Criminal Behavior Systems

Gender and Arrests for Larceny, Fraud, Forgery, and Embezzlement: Conventional or Occupational Property Crime Offenders?

“…This conceptualization is advantageous because it is widely accepted within criminology (see Benson & Simpson, 2009;Geis, 2007;Holtfreter, 2005); it distinguishes occupational from conventional property crime (i.e., crimes such as burglary or robbery and various kinds of common-law thefts and frauds such as shoplifting, check fraud, and low-level cons and swindles); and because the occupational/non-occupational distinction corresponds closely with the way the term "white-collar" crime is used in the writings debating the types of offenses/offenders that are represented in the UCR categories (see review below). Also, as applied here, "occupational" offending includes both upper-level occupational or high status financial or property crime (Sutherland, 1940) and any workplace financial or property crime regardless of the status or occupational position of the offender (Clinard & Quinney, 1973). Whereas some scholars assume most of those arrested for LFFE offenses committed upper-level occupational or serious forms of white-collar crime (e.g., Adler, 1976;Albanese, 1993;Dodge, 2009Dodge, , 2015Hirschi & Gottfredson, 1989;Simon & Landis, 2005), others leave it open-ended as to whether the offenders occupied low-or high-level occupational positions (Barnett, 2002;Miethe, McCorkle, & Listwan, 2005).…”

Réaction sociale et criminalité en col blanc

“…Leur approche, qui insiste sur l'importance du statut social et de la position de respectabilité dans la commission d'un acte criminel, permet ainsi de concevoir la délinquance en col blanc comme l'ensemble des « illegal or unethical acts that violate fiduciary responsibility or public trust, committed by an individual or organization, usually during the course of legitimate occupational activity, by persons of high or respectable position for personal or organizational gain » (Helmkamp, Ball et Townsend, 1996, p. 330). L'utilisation de cette définition permet ultimement d'inclure les crimes d'entreprise (Braithwaite, 1984 ;Clinard et Quinney, 1973 ;Clinard et Yeager, 1980) et les déviances organisationnelles (Ernmann et Lundman, 1978 ;Schrager et Short, 1978), qu'elles soient politiques ou corporatives, sous l'étiquette de délinquance en col blanc. pus, ont pu agir illégalement sans trop se soucier des autorités ni craindre les représailles.…”

Is Ohs Negligence and Evasion an “Error of Judgement” or “White-Collar Crime”? An Interpretation of Apparel Manufacturers in Bangladesh

“…In the context of Bangladesh, the RMG factory owners' negligence and laxness in regulating the OHS provisions can be analysed using framework of crime suggested by Clinard & Quinney (1973). Building on Sutherland's (1944) concept, Clinard and Quinney suggested two divisions of white-collar crime: (a) corporate crime, and (b) occupation crime.…”

“…Building on Sutherland's (1944) concept, Clinard and Quinney suggested two divisions of white-collar crime: (a) corporate crime, and (b) occupation crime. Corporate crime is illegal behaviour that is committed to benefit the organisation or business; and occupational crime is violations of the legal codes in the course of activity in a legitimate occupation (Clinard & Quinney, 1973). Maintaining the compliance factors and OHS regulations provided by the local government, global supply chain, and social compliance authorities requires employers to employ industrial advocates and human resource management experts, along with introducing a makeover of their poorly-designed factories with modern facilities, safety equipment, and health arrangements.…”