Crj Test 2

Front 1

What is the dark figure of crime?

Back 1

Criminal activity not reported and not part of official record.

Front 2

What are the three methods of crime statistic measurement?

Back 2

1. Uniform Crime Reports (UCR)

2. Victimization surveys

3. Self-report surveys

Front 3

What is the UCR?

Back 3

1. Officially reported crimes

2. Reported via things like crime rates, clearance rates, and crime clocks

Front 4

Name a problem with the UCR

Back 4

It misses many white collar crimes and unreported crimes.

Front 5

What does UCR stand for?

Back 5

Uniform Crime Reports

Front 6

What replaced the UCR?

Back 6

NIBRS

Front 7

What does NIBRS stand for?

Back 7

The National Incident-Based Reporting System

Front 8

What makes the NIBRS different from the UCR?

Back 8

1. reports more extensive data on crimes

2. not as widespread.

Front 9

What are victimization surveys?

Back 9

1. Ask for personal experiences with crime

2. personal data about race, sex, and other identifying characteristics

Front 10

What are the problems with victimization surveys?

Back 10

1. Do not account for “victimless” crimes

2. Relies on memory

Front 11

What are self-report surveys?

Back 11

1. Used in prisons

2. Poll adolescents about drug activity

Front 12

What are the problems with self-report surveys?

Back 12

1. Reliance on honesty

2. Limited sample

Front 13

What are victimless crimes?

Back 13

Involve willing participation

Front 14

Name some "victimless" crimes.

Back 14

1. Gambling

2. Drug use

3. Prostitution

Front 15

Why aren't "victimless" crimes really victimless?

Back 15

1.Can influence those who do not consensually participate

2. Some of these laws uphold a moral code

3. Allow for communities surrounding these crimes that do participate in criminal activities

Front 16

Describe the difference between the crime picture in the United States and the crime picture in other major European and North American industrial democratic nations.

Back 16

1. United States is very similar to most industrial democratic nations

2. Robbery and assault rates are very similar to many other areas in the world

3. The US differs in its homicide rates, which are strikingly higher than in many other parts of the world

Front 17

How does the “crime clock” distort our understanding of crime?

Back 17

1. Does not describe the specifics of criminal situations

2. Does not account for location/concentrated timing of crimes

Front 18

Describe the image of crime depicted within our news and entertainment media. How does this reflect the statistics collected through the measures described above?

Back 18

1. Reporting focuses on violent crime

2. Property/nonviolent crimes are more common than violent crimes

3. Crime rates have decreased over the years, but crime coverage by the news has increased

4. In entertainment media, the rate of homicide is 1,000 times greater than real life

Front 19

What is a “racial hoax”?

Back 19

False narrative that accuses a person of a crime because of their race

Front 20

How are racial hoaxes supported by the media portrayal of crime in our society?

Back 20

Young black men are usually victims of violent crime, but media reports on young white women as victims of crime

Front 21

Part I Offenses

Back 21

Crimes designated by FBI as most serious

Front 22

Part II Offenses

Back 22

Crimes designated by the FBI as less serious

Front 23

Total Crime index

Back 23

Sum of Part I offenses reported in a given place for a given period of time

Front 24

Violent Crime index

Back 24

The sum of four Part I violent offenses

reported in a given place for a given period of time

Front 25

Property Crime index

Back 25

The sum of four Part I property offenses reported in a given place for a given period of time

Front 26

Crime rate

Back 26

1. Number of crimes known to police for a given year

2. Divided by population for that year

3. Multiplied by 100,000

Front 27

Name Part I violent offenses

Back 27

1. homicide

2. forcible rape

3. robbery aggravated assault

Front 28

Name Part I property offenses

Back 28

1. burglary

2. larceny

3. auto-theft

4. arson

Front 29

Clearance rate

Back 29

Proportion of crimes that result in arrest

Front 30

Crime clock

Back 30

Form of display used in UCR to illustrate annual ratio of specific crimes to fixed time intervals

Front 31

National Crime Victimization survey

Back 31

1. Annual

2. 100,000 people

3. 12 or older

4. Extent of victimization

5. Nature of victimization

6. US Census Bureau

Front 32

National Youth Survey

Back 32

1. Longitudinal survey

2. Adolescents

3. Yearly from 78-81

4. 4 more times as adults thru 93

Front 33

High School Senior Survey

Back 33

1. Annual survey

2. Rep. sample of high schoolers

3. Asked about drugs and alcohol

4. Conducted by National Institute of Drug Abuse

Front 34

White collar crime

Back 34

General term which encompasses crimes committed by "respectable" persons

Front 35

Occupational crime

Back 35

Offenses committed by persons acting in their legitimate occupational roles

Front 36

Corporate crime

Back 36

Criminal conduct of employees of an organization committed for the benefit of the organization

Front 37

Organized crime

Back 37

Illegal business which provides illegal goods and services to the public

Front 38

State crimes

Back 38

Illegal acts committed by governments and other public authorities in violation of domestic and international law

Front 39

Criminal homicide

Back 39

Unlawful killing of one human being by another

Front 40

Forcible rape

Back 40

Unlawful sexual intercourse with a female without her consent and against her will

Front 41

Robbery

Back 41

Felonious taking of money/goods from another person through the threat of force/violence

Front 42

Assault

Back 42

Intentional attempt/threat to physically injure another

Front 43

Aggravated assault

Back 43

Intent to commit serious bodily injury

Front 44

Battery

Back 44

Non-lethal culmination of an assault

Front 45

Burglary

Back 45

Trespass through breaking and entering or personal/commercial property with the intent to commit a crime

Front 46

Larceny

Back 46

Taking and carrying away of personal property of another with intent to deprive them of the property permanently

Front 47

Arson

Back 47

Willful/malicious burning/attempt to burn of any dwelling, building, vehicle, or personal property

Front 48

What is DAWN?

Back 48

Drug Abuse Warning Network

Front 49

Drug Abuse Warning Network

Back 49

Program which compiles data on drug overdoses/deaths reported by hospital ERs

Front 50

What is DUF?

Back 50

Drug Use Forecasting

Front 51

Drug Use Forecasting

Back 51

Department of Justice program which compiles data on drug use by people arrested in selected cities

Front 52

Genocide

Back 52

International crime consisting of specific acts of violence committed with intent to destroy a national/ethnic/racial/religious group

Front 53

Political crimes

Back 53

Illegal acts committed against government/public authorities

Front 54

Human Rights

Back 54

Concept that there are basic inalienable rights universal to all ppl by virtue of their humanity

Front 55

Crimes of omission

Back 55

Failure of governments to provide decent opportunities for housing/education/jobs/citizenship rights for citizens

Front 56

Terrorism

Back 56

Use of unlawful force/violence against a target to create fear or coercion for the purpose of obtaining some political concession or reward or other goal

Front 57

Reification

Back 57

Transformation of a neutral word/concept into a sacred and powerful symbol

Front 58

Mean World Syndrome

Back 58

Belief that the world is full of predators waiting to assault innocent strangers

Front 59

What are the 5 material elements of crime?

Back 59

1. Actus reus

2. Mens rea

3. Concurrence act

4. Identifiable harm

5. Genuine cause of the harm

Front 60

What is actus reus?

Back 60

Physical act of a crime

Front 61

What is mens rea?

Back 61

Conscious mental decision to commit a criminal act

Front 62

What is the concurrence act?

Back 62

Both actus reus and mens rea must occur simultaneously

Front 63

How does mens rea influence the seriousness of the crime?

Back 63

How specific a person’s intent was, the presence of a motive, the understanding of risk or repercussions, and other aspects of a person’s mental state can impact how serious the crime is and what a person is actually charged with.

Front 64

Name the five elements required to prove self-defense

Back 64

1. Reasonableness standard

2. Imminent danger

3. Unlawful

4. Equal to the threat of force

5. Last resort

Front 65

What is the reasonableness standard?

Back 65

Were their actions understandable?

Front 66

What is imminent danger?

Back 66

Did the person perceive imminent danger?

Front 67

What is the "unlawful" portion of self-defense?

Back 67

Self-defense only applies when the perceived harm was not lawful

Front 68

Why must self-defense be equal to the threat of force?

Back 68

You cannot respond to raised fists with a firearm

Front 69

What is the "last resort" portion of the self defense requirement?

Back 69

Were other options (such as retreat) exhausted?

Front 70

How could the "reasonable person standard" raise the possiblity of bias?

Back 70

1. Racism or other discrimination

2. What different groups/areas are used to

Front 71

Factual guilt

Back 71

Guilty based on facts even if not legally guilty

Front 72

Legal guilt

Back 72

1. Proof of criminal liability

2. beyond a reasonable doubt

3. by admissible evidence

4. within a court of law

Front 73

Criminal liability

Back 73

Degree of blameworthiness assigned to defendants is a result of legal adjudication

Front 74

Elements of a crime

Back 74

Five key elements common to almost all criminal statues which must be proven within a court of law beyond a reasonable doubt according to the rules of criminal procedure and evidence to establish legal guilt

Front 75

Human conduct rule

Back 75

Requirement that some human action is required for criminal liability; thought is not sufficient

Front 76

Motive

Back 76

Reason a person commits a particular action

Front 77

First degree

Back 77

Premeditated, deliberate, and clear conscious intention on the part of an individual to carry out a homicide

Front 78

Specific intent

Back 78

Thoughtful/conscious intention to perform a specific act in order to achieve a particular outcome

Front 79

General intent

Back 79

State of mind inferred from behavior or conduct itself to commit the act

Front 80

Criminal negligence

Back 80

Unconscious creation of high risk of harm

Front 81

Criminal recklessness

Back 81

Knowing creation of high risk of harm to others

Front 82

Constructive intent

Back 82

The actor doesn't intend harm but their conduct violates basic standards of responsible conduct

Front 83

Strict liability statutes

Back 83

Crimes for which one may incur liability without fault or intention

Front 84

Homicide

Back 84

Killing of a human being by the act, procurement or omission of another human being

Front 85

Justifiable homicide

Back 85

Homicide that is permitted under the law either through self-defense, necessity or through the execution of a public duty

Front 86

Excusable homicide

Back 86

Homicide that is committed by persons w/o legal liability for their conduct or in a manner that the criminal law does not prohibit, for example, accidentally.

Front 87

Criminal homicide

Back 87

Unlawful killing of one human being by another

Front 88

Murder

Back 88

Killing of one human being by another with malice or premeditation

Front 89

Second degree

Back 89

Committing a homicide with malice but not premeditation

Front 90

Felony murder

Back 90

If death occurs during the commission of a felony, the person committing the primary offense can also be charged with first-degree murder

Front 91

Manslaughter

Back 91

Unlawful killing of a human being without malice or premeditation

Front 92

Involuntary manslaughter

Back 92

An unintentional killing for which criminal liability is imposed

Front 93

Voluntary manslaughter

Back 93

Unlawful killing of a human being w/o malice which is done intentionally upon a sudden quarrel/in the heat of pasion

Front 94

Vehicular homicide

Back 94

Killing of a human being by operation of a motor vehicle by another in a reckless manner likely to cause the death of or great bodily harm to another

Front 95

Reasonable person standard

Back 95

Circumstances as they appeared to the defendant would have created the same beliefs in the mind of an average normal sensible human being

Front 96

Concurrence

Back 96

Simultaneous coexistence of an act in violation of the law and a criminal intent

Front 97

Causation

Back 97

Casual link between an actors conduct and a harm

Front 98

"but for" standard

Back 98

Standard for determining causality which holds that "but for" the conduct of the accused, the harm in question would have not occurred

Front 99

Harm

Back 99

Loss, disadvantage, or injury to victim

Front 100

Affirmative defenses

Back 100

Category of defense raised by the defendant's counsel who had the burden of proof to prove beyond a reasonable doubt

Front 101

Defense of alibi

Back 101

Legal defense in which a defendant claims to be in a different location when the crime was committed

Front 102

Defenses of justification

Back 102

Category of legal defense in which the defendant admits committing the act in question but claims it was necessary to avoid some greater evil

Front 103

Public duty

Back 103

Defense to a criminal charge that claims it was necessary to commit some unlawful act in order to prevent/avoid greater harm

Front 104

Self-defense

Back 104

Defense to a criminal charge based on a person's inherent right to self-protection and to reasonably defend oneself from unlawful attacks

Front 105

Ignorance of law

Back 105

Lack of knowledge of the law/existence of the law

Front 106

Mistake of fact

Back 106

Defense claiming an error/misunderstanding of fact/circumstances resulting in an act that would otherwise not have been undertaken

Front 107

Defense of duress

Back 107

Defense to a criminal charge that the defendant was forced to act against one's will

Front 108

Voluntary intoxication

Back 108

Intoxication that is the result of willful personal choice

Front 109

Involuntary intoxication

Back 109

Intoxication that is not willful

Front 110

Defense of infancy

Back 110

Defense that claims individuals below a certain age should not be held criminally liable for their actions by virtue of their young age

Front 111

Entrapment

Back 111

Inducement of an individual to commit a crime not contemplated by him or her

Front 112

Defenses of insanity

Back 112

Affirmative defense seeking to prove a mental state that prevents an individual from comprehending the nature and consequences of actions or from distinguishing right from wrong

Front 113

Diminished capacity

Back 113

Affirmative defense that an individual could not have developed the requisite intent

Front 114

Defense of excuse

Back 114

Category of legal defense in which the defendant claims a personal condition at the time of the act that excuses them from criminal liability under the law

Front 115

What is the process of “victim-blaming”?

Back 115

“Victim-blaming” centers around the idea that a person is at fault because they were vulnerable or left themselves open to the possibility of crime.

Front 116

Why is victim-blaming a common psychological reaction to victimization in our culture?

Back 116

We feel that as long as we can be careful and avoid mistakes, we will not be victims of a crime. We fear a loss of control, so we want crime to be the fault of someone who did not exercise enough (or wise) control.

Front 117

What is “secondary victimization”?

Back 117

“Secondary victimization” is when inhumane or otherwise callous treatment by the justice system inflicts additional psychological harm or trauma on victims.

Front 118

Give examples where secondary victimization might take place within the criminal justice system.

Back 118

1. callous questioning by the police

2. definitions of “harm” or “trauma” forcefully posited by others

3. subconscious requirement that a victim must prove themselves “worthy.”

Front 119

What are victims' rights?

Back 119

1. Repercussions for psychological/emotional trauma

2. Rights of knowledge and safety within the CJ system

Front 120

Name a few victims' rights

Back 120

1. Victim-impact statements

2. Victim witness and advocacy programs

3. Notification rights

4. Victim compensation funds

Front 121

What three questions does Howard Zehr believe are central to retributive justice?

Back 121

1. What law was broken?

2. Who broke it?

3. What punishment do they deserve?

Front 122

What three questions does Howard Zehr believe are central to restorative justice?

Back 122

1. Who has been harmed by the crime?

2. What is needed to repair the harm?

3. Whose responsibility and obligation is it to offer this repair?

Front 123

Offender-focused

Back 123

All resources, policies, and personnel of the justice system are devoted to activities which concern the person who is accused of or has been convicted of violating the law

Front 124

State-centered justice

Back 124

When crime is defined as primarily an offense against the authority of these powerful institutions rather than a harm to individuals within the community

Front 125

Victimology

Back 125

Scientific study of the physical, psychological, and financial harm people suffer because of crime and the handling of crime by the criminal justice system itself

Front 126

Victim-precipitation

Back 126

Behavior of individuals that increases the likelihood of criminal victimization

Front 127

Victim-blaming

Back 127

Responsibility for the crime is shifted from the perpetrator to the victim

Front 128

Secondary victimization

Back 128

Callous and insensitive treatment by the criminal justice system which inflicts additional pscyhological harm and emotional trauma on victims

Front 129

Victims' rights movement

Back 129

Social movement started in the 70s to increase awareness of victims' issues and to advocate for the right of victims in the criminal justice system

Front 130

Victim-impact statement

Back 130

Report to the sentencing judge listing the effects of the crime on the victim

Front 131

Victim witness and advocacy programs

Back 131

An organized program with specialized personnel housed within district attorneys' offices or victims assistance agencies who assist victims throughout the justice process

Front 132

Notification rights

Back 132

Right of victims to be informed of key decisions and hearings related to their cases, such as plea agreements, parole hearings, or early release decisions

Front 133

Victim compensation funds

Back 133

Money collected by the state from criminal fines and awarded to victims for medical bills, counseling, and to compensate for financial losses

Front 134

PTSD

Back 134

Set of psychological symptoms suffered by some victims in response to the trauma of the crime

Front 135

Survivors mission

Back 135

Sustained efforts by victims to bring about positive legislative or social change that will prevent re-occurence of the crime to others or will assist victims in dealing with the trauma of the crime

Front 136

Restorative justice

Back 136

Response to crime that seeks to restore the well-being of victims and the larger community while promoting responsible and productive behavior in offenders

Front 137

Retributive justice

Back 137

Response to crime that seeks to inflict punishment on offenders in just proportion to the seriousness of the offense

Front 138

Restitution

Back 138

Criminal sanction in which offenders repay victims for their crime or provide work service to the community/victim

Front 139

Victim-offender reconciliation

Back 139

Programs which bring victims and offenders face-to-face to discuss the impact of the harm and to negotiate restitution to the victim/community

Front 140

Family group conferencing

Back 140

Form of restorative justice originating in New Zealand in which offenders, victims, and their respective families meet under the authority of the justice system to discuss the impact of the harm and negotiate accountability by the offender to the victim and the community