Download Free The Making Of A Criminal Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online The Making Of A Criminal and write the review.

This new textbook will provide students of criminology with a better understanding of criminal justice policy and, in doing so, offers a framework for analysing the social, economic and political processes that shape its creation. The book adopts a policy-oriented approach to criminal justice, connecting the study of criminology to the wider study of British government, public administration and politics. Throughout the book the focus is on key debates and competing perspectives on how policy decisions are made. Recognising that contemporary criminal justice policymakers operate in a highly politicised, public arena under the gaze of an ever-increasing variety of groups, organisations and individuals who have a stake in a particular policy issue, the book explores how and why these people seek to influence policymaking. It also recognises that criminal policy differs from other areas of public policy, as policy decisions affect the liberty and freedoms of citizens. Throughout, key ideas and debates are linked to wider sociology, criminology and social policy theory. Key features include: a foreword by Tim Newburn, leading criminologist and author of Criminology (2nd Edition, 2013), a critical and informed analysis of the concepts, ideas and institutional practices that shape criminal justice policy making, an exploration of the relationship between criminal justice and wider social policy, a critical analysis of the debate about how and why behaviour becomes defined as requiring a criminal justice solution, a range of case studies, tasks, seminar questions and suggested further readings to keep the student engaged. This text is perfect for students taking modules in criminology; criminal justice; and social and public policy, as well as those taking courses on criminal and administrative law.
This book intends to contribute to the consolidation of the new approach to lawmaking that has taken place in the last 20 years in legal philosophy and legal theory, spreading to other legal fields, especially criminal law. This new legislation science focusing on criminal problems has triggered a growing interest in the field, a dynamic which has led to a long-needed convergence of disciplines such as administrative law, criminal law, criminology, political science, sociology and, of course, legal philosophy to contribute to a more rational decision-making process for the construct of criminal laws. With the intention to continue on with the building of a solid “Criminal Legislation Science”, this work presents scholars, lawmakers and students various emblematic approaches to enrich the discussion about different and promising tools and theoretical frameworks.
Exposing ethical dilemmas of neuroscientific research on violence, this book warns against a dystopian future in which behavior is narrowly defined in relation to our biological makeup. Biological explanations for violence have existed for centuries, as has criticism of this kind of deterministic science, haunted by a long history of horrific abuse. Yet, this program has endured because of, and not despite, its notorious legacy. Today's scientists are well beyond the nature versus nurture debate. Instead, they contend that scientific progress has led to a nature and nurture, biological and social, stance that allows it to avoid the pitfalls of the past. In Conviction Oliver Rollins cautions against this optimism, arguing that the way these categories are imagined belies a dangerous continuity between past and present. The late 1980s ushered in a wave of techno-scientific advancements in the genetic and brain sciences. Rollins focuses on an often-ignored strand of research, the neuroscience of violence, which he argues became a key player in the larger conversation about the biological origins of criminal, violent behavior. Using powerful technologies, neuroscientists have rationalized an idea of the violent brain—or a brain that bears the marks of predisposition toward "dangerousness." Drawing on extensive analysis of neurobiological research, interviews with neuroscientists, and participant observation, Rollins finds that this construct of the brain is ill-equipped to deal with the complexities and contradictions of the social world, much less the ethical implications of informing treatment based on such simplified definitions. Rollins warns of the potentially devastating effects of a science that promises to "predict" criminals before the crime is committed, in a world that already understands violence largely through a politic of inequality.
In Making Crime Pay, forensic expert and writing coach Andrea Campbell unravels the maze of criminal...
Winner of the John Hope Franklin Prize A Moyers & Company Best Book of the Year “A brilliant work that tells us how directly the past has formed us.” —Darryl Pinckney, New York Review of Books How did we come to think of race as synonymous with crime? A brilliant and deeply disturbing biography of the idea of black criminality in the making of modern urban America, The Condemnation of Blackness reveals the influence this pernicious myth, rooted in crime statistics, has had on our society and our sense of self. Black crime statistics have shaped debates about everything from public education to policing to presidential elections, fueling racism and justifying inequality. How was this statistical link between blackness and criminality initially forged? Why was the same link not made for whites? In the age of Black Lives Matter and Donald Trump, under the shadow of Ferguson and Baltimore, no questions could be more urgent. “The role of social-science research in creating the myth of black criminality is the focus of this seminal work...[It] shows how progressive reformers, academics, and policy-makers subscribed to a ‘statistical discourse’ about black crime...one that shifted blame onto black people for their disproportionate incarceration and continues to sustain gross racial disparities in American law enforcement and criminal justice.” —Elizabeth Hinton, The Nation “Muhammad identifies two different responses to crime among African-Americans in the post–Civil War years, both of which are still with us: in the South, there was vigilantism; in the North, there was an increased police presence. This was not the case when it came to white European-immigrant groups that were also being demonized for supposedly containing large criminal elements.” —New Yorker
The study of decisions in the criminal justice process provides a useful focus for the examination of many fundamental aspects of criminal jus tice. These decisions are not always highly visible. They are made, or dinarily, within wide areas of discretion. The aims of the decisions are not always clear, and, indeed, the principal objectives of these decisions are often the subject of much debate. Usually they are not guided by explicit decision policies. Often the participants are unable to verbalize the basis for the selection of decision alternatives. Adequate information for the decisions is usually unavailable. Rarely can the decisions be demonstrated to be rational. By a rationaldecision we mean "that decision among those possible for the decisionmaker which, in the light of the information available, maximizes the probability of the achievement of the purpose of the decisionmaker in that specific and particular case" (Wilkins, 1974a: 70; also 1969). This definition, which stems from statistical decision theory, points to three fundamental characteristics of decisions. First, it is as sumed that a choice of possible decisions (or, more precisely, of possible alternatives) is available. If only one choice is possible, there is no de cision problem, and the question of rationality does not arise. Usually, of course, there will be a choice, even if the alternative is to decide not to decide-a choice that, of course, often has profound consequences.
It's time to set the record straight about Steven Avery. The Netflix series Making a Murderer was a runaway hit, with over 19 million US viewers in the first 35 days. The series left many with the opinion that Steven Avery, a man falsely imprisoned for almost 20 years on a previous, unrelated assault charge, had been framed by a corrupt police force and district attorney's office for the murder of a young photographer. Viewers were outraged, and hundreds of thousands demanded a pardon for Avery. The chief villain of the series? Ken Kratz, the special prosecutor who headed the investigation and trial. Kratz's later misdeeds—prescription drug abuse and sexual harassment—only cemented belief in his corruption. This book tells you what Making a Murderer didn't. While indignation at the injustice of his first imprisonment makes it tempting to believe in his innocence, Avery: The Case Against Steven Avery and What Making a Murderer Gets Wrong and the evidence shared inside—examined thoroughly and dispassionately—prove that, in this case, the criminal justice system worked just as it should. With Avery, Ken Kratz puts doubts about Steven Avery's guilt to rest. In this exclu- sive insider's look into the controversial case, Kratz lets the evidence tell the story, sharing details and insights unknown to the public. He reveals the facts Making a Murderer conveniently left out and then candidly addresses the aftermath—openly discussing, for the first time, his own struggle with addiction that led him to lose everything. Avery systematically erases the uncertainties introduced by the Netflix series, confirming, once and for all, that Steven Avery is guilty of the murder of Teresa Halbach.
Rather than providing students with "the answers," Making Sense of Criminal Justice: Policies and Practices, Third Edition, challenges them to think critically about how the criminal justice system deals with challenging situations--like the use of force by the police--and offers a framework for lively classroom discussions and debates.