Thoughts from the criminology team

Home » Crime and Punishment (Page 2)

Category Archives: Crime and Punishment

Does compassion have a place in Criminology or is this a forgotten element in Justice?

Source

In recent months, I’ve been thinking about the idea of compassion and its diminishing presence in societies. Let me start by saying this blog wasn’t prompted by any specific event, but rather by observing the increasing prevalence of hate speech in media and public discourse. More and more, we are seeing this troubling pattern manifesting across all levels of society – from world leaders mocking marginalised populations, citizens spreading hate speech online, media outlets amplifying divisive rhetoric in the name of balanced reporting, workplaces failing their employees on many grounds, public institutions are becoming more and more intolerant of the ‘other’ – extending into criminal justice systems where overcrowded prisons, harsh sentencing guidelines, limited rehabilitation programmes, and the stigmatisation of former offenders all continue to reflect this absence of compassion.

Against this backdrop of increasing hostility, the teachings of Pope Francis (1936 – 2025) offer a powerful counterpoint that resonates beyond religious boundaries. He consistently championed respect, dignity, and compassion towards all people. You don’t have to be religious to recognise the universal truth in his words: “A little bit of mercy makes the world less cold and more just.” This intersection of justice and mercy naturally leads us to examine criminology through that very compassionate lens, because the moment we strip compassion from our criminal justice systems, the consequences become counterproductive. By this, I mean rehabilitation becomes secondary to punishment, criminogenic factors become ignored, recidivism rates become affected as former offenders encounter insurmountable barriers to reintegration and so forth.

The question I want you to ponder over this sunny weekend is: What defines us when compassion vanishes from our interactions? When hatred becomes our default response? Personally, I believe compassionate approaches to criminology do not weaken justice – they strengthen it by addressing root causes while maintaining accountability. I won’t elaborate further here, but if you’re interested in exploring these concepts more deeply, consider enrolling in my new module launching this September on global perspectives of crime, where a comparative approach to understanding and responding to crime will also be explored.

Have a lovely sunny weekend!

Reflecting on Adolescence

This short series from Netflix has proven to be a national hit, as it rose to be the #1 most streamed programme on the platform in the UK. It has become a popular talking point amongst many viewers, with the programme even reaching into parliament and having praise from the government. After watching it, I can say that it is deserving of its mass popularity, with many aspects welcoming it to my interests.

It is not meant to be an overly dramatised show as we see from other programmes on Netflix. Whilst it fits in the genre of “Drama” it mainly serves itself as a message and portrayal of how toxic masculinity takes form at a young age. One episode was an hour long interrogation that became difficult to watch as it felt as if I was in the room myself, seeing a young boy turn from being vulnerable and scared to intimidating, aggressive and manipulative. As a programme, it does its job of engagement, but its message was displayed even better. Our society has a huge problem with perceptions of masculinity and how young men are growing up in a world that normalises misogyny. The microcosm that Adolescence shows encapsulates this problem well and highlights the problem of the “manosphere” that many young men and even children are turning to as they become radicalised online.

Commentators such as Andrew Tate have become a huge idol to his followers, which are often labelled as “incels”. Sine his rise in popularity in past years, an epidemic of these so called manosphere followers perpetuate misogyny in every corner of their lives, following and believing tales like the “80-20 rule” in which 80% of women are attracted to 20% of men. This kind of mindset is extremely dangerous and, as displayed in Jamie’s behaviour, leads to a feeling of necessity in regard to women liking them. This behaviour isn’t exactly new; it is a form of misogyny that has plagued society for as long as society has been around, however it has been perpetuated further by the “Commentaters”, as I call them.

As a fan of the Silent Hill series, I have always enjoyed stories that dive deep into the psyche and explore wider themes in ways that make the audience uncomfortable, yet willing, to confront. Adolescence does this in the form of a show not so disguised as an overarching message. I feel like it has done its job of making people reflect and critically think about what is wrong with society, and exposing those who do not think about the wider messages and only care about entertainment. I mean, people sit and question whether or not Jamie did the crime and argue that he is not guilty, when the show explicitly shows and tells you what happens through Jamie’s character, demeanour and interactions in the interrogations.

Misogyny and the forces that uphold it are not new concepts and nor will it be an ancient concept any time soon with the way contemporary society functions. Even as society may become more tolerant, there will always be a way for women to be disadvantaged. However, stories like Adolescence may provide a glimmer of hope in dissecting and being a piece of the puzzle that pieces together the wider branches of misogyny and allow for more people to explore its underpinnings.

Exploring the National Museum of Justice: A Journey Through History and Justice

As Programme Leader for BA Law with Criminology, I was excited to be offered the opportunity to attend the National Museum of Justice trip with the Criminology Team which took place at the back end of last year. I imagine, that when most of us think about justice, the first thing that springs to mind are courthouses filled with judges, lawyers, and juries deliberating the fates of those before them. However, the fact is that the concept of justice stretches far beyond the courtroom, encompassing a rich tapestry of history, culture, and education. One such embodiment of this multifaceted theme is the National Museum of Justice, a unique and thought-provoking attraction located in Nottingham. This blog takes you on a journey through its historical significance, exhibits, and the essential lessons it imparts and reinforces about justice and society.

A Historical Overview

The National Museum of Justice is housed in the Old Crown Court and the former Nottinghamshire County Gaol, which date back to the 18th century. This venue has witnessed a myriad of legal proceedings, from the trials of infamous criminals to the day-to-day workings of the justice system. For instance, it has seen trials of notable criminals, including the infamous Nottinghamshire smuggler, and it played a role during the turbulent times of the 19th century when debates around prison reform gained momentum. You can read about Richard Thomas Parker, the last man to be publicly executed  and who was hanged outside the building here. The building itself is steeped in decade upon decade of history, with its architecture reflecting the evolution of legal practices over the centuries. For example, High Pavement and the spot where the gallows once stood.

By visiting the museum, it is possible to trace the origins of the British legal system, exploring how societal values and norms have shaped the laws we live by today. The National Museum of Justice serves as a reminder that justice is not a static concept; it evolves as society changes, adapting to new challenges and perspectives. For example, one of my favourite exhibits was the bench from Bow Street Magistrates Court. The same bench where defendants like Oscar Wilde, Mick Jagger and the Suffragettes would have sat on during each of their famous trials.  This bench has witnessed everything from defendants being accused of hacking into USA Government computers (Gary McKinnon), Gross Indecency (Oscar Wilde), Libel (Jeffrey Archer), Inciting a Riot (Emmeline Pankhurst) as well as Assaulting a Police Officer (Miss Dynamite).

Understanding this rich history invites visitors to contextualize the legal system and appreciate the ongoing struggle for a just society.

Engaging Exhibits

The National Museum of Justice is more than just a museum; it is an interactive experience that invites visitors to engage with the past. The exhibits are thoughtfully curated to provide a comprehensive understanding of the legal system and its historical context. Among the highlights are:

1. The Criminal Courtroom: Step into the courtroom where real trials were once held. Here, visitors can learn about the roles of various courtroom participants, such as the judge, jury, and barristers. This is the same room that the Criminology staff and students gathered in at the end of the day to share our reflections on what we had learned from our trip. Most students admitted that it had reinforced their belief that our system of justice had not really changed over the centuries in that marginalised communities still were not dealt with fairly.


2. The Gaol: We delved into the grim reality of life in prison during the Georgian and Victorian eras. The gaol section of the gallery offers a sobering look at the conditions inmates faced, emphasizing the societal implications of punishment and rehabilitation. For example, every prisoner had to pay for his/ her own food and once their sentence was up, they would not be allowed to leave the prison unless all payments were up to date. The stark conditions depicted in this exhibit encourage reflections on the evolution of prison systems and the ongoing debates surrounding rehabilitation versus punishment. Eventually, in prisons, women were taught skills such as sewing and reading which it was hoped may better their chances of a successful life in society post release. This was an evolution within the prison system and a step towards rehabilitation of offenders rather than punishment.

3. The Crime and Punishment Exhibit: This exhibit examines the relationship between crime and society, showcasing the changing perceptions of criminal behaviour over time. For example, one famous Criminologist of the day Cesare Lombroso, once believed that it was possible to spot a criminal based on their physical appearance such as high cheekbones, small ears, big ears or indeed even unequal ears. Since I was not familiar with Lombroso or his work, I enquired with the Criminology department as to studies that he used to reach the above conclusions. Although I believe he did carry out some ‘chaotic’ studies, it really reminded me that it is possible to make statistics say whatever it is you want them to say. This is the same point in relation to the law generally. As a lawyer I can make the law essentially say whatever I want it to say in the way I construct my arguments and the sources I include. Overall, The Inclusions of such exhibits raises and attempts to tackle difficult questions about personal and societal morality, justice, and the impact of societal norms on individual actions. By examining such leading theories of the time and their societal reactions, the exhibit encourages visitors to consider the broader implications of crime and the necessity of reform within the justice system. Do you think that today, deciding whether someone is a criminal based on their physical appearance would be acceptable? Do we in fact still do this? If we do, then we have not learned the lessons from history or really moved on from Cesare Lombroso.

Lessons on Justice and Society

The National Museum of Justice is not merely a historical site; it also serves as a platform for discussions about contemporary issues related to justice. Through its exhibits and programs, our group was invited to reflect on essentially- The Evolution of Justice: Understanding how laws have changed (or not!) over time helps us appreciate the progress (or not!) made in human rights and justice and with particular reference to women. It also encourages us to consider what changes may still be needed. For example, we were incredibly privileged to be able to access the archives at the museum and handle real primary source materials. We, through official records followed the journey of some women and girls who had been sent to reform schools and prisons. Some were given extremely long sentences for perhaps stealing a loaf of bread or reel of cotton. It seemed to me that just like today, there it was- the huge link between poverty and crime. Yet, what have we done about this in over two or three hundred years? This focus on historical cases illustrates the importance of learning from the past to inform present and future legal practices.

– The Importance of Fair Trials: The gallery emphasizes the significance of due process and the presumption of innocence, reminding us that justice must be impartial and equitable. In a world where public opinion can often sway perceptions of guilt or innocence, this reminder is particularly pertinent. The National Museum of Justice underscores the critical role that fair trials play in maintaining the integrity of the legal system. For example, if you were identified as a potential criminal by Cesare Lombroso (who I referred to above) then you were probably not going to get a fair trial versus an individual who had none of the characteristics referred to by his studies.

– Societal Responsibility: The exhibits prompt discussions about the role of society in shaping laws and the collective responsibility we all share in creating a just environment. The National Museum of Justice encourages visitors to think about their own roles in advocating for justice, equality, and reform. It highlights that justice is not solely the responsibility of legal professionals but also of the community at large.

– Ethics and Morality: The museum offers a platform to explore ethical dilemmas and moral questions surrounding justice. Engaging with historical cases can lead to discussions about right and wrong, prompting visitors to consider their own beliefs and biases regarding justice.

 Conclusion

The National Museum of Justice in Nottingham is a remarkable destination that beautifully intertwines history, education, and advocacy for justice. By exploring its rich exhibits and engaging with its thought-provoking themes, visitors gain a deeper understanding of the complexities surrounding justice and its vital role in society. Whether you are a history buff, a legal enthusiast, a Criminologist or simply curious about the workings of justice, the National Museum of Justice offers a captivating journey that will leave you enlightened and inspired.

As we navigate the complexities of the modern world, it is essential to remember the lessons of the past and continue striving for a fair and just society for all. The National Museum of Justice stands as a powerful testament to the ongoing quest for justice, inviting us all to be active participants in that journey. In doing so, we honour the legacy of those who have fought for justice throughout history and commit ourselves to ensuring that the principles of fairness and equity remain at the forefront of our society. Sitting on that same bench that Emmeline Pankhurst once sat really reminded me of why I initially studied law.

The main thought that I was left with as I left the museum was that justice is not just a concept; it is a lived experience that we all contribute to shaping.













What makes a good or bad society?: X

As part of preparing for University, new students were encouraged to engage in a number of different activities. For CRI1009 Imagining Crime, students were invited to contribute a blog on the above topic. These blog entries mark the first piece of degree level writing that students engaged with as they started reading for their BA (Hons) Criminology. With the students’ agreement these thought provoking blogs have been brought together in a series which we will release over the next few weeks.

A society can be defined as a certain number of people living together within a community, of which, all of humanity contribute toward in various ways. Therefore, to accurately determine whether the very society we live in is plainly good or bad is practically impossible. This is due to the sheer number of factors that intertwine to breed what we know as a society, such as beliefs, language, social norms and various other elements. Having said this, it is possible to determine what makes a society better, for example equality for all that present equal chance and opportunity for every human, regardless of age, gender or race of which can be evidenced in the world we live in today. Examples of this include the Equality Act of 2010, that required public bodies to prove how their chosen policies have affected people with protected characteristics. This provides evidence that suggests the society we live within is indeed good, as this alludes to the idea that all who contain protected characteristics are catered for as their needs may require, ideally removing any feeling of prejudice or hardship for those with protected characteristics.

However, there are components that make a society worse, such as prejudices, these can be based on people’s race, gender, age, etc. Prejudice can be described as someone obtaining a preconceived opinion that is not based on reason, reality or even from an opinion that is often harmful and negative. This can derive from harmful stereotypes or even family upbringing, meaning natural tensions and aggression appear within society, of which, appear within our very own. Despite actions taken to combat such, it is indisputable to argue that racism and sexism still very much plague humanity and therefore society, potentially causing the conclusion that our society is in fact bad.

Overall, the idea that our society can be plainly labelled as good or bad is vastly naïve. However, this is not to suggest that elements within our society are good, such as equality being more and more evident within our society, meaning equal opportunity and chance for humanity that is unarguably positive. On the contrary, the very fact that prejudices still plague society to this very day, highlights the worst parts of society, concluding that our society is neither good nor bad, but rather a combination of the two thus creating a complex system we know today as, our society.

25 years of Criminology

When the world was bracing for a technological winter thanks to the “millennium bug” the University of Northampton was setting up a degree in Criminology.  Twenty-five years later and we are reflecting on a quarter of a century.  Since then, there have been changes in the discipline, socio-economic changes and wider changes in education and academia. 

The world at the beginning of the 21st century in the Western hemisphere was a hopeful one.  There were financial targets that indicated a raising level of income at the time and a general feeling of a new golden age.  This, of course, was just before a new international chapter with the “war on terror”.  Whilst the US and its allies declared the “war on terror” decreeing the “axis of evil”, in Criminology we offered the module “Transnational Crime” talking about the challenges of international justice and victor’s law. 

Early in the 21st century it became apparent that individual rights would take centre stage.  The political establishment in the UK was leaving behind discussions on class and class struggles and instead focusing on the way people self-identify.  This ideological process meant that more Western hemisphere countries started to introduce legal and social mechanisms of equality.  In 2004 the UK voted for civil partnerships and in Criminology we were discussing group rights and the criminalisation of otherness in “Outsiders”. 

During that time there was a burgeoning of academic and disciplinary reflection on the way people relate to different identities.  This started out as a wider debate on uniqueness and social identities.  Criminology’s first cousin Sociology has long focused on matters of race and gender in social discourse and of course,  Criminology has long explored these social constructions in relation to crime, victimisation and social precipitation.  As a way of exploring race and gender and age we offered modules such as “Crime: Perspectives of Race and Gender” and “Youth, Crime and the Media”.  Since then we have embraced Kimberlé Crenshaw’s concept of intersectionality and embarked on a long journey for Criminology to adopt the term and explore crime trends through an increasingly intersectional lens.  Increasingly our modules have included an intersectional perspective, allowing students to consider identities more widely. 

The world’s confidence fell apart when in 2008 in the US and the UK financial institutions like banks and other financial companies started collapsing.  The boom years were replaced by the bust of the international markets, bringing upheaval, instability and a lot of uncertainty.  Austerity became an issue that concerned the world of Criminology.  In previous times of financial uncertainty crime spiked and there was an expectation that this will be the same once again.  Colleagues like Stephen Box in the past explored the correlation of unemployment to crime.  A view that has been contested since.  Despite the statistical information about declining crime trends, colleagues like Justin Kotzé question the validity of such decline.  Such debates demonstrate the importance of research methods, data and critical analysis as keys to formulating and contextualising a discipline like Criminology.  The development of “Applied Criminological Research” and “Doing Research in Criminology” became modular vehicles for those studying Criminology to make the most of it.

During the recession, the reduction of social services and social support, including financial aid to economically vulnerable groups began “to bite”!  Criminological discourse started conceptualising the lack of social support as a mechanism for understanding institutional and structural violence.  In Criminology modules we started exploring this and other forms of violence.  Increasingly we turned our focus to understanding institutional violence and our students began to explore very different forms of criminality which previously they may not have considered.  Violence as a mechanism of oppression became part of our curriculum adding to the way Criminology explores social conditions as a driver for criminality and victimisation.    

While the world was watching the unfolding of the “Arab Spring” in 2011, people started questioning the way we see and read and interpret news stories.  Round about that time in Criminology we wanted to break the “myths on crime” and explore the way we tell crime stories.  This is when we introduced “True Crimes and Other Fictions”, as a way of allowing students and staff to explore current affairs through a criminological lens.

Obviously, the way that the uprising in the Arab world took charge made the entire planet participants, whether active or passive, with everyone experiencing a global “bystander effect”.  From the comfort of our homes, we observed regimes coming to an end, communities being torn apart and waves of refugees fleeing.  These issues made our team to reflect further on the need to address these social conditions.  Increasingly, modules became aware of the social commentary which provides up-to-date examples as mechanism for exploring Criminology.

In 2019 announcements began to filter, originally from China, about a new virus that forced people to stay home.  A few months later and the entire planet went into lockdown. As the world went into isolation the Criminology team was making plans of virtual delivery and trying to find ways to allow students to conduct research online.  The pandemic rendered visible the substantial inequalities present in our everyday lives, in a way that had not been seen before. It also made staff and students reflect upon their own vulnerabilities and the need to create online communities. The dissertation and placement modules also forced us to think about research outside the classroom and more importantly outside the box! 

More recently, wars in Europe, the Middle East, Africa and Asia have brought to the forefront many long posed questions about peace and the state of international community.  The divides between different geopolitical camps brought back memories of conflicts from the 20th century. Noting that the language used is so old, but continues to evoke familiar divisions of the past, bringing them into the future.  In Criminology we continue to explore the skills required to re-imagine the world and to consider how the discipline is going to shape our understanding about crime.

It is interesting to reflect that 25 years ago the world was terrified about technology.  A quarter of a century later, the world, whilst embracing the internet, is worriedly debating the emergence of AI, the ethics of using information and the difference between knowledge and communication exchanges.  Social media have shifted the focus on traditional news outlets, and increasingly “fake news” is becoming a concern.  Criminology as a discipline, has also changed and matured.  More focus on intersectional criminological perspectives, race, gender, sexuality mean that cultural differences and social transitions are still significant perspectives in the discipline.  Criminology is also exploring new challenges and social concerns that are currently emerging around people’s movements, the future of institutions and the nature of society in a global world. 

Whatever the direction taken, Criminology still shines a light on complex social issues and helps to promote very important discussions that are really needed.  I can be simply celebratory and raise a glass in celebration of the 25 years and in anticipation of the next 25, but I am going to be more creative and say…

To our students, you are part of a discipline that has a lot to say about the world; to our alumni you are an integral part of the history of this journey.  To those who will be joining us in the future, be prepared to explore some interesting content and go on an academic journey that will challenge your perceptions and perspectives.  Radical Criminology as a concept emerged post-civil rights movements at the second part of the 20th century.  People in the Western hemisphere were embracing social movements trying to challenge the established views and change the world.  This is when Criminology went through its adolescence and entered adulthood, setting a tone that is both clear and distinct in the Social Sciences.  The embrace of being a critical friend to these institutions sitting on crime and justice, law and order has increasingly become fractious with established institutions of oppression (think of appeals to defund the police and prison abolition, both staples within criminological discourse.  The rigour of the discipline has not ceased since, and these radical thoughts have led the way to new forms of critical Criminology which still permeate the disciplinary appeal.  In recent discourse we have been talking about radicalisation (which despite what the media may have you believe, can often be a positive impetus for change), so here’s to 25 more years of radical criminological thinking!  As a discipline, Criminology is becoming incredibly important in setting the ethical and professional boundaries of the future.  And don’t forget in Criminology everyone is welcome!  

What makes a good or bad society?: IX

As part of preparing for University, new students were encouraged to engage in a number of different activities. For CRI1009 Imagining Crime, students were invited to contribute a blog on the above topic. These blog entries mark the first piece of degree level writing that students engaged with as they started reading for their BA (Hons) Criminology. With the students’ agreement these thought provoking blogs have been brought together in a series which we will release over the next few weeks.

By definition, a society is a crowd of people living together in a community. So when it comes to discussing a ‘good’ or ‘bad’ society we must consider if everybody in the community follows the standard of social norms that are expected and what each community demands as the list of standardised norms may differ. In modern day British societies, it can sometimes be difficult to decide whether we live in a good or bad society. This can be difficult for reasons such as politics, law and crime. Some may decide our society is good because they believe our government is fair and they reap the benefits of those higher up whereas others may deem our society as bad because the government is unfair, and they are at a disadvantage. I would say there are 5 main qualities to a good society: Equality, freedom, empowerment, opportunity and education. Equality is an important factor for a good society as it makes sure people are treated with the same levels of respect and dignity as everyone else and that the differences they may have are celebrated and not shunned. As well as this, freedom is important as it allows people to create lives full of purpose, meaning and success and gives people the ability to flourish and thrive. Similarly, empowerment is important because it promotes both equality and freedom while reducing inequality by enabling the individuals who have been discriminated against to take charge and participate as a member of society. In addition to this, opportunity is equally as important because it enables individuals to have a fair chance to achieve their potential, whether this be achieving their dream job/career or being successful in education. Finally, education is an important characteristic to a good society because it promotes economic growth within our society, provides young people with career paths and ensures a great deal of personal development. Without these key fundamentals in a society, it can lead to high crime rates in certain categories such as antisocial behaviour, hate crime, violent crime and theft. To avoid a spike in crime rates it is essential a society works on these values. While its easy to talk about what makes a good society it is just as important to be aware of what makes a bad society. Each individual will believe it takes different characteristics to make a society bad, but in my opinion, I believe there are 5 specific qualities to a bad society. If a society contains any of the following, it can arguably be classified as a bad society: inequality, lack of justice, discrimination, poor education and cultural oppression. Not only will a society with these values be ‘bad’ but it creates an altered view on what the socially normative way of life is.

Unfortunately, in today’s society each of the crucial qualities to have a ‘good’ society can never be guaranteed. Even in modern-day society we still see each of these qualities shut down by racism, sexism and ableism. So with all of this information considered I believe there can never be a definitive answer to the question of “Do we live in a good or bad society”.

SUPREME COURT VISIT WITH MY CRIMINOLOGY SQUAD!

Author: Dr Paul Famosaya

This week, I’m excited to share my recent visit to the Supreme Court in London – a place that never fails to inspire me with its magnificent architecture and rich legal heritage. On Wednesday, I accompanied our final year criminology students along with my colleagues Jes, Liam, and our department head, Manos, on what proved to be a fascinating educational visit. For those unfamiliar with its role, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom stands at the apex of our legal system. It was established in 2009, and serves as the final court for all civil cases in the UK and criminal cases from England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. From a criminological perspective, this institution is particularly significant as it shapes the interpretation and application of criminal law through precedent-setting judgments that influence every level of our criminal justice system

7:45 AM: Made it to campus just in the nick of time to join the team. Nothing starts a Supreme Court visit quite like a dash through Abington’s morning traffic!

8:00 AM: Our coach is set to whisk us away to London!

Okay, real talk – whoever designed these coach air conditioning systems clearly has a vendetta against warm-blooded academics like me! 🥶 Here I am, all excited about the visit, and the temperature is giving me an impromptu lesson in ‘cry’ogenics. But hey, nothing can hold us down!.

Picture: Inside the coach where you can spot the perfect mix of university life – some students chatting about the visit, while others are already practising their courtroom napping skills 😴

There’s our department Head of Departmen Manos, diligently doing probably his fifth headcount 😂. Big boss is channelling his inner primary school teacher right now, armed with his attendance sheet and pen and all. And yes, there’s someone there in row 5 I think, who’s already dozed off 🤦🏽‍♀️ Honestly, can’t blame them, it’s criminally early!

9:05 AM The dreaded M1 traffic

Sometimes these slow moments give us the best opportunities to reflect. While we’re crawling through, my mind wanders to some of the landmark cases we’ll be discussing today. The Supreme Court’s role in shaping our most complex moral and legal debates is fascinating – take the assisted dying cases for instance. These aren’t just legal arguments; they’re profound questions about human dignity, autonomy, and the limits of state intervention in deeply personal decisions. It’s also interesting to think about how the evolution of our highest court reflects (or sometimes doesn’t reflect) the society it serves. When we discuss access to justice in our criminology lectures, we often talk about how diverse perspectives and lived experiences shape legal interpretation and decision-making. These thoughts feel particularly relevant as we approach the very institution where these crucial decisions are made.

The traffic might be testing our patience, but at least it’s giving us time to really think about these issues.

10:07 AM – Arriving London – The stark reality of London’s inequality hits you right here, just steps from Hyde Park.

Honestly, this is a scene that perfectly summarises the deep social divisions in our society – luxury cars pulling up to the Dorchester where rooms cost more per night than many people earn in a month, while just meters away, our fellow citizens are forced to make their beds on cold pavements. As a criminologist, these scenes raise critical questions about structural violence and social harms. When we discuss crime and justice in our lectures, we often talk about root causes. Here they are, laid bare on London’s streets – the direct consequences of austerity policies, inadequate mental health support, and a housing crisis that continues to push more people into precarity. But as we say in the Nigerian dictionary of life lessons – WE MOVE!! 🚀

10:31 AM Supreme Court security check time

Security check time, and LISTEN to how they’re checking our students’ water bottles! The way they’re examining those drinks is giving: Nah this looks suspicious 🤔

The security checkpoint at the Supreme Court entrance, London

So there I am, breezing through security like a pro (years of academic conferences finally paying off!). Our students follow suit, all very professional and courtroom-ready. But wait for it… who’s that getting the extra-special security attention? None other than our beloved department head Manos! 😂

The security guard’s face is priceless as he looks through his bags back and forth. Jes whispers to me ‘is Manos trying to sneak in something into the supreme court?’ 😂 Maybe they mistook his collection of snacks for contraband? Or perhaps his stack of risk assessment forms looked suspicious? 😂 There he is, explaining himself, while the rest of us try (and fail) to suppress our giggles. He is a free man after all. 

10: 44AM Right so first stop, – Court Room 1.

Our tour guide provided an overview of this institution, established in 2009 when it took over from the House of Lords as the UK’s highest court. The transformation from being part of the legislature to becoming a physically separate supreme court marked a crucial step in the separation of powers in the country’s legislation. There’s something powerful about standing in this room where the Justices (though they usually sit in panels of 5 or 7) make decisions. Each case mentioned had our criminology students leaning in closer, seeing how theoretical concepts from their modules materialise in this very room.

10:59 AM Moving into Court 2, the more modern one!

After exploring Courtroom 1, we moved into Court Room 2, and yep, I also saw the contrast! And apparently, our guide revealed, this is the judges’ favourite spot to dispense justice – can’t blame them, the leather chairs felt lush tbh!

Speaking of judges, give it up for our very own Joseph Buswell who absolutely nailed it when the guide asked about Supreme Court proceedings! 👏🏾 As he correctly pointed out, while we have 12 Supreme Court Justices in total, they don’t all pile in for every case. Instead, they work in panels of 3 or 5 (always keeping it odd to avoid those awkward tie situations). 👏🏾 And what makes Court Room 2 particularly significant for public access to justice the cameras and modern AV equipment which allow for those constitutional and legal debates to be broadcast to the nation. Spot that sneaky camera right at the top? Transparency level: 100% I guess!

[Picture: A slightly cut-off view of the court because my phone said “not today bestie!” 📱💔]

The exhibition area

The exhibition space was packed with rich historical moments from the Supreme Court’s journey. Among the displays, I found myself pausing at the wall of Justice portraits. Let’s just say it offered quite the visual commentary on our judiciary’s journey towards representation…

[Picture: The wall of Supreme Court Justices portraits]

Beyond the portraits, the exhibition showcased crucial stories of landmark judgments that have shaped our legal landscape. Each case display reminded us how crucial diverse perspectives are in the interpretation and application of law in our multicultural society.

11: 21AM Moving into Court 3, home of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC)

The sight of those Commonwealth flags tells a powerful story about the evolution of colonial legal systems and modern voluntary jurisdiction. Our guide explained how the JCPC continues to serve as the highest court of appeal for various independent Commonwealth countries. The relationship between local courts in these jurisdictions and the JCPC raises critical questions about legal sovereignty and judicial independence and the students were particularly intrigued by how different legal systems interact within this framework – with each country maintaining its own laws and legal traditions, yet looks to London for final decisions.

Picture: The JCPC with its display of Commonwealth flags, and there’s Liam, channelling his inner photobomber just as I’m trying to capture the GRAVITAS of this historic space!

Breaktime!!!!

While the group headed out in search of food, Jes and I were bringing up the rear, catching up after the holiday and literally SCREAMING about last year’s Winter Wonderland burger and hot dog prices (“£7.50 for entry too? In this Keir Starmer economy?!😱”). Anyway, half our students had scattered – some in search of sustenance, others answering the siren call of Zara (because obviously, a Supreme Court visit requires a side of retail therapy 😉).

But here’s the moment that had us STUNNED – right there on the street, who should come power-walking past but Sir Chris Whitty himself! 😱 England’s Chief Medical Officer was on a mission, absolutely zooming past us like he had an urgent SAGE meeting to get to 🏃‍♂️. That man moves with PURPOSE! I barely had time to nudge Jes before he’d disappeared. One second he was there, the next – gone! Clearly, those years of walking to press briefings during the pandemic have given him some serious speed-walking skills! 👀

3:30 PM – Group Photo!

[Picture: Our whole group gathered for that essential end-of-trip photo outside the Supreme Court, after a day of legal learning!]

Looking at these final year criminology students in our group photo though! Even with that criminal early morning start (pun intended 😅), they made it through the whole Supreme Court experience! Big shout out to all of them 👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾 Can you spot me? I’m the one on the far right looking like I’m ready for Arctic exploration (as Paula mentioned yesterday), not London weather! 🥶 Listen, my ancestral thermometer was not calibrated for this kind cold today o! Had to wrap up in my hoodie like I was jollof rice in banana leaves – and you know we don’t play with our jollof! 😤

4:55 PM Heading Back To NN

(Picture: Heading back to NN)

On the journey back to NN, while some students dozed off (can’t blame them – legal learning is exhausting!), I found myself reflecting on everything we’d learned. From the workings of the highest court in our land to the stark realities of social inequality we witnessed near Hyde Park, today brought our theoretical classroom discussions into sharp focus. Sitting here, watching London fade into the distance, I’m reminded of why these field trips are so crucial for our students’ understanding of justice, law, and society.

Picture: End of day

Listen, can we take a moment to appreciate our driver though?! Navigating that M1 traffic like a BOSS, and getting us back safe and sound! The real MVP of the day! 👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾

And just like that, our Supreme Court trip comes to an end. From early morning rush to security check shenanigans, from spotting Chief Medical Officer on the streets to freezing our way through legal history – what a DAY!

To my amazing final years who made this trip extra special – y’all really showed why you’re the future of criminology! 👏🏾 Special shoutout to Manos (who can finally put down his attendance sheet 😂), Jes, and Liam for being the dream team! And to London… boyyyy, next time PLEASE turn up the heat! 🥶

As we all head our separate ways, some students were still chatting about the cases we learned about (while others were already dreaming about their beds 😴), In all, I can’t help but smile – because days like these? This is what university life is all about!

Until our next adventure… your frozen but fulfilled criminology lecturer, signing off! 🙌

What makes a good or bad society?: VIII

As part of preparing for University, new students were encouraged to engage in a number of different activities. For CRI1009 Imagining Crime, students were invited to contribute a blog on the above topic. These blog entries mark the first piece of degree level writing that students engaged with as they started reading for their BA (Hons) Criminology. With the students’ agreement these thought provoking blogs have been brought together in a series which we will release over the next few weeks.

Fundamentally, the requirements for a ‘good’ society should consist of several characteristics that contribute to a positive quality of life for all members of the community. There should be a basis in equality, fair judgment, and the ability for all people who are a part of that society to live without undue struggle or unnecessary discomfort, be it financial, emotional or physical. There are a lot of reasons why a society might be good, or bad, and fixing any one problem will not automatically allow us to call ourselves good, but any progress can be positive and may take us closer.

There are large steps towards equality that we as a society have taken in the last century, however this progress is not sustainable when there are many in positions of power who have no interest in changing the status quo. According to the European Commission, less than one in ten CEOs of major companies are women, and women are over represented in particular types of career, which is known as sectoral segregation. This leads to many viewing these sectors as overly feminine, and while this isn’t necessarily true, and shouldn’t affect how valued those careers are, careers viewed as feminine are systemically undervalued, and consistently lead to judgment for those choosing to follow those paths, leaving them underpaid and overworked. In 2021 there was still a gender pay gap of 12.7% in the European Union, with women on average earning almost 13% less than men hourly. Can a society that undervalues over half of its members truly be a good society?

In addition to this, there is a cycle of racial discrimination within this society’s judgment system. With systemic racism ingrained in society for years before legislation was introduced to prevent discrimination in terms of housing and hiring, the UK’s police force contained rampant racial bias for years, which perpetuates even today. Black people in the UK are stopped on the street up to seven times more frequently than white people. There is an undue fear within the public that black people are more dangerous, that they are more likely to commit crime, and statistics that seem to prove this correct are often taken out of context, or supplied without consideration for social factors which may cause this. There is often an aspect of moral panic, whereby the media and other agents of social control use isolated events to incite fear of a particular community, and this causes a dangerous cycle of self fulfilling prophecy, where that community appears to act as expected. After all, if an entire group of people are going to be treated badly, regardless of their actions, does it make any difference if they fulfil our expectations or not?

True equality within any society is impossible, as humans we have natural differences which prevent us from being exactly the same. If men and women participated equally in all sports, there would likely be more injuries simply from biological advantages. If everyone earned the same, and class differences did not exist, there would be no motivation or reward for going above and beyond in the search for success and improvement, and society would remain stagnant. However, we are failing in our most basic duty to protect people from unfair discrimination, and at least offer the opportunity to try for success. Many careers considered ‘too feminine’ to hold true value in society include those in education or healthcare, which are vital in ensuring the next generation can be better than we are, and in maintaining the wellbeing of current members of the community. We should be using the media to dismantle these prejudices, rather than using it to target other groups and spread fear and misinformation. These issues may persist due to a lack of awareness in the wider community, or maybe they exist due to higher powers encouraging that society remain as it is, with them benefiting at the cost of others suffering. I would prefer to assume ignorance over malice, but neither is an excuse. Until we can claim to be as equal a society as it is possible to be, respecting the contributions women offer to society and treating them with the respect they deserve, and not treating a different skin colours as a marker for antisocial behaviour, just to name a few, I cannot claim to live in a truly good society.

What makes a good or bad society?: VII

As part of preparing for University, new students were encouraged to engage in a number of different activities. For CRI1009 Imagining Crime, students were invited to contribute a blog on the above topic. These blog entries mark the first piece of degree level writing that students engaged with as they started reading for their BA (Hons) Criminology. With the students’ agreement these thought provoking blogs have been brought together in a series which we will release over the next few weeks.

What are some requirements to a good society? A good society makes us, as a community, feel secure. This is so incredibly important in making a society be considered good as it lowers the rates of criminality, thus improving the appearance of the area and reassurance of being a safe place. This will lead to a better world, given that it will promote positive behaviour, similar to the idea of positive reinforcement, if people were to act accordingly, they would be rewarded with a positive environment. Another requirement is the higher employment rates, the more success will be found within a society. Meaning, there will be less cases of homelessness, and considerably more wealth compared to if there were lower employment rates within a place. Higher employment rates also link into my next point of a fair education. A fair education is arguably one of the most important requirements of a good society, as it firstly links into high employment rates, if someone were to be in a position of having a better education, their IQ is likely to be higher which in most chances will lead to a very succeeding job. A fair education is very important as it allows everyone involved a fair chance and involves no bias, if this were the case it would lead to a bad society as the community are not promoting wealth for everyone involved, only for those they favour. Another requirement that makes up a good society is human rights. Similar to a fair education, human rights provide a chance for people and includes no favouritism. Human rights provide freedom which impact factors such as food and healthcare. These thrive to better societies given that people are not held back and can be free to do however they please in positive and safe ways.  A final requirement I would suggest that makes a good society are basic human needs. It is crucial that humans are provided with our biological needs such as water, food, housing/shelter etc. This is due to the fact that we simply cannot live without it.

However, I do believe that we live in a bad society, for many reasons, including the reasons previously mentioned. To begin, there has been a lack of safety net from the police to the public, which leads to repeated cases of rape, police brutality etc. While it can be argued the police are trying to keep the public safe, they are simply causing more harm than good, and considering the police are meant to be role models to the public, the public have increased the rate of criminality with riots and protests against the police, not making our society a safe place. Our society has become let down in regard to basic human needs, although employments rates are high at 74.8% for those ages 16-64, in 2019 the homelessness statistic in the UK is significantly high at 219,000. Meaning the need for food, shelter and water has become at a higher demand.

It has been very clear in recent years that we do not live in a good society, due to the reasons of security within the police, employment rates, a fair education,  human rights and basic human needs, all of which could easily make up a good society if it were taken seriously by the appropriate people.

What makes a good or bad society?: VI

As part of preparing for University, new students were encouraged to engage in a number of different activities. For CRI1009 Imagining Crime, students were invited to contribute a blog on the above topic. These blog entries mark the first piece of degree level writing that students engaged with as they started reading for their BA (Hons) Criminology. With the students’ agreement these thought provoking blogs have been brought together in a series which we will release over the next few weeks.

I believe that the society we live in is good but has areas that need to be improved. One of the requirements that I think will make a good society is sympathy. I believe that if more people show sympathy towards the homeless, then it can help lower the homeless population and, therefore, lower the percentage of unemployment. This can also reduce the strain on charities, which in turn allows them to focus more help on the people who really need it.

Another requirement to make a good society is self-control. If the population practices self-control, then our society will start to have fewer incidents involving alcohol, such as drink driving and fewer aggressive assaults. One of the other outcomes of practising self-control is a decrease in the volume of visits to the NHS. This can be anything from A&E visits after a night out to health visits due to obesity, this decrease could majorly help the NHS and allow them to give more appointments to people with life-threatening conditions.

Another requirement to help make a good society is more successful and higher rehabilitation rates. If we as a society start to give more support to the members that have wronged then they will have a higher chance of being reformed, which will allow us to live in a society with a lower crime rate, therefore, giving us the opportunity to feel safer in our lives.  

One of the other areas of our society that needs improvement is education. If the level of education and extra educational support is improved in areas of higher deprivation then it will help young people to move away from crime and bad role models, they may be able to get higher paying jobs, which will allow them to take care of their families and improve the areas that they have come from. This can give them security in their lives, which again will help them to turn away from criminal acts. If the extra educational support is increased then the young people who need extra support can improve on their studies and gain more confidence in themselves, which will help them to gain better grades.

Another requirement of a good society is lower unemployment levels. If we start to improve support for the unemployed, such as classes to help them improve on existing skills and to learn new skills. This can start to lower the unemployment rates and relieve some of the pressure on the government and the county and district councils.

One of the other areas that we could improve in our society to make it better is extra curricular activities for young people to get involved with. If there are more weekend and after school activities and workshops for our younger people to get involved with then it can help to stop them committing crimes. These activities can also help them to learn new skills to take forward in their lives, it can also help those who maybe aren’t as academic as others.