The rationale underlying the use of twins in explaining criminal behaviour is that if 1 MZ twin shows signs of aggressive behaviour, and the other one does too, then it is down to genetic influence. However if they other twin doesn't, then it means the environment must have something to do with it. If Harry did have a twin who also shows aggressive behaviour, which may due to his 'difficult family background', because he would share a 100% concordance with him, this would be why he showed aggressive behaviour and had criminal record. Studies were undergone which both supported and criticised this approach. One of the earliest studies done by Johannes Lange found that MZ twins showed a much higher degree of concordance for criminal behaviour than DZ twins.
Principles of Crime Causation: Biological and Psychological Basic Principles- Biological Perspectives of crime causation: • The brain is the organ of the mind and the locus of personality. In the words of the well-known bio-criminologist Clarence Ray Jeffery, "The brain is the organ of behavior; no theory of behavior can ignore neurology and neurochemistry. "(1) • The basic determinants of human behavior, including criminal tendencies, are, to a considerable degree, constitutionally or genetically based. • Observed gender and racial differences in rates and types of criminality may be at least partially the result of biological differences between the sexes and/or between racially distinct groups. • The basic determinants of human behavior, including criminality, may be passed on from generation to generation.
Lombroso stated that born criminals could be recognised because they possessed certain ‘stigma’, an example of this would be big ears, big lips, prominent cheeks bones, extra visible wrinkles, extra fingers or toes, irregularity of the head or face. A male with more than 4 of these anomalies is labelled a born criminal. Females can also be born criminal but they only need as little as 3 to inherit the title of a born criminal. (Lombroso 1876 cited in Akers 1999) This theory of criminal behaviour helped and inspired other criminologists come up with biological theories on criminal behaviour, but it has been proved that Lombroso’s theory on the born criminal is wrong. Charles Goring made an experiment of comparing prison inmates with soldiers, professors, university undergraduates and hospital patients and he found no differences between the 37 physical traits and behaviour, he concluded that ‘there was no such thing as a physical criminal type.’ (Akers,
Theories on Crime Comparison: Psychological Positivism At the end of the 19th, and into the early 20th century a new school of thought emerged in regard to behavior, called positivism. This theoretical principle maintained that a person’s behaviors, although also the product of free will, were primarily the result of a person’s biological, psychological, and social traits. Modern criminologists continue to use components of the positivist theoretical approach in determining criminal behavior; however, many experts are of the opinion that various aspects of this school of thought are obsolete. This view originates from the knowledge that medical science, psychological research, and sociological studies are far more advanced than they were 100 years ago. Nevertheless, criminologists continue to find useful aspects of old studies even from discredited psychological theories, like psychoanalysis (Williams & McShane, 2009).
People are concerned that a biological focus may become racist. The brain is the organ of the mind and the locus of personality. -The basic determinants of human behavior, including criminal tendencies, are to a considerable degree constitutionally or genetically based. -Observed gender and racial differences in rates and types of criminality may be at least partially the result of biological differences between the sexes and/or between racially distinct groups. -The basic determinants of human behavior, including criminality, may be passed on from generation to generation.
However subcultural theorists developed this idea claiming that people experiencing strain seek different forms of success. More specifically Cloward and Ohlin put forward the idea of the 'illegitimate opportunity structure’, which they used to explain subcultural crime. This structure was operable outside of the mainstream structure and ultimately lead to the attainment of success and money through deviant means. For example, Cloward and Ohlin argued that organized crimes such as the drugs trade could be explained by failures in mainstream capitalism. Cloward and Ohlin argue, that the majority of criminals involved in the drugs trade were unable to succeed within capitalism and were driven to an illegitimate means of obtaining wealth.
In other cases some criminals are born with the lack of humility, which is the ability to put yourself in the situation of the person who you are doing harm to. These people are considered sociopaths. Another theory called the rational choice theory states that everyone has their own thoughts and emotions for which they commit their crimes weather to improve their living standards or to avoid hardships. Intelligence can play a huge role in the mind of a criminal; this is considered the nature theory. A person who does not know any better is much more likely to commit a crime then a well educated person, although this
They believe that people may be biological more attracted to committing crime than others for example, they believe traits such as aggression and risk taking are inborn in the person and this causes them to commit crimes. They also think that the socialisation of the person leads to their tendency towards crime. They believe, like conservatives and new rightist, that the nuclear family is the best form of socialisation and avoiding crime Another right realist, Charles Murray, believes that the rising crime rates may be due to a rising ‘underclass’, those who are defined by deviant behaviour and fail to socialise their children properly. As mentioned in item a, right realists also believe that the state plays a big part in the rtes of crime. As people can rely on the state to supply them with money people are less encouraged to go out and work to end their money, fathers no longer need to support their children as lone parents can live off benefits, there
He believed that the features of a criminals face could determine what kind of criminal they were; he believed that criminals were born deviant and lacked the free will and were not responsible for their own actions. He collected skulls, brains and photographs of the criminally insane which were later displayed in a museum. “Lombroso was the first to describe the observations of cortical dysplasia in patients with epilepsy. In attempting to predict criminality by the shapes of the skulls and other physical features of criminals, he had in effect created a new pseudoscience of forensic phrenology. For example, he and his collaborators were the first ever to describe and explain the form of epilepsy known now as Taylor’s dysplasia.
The question is should young offenders be treated like adults and receive the same sanctions for similar crimes that they might commit. The government of each state have issued what they think is the age of criminal responsibility, which is shown in the following diagram: As seen in the above figure each state agrees that children that commit crimes under the age of ten have no criminal responsibility. This is mainly because children under the age of ten are too young to have a criminal intent (mens rea); this is also referred to as doli incapax.