White collar crimes
Elite crimes
Crimes of
the powerful
Occupational crimes
Offences committed by individuals for themselves in
the course of their occupations and the offences of
employees against their employers (Clinard and
Quinney 1973).
A typical example of which is embezzlement,
involving offenders, either individually or in groups,
engaging in illegal or rule-breaking activities for
personal gain at the expense of consumers, clients or
employers.
Organizational crimes
Illegal organizational behaviour which is a
form of collective rule breaking in order to
achieve the organizational goals.
A typical example is the neglect of safety
regulations, which does not involve personal
gain, but may be seen as being ‘for the good
of’ the organization’ by enhancing
profitability or efficiency.
Characteristics of
white collar crimes
Low visibility
An essential feature of white-collar offences is that they take
place under the cover of normal occupational routines
(Shapiro, 1990), and involve the exploitation of occupational
expertise or organizational system. They can therefore be
readily disguised as ‘business offenders are legitimately
present at the scene’ (Clarke, 1990). All of this means that
victims are often unaware that any offence has been
committed at all. In addition, offences are generally ‘private’
rather than public, leaving little visible evidence of their
commission. This relative invisibility means that offences are
peculiarly resistant to detection, and even when detected, are
often not reported to public authorities.
Complexity
 While many white-collar crimes can essentially be reduced
to lying, cheating and stealing (Shapiro, 1990), many are
extremely complex. The expertise which is being abused,
which forms the basis of the offender’s occupational position,
may be scientific, technological, financial or legal. Many are
also highly organized, involve many employees, and may
have been going on for several years. Organizational offences
may involve a complex web of falsification, cover ups, action
and inaction. Many of the regulations and laws which are
being flouted are themselves exceedingly complex, making it
difficult to determine exactly what offences have been
committed and who is responsible for them.
Diffusion of responsibility
In many organizations functions are
separated and responsibilities delegated.
Consequently, it is often difficult to
determine who is immediately responsible
for any offence
The diffusion of victimisation
Victimization is also diffused. Whereas in
many conventional offences individual
identifiable offenders harm individual
identifiable victims, in many white-collar
offences there is no single identifiable victim.
The victim may be an abstract entity such as
the government or the company, or there may
be many victims who suffer only a minimal
loss
Detection and prosecution
White-collar crimes are particularly difficult
to detect by victims, supervisors or law
enforcers. Enforcers must possess the same
scientific and technical knowledge as
perpetrators and it may take many weeks,
months or even years of careful investigation
to unravel the more complex offences
Lenient sanctions
Even when prosecuted, it is often
argued that white-collar offenders
are not dealt with severely. Few
offenders are sent to prison and the
vast majority are fined amounts
which are often described as
“derisory”
Ambiguous law
The nature of offences creates many legal
problems. Their complexity means that it is
often difficult to capture the essence of
offences in legislation and to specify precisely
the situations in which an offence has been
committed, leaving many loopholes to be
exploited.