Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Corporate and white-collar crime in IrelandA new architecture of regulatory enforcement$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Joe McGrath

Print publication date: 2015

Print ISBN-13: 9780719090660

Published to Manchester Scholarship Online: January 2016

DOI: 10.7228/manchester/9780719090660.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM MANCHESTER SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.manchester.universitypressscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Manchester University Press, 2020. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in MSO for personal use.date: 08 April 2020

Conventional crime methods

Conventional crime methods

Chapter:
(p.47) 3 Conventional crime methods
Source:
Corporate and white-collar crime in Ireland
Author(s):

Joe McGrath

Publisher:
Manchester University Press
DOI:10.7228/manchester/9780719090660.003.0004

The third chapter explores how the social and political inertia documented in Chapter 2 impacted on policy choices in addressing corporate crime. It is shown that addressing corporate wrongdoing by a conventional criminal justice model meant that corporate wrongdoers were entitled to a whole range of due process safeguards. The burden was on the prosecution to prove that the company officer committed the offence beyond a reasonable doubt. In general the accused had to be found subjective culpable and he was protected by the right to privacy, the right to liberty, the right to silence, the right of reasonable access to a lawyer, among others. Though not fully settled in Irish law, companies also seem to be able to claim constitutional protections in criminal proceedings, reflecting the traditional respect for fairness and 42 the fundamental principles of justice. Finally, the accused was entitled on conviction to proportionality in sentencing, whereby his punishment reflected both the particular personal circumstances and those surrounding the commission of the offence. The purpose of this chapter is to show that this system of punishment was developed under an equality of arms framework to act as a check on government power, and against the sweeping use of criminal sanction for instrumental purposes. In keeping with conventional criminal justice, punishment was personal and individuated because the traditional system emphasised punishing blameworthy conduct which was morally reprehensible.

Keywords:   Equality of Arms, Due Process, Subjective Culpability, Proportionality, Sentencing

Manchester Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.