbrella term “restorative justice” has been tion—that offenses occur within a three- Minnesota Law School, as project director. applied to initiatives identified as restorative dimensional relationship—may change the by some but not by others. Examples are sex- movement. One product of the sessions is this series of offender notification laws, papers, commissioned by NIJ and the CPO as because crime harms the victim and the basis for the discussions. Drawing on the victim impact statements, the community, the primary goals [of research and experience of the session partici- and murder victim sur- restorative justice] should be to repair pants, the papers are intended to distill their vivors’ “right” to be present the harm and heal the victim and the judgments about the strengths and weaknesses at executions. Most advo- community. of current practices and about the most prom- cates of restorative justice ising ideas for future developments. agree that it involves five All three parties should be able to participate The sessions were modeled on the executive basic principles: in rebuilding the relationship and in deciding sessions on policing held in the 1980s and ■ 1990s under the sponsorship of NIJ and Crime consists of more than violation on responses to the crime. The distinctive Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government. of the criminal law and defiance of govern- characteristic is direct, face-to-face dialogue Those sessions played a role in conceptualizing ment authority. among victim, offender, and increasingly, the community. community policing and spreading it. Whether ■ Crime involves disruptions in a three- the current sessions and the papers based on dimensional relationship of victim, community, them will be instrumental in developing a new ■ ■ ■ and offender. paradigm for sentencing and corrections, or even whether they will generate broad-based ■ Because crime harms the victim and the What is community justice? support for a particular model or strategy for community, the primary goals should be to he concept of community justice is less change, remains to be seen. It is our hope that repair the harm and heal the victim and the T clear. It can be portrayed as a set of new in the current environment of openness to new community. organizational strategies that change the focus ideas, the session papers will provoke com- of criminal justice from a narrow, case pro- ment, promote further discussion and, taken ■ The victim, the community, and the offender cessing orientation: operations are moved together, will constitute a basic resource docu- should all participate in determining the ment on sentencing and corrections policy response to crime; government should to neighborhood locations that offer flexible issues that will prove useful to State and local surrender its monopoly over that process. working hours and services, neighborhoods policymakers. are assigned their own officers and are pro- ■ Case disposition should be based primarily vided with more information than is standard Jeremy Travis on the victim’s and the community’s needs— practice, and residents may identify crime Director not solely on the offender’s needs or culpabil- National Institute of Justice problems and define priorities for neighbor- U.S. Department of Justice ity, the dangers he presents, or his criminal hood revitalization. Most experience with history. Larry Meachum community justice is in the context of com- munity policing, but prosecutors, judges, Director The original goal of restorative justice was Corrections Program Office and correctional officers are increasingly to restore harmony between victims and U.S. Department of Justice rethinking their roles and goals. Sentencing & Corrections 3 The most frequently cited standpoints for Should restorative and and requirements for programs reflecting community justice are problem solving and community justice be these values, thereby bureaucratizing them community empowerment. Problem solving is incorporated into the and once again “stealing the conflicts” from understood broadly: first, as an effort to build criminal justice system? communities. As Ronald Earle put it, the partnerships between criminal justice and “unstructured lack of standardization is the other government agencies and between gov- dvocates of restorative justice and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • An Examination of the Impact of Criminological Theory on Community Corrections Practice
    December 2016 15 An Examination of the Impact of Criminological Theory on Community Corrections Practice James Byrne University of Massachusetts Lowell Don Hummer Penn State Harrisburg CRIMINOLOGICAL THEORIES ABOUT parole officers in terms of practical advice; to other community corrections programs are to why people commit crime are used—and mis- the contrary, we think a discussion of “cause” is be successful as “people changing” agencies. used—every day by legislative policy makers critical to the ongoing debate over the appro- But can we reasonably expect such diversity and community corrections managers when priate use of community-based sanctions, and flexibility from community corrections they develop new initiatives, sanctions, and and the development of effective community agencies, or is it more likely that one theory— programs; and these theories are also being corrections policies, practices, and programs. or group of theories—will be the dominant applied—and misapplied—by line commu­ However, the degree of uncertainty on the influence on community corrections practice? nity corrections officers in the workplace as cause—or causes—of our crime problem in Based on recent reviews of United States cor­ they classify, supervise, counsel, and con­ the academic community suggests that a rections history, we suspect that one group of trol offenders placed on their caseloads. The certain degree of skepticism is certainly in theories—supported by a dominant political purpose of this article is to provide a brief order when “new” crime control strategies are ideology—will continue to dominate until overview of the major theories of crime causa­ introduced. We need to look carefully at the the challenges to its efficacy move the field— tion and then to consider the implications of theory of crime causation on which these new both ideologically and theoretically—in a new these criminological theories for current and initiatives are based.
    [Show full text]
  • The Little Book of Restorative Justice
    The authors THE LITTLE BOOK OF oward Zehr directed the first victim offender conferencing program in the U.S. and is one H of the developers of restorative justice as a concept. His book Changing Lenses: A New Focus for Crime and Justice is considered a classic in the field. His other publications include Doing Life: Reflections of Men and Women Serving Life Sentences, Transcending: Reflections of Crime Victims and The Little Book of Restorative Justice. Forthcoming in fall, 2003, is The Little Book of Family Group Conferences, New Zealand Style (with Allan MacRae). Dr. Zehr is Co-Director of the graduate Conflict Transformation Program at Eastern Mennonite University. From this base he also teaches and practices in the field of restorative justice. Zehr received his M.A. from the University of Chicago and his Ph.D. from Rutgers University. li Gohar worked as Additional Commissioner Social Welfare Cell for Afghan Refugees for A thirteen years. Presently working as Chief Executive, Just Peace International inc. for Afghanistan and Pakistan. Ali Gohar received his MSc in International Relations from Quaid-i-Azam university Islamabad . He completed his second Master in Conflict Transformation as a Fulbright Scholar from Eastern Mennonite University VA, USA. The Pushto, Urdu and Persian (Dari) version of the hand book by the same authors are under publications. [email protected] Ph: ++92 - 91 - 5700724 The authors THE LITTLE BOOK OF oward Zehr directed the first victim offender conferencing program in the U.S. and is one H of the developers of restorative justice as a concept. His book Changing Lenses: A New Focus for Crime and Justice is considered a classic in the field.
    [Show full text]
  • Tol, Xeer, and Somalinimo: Recognizing Somali And
    Tol , Xeer , and Somalinimo : Recognizing Somali and Mushunguli Refugees as Agents in the Integration Process A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY Vinodh Kutty IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY David M. Lipset July 2010 © Vinodh Kutty 2010 Acknowledgements A doctoral dissertation is never completed without the help of many individuals. And to all of them, I owe a deep debt of gratitude. Funding for this project was provided by two block grants from the Department of Anthropology at the University of Minnesota and by two Children and Families Fellowship grants from the Annie E. Casey Foundation. These grants allowed me to travel to the United Kingdom and Kenya to conduct research and observe the trajectory of the refugee resettlement process from refugee camp to processing for immigration and then to resettlement to host country. The members of my dissertation committee, David Lipset, my advisor, Timothy Dunnigan, Frank Miller, and Bruce Downing all provided invaluable support and assistance. Indeed, I sometimes felt that my advisor, David Lipset, would not have been able to write this dissertation without my assistance! Timothy Dunnigan challenged me to honor the Somali community I worked with and for that I am grateful because that made the dissertation so much better. Frank Miller asked very thoughtful questions and always encouraged me and Bruce Downing provided me with detailed feedback to ensure that my writing was clear, succinct and organized. I also have others to thank. To my colleagues at the Office of Multicultural Services at Hennepin County, I want to say “Thank You Very Much!” They all provided me with the inspiration to look at the refugee resettlement process more critically and dared me to suggest ways to improve it.
    [Show full text]
  • INL Corrections Guide
    INL GUIDE TO CORRECTIONS ASSISTANCE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs INL GUIDE TO CORRECTIONS ASSISTANCE • I Contents Foreword . V Why Corrections Matters . .1 . Purpose and Scope of the Handbook . 2 . The Corrections World at a Glance . 2 Definitions . 2 Types of Incarceration and Supervision . 2. Elements of a Corrections System . 3. Persons in Vulnerable Situations . 4 The United States Corrections System . 4 . Institutional Resistance to Change . 5. Planning a Corrections Assistance Program . 5 U .S . Foreign Assistance and International Human Rights Standards . 5 . INL Program Objectives . 6 Identifying Resources for Sustainability . 7 . Context . 8 . Assessing the Corrections System . 9. Designing and Implementing a Corrections Assistance Program . 11 Program Design and Implementation . .11 . Program Activities . 12 Program Goals . 17 . Measuring Progress and Reporting in Corrections Assistance . 18. Incorporating Lessons Learned . 18 Appendix I: International Standards . 24. Appendix Ii: Corrections Terminology . .26 . Appendix Iii: Additional Resources . 27 INL GUIDE TO CORRECTIONS ASSISTANCE • III Foreword “Effective implementation of rule of law reforms can only be accomplished if corrections is part of the equation .” — Keynote Address to the 15th Annual International Corrections and Prisons Association Conference on October 28, 2013, William R. Brownfield he mission of the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL) is to minimize the impact of international crime and illegal drugs on the United States and its citizens by providing Teffective foreign assistance and fostering global cooperation. The complex and transnational nature of crime can only be countered when nations work together to build effective and responsive criminal justice systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Trends in Sentencing and Corrections State Legislation Trends in Sentencing and Corrections: State Legislation
    Trends in Sentencing and Corrections State Legislation Trends in Sentencing and Corrections: State Legislation Trends in Sentencing and Corrections State Legislation By Alison Lawrence National Conference of State Legislatures William T. Pound, Executive Director 7700 East First Place Denver, Colo. 80230 (303) 364-7700 444 North Capitol Street, N.W., Suite 515 Washington, D.C. 20001 (202) 624-5400 www.ncsl.org July 2013 Printed on recycled paper. © 2013 by the National Conference of State Legislatures. All rights reserved. ISBN 978-1-58024-696-5 2 National Conference of State Legislatures Trends in Sentencing and Corrections: State Legislation tate legislatures have been pivotal in Common developing sentencing and corrections Denominators strategies that focus on a trio of objec- S A distinguishing fea- tives: protecting public safety, holding offend- ers accountable, and doing so while making ture of some of the best use of fiscal resources. Significant trends most comprehensive have emerged in legislative leadership and state legislation has been cross-governmental plan- legislation in meeting these responsibilities. ning that involves stakeholders in all branches Actions have included expanding eligibility and at all levels of government. Setting apart for community corrections and improving su- the efforts of these groups from that of pre- pervision, employing the use of diversion and decessors has been their ability to collect and treatment, revising sentence lengths and priori- make effective use of data. A growing number tizing prison resources. of states have engaged in a “justice reinvest- ment” process that involves data collection and A decade ago, rising prison populations and analysis of trends that drive prison populations costs seemed to be an uninterruptable trend.
    [Show full text]
  • Article 23-A New York State Department of Corrections Law Licensure and Employment of Persons Previously Convicted of One Or More Criminal Offenses
    ARTICLE 23-A NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS LAW LICENSURE AND EMPLOYMENT OF PERSONS PREVIOUSLY CONVICTED OF ONE OR MORE CRIMINAL OFFENSES Section 750. Definitions. 751. Applicability. 752. Unfair discrimination against persons previously convicted of one or more criminal offenses prohibited. 753. Factors to be considered concerning a previous criminal conviction; presumption. 754. Written statement upon denial of license or employment. 755. Enforcement. S 750. Definitions. For the purposes of this article, the following terms shall have the following meanings: (1) "Public agency" means the state or any local subdivision thereof, or any state or local department, agency, board or commission. (2) "Private employer" means any person, company, corporation, labor organization or association which employs ten or more persons. (3) "Direct relationship" means that the nature of criminal conduct for which the person was convicted has a direct bearing on his fitness or ability to perform one or more of the duties or responsibilities necessarily related to the license or employment sought. (4) "License" means any certificate, license, permit or grant of permission required by the laws of this state, its political subdivisions or instrumentalities as a condition for the lawful practice of any occupation, employment, trade, vocation, business, or profession. Provided, however, that "license" shall not, for the purposes of this article, include any license or permit to own, possess, carry, or fire any explosives, pistol, handgun, rifle, shotgun, or other firearm. (5) "Employment" means any occupation, vocation, or employment, or any form of vocational or educational training. Provided, however, that "employment" shall not, for the purposes of this article, include membership in any law enforcement agency.
    [Show full text]
  • How Restorative Is Restorative Justice?
    How restorative is restorative justice? Dr Martin Wright Visiting Research Fellow, School of Legal Studies, University of Sussex. Paper to conference, Quali prospettive per la mediazione? Riflessioni teoretiche ed esperienze operative (What prospects for mediation? theoretical reflections and practice), Museo Criminologico, Rome, 20-21 April 2001. There are certain things which we take for granted: 1) that crime is an offence against the state 2) that people who commit crimes should be punished 3) that punishment is a responsibility and a monopoly of the state 4) that the decisions about how to deal with offenders should be taken by state officials through a formal legal process. What is remarkable about RJ is that it challenges all these assumptions: it views crime not as an offence against the State but as an injury to people and relationships. Instead of punishing offenders, justice involves repairing harm caused by crime. The victim and the offender can take an active part in the process. The community can support the victim and help the offender to fulfil any agreement he has made about reparation. In the conventional system the victim and the offender are not able to tell the story of what happened in their own way, much less to communicate with each other. The damaging potential of the system is well known. It is aggravated by the fact that the system focuses on its objective - to determine guilt or innocence and decide on a sanction - and does not consider the effect of the process on the participants. Restorative justice, instead of taking the whole matter out of their hands, offers both victim and offender the chance to discuss it and decide how to resolve it, through victim/offender mediation, or an extension of this known as ‘conferencing’, in which victims and offenders are invited to include their extended families.
    [Show full text]
  • Building a Community Court
    BUILDING A O ~ ii COMMUNITY COURT I N 1. R (O I.) U s II 0 N " ~HIS CATALOG OFFERS TOOLS, advice and resources about community courts. What are community courts? Community courts harken back to a bygone era, when courthouses stood at the center of the village green. Like the courts e of yesterday, community courts embrace old- fashioned notions of accountability, tying a cr~me to its consequences, and lending a helping hand to those in need. Community courts are located in neighborhoods rather than centralized office complexes. More important than their location is their philosophy: community courts take an aggressive approach to solving neighborhood problems like vandalism, landlord-tenant disputes, juvenile delinquency and drugs, e Colllnltlniry cotlrts use the authority of the justice system to restore neighborhoods that have been victimized by crime, neglect or disorder. They encourage greater citizen involvement, asking local residents and merchants to identify and prioritize neigh- borhood hot spots and eyesores. And they b,'ing an array of new partners into the justice system -- mediators, drug counselo,'s, :o k ,d!d doctors, teachers, employment specialists -- transforming the court into a hub for social services. What's the point? Why would anyone want to spend the time and energy and money to build one of these new courts? The answer is simple: community courts have proven effective in addressing quality-of-life problems and improving public confidence in justice. The first such court was the Midtown Com- mu,3itv Court in New York. Since Midtown opened in 1993, a number of other states have picked tip on the idea-- from Florida to Oregon, from Pennsylvania to Colorado i';.~;'.~.~ ~o.
    [Show full text]
  • Restorative Justice in Prisons: Methods, Approaches and Effectiveness
    Strasbourg, 29 September 2014 PC-CP (2014) 17 rev PC-CP\docs 2014\PC-CP(2014)17e rev EUROPEAN COMMITTEE ON CRIME PROBLEMS (CDPC) Council for Penological Co-operation (PC-CP) Restorative Justice in Prisons: Methods, Approaches and Effectiveness Document prepared by Gerry JOHNSTONE Professor of Law, Law School, University of Hull, United Kingdom Introduction Imprisonment of offenders is a central and seemingly indispensable part of the raft of methods used to respond to crime in contemporary societies. Whereas in dealing with other problems, such as mental disorder, modern societies have pursued policies of decarceration – relying less upon control in institutions, more upon care and control in the community – in responding to crime these societies are making increasing use of imprisonment. Walmsley (2013) estimates that, throughout the world, 10.2 million people are held in penal institutions and that prison populations are growing in all five continents at a faster rate than the general population. For the public at large, this raises little concern; indeed, there is much public support for high custody rates and for lengthy prison sentences for those who commit violent and sexual offences (Roberts, 2008). But for penal reformers and most criminologists this is a regressive trend: society is increasing its use of an outdated penal method which is ineffective (in either deterring crime or preparing offenders for life in the community upon release), inhumane, and very expensive.i Critics of imprisonment argue both for a significant reduction in its use and for the reform of prison conditions to render the practice more constructive and civilised.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of the Hartford Community Court
    Evaluation of the Hartford Community Court By: The Justice Education Center, Inc. Date: December 2002 Acknowledgments The Evaluation of Hartford Community Court was conducted by the Justice Education Center, Inc., for the Connecticut Judicial Branch. The Center gratefully acknowledges the efforts of the Community Court personnel for their tremendous cooperation and support throughout the evaluation process. Judge Raymond Norko and Court Planner Chris Pleasanton’s doors were always open. Their assistance in providing data to The Center’s research team and enabling team members to utilize the Community Court facility both during and after hours for interviews and focus groups was of immeasurable value and indicative of the openness and flexibility of the Court as a whole. A tremendous debt of gratitude is also extended to Harold Moan, the Judicial Branch’s Official Court Reporter and his staff for allowing The Center to use the recording and transcription equipment of the Court. Transcribing the focus group discussions could not have been accomplished without the excellent services of Susan Frederick, Administrative Assistant of the Superior Court. Also, special thanks are extended to Community Service Coordinator Christopher Mena and his entire staff of field supervisors in assisting with the coordination of client exit interviews, and to all Community Court marshals for their day-to-day cooperation. Extended thanks are given to the hardworking team of focus group facilitators and exit interviewers: Brian Smith, Gabriela Campos, Hector Ortiz, and Victor Alvaladero. Further, The Justice Education Center wishes to acknowledge the contributions of Robert Price, Project Coordinator, whose extraordinary efforts in managing the evaluation process, conducting interviews and co-facilitating focus groups were critical to the success of the project.
    [Show full text]
  • Small Claims Courts: an Overview and Recommendation
    University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform Volume 9 1976 Small Claims Courts: An Overview and Recommendation Alexander Domanskis University of Michigan Law School Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjlr Part of the Courts Commons, Rule of Law Commons, and the State and Local Government Law Commons Recommended Citation Alexander Domanskis, Small Claims Courts: An Overview and Recommendation, 9 U. MICH. J. L. REFORM 590 (1976). Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjlr/vol9/iss3/5 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform by an authorized editor of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SMALL CLAIMS COURTS: AN OVERVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION A... problem is to make adequate provision for petty litiga- tion, to provide for disposing quickly, inexpensively, and justly of the litigation of the poor, for the collection of debts in a shift- ing population, and for the great volume of small controversies which a busy, crowded population, diversified in race and lan- guage, necessarily engenders. It is here that the administration of justice touches immediately the greatest number of people. Roscoe Pound' Small claims courts have been in operation in the United States for over sixty years.2 They were established to function as inexpensive, efficient, and convenient forums for resolving claims which could not be brought eco- nomically in ordinary civil courts because of the costs and delays accom- 3 panying ordinary civil court proceedings.
    [Show full text]
  • Criminology and the Criminologist Marvin E
    Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume 54 Article 3 Issue 2 June Summer 1963 Criminology and the Criminologist Marvin E. Wolfgang Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Criminology Commons, and the Criminology and Criminal Justice Commons Recommended Citation Marvin E. Wolfgang, Criminology and the Criminologist, 54 J. Crim. L. Criminology & Police Sci. 155 (1963) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology by an authorized editor of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. CRIMINOLOGY AND THE CRIMINOLOGIST MARVIN E. WOLFGANG The author is Associate Professor of Sociology in the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. He is also Director of a basic research project entitled "The Measurement of Delinquency." Dr. Wolfgang is the author of Patterns in Criminal Homicide, for which he received the August Vollmer Research Award in 1960, and is President of the Pennsylvania Prison Society. As a former Guggen- heim Fellow in Italy, he collected material for an historical analysis of crime and punishment in the Renaissance. In this article Dr. Wolfgang explores the meaning of the terms "criminology" and "criminol- ogist." Recognizing that these terms have been used with great varieties of meaning since Lombroso, and that in the United States criminology has had primarily a sociological orientation, the author poses the question whether criminology can be considered an autonomous, separate discipline of knowledge. He examines the interrelationships between criminology and other fields, and the di- versity of present-day approaches to the study of crime and criminals.
    [Show full text]