Crime and Crime
Crime and Crime
The concepts of "crime" and "crime" are so polysemic that there is no other way but to propose, first, a sociological rather than a legal definition. In this perspective, it is considered criminal or delinquent behavior all that a legislator criminalizes threatening the head of a sentence. In this definition, there is no crime in itself. A criminal act is qualified under the action of a legitimate authority sanctioning certain behaviors. For philosophers, ethicists and legal experts, the breaking of a taboo can be characterized as criminal, regardless of the capacity of institutions to identify more or less correctly its author; it follows the belief in the existence of a "real crime" that would only be the total number of violated acts carry a penalty that authors have more or less aware of having committed.
Alongside this theoretical conception of a "real crime" that would exist virtually without a shred of evidence, is a second design, worn by lawyers: "legal crime." This includes all penalized acts whose perpetrators are identified by the specialized agencies in the identification and punishment (court statistics), and punishable by fines or deprivation of liberty (prison statistics). This legalistic conception of crime extremely restrictive, does not take into account rigorously, as the authors found responsible for acts defined as "crime or offense" and punished as such. All the "authors" presumed innocent until the court has convicted should be strictly ignored the scope of institutional analysis. Now, obviously, this is never the case, even among the most legalistic lawyers. Everything happens as if it could topple the famous proposal of the Italian philosopher Cesare Beccaria (1738-1794): "nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege" ("no crime, no punishment without law"). Indeed, in our system of criminal justice, "suspects" authors are virtually presumed guilty by police agencies until justice is innocent. Procedures "plead guilty" are they not the implicit recognition of the efficiency of such a principle? The intermediate term "apparent crime", which claims to be the in-between "real crime" and "legal crime" remains equally problematic.
Whether they are victims, the police and magistrates, stakeholders do not qualify in the same way the facts, actions, procedures or suspicious persons. Their status varies according to the different perceptions that have these players. It varies especially over time and space, a fact that may be legally qualified as criminal, tortious, contraventionnel or "deviant" at a particular moment in history, and no longer receive these qualifications to another. The content of the concept of "apparent crime" is so volatile and on a given sequence of time and space that can not be made a subject of sociological study: the substance of the transgression is diluted
تعليقات
إرسال تعليق