Thoughts from the criminology team

Home » Violent Crime

Category Archives: Violent Crime

State Crime

A year ago, on this day a terrible accident took place.  Two trains collided head on: a passenger and a cargo train.  The crash was ferocious, following a massive bright explosion, that was heard for miles.  The official count of fatalities are 57 dead and over 100 injured, some of whom very seriously, one of whom at least on a medically-induced coma.  The term accident implies something that happened unintentionally and unexpectedly.  As the story emerged, different elements came to the surface which indicated that what happened, was not unexpected.  The people who worked in the train service raised the alarm months, if not years in advance, sending official statements to the relevant departments and the minister for transport. There were several accidents months before the disaster and there were calls to correct the infrastructure, including the signalling system.  Several politically motivated appointments in key positions also meant that the people in the organisation at certain levels lacked the expertise and knowledge to work with the complexities of the railways.  The employees’ protests were largely ignored as they never received an official response.  So, was it an accident, a disaster, or a crime? 

I have left the details, names and even the country of the disaster out, for one reason only.  This tragedy can happen in any place at any time and for any kind of people.  The aftermath leaves people wondering why it happened and if it was preventable.  The pain of those who lost loved ones transcends borders, race, and origin.  The question posed earlier remains.  Worldwide we have seen similar disasters some of which have permanently marked the local and international community.  It is the way we deal with the aftermath that will partially answer the question of what this tragedy was.  A disaster goes in deep highlighting questions such as; what do people pay taxes for, what is the role of the State and how important is human life?     

People in position of power were warned about it beforehand.  There were similar incidents that should have signalled that something wasn’t right.  There was underfunding and lack of staffing.  All of these may have happened separately, but considered together, they cannot support this being an accidental event.  It was a disaster waiting to happen.  Then the question is whether this event is a crime or not.  Crime is usually seen as a social construction of individual behaviour in conflict with social conventions.  This focuses crime onto an action by an individual and therefore the motivations and intent focus on the usual gains, opportunity and other personal rewards.  This approach largely ignores an entire section of criminology that deals with harm and social injustices.  A crime of this magnitude has individual actors who for their own motivations contributed to the disaster.  Nonetheless this is something bigger; it encompasses, services, organisations, departments, and ministries.  This is a State crime.  Different parts of the State contributed to the disaster and once it happened, they tried to provide a harried response on an individual’s fault…human error.    

Years ago, in another place the toxic gases of a plant killed and blinded thousands of people; a nuclear cloud was released in another incident and people were made to evacuate their homes for ever.  Some years ago, a fault in a type of plane grounded an entire fleet after a couple of crashes.  A terrible earthquake which revealed errors in construction and design.  Boats full of people sinking and no one seems to take any notice.  A similar picture in most disasters: people looking for their loved ones, feeling powerless in front of a State that took decisions to ignore the risk and the calls of the experts.  So, what does this train disaster, the plane crashes, the boat sinkings and the earthquake destruction have in common?  They are all State crimes.  In modern literature we have learnt to recognise them, identify the commonalities, and explain what a State crime is.  What we haven’t done as effectively is to find a way to punish those responsible.  Each State, like in this train disaster, recoils into providing all necessary information and changing its mechanisms; maybe because for some countries profit is above people, providing of the main intentions behind State crime.  Whilst the State delays, the dead await justice.

In memoriam to the 57 and to the millions of victims of state crimes.       

Meet the Team: Liam Miles, Lecturer in Criminology

Hello!
I am Liam Miles, a lecturer in criminology and I am delighted to be joining the teaching team here at Northampton. I am nearing the end of my PhD journey that I completed at Birmingham City University that explored how young people who live in Birmingham are affected by the Cost-of-Living Crisis. I conducted an ethnographic study and spent extensive time at two Birmingham based youth centres. As such, my research interests are diverse and broad. I hold research experience and aspirations in areas of youth and youth crime, cost of living and wider political economy. This is infused with criminological and social theory and qualitative research methods. I am always happy to have a coffee and a chat with any student and colleague who wishes to discuss such topics.

Alongside my PhD, I have completed two solo publications. The first is a journal article in the Sage Journal of Consumer Culture that explored how violent crime that occurs on British University Campuses can be explained through the lens of the Deviant Leisure perspective. An emerging theoretical framework, the Deviant Leisure perspective explores how social harms are perpetuated under the logics and entrenchment of free-market globalised capitalism and neoliberalism. As such, a fundamental source of culpability towards crime, violence and social harm more broadly is located within the logics of neoliberal capitalism under which a consumer culture has arisen and re-cultivated human subjectivity towards what is commonly discussed in the literature as a narcissistic and competitive individualism. My second publication was in an edited book titled Action on Poverty in the UK: Towards Sustainable Development. My chapter is titled ‘Communities of Rupture, Insecurity, and Risk: Inevitable and Necessary for Meaningful Political Change?’. My chapter explored how socio-political and economic moments of rupture to the status quo are necessary for the summoning of political activism; lobbying and subsequent change.

It is my intention to maintain a presence in the publishing field and to work collaboratively with colleagues to address issues of criminal and social justice as they present themselves. Through this, my focus is on a lens of political economy and historical materialism through which to make sense of local and global events as they unfold. I welcome conversation and collaboration with colleagues who are interested in these areas.

Equally, I am committed to expanding my knowledge basis and learning about the vital work undertaken by colleagues across a breadth of subject areas, where it is hoped we can learn from one another.

I am thoroughly looking forward to meeting everyone and getting to learn more!

For Tyre’s last Five badges. (spoken word)

The badges you wear were betrayed the very instant you flashed your sights on me.

You had nothing good in mind from the start.

I was doomed from the beginning.

By the time the brutality started,

The senselessness of it all kept my body numb to the assault.

“What did I do,” I keep asking, as

Your brutal blows, strongholds and punches bend my body into painful pretzels.

While y’all’ve got me firmly pressed against the pavement, y’all yell:

“Get on the ground.”

Pressed on the ground, I say disarmingly:

“You guys are really doing a lot right now.”

My calmness stands out against all your unwavering aggressions.

Yet, you continue to play the same game: “Get on the ground.”

Beneath the ground there is only hell, and yet

My face pressed against the gravel by your hooves feels like hell, right here, right now.

‘Watching the world wake up from history.

As if wielding your fists and batons, tasers and bullets don’t threaten me enough,

There are five of you, and

Each of you is massive.

Each of you …highly trained, experienced, and tremendously pumped up.

I am a little weasel sized up against any one of you, and

You are a mob of five.

Too weak to lift my own self, two officers hoisted me up by my limp arms, blood streaming from my head and outta ev’ry orifice, voice too weak to shout. I’m beaten badly, and yet you continue to brutalise me.

Manhandled.

I stumble up, firmly in your grasp, and all I do is plead, which gave enough time for another officer to grab a baton.

He quickly came back with the baton, screaming “give us your hands,” while the two officers still restrained me by these very same hands.

You continually scream “Stop resisting,” while

At least two if not three of you all strangling some part of my body.

The agony is immense.

You’re a pack on the hunt.

You chase me down, and

Torture and kick me more feverishly for running away.

I am in a battle for my life, you…

You are in a battle for your manhood.

“Bruh, you say, and words like these are the same words used to connect us to one another.

The words you use to abuse me could be endearing in another context.

Yet you have the nerve to call me “bruh,” and beat your brother to death.

‘I was alive and I waited, waited’

Waited for your humanity to show up,

Waited for justice to be served to me equally.

‘I was alive and I waited, waited,’ waited three days in the hospital…and

Neither justice nor your humanity ever showed up.

The True Crime Genre and Me

I have always enjoyed the true crime genre, I enjoyed the who dunnit aspect that the genre feeds into, I also enjoyed “learning” about these crimes, and why people committed them. I grew up with an avid interest in homicide, and the genre as a result. So, studying criminology felt like it was the best path for me. Throughout the three years, this interest has stayed with me, resulting in me writing my dissertation on how the true crime genre presents homicide cases, and how this presentation influences people’s engagement with the genre and homicides in general.

With this being my main interest within the field of criminology, it was natural that True Crime and Other Fictions (CRI1006) module in first year caught my attention. This module showed me that my interest can be applied to the wider study of criminology, and that the genre does extend into different areas of media and has been around for many years. Although this module only lasted the year, and not many other modules- at least of the ones that I took- allowed me to continue exploring this area, the other modules taught me the skills I would need to explore the true crime genre by myself. Something- in hindsight- I much prefer.

I continued to engage with the wider true crime genre in a different way than I did before studying criminology- using the new skills I had learnt. Watching inaccurate and insensitive true crime dramas on Netflix, watching YouTubers doing their makeup whilst talking about the torture of a young girl, podcasts about a tragic loss a family suffered intercut with cheery adverts. This acts as a small snapshot of what the genre is really like, whereas when I originally engaged with it, it was simple retellings of a range of cases, each portrayed in slightly different ways- but each as entertaining as the next. To me, I think this is where the genre begins to fall apart, when the creators see what they are producing as entertainment, with characters, rather than retellings of real-life events, that affects real people.

Having spent so much time engaging with the genre and having the skills and outlook that comes with studying criminology, you can’t help but to be critical of the genre, and what you are watching. You begin to look at the reasoning behind why the creators of this content choose to present it in such ways, why they skip out on key pieces of information. It all makes a bit more sense. Its just entertainment. A sensationalist retelling of tragic events.

Although studying criminology may have ruined how I enjoy my favourite genre of media, it also taught me so many skills, and allowed me to develop my understating in an area I’ve always been interested in. These skills can be applied in any area, and I think that is the biggest take away from my degree. Considering I now work as the Vice President of Welfare at the Students Union– and getting some odd looks when I say what my degree was- I have no regrets. Even if I walk away from my time at university and never use the knowledge I gained from my studies, I can walk away and know that my time was not wasted, as the skills I have learnt can be applied to whatever I do moving forward.

Violence on the Frontline: Guest speakers and CRI3003

Before starting the CRI3003 module, if you asked me what violence was, I was pretty confident that I could answer. Violence, of course, is a “behaviour involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something” (Oxford Dictionary). Alike to the Oxford Dictionary, this was also my understanding. It wasn’t until I started the module that I was bombarded by a whole different understanding: violence as institutional.

At first, this concept confused me. I think anybody who believes they fully understand the complexities of violence is not yet finished in their journey to understanding. This module, unlike other modules on the course, allowed students to listen to guest speakers from the frontline of the many institutions in which we learnt about. This, for me, proved invaluable. It helped me understand institutional violence, and why it is so complex. The speakers, albeit brilliant and informing, sometimes themselves didn’t completely understand the concept of institutional violence, and for me this highlighted the exact reason why it flourishes: lack of understanding within the institution. As violence is not understood as institutional, its insidious nature will never be understood, and neither will its impact. Instead, institutions desperately want to point the finger, and struggle to understand violence which has no actor.

In my opinion, not only did I learn as a student from the guest speakers, I believe the guest speakers also learnt from us. The interaction and questioning as a result of these sessions is where the crucial learning took place, as it allowed me as a student to understand an institutionalised perspective, and it allowed the guest speaker to understand an outsider perspective; a view they may not be encouraged to adopt within the institution in which they operate.  This cross examination of ideas allowed for a more informed, deeper understanding. I think it is very easy to think you understand a concept, but applying it in your evaluation of the guest speaker’s experiences accelerates your understanding.

It is fair to say I learnt a lot from all the guest speakers on the module, and I believe it is a great opportunity and privilege to have had as an undergraduate student. Just when you think you understand a case in class, the guest speaker will make you re-evaluate everything you had learnt previously. This is a skill which is not only useful for a criminology degree, but also for everyday life when you enter the social world in which is made up by such institutions.

It is for the reasons stated above that I believe CRI3003: Violence from Domestic to Institutional is a brilliant module. Personally, it was my favourite. It consolidated my learning perfectly and allowed me to demonstrate all of the knowledge I had previously learnt. As I said before, the guest speakers allowed students to question their own understanding, and perhaps view a case in an alternative lens. This multifaceted understanding of such complex concepts is crucial in criminology, and life as a whole.

From my experience, the guest speaker sessions are only as good as the questions asked, so come prepared! In asking the right questions, invisible violence becomes visible, and all of the content learnt before finally falls into place.

Tyre Nichols’ last bird’s eye view.

[Spoken Word/Read aloud]

After my death, the New York Times reported that you all gave me “at least 71 commands.”

“Many were contradictory or impossible,” the Times tweeted.

In a mob frenzy throughout the whole ordeal, y’all kept shouting at me over each other.

When I couldn’t comply – and even when I did manage to obey– you…(SMH)

“Responded with escalating force.”

Hmph!

NYT’s tweet is cleverly crafted, with a photo – a bird’s eye view of us from the street camera.

There we see 4 of you hunched down on me, pressing my whole body against the ground.

The 5th thug is lunging toward me with a weapon.

After my death, I wonder how y’all will explain this footage

Knowing the nature of these viral tweets?

I’ve personally reposted too many posts of Black bodies in my exact position to count.

I know I didn’t have to do anything to get here,

Knowing this brings me no comfort in this moment.

All of your commands ignore my humanity.

I am powerless and yet you persist.

In the many video angles of your fatal attack, we all see that…

Each of you had so many chances to just stop!

I’ve always tried to make sense of such lethal violence.
I try to understand the who, what and why of your attack that led to my death.

You had me pinned and pressed to the ground when you kept barking:

“Get on the ground.”

When you kept yelling, one after the other, “Give me your hands,”

Two or three of you were already bending my arms backward and forward with force.

I contort myself and try to comply, yet

You keep screaming “Stop resisting,” meanwhile,

At the same time, two or three of you are manhandling some part of me, at all times.

At the end when you leaned my beaten-up, bleeding, limp body against your car,

One of you snaps-n-shares pictures of me with colleagues and friends.

He’s proud and reaching out to folks who’ll pat him on the back for his latest accomplishment.

During the whole attack, I notice this is the only time he’s cool. He smiles.

He’s clearly used to this exact same rush, this exact same thrill.

I’m more disappointed than angered by his grin.

Mine is an all-American honor killing –

Most just get shot, but many have been tortured just like me.

We see this is how too many of his brethren defend their shield.

Where was I to go?

Appeal to the other officers on the scene whose negligence is pristine?

I tried to run, you captured me, which provoked more torture; nowhere feels safe.

Why was I being terrorized?

And by you, who’ve pledged to protect us from (this) terrorism and (this) thug behavior.

What was I to do?

Flight, freeze or fight.

I am tiny compared to any one of you, y’alls combat training and y’alls five big bodies built-up for battle.

I am a fly; you act like lords.

“Bruh,” you call me, but there is no evidence of brotherliness here.

Or, does your fraternity honor and practice such sadomasochistic rituals?

I like skateboarding and photography, another magazine writes, trying to digest my senseless murder.

Yet the videos of me captured for the world to see are

“…absent all beauty and sterilized of hope.”

When would this end?

Would I have to die for you to stop.

How had I possibly provoked this attack?

Who was I to obey?

You? You’re no good, like Linda Ronstadt said:

You’re no good. You’re no good. Baby, you’re no gooooooood…..

You’re no good.

Or perhaps good in your god’s eyes?

Or, are you God?

No.

You’re not anybody’s God, but…

You play one out here on these streets.

Now, you’re playing my God… my life is keenly in your fists.

Yes! These unceasing murders that I’ve seen – not just mine now–

Is what makes this place hell on Earth in the here and now.

So perhaps y’all’re just agents of the devil,

A force unleashed from the depths upon these streets.

“Momma,” I cry out as loud as I can, and you continue to holler obscenities at me.

Momma used to say all people are fundamentally good,

But lately, I’ve felt fundamentally unsure, and now I’m convinced.

“I didn’t do anything,” I plea, rolling on the ground with my hands behind my back.

Y’all kick me.

“Mom,” I cry out again.

I will die here alone.

No mother should lose her child like this.

The agony inside now, as I call out to my momma, is not for her help,

But because I can already feel her pain once she hears how I’m dying.

Since momma fought for the public release of the videos of my attack,

My name is a hashtag and we have been written about a plenty.

“Every Black mother knows she is a split second,” one newspaper writes,

“… a quirk of chance, from joining a lineage of suffering that stretches back through Mamie Elizabeth Till-Mobley…”

When she saw y’all in court for my kidnapping, assault, oppression, and murder,

Momma said you didn’t even have the courage to look her in the face.

Cowards.

Momma said you’re gonna see her each time you are called to see the judge.

-END-

Photo:

NPR OBITUARIES: “Tyre Nichols loved skateboarding. That’s how his friends say they’ll remember him.”

A world without prisons follow-up.  A student/staff reflection piece

As a department Criminology has pushed the envelope in promoting discussions around the key disciplinary debates.  @franbitalo and myself co-ordinated a conversation where the main focus was to imagine “a world without prisons”.  The conversation was very interesting, and we decided to post parts of it as a legacy of the social debates we engage in.  The discussion is captured as a series of comments made by the students with some prompts in bold. 

The original question stands, can you imagine a world without prisons?  First thing first, there is a feeling that prisons will always exist as mechanisms to control our society.  Mainly because our society is too punitive and focused on punishment rather than rehabilitation.  We live in a society that ideologically sees the prison as the representation of being hard on crime.  Further to this point we may never be able to abolish the prison, so it can always remain as the last resort of what to do with those who have harm others.  Especially for those in our society who deserve to be punished because of what they did.  Perhaps we could reform it or extend the use of the probation service dealing with crime. 

In an ideal world prisons should not exist especially because the system seems to target particular groups, namely minorities and people from specific background.  It important to note that it does stop people seeking or taking justice into their hands and deflecting any need for vengeance “eye for an eye”.  Prison is a punishment done in the name of society, but it does carry political overtones.  There are parts of political ideology that support the idea that punishment is meant to make an example of those breaking the law.  This approach is deeply rooted, and is impervious to reform or change. Which can become one of the biggest issues regarding prisons. 

Then there is the public’s view on prisons.  When people hear that prisons will go they will be very unhappy and even frightened.  They will feel that without prisons people will go crazy and commit crimes without any consequences.  Society, people feel, will go into a state of anarchy where vigilantism will become the acceptable course of action.  This approach becomes more urgent when considering particular types of criminals, like sex offenders and in particular, paedophiles.  Regardless of the intention of the act, these types of crime cause serious harm that the victim carries for the rest of their lives.  The violation of trust and the lack of consent makes these crimes particularly repulsive and prison worthy.  How about child abduction?  Not sure if we should make prison crime specific.  That will not serve its purpose, instead it will make it the dumping ground for some crime categories, sending a message that only some people will go to prison. 

Will that be the only crime category worthy of prison?  In an ideal world, those who commit serious financial crimes should be going to prison, if such a prison existed.  Again, here if we are considering harm as the reason to keep prisons open these types of crime cause maximum harm.  The implication of white-collar crime, serious fraud and tax evasion deprive our society of taxes and income that is desperately needed in social infrastructure, services and social support.  Financial crime flaunts the social contract and weakens society.  Perhaps those involved should be made to contribute reparations.  The prison question raises another issue to consider especially with all the things said before!  Who “deserves” to go to prison.  Who gets to go and who is given an alternative sentence is based on established views on crime.  There are a lot of concerns on the way crime is prioritised and understood because these prioritisations do not reflect the reality of social disorder.  Prison is an institution that scapegoats the working classes.  Systematically the system imprisons the poor because class is an imprisonable factor; the others being gender and race. 

If we keep only certain serious crimes on the books, we are looking at a massive reduction in prison numbers.  Is that the way to abolitionism?  The prison plays too much of a role in the Criminal Justice System to be discounted.  The Industrial Prison Complex as a criminological concept indicates the strengths of an institution that despite its failings, hasn’t lost its prominence.  On the side of the State, the establishment is a barrier to any reform or changes to this institution.  Changes are not only needed for prison, but also for the way the system responds to the victims of crime as well.  Victims are going through a process of re-victimisation and re-harming them.  This is because the system is using the victims as part of the process, in giving evidence.  If there is concern for those harmed by crime, that is not demonstrated by the strictness of the prison.

As a society currently we may not be able to abolish prisons but we ought to reduce the harm punishment has onto people.  In order to abolish prisons, the system will have to be ready to allow for the change to happen.  In the meantime, alternative justice systems have not delivered anything different from what we currently have.  One of the reasons is that as a society we have the need to see justice being served.  A change so drastic as this will definitely require a change in politics, a change in ideology and a change in the way we view crime as a society in order to succeed.  The conversation continues… 

Thank you to all the participating students: Katja, Aimee, Alice, Zoe, Laura, Amanda, Kayleigh, Chrissy, Meg, and Ellie also thank you to my “partner in crime” @franbitalo.      

The Origins of Criminology

The knife was raised for the first time, and it went down plunging into naked flesh; a spring of blood flowed cascading and covering all in red.  The motion was repeated several times.  Abel fell to his death and according to scriptures this was the first crime.  Cain who wielded the knife roamed the earth until his demise.  The fratricide that was committed was the first recorded murder and the very first crime.  A colleague tried to be smart and pointed that the first crime is Eve’s violation in the garden with the apple, but I did point out that according to Helena Kennedy QC, she was framed!  In the least Eve’s was a case of entrapment which is criminological but leaves the first crime vacant.  So, murder it is!  A crime of violence that separates aggressor and victim. 

The response to this crime is retribution.  In the scriptures a condemnation to insanity.  In later years this crime formed the basis of the Mosaic Law inclusive of the 10 commandments and death as the indicative punishment.  In the Ancien Régime the punishment became a spectacle on deterrence whilst the crowds denounced the evildoer as they were wheeled into the square! In modern times this criminality incorporated rehabilitation to offer the opportunity for the criminal to repent and make amends. 

‘The first man who having enclosed a piece of ground bethought himself of saying “This is mine”’!  This is an alternative interpretation of the first crime, according to Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1762/1993: 192).  In The Social Contract he identifies the first crime very differently from the scriptures.  In this case the crime is not directed at a person but the wider community.  The usurping of land or good in any manner that violates the rights of others is crime because it places individualism ahead of the common good.  As in this crime there is no violence against the person, the way in which we respond to it is different.  Imperialism as a historical mechanism accepts the infringement of property, rights, and human rights as a necessity in human interactions.  The law here is primarily protected for the one who claims the land rather than those who have been left homeless.  In this case, crime is associated with all those mechanisms that protect privilege and property.  Soon after titles of land emerged and thereafter titles of people owning other people follow.  The land becomes an empire, and the empire allows a man and his regime to set the laws to protect him and his interests.  Traditionally empires change from territories of land to centres of government and control of people.  The land of the English, the land of the Finnish, the land of the Zulu.  In this instance the King become a figure and custom law subverts natural law to accommodate authority and power.

These two “original” crimes represent the diversity in which criminology can be seen; one end is the interpersonal psychological rendition of criminality based on the brutality of violence whilst on the other end is an exploration of wider structural issues and the institutional violence they incorporate.  The spectrum of variety criminology offers is a curse and a blessing in one.  From one end, it makes the discipline difficult to specify, but it also allows colleagues to explore so many different issues.  Regardless of the type of crime category for any person attracted to the discipline there is a criminology for all. 

Between these two polar apart approaches, it is interesting to note their interaction.  In that it can be seen the interaction of the social and historical priorities of crime given at any given time.  This historical positivism of identifying milestones of progression is an important source of understanding the evolution of social progression and movements.  Let’s face it, crime is a social construct and as such regardless of the perspective is indicative of the way society prioritises perceptions of deviance.  

Arguably the crimes described previously denote different schools of thought and of course the many different perspectives of criminology.  A perfectly contorted discipline that not only adapts following the evolution of crime but also theorises criminality in our society.  When you are asked to describe criminology, numerous associations come to mind, “the study of crime and criminality” the “discipline of criminal behaviours” “the social construction of crime” “the historical and philosophical understanding of crime in society across time” “the representation of criminals, victims, and agents in society”.  These are just a few ways to explain criminology.  In this entry we explore the origins of two perspectives; theology and sociology; image that the discipline is influenced by many other perspectives; so consider their “origin” story. How different the first crime can be from say a psychological or a biological perspective. The origins of criminology is an ongoing tale of fascinating specialisms.  

Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, (1762/1993), The Social Contract and Discourses, tr. from the French by G.D.H. Cole, (London: Everyman’s Library)

Looking in all the wrong places and finding no answers

Recently we saw the killer of Sarah Everard receive a whole life sentence for her murder and with the sentence came the usual rhetoric from the politicians and media alike.  I could tell you how I feel as a former police officer, but I just don’t think that really matters, others have said it but what they say, undoubtedly with conviction, seems rather hollow.  What matters is that another life has been taken as a result of male violence, not just violence, male violence.  I don’t disagree with those that want to make the streets safe for women, reclaim the streets, I don’t disagree with the ‘me too movement’, but somehow, I feel that the fundamental issue is being missed.  Somehow, I think that all the rhetoric and calls for action concentrate too much on women as victims and looking for someone or some organisation to blame.  There seems to be a sense created that this is a problem for women and in doing so concentrates on the symptoms rather than the cause.  This is a problem for men and our society.  Let’s not dress it up, pretend it could be something else, use terms like ‘not all men’, it is a fact nearly all violence, whether that be against women or men is perpetrated by … you guessed it, men.

I was watching a tv programme the other day about migraines and as it transpires there are millions of migraine sufferers around the world, most are women.  It seems as a man I’m in the minority.  One of the interviewees, a professor was asked why so little had been done in terms of research and finding a cure.  He was frank, if it had been a male problem then there would have been more done.  I’m not sure I totally subscribe to that because there are lots of other factors, after all prostate cancer a major cause of male deaths seems to have received comparatively little coverage until recently.  But he made me think, if men, particularly those of influence accepted there was a problem would they be inclined to act? We call for more females in policing, we call for more females in the boardroom, predominately because we want to make things look a little fairer, a bit more even. We still have a massive gender pay gap in so many businesses and the public sector, we still have accusations and proven cases of sexual harassment.  We still have archaic attitudes to women in so many walks of life, including religion.  Words are great, useless but great. If you own the problem, you find solutions, men don’t own the problem and that is a problem.

So, it seems to me, that we are looking in the wrong place.  Removing Cressida Dick as the head of the Metropolitan Police service isn’t going to change things. Blaming the police as an organisation isn’t going to change things.  Look around you, look at all the scandals, all the sexual offences against women, against children.  Look at where the perpetrators are placed in society, in positions of trust, as members of a variety of organisations, organisations that traditionally we thought we could turn to in our need. And look at the gender of those that commit those crimes, almost always men.

The solution to all of this is beyond me.  As a criminologist I know of so many theories about why people commit crime or are victims of crime.  Some are a little ridiculous but are a product of their time, others fit quite nicely into different circumstances, but none fully explain why.  There are no real certainties and predicting who and where is almost impossible.  Somehow, we need our leaders, predominately men, to grasp the mettle, to accept this a problem for men.  If we owned the problem, we might start to tackle the causes of male violence, whatever they might be. Maybe then we might start to address the symptoms, society will be a safer place, and nobody will need to reclaim the streets.

#CriminologyBookClub: The Hundred-Year-Old Man Who Climbed Out of the Window and Disappeared

As you know by now, a small group of us decided the best way to thrive in lockdown was to seek solace in reading and talking about books. Hence the creation of #CriminologyBookClub! Building on on what has quickly become standard practice, we’ve decided to continue with all eight bloggers contributing! This title was the second chosen by @paulaabowles and is our 13th book. Read on to find out what we thought….

I chose this book on the strength of its quirky title. In terms of quirkiness, it didn’t disappoint. What’s not to like about the adventures of a centenarian? Part history lesson, part Forrest Gump, the cast of characters includes Stalin, Chiang Kai-shek and Harry Truman, alongside Allan, Beauty and an elephant called Sonya (seems Criminology Book Club cannot escape elephants from our reading diet…)! The story, despite including all manner of improbable deaths, is a gentle read. In many ways, it reminded me of Leslie Thomas’ The Adventures of Goodnight and Loving and I do have to say I prefer that story. Nevertheless, it was lovely to see the representation of older characters in an adventurous tale.

@paulaabowles

A centenarian is the most unlikely hero! Their mortality alone makes them too frail and fragile to be featured in a movie where villains end up dead in a path of carnage. In this book, the title is not a metaphor but most literal. A century old man is running away in his slippers dragging a stolen suitcase; somehow the story of what happens next, becomes compelling in this fast-paced action-packed adventure. The old man is carrying with him also a century of stories involving “who’s who” of the 20th century! At some point you are wondering if this is a comedy of errors, a farce or a spy thriller. The old man, in his back and forth stories, is bringing to light the absurdity of the 20th century, the political and ideological conflict of the time. This part of the story becomes a bit of a parody and the flashbacks become a bit tiresome as they seem to take us away from the main story, as you are left wondering will the old man live another day?

@manosdaskalou

I found this book an absolute joy to read, laughing out loud throughout. The book was about a centenarian who gets into all kinds of adventures and has done throughout his life. Each story of how he accidentally fell into situations with various historical political figures made me chuckle. What I also liked was that the book was devoid of any emotion. The love stories were quite clinical, the life and death situations fearless but this is just what I needed, and I think it made the book even more funny. More slapstick humour than romcom, it was completely ridiculous and an unlikely tale but because of this I could laugh at the dinners with murderous war mongers and the protagonist’s penchant for blowing stuff up.

@amycortvriend

We’ve come full circle in relation to book choices: it is Paula’s choice once again! And in all fairness, this book was more enjoyable than the Yellow Room. The Hundred-Year-Old Man Who Climbed Out the Window and Disappeared, was a book of two halves for me. The first half was witty, quick paced, and not like anything I had read before. However the second half of the book, was repetitive and without giving away any spoilers, the characters did not develop into the loveable rogues I thought they were. They remained quite stagnant. Nevertheless, I did really enjoy the book and found myself chuckling away at various points. Something which none of the other choices (excluding Inspector Chopra) have done. Good choice, @paulaabowles: I wonder how @manosdaskalou’s second choice will fare?

@jesjames50

The 100 Year Old Man was a novelty for me. Prior to this I had never encountered a book where the main character at 100 years old gets up to all kinds of unintended mischief. The sense of adventure included within the book was something that I needed at the time, although I found that the appeal of the book began to wear off at the half-way point. I also found some descriptions to be problematic from my own point of view, but overall I enjoyed the book!     

@haleysread

I don’t suppose you get to be a hundred years old without having a few tales to tell.  Allan’s life appears to have been a little more adventurous than most and his absconding from an old people’s home seems to be a continuation of mishaps and mayhem. A delightfully funny book, cleverly written to incorporate some historic characters into the narrative.  The chapters jump from the past to the present and back again, sometimes leaving you wanting to skip a chapter to continue the narrative of the past or to find out what happens next in this tale of murder and destruction.  Its amazing what you can get away with when you are a hundred years old.  I can’t wait to get my hands on the next book.

@5teveh

I haven’t read a book like this before and really enjoyed the whole concept of a much older than average ‘hero’ and their adventures both past and present. The glimpses into his colourful past and the famous faces from throughout history that he met along the way gave this book an interesting sense of time and place – both completely fictional and yet almost plausible in the real world. The writing style was also different from the other books we have read as a group and I found it very funny in places. Overall I found the book slightly too long – the novelty began to wear off and I found myself a little fed up with the alternating chapters between past and present ( I preferred those set in the present, though I know others in the group preferred those set in the past) but am still excited to find out what happens to him and his friends in the next book!

@saffrongarside

I was not expecting what I was going to read….elephants, gangsters and men locked in freezers. This book is a light and easy read. It centres around the very colourful life of 100 year old Alan Karlsson. Throughout the book Alan takes you on a journey to meet some interesting historical figures such as Stalin and President Truman. In many ways Alan influences these characters, which in essence shapes events that have happened in history.

We also follow Alan’s life in present day, in which we follow outlandish characters through a very humorous story. Overall, I really enjoyed this book. It kept me entertained and wanting more. Although some parts of the book were about some dark things, such as Eugenics and abuse under the guise of ‘medicine’ the humorous present-day story of Alan’s journey balanced this book out, making it a light hearted tale.

@svr2727