Investigating financial aspects of dog‐fighting in the UK

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to discuss financial aspects of illegal dog‐fighting in the UK and to reflect upon and discuss the difficulties of researching illegal entrepreneurial activities such as dog‐fighting which are operated for criminal profit. Such activities are conducted by urban criminals often in a rural setting. Such crimes invariably occur in a closed social milieu to which the authorities and the academic researcher cannot legitimately gain access. In this case the illegal activities, as well as being status and animal welfare crimes, can legitimately be regarded as being an entrepreneurial activity as they entail trading in a Kirznerian sense as well as financial implications associated with gambling.Design/methodology/approachThe methodological approach used in this article is that of desk‐based research to locate and review academic articles in relation to the illegal activity of dog‐fighting and to synthesise this knowledge with empirical material gathered from a search of British newspapers on the subject to develop an aperçus in relation to financial aspects of the crime.FindingsVery little is known about the financial aspects of illegal dog‐fighting in the UK. It is an activity shrouded in secrecy. The primary purpose of the activity is to engage in gaming activities with the intention of making money. This qualifies it as a financial crime.Originality/valueThe paper is of value because of its novelty and also because it highlights the difficulties in investigating certain illegal entrepreneurial criminal activities. It is vital to conduct such research because otherwise the subject matter would be ignored by the research community.

Developing a Working Typology of Rural Criminals: From a UK Police Intelligence Perspective

“…The purpose of this dialogical exercise is not to prove or disprove a particular criminological or enterprise based thesis, merely to highlight the changing landscape of rural crime and criminality and where each typology of rural criminal fits into the landscape. This work also extends the emerging literature on rural criminal entrepreneurship (see McElwee, 2009;McElwee, Smith & Sommerville, 2011;Smith, 2004;Smith, 2008;Smith, 2009;Smith, 2011Smith & McElwee, 2013). As will be demonstrated the changing geographies of rural policing have affected how the informal rural economy is policed and by whom.…”

Illegal diversification strategies in the farming community from a UK perspective

“…The point here is that these are real stories gathered from press and media reports (part anecdotal and part biographical) and that collectively, from an analytic sociological context, they constitute both qualitative and quantitative data (Franzosi, 2010(Franzosi, , 2014. We were aided in this by having used the same basic methodology to author a series of 'nested' case studies (Smith, 2004;Smith, 2011;Smith & Whiting, 2013;Smith & McElwee, 2013;Smith and McElwee, 2014;Somerville, Smith & McElwee, 2015). This assisted in the creation of the excel spreadsheet of 210 cases from across the UK in which farmers had been charged with criminal offences relating to their occupation of farming.…”

Developing qualitative research streams relating to illegal rural enterprise

“…Robert Smith also conducted a related study on the financial aspects of illegal dog fighting in the UK which was published in The Journal of Financial Crime (Smith, 2011) demonstrating that there was a market for such niche research. We decided to target rural studies type journals but the submission to was rejected because of concerns that we had not addressed the rural dimension robustly enough.…”