Thoughts from the criminology team

Home » Historic crimes

Category Archives: Historic crimes

A Criminal Called Bob

It was years ago that Bob was born in St. Mary’s Hospital.  His mum delivered a relatively healthy baby that she called Robert, after her father despite kicking her out when he found out that she was pregnant from a casual encounter.  Bob’s early memory was of a pain in the arm in a busy place he could not remember what it was.  His mother was grabbing his arm an early sign that he was unwanted.  He would remember many of these events becoming part of everyday life.  He remembers one day a stern looking woman came to the place he was living with his mother and take him away.  This was the last time he would ever see his mother; he was 5 or 6.  A few years afterwards his mother will die from a bad heart.  Later, he would find out it was drugs related. 

 The stern looking lady will take him to another place to live with a family.  One of many that he would be placed in.  At first, he tried to get to know the hosts but soon it became difficult to keep track.  He also lost track of how many times he moved around.  There were too many to count but the main memory was of fear going into a place he did not know to stay with people who treated him as an inconvenience.  He owned nothing but a bin bag with a few clothes and people will always comment on how scruffy he looked.  He remembers discovering some liquorice allsorts in a drawer with the kid he was sharing the room with.  He cannot forget the beating he got for eating some of them.  The host was very harsh, and they used the belt on him. 

School was hell for Bob.  As he moved from place to place the schools also changed.  The introduction to the class was almost standard.  Bob is joining us from so and so and although he lives in foster care, I hope you will be making him feel welcomed…and welcomed he was.  The bullying was relentless so was the name calling and the attacks.  On occasion he would meet an aloof man who was his “designated tutor”.  His questions were abrupt and focused only if he was behaving, if he was making any trouble, if he did as was told.  It was hardly ever about education or any of his needs.  He remembers going to see him once with a bruised eye to be asked “what did you do?”

And he did a lot!  Early on he learned that in order not to go hungry he must hide food away.  If he was to meet a new person, he had to show them that he is cannot be taken for granted, he needed to show them he can handle himself.  Sometime during his early teenage years his greeting gesture was a headbutt.  Violence was a clear vehicle for communication.  One person is down the other is up.  This became a language he became prolific in.  He could read a room quickly and in later years be able to assess the person opposite.  If he can take him or not! 

The truth that others kept talking about around him became a luxury and an unnecessary situation.  Lying about things got him to avoid punishment and any consequences to any of his actions.  The only problem was when he was get caught lying.  The consequences were dire.  So, what he needed to do was to become very good at it.  He did.  He could lie looking people straight in the eye and not even blink about it.      

Later in life he discovered this was an amazing talent to possess.  It was useful when he was stealing from shops, it was good when people asking him for the truth, it was profitable when his lies covered other people’s crimes.  Before he turned 18, he was an experienced thief and a creative liar.  His physique allowed him to take to violence should anyone was to question his “honesty”.  When he was 15, he discovered that a combination of cider and acid gives him such a buzz. To mute his brain and to relax his body even for little was so welcomed.  This habit became one of his most loyal relationships in his life.             

In prison he didn’t go until he was 22 but he went to a young offender’s institution at the age of 17 for GBH.  The “victim” was a former friend who stole some of his gear.  That really angered him; even days after the event in court he was still outraged with the theft.  He was still making threats that he will find him and kill him, in some very graphic descriptions!  The court sought no other way but to send him away.  From the age of 22 he would become a “frequent flyer” of the prison estate!  A long list of different sentences ranging from everything on offer.  Usually repeated in pattern; fine, community sentence, prison….and back again!  By the time he was 35 he had been in prison for more than 8 years collectively.  He did plenty of offender management courses and met a variety of probation and prison officers, well-meaning and not so good.  Some tried to help, and others couldn’t care but all of them fade in the background. 

Now at the ripe age of 45 he is out of the prison, and he is sofa surfing and claiming universal credit.  He gets nothing because he has unpaid fines, so he is struggling financially.  In prison he did a barista apprenticeship, but he cannot find any work.  As it stands, he is very likely to be recalled back to prison, if the cold weather doesn’t claim him first.    

In context, there are some lives that are never celebrated or commemorated.  There are people who exist but virtually no one recognises their existence.  Their lives are someone else’s inconvenience and in a society that prioritises individual achievement and progression they have none.  Bob is a fictional character.  His name and circumstances are made up but form part of a general criminological narrative that identifies criminality through the complexity of social circumstance.           

St Valentines Day! Love and other emotions

This blog today is all about love…. or maybe not!  As criminologists, we tend to see things slightly different, and our perspective is influenced by functions other than undying declarations of love.   

Saint Valentine is associated with love and people celebrate the day with their special romantic person, or by pursuing any person of interest, with romantic cards.  Greeting cards, bottles of wine, boxes of chocolates, bunches of flowers, heart shaped jewellery, lovely sonnets, sexy underwear, kinky gifts and over the top romantic gestures!  All of the above are anticipated actions on this day.  Any of these will act as a demonstration of love.  In some ways the more enormous the gesture the greater the demonstration of love and intimacy to the intended special person.  Many times, we hear those in a relationship rut complaining that “they don’t even buy me chocolates anymore” a sign that love has fizzled out. 

Love is a powerful emotion, and I dare not to challenge it.  Artists have created their best work on love!  Religion has created its strongest appeal on love. People, the world over, have based their entire lives of how they feel about a person they choose to be their partner and share their lives with.  So clearly love is important! Enough for an Austrian psychotherapist to create an entire theory on love and sex.  We feel ready to go to war for love and we are completely convinced that love is the force that keeps us going. Love is strong and we feel it every day.   

Therefore, it is slightly surprising that the patron saint of romantic love is a rather fictional character!  The saint is meant to be a priest who lived in the 3rd century AD and martyred by tortured for his faith.  There was no romance involved and there were no love poems written of the time.  In fact, the Roman Catholic church did not recognise or mentioned this martyrdom at the time.  The first accounts on St Valentine appear in the 6th and later the 9th centuries, some centuries later.  Since then, the story of the saint is embellished further, until the 19th century when it becomes connected with romantic love in some tenuous way.  For example, the more recent narratives claim that before his execution he would convert and cure the daughter of his jailer.  He was also officiating wedding ceremonies between Christians which may have given him the romantic connection.  In the 19th century we have the first mass production of love tokens dedicated to the day and in the 20th, century especially post 1960s the celebration was growing in popularity and appeal.  Currently the day is a celebration that has a significant capitalist value.  It is usually a commercial success midway between Christmas and Easter.   

Some religious historians noted that in the Roman calendar in February there have been rituals and celebrations on fertility and cleanliness (physical, spiritual).  It was the time presumably when young Romans prepared for sexual relations.  Therefore, an amalgamation of the old practices and the then new religion overlap with an obscure Saint to act as the glue to connect them and reaffirm the importance of love.  Ironically the Roman citizens of the time, in particular the patricians, would not recognise such acts!  They married out of interest, connecting the wealth and power of different factions.  In those cycles love was more of a chimera rather than a reality. 

Romantic love with knights, towers, dragons and gestures of devotion will appear as fanciful tales.  Who hasn’t heard of Odysseus and his beloved wife Penelope who remained faithful to him for 20 years!  Her fidelity was not reciprocated, and Odysseus had multiple affairs and fathered several children across the Mediterranean.  Not quite the romantic story people would like to believe.  Romantic love was always a tale, with vivid twists and turns.  Love appears almost pure, undiluted that lifts those in its path.  Shakespeare wrote fantastic sonnets on love.  Some of the best things ever written in English.  Still his contemporaries did not recognise this love.  The majority of people at the time died young, malnourished and exhausted.  Those who barely survive cannot afford to embrace love.  As for those in power their relationship with love can be summed up in the old mnemonic rhyme “divorced, beheaded, died; divorced, beheaded, survived”! 

We presume that romantic love is a representation of two people having feelings for one other.  That is a nice sentiment but historically weak.  Love for women does not exist.  Not because women are devoid of emotions; quite the contrary!  Because women have been used in social transactions between men who barter and use them as part of their household.  A feminist today can recognise, despite all assurances for equality, how unequal life is.  Especially in the household!  If anyone wants to see why love is not equal only see how domestic and intimate violence is spread between gender lines.  Because St Valentine brings flowers and chocolates, but it also brings beatings and abuse.  Across the year it is during holidays and significant dates, including St Valentines that violence against women surges.  One can unfortunately deduce that love is not for women. Oh…. The irony as romantic novels and movies are presented mostly for women as “chick flicks”!    

Earlier in this post, it was said that the bigger the romantic move the better!  Who will do this big romantic gesture?  A man with chivalrous intent.  Our household data reveal that men will spend more than double on what women will spend on the day, making their romantic intent more obvious.  Perhaps men are more romantic and feel the need to satisfy that internal need.  Or maybe there are other emotions at play.  Love is very powerful, but so is possessiveness.  In a history of transactions men used women for trading, so their gestures may be a latent act of dominance, a fresh reminder of possession.  Instead of giving them chocolates, you may as well urinate all over them.  That way your beloved will have your scent and keep other suitors away.  So, this is not love but control, jealousy and dominance.  Every drop of wine, every piece of chocolate, every flower petal, is yet another link in the chain of ownership.  In case this gets misunderstood, the individual who buys flowers isn’t a villain, but the history of this kind of love is pointing in this direction.  Your partner may have the best intentions and the greatest love and regard for you, but our society has never really acknowledged the transactional relationship between men and women.  It is similar to those who speak of the evils of slavery, but with no recognition of reparations.  This love is not pure and clean.  It is the darkest form of patriarchy that controls people making them to believe in an adult fairytale once the other story of Santa Claus is not believed any more.

Romantic actions target all incomes and all ages, but of course there is a drive to get younger people, new generations of customers, on the love spending machine.  At this stage I shall write…what not to do when you are planning a romantic day!  Do not go overboard.  Love is something felt in the heart not in the pocket.  Heart-shaped products do not say “I love you” more than square or round ones!  Red is no more appealing than any other colour and of course if emotions are high, they tend to last more than a day!  Ideally do not spend any money!  In the unfortunate event that you do, do not cook your romantic meal with a sharp knife.  You may pierce the palm of your hand and end up with stitches.  Do not spread chocolate on a partner before establishing if they are allergic to any of the ingredients, you may end up in A&E.  Do not offer them wine, if they have an intolerance to alcohol, they may vomit all over your pristine bedspread. Do not write something funny or profound if they are thick and unable to comprehend deeper meanings (in that case what are you doing with them???). Love is not an idea, a moment, a day, an instant.  It is a lifetime however long or short it is. You will live in love and you will die in love. Even when you are by yourself love is in you and it cannot be defined by the actions of people around you.  Finally, love is selfless so do not try to control them, “love is a rebellious bird that nobody can tame”!   

Media Madness

Unless you have been living under a rock or on a remote island with no media access, you would have been made aware of the controversy of Russell Brand and his alleged ‘historic’ problematic behaviour. If we think about Russell Brand in the early 2000s he displayed provocative and eccentric behaviour, which contributed to his rise to fame as a comedian, actor, and television presenter. During this period, he gained popularity for his unique style, which combined sharp wit, a proclivity for wordplay, and a rebellious, countercultural persona.

Brand’s stand-up comedy routines was very much intertwined with his personality, which was littered with controversy, something that was welcomed by the general public and bosses at big media corporations. Hence his never-ending media opportunities, book deals and sell out shows.

In recent years Brand has reinvented (or evolved) himself and his public image which has seen a move towards introspectivity, spirituality and sobriety. Brand has collected millions of followers that praise him for his activist work, he has been vocal on mental health issues, and he encourages his followers to hold government and big corporations to an account.

The media’s cancellation of Russell Brand without any criminal charges being brought against him raises important questions about the boundaries of cancel culture and the presumption of innocence. Brand, a controversial and outspoken comedian, has faced severe backlash for his provocative statements and unconventional views on various topics. While his comments have undoubtedly sparked controversy and debate, the absence of any criminal charges against him highlights the growing trend of public figures being held to account in the court of public opinion, often without a legal basis.

This situation underscores the importance of distinguishing between free speech and harmful behaviour. Cancel culture can sometimes blur these lines, leading to consequences that may seem disproportionate to the alleged transgressions. The case of Russell Brand serves as a reminder of the need for nuanced discussions around cancel culture, ensuring that individuals are held accountable for their actions while also upholding the principle of innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. It raises questions about how society should navigate the complex intersection of free expression, public accountability, and the potential consequences for individuals in the public eye.

There is also an important topic that seems to be forgotten in this web of madness……..what about the alleged victims. There seems to be a theme that continuously needs to be highlighted when criminality and victimisation is presented. There is little discussion or coverage on the alleged victims. The lack of media sensitivity and lay discussion on this topic either dehumanises the alleged victims by using lines such as ‘Brand is another victim of MeToo’ and comparing him to Cliff Richard and Kevin Spacey, two celebrities that were accused of sexual crimes and were later found not guilty, which in essence creates a narrative that does not challenge Brand’s conduct, on the basis of previous cases that have no connection to one another.

We also need to be mindful on the medias framing of the alleged witch hunt against Russell Brand and the problematic involvement that the UK government. The letter penned by Dame Dinenage sent to social media platforms in an attempt to demonetize Brand’s content should also be highlighted. While I support Brand being held accountable for any proven crimes he has committed, I feel these actions by UK government are hasty, and problematic considering there have been many opportunities for the government to step in on serious allegations about media personalities on the BBC and other news stations and they have not chosen to act. The step made by Dame Dinenage has contributed to the media madness and contributes to the out of hand and in many ways, nasty discussion around freedom of speech. The government’s involvement has deflected the importance of the victimisation and criminality. Instead, it has replaced the discussion around the governments overarching punitive control over society.

Brand has become a beacon of understanding to is 6.6 million followers during Covid 19 lockdowns, mask mandates and vaccinations. This was at a time when many people questioned government intentions and challenged the mainstream narratives around autonomy. Because Brand has been propped up as a hero to his ‘awakened’ followers the shift around his conduct and alleged crimes have been erased from conversation and debates around BIG BROTHER and CONTROL continue to shape the media narrative………