Seeing Crime

• In Event: Penal Abolition: Session 2 of 2

Abstract

In this paper I deconstruct the discourse of “crime,” and more exactly, the perception “crime.” Though a fiction, the perception “crime” carries an all but unquestioned reality in the tradition of “criminology,” the practices of the “criminal justice” system and reformist discourse. While on the one extreme penal thinking and practice – even recognizing labeling theory – promote a response to “crime” tangled in the punishment mythology, on the other extreme reformist and frequently abolitionist-leaning discourse argues that “crimes” need to be responded to in a non-penal fashion (non-punitively). I argue that both fail to capture the creative acts that materialize “crime.” Put differently, how do we “see” someone placing a candy bar in their pocket and leaving the store without paying for it? Do we recognize that calling it “theft” gives birth to “stealing,” leads to “seeing crime,” literally “creating crime”? Or do we “see” this act as properly described by the name “theft,” belonging to the category “crime,” and so on all the way to the consequent roles (offender, victim) and institutions (law, police, courts, prisons)? Why has labeling theory and social construction captured the process and impact of naming “crimes,” but not the fiction of “seeing crime”?

Author

• Michael J. Coyle, California State University, Chico