White Collar Crime An Analysis

Question: Describe about white collar crime. Answer: Human societies across the globe have been plagued by different manifestations of crimes. There was a time when crime was related to unprivileged lower class, and criminals were thought to be the outcome of income disparity and lack of educational basis. But time has changed, and on a gradual basis, the modes, motives, and origins of crimes and the nature of criminals have changed radically. The rise of white collar crimes have pointed to the fact that, often greed can instigate individuals from sound socio-economic backgrounds and educational spheres, to commit crimes that can render negative impacts on innumerable lives, and often on the majority of the populace of a nation. White collar criminals are the new face to crime disguised in sobriety. This disguise, accompanied by the lack of proper definition of the crime, differences in opinion, differences in levels of interpretation, difference in federal and state (and local) level functions, the nature of U.S. criminal justice syst em, and hindrances related to international laws, has often made it difficult for law enforcement to bring under trial a white-collar criminal in the right way. Coined in 1939 by Edwin Sutherland, the phrase white-collar crime, as defined by Sutherland (as cited in Cornell University Law School, n.d.) denotes crimes that have been committed by respectable individuals holding important professional and social positions. With the passage of time the definition of white-collar crime went on accumulating more aspects, and it has continued to entail some more elements. From todays perspective, if analyzed, then it can be seen that, white-collar crime encompasses different types of crimes which are nonviolent in nature, and which are committed for securing financial gains (Cornell University Law School, n.d.). It is explicitly visible in the definition of the crime that there are ambiguities, and there is no single criminology definition which has been unanimously accepted by criminologists and law enforcements in terms of white-collar crime. This has added to the problem of prosecuting a myriad of white-collar criminals in reality. It has often b een observed that most white-collar criminals use sophisticated means to hide their criminal activities through a series of complicated transactions which may apparently seem normal (Cornell University Law School, n.d.), and this adds to the problem of bringing such criminals under trial. Dilemma also lies in the fact that, the validity of white-collar crime as a form of crime has often been challenged by many scholars. It has been seen that as a form of crime, the definition and characterization of white-collar crimes have been subjected to severe criticism and controversy, and this has led to conceptual ambiguity (which in turn, has added to the problem in a greater degree) (Quinney, 1964). Also, it is noteworthy that, there is a lack of clarity from the conceptual perspective, and there is also ambiguities related to the diverse behaviors which constitute a white collar crime. But it is noteworthy that, These difficulties are to be expected since the search for a causative theory of white collar crime has been hampered by a number of problems which have also impeded the study of other forms of crime (Quinney, 1964). There are two principal problems related to the proper analysis of what white-collar crime is first, it is the problem related to the unit of analysis, and second, the problem related to the level of explanation (Quinney, 1964). The unit of analysis of white-collar crimes from the legal perspective is ingrained with ambiguities. It has been noted that the motives of several different white-collar crimes can be assorted to several different sociological and psychological sub-headings, and no single motive can be related to every crime. This is one primary problem related to white-collar crime. There is a need of categorizing different white-collar crimes under different typologies. But there is a problem related to this too. It is to be noted that, behavioral aspects can also come into play in this regard, adding to the problem even more. Moreover, in respect of the level of explanation, there is a confusion and ambiguity related to white collar crimes. Theories have differed in term s of their validity or invalidity, but this is not the only difference in terms of levels. As a matter of fact; theories have differed in the level of explanation. If some theorists have tried to interpret white collar crimes from the criminological perspective, then some other theorists have tried to explain the phenomenon purely from sociological perspective. Some other theorists have again interpreted this specific genre of crime from a complete psychological perspective. There lies the problem. The lack of unanimity and uniformity in the levels of explanation has added to the problems which already exist in terms of identifying a white collar crime and bringing the perpetrator under trial. The fact that, despite of successes in bringing white-collar criminals under trial, law enforcement and the criminal justice system as a whole has felt the difficulty of accomplishing success in every case, has been proved by the fact that, even today white collars crime are being committed, but it is difficult to nail down the perpetrators due to several different problems. In this regard it can be interesting to note that, While federal prosecutors have won many trials in their three-year post-Enron crackdown against corporate crime, the acquittal of former HealthSouth CEO Richard Scrushy shows how tough it can be to nail executives in white-collar fraud cases (Iwata, 2005). But it must be erroneous to put the blame of such incapability solely on the shoulder of the nature of the crime. The liberal outlook and principles of the American criminal justice system has also contributed to the enhancement of the degree of dilemmas in relation to identifying white collar crimes and bringi ng under trial white collar criminals. In many cases the liberal approach of the American criminal justice system has been seen in the form of the mes rea requirement, in the absence of vicarious criminal liability, in the principle of legality, in the presumption of innocence clause, in the requirement of proof beyond reasonable doubt, in the form of attorney-client privilege, and in the privilege against self-incrimination (Hasnas, 2005). And all these approaches have been employed by white collar criminals to their benefit. It can be interesting to learn how the criminal justice systems criminal intent clause has contributed to the evasion of white collar criminals from litigations. According to this clause, an executives actions and words that have been showed as criminal intent must have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt, and in case of white collar crimes, the standard of the clause (and its rigidity) extends manifold in comparison which other types of civil or criminal cas es (Iwata, 2005). This is a problem, and this problem is often considered as loophole of law by both the perpetrator and his/her attorney. The demarcation between federal and state powers in terms of applying criminal justice processes also has contributed to the problem of prosecuting a majority of white collar criminals. It is noteworthy that, One of the main realities of the American criminal justice system is that it is a county/state based system. Reflecting the nonfederal emphasis, the vast majority of incarcerated inmates are state and not federal prisoners (Vance Trani, 2008). The problem lies in the fact that, when a white collar crime is detected and the perpetrator is brought under trial on a state level, the lack of proper emphasis on federal principles on the part of the states, makes it possible for the perpetrator to escape the hands of law. Adding to the problem; the local jurisdictions have been left with almost no power to act on or highlight white-collar crime (Vance Trani, 2008). Moreover, Benson and Cullen (as cited in Vance Trani, 2008) have rightly pointed out that, as the common perception is that, white collar crime is not a serious problem, it often becomes difficult for the criminal justice system to prosecute the perpetrators. General public is often are unaware of the potential negative consequences of white collar crimes, and that is the reason why the common view is that, such crimes are not serious, or such crimes are harmless. As a matter of fact; white collar crime is not a victimless crime and it has the potential to ruin organizations, destroy family lives, and bring about immense economic hardships (The Federal Bureau of Investigation, n.d.). Furthermore, there are international barriers. The laws of different nations have different clauses placed in reserve for defining and prosecuting a white collar criminal, and this often makes it difficult for the criminal justice system of one nation to bring under trial a white collar criminal who is a citizen of another nation (Snow, 2002). It is not that there is a void of international treaties and agreements in terms of dealing with white collar crimes; the problem lies in the course of implementing such treaties in actual situations. Theoretically such treaties and agreements sound perfect, but in practicality they are ingrained with certain difficulties. And in this regard it must be noted that, even when extradition and mutual legal assistance treaties are in force, and when their terms appear to provide for the foreign assistance needed in a particular case, their utilization can generate vexing legal, policy, and practical issues which at times frustrate, or at a minimum s low, the acquisition of the requested assistance (Snow, 2002). Hence, it can be seen that, along with several other problems, the problem ingrained in international relations, and in, their white-collar crime-related perspectives add to the problem of bringing under trial the white collar criminals. In conclusion, the rise of white collar crimes have pointed to the fact that, often greed can instigate individuals from sound socio-economic backgrounds and educational spheres, to commit crimes that can render negative impacts on innumerable lives, and often on the majority of the populace of a nation. White collar criminals are the new face to crime disguised in sobriety. This disguise, accompanied by the lack of proper definition of the crime, differences in opinion, differences in levels of interpretation, difference in federal and state (and local) level functions, the nature of U.S. criminal justice system, and hindrances related to international laws, has often made it difficult for law enforcement to bring under trial a white-collar criminal in the right way. Moreover, it has been seen that, along with several other problems, the problem ingrained in international relations, and in, their white-collar crime-related perspectives add to the problem of bringing under trial the white collar criminals. References Cornell University Law School (n.d.). White-collar Crime. Retrieved February 2, 2016, from https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/white-collar_crime Hasnas, J. (2005). ETHICS AND THE PROBLEM OF WHITE COLLAR CRIME. Retrieved February 2, 2016, from https://www.wcl.american.edu/journal/lawrev/54/hasnas.pdf Iwata, E. (2005). White-collar crime cases prove difficult to prosecute. USA TODAY. Retrieved February 2, 2016, from https://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/industries/health/2005-06-28-white-collar-usat_x.htm Quinney, E.R. (1964). The Study of White Collar Crime: Toward A Reorientation in Theory and Research. Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology Police Science. Retrieved February 2, 2016, from https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5230context=jclc Snow, T.G. (2002). The Investigation and Prosecution of White-Collar Crime: International Challenges and the Legal Tools Available to Address Them. William Mary Bill of Rights Journal, 11(1), 209-244. Retrieved February 2, 2016, from https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1317context=wmborj The Federal Bureau of Investigation (n.d.). White-Collar Crime. Retrieved February 2, 2016, from https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/white_collar Vance, N. Trani, B. (2008). Situational Prevention and the Reduction of White Collar Crime. Retrieved February 2, 2016, from https://sgpp.arizona.edu/sites/sgpp.arizona.edu/files/Situational%20Prevention%20and%20the%20Reduction%20of%20White%20Collar%20Crime%20by%20Dr.%20Neil%20R.%20Vance_1.pdf