The study of criminals in criminology and crime prevention

Thirdly, with regard to crime prevention based on crime causation understanding, the thesis will suggest all potential methods to prevent crime without concentrating on only one type of

HO CHI MINH CITY UNIVERSITY OF LAW MANAGING BOARD OF SPECIAL TRAINING PROGRAM

- -

BACHELOR THESIS REGULAR EDUCATION COURSE 35 (2010 – 2014)

THE STUDY OF CRIMINALS IN

CRIMINOLOGY AND CRIME PREVENTION

STUDENT: NGUYEN LUU TUONG AN STUDENT CODE: 1055050002

CLASS: ADVANCE CLASS 35 th COURSESUPERVISOR: Dr NGUYEN THI PHUONG HOA

HO CHI MINH CITY, July 2014

Acknowledgments

In this thesis, thanks are given to my family and friends, who have supported and encouraged me during my study Moreover, I emotionally appreciate our university lecturers for their teaching and enthusiasm Specially thanks to Dr

Nguyen Thi Phuong Hoa for being my supervisor and helping me throughout this

course with valuable comments and important amendments Finally, I would like to

thanks to Prof Mai Hong Quy, our university principal, who promotes this

advance program and gives many students like me a chance to participate in

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 1

Chapter 1 The study of criminals in criminology 6

1.1 Overview on the study of criminals in criminology 6

1.1.1 Purpose and scope of the study of criminals in criminology 6

1.1.2 Overview of schools of thought about criminals throughout history 7

1.2 The study of criminals in classical theories 18

1.2.1 Rational decision theory 20

1.2.2 Theory of utilitarianism 21

1.2.3 Classical theories – pros and cons 23

1.3 The study of criminals in biological theories 24

1.3.1 Physiognomy and phrenology 24

1.3.1.1 The study of people‟s skull 24

1.3.1.2 Atavistic theory 26

1.3.2 Somatotype theory 29

1.3.3 Genetic theories 32

1.3.4 Other biological studies 35

1.3.5 Biological theories – pros and cons 38

1.4 The study of criminals in psychological theories 40

1.4.1 Theories based on psychoanalysis 40

1.4.2 Theories based on behavior theorists‟ viewpoint 43

1.4.3 Psychological traits and criminality 44

1.4.3.1 Personality and crime 44

1.4.3.2 Personality disorder and crime 45

1.4.3.3 Intelligence and crime 46

1.4.3.4 Psychological theories – pros and cons 48

1.5 The study of criminals in social theories 49

1.5.1 Social structure theories 49

1.5.2 Social process theories 53

1.5.3 Conflict theory 55

1.5.4 Social theories – pros and cons 57

Chapter 2 Crime prevention based on the study of criminals 58

2.1 Definition and implication of crime prevention 58

2.2 Prevention of crime based on the study of theories about criminals 61

2.2.1 Prevention of crime based on the study of classical theories 61

2.2.2 Prevention of crime based on the study of psychological theories 65

2.2.3 Preventing crime based on the study of social theories 70

CONCLUSION 73

INTRODUCTION

1 Research background

“Criminals” - how much do we know about this word? We hear this word everyday, everywhere: on the trains, in newspapers, on television, internet, via facebook, in the coffee shop, while shopping in a mall or having dinner with friends, etc… We talk about it at first like a strange phenomenon However, day by day, it became so familiar that we accepted it as a part of our life which we can not get rid of in decades We talk about „criminals‟ with a dim awareness about bad people who are living beside us, like a dark shadow They stand there, in the corner

of the dark, silently watching us, and attacking us when we think we‟re safe and sound

In fact, we do can catch criminals because they are just normal people like us Criminals come from our usual life, maybe our mother, maybe our boyfriend/girlfriend, maybe they are our beloved teacher or the leaders of the government Nevertheless, the matter is, were they born criminals? Or they chose to

be so? As Hamlet said to Ophelia in the Hamlet tragedy of Shakespeare: “God has

given you one face, and you make yourself another” [51], the battle between these two halves of identity: who we are and who we pretend to be is unwinnable Maybe

as Shakespeare‟s hypothesis, people can control what they do and what they are going to do, by choices But besides that, will there be any other reasons that can explain why a so-angel-person turned into a devil? Do they willing to commit crimes? And how could we know what kind of people can engage in criminal behaviors?

Therefore, before planning crime prevention programs, we have to understand clearly about the reasons why criminal behaviors are conducted By approaching viewpoints and theories of criminologists all over the world throughout history, we can learn from advantage and disadvantage points in those theories When we have solid knowledge about what we are studying, the solutions we (then) make to solve

problems is going to be reasonable and practical than making suggestions based on useless sources

In Viet Nam, there are many books, articles and journals maintain this sector to synthesize scholars‟ viewpoints about criminals from different countries, and most

of these books are written in Vietnamese Besides that, some books contain several theories, other books contain other different theories, there‟s no relation between them for readers to have a general overview of criminals and crime causation With the purpose to summarize those theories by researching each theory throughout history and planning crime preventing program, the author chooses to study the topic: “The study of criminals in criminology and crime prevention”

2 Literature review

According to the author research, there are many books, journal articles or theses related to international civil judicial assistance in Vietnam Remarkable documents as follows:

- „Contemporary criminology‟, 2013 by Associate Professor Duong Tuyet

Mien This document provides general review on the schools of thoughts

all over the world about crime causation

- „Modern criminology and crime prevention‟, 2001 by Professor Nguyen

Xuan Yem This book focuses on finding solutions to prevent crime as

well as solving problems which can be caused by criminal behaviors

- „About the social control and criminals control‟, 2012 by Associate

Professor Le Thi Son This research mentions the role of social elements

in criminal behavior and the correlation between maintaining social order

and crime prevention

In Vietnam, although there have been a great amount of researches on criminals, there are few detailed research on the prevention based on all theories of crime Most of these documents only concentrate on crime prevention based on one school of thought of criminals without the application of all viewpoints to make a general recommendation for the prevention of crime In other countries, to verify

the role of social factors, environmental factors, biological factors and psychological factors in crime causation, there are some remarkable articles:

- Larry Siegel, „Criminology‟, 1992 This books shows a comparative

analysis of viewpoints about crime and criminals from the classical criminology to the modern criminology; proposal for improvement of public policy

- Freda Adler, Gerhard O W Mueller and William S Laufer,

„Criminology‟, 1991 This researching concentrates on the explaining of

criminal behavior

- George B Vold, Thomas J Bernard and Jeffrey B Snipes, „Theoretical

Criminology‟, 1998 This is the review of all theories in the

developmental history and the concentration on the theory of social criminology and its effect in improving public policy

In general, these foreign researches mainly examine the role of biological, psychological and social factors in criminal behavior

This thesis serves as a combination of these researches about theoretical basic

of crime causation In addition, the thesis presents detailed analysis of the causes of

crime and then contributing suggestions for crime prevention

3 The scope of the thesis

Due to limitation of time, this thesis just concentrates on research the following points:

Firstly, it is to provide the concept and characteristic of crime causation; the importance of crime prevention; and the reciprocal relationship between them How ever, it does not aim to the details of all theories about criminal or listing every study and experiment relates to each theory

Secondly, the thesis does not intend to re-define the concept of criminals and criminology as well as pointing out the differences between the concept of criminals

in criminal science and the concept of criminals in criminology This thesis gives a general review on scholars‟ thoughts of criminal behavior and causes of crime Thirdly, with regard to crime prevention based on crime causation understanding, the thesis will suggest all potential methods to prevent crime without concentrating on only one type of solution which is based on only one theory of criminals

Finally, the prevention can be applied for suitable countries depending on the status of each area This thesis will not aim to find crime prevention for only society

in Viet Nam or any specific country Therefore, there will be neither analysis nor

survey on a crime rate in particular area

- Inductive method: used in Chapter I and Chapter II to present the concept

of crime causation; concept and characteristics of crime prevention; the reciprocal relationship between them

- Analysis: used in all chapters, to withdraw conclusions and

recommendations

5 Significance

Firstly, the thesis provides a general understanding of some scholarly viewpoints around the world about criminals

Secondly, the thesis provides analyses of each theory from the early age of history till the present day in order to point out its ineffectiveness and the reasons Finally, based on the understanding of factors which can impact a person to behave illegally, the author recommends some methods to help reduce the crime rates

This thesis is hoped to become a useful document for the researchers who conduct researches on criminals and any law student who have interested in studying the criminals

6 Structure

This thesis is divided into two chapters:

CHAPTER 1: THE STUDY OF CRIMINALS IN CRIMINOLOGY – the general view of schools of thought of criminals throughout history; definition and characteristic of each criminology theory; advantage and disadvantage of applying each theory in crime explanation

CHAPTER 2: CRIME PREVENTION BASED ON THE STUDY OF CRIMINALS - concentrates on providing as many solutions as possible for the government, the polish and the citizen to eliminate chances for criminals to conduct deviant behavior

Chapter 1 The study of criminals in criminology

1.1 Overview on the study of criminals in criminology

1.1.1 Purpose and scope of the study of criminals in criminology

The term „criminals‟ has many complex and enormous concepts Nonetheless, the most popular definition concentrates on individuals who do wrongful acts that are considered as „illegal‟ by the communities and the Court The one that has committed or been legally convicted of a crime is a criminal However, criminologists do not study about criminals only Unlike criminalists whose jobs focus on crime scene investigation such as interprets and analyze evidence to assess which pieces are relevant to the case and develops written reports of the findings [48], criminologists mainly research the nature and extent of crime and the causes and prevention of criminality While doing so, criminologists pose a lot of questions For example: Why do people behave the way they do? Why do they commit crimes? Was that wrongful behavior the result of a diseased mind or antisocial personality? How many crimes are there and what are the trends and patterns in the crime rate? [25-p.18] In the process of finding the answers for such questions, criminologists tend to go back to the origin of criminality: criminals – the object that disturbs the social order, causes damage and breaks the law By testing and doing research on criminals and the factors around them, criminologists can figure out which elements directing a person in the road of crimes

However, during the process of exploring the causes of crime, many theories were made by criminologists to answer the core question: “Why do people commit crimes?” Some view criminals as society‟s victims who are forced to violate the law because of poverty and lack of opportunity Others view aggressive, antisocial behavior such as the product of mental and physical abnormalities, present at birth

or soon after, that are stable over the life course Still another view is that crime is a function of the rational choice of greedy, selfish people who can be deterred from engaging in criminal behavior only by the threat of harsh punishments [26-p.4]

Among these hypotheses, there are the truths and also the myths that cloud people‟s thinking about crime and criminals Therefore, the main purpose of the study of criminals in criminology is to find out the true causes of criminal behaviors among hypotheses throughout history based on careful researching and concerning the rationality of each hypothesis Thereafter, in the knowledge of criminal‟s motivation for crime, a criminologist or whoever studies in this field should draw fundamental measures to prevent crime at minimum by applying reasonable thoughts This is the reason why the science studying of crime and criminals were built

The study of criminals concentrates on the following points:

Firstly, it is to provide the concept and characteristic of criminals and factors which can impact on the criminals lead to a wrongful act; and the reciprocal relationship between them However, it does not aim at the details of all the factors because there are lots of factors that are out of the boundary of threshold – which can never effect a change of a so-angel person‟s mind to become the devil

Secondly, the study of criminals in criminology should group the same thoughts together and put them into schools of thought: classical, biological, psychological or social theories

Finally, after exploring the cause of crime, criminologists draw a conclusion based on viewpoints studied before Criminologists have to point out what are the strengths and weaknesses of each theory as well as listing which theories can be applied in crime prevention On that basis, the primitive question “Why do people commit crime” will be partly answered and the crime prevention activities will easily be facilitated by those studies

1.1.2 Overview of schools of thought about criminals throughout history

Many people believed that the scientific study of crime and criminology began

in the eighteenth century when Cesare Beccaria published his one and only book

“Dei delitti e delle pene” (On Crimes and Punishment) and established the classical theory of crime But when tracing back to the ancient time, about 5000 years ago,

criminologists found that there were already some understandings and interpretations for crime and criminals However, scholars didn‟t see it as criminology but a premise for later theories of crime

From the early time in ancient societies, human knew how to explain and diminish criminal behaviors, but differ from our current methods the way they explain crime was conservative, partly unreasonable and depended upon the leader

of each society In 1760 B.C, King Hammurabi (1792-1750 B.C), the sixth king of

Babylon, adopted the famous set of written law named Code of Hammurabi

[26-p.26] In this code, Hammurabi stated (and believed) that he was chosen by the God

of the Sun - Shamash to bring the law from up above to his people The punishment was very cruel as it is the gods‟ intention based on physical retaliation “an eye for

an eye” It emphasized to individual or punished for the material, but not taking into account education, or to facilitate offender in rehabilitation

Also the Mosaic Code of the Israelites (1200 B.C) was built based on the knowledge at that time that: “God entered into a covenant or contract with the tribes

of Israel in which they agreed to obey His law.” In this kind of regulation, the reason why people have to behave in good manner is because God said so

Consequently, all regulations made at this time were in the spirit of God worship Some regulations still exist until today Some punishments were very cruel but it also somehow prevented the development of the criminals Although there were no clear explanation for “Why people have to behave things like the Code ruled?”, but at some aspects, it is still reasonable and acceptable than the regulations set out in the Dark Age which will be mention in the following paragraph

After the early origins, it came to the Dark Ages – also be called as the Early Middle Ages – lasted from the fall of Rome to about the year 1000, when there was

no Roman emperor in the West [50] This period of time presented the confusing and often contradictory picture of a society attempting to structure itself politically

on a spiritual basis During this period, superstition and fear of magic and satanic black arts dominated thinking Crime causation was explained as black magic and

criminals were believed to be possessed by demons [25-p.28] When a member of a society has fathomless behaviors which contrary to the society‟s rules or norms – that person will be assumed as an evil witch without any thorough investigation by the most powerful member

Guilt was determined by „ordeals‟, a cruel method made by the Court to find out whether a person is innocent or not „For example, a common method of determining whether a woman was a witch was to tie her up and throw her into the water If she floated she was considered innocent, but if she sank she was guilty‟ [19-p.5] Some other common cruel tortures were used to extract confession like whipping, branding, maiming or walking on fire and execution

Although the results of those tortures were impactful to the people and prevented them from steeling, murdering or behaving contrary to the social norms,

it only provides a way of understanding crime that is satisfactory to some people Thus these theories cannot be considered as scientific, even if some thoughtful and intelligent people believe that they presented the best explanation of crime Those hypotheses about witch, fairy and demon lasted until the eighteen century that a coherent view of law, crime and society developed, when people decided to sit back and think seriously about the explanation of crime

It came to an assumption that the development of criminology and its effects undergo three stages: Classical criminology (from the eighteenth century till the early nineteenth century); positivist criminology (from the nineteenth century till the early twentieth century) and modern criminology (from the twentieth century till the present day) There are also some other viewpoints about criminology development, one of these viewpoints declares that the time should be designate into 4 stages: classical criminology, positivist criminology, modern criminology and postmodern criminology However, because the discriminations of these two latter stages are faint and not clear, most of criminology studies assume that there should

be three stages of criminology development, which means after the positivist criminology stage there comes to the modern criminology Besides, there should be

noted that separating stages of the development of criminology is for reference only

In fact there is no sheer boundary of time in this development

 Classical theories

In July 1764, Cesare Beccaria (1738-1794) published the book “Dei delitti e delle pene” (On crime and Punishments) With the publication of this small book, Beccaria became the “father of modern criminology” [18-p.50]

According to Beccaria‟s rational thoughts, a man committed a crime does not mean he is a witch or has powerful magic Hence, a criminality happened is not synonymous with God‟s intention None of the divine forces can make a man break the law but his own intention Beccaria illustrated that when a man wants to steal another‟s property, for example, a luxury car, it is based on the reason that he may need that property but he can not have it no matter how hard he works However, before performing the wrongful act, which means stealing the luxury car, this man has considered about the punishments he will suffer from and its influences to his life if he was caught The crux of this case is after weighing all the circumstances,

he chooses to behave illegally in spite of finding another lawful solutions Therefore, Beccaria claimed that a criminality happened because of a man‟s decision, and each person is said to be master of his or her fate, possessed of free will rather than driven by spirit or devils Crime is seen as a product of the free choice of the individual, who first assesses the potential benefits of committing the crime against its potential costs [19-p.51]

After Beccaria, Jeremy Bentham (1748-1833), a British philosopher, did agree

with Beccaria‟s hypothesis Bentham then made a concept of utilitarianism principle [26-p.9], which means when people decide to behave illegally or not, they

have already answered their own question: “Would the potential pleasure I will get

be bigger than the pain of punishments I will suffer from if I get caught?” Because people tend to achieve pleasure and avoid pain [18-p.9], they will commit crimes when the pleasure is larger than the pain of punishment In short, it is recognized as the criminal‟s free will and free choice to commit a crime

Bentham believed that the purpose of law is to produce and support the total happiness of the community it serves Since punishment is itself harmful, its existence is only justified if it promises to prevent greater evil than it creates [25-p.33] That‟s why, if one punishment is applied for two different types and levels of crime, there will be no reason an accused chooses the less dangerous method to achieve the pleasure when whether he did the less one or not, he would suffer from the same punishment later Thus, Bentham, in according to Beccaria‟s idea, suggests that the punishment should fit the crime, not the criminal That means the punishments have to be made sufficient to the level of each type of criminal behaviors The punishment for burglary has to be lesser than murder By that way, criminals will seriously concern about their behaviors and the consequences of it Bentham skipped studying about the individual but to concentrate on the behavior and its effects (and also its weaknesses) that can be beaten by the law

In addition, classical theories chiefly illustrate a viewpoint of the capacity of human being to choose freely between good and evil was accepted without question There was no need to ask why people behave as they do, to seek a motive

or to ask about the specific circumstances surrounding criminal acts [18-p.52] The important thing the society has to do to prevent the crime is building the appropriate legislation based on the criminal behavior to prevent crime as cheaply as possible But, some say that our lives are defined by the sum of our choices It isn‟t really our choices that distinguish who we are It‟s our commitment to them When a man gets involved into a criminal life, he automatically signs an unseen commitment to the community that one day he will „reap for what he sows‟ But beside his intention, is there any factor that can impact him before he signs the commitment?

In fact, there are some other factors that lead a person to commit a crime In the nineteenth century, a new generation of studying criminology was born There were new method, new explanation, and of course, many new answers for the question

“Why do people do criminal acts?” During that period, scholars‟ concentration

shifted from criminal acts to the one who act criminality, from the behaviors to the real individuals and social factors that will be mentioned below

 Positivist and modern criminology

During the nineteenth century, a new vision of the world challenged the validity

of classical theory and presented an innovative way of looking at the causes of crime [26-p.10] The scientific method was used to research about the nature of human behaviors This kind of research was more systematic than the way the classical theories did before After Auguste Comte (1798-1857) began to take scientific method into social science to interpret the social phenomenon, not very

much criminologist did share his viewpoint But at the time the book Origin of

Species written by Charles Darwin (1809-1882) was published – which stated that

man was not created by God in 2 days and human origins is the ape – many conservative thoughts were changed Criminologist began to look harder on the real life with practical elements than on the vision of spiritual, demons or witches

In the book Criminology, Larry J Siegel summarized that: “As we understand it

today, the positivist tradition has two main elements The first is the belief that human behavior is a function of external forces that are beyond the individual control Some of these forces are social, such as the effect of wealth and class, while others were political and historical such as war and famine Other forces are more personal and psychological, such as an individual‟s brain structure and his or her biological makeup and or mental ability Each of these forces operates to influence human behavior.” [25-p.34]

That‟s the reason why criminologist today divided positivist criminology into three fields: biological criminology, psychological criminology and social criminology All these three fields of criminals studying use the same way to find out the causes of crime: scientific methods

Biological criminology

Since the occupancy of scientific method in studying criminology, criminologists had wider vision when approaching the understanding of human behaviors Biologic factors are the first elements which criminologists used to conduct their experiments Theories made at this time no longer consider the human‟s free will as the core reasons that lead to a criminal behavior Scholars began to deduce that sometimes, it‟s not up to the criminals‟ decisions but the outside-human structure and genes which regulate a person‟s mind Some individuals were meant to behave illegal from the day they were born which criminologists called it: „born criminal‟ Thereof, the studies tended to focus on the idea that the physical body, through inherited genes, evolutionary factors, brain structures, or the role of hormones, has an influence on an individual‟s involvement

of that individual in engaging in crimes According to Lavater, for example, people who have “shifty” eyes, “weak” chins or “arrogant” noses often can commit crimes [19-p.41] Later, Franz Joseph Gall (1758-1828) and Johann K Spurzheim (1776-1832) – two phrenologists - concluded after researching that there is an association between criminals‟ conducts and the size of the brain, not the appearance of the face Gall and Spurzheim believed the outside structure of the skull impacted the inside structure of it and then impacted to the brain Simultaneously, the will of the mind depended on several parts of the brain Therefore, the outside structure of the brain mainly designed the changes of the mind, what criminals thinks, which makes

criminals become so aggressive and behaves illegally But the one who had major influence in the study of criminals in biological criminology is Cesare Lombrosso (1835-1909) Lombrosso had three viewpoints which are: some people were born criminals, others were not; people had defects different from a normal person who are noncriminal will be considered as criminal; people commit crime because of

their mental illness includes 2 categories insane criminals and criminoloids Insane

criminals are not criminals from their birth, they become criminal as a result of

some change in their brains which interferes with their ability to distinguish

between right and wrong Criminoloids includes habitual criminals who do not want

to commit crime but are drown into doing so by insignificant reasons and criminals

by passion [18-p.56]

Secondly, biological criminologists interpreted the crime causation based on the

body build of the criminals According to William Sheldon (1898-1977), there were some typical types of a person body structure that can impel him/her into a life of crime One person had a set of three calculated numbers for his/her body shape, and

if the numbers coincide with Sheldon‟s given numbers, that person is likely to be a criminal than others

Thirdly, it is believed that people commit a crime because of the inheritance of

bad traits in genes of previous generations This kind of explanation was mainly studied by Richard Dugdale (1841-1883) and Henry Goddard (1866-1957) By examine the family trees one derived from a good person and another derived from

a criminal, Dugdale and Goddard had same conclusion that descendants from a criminal will mostly become criminals, too

Other theories belong to biological criminology defined crime based on the changes of hormone imbalances, the increase in blood sugar, etc…

Psychological theories

Another type of positivist criminology focus on studying the human mind in spite of human body like biological criminologists did before Psychological theories view that the factors impelling a person into a life of crime are: mental

illness, intelligence, personality and learning Henry Maudsley (1835-1918) – a psychiatrist - believed that the insanity and criminal behavior were strongly linked [18-p.37] Maudsley stated criminality is the way of expression There are some people whose neurons were very sensitive and different from the rests of the world and their head had to suffer from voices, whispers or illusions that drive them crazy Hence, they have to do something, like committing a crime, to set them free from those voices, illusions – as they believed so As Maudsley said, criminal behavior is the „outlet‟ of their madness He assumed that is the „mental degenerate‟ which affected incapable of controlling the criminals‟ aggressive behaviors [25-p.38] Secondly, it is believed that the cause leading a person to commit a crime is the

“defective intelligence” Charles Buckman Goring (1870-1919) – a criminologist –

published the most comprehensive criminological works of his time named The

English convict: a statistical study to affirm the hypothesis above In the view of

Goring, there‟s no such things called „significant physical factor‟ among the criminal classes that absolutely and mostly dominate a criminal mind He asserted that the element could set a criminal apart from ordinary men is defective intelligence, which means criminals often had mental illness such as feeble-minded, epilepsy and defective social instinct [25-p.38] He finally encouraged combating crimes by regulating the reproduction of people had such kind of mental illness Thirdly, it was believed that not because of the human body, human neurons, or the mental illness that impels a criminal into a life of crime but the imitation of each individual, because of the fact that one man can see what the other do and then copy that act into his real life; sometimes the imitation originates from the movie, media, sometimes it comes from a member in the family This theory was also called

„modeling theory‟ Gabriel Tarde (1843-1904) – a French social psychologist – assumed the basic of each society is imitation In the community, each person behavior was essentially parody of one another‟s act Simultaneously, a criminal was just ordinary man who copies the criminal behavior from others Therefore, the

causes of crime was defined as the imitation of a man who saw another one conduct illegal acts, then he applies it into his own life [25-p.38]

Last but not least, psychological criminologists maintained a person‟s consciousness, pre-consciousness and unconsciousness was motivations of criminal behavior Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) – the father of psychoanalysis – proposed that the human psyche could be divided into three parts: id, ego and super-ego Id and superego belong to unconsciousness Id represents human impulsive, childlike portion of the psyche that operates on the "pleasure principle" and is the source of basic impulses and drives; it seeks immediate pleasure and gratification, while superego is inclined to represent conscience of each person Ego is the pre-conscious portion of the psyche Ego is understood as the will of human being It is the part of the psyche that attempts to exact a balance between the impractical hedonism of the Id and the equally impractical moralism of the Superego Freud discussed criminality originates from the relation of the Id, the Ego and the Superego inside an individual, not the outside structure of human body When the childlike portion (represented by the Id) arises to exorbitant and uncontrolled level combined with bad conscience (represented by the Superego) but the will of human being (represented by the Ego) is too weak to restrain the behavior from deviant thoughts, then an individual will commit a crime

Sociological criminology

Sociological criminology began at merely the same time with the appearance of biological criminology Later on, sociological criminology became one of the most extremely developed fields in the study of criminals While a number of criminologists study crime causation based on physique, facial factors, other criminologists focus on macro elements that impact human behavior There are three typical branches of this field: social structure criminology, social process criminology and conflict criminology

Social structure criminology was first examined by the Belgian mathematician Adolphe Quetelet (1796-1874) In his studies, Quetelet pointed out that social

factors are the things which exercised its influence on a man behavior Those social factors included season, climate, population composition and poverty To clarify, Quetelet gave an example that crime rates were greatest in the summer, in southern areas, among heterogeneous populations, and among the poor and uneducated and were influenced by drinking habits [25-p.40]

Social process criminology emphasized on social processes which responsible for the criminality such as the interaction between individual and his/her matter of education, family studies, school orientation, high school dropouts, unemployment, deteriorating infrastructures, and single-parent homes This theory was developed

by Chicago School sociologists In their view, crime is the reflection of what a person was trained and experienced in life courses For example, if a child was sent

to a terrible primary school till high school under the pressure of being bullied, strict teachers with heartlessness, and later that child got a low-salary job, it will be assumed that that child one day might commit crime if he thinks the social is unfair for him, for his attempt and the only way to achieve what he thinks he deserves is steeling another‟s property

Conflict criminology is a little different from social structure theories and social process theories This theory was studied by Karl Marx (1818-1883) Marx still kept the standpoint that criminal behavior had roots from social factors not the human body or human free will Further, he concentrated his attention on the means of economic production and its control over social life more than on each individual

In his view, Marx proposed when economic had shifted from cottage industries to large factories, the product would be made more than the average limit at which each person could deserve Then there were things called “surplus product” which flew from the factories into the hands of the capitalist class When the conflict between working class and capitalist class was bad enough, the worker would arise

to fight for their rights in many ways which are considered as crimes in the

capitalist class‟ set of rules called criminal law Marx‟s opinion on the social

conditions that promoted crimes did not really come into notice until the

development of an antiestablishment counterculture movement, the civil right movement and the women‟s movement in the United States [26-p.12] The result of these movements was the establishment of critical criminology, radical criminology etc… Those theories will be discussed later in this thesis

In conclusion, there are many interpretations for the causes of crime and the roles of criminals in criminal process throughout history From the ancient time till modern life, scholars have changed their views many times from the vision of spiritual creatures to believe in human free will without being possessed by God or demons that caused criminality Then by the development of applying scientific method in researching human behavior, criminologists shifted their attention to the new field of thinking: human body, facial factors, intelligence, hormones, mental illness… which are believed to be responsible for the criminal behaviors In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, sociologists began to dominate the field of criminology by the explanation of crime due to the impact of social condition, human reaction to society Finally, the view of Marx and his followers about conflict between classes in a capitalism country will create people who would be called „revolutionist‟ by worker class and would be called „criminals‟ by capitalist class

Each of these theories in criminology has its own advantages and shortcomings, some of them are not used to explain crime causation nowadays Nevertheless, it still has value in studying To indicate the differences and correlation between each theory throughout the developmental history of criminology easier, the author chooses to separate theories in the positivist and modern stages into parts in this thesis rather than presenting them in chronological order These theories will be discussed in detail in the following parts

1.2 The study of criminals in classical theories

There were many ways to explain the reason why people commit crime from the ancient time However, most of them were inclined to be mystical and supernatural From 5000 BC to 1692 AD, Demonologists viewed the motive of

crime is demonic influence From 3500 BC to 1630 AD, Astrologists explained the core of crime based on zodiac influence From 1215 BC, theologians argued that the will of God is only the motive that impels one person into a criminal life [41]

500 years before Cesare Beccaria‟s fundamental theory of crime, St Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) proposed there was a God-given “natural law” that was revealed by observing, though the eyes of faith, people‟s natural tendency to do good rather than evil In his view, Aquinas held that who commit crime (by the criminal law violating behavior) therefore also commit sin (by the natural law violating behavior) [19-p.15] In his viewpoint, there‟s only one way to wash away the sin of the offender is extremely harsh and gruesome execution Later, Thomas Hobbes (1588-1678) – a “social contract” thinker – has contrast viewpoint with Aquinas‟ hypothesis Hobbes argues that it‟s neither because of the demonic influence nor God‟s will that led people to behave illegally Everybody, as Hobbes said, was rational enough to distinguish from right to wrong That people were able

to understand which was adversely affecting their interests That if one day people agreed to sit back and „agree to give up their own selfish behavior as long as everyone else does the same thing at the same time‟ [19-p.15], it is up to their intent,

not the intent of the God The compromise between them was called social contract

– a commitment made by rational people In that commitment, punishment was created as means to prevent persons who probably violate the rules A criminal was not seen as the separate matter of the social, as the core of the criminality

After Hobbes, there were other social contract philosophers such as Locke (1632-1704), Montesquieu (1689-1755), Voltaire (1694-1778) and Rousseau (1712-1778) followed him But, those hypotheses still held to the spiritual explanations of crime, or, if not, it still had disadvantage For instance, Hobbes‟s theory didn‟t take into account the fact that some societies are unfair For some groups, the costs of participation to the social contract may be few and the benefits great; for other group, the costs may be great and the benefits few With the second groups, the chance that a person in society commits a crime is larger than the prior groups

Hence, the crime rate at those second groups is higher Mostly, the criminal justice systems of this time tended to apply cruel and horrible punishments on criminals

It was not until a unique brilliant mathematician Cesare Beccaria built a new groundwork in the science studying of crime causation, people began to shift their attention from supernatural factors to the individual‟s free will by which a person breaks the law, injures the others and damages the social balance Classical theories were established with the name of two people Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham

as two founders of this field of science researching

1.2.1 Rational decision theory

Cesare Bonesana, Marchese de Beccaria, (15 March 1738 – 28 November 1794) was an Italian criminologist, jurist, philosopher and politician best known for

his treaties On Crimes and Punishments (1764) Born in Milan, Beccaria received

his early education in a Jesuit college at Parma Subsequently, he graduated in law from the University of Pavia in 1758

At first, he showed a great aptitude for mathematics, but studying Montesquieu (1689-1755) redirected his attention towards economics In 1762 his first publication, a tract on the disorder of the currency in the Milanese states, included a proposal for its remedy

In 1764 Beccaria, with help from Pietro Verri and Allessandro Verri, published

a brief but justly celebrated treatise On Crimes and Punishments, which marked the

high point of the Milan Enlightenment In it, Beccaria put forth some of the first modern arguments against the torture and the death penalty, and was a founding work in the field of penology and the Classical School of criminology He promoted criminal justice His treatise was also the first full work of penology, advocating reform of the criminal law system The book was the first full-scale work to tackle criminal reform and to suggest that criminal justice should conform to rational principles [39]

In his one and only book written about criminology, Beccaria proposed that people could control what they think and what they will do Every decision came

from the mind as the mind knew what was good or bad and how painful the punishments were That people freely to choose what they do and were responsible for the consequences of their behavior The criminal behaved by his own intent without any possession of the demons And because he is rational, his disposition of the mind is the cause of criminal behavior

About punishments, Beccaria assumed punishments were means to effectively obviate criminals Therefore it should be a preventive method rather than a retributive method used by the powerful group of the society With him, only the laws could decide punishments for crimes and a magistrate neither has the authority

to augment the punishments established for the delinquent citizen nor having the right to interpret laws He also emphasized that punishment should be proportionate

to the crime committed That it would be necessary to form not only a particular code for each citizen, but a new law for every crime [19-p.18] That the probability

of punishment not its severity would achieve the preventive effect That the procedures of criminal convictions should be public and finally, in order to be effective, punishment should be prompt

Beccaria‟s fundamental viewpoint and his book On Crimes and Punishments

were extremely well received by his coeval The making of French Code of 1791 was inspired by his principles This was the first code which set up an easy and clear procedure to administer, it also limited the authority of the judges who are just instruments to force the offender to follow the punishment

The disadvantages of Beccaria‟s theory were that he overemphasized the individual‟s free-will without concerning about the environment around that individual, or the lifestyle, mental illness which may probably impact the decision

of the individual

1.2.2 Theory of utilitarianism

Jeremy Bentham is considered as Beccaria‟s follower who agreed with Beccaria‟s theory and developed it in criminal procedure regulations Even so,

nowadays when mention about the classical theories, both Beccaria and Bentham is considered as the founders of this field of criminal research science

Jeremy Bentham was a British philosopher, jurist and social reformer [40] He

is regarded as the founder of modern utilitarianism – which means people‟s

behavior is motivated by the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of pain More specifically, according to his view, criminals knew what they were going to do, they knew their act was wrong, illegal and would injure someone else But after weighing the potential pleasures they would gain with the pains of punishments they had to suffer if they got caught, criminals found that the pleasure is larger than the consequences therefore they do the wrong thing – committing a crime, burgling

a house or raping Bentham called this was the „balancing test‟ of each „human calculators‟ [19-p.52]

About punishments, Bentham agreed with Beccaria‟s writings Moreover, he believed that the main onus of the laws was to create as much happiness as it could for its citizen And only the punishments which can prevent enormous bad people than create more were the only true righteous punishments Bentham derived six rules to guide punishment [25-p.33]:

a) The value of the punishment must not be lesser in any case than what is sufficient to outweigh that of the profit of the offense

b) The greater the mischief of the offense, the greater is the expense which it may be worthwhile to be at, in the way of punishment

c) Where two offenses come in competition, the punishment for the greater offense must be sufficient to induce a man to prefer the less

d) The punishment should be adjusted in such a manner to each particular offense that for every part of the mischief there may be a motive to restrain the offender from giving birth to it

e) The punishment ought in no case to be more than what is necessary to bring

it into conformity with the rules here given

f) That the quantity actually inflicted on each individual offender may correspond to the quantity intended for similar offenders in general, the several circumstances influencing sensibility ought always to be taken into account

In the field of classical theories, Bentham spent his whole life trying to compile

a perfect legislation and jurisprudence based on the utilitarian spirit He was the first

person to propose the codification of all of the common law into one unified set of

statutes During his lifetime, Bentham's codification efforts were completely unsuccessful Even today, they have been completely rejected by almost every common law jurisdiction, including England Although his project wasn‟t completely finished but the concept about it had an important influence on later generations of thinkers

1.2.3 Classical theories – pros and cons

The classical school of criminology holds that all people are capable of committing crime This school of thought contends that pleasure and pain that motivate people; punishment deters people from violating the law The punishments therefore should be coherent and not based on mitigating circumstances

The good point of this classical theory is that it didn‟t take place on the ground

of spiritual factors to interpret the crime causation Beccaria was the one who explained the criminal behavior upon logical thoughts without any superstition But the minus point was Beccaria and Bentham didn‟t take account to the different circumstances of particular situation which can impact a criminal‟s mind Because sometimes, by some other reasons, a person does the wrong thing which he does not discern it is wrong or right, or maybe there‟re other factors which can direct that person to commit a crime even though he has considered the benefit and the punishment he could gain Or in other words, is free-will the only motivation of criminal behavior? Do people always have a choice to commit crime or they must

do it to survive in an incompatible environment?

1.3 The study of criminals in biological theories

While classical theories was stuck in the stereotype of thinking that „people consciously choose to commit crime‟ in explaining the reason of criminal behavior without empirical evidences, in the late nineteenth century, there was a revolution of researching that redirected scholars from mere inferences to empirical investigation and verification in criminology

Thanks to the development of medicine, biology, chemistry and physics that led

to the adoption of scientific methods, new hypotheses were born based on testing and experimentation that became new guidelines in searching for crime causations

It was not until 1859 when Darwin‟s publication of On The Origins Of The

Species combined with August Comte‟s positivism before, scholars shifted their

intention from classical theories with philosophical assumptions about nature of human behavior to positivist criminology with more practical research by using statistics of the social facts of people‟s physical appearances or psychological factors

In the field of biological criminology, criminologists believed that criminals and deviant individuals were the way that they were because of their biological composition Their criminal indication is shown via organic structure such as: physical appearance, organic inferiority, body types, and other biological factors like hormones or neurotransmitter

1.3.1 Physiognomy and phrenology

1.3.1.1 The study of people’s skull

Physiognomy is the concept of the assessment of a person's character or

personality from his or her outer appearance, especially the face While phrenology

focuses in studying the relationship between the shape of the skull and human character [29-p.250] Prior to what we call biological criminology today, there were some studies conducted by criminologists by using the shape of the skull to find whether there was a link between the skull structure and people character These criminologists are called phrenologists

Franz Joseph Gall (1758-1828) and his student and colleague John Gaspar Spurzheim (1776-1832) are generally associated with the development of the systematic study of head shape and character [29-p.250] These two scientists asserted that there were three regions in the brain had the power of directing a

person into angel or demon The first one was the active propensities such as

combativeness, acquisitiveness or destructiveness This faculty if grew big enough, then people tent to commit crime However, if it was overruled by other two

faculties – moral sentiments and intellectual faculties – then in no case crime would

be committed Hence, the human behavior could become whether good or bad depended on the balance between these three faculties Gall and Spurzheim also suggested that if we educated child by restraining the active propensities and developing moral sentiments and intellectual faculties, we could prevent crimes Because in Gall‟s opinion, these three faculties were similar to organs in the human body, if people did not use those organs, they would become destructive Therefore,

by education and right living, people could inhibit active propensities while strengthened moral sentiments and intellectual faculties This study is similar to psychoanalytic approach introduced by Sigmund Freud more than a century later [29-p.251] Freud also assumed that three motivations led a person to conduct deviant behavior were Id, Ego and Superego The human conduct was a consequence of a struggle between these three motivations to control each other Unfortunately, Gall‟s hypothesis was not well-received The obvious scientific criticism was that no one was able to see the physiological „organs‟ of the mind or their relation to particular types of behavior Moreover, if human conduct were the result of the organs of the mind, then people‟s fate was in the hand of their anatomy and physiology [19-p.42] Moreover, some people rejected Gall‟s view and stated that people were the master of themselves, that their mind and their will are the main motivations for what they do Maybe because of this, in 1811, Gall published

another book argued that phrenology couldn‟t mainly draw a person‟s fate, that will and spirit were basic and supreme in the direction and control of human behavior

1.3.1.2 Atavistic theory

Cesare Lombroso (1835-1909) was one of the most influential criminologists

He was believed to be the father of positivist criminology By extending the concept

of physiognomy, phrenology combined with Darwinian perspective, associated with Franz Joseph Gall‟s study, after many years of studying patiently and systematically,

by the year of 1876, Lombroso published the book named Criminal Man This book

drew a new way for researchers in criminal research From the day the book was published, criminology truly became the science studying the causes of crime and criminals According to the book, Lombroso rejected the classical school which was built upon the belief in free will of human He also indicated that to understand the criminal, criminologists should understand the human‟s physiological factors mainly

Cesare Lombroso was the second of the five children in a wealthy Jewish family in Verona, Italia Before becoming an eminent criminologist as we know today, Lombroso was the literature researcher and an anthropologist Then he turned his career to be an army surgeon in 1859 In 1866 he was appointed visiting lecturer

at Pavia, and later took charge of the insane asylum at Pesaro in 1871 Later, he became professor of forensic medicine at Turin in 1878 [45] With his colleagues,

he developed criminology in a new method – explaining causes of crime based on scientific research and experiments Lombroso‟s work reflected the beginning of the field of statistics In identifying the relation between human conduct and other human physiological factors, he spent years studying bones and portraits of notorious criminals who were executed or died in jails or still living in prisons To come to the conclusion that changed the way the world know about criminology, Lombroso compared the characteristics of criminals mentioned above with normal people who were considered as non-criminals

After his study, Lombroso assumed that according to the skull, facial factures and proportion of the length and size of some external organs of the human body, criminals were people who had as much similar characteristic as our primitive

ancestors Some of the characteristics which represented for the criminal-propensity were [29-p.254]:

- The shape of the head or the shape of the skull is bigger or smaller in compared with non-criminal people‟s size of head or skull

- Big mouths, strong teeth and large jaws

- Unusually large or small ears or ears that stand out from the head like a chimpanzee

- Rapists and murderers are likely to have fleshy lips Defrauders have thin, straight lips

- Having nose like nose of the hawk

- Shifty eyes and thick eyebrows

- Extravagantly long arms compares to the legs like a monkey walking on the ground

- Etc

In Lombroso‟s view, characteristics mentioned above belong to monkeys‟ or chimpanzees‟ features And people who had characteristics like those were considered to be criminals Lombroso pointed out that criminals did not have complete biological structure of the body like a normal person, and in physiological aspect, criminals were more similar to carnivores or primates than a human being

The reason, believed by Lombroso, was atavistic phenomena – which meant people

had features resemble primitive ancestors at lower stage of human evolutionary chain, before the ancestors completely became human People has atavistic traits like that were called „born criminals‟ and almost criminals were atavistic persons

To prove the theory, Lombroso took a test to make sure his conclusion was not theoretic statements He compared skull anomalies in 2 groups of criminals with one group of Italian soldiers The result was positive: the proportion of group one and two having more than two anomalies of skull was higher than that of the Italian soldier group (40 percent versus 11 percent), but the proportion of group one and

two having two or fewer of anomalies was lower than that of the group of soldiers (65 percent versus 89 percent) [29-p.255]

But later, Lombroso and his colleagues would revise this figure, and by the time

of his death, Lombroso conceded that born criminals accounted fro only one-third

of the criminal population The other two-thirds consisted of criminaloids, insane and criminal incited by passion

- Insane criminals were not born criminals They are normal person but because of some changes in their brain and morality which deluded that person from realizing the differences between right and wrong

- Criminaloids were also not born criminals They became criminals because

of the affection of the surrounding environment

- Criminals incited by passion were people who were very normal and had normal skull structure like ordinary human being, but because of negative emotions such as hatred, jealousy, or vulnerable scare, they turned out to be so aggressive and broke the law

Those latter theories of criminals made by Lombroso were criticized by many other criminologists due to the inconsistencies, contradictions in his reasoning because of the fact that when mentioned about born criminal, Lombroso didn‟t deny the impact of environment, moral education on deviant individuals His work has been kept alive more by criticism than by agreement One of the big Lombroso‟s theory refute allegation came from the work of Charles Buckman Goring

Charles Buckman Goring (1870-1919) is a medical officer at Parkhurst Prison

in England He and his assistant, Karl Pearson, collected and analyzed data bearing upon 96 traits of each of over 3,000 English offenders, and then compared with characteristics of his normal-person group consisted of Oxford and Cambridge University students, hospital patients and soldiers He ultimately concluded that the physical and mental constitution of both criminals and law-abiding persons, of the same age, stature, class, and intelligence, are identical He also reported to the scientific community:

„From the knowledge only of an undergraduate‟s head measurement, a better judgment could be given as to whether he were studying at an English or Scottish university than a prediction could be made as to whether he would eventually become a university professor or a convicted felon.‟ [18-p.57]

In his conclusion to his book named The English Convict (1913), Goring once

again confirmed: “There is no such thing as an anthropological criminal type." p.259] Goring rejected the claim that having some traits similar to primitive ancestors did not identify the criminals He, however, suggested that there were still some typical type of human that inclined to be criminals such as „one or two inches shorter than non-criminals and weighed from three to seven pounds less‟ This statement seemed to be contradictory to his prior study But his work had still been the weighty critical anatytic thinking of Lombroso‟s theory of the born criminal for about a quarter of a century

[29-1.3.2 Somatotype theory

The somatotype school of criminology was built upon the idea that there was a

relation between human body build and deviant behavior Somatotype was a

category to which people are assigned according to the extent to which their bodily physique conforms to a basic type

The first one who mentioned this idea was Ernst Kretschmer (1888-1946) – a German psychiatrist Kretschmer identified three types of human body and assumed that one of them is the popular type which almost criminals had Three those types

of body build were: skinny people, burly people and fat people In his view, Kretschmer explained that the burly people with high development of muscles were likely to commit crime than the two others [29-p.262]

Kretschmer‟s work was brought to the United States by William Sheldon

(1898-1977), who formulated his own group of somatotypes: the endomorph, the

mesomorph, and the ectomorph Sheldon also believed there was a link between

physical appearance of the body and the temperament of the mind which would lead

an individual to behave aggressively or to break the law

- The endomorphs: individuals who easily put on weight Their identification

sign is their round body shape Whether eating much or not, these people definitely have extremely developed digestive organ system Their skin seems to be smoother than other types of people

- The mosomorphs: these people are easily recognized because of their

attractive physical body appearance They tend to have muscles, and are very burly

as same as the body of athletes such as: large body, heavy chest, large wrists and hands These people can put on weight and be fat, but they are still different from the endomorph at the fact that their body becomes fat but solid, and the endomorph fat body is flabby

- The entomorphs: are people with skinny shape of body structure We can

image them with some relative words like: thin, light, small, fragile

To measure somatotype, the individual is given a score between one and seven for each of three somatotypes For example: a score of 7-1-1 means the individual posses many endomorphic characteristics, very little mesomorphic and entomorphic traits A somatotype of 4-4-4 would represent for an average physical body build To prove his assumption, Sheldon took an experiment of 200 youth males compared with 200 college students He found that youth males who engaged in delinquent behavior had high mesomorphic proportion, and low ectomorphic proportion with the score of 3.5-4.6-2.7 But the college student had different result with same proportions between three numbers of somatotype score: 3.2-3.8-3.4 [19-p.48] About the temperament of the mind, Sheldon deduced that the mesomorphs

were much similar to criminals because they were very excitable, quick-tempered,

easy to get mad or being stress and difficult to control the emotions He considered endomorphs as people who were tolerant, friendly and easily satisfied And ectomorphs were individuals so much sensitive, easy to quit, introvert and shrink from crowds Sheldon came to the conclusion that the mesomorphs had high rate in committing a crime than the others

William Sheldon‟s theory was then continued and developed by other criminologists such as Sheldon Glueck (1896-1980) – a Polish-American criminologist He compared 500 delinquents with 500 non-delinquents matched in terms of age, general intelligence The result was positive that 60.1 percent of the delinquents and only 30.7 percent of the non-delinquents were found to be mesomorphs [19-p.48]

The study of Glueck was criticized because he only did the experiment with the youths and did not take into account the changes of the growth of these young delinquents after their adolescence Till the present day, many scholars have disagreed with Sheldon‟s opinion in which he maintained that the person's somatotype is genetically determined and causes people to develop and express personality traits consistent with their body builds They critical responses gave to Sheldon‟s assertion that the human behavior is the consequence of the physical composition rather than environment

In conclusion, the contribution of the body build school in the development of positivist criminology is undeniable These theories partly explained the causes of crime and the idea lasted for about more than twenty years However, the somatotype school of criminology is still criticized because of the lack of diversity

of research sample, poor statistical analyses, which included only two three types of human body build and two types of human (delinquents and nondelinquents) Therefore, these theories can not explain the causes of all crimes Some of the contemporary critics suggested that somatotype was another type of „phrenology‟ of Lombroso by which instead of studying skulls, criminologists concentrated on „the buttocks‟ [18-p.59] Nevertheless, the failure of one school sowed the seed of another school After World War II, somatotype seemed to nearly become the same

as eugenics – which assumed the criminals were inherited and the only way to

prevent crime was preventing reproduce of those defect people, as we shall see in the following section

1.3.3 Genetic theories

 Inherited theory:

From the very beginning of the eighteenth century, some researchers had a hypothesis that the causes of crime were due to genetic However, it was not until

1877 that Richard Louis Dugdale (1841-1883) deeply studied in this field and

published the book named The Jukes: A study in Crime, Pauperism, and Heredity, the inherited criminology and genetic theories were established and arose strongly

The main assumption of this school of thought was the criminal behavior was the consequence of inherited biological defects [29-p.265]

Richard Louis Dugdale was an English socialist and a writer In his career life,

he luckily had a chance to be the member of the executive committee of the Prison Association of New York in 1868 and in 1874 was delegated to inspect thirteen county jails in upstate New York Noticing that many of the inmates were related by blood or marriage, he self-funded a study of a family living in and around Ulster County, New York, whom he named "Jukes" With all respect, Dugdale began his work from the mother of the Jukes named Ada Jukes Then he located more than a thousand of her descendants and found that among 1.200 members of the Jukes, there were 280 cadgers, 60 thieves, 7 murderers, 40 people had venereal disease, 50 prostitutes, and 90 members engaged in other offenses [29-p.265] His elicitation led to a conclusion that some families could produce some generations of criminals, the offspring were definitely inherited one or more than two degeneration characteristics from their mother, father, grand mom or granddad Simultaneously, Dugdale compared the Jukes with other family which he named Janathan Edwards Jonathan Edwards was the principal of Princeton University Among his descendants, there were members became president and vice president of The United States, many people succeeded in business aspect No one in the Edwards family had criminal record

To continue Dugdale‟s work and to concrete the genetic theory, Henry Goddard (1866-1957) – an American psychologist and eugenicist – studied another family

whom he named the „Kallikaks‟ Goddard's best-known work, The Kallikaks

Family, was published in 1912 Martin Kallikak, an American Revolutionary War

soldier, had 2 wives in his whole life The first one was a respectable girl of a good family All children that came from this relationship were “clean” and had no signs

of metal-retardation But later it was found out that Kallikak had an affair with a

„nameless feeble-minded woman‟ [29-p.266] The most startling thing was among

480 descendants of the relationship between Kallikak and this second woman, there were 36 illegitimates, 33 prostitutes, 24 alcoholics, 3 epileptics, 82 died in infancy,

3 were criminals and 8 kept houses of ill repute It seemed like this relationship produced a generation of criminals Goddard called this the defective degeneration Influenced by the inherited theory, from 1920 to 1930, there was a rapid development of the eugenics movement which later grew into the eugenic criminology Scholars studying this kind of field had a viewpoint that the reason of criminality was because of the defect characteristics heredity from the ancestor to the offspring Therefore, they suggested that the only way to control the crime rate was not to let the traits of the criminal could have a chance to transmit to his or her posterity, the method was sterilization The eugenics movement spread out all over the America until the World War II and then was used by the Germany Nazi to kill the Jewish and the disabled.[29-p.267]

Besides the compliments, there were also several concerns about the persuasiveness of this inherited theory First, Dugdale and Goddard did not take into account the circumstances that some criminals might be born from well-educated families Second, results of the experiments of the Jukes and the Kallikaks did not list the other „nondelinquents‟ in the degenerate family: almost half of the Jukes and nearly 300 of degenerate branch of the Kallikaks were reported to be „normal‟ [29-p.266] Third, there was a concern about the effect of genes on human behavior, was

it the only factor could impact a person conduct or there were other influences such

as environment, society effect? Family studies of this type have fallen into disrepute

 Twin and adoption studies

There were many kinds of study attempting to find the role of heredity in criminality Besides researches on human‟s genes, some scholars concentrated in finding the relation between crime rate and twins They made a hypothesis: „Is there any criminal concordance‟ – which means in a pair of twins, when one person had criminal record then it is possible that the other person will also commit a crime? Since there are two different types of twinning, identical twins and fraternal twins, scientists examine both of these to make sure they did not miss any circumstances at which will become the cause of criminality Identical twins are twins developed from a single fertilized egg that split into two to combine with a sperm, while fraternal twins are developed from two different eggs fertilized by two different sperm cells Johannes Lange studied 30 pairs of twins included both identical twins (13 pairs) and fraternal twins (17 pairs) He found that 77 percent of the identical twins group (10 of 13 pairs) and only 12 percent of the fraternal twins group (2 of 17 pairs) had the „criminal concordance‟ [19-p.72] He also did experiment on 214 pairs of normal brothers and there were only 8 percent of the brothers found to have a criminal record when the other had a record Lange then came to the conclusion that similarities in conducts of identical twins and heredity really could impact on the criminal generation producing

After Lange, there were similar studies to prove the greater similarity of criminal behavior among identical twins than among fraternal twins like the work of

K O Christiansen, Glenn D Walters or W M Groove They did make experiments

on twins who were separated shortly after birth, the result still showed that although they are living apart, it still had potential of the „criminal concordance‟ among those twins However, being more radical than Lange, in the report of the study, Christiansen and Walters pointed out that it might not because of the genes that tells

us the high rate of criminals in the identical twins or fraternal twins but maybe because of the training and environmental experience combined with their hereditary makeup to make their become criminals [19-p.73]

Another method for determining the effects of heredity on criminality is to study the records of adoptees Such studies were carried out by Fini Schulsinger, Barry Hutchings and Sarnoff A Mednick [19-p.74] All of these studies were carefully examined with many samples The conclusions were summarized as following bullet points:

- Firstly, it was assumed that psychopathic adoptees had high proportion of biological relative engaged in some psychopathic disorders such as alcoholism, drug abuse or criminality while the proportion of such relative of non-psychopathic adoptees was lower

- Secondly, researchers confirmed there was really a criminal-link between the prior and the latter generation, in which adopted boys were more likely to commit a crime when their biological fathers (the real father of the boy) had a criminal record

- Lastly, the effect of criminality of the adoptive father was not greater than the effect of criminality of the biological father The researcher found that if the biological father had many times going to jail, it would impact on an adoptee‟s mind and might lead that child to become criminal when he grew up But it did not or rarely happen when the one who had to go to jail was the adoptive father

These hypotheses had some defects First, because the adoptive parents usually wealthy and they had no reason to engage in crimes, so we can not compare these people with biological parents of adoptees who were not wealthy well-educated to behave in well manner Second, maybe it was not the genetic factor which influenced the adoptee‟s behavior but the environmental experiences such as school education program, the connection of that child with community could impact on the conducts [19-p.76]

1.3.4 Other biological studies

In the field of biological criminology, many scholars did research on hereditary factors influencing antisocial behavior and criminal behavior such as the family, twins or adoption Yet so far, there were also researches covering factors that may

be heredity but might change overtime due to environmental influences such as