You have learned about the historical origins of orthodox and modern criminology (e.g., Classical, Positivist, Durkheimian, Strain Theory). You have also studied critiques put forth by critical criminologists (e.g., Bernie & Messerschmidt) and those who evaluate criminology from the perspective of post-colonialism (e.g., Agozino). Drawing on this material, and your own analysis and interpretation of it, please respond to the following questions in one essay: a) Which of the theoretical perspectives that we have learnt about so far, most resonate with you and why? (none may fully resonate, that’s ok, you have the opportunity to engage with that in part b)) b) What are the key strengths and limitations of your chosen perspective for helping us understand why crime occurs and what its consequences and implications can be (for society at large, and individuals/groups)? To argue your position, please pick a relevant “real-world” case that will help to support the points you make. For instance, if you are interested in critiquing classical criminological theory for neglecting to consider how inequality and race operate in the criminal-justice system, you might pick the case of the “central park five”: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/30/arts/television/when-they-see-us.html This is simply an example – and one that may not be relevant to you. Some additional examples of relevant “cases” are below: The criminalization of Poverty (through a critique of the American Dream): https://news.un.org/en/story/2017/12/639652-american-dream-quickly-becoming- illusion-says-un-human-rights-expert ??????? People vs. Turner: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/07/us/outrage-in-stanford- rape-case-over-dueling-statements-of-victim-and-attackers-father.html Kalief Browder Story: https://www.newyorker.com/topics/kalief-browder-in-the- new-yorker
Sample Solution