Introduction
With the development of the media, it is even easier for someone to give their opinion on a crime that occurred, even if it is an uninformed/uneducated one.. As a result, whenever a crime occurs, the public usually give their opinion on the motivations of the offender and what should happen to them. Within these comments, criminological theories are often evident. This is known as implicitly theorising. The public’s commentary was evident when a fourteen-year-old boy stabbed a pregnant Pei-Jiun Cheah in June 2013. The comments below the news article demonstrated that members of the public predominately implicitly theorise youth offending in terms of classical theory. They theorise that young people commit crimes based on an individual and rational choice to do so, and therefore they should be punished and deterred. This does not reflect the majority of the literature, which suggests that the public believe that rehabilitation is the best course of action for young offenders, not punishment or deterrence. This research report will demonstrate this through analysing and comparing the comments of the public and academic literature.
Implicit theories
An implicit theory is when an individual utilizes observations, interactions and experiences to form hypotheses and theories, and, in turn, uses these theories to understand, interpret and explain criminality or to determine a criminal’s behaviour. (Mann & Hollin 2007: 8; McCartan 2010, Ó Ciardha & Gannon 2012). The development of implicit theories is unconscious and automatic, and occurs through an interaction of developmental factors, social learning, and life experiences. They usually reflect ideas and explanations within explicit theories, which are criminological theories of crime that have been developed and tested in order to help us understand and explain the world. In turn, these implicit theories affect thinking, actions, and the way the behavior of others and the self is perceived’ (Dempsey & Day 2011: 417; source). As a result an individual can form an inaccurate understanding of the underlying the observations that form the theories, or of the subject of the theory. They also shape and are shaped by media representations and professional knowledge (Box 1981, Hardiker and Webb 1979, McCartan 2010). These implicit theories are evident within the comments below the news article reporting on the stabbing of Pei-Jiun Cheah.
Offender
In regards to the stabbing of Pei-Jiun Cheah, the public predominantly theorises the crime of the offender in terms of classical theory. Classical theory views offending as a rational decision that the offender makes after weighing up the risks and rewards, because humans have the capacity to reason. Thus, the offender is viewed as voluntaristic and responsible for their actions (Carrabine et al. 2004, 16; Cunneen, White and Richards 2015, 25-26). This ideology is reflected in comments such as “ [the stabbing was a] very calculated move on his behalf” and “[the offender] should…learn accountability.” These comments show that members of the public within the comments view offenders as rational beings, voluntaristic and therefore and responsible for their actions. Therefore, these comments clearly demonstrate that the members of the public within the comments implicitly theorises offending in terms of classical theory (White, Haines and Asquith 2017, 24-25). However, these comments made by the members of the public do not reflect what the academic literature shows in regard to public opinion about what should happen to offenders (Colmar Brunton 2016, 6; Weatherburn 2001, 1-6).
The academic literature demonstrates that the majority of the public view offending as a result of other factors as opposed to simply just a result of individual choice, which challenges the comments made by members of the public. This is exemplified by statistics, which show that 86% of respondents say that drugs are major causes of crime, whereas 77% say that alcohol is. 68% cited unemployment as a major cause of crime, 63% said ‘poverty’ 58% said ‘breakdown of family’, and 55% said ‘poor education/poor schooling. (Colmar Brunton 2016, 6; Weatherburn 2001, 1-6). This demonstrates that while members of the public in the comments view offending as a result of individual choice, the academic literature shows that the majority of the public view offending as a result of other factors.
Incarceration
The publics implicit theorising also reflects classical theory’s emphasis on incarceration. Classical theory proposes that due to the risk/reward principle discussed earlier, punishment should be used to deter individuals from committing crime though increasing of the risk of punishment in order to outweigh the prospect of any reward (Cunneen, White and Richards 2015, 25-26; Dripps 2009, 390). This idea is reflected in comments such as “[the offender should be] locked…up from society”, “lock him up for life”, “[he] deserves to go to jail”, and the numerous members of the public that simply commented “lock him up”. These comments clearly show that members of the public implicitly theorise that punishment should be used to deal with offenders, which reflects how the explicit theory of classical theory also suggests this (Tierney 2009, 14). The reason why members of the public within the comments support punitive policies is because members of the public tend to overemphasize dispositional explanations in explaining criminal behavior. This means they are likely to overlook the situation that an offender was in, and judge their behavior based on what they assume is their personality instead of analysing all of the factors that contributed to someone’s criminality, such as mental illness. Moreover, if members of the public believe that little or nothing can be done to modify criminality, then they are likely to support incapacitative practices that would separate individuals who were so determined from the rest of society (Strossner and Green 1990; Maruna and King, A. 2009). However, the demonisation and lack of empathy for young people within these comments is a major issue, as it can cause youth criminals to be alienated and can drive policy. However, these comments by the members of the public do not reflect what the academic literature shows in regard to public opinion about what should happen to offenders.
The academic literature demonstrates that members of the public favour rehabilitation rather than incarceration, which challenges the comments made by the public.. This is demonstrated by a number of sources such as Gelb (2011a, page), who found 74.3% of respondents supported the use of alternatives to imprisonment for the young. Furthermore, members of the public saw incapacitation as inappropriate for first-time offenders, with only an average of 3.2% of respondents nominating this purpose as the most important for this type of offender. Rather, respondents were most likely to nominate rehabilitation, with an average of 39.6% in favour of it as the most important purpose of sentencing for young offenders. (Gelb, K. 2011b). Thus, there is substantial public support for educational programs, drug treatment, job skills training, and other rehabilitative initiatives for juvenile delinquents (Pickett, Chiricos and Gertz(2014, 50) and a more compassionate juvenile justice system (Piquero et al 2010, 200) Thus, while the comments under the news article argued that the young offender should be incarcerated, the academic literature showed that the public actually considers this inappropriate for a first time offender and favours rehab instead.
Deterrence
The public’s implicit theorising also reflects classical theory’s emphasis on deterrence, which is the fear of a threatened or experienced criminal sanction. Classical theory proposes that punishment should be used for the sole purpose of crime prevention, and that for it to work as a deterrent, it needed to be rationally applied as all human beings as rational (White, Haines and Asquith 2017, 27-28; source). These ideas are reflected through comments such as “ this 14 year old needs…something severe enough to act as a deterrent”, with another saying that he should be incarcerated in an adult prison in order to “deter him and others.” This implicit theorising reflects the risk/reward principle that is evident within explicit theory of classical theory, in that punishment should be used to deter individuals from committing crime though increasing of the risk of punishment in order to outweigh the prospect of any reward (source). Although members of the public within the comments view deterrence as important, this does not reflect what the academic literature says about public opinion on responses to youth offending (source).
Although the members of the public in the comments suggest that deterrence should be used to deal with the offender, the literature shows that deterrence is unpopular with the public. This is exemplified by the fact that among members of the public, first-time offenders were the least likely to be nominated for general deterrence, with an average of 5.9% voting for this, as the most important purpose of sentencing. (Gelb 2011b). The unpopularity of deterrence was also identified in a study by Roth (2013, 6), who found that there was little support for deterrence whether on an individual basis or a general one. This demonstrates that the academic literature challenges the assertion by members of the public within the comments that deterrence should be employed to deal with offenders.
Use scared straight article
Conclusion
When the public comment on crimes that have occurred, they are often implicitly theorising in that utilize their own observations, interactions and experiences to form hypotheses and theories, and, in turn, uses these theories to understand, interpret and explain criminality or to determine a criminal’s behaviour. (Mann & Hollin 2007: 8; McCartan 2010, Ó Ciardha & Gannon 2012). The comments below the news article demonstrated that members of the public predominately implicitly theorised youth offending in terms of classical theory. They theorised that young people committed crimes based on an individual and rational choice to do so, and therefore they should be punished and deterred. This did not reflect the majority of the literature, which suggested that the public believe that rehabilitation is the best course of action for young offenders, not punishment or deterrence.