The History of Crimes - Coursework Example

Histories of Crime: Those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it. I. Introduction History tells us a lot about the present. For many experts, looking into the history of things is very important to explain some present events. However, there are instances when what is recorded in the history of humankind was not really what happened. We must understand that the recording of history is often affected by the points of the view of the people who are documenting the event and the common opinions and sentiments of the people when the event took place. Since history has a unique way of presenting itself, author Mark Twain used to say "history does not repeat itself, at most it rhymes." In other words, although certain events do happen again and again, the elements present in these events often differ. For instance, if we talk about crimes and criminals, the act of murder involves the killing of a person but not all killings have the same motives. Each crime has its own unique aspects that keep us asking why and how things happened the way they did. Although history does not exactly repeat itself, there are things that history can teach us about future events. For instance, based on the historical account of the mental state of a person, one can already get an idea of how this person is likely to behave in a given situation. Since we have reasonable way to predict the reactions of that person when exposed to certain situations, we are more likely to be able to anticipate such actions and effective foil any act that may cause harm. On the broader side of things, learning from the mistakes of the past is essential to help us avert certain types of disaster. To help us understand why it is very important to learn from past experiences, let us look into the area of crimes specifically rape, treason and criminal women as well as the areas of penalty, prison and capital punishment. II. Crimes Crimes are considered as a deviation or violation from the prevailing norms and laws of the land. Crimes are divided into two major categories which are the mala en se which means wrong in itself and the mala prohibita which means wrong because it is prohibited (Blacks Law Dictionary). Both types of crimes are punishable under the law. The universally outlawed offenses such as rape, murder, robbery and thief are examples of mala en se while those offenses which are made punishable because of a prohibition such as smoking in non-smoking areas, use of illegal drugs and the likes are considered as mala prohibita. The history of crimes is quite long and each type of crime has its own story. Over the years, the authorities have encountered several types of crimes which then prompted the evolution and the enactment of many laws. Most of these laws are enacted to prevent the recurrence of wrong doings and to prevent harm on innocent people. To come up with laws that address the problem of criminality, legislators often draw ideas from past events. To define the elements of a crime, legislators often rely on the history of the commission of that crime. By looking into past events, one can now determine what things need to be prevented and what are the acts that deserve punishments. For instance, in defining the elements of the crime of infanticide, legislators need to look into the history of the commission of this type of offenses. By drawing on the history of the commission of this type of offense, one can now define the crime more fully and provide for a fair punishment. Learning from past experience is therefore very crucial in defining the elements of the crime. Going back to our example on the case of infanticide, there is a need to keep on reviewing the past events that lead to this type of criminal offense. Just because we have used past experiences to help us define the elements of the crime of infanticide, that does not mean that we will stop there. For a law to be effective, it must be dynamic and must evolve with time. This means that to improve the delivery of justice, we need to continually look into our past experiences to find out if there are some things that need to be changed or improved. Our failure to monitor and review the implementation of the laws would lead to repeating that mistake all over again. A good example of a common belief that had been present for a long time is that infanticide can only be committed by the mother of the child who is less than 12 months old (see Infanticide Act 1938). This belief in fact based on the law that governs infanticide. However, in the recent years, we have learned that some physicians who are attending to very sick-newborns often times withdraw treatment on the baby (Templeton, Sarah-Kate, 2006). The withdrawal of treatment is in fact a kind of "active euthanasia" on newborn babies that are severely infirmed. Since euthanasia or mercy killing in not allowed in this country, we can say that to some degree, the act of indirectly killing the baby is infanticide. However, since our law defined infanticide as a killing of a baby by his or her mother, doctors who are not parents of the babies they withheld treatment from could not be prosecuted under this law. If we are to protect fully protect the right of a newborn child, we need to look into the experiences of the past to help us redefine the nature of this type of crime. Since it is not only the mother who may kill a newborn child, there may be a need to review the coverage of this law to include other people who are privy to the death of a newborn child. Unless we revise our opinion on this matter and learn from past experiences, we are bound to continue committing the same mistakes that we had in the past. a. Rape According to English common law, rape can be defined as forcing a woman against her will to have carnal knowledge with another person (LaFave 2000). There are many things that we can learn from the past when it comes to the crime of rape. However, we should not take the history of rape on its face value alone. We have to look deeper into history and ask questions as to why this crime is being committed again and again. In understanding crimes, we just dont look at things at their face values. We need to dig deeper and revise the opinions of the general public on certain matters when needed be. First, if we want to use history to prevent crimes, we need to look into the profile of perpetrators. Who are these people who are committing this crime and why are they doing the things that they do to their victims? Second, we need to look into the laws and policies of the state when it comes to this office. We have to ask why this crime is still very much rampant even in these modern times. We need to use history to understand what went wrong with these laws and why they are not working to prevent as much rape incidents as they should. Studies show that the person who is most likely to commit this crime is someone who is known to the victim like steady dating partner, a friend, an ex-boyfriend, casual acquaintances and the likes (Abbey, A., BeShears, R., Clinton-Sherrod, A. M., & McAuslan, P. (2004). Most cases of rape occur indoors and not outdoors as most of us would like to believe. In fact, two thirds of the cases of rape in the country occurred in someones home (Abbey, A., BeShears, R., Clinton-Sherrod, A. M., & McAuslan, P. (2004). Since the crime of rape often times involve just two people and no witnesses, investigators now has to rely on the statements of the victim. Since not all those claimed to be victims are actually "victims" in truest sense of the word, it is often difficult for an investigator to determine if the victim is telling the truth or not. Given this condition, there are times when an innocent person is sent to prison and the guilty set free. If an investigator refuses to learn from history, he or she is most likely to commit the same mistakes all over again. On the other hand, it is not just investigators who should learn from history. Legislators and law enforcement ought to learn something from the past. As early as the 17th century, Lord Chief Justice Sir Mathew Hale, then chief justice of England, already summed up what our justice system have to say about rape. According to Lord Chief Justice Sir Mathew Hale, the accusation of rape is easy to make but very hard to prove. He also adulated that in the case of rape, it is victim who is on trial and not the defendant (LaFave 2000). In a society that believed for a long time that it is the womans fault that she was raped, it is often difficult for women who are victims of this crime to seek justice. Unfortunately for the victim, even those who are supposed to enforce the law are often skeptical about their allegations of rape. Instead of being treated as the victim of the crime, many law enforcement people tend to subject the victim to self-demeaning interrogations as if the victim is actually the offender. Over the years, the way people see the crime of rape have improved much but there are still a lot of things left to be desired. Although laws have been formulated imposing stiff punishments for perpetrators of this type of crime and those people who are assigned to investigate rape cases are more humane in their approach to the victim, nevertheless, things have not really looked much better from the perspective of the victim. Since the 1970s, rape has been considered as "a crime of violence and control."(Margulis, S. 2003) According to Pederson, D. (1997), privacy is not absence of people around the victim bur rather the inability of the victim to exercise control over these people when he or she comes in contact with them. Because the victim has no control over his or interaction with the perpetrator, the perpetrator has the advantage of the victim. This more liberal interpretation of rape has it advantages and disadvantages. Where the women is not given more latitude to claim rape when she is forced to have sex against her will and that her right to privacy was violated by the offender, she still bears the burden of proof (Denov, Myriam S. (2004) . In other words, when the case eventually goes to trial, it is still as if she is the one on trial and not the offender. It is no secret that even our modern criminal justice system is biased against the rape victims (McDonalds 2001). What does the history of rape has to tell us? Over the years, "victim blame" shadowed the investigation and prosecution of rape cases (Branscombe, Nyla R.; Wohl, Michael J. A.; Owen, Susan; Allison, Julie A.; Ngbala, Ahogni. (2003). We have not really learned much from our past mistakes and since we have not really learned, we keep on repeating the same mistakes all over again. Even in these modern times, we still believe that the allegations of the victim of rape are false and we still treat these people as if they are offenders and that they are being put to trial for reporting the crime to the authorities (Denov, M. 2004). Until such time when we learn from the past and totally revise our long standing views on the culpability of women who are victims of rape, we cannot really hope to help those women who have been sexually brutalized. b. Treason When it comes to learning from the past, we have come quite a long way when it comes to crime of treason. Note that when this act was first considered as a crime, there was really no clear definition of what constitute this type of crime. At the time when treason was first considered as a crime, it was up to the King and his judges to decide which acts shall constitute as treason and which does not (Steffen, Lisa (2001). As it is, the procedure of investigating acts of treason was very much open to abuse and many arbitrary decisions were made which led to the death of many innocent people (Steffen, Lisa (2001). Because of the many abuses committed in trying people who are suspected of treason, the Parliament passed legislation on treason in 1351. This became the backbone of laws governing treason. This law defined the scope of the crime of treason, the manner of trial and penalty which may be imposed on a person who is convicted with the crime (Treason Act 1351). Technically, this clear definition of the crime of treason reduced if not totally eliminates the abuses in the past. The enactment of the first law governing treason is a clear manifestation that if learn from the past, we can help change the future. Since the time the Treason Act 1351 was enacted, several addenda have been made to the law. Other laws were also enacted to support the Treason Act 1351. These laws were the by the products of what we have learned in the past. If we take a closer look into the evolution of this law, we can see that these law has indeed underwent a lot of interesting changes in the past to conform to the needs of the time. For instance the reduction of penalty from death to life imprisonment for people convicted of this crime was a clear sign that we have indeed learned from our past mistakes (Orr, Alan (2002). At present, the laws on treason together with other laws enacted to support them are still in force. However, it has been quite a long time since there was a trial for treason in England. The last person to be tried for this crime was William Joyce way back in 1945 (Orr, Alan (2002). From that time on, there was really nobody who had been officially charged with this offense until the present. During the 9/11 incident, the British government threatened to use the law on treason to prosecute those people who are said to have aligned themselves with the enemies (see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4130454.stm) but no charges were made under the laws of treason. In an interview with the BBC News at that time, Baron Carlile of Berriew, said that the inability of the authorities to prosecute those suspected traitors of the country may be traced to the fact the laws of treason in England is already outdated. Clearly, we have overlooked the fact that we should update our laws to go with the times. Since our laws on treason are not updated, it becomes difficult for us to prosecute people who are disloyal to the country. You see, this situation is almost just like before the enactment of the Treason Act 1351 where these were no available definition of the crime of treason to guide those who are tasked to enforce the peace. The only difference here is that in the past, there were no other lands which can be applied to the violators while now, England have other sets of laws which can be applied in the event where one law cannot be applied to the offender. However, the fact still remains that if we do not take cue from the past and learn from our past mistakes, we are bound to repeat such mistake all over again. Laws that have fallen to disuse over time need to be amended and update to be applicable to our present situation. We cannot really afford to let those people who threatened our sovereignty to go free simply because our laws are outdated and could no longer be applied to them. III. Conclusion Learning from the mistakes of the past may not really be as easy as we would like to think. As we have mentioned before, history can be tainted with doubts at to its veracity and what we believed to be true for so long may not really be the truth after all. In the case of rape, we have believed for so long that the victim is at fault for what happened. In fact, we treat the victim as if he or she is the offender. Although studies showed that only about 2% to 8% of those reported rape cases are fraudulent or not true (DiCanio, M. (1993); Haws, D. (1997), we still insist on putting the credibility of the victim on trial. Clearly, we have missed the point that victims do not just cry rape because they feel like doing so. Although we have learned much from the past when it comes to dealing with the crime of rape, we have not really examined the past well enough to revise our opinions regarding this matter. In effect, until the present, we are still repeating the same mistakes that we did in the past. With regards to the crime of infanticide and treason, it can conclude that there is a need t continually learn from our past experiences and use our learning to change the future. When we stop learning from our past mistakes, we put ourselves at risk of not being able to protect those people whom we ought to protect. On the other hand, when we cease to be more pro-active in applying out learning to change the future, we risk our chance of ever bringing criminals to justice. Yes, history may not really repeat itself but according to Mark Twain "they do rhyme". In the end, we can very well say that if we do not learn from the past, we are doomed to repeat our mistakes over and over again. Bibliography 1. Abbey, A., BeShears, R., Clinton-Sherrod, A. M., & McAuslan, P. (2004).Similarities and differences in womens sexual assault experiences based on tactics used by the perpetrator Psychology of Women Quarterly, 28, 323-332 2. Bellamy, John (1979) The Tudor Law of Treason: An Introduction. Routledge, London 3. Blacks law Dictionary 4. Branscombe, Nyla R.; Wohl, Michael J. A.; Owen, Susan; Allison, Julie A.; Ngbala, Ahogni. (2003). Counterfactual Thinking, Blame Assignment, and Well-Being in Rape Victims. Basic & Applied Social Psychology, 25 (4). p265, 9p 5. Buddie Amy M. & Arthur G. Miller (2001) Beyond Rape Myths: A More Complex View Of Perceptions of Rape Victims. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, August 2001. 6. Denov, Myriam S. (2004) Perspectives on Female Sex Offending: A Culture of Denial. Ashgate Publishing 7. Di Canio M. (1993). The Encyclopedia of violence: Origins, attitudes, consequences. New York 8. Haws, D. (1997) The Elusive Numbers on False Rape. Columbian Journalism Review November/December 1997 9. Howard, A. & Kavenik Francis (2000). Handbook of American Womens History. CA: Sage Publications Inc. 10. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4130454.stm 11. Infanticide Act 1938 12. LaFave, W.R (2003) Rape- overview, Act and Mental State. Substantive Criminal Law (3rd ed) 13. Macdonalds, John (2001). World Book Encyclopedia. United States of America: World Book Inc. 14. Margulis, S. (2003). Privacy as a social issue and behavioral concept. Journal of Social Issues, 59. 15. Orr, Alan (2002) Treason & the State: Law, Politics and Ideology in the English Civil War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 16. Pauwels, B. (2002). "Blaming the victim of rape: The culpable control model perspective." Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, 63(5-B). 17. Pedersen, D. (1997). Psychological functions of privacy. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 18. Steffen, Lisa (2001) Defining A British State: Treason and National Identity, 1608-1820 (London: Palgrave 2001) 19. Templeton, Sarah-Kate (2006) Doctors: Let us Kill Disabled Babies Retrieved 22 December 2007 http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2437921.html 20. Treason Act 1351 Read More