BOOK REVIEW- TOM GASH'S CRIMINAL: THE TRUTH ABOUT WHY PEOPLE DO BAD THINGS

After having read Tom Gash’s book on criminality and his interpretation of precisely ‘why people do bad things’, it has definitely opened up my mind into looking at new and different perspectives when researching Criminality. Tom Gash is a senior researcher at the Mannheim school of Criminology at the London school of economics. He is a regular contributor to debates and discussions on a variety of topics including Criminology, public policy and current affairs. He also regularly writes for media outlets such as the Guardian and the Financial times. He has an ambiguous interpretation and hosts a critical analysis of criminal behaviour in a Contemporary society. Within the book, he takes apart day to day interpretations of myths surrounding criminality. He picks apart and looks at different myths in a critical manner. In the first chapter on p27-49, he talks about the idea that crime is significantly rising. However, throughout this chapter, I questioned the validity of this statement. Firstly, I wondered simply, where? Which region is he referring to with the inference of risen crime? Secondly, I also considered the idea of time scale. Between what length of time is crime rising? This whole question is open to interpretation and debate. For example, you could take a country with high levels of poverty which can result in high crime rates, especially in tight urban densities. For example, Honduras has one of the highest murder rates in the world. Compare that statistic to a country which has typically more affluence and prosperity, also which has a stricter and more controlled Government regime, such as Norway with significantly lower crime rates. These are factors that I have noticed, and feel could use more clarification within his analysis. Gash T discussed Government policy which was partly responsible for social issues up and down the UK. He focused heavily on the 2011 London Riots with references to the aftermath and how he felt that the English authorities failed to handle the problem in terms of eradicating the rioters from the streets and quickly restoring normality and serving justice to those involved. I think this is a unique and quite popularly shared view point. I think this has expanded my understanding of the motivations behind many of the rioters. For example, on p28, a rioter who was asked brief questions by an investigator stated ‘Normally the police control us, but during the riots, the law was obeying us’. This statement displayed a heightened sense of anarchy. A mutual feeling between groups and individuals within English cities that they are the forgotten society. They are not looked after by the mainstream Government. This however is just one side of the coin. Many media outlets and politicians blamed the spark of the London Riots on tensions within communities. However, I believe that many of the rioters were simply opportunistic. They saw an opportunity to ‘blend in with the masses’ and to conform to the looting and rioting that was taking place. This opportunistic behaviour could also have been fuelled by desperation and the desire to come across as more affluent than their peers, through materialistic goods. Gash T also talked about ‘moral collapse’.  The definition of moral collapse is where the moral intellect within society is depleting at a rapid rate.

When Gash T talked about moral collapse, it made sense to me that of course, many of the rioters would have felt angry at the Government in terms of policy, increased austerity and poverty which many felt they could not recover from. This mutual feeling of anger, betrayal and frustration within poor Urban communities would have created a sense of unity within the young groups which could allow a vacuum for gangs to form, as there would have been a lack of opportunity elsewhere. All they would have needed at this point is a spark, a trigger which would internally justify their actions. This is what the aftermath resulted in after the shooting of Mark Duggan by Metropolitan Police. The eruption of these angry feelings would have been a leading contributor to the eruption of riots which took place. I see moral collapse as a de- multiplier effect within communities who can lack socio-economic prosperity. The collapse of social structure, law and order and the rise of anarchy and gang unity.

I am not however saying that this is the one and only cause to the riots taking place. There are other factors which would need to be considered. For example, the opportunistic nature which was fuelled by pure chance and the feeling of invincibility, the adrenaline rush of not getting caught by the authorities, who in many cases at the time, were the ‘enemy’ within communities. 

The second myth which was on pp 50-65, discusses the idea of taking up a life of crime. This is now looking at potential reasons as to why individuals from all types of societies and walks of life decide to go against the laws that are ascribed to them. The chapter starts off with a case study of Lee Kildare, Lee was convicted for a rampage of burglaries in Newcastle in 2008. The language which was used when describing Lee Kildare was quite emotive. P50, - ‘Lee Kildare was a man who had few options in life, he had struggled at school and, suffering from dwarfism, was under four feet tall’. This language in my opinion, shows a sense of emotion and justification for what Lee Kildare did. However, in an interview, Lee clearly explained his reasoning for his offences, p50- ‘It’s what I have to do for money because I couldn’t get a normal job. It’s a tall man’s world’. This makes me think as the reader that Lee was victimising himself, in the sense that society and life has been unfair on him. Starting with the dwarfism and continuing to lack of employment opportunities and economic prosperity and independence. This also gives the notion that Lee is taking back from society what he believes was taken from him. Following his conviction, he also said that he was not going to give up a life of crime. This goes back to the overall title on this case study, which was named ‘life choices’. It is relevant to look at Criminological schools of thought, such as classicism and positivism. The idea of looking at the offender (positivism), in comparison to the offence taken place (classicism). Personally, I think that in the case of Lee Kildare, the behaviour was determined. I think he carefully and rationally thought about his actions, with a drive to commit them.  As we go further into the second chapter, we look at ‘hidden childhoods’. P60-64. Gash T talks about how within mainstream society, adults (starting from age 18-21) are known as independent, self-thinking and self-directing agents who are responsible for their thoughts and actions. In comparison to children who are dependent on adults, impressionable and are deemed not accountable for their thoughts and actions. However, I personally think the moral responsibility can be applied at any age following the stages of infancy and complete dependency. I think that once an adolescent is capable of training and applying their own thoughts, they become of the age of criminal accountability. When looking for substantial evidence in the argument that adolescents can commit terrible crimes, I refer to the James Bulger case. James Bulger was born on the 16^th March 1990, and tragically murdered on the 12^th February 1993. He was only two years old. He was led away from his mother who took her eyes off him for a few seconds in a shopping queue. He was led away by two 10-year-old boys, Robert Thompson and Jon Veneables, both born in 1982. They had used bricks and metal poles to torture him, and eventually they murdered him and left the remains of his body on the railway tracks. This was a tragic death that truly shocked the nation. This takes me back to my previous point of criminal accountability within adolescents. Robert Thompson and John Veneables were simply children themselves. However, this makes me ask another question, simply- what is the universal definition of a child??

I look closely at different societies, the East and the West, and how ‘children’ must grow up a lot quicker in some societies in comparison to others. For example, take Britain or the United States, many children live in nurtured and safe homes. This type of environment allows them to act as a child is supposed to be and to carry out their resemblance of innocence. However, in countries where there is war/conflict and major suffering, children in those countries will of course have to learn to cope and adapt with their surroundings. This is in terms of mentally adulting much more quickly.  It shows to me that children are capable of thinking and acting in an adult manner. And of course, much of criminal activity is committed by adults who are deemed responsible for their actions. This says to me that it was right that Robert Thompson and John Veneables were tried as adults and were deemed responsible for their actions committed against James Bulger. Based on the pathology report which gave evidence to say that there were 42 Injuries sustained to him. This says to me that they intended to harm him. With full clarification of what they were doing. They were tried as adults and detained at her Majesty’s pleasure and served a minimum of eight years in prison.

Going into the third chapter, which is on pp 66-87, Gash T, talks about how criminals will often stop at nothing to achieve their goals. This is looking at determinism and what would drive a criminal to commit terrible acts? Would they consider the risks and whether the benefits outweigh them? Is it a case of desperation within their livelihoods which drives them to commit crime? Could it also be an adrenaline rush, or a feeling of self-gratification which internally justifies their actions? Gash T begins the chapter by looking at the Antwerp Diamond centre heist and how robbers managed to defeat all odds and successfully carry out a diamond robbery. The robbery took place on Monday 19^th February 2003. He talks in depth about the security measures which have been put into place to protect the diamonds. ‘Diamonds could only be accessed by their owners and the vault which contained them was supposed to be impenetrable. There were ten security features, including cameras, infrared heat detectors, Doppler radar, a magnetic field, a seismic sensor, and a lock with 100 million possible combinations’. This quote extrapolated from Gash T p66, clearly shows that these diamonds were highly protected and that for anyone considering robbing the diamonds would be faced with a lot of risk. However, the diamonds were robbed, which shows to me that they were absolutely determined and as said in the title of chapter 3, will ‘stop at nothing’.  Also, the fact that only a select few would have had access to the combination, advocates that it could have been an inside job, a cover up perhaps? These are in my opinion all plausible theories which would have needed to be have been considered at the time. The haul would have been an estimated $100 million. However, those responsible were eventually caught. A local habitat preserver called August Van Camp found traces of diamonds in a forest in Antwerp with rolls of Israeli and Indian currency. DNA was extrapolated from half eaten food, and suspicion was raised to a lifelong thief, Leonardo Notarbartolo.  He eventually gave himself up and revealed the nicknames of those who were also involved. – ‘the genius’, ‘the monster’ and ‘speedy’. Questions would still be raised now as to how did they manage to pull off a heist to this level, knowing the risks involved?

These sorts of crimes show how calculated and methodical major criminals like Leonardo Notarbartolo are in the sense that they almost have a genius mind in terms of defeating all odds and doing the ‘impossible’ with a heightened aura of invincibility.

The next part of chapter 3, talks about human nature and how we are in a lot of cases naturally impatient, that we are wired to cave into our instincts and our want for items. Researchers at Bing Nursery school on the campus of Stanford university, did an experiment which would determine the mindset of children aged 4-6 years old, when presented with a treat like a marshmallow. Dr Walter Mischel who was the face of the experiment, said to the children that they could have just one treat now, or wait 15 minutes when he came back into the room and be given an additional treat. This was a test of resisting the alluring urge to fulfil their desires. The results of the marshmallow test were promising in furthering Criminological research. According to Gash T, many of the children resorted to putting themselves through physical pains to resist the temptation and missing out on an additional treat. P70- ‘some hit their heads, others kick at the underside of the table; and a few (rather unwisely) stare purposefully at the object of the desire’. Looking at these results from a psychological analysis, when a child is presented with a desirable item, they could even temporarily drive themselves to an insane manner to resist the urge to giving into their cravings.  This train of thought can also be applied when looking at criminality within adults, such as sexual violence.

 This says a lot about criminality and the early mindset which can be adopted at an early age. The Marshmallow experiment also showed that the children who caved in and ate the marshmallow before the 15 mins was up, were more likely to not be able to sit still in class and train themselves on the correct way to act in a classroom-based environment. They were deemed more irrational and even showed signs of possessing conditions such as ADHD. Going back to my previous point which suggests that these early signs could lead to a life more prone to criminality, allows us to look at the correlation between these factors and long-term drug users and sexual offenders. The need to fulfil the desire of taking drugs or having sex makes me think that conditioning experiments could be a plausible factor in nipping these signs in the bud at an early age. This may sound indeed controversial; however, it is my belief that this is a plausible idea, which I hope to back up in research at a later date.

Gash T talks in his next chapter about how organized crime is ‘booming’. When a lot of people reflect on what organised crime is, they often think of Mafia styled killings, and Robbers stealing the crown jewels. However, the true identification of organized crime goes into more complex ideals.  Firstly, it is important to define the meaning of the term ‘organised crime’, I personally don’t think there is a one definitive answer to this question. The complexities of organised crime are too diverse to sum up in one or two sentences. There are however, distinguishable features which unifies organised crime. For example, you would consider those involved. Organised crime rings are typically consistent of having multiple people working in different areas with the aim of achieving something big and significant. These ‘achievements’ can be materialistic gain through dramatic profit increase. (linked to other crimes such as robbery). It could also be defined on a more human based scale. This is in terms of Human trafficking, exploitation, and slavery which would mean the suffering of masses for economic gain of those involved. Ultimately there are two definitive aims of organised crime. According to Newburn T (2017), pp 432, this is profit and power. Another defining feature of organised crime gangs is that they would utilise violent to exert their power and dominance.  You could also consider the fact that many organised crime gangs will work in a business-like structure with a hierarchy which has to be respected. This can give the gang the status of being known as ‘organised’.  I would also consider the fact that many organised crime rings will have an aim of achieving something. Usually profit. This would be backed up by items such as illegal drug substances. Drugs are a very demandable product, so from a crime gang’s perspective, there will always be supply and demand. These are all factors which should be contemplated when referring to the qualities of organised crime gangs. Going back to the title of Organised crime and how it is ‘big’, ‘bad’ and ‘booming’ makes me wonder what factors are at large which makes organised crime boom? I think that there are a lot of illegal markets to play into, where there will always be a lot of demand and profit to be made. Ultimately the long-term aims of organised crime are to gain profit and power. These can be achieved through markets such as drugs, prostitution (human trafficking), forced labour or slavery. These are all illegal and immoral actions which sadly are always in demand. This would allow a market to form which organised crime gangs can capitalise on.

 Questions have been raised regarding how do we form a blockade between organised gangs and these easily exploitable markets? Ideas such as more policing, heavier sanctions for those involved to be imposed have all been considered. However, it does have to be said that items such as cocaine and heroin which are illegal in countries like the UK, have a high demand and an even higher street value. This is because it is impossible to obtain (without resorting to illegal means). I think drugs are an item which its takings should be based on choice. In other terms I feel drugs should be de-criminalised. This is an ongoing and controversial debate. However, I believe that drugs are hyped up so much in society, especially within youth groups, as there is an assumption around them, as being daring, and those who take drugs are ‘rebels’, ‘gangsters’ and anarchists. This is a culture which I feel with the increasing influence from music and film productions is being glorified and seen to be a substantial way of living and conduction. I look at this popularly viewed type of society and I consider what  society (in Britain) would look like if most drugs were de-criminalised. Firstly, I think that the widespread taking of drugs would decrease. This is because the notion around them as being ‘rebellious’ or ‘living on the dangerous side’ will evaporate. You can’t imply gangster references through song lyrics and movies about something which legally you can do. This goes against the whole ideals of being a ‘drug taking gangster’. Secondly if I was to look at evidence from a scientific point of view, yes drugs are risky for long-term health, but it is not that much different from smoking a packet of cigarettes a day or drinking a bottle of vodka every day too. These are actions that we decide to do to ourselves, so my question is why should it be any different for drugs? This leads me onto my next point which is about choice. We as adults are self-directing and self-thinking agents who take decisions into our hands every day. The notion of taking drugs in my opinion should be a matter of choice. Many critics argue that drug taking is immoral and an unlawful act. However, my argument resides with a lot of Criminological thinkers such as Edwin Sutherland who summed crime up as being essentially a concept. It is acts and laws put together by Governments who deem certain acts to be lawful or unlawful often based on the religious, political and ethical train of thought which is commonly shared within that society.  According to the Guardian, research has displayed evidence to conclude that British police forces spend 3 billion pounds every annum just for tackling drugs alone. This makes me think that this expenditure is a colossal waste, and even a bigger waste of police resources. Furthermore, drugs if legalised can have the same impositions put onto them such as tax which from the Governments perspective is another source of income. They can also regulate the distribution of where drugs are being sold and in what quantities.  This can save current drug users from being economically exploited by organised crime gangs. This brings me to my overall point of arguing that by de-criminalising and de-stigmatising drugs, it would create a significant loss in terms of market and economic gain within these organised crime gangs. Drugs are the main source of their activity and income. So, when critics and politicians debate about methods of disrupting organised crime gang activity, this is a serious and, in my opinion, promising idea that should be considered and analysed in more extensive debate.

Moving onto the next chapter in his book, Gash T talks about Biological arguments on pp 125- 148 which can elucidate reasons of committing crime. This is in terms of looking at positivist theories and arguments. The idea of looking at the criminal and his or her biological, psychological and genetic composition, opposed to their environment and sociological make up. Gash T starts the chapter with talking about how domestic violence typically gets more common around Christmas time. (This research is based in New York City.) He includes factors which can trigger this burst of domestic violence. Factors such as alcohol, cold weather, family feuds and financial strain which causes pressure amongst some households. (These factors are by no means justifications for domestic violence). Gash T mentioned the case of Herbert Weinstein. He was a man living in Manhattan who in 1991, killed his wife Barbara by throwing her out of the window 12 floors up in their apartment. This was an attempt to make her death look like a suicide after he had strangled her.  They had had a confrontation about an issue and subsequently she died. It was later revealed that Herbert who was aged 65 years old had a cyst in his brain. A cyst is a futile lump of fatty tissue. The cyst was found to be in the arachnoid membrane following a brain scan. According to research, the arachnoid membrane is a component of the membranes contained within the brain cells. The primary function of a cell membrane is to control what goes into and out of the cell in terms of food and water molecules and consequently the waste products will leave the cell. In the case of the arachnoid part of the membrane, its function is to form the middle layer of the 3 coverings of the Central Nervous system (CNS), Herbert Weinstein’s arachnoid membrane formed a cyst. This blocked connection between this component and the dura mater. The dura mater is a membrane which surrounds and underpins the arachnoid which collectively transports blood from the brain to the heart. These essential functions were a leading contributor to the fact Herbert developed pathological tendencies, in which he internally could have lost control of his normative functions. 

Since the murder case of Barbara Weinstein, the thought around neurological abnormalities and criminal responsibility amongst critics have been re-evaluated. In the case of the American legal system, there have been several transgressions in debates about how we in the future look at criminal accountability. According to NY times, American law holds people to criminal account for their actions, unless they were under duress (such as being held at knife/gun point and being ordered to do something), or if an individual is a suffer from complete irrationality. This is in terms of an adult not being self-functioning and capable of thinking for themselves. In this case, they would not know ethical or moral stances and what is right and wrong, legal and illegal. However, this definition does not include other defects. These could be sociological such as an unhappy home life, or a biological factor which in the case of Herbert Weinstein’s neurology, he was not deemed irrational and by the American legal and justice system was held to account for this actions in murdering his wife Barbara Weinstein by means of strangulation.

After looking at this case study, it has indeed changed my thinking around biological perspectives of assessing criminality and it leads to both rhetorically and externally ask a summative question. This is, - Is accepting biology to be the answer of why people do bad things a deterrent of holding people to account for their actions? This is a question which I will be looking to do research on and propose arguments for at a later date. 

The next chapter on pp 149- 169 talks about the idea of poverty being the real cause of crime. This as a proposal when searching the roots of criminality, is something that needs to be deliberated. When I think of this theory, I think it is essential to look back at historical contexts which emulates the idea that poverty is a cause for criminality. The Victorian era (1837-1901), I think displays some grounding evidence in terms of looking at what poverty meant back then and what it means now within our society, and how we can interpret this to either support or criticise the statement that poverty is the ultimate cause of crime. After also reading Jeremy Paxmans book titled ‘The Victorians’, I think he perfectly discussed Victorian society and life through their great works of their art. On p64, he talks about the 1834 poor law Amendment act.  The act was passed by the Government at the time with the aims of reducing public money spent on the poor, following this passing, those living in poverty would have to declare themselves at the police stations and they would be put to work in factories. Amongst affluent Victorians, there was this stigma that those living in poverty were suffering from ‘idleness’ and that they should be put to work. This way of thinking during this time would have created a social divide between the rich and the poor. The poor would have a label put onto them that they are merely useful to work and provide income for the rich.  However, if I was to look at this social attitude in a Criminological context, it would bring me to strain theory. Strain theory was later devised in 1938 by Robert K Merton. He talked about the strains and tensions we face in society and factors such as economic destitution can lead onto emotive and sociological factors which drives people to commit crime. According to Newburn T (2017) The algorithm   strain theory on p193 clarifies the major strains. These are:

*Individuals who are treated in an unfair or stigmatised manner by others in society.

*Individuals who lose something meaningful to them. This could be a person, object or financial affluence.

*Individuals are unable to achieve their goals.

These major strains may be individual or collective factors which leads onto negative emotions in their life on a consistent basis, and then as a result this can lead to a life of crime.  According to the same source, the factors which can drive the effects of strain and negative emotions can be:

·        Lack of ability to cope with strains in a legal manner.

·        The costs of criminal coping

·        Disposition for criminal coping.

These factors are subsequently linked to the treatment of those living in poverty in Victorian Britain, however during that time of strictness and tough punishments for those committing crimes, it makes me wonder, just how desperate were the times for the working class? According to Picard L (2009), she makes a revealing analysis of just what Victorian society was like. Before the establishment of work houses, there were poor houses in which they were put into. The differential characteristics of a poor house and a work house was that the desperate within society would go to a poor house and receive lodgings, however the workhouse which was funded by the local parish would put the poor to work. This is an applicable illustration in determining the fact that the poor were essentially the cannon fodder of Industrial Britain. The emphasis of profit and power and its clear implementation symbolises to me that yes, the poor were desperate, but would this have fuelled the surge in crime rates? Well, women and the elderly (who at this time were regarded as socially inferior) would still be put to work. Women at the age of 70 were told by their bosses that they are still young enough to be put to work. There was also no regard for humanitarian and social issues, families were often split up to be put to work in their designated roles, and of course, the food received would only be enough to stop the workers from starving. I think this environment of desperation, frustration both on a social and a political scale would have fuelled the rise of crime. Going back to strain theory adopted by Robert K Merton, he said that individuals who are stigmatised and treated in an unfair manner would turn to a life of crime, also because of sheer desperation. They would have to eat more or face impending death of starvation. However, a contradiction when contesting the components of strain theory and looking at poverty and crime in Victorian Britain, is simply that this stigmatisation of the working classes was the norm. The clear and enforced hierarchy structure. Property owners, land owners, factory and wealthy business men at the top and the working class at the bottom. They may not have even known they were being stigmatised, so does this validate the argument that the components of strain theory contributed to the rise of crime in Victorian society?

Conclusion:  

This is my first blog post, where I have talked about the Criminological books I have read with my interpretations of the theories, myths, facts and figures which gives us a summative argument for different aspects of criminality. Thank you for taking the time to read this blog, and I hope it has helped give some insight into Criminology. I look forward to writing and publishing my next review. Next time will be on ‘A history of British serial killing’ written by David Wilson.

References:

·         Gash T (2017) Criminal- the truth about why people do bad things, Penguin, Great Britain by Clays Ltd. St Ives plc.

·         Newburn T (2017) Criminology 3^rd edn, Routledge, Abingdon.

·         Carribine E, Cox P, Fussey P, Hobbs D, South N, Thiel D, and Turton J- (2014)– Criminology – A sociological introduction 3^rd edn. Routledge, Abingdon.

·      McDonald B- (2010)- gangs of London- 100 years of mob warfare, Milo books, Reading Berkshire.

·      Paxman J – (2010)- The Victorians, BBC books, Great Britain by Clays Ltd, St Ives PLC.

·         Runciman R (2012) – The Guardian- ‘Britain’s drug policies could be wasting billions’.  Date accessed: Sunday 11^th February 2018. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/oct/15/britain-drug-policies

·         Rosen J (2007) – The New York times magazine- ‘The brain on the stand’  date accessed: Monday 12^th February 2018.  http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/11/magazine/11Neurolaw.t.html

·         Keane M, (2003)- the free dictionary by Farlex- Arachnoid- definition of Arachnoid by medical dictionary- Date accessed- Monday 12^th February 2018. https://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/arachnoid

·         Picard L (2009) – The British Library- The working classes and the poor- Date accessed: Wednesday 14^th February 2018. https://www.bl.uk/victorian-britain/articles/the-working-classes-and-the-poor

·