Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
relatively rich in the relatively poor areas suffer
most, and if they also have a lifestyle that involves
going out and drinking, the risks are further
augmented.
Environmental criminology also has a
contribution to make to the geography of
victimisation. Victim behaviour, particularly in
public places, may be instrumental in increasing
vulnerability, perhaps by simple exposure through
engaging in certain activities at certain times in
certain places, or by being careless or not taking
precautions, or by being attractive through the
visual cues offered. At another level, the nature of
places may mediate victimisation, either through
perceptual qualities such as privacy and familiarity
or through functional qualities such as lighting,
architecture or land use.
was police recording practices (Farrington and
Dowds 1985).
Detection and prosecution
The means by which offenders are identified and
brought before the courts is another area where
research has whetted geographical interest without
providing up-to-date evidence. The Sheffield
Urban Crime Project demonstrated two decades
ago that suspects are brought forward in three
ways: (1) by victims directly identifying who did
it; (2) by indirect means (normally offenders in
custody admitting to other offences); and (3) by
the police (either by catching the offender in the
act or by police work). Police discretion was most
commonly used in high-offender areas, where
attitudes to the police were likely to be negative
(see Mawby 1979). Since then, there has been a
gradual decline in detection ratios, although
variation between police forces remains high.
There also continue to be differences in the use of
police cautions and in the proportions of offenders
prosecuted.
Reporting and recording
The victim's decision to report a crime is
mediated primarily by the seriousness of the
offence. There are important distinctions between
reasons for reporting less serious offences (feelings
of vulnerability, intrusion of private space, wanting
something done, insurance) and reasons for not
reporting serious offences (belief that nothing can
be done, feelings of powerlessness, too much
effort/cost, knowing offender). It is clear that
victims do not make the decision to report in
isolation—family and neighbourhood
expectations may be just as important as personal
feelings. Geographical factors that significantly
increase the likelihood of reporting include
intrusion into victim's own home, job-related
offence, home ownership and council tenancy.
Details of police recording are not covered by
the British Crime Survey, and relatively little work
has been done to demonstrate the extent of
variations in police practices. In the study by
Sparks
et al
. (1977) of London, incidents were
followed through directly from victimisation to
police record, and the proportions recorded varied
between the three areas chosen for analysis (see
Davidson 1981: pp. 98-100 for a re-analysis of
these data). An analysis of Nottinghamshire's high
official crime rate concluded that the main reason
Justice
By whatever criterion, spatial disparities in justice
are considerable. Most justice systems endow
sentencers with considerable powers of discretion,
and this had led to a mosaic of sentencing patterns.
Tarling (1979) notes that courts even within a
single police force area could be inconsistent in
their sentencing, and indeed were not overly
concerned that it should be so. Some clues as to
why this should be so are suggested in Hogarth's
(1971) penetrating study of Toronto magistrates.
He concludes that magistrates adopt a variety of
sentencing models that emphasise different aspects
of the justice process—punishment, rehabilitation,
just deserts, etc. Among these and variable in its
impact is the need to serve the community
through the sentencing process. How this is
achieved will reflect the perceived needs of the
community as well as the predispositions of
sentencers with considerable autonomy and
powers of discretion. Variations in punishment in
