The Great Paradox of White-Collar Crime

The great paradox related to a white-collar crime can be defined as a scenario whereby a person that may not be inclined to hurt someone on individual capacity but are compelled to hurt people under the corporate shield (Rub, 2018). Typically, when the individual is behind the corporate shield, he or she starts perceiving people as mere statistics rather than individuals with emotions. For example, Moses is a well-mannered young man who would not dare take anyone’s money. Nonetheless, as a salesperson in a hedge fund that thrives on the use of insider trading, Moses successfully buys and sells shares based on the insight received. Therefore, when under the corporate shield, he does not hesitate to compromise the financial position of other traders. Postponed violence is a less obvious crime, not easily traceable, and less immediate, but is equally devastating to the victims (Jacob, 2017). An excellent example of postponed violence is the Ponzi scheme orchestrated by Charles Ponzi himself. When Ponzi lied to investors that their money will be used to buy postal stamps, the effect of the crime was not immediately detectable. Nonetheless, the impact of the violence was manifested in the long run. Common laws are integral in solving white-collar crimes since they address gaps stemming from written law (Ghazi-Tehrani, 2018). By basing judgment of set precedents, courts are able to handle white-collar crimes better. Most perpetrators of white-collar crimes prey on the gaps in the legal system. Ultimately, basing future interpretations of the law on past cases enables courts to make informed judgments and maintain a degree of consistency.

References

Ghazi-Tehrani, A. (2018). Corporate Crime and the State. In  Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice .

Jacob, R. U. B. (2017). Criminological Aspects of Reduction of White-Collar Criminality in Moldova and Israel: Criminal Behavior Approach.

Rub, J. (2018). White-collar criminality reduction.