NCJ Number
84477
Journal
Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume: 73 Issue: 2 Dated: (Summer 1982) Pages: 723-763
Date Published
1982
Length
41 pages
Annotation
This article discusses the concept of just deserts with respect to white-collar crime and argues that its application, in practical terms, is unworkable.
Abstract
A large proportion of white-collar offenses are organizational crimes perpetrated by persons on behalf of their organization. Thus, under the just deserts theory, problems arise as to who should be punished for offenses, e.g., senior officials who did not know of the offense but who are held accountable for the organization's observance of the law. In contrast, the utilitarian rationale for punishing such authorities is clear. In addition, just deserts as a principle of sentencing provides no guidance as to how to resolve the dilemma of whether to punish the individual or the corporation. Public attitudes suggest that white-collar crime which causes severe harm to persons is more serious than even some types of homicide, but use of the just deserts rationale in sentencing fails to address this viewpoint. To base assessment of desert on objective harm ignores the mental element of the offense. Also, objective harm is difficult to measure with regard to many forms of white-collar crime. If just deserts were to work in practice, there would be many more white-collar criminals in prison than common criminals. However, the cost factor alone precludes successful processing and prosecution of many white-collar cases. Adherence to the just deserts practice ensures that those who are most deserving of punishment are the least likely to receive it. The article includes 191 footnotes.