What's Crime?

What is crime? When this question comes into mind, many people might think that crime is the offences such as murder, rape, assault, manslaughter and so on. Those offences are clearly immoral and also causes harm to the victims. But, is it enough to conclude that those which are immoral and cause harm regard as a crime?

In order to answer the question 'what is crime?', common definitions from non-legal dictionaries do not provide much help, but just offering bland definitions such as 'an act or omission prohibited and punished by law'. Although they may inform that the meaning of the word 'crime' can be traced to the Latin 'crimen' (accusation), it takes us no further forward to understand the subject. A simple definition of a crime is a wrong, prosecuted and carrying a penalty. Arguably, an exercise in further definition is still futile.

Again, if the question is 'what is crime?' the answer would be something which the Crown alone can pardon. But, 'what type of activity can the Crown alone pardon?' the answer would be something which is a crime! Therefore, it is difficult to define the type of activity which is criminal. Austin attempted to do it by stating his 'positivist' theory that it is activity which is forbidden by a sovereign power on pain of punishment. Hart distinguished between primary rules which are concerned with basic matters such as violence and theft; and the secondary rules which are more regulatory in nature. All that these theories serve to illustrate, however, is that there is a wide range of activity which is covered by the criminal law, from murder to parking on double yellow lines.

Criminal law is in the category of public law. It can be considered as public law because crime is regarded as an action against the State and society as a whole. Other than that, criminal law sets out the types of behaviour which are forbidden at risk of punishment. Those behaviors are judged as crime, which is conduct forbidden by the State and to which a punishment has been attached because the conduct is regarded by the State as being criminal.

Crimes are generally acts which have a particularly harmful effect on the public and do more than interfere with the merely private rights. Sir Carleton Allen writes:

"Crime is crime because it consists in wrongdoing which directly and in serious degree threatens the security or well-being of society, and because it is not safe to leave it redressable only by compensation of the party injured."

This explains why acts have been made crimes either by judicial decision or by legislation, and it does not necessarily accurately represent the present state of affairs. A crime may remain a crime long after it has ceased to be a threat to the security or well-being of society. Thus Allen's proposition tells us what he thinks - ought to be criminal rather than what is criminal. There is a further dimension to the concept of public wrong. This emphasizes not that the wrong is one done against the public, but rather that a 'public wrong' is significant for defining crimes because it reflects the important role that the public has in punishing crimes. As Duff explains:

"...we should be held criminally responsible for wrongdoings which are public in the sense that they properly concern all members of the polity, and merit a formal public response of censure and condemnation."

As Duff acknowledges, that does not assist in determining what wrongdoing should count as 'public'.

The purpose of criminal law is to protect individuals and their property from harm. In addition, it is to preserve order in society and also punish those who deserve punishment. Criminal law also can educate people about appropriate conduct and behaviour as well as enforcing the moral values. However, the question of whether criminal law should enforce moral values is much more debatable. It feels that criminal law should not interfere with citizens' private life or their views of point. But, it is necessary to do so in some special circumstances in order to make sure the standard of behaviour is under-controlled. Once again, however, some people think that immoral acts do not provide sufficient help in determining whether the defendant is guilty or not.

Morality is what is right and wrong according to a set of values or beliefs governing a group's behaviour. Morality is not fixed and will vary from one group or society to another. Other than that, moral values may also change over time. Warnock said:

"I do not believe that there is a neat way of marking off moral issues from all others; some people, at some time, may regard things as matters of moral right or wrong, which at another time or in another place are thought to be matters of taste, or indeed to be matters of no importance at all. "

The best case which illustrates the changes of the society, economic and cultural development is R v R case. Lord Keith said:

"This is not the creation of a new offence, it is the removal of a common law fiction which has become anachronistic and offensive and we consider that it is our duty having reached that conclusion to act upon it"

Law and morality usually overlap on major issues, but may differ on other matters. For example, murder is an example of overlap. It is both legally and morally wrong. However, in Airedale NHS Trust v Bland , on this major issue, there are groups who believe that euthanasia should be allowed and legally. It has been ruled that the withdrawal of sustenance from a person in a persistent vegetative state is not murder, but an omission. Lord Goff said:

"The question is not whether the doctor should take a course which will kill his patient, or even take a course which has the effect of accelerating his death. The question is whether the doctor should or should not continue to provide his patient with medical care which, if continued, will prolong his patient's life. "

Lord Goff added that it might be difficult to say that it was in the patient's best interests that the treatment should be ended but that it could sensibly be said that it was not in his best interests that it should be continued. 'Ending' and 'not continuing' look uncommonly like the same thing; but the former expresses the conduct as an act, which could not be justified, and the latter as an omission, which could.

However, in the complex societies, morality and law are never likely to be co-extensive. Major breaches of a moral code, for example murder and robbery, also against the law, but in other matters,