SCHOOLS OF CRIMINOLOGY

WHAT IS SCHOOLS OF CRIMINOLOGY..

• The system of thought which consists of an
integrated theory of causation of crime and
policies of control implied in the theory of
causation.
•
Each school try to explain the causation of
crime and criminal behaviour in their own
way relying on the theory propounded by the
exponent of that particular school.
• Modern criminology is the product of two main
schools of thought: The classical school originating in
the 18th century, and the positivist school originating
in the 19th century
 Understand Beccaria’s impact on modern
punishment
 Compare Bentham with modern rational
choice theories
 Analyze and critique positivism
 Understand neo-classicalism and how this
theory relates to modern criminology
 Understand the implications of theory on
public policy
 The Pre-Classical School:

• The history of primitive societies and early medieval

period reveals that human thinking in those days was
predominated by religious mysticism and all human
relations were regulated through myths, superstitions
and religious tenets prevailing in a particular society.

• There was a general belief that man by nature is

simple and his actions are controlled by some super
powers. It was generally believed that a man commits
crime due to the influence of some external spirits.
• They considered crime and criminals as an
evidence of the fact that the individual was
possessed of devil and the only cure for which
was testimony of the effectiveness of the spirit.
Worships, sacrifices and ordeals by water and
fire were usually prescribed to specify the spirit
and relieve the victim from its evil influences.
Ever since the time of Manu it has been
repeatedly argued that ordeals are the creations
of Brahma and have been practiced by gods,
great sages and all thoughtful persons.
• The pre-classical thinking, however, withered
away with the lapse of time and
advancement of knowledge. Though these
practices appear to be most irrational and
barbarious to the modern mind, they were
universally accepted and were in existence in
most countries.
 Prior to the eighteenth century, explanations of a
wide variety of phenomena tended to be of a
religious or spiritual nature.
• Demonological explanations of crime began to wane
in the 18th century with the beginning of a period of
historians call The Enlightenment, which was
essentially a major shift in the way people began to
view the world and their place
• These explanations began to wane with the
18th century “Enlightenment.”
• Predominated by humanism, rationalism, and
a belief in the primacy of the natural over the
supernatural world.
 The Classical School:
• Originated in the 18th Century
• Cesare Beccaria–“Father of Classical Criminology”:

Dei Delitti e della Pene (On Crimes and Punishment)

(1764): This book is an impassioned plea to
humanize and rationalize the law and to make
punishment more just and reasonable.
• During the Middle of 18th century, a systematic
study of criminology was first taken by the
Italian scholar Beccaria who is known as father
of modern criminology. His greatest contribution
to the science of criminology was that he for the
first time proceeded with the study of criminals
on a scientific basis and reached certain
conclusions from which definite methods of
handling crime and criminals could be worked
out. He expounded his naturalistic theory of
criminality by rejecting the omnipotence of evil
spirit.
• He laid greater emphasis on mental
phenomenon of the individual and attributed
crime to ‘free will’ of the individual. Thus he w
as much influenced by the ‘Utilitarian
Philosophy’ of his time which placed reliance on
hedonism, namely, the “Pain and pleasure
theory”. He sought to humanize the criminal law
by insisting on natural rights of human beings.
Beccaria’s tightly reasoned argument can be
summarized in relatively simple terms:-
• (1) In order to escape war and chaos, individuals gave up some of
their liberty and established a contractual society.
•
(2) Because criminal laws placed restrictions on individual
freedoms, they should be restricted in scope. They should not be
employed to enforce moral values.
•
(3) The presumption of innocence should be the guiding principle
in the administration of justice, and at all stages of the justice
process the rights of all parties involved should be protected.
•
(4) The complete criminal law code should be written and should
define all offences and punishments in advance.
•
(5) Punishment should be based on retributive reasoning because
the guilty had attacked another individual’s rights.
• 6) The severity of the punishment should be limited and it should
not go beyond what is necessary for crime prevention and
deterrence.
•
(7) Criminal punishment should correspond with the seriousness
of the crime; the punishment should fit the crime, not the
criminal.
•
(8) Punishment must be a certainty and should be inflicted
quickly.
•
(9) Punishment should not be administered to set an example,
neither should it be concerned with reforming the offender.
•
(10) The offender should be viewed as an independent and
reasonable person.
 Jeremy Bentham and Human
Nature
• Benthem was greatly influenced by Beccaria and
carried on the work in the same direction
subsequently. Benthem like Beccaria, was an
outright Utilitarian and to him the only rational
basis of any law could be the greatest happiness
of the greatest numbers. The principle, known
as Utilitarian Hedonism, requires that
punishment, being an evil in itself, should not
exceed more than what is absolutely necessary
to produce the desired effect on the criminal
and society.
Principles of Morals and Legislation (1789) is a
philosophy of social control based on the principle
of utility, which prescribed “the greatest
happiness for the greatest number.”
Any human action at all should be judged moral or
immoral by its effect on the happiness of the
community.
Hedonism: A doctrine with the central tenet that
the achievement of pleasure or happiness is the
main goal of life.
Free will enables human beings to purposely and
deliberately choose to follow a calculated course
of action.
If crime is to be deterred, punishment (pain) must
exceed the pleasures gained from the fruits of
crime.
 The Legacy of the Classical School
• The contribution of Classical School to the
development of rationalized criminological
thinking was by no means less important,
nevertheless, it had its own pitfalls. The
major shortcoming of the classical school was
that it proceeded on an abstract presumption
of free will and relied solely on the act
without devoting any attention to the state
of mind of the criminal.
• It believe in prescribing equal punishment for
same offence thus making no distinction
between first offenders and habitual
criminals. However, the greatest achievement
of this school of criminology lies in the fact
that it suggested a substantial criminal policy
which was easy to administer without resort
to the imposition of arbitrary punishment.
– All modern criminal justice systems in the world assume
the classical position that persons are free agents who
deserve to be punished when they transgress the law.
• Many of the ideas championed by Beccaria in such
rights as freedom from cruel and unusual punishment,
the right to a speedy trial, as freedom from cruel and
unusual punishment, the right to a speedy trial, the
prohibition of ex post facto laws, the right to confront
one’s accusers, and equality under law, contained in the
Bill of Rights and other documents at the heart of
Western legal systems today
• The ‘free will’ theory of Classical School did not
survive for long. It was realized that this approach
ignored the individual differences under certain
situations. The neo-classists asserted that certain
categories of offenders such as minor, idiots, insane
or incompetent had to be treated leniently
irrespective of the similarity of their criminal act
because these persons were incapable of appreciating
the difference between right and wrong. This
tendency of neo-classicists to distinguish criminals
according to their mental depravity was indeed a
progressive step inasmuch as it emphasized the need
for modifying the classical view. The conditions under
which a criminal commits a crime was studied first
time in this theory.
 Neo-Classical School:
• Neo-classists approached the study of
criminology on scientific lines by recognizing
that certain extenuating situations or mental
disorders deprive a person of his normal
capacity to control his conduct. They supported
individualization of offender and treatment
methods. The distinction between responsibility
and irresponsibility, i.e. the sanity and insanity
of the criminals paved way to subsequent
formulation of different correctional
institutions.
• Neo-classists adopted subjective approach to
criminology and concentrated their attention on
the conditions under which an individual
commits crime.
The main contribution of the neo-classical
school of criminology lies in the fact that it came
out with certain concessions in the ‘free will’
theory of classical school and suggested that an
individual might commit criminal acts due to
certain extenuating circumstances which should
be duly taken into consideration at the time of
awarding punishment.
 The Positive School:
• With the advance of behavioural sciences, the
monogenetic explanation of human conduct lost
its validity and new trend to adopt an eclectic
view about the genesis of crime gradually
developed. By the 19th of century, certain
French doctors were successfully establishing
that it was neither ‘free will’ of the offender nor
his innate depravity which actuated him to
commit crime but the real cause of criminality
lay in anthropological features of the criminal.
This led to emergence of Positive School of
criminology.
• The most significant difference between the
classical school and the positivist school is
the latter’s search for empirical facts to
confirm the idea that crime was determined
by multiple factor. They primarily emphasized
the mind and the body of the criminal, thus
to some extent neglecting social factors
external to the individual.
• Cesare Lombroso (born Ezechia Marco Lombroso;
Italian:
• 6 November 1835 – 19 October 1909), was an Italian
criminologist, physician, and founder of the Italian
School of Positivist Criminology. Lombroso rejected
the established Classical School, which held that
crime was a characteristic trait of human nature.
Instead, using concepts drawn from physiognomy,
early eugenics, psychiatry and Social Darwinism,
Lombroso's theory of anthropological criminology
essentially stated that criminality was inherited, and
that someone "born criminal" could be identified by
physical defects, which confirmed a criminal as
savage, or atavistic.
• The modern search for multifactor explanations of
crime is usually attributed to Lombroso, an Italian
often called “the father of modern criminology”.
Lombroso, a specialist in psychiatry, was serving as
army physician handling the mentally afflicted
soldiers at various military posts. For Lombroso the
objective search for explaining human behaviour
meant disagreement with free will philosophy.
Lombroso made observations on tattooing,
particularly the more obscene designs which he felt
distinguished infractious soldiers. Later Lombroso
used the practice of tattooing as a distinguishing
characteristic of criminals.
• Lombroso adopted an objective and empirical
approach to the study of criminals through his
anthropological experiments. After an intensive study
of physical characteristics of his patients and later on
of criminals, he came to definite conclusion that
criminals were physically inferior in the standard of
growth and, therefore, developed a tendency for
interior acts. He further generalized that criminals are
less sensitive to pain and therefore they have little
regard for the sufferings of others. Thus through his
biological and anthropological researches on
criminals Lombroso justified the involvement of
Darwin’s theory of biological determinism in criminal
behaviour .
• The central tenet of Lombroso’s early
explanations of crime is that criminals
represent a peculiar physical type,
distinctively different from non-criminals. In
general terms, he claimed that criminals
represent a form of degeneracy that was
manifested in physical characteristics
reflective of earlier forms of evolution. He
described criminals as atavistic, a thrownback
to an earlier form of evolutionary life.
• Lombroso classified criminals into four major categories:
(i) The born criminals, people with atavistic characteristics. He
considered these criminals beyond ;
•
(ii) Insane criminals, who included idiots, imbeciles, and
paranoiacs, as well as epileptics and alcoholics;
•
(iii) Occasional criminals or criminolids, whose crimes are
explained primarily by opportunity, although they too have innate
traits that predispose them to criminality. They have a tendency
to commit crime to overcome their inferiority in order to meet the
needs of survival; and
•
(iv) Criminals of passion who commit crimes because of anger,
love or honour. They are characterized by being propelled to crime
by an “irresistible force”.
• Lombroso modified his theory throughout
five editions with each one giving attention
more and more environmental explanations
including climate, rainfall, sex, marriage
customs, laws, the structure of government,
church organization, and the effects of the
other factors. However, he never completely
gave up the idea of the existence of a born
criminal type.
• Most note worthy here is the attention he gave
to a multifactor explanation of crime that
included not only heredity but social, cultural,
and economic variables. He was positive in
method and objective in approach which
subsequently paved way to formulation of
multiple-causation theory of crime by the
sociologists. The multiple factor explanation is
common in today’s study of crime. Lombroso is
credited also with pushing the study of crime
away from abstract metaphysical, legal, and
juristic explanations as the basis of penology “to
a scientific study of the criminal and the
conditions under which he commits crime.”
• Lombroso’s legacy of positivism was continued and
expanded by a fellow Italian, Enrico Ferri. Unlike
Lombroso who gave more attention to biological than
to social factors, Ferri gave more emphasis to the
interrelatedness of social, economic, and political
factors that contribute to crime. He firmly believed
that other factors such as emotional reactions, social
infirmity or geographical conditions also play a vital
role in determining criminal tendencies in men. He
argued that criminality could be explained by
studying the interactive effects among physical
factors, individual factors and social factors. He also
argued that crime could be controlled by social
changes, many of which were directed toward the
benefit of the working class.
• In the first four editions of his work Ferri had only five classes of
criminals:
(i) The born of instinctive criminal whom Lombroso had identified
as the atavist;
•
(ii) The insane criminals who was clinically identified as mentally
ill;
•
(iii) The passion criminal who committed crime as a result of
either prolonged and chronic mental problem or an emotional
state;
•
(iv) The occasional criminal who was the product of family and
social conditions more than abnormal physical or mental
problems; and
•
(v) The habitual criminal who acquired the habit from the social
environment.
• After Lombroso and Ferri, Raffele Garofalo
was the last major contributor to the
positivist school of criminology. Unlike
Lombroso’s emphasis on criminals as
abnormal types with distinguishable
anatomic, psychological and social features,
or Ferri’s emphasis on socialistic reforms and
social defenses against crime, Garofalo is
remembered for his pursuit of practical
solutions to concrete problems located in the
legal institutions of his day and for his
doctrine of “natural crimes”.
• Garofalo’s theoretical arguments on the nature of crime
and on the nature of criminals were consistent with social
Darwinism. He argued, for example, that because society
is a “natural body” crimes are offences “against the law of
nature”. Criminal action was therefore crime against
nature. Accordingly, the “rules of nature” were the rules
of right conduct revealed to humans through their
reasoning. Garofalo’s thinking also included some
influence from the classical school and its emphasis on
reasoning. He nevertheless identified acts that no society
could refuse to recognize as criminal and repress by
punishment: natural crimes. These offences, according to
Garofalo, violated two basic human sentiments found
among people all ages, namely the sentiments of probity
and pity.
He argued that true criminals lacked properly developed
altruistic sentiments.
• True criminals, in other words, had psychic or moral
anomalies that could be transmitted through
heredity. This conclusion led Garofalo to identify four
criminal classes one distinct from the other because
of deficiencies in the basic sentiments of pity and
probity:
(i) Murderers whom he called “endemic” criminals
(ii) Violent criminals who are affected by
environmental influences such as prejudices of
honour, politics and religion;
(iii) Criminals lacking in sentiments of probity
(Thieves);
(iv) Lascivious or lustful criminals who commit crimes
against sex and chastity.
• He reasoned that because true criminals’ action revealed an
inability to live by the basic human sentiments necessary for
society to survive, they should be eliminated. Their death would
contribute to the survival or society. For lesser criminals, he
proposed that elimination take the form of life imprisonment or
overseas transportation.
It is clear that deterrence and rehabilitation were secondary
considerations for Garofalo. However, he favoured “enforced
reparation” and indeterminate sentences, which indicates that
Garofalo’s social defenses against crime were modeled to some
extent on the psychic characteristics of the offender. In this regard
his position of punishment is more in line with the free will
reasoning of the classical scholars than Garofalo might admit.
He strongly pleaded for elimination of habitual offenders who
were incapable of social adaptation as a measure of social
defence.
• Psychologists approach the task of explaining
delinquent and criminal behaviour by
focusing on an individual’s personality. In
particular, they examine the processes by
which behaviour and restraints on behaviour
are learned. These processes often are
conceived as being the result of the
interaction of biological predispositions and
social experiences.
 Pychological theories
• Among the earliest psychological theories of crime were
those based on the work of Sigmund Freud(1856–1939).
Freud argued that human nature includes a great reservoir
of instinctual drives (the “id”) that demand gratification.
These drives are restrained by moral and ethical codes
(the “superego ) that children internalize as a result of
their great love for and attachment to their parents.
Adults develop a rational part of their personality (the
“ego”) that mediates between the drives of the id and the
restraints of the superego. Because the id is a relatively
constant drive, criminality is assumed to result from the
failure of the superego, a consequence of its incomplete
development. However, the empirical evidence for this
theory is thin.
(Sigmund Freud (1856-1939)
• Freud claimed that all human beings are born with
certain instincts, i.e. with a natural tendency to
satisfy their biologically determined needs for food,
shelter and warmth
• All humans have natural drives and urges repressed
in the unconscious
• All humans have criminal tendencies
• Freud hypothesized that the most common element
that contributed to criminal behavior was faulty
identification by a child with her or his parents
• Later psychological theories of crime were based on
behaviour theory, such as that of the American
psychologist B.F. Skinner (1904–90), who viewed all
human behaviour—criminal and otherwise—as
learned and thus manipulable by the use of
reinforcement and punishment (see behaviourism).
The social learning theory of Ronald Akers expanded
behaviour theory to encompass ways in which
behaviour is learned from contacts within the family
and other intimate groups, from social contacts
outside the family (particularly from peer groups),
and from exposure to models of behaviour in the
media, particularly television.
• Beyond these broad psychological theories, it is
sometimes argued that crime is associated with
certain mental conditions. Mental illness is generally
the cause of a relatively small proportion of crimes,
but its perceived importance may be exaggerated by
the seriousness of some of the crimes committed by
persons with mental disorders. The closure of many
American mental institutions in the 1960s and ’70s
thrust many mentally ill people into the surrounding
communities, where some of them later became
troublesome. Because authorities had no other place
to put them, there was a strong tendency for
mentally ill people to end up in jails and prisons.
• According to Freud, a boy's close relation to his
mother leads to a desire for complete union with
her
• A girl, on the other hand, who is similarly attached
to the mother and thus caught up in a
"homosexual" desire, directs her libido (love, sexual
energy broadly construed) toward her father
• This produces a triadic relationship regardless of
one's sex, with the parent of the same sex cast in
the role of a rival for the affections of the parent of
the opposite sex.
• Id -- the biological, inherited, unconscious source of
sexual drives, instincts, and irrational impulses
• The ego is produced from the non-biological (social
and familial) forces brought to bear on one's
biological development and functions as an
intermediary between the demands of the id and
the external world
• Super-ego (internalized rules placing limits on the
subject's satisfactions and pleasures)
• The id is the unorganized part of the
personality structure that contains a human's
basic, instinctual drives. Id is the only
component of personality that is present
from birth.It is the source of our bodily
needs, wants, desires, and impulses,
particularly our sexual and aggressive drives.
The id contains the libido, which is the
primary source of instinctual force that is
unresponsive to the demands of reality
• According to Freud the id is unconscious by definition:
• "It is the dark, inaccessible part of our personality,
what little we know of it we have learned from our
study of the Dreamwork and of the construction of
neurotic symptoms, and most of that is of a negative
character and can be described only as a contrast to
the ego. We approach the id with analogies: we call it
a chaos, a cauldron full of seething excitations. ... It is
filled with energy reaching it from the instincts, but it
has no organization, produces no collective will, but
only a striving to bring about the satisfaction of the
instinctual needs subject to the observance of the
pleasure principle.
• Ego
• The ego acts according to the reality principle; i.e. it seeks
to please the id's drive in realistic ways that will benefit in
the long term rather than bring grief.At the same time,
Freud concedes that as the ego "attempts to mediate
between id and reality, it is often obliged to cloak the Ucs.
[Unconscious] commands of the id with its own Pcs. [
Preconscious] rationalizations to conceal the id's conflicts
with reality, to profess ... to be taking notice of reality
even when the id has remained rigid and unyielding." The
reality principle that operates the ego is a regulating
mechanism that enables the individual to delay gratifying
immediate needs and function effectively in the real
world. An example would be to resist the urge to grab
other people's belongings and buy them instead
• The ego separates out what is real. It helps us
to organize our thoughts and make sense of
them and the world around us."The ego is
that part of the id which has been modified
by the direct influence of the external world.
..
• The superego reflects the internalization of cultural
rules, mainly taught by parents applying their
guidance and influence. Freud developed his concept
of the super-ego from an earlier combination of the
ego ideal and the "special psychical agency which
performs the task of seeing that narcissistic
satisfaction from the ego ideal is ensured ... what we
call our 'conscience'."For him "the installation of the
super-ego can be described as a successful instance of
identification with the parental agency," while as
development proceeds "the super-ego also takes on
the influence of those who have stepped into the
place of parents — educators, teachers, people
chosen as ideal models.
• One particular personality configuration—antisocial personality
disorder—is thought to be strongly associated with criminality.
However, because the criteria for diagnosing the disorder
emphasize committing crimes and engaging in crimelike
behaviour, it is unclear whether the disorder is a cause of crime or
simply a label that psychiatrists use to describe people who
happen to be criminals. In the 1990s, psychological research was
focused on early childhood experiences that tended to lead to
criminality in later life, including poor parental child-rearing
techniques, such as harsh or inconsistent discipline. Research also
isolated impulsivity—the tendency to engage in high levels of
activity, to be easily distracted, to act without thinking, and to
seek immediate gratification—as a personality characteristic
associated with criminality.
 Eysenck's theory of crime:
Extroversion and introversion
•
Eysenck claimed that the hedonistic tendency to
commit crimes is controlled by the conscience. He
also spoke about introversion and extroversion.
Introverted persons are sensitive and can't take the
limited number of stimulus, while extroverted
persons enjoy in a large number of stimulus and do
not to be bored. According to Eysenck, criminality is a
natural and normal choice with whom the people
enhance pleasure or reduce pain. Reactions on some
behavior are punishments or rewards. Extroverted
persons aren't able to learn from experience.
.
• Other psychological theories of the crime
deal with mental disorders, psychopathy, self
induced mental incapacity (alcoholism and
drug addiction) and influence of public media
on the crime. Today, personality test are able
to provide a great insight about someones
predisposition towards delinquency by
examining the potential conflicts, which exist
in someones personality
 Henry Herbert Goddard
• Henry Herbert Goddard (August 14, 1866 – June
18, 1957) was a prominent American
psychologist and eugenicist in the early 20th
century. He is known especially for his 1912
work The Kallikak Family: A Study in the
Heredity of Feeble-Mindedness, which he
himself came to regard as deeply flawed, and for
being the first to translate the Binet intelligence
testinto English in 1908 and distributing an
estimated 22,000 copies of the translated test
across the United States; he also introduced the
term "moron" into the field.
• Moron is a term once used in psychology to denote
mild intellectual disability. "Moron" was coined in
1910 by psychologist Henry H. Goddard from the
Ancient Gree word (moros), which meant "dull"(as
opposed to oxy, which meant "sharp"oxymoron), and
used to describe a person with a mental age in
adulthood of between 8 and 12 on the Binet scale.It
was once applied to people with an IQ of 51–70,
being superior in one degree to "imbecile" (IQ of 26–
50) and superior in two degrees to "idiot" (IQ of 0–
25). The word moron, along with others including,
"idiotic", "imbecilic", "stupid", and "feeble-minded,
was formerly considered a valid descriptor in the
psychological community, but it is now deprecated in
use by psychologists.
• He was the leading advocate for the use of
intelligence testing in societal institutions
including hospitals, schools, the legal system
and the military. He played a major role in the
emerging field of clinical psychology, in 1911
helped to write the first U.S. law requiring that
blind, deaf and mentally retarded children be
provided special education within public school
systems, and in 1914 became the first American
psychologist to testify in court that subnormal
intelligence should limit the criminal
responsibility of defendants.
 Geographical Theory of Crime

• This explanation evaluates crime on the basis

of geographical factors like climate,
temperature, humidity, etc. It is supported by
scholars like Montesquieu, Quetelet, Dexter,
Kropotokin, Champneuf, and many others.
 Montesquieu
• Montesquieu (Spirit of Laws, 1748) laid
down the law that criminality increases
in proportion as one approaches the
equator, and drunkenness increases in
proportion as one approaches the poles.
 Quetlet
• About a century later, Quetlet formulated his
famous 'thermal law' of delinquency in which
he claimed that crimes against person
predominated in the south and increased in
summers, while crimes against property
predominated in the north and increased
during the winter time.
 Champneuf
• Champneuf supported this hypothesis of the
relationship between the nature of crime and the
climate on the basis of his study conducted in France
between 1825 and 1830.
• He found 181.5 property crimes against every 100
crimes against persons in north France, and 98.8
property crimes against every 100 crimes against
persons in south France. On the basis of his study of
property crimes conducted between 1825 and 1880,
the French scholar Laccasagne also found the highest
number of property crimes in December, followed by
January, November and February.
 Dexter
• In a study on the effect of climate on an individual's
behaviour made in 1904, the American scholar Dexter
found that crime and geographical conditions like
barometric pressure, heat, humidity, etc., were highly
related with one another.
• His found that crimes of violence were most numerous
during the warm months of the year, during periods of
low barometric pressure, and during periods of low
humidity. (Cf. Joseph Cohen, The Geography of Crime,
September 1941) In 1911, a Russian scholar Kropotkin
established that the rate of murder in any month/year can
be predicted by calculating the average temperature and
humidity of the preceding month/year.
• For this, he gave a mathematical formula
2(7x+y), where x is temperature and y is
humidity. Multiplying the average
temperature x of the last month with 7 and
adding the average humidity of the last
month y to it, and then multiplying the total
figure with 2, we will get the number of
murders to be committed in a given month.
• The geographical explanation has been
criticised on the ground that geographical
factors may affect individual behaviour but
the direct relationship between crime and
geographical factors cannot be accepted as
claimed by these scholars.
• The geographical theories over-simplify the
problem of crime and exaggerate the
geographical factors. Had such relationship
really existed, the number and nature of
crime in a given geographical environment
would have been the same at all times, which
is not so. Hence, the invalidity of this theory.
 Economic theory of crime

• Criminal is a product of economic environment.

• Fornasari
• Fornasari the Italian scholar talk of the
relationship between crime and poverty in
1894.He maintain that 60 % of the population of
Italy was poorand of the total crimes in
Italy,85%to 90%are poor.
 Bonger
• Bonger also emphasised capitalistic system
man concentrates only on himself and not
interested in the needs of others.thus it
breeds social irresponsibility and leads to
crime.
 Cyril Burt
• While analysing juvenile delinquency,found
that 19%juvenile delinquents belonged to
extremely poor families and 37% to poor
families.
 Criticism
• Sutherland has said:
• We find more criminals in poor families
because it is easy to locate them
• Criminals belonging to upper classes use their
influence and pressures in escaping arrests
and conviction.
• Reaction of administrators are more biased
towards the upper class people.