White Collar Crime and the Public View of These Crimes - Essay Example

Literature Review The following literature deals with studies about public perceptions of various aspects of white-collar crime. Likewise, factors which contribute to the frequency of occurrence of white-collar crimes and punishment for white-collar were also examined. Existing studies were surveyed in order to attain a better understanding of how the public views such illegal acts and what influences their commission. White collar crime and the public view of these crimes Holfreter, Van Slyke, and Gertz maintained that public awareness if white-collar crimes increased as a consequence of high profile scandals recently. They are, however, unsure of the public attitude has changed with such awareness. The group noted that although higher financial losses incurred from white-collar crime compared with street crime, the law tends to focus more on street crime. Moreover, they argued that the public are even more inclined to sustain corrective measures against street offenders. The study improved on prior white-collar research by recognizing the effects of socio-demographics, perceptions of white-collar crime, as well as corresponding punitive actions on public support for allocating budget for white-collar initiatives. (Holfreter, et al. 50). Male and female white-collar offenders have similar ways of declaring their account of how and why they committed fraud. While men declare their white-collar crime as out of character perpetrated out of necessity, women usually plead to the crime as due to necessity and the only reasonable alternative based on the circumstances. Based on qualitative researches, gender has been proven to be am important social characteristic with respect to the choice and use of specific accounts for various white-collar offenses (Klenowski, et al. 60, 69). Punishment of white collar crimes Meanwhile, public perceptions about the punishment white-collar crimes and street crimes were studied by Schoepfer, Carmichael, and Piquero, particularly, the factors associated to sanction threats. A probability sample was involved in a study comparing robbery and fraud as exemplars. Findings revealed that popular perception tends to consider street crime as having a higher probability of being caught and that the penalties of street crime are stiffer than for white collar crimes. Furthermore, the correlates of certainty and severity for both street and white collar crimes are similar. However, respondents differed in their perceptions about the possibility of being meted particular punishments and actual punishments that white-collar offenders should receive (Schoepfer, et al. 151). Cullen, Clark, Mathers, et al. disproved the popular belief that white-collar crime proliferate because the public are either uninformed of the financial burden brought about by such crimes or are indifferent to control measures. While the public are generally aware of the great economic and moral cost of white-collar crimes, they are also wont to believe that white-collar crimes are not as violent. The study also revealed that the public support the punishment imposed on white-collar offender. Thus, the public should not be used as scapegoat for seeming reluctance of the authorities to bring white-collar criminals within the reach of the law (Cullen, et al. 481). Factors which contribute to the prevalence of white collar crime A review conducted by Bashir, Shahzad, Abbass, et al. on current literature pertaining to white collar crimes committed in public sector organizations unearthed several factors which exert a substantial degree of influence and contribute to the prevalence of the act. Results of the review show factors involved in the development of white collar crime include: support from peers, prevailing culture in an organization, accountability issues, and flawed reporting mechanisms. Most white collar crimes are instigated by more than one person and usually involve colleagues. Therefore, whether colleagues will lead a person to safety or harm plays a crucial part in the prevention of white collar crime (Bashir, et al. 13359). The prevailing culture in a public sector organization also plays an important role in white collar crime. An unhealthy and repressive work environment often leads to the development of deviant behavior. In addition, the lack of accountability and reporting mechanisms encourage white collar crimes since offenders can easily deny responsibility and people who have knowledge of these crimes are intimidated by the risk involved in reporting (Bashir, et al. 13360, 13361). Reichman lamented on the fact that white collar crime will continue to prevail unless effective measures of exposing deception and secrecy and interventions of the law are developed. Most white collar crimes evolve around a pact of silence among offenders, making it possible to commit a crime repeatedly. Hence, more incentive for people to come forward and expose the offenders is seen as a crucial factor in thwarting attempts to commit white collar crime (Reichman 483). From a legal perspective, Comey delineated apparent deficiencies the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SAA) and the White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002 (WCCPA) in successfully preventing white-collar crime. SAA was enacted by stunned American lawmakers in reaction to the demoralizing collapse of Enron and a host of other American corporations on account of massive corporate crimes. The SAA also gave birth to WCCPA which stridently increased the punishment for different forms of fraud. Both the SAA and WCCPA, however, are being criticized to be “overly rushed and insufficiently prescient to deal with the changing business crimes in America” (qtd. in Comey 1728). The seeming failure of SAA and WCCPA pinpointed the attitude of judges to significantly and increasingly deviate from the Federal Sentencing Guidelines in reaction to what the judges perceived as harsher WCCPA penalties (Comey 1728). Possible solutions With the judges toning down the sentences prescribed under WCCPA, penalties for white-collar criminals after WCCPA were dissimilar and reliable just like before WCCPA was enacted. Thus, the scaled-down punishment under WCCPA do not cause fear among elements who perpetrate white-collar crimes and does not deter the occurrence of corporate crimes (Comey 1728). Comey recommends that the white-collar sentencing system be stabilized and rationalized to encourage judges to lay down sentences systematically and consistently (1729). Meanwhile, according to Graborsky and Shover, initiatives to minimize the recurrence of white-collar crimes can be directed toward three areas: “(1) reducing the supply of lure, (2) increasing prevailing estimates of the credibility of external oversight, and (3) increasing the use of effective systems of internal oversight and self restraint” (641). In the public sector, practically all new commodities and government programs attract and offer opportunities for potential white-collar offenders to exploit. Only resolute watchfulness from the public can provide protection for the “worst excesses of capitalism” (Graborsky and Shover 643). The third area recommended for improvement pertaining to self-restraint can not be easily engineered because this will entail a cultural change (qtd in Graborsky and Shover 644). Langton and Piquero explored the efficacy of Agnew’s general strain theory in predicting white collar offending based on the records of convicted white-collar offenders. Findings revealed that the theory can predict middle-level white collar crimes such as bribery, mail/wire fraud, and false claims. However, the general strain theory can not be generally used for corporate-type crimes. (1, 11). . References Bashir, Sajid, Khurram Shahzad, Mashal Abbass, Nida Abbass, and Sania Saeed. “Antecedents of white collar crime in organizations: A literature review.” African Journal of Business Management 5.35 (2011). 13359-13363. Print. Comey, James Jr., B. “Go Directly to Jail: White Collar Sentencing After the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.” Harvard Law Review 122.6 (2009): 1728-1749. Print. Cullen, Francis T., Gregory A. Clark, Richard A. Mathers, and John B. Cullen. “Public Support for Punishing White-Collar Crime: Blaming the Victim Revisited.” Journal of Criminal Justice 11.6 (1983): 481-493. Print. Graborsky, Peter and Neal Shover. “Forestalling the Next Epidemic of White Collar Crime: Linking Policy to Theory.” Criminology & Public Policy 9.3 (2010): 641-654. Print. Holtfreter, Kristy, Shanna Van Slyke, Jason Bratton, and Mark Gertz. “Public Perceptions of White-Collar Crime and Punishment.” Journal of Criminal Justice 36.1 (2008): 50-60. Print. Klenowski, Paul M., Heith Copes, and Christopher W. Mullins. “Gender Identity, and Accounts: How White Collar Offenders Do Gender When Making Sense of their Crimes.” Justice Quarterly 28.1 (2011): 46-69. Print. Langton, Lynn and Nicole Leeper Piquero. “Can General Strain Theory Explain White Collar Crime? A Preliminary Investigation of the Relationship Between Strain and Select White-Collar Offenses.” Journal of Criminal Justice 36.1 (2007): 1-15. Print. Reichman, Nancy. “Getting our attention.” Criminology and Public Policy 9.3 (2010), 483-491. Print. Schoepfer, Andrea, Stephanie Carmichael, and Nicole Leeper Piquero. “Do Perceptions of Punishment vary Between White-Collar and Street Crimes?” Journal of Criminal Justice 35.2 (2007): 151-163. Print. Read More