Neutralizations of punishment: An examination of accounts of violence in judicial confessions

• In Event: Procedural and Courtroom Dynamics and the Sentencing Process 1

Abstract

Although offenders’ accounts of deviant behavior have received considerable attention in criminological and psychological research, the examination of justifications and excuses supported by criminal defendants in trial is a rather unexplored field. The current study investigated the judicial confessions of twenty-eight offenders convicted of serious violent crimes. The court transcripts were drawn from the Courts of Appeal located in Greece's major urban centers, where the convicted offenders appealed, seeking more favorable sentence. Qualitative analysis of court transcripts was conducted with the method of thematic analysis. According to the thematization, the offenders’ accounts of their violence in criminal trial focus on five themes relating to (i) Vulnerability of the offender, (ii) Punishment of an injustice inflicted to the offender by the victim, (iii) A normal reaction to victim’s provocations, (iv) Downplaying crime severity and offender’s role to perpetration and (v) A defensive response. The identified themes reflect the use of various neutralization techniques including minimizing own agency, blaming and dehumanizing the victim, reconstructing the crime event, distorting negative impact, blaming co offenders, appealing to higher loyalties and portraying the violent act as serving a moral purpose. Existing research has shown that accounts of deviant behavior are facilitating initial crime involvement or recidivism through the neutralization of self-sanctions. The current study has highlighted how these accounts are shaped through legal defences, as well as “defences” deriving from cultures and ideologies accepting violence, to neutralize punishment, when the offender enters the judicial system.

Author

• Elli Anitsi, National & Kapodistrian University of Athens