Access Restriction

Author Peay, Jill
Source CiteSeerX
Content type Text
File Format PDF
Subject Domain (in DDC) Computer science, information & general works ♦ Data processing & computer science
Subject Keyword Academic Criminology ♦ Informed Opinion ♦ Relative Powerlessness ♦ Relative Reliability ♦ Public Feeling ♦ Criminal Justice Policy ♦ Philip Rawlings ♦ Time Policy ♦ David Faulkner ♦ Popular Conception ♦ Serious Void ♦ Criminal Justice System ♦ Charge Academic Criminologist ♦ Lofty Disdain
Abstract Philip Rawlings argues in this volume that assumptions concerning 'the relative reliability of academic writing about crime as against popular writing about crime ' have led to the 'marginalization of the latter in the former'. He further charges academic criminologists 'with a lofty disdain for the prurience of such work'. This chapter attempts to set his observations into the context of an examination of the power of popular conceptions of crime, criminality and normality to influence the development of law. I have undertaken this task against a backdrop of what I perceive to be a growing impotence of academic criminology and its power to influence. The shrivelling of academic criminology? The relative powerlessness of academic criminology may be partly sustained by what David Faulkner has described as 'a serious void at the centre of the criminal justice system'.[1] His view, moreover, is that the formation of criminal justice policy has changed; a change he dates from late 1992. He argues that until this time policy had evolved gradually through a process which took account of public feeling, but which was driven largely by consultation with professionals, practitioners, academics and representatives of informed opinion.
Educational Role Student ♦ Teacher
Age Range above 22 year
Educational Use Research
Education Level UG and PG ♦ Career/Technical Study
Learning Resource Type Article