General Strain Theory was formulated by Robert Agnew, and first published in 1992. According to General Strain Theory individuals engage in crime because of strains or stressors which produce anger and anxiety (Agnew, 1992). Crimes become the outlet that the individual uses to cope with or remedy the strains or stressors. Agnew states that there are three different types of deviance producing strains. They are failure to achieve positively valued goals, removal of positively valued stimuli, and confrontation with negative stimuli (Agnew, 1992).
After a crime has been committed and the individual who is responsible has been caught, they will begin the process involving “criminal defense.” When an individual breaks the law, there are various forms of defense that he or she may be eligible in using in regard to the charges that are being brought up against them. During the process, there maybe one or more defenses’ that will be used during the defendants criminal trial. Types of Defense’s When a person has been accused of a crime, he or she are given a chance to plead his or her fate during the trial process. This process is done during the arguments of the trial and submission of evidence proving their innocents. A defendant and his or her legal representation must prove to the judge and jurors why they are innocent and that he or she should not be held accountable for the crime in question.
For an assault to be considered a misdemeanor, it must be an assault that was unaccompanied by aggravation circumstances (Schmalleger, Hall & Dolatowski, 2010). Aggravated assaults, though, fall under the felonious assaults. Aggravates assaults are more of an intent to commit murder or rape. Battery Another personal crime is battery. The definition of battery is an
DURESS BY THREATS INTRODUCTION The general nature of the defence of duress is that the defendant was forced by someone else to break the law under an immediate threat of serious harm befalling himself or someone else, ie he would not have committed the offence but for the threat. Duress is a defence because:- "...threats of immediate death or serious personal violence so great as to overbear the ordinary powers of human resistance should be accepted as a justification for acts which would otherwise be criminal." (Attorney-General v Whelan [1934] IR 518, per Murnaghan J (Irish CCA) The defendant bears the burden of introducing evidence of duress and it is then up to the prosecution to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the defendant was not acting under duress. If a defence is established it will result in an acquittal. 1.
An example of replication is law enforcement replicating a crime to see how the crime was committed. Verification is confirming or validating something. A lie detector test verifies whether someone is telling the truth or not. Theory is in criminal justice represents an attempt to develop plausible explanations of reality, which in this case are crime and the criminal justice system. In addition to one of the most intriguing aspects is the Hypothesis of the Criminal Justice system when referring to a crime being committed.
And Secondary Deviance, he suggested, was the idea criminality is a response to being labelled as deviant. The deviant label then becomes the individual’s master status, and the deviance is used as a means of attack, defence or adjustment to the societal reaction to the label/stigma they carry (Lemert, 1951). Social reaction is a fundamental concept in relation to crime, and changing definitions of crime are also evident; over time and between cultures, what gets labelled as a crime has shifted, highlighting cultural variations regarding what society labels as criminal. This reaction to crime may be criminogenic – meaning tending to produce crime or criminality as a result of reaction and labelling, highlighting the extent to which labelling is present in the establishment of criminal identity. Howard Becker developed his theory of labelling - also known as social reaction theory - in the 1963 book Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance.
It was proved that the defendant was guilty of rape by his dna, also the fact that he was menacing people with a shotgun, which is how the taking of the DNA came about to prove him guilty of rape. Accomplice liability does not apply to this case; accomplice liability allows the courts to find a person criminally liable for acts committed by another person. If a person aids, assist or encourages another in the commission of a crime they are an accomplice to the crime, while the person who actually commits the act is called the” principal”. However, when determining what is accomplice liability and criminal liability a court needs to examine factors and intent of both the principal and the accomplice (www.legalmatch.com). The elements of crime are a series of components that must be present in order for it to be demonstrated that someone is guilty of a crime.
Social Deviance and Social Control Student’s Name Institutional Affiliation Social Deviance and Social Control An assault is a threat or a deliberate attempt to inflict bodily harm or offensive physical contact on a person hence putting the person in apprehension or danger of such contact or harm. It is both a tort and a crime, and consequently it may either lead to civil or criminal liability. It is a social deviance as it goes against the norms of the society; also, it involves actions of threat and violence either by show of force or sometimes causing another person to apprehend immediately. An assault may include either of the following cases: when one inflicts serious bodily injury
The next one would be entrapment. This is where the defenses will fight that the person was set up for the crime. To prove this
Hugh and Keith problem question unit guide page 12- Rickesh Punjani Hugh may be guilty of a theft or burglary charge under the theft act 1968. The basic definition under section one of the theft act 1968 is that a person Is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention to permanently depriving the other of it; and ‘theft’ and ‘steal’ shall be considered accordingly. We can tell from section one of the theft act that the actus reus of a theft is the appropriation of property belonging to another. Appropriation simply means assuming the owners right to that property. From the scenario we can see that Hugh has done this when he has ‘sneaks round his father’s house and takes the bike with a view of selling it’.