Zoekresultaat: 5 artikelen

x
De zoekresultaten worden gefilterd op:
Jaar 2018 x Rubriek Article x
Artikel

Gevallen helden van bedrijfsleven en openbaar bestuur

De ‘fall from grace’ van witteboordencriminaliteit

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift over Cultuur & Criminaliteit, Aflevering 2 2018
Trefwoorden white-collar crime, status degradation, sanctioning, executives, punishment
Auteurs Prof. dr. Wim Huisman en Drs. Dennis Lesmeister
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In criminology, it is generally assumed that the high social status of white-collar offenders prevents them of being targeted by criminal law enforcement. But when they do, they suffer greater social and economic damage because of this high social status. Empirical research on the consequences of criminal law enforcement and conviction for white-collar offenders is scarce, and limited to the US and the UK. This paper used biographies of convicted former executives in business and public office in the Netherlands, to analyse these consequences and the process of the ‘fall from grace’ of white-collar offenders. The consequences are described in four life-domains: health, the private sphere, the occupational sphere and the social sphere. The results show that Dutch executives, in line with findings for the Anglo-American white-collar offenders, experience status degradation and suffer much collateral damage of criminal law enforcement. After the initial horror of imprisonment, they endure prison life fairly well. Individual competences and remaining social and economic capital enable them to return to normal life, although they cannot return to pre-conviction levels of social status.


Prof. dr. Wim Huisman
Prof. dr. Wim Huisman is hoogleraar criminologie aan de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.

Drs. Dennis Lesmeister
Drs. Dennis Lesmeister is veroordeeld in de Klimop-zaak en is geassocieerd onderzoeker aan de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Artikel

Persoonlijkheidskenmerken van e-fraudeslachtoffers

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Veiligheid, Aflevering 1-2 2018
Trefwoorden Online fraud, Big Five personality traits, Phishing, online marketplace fraud, cybercrime prevention
Auteurs Jildau Borwell, Jurjen Jansen en Wouter Stol
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    With the digitization of society, perpetrators gained new tools to commit crimes. Online fraud, also referred to as e-fraud, is one of the most common types of cybercrime. The present study focusses on two types of e-fraud: phishing and online consumer fraud. Although e-fraud always contains a digital component, the human is the weakest link in such crimes. Perpetrators deceive their victims to acquire sensitive data or to conclude a fraudulent sale, which makes victims unwillingly participate in the offence. However, not every person adheres to such fraudulent schemes. This raises the question what makes some people comply with these schemes and thus become a victim of cybercrime, while others do not. In this study, the differences between personality traits of e-fraud victims and the Dutch population were investigated. Personality traits influence the way people process information and react to situations, which also applies when people are confronted with e-fraud. Data were collected through an online survey, in which 224 e-fraud victims participated. The outcomes of the survey were compared with norm groups representative for the Dutch population. E-fraud victims, compared to the Dutch population, scored higher on extraversion, altruism and conscientiousness, and lower on neuroticism. Based on the findings, recommendations have been made for the development of targeted preventive measures against e-fraud.


Jildau Borwell
Jildau Borwell is werkzaam bij de Dienst Regionale Informatieorganisatie (Analyse & Onderzoek), Nationale Politie, Eenheid Noord-Nederland, Groningen. Email: jildau.borwell@politie.nl.

Jurjen Jansen
Jurjen Jansen is werkzaam bij de Faculteit cultuur- en rechtswetenschappen aan de Open Universiteit, Heerlen en bij het Lectoraat cybersafety, NHL Hogeschool en Politieacademie, Leeuwarden en Apeldoorn. Email: j.jansen@nhl.nl.

Wouter Stol
Wouter Stol is lector Cybersafety aan de NHL Stenden Hogeschool en de Politieacademie, en bijzonder hoogleraar Politiestudies aan de Open Universiteit. Email: wstol@planet.nl.
Artikel

Determinanten en motivaties voor intentie tot aangifte na slachtofferschap van cybercrime

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Veiligheid, Aflevering 1-2 2018
Trefwoorden Cybercriminaliteit, Slachtofferschap, Aangiftebereidheid, Politie
Auteurs Lisanne Jong, Rutger Leukfeldt en Steve van de Weijer
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This study focusses on determinants of willingness to report cybercrime to the police or to other organizations and motivations for (not) reporting victimization. In this study, a questionnaire containing vignettes is used. Vignettes are semi-experimental designs in which hypothetical situations are presented and certain factors can be manipulated between and within respondents. Factors that are measured within the vignettes are the type and seriousness of the offence, the relationship between offender and victim and which possibilities for reporting the offence are available.
    It is shown that the type of offence is an important determinant for willingness to report the offence, which is highest for fraud, followed by hacking and malware. Likewise, willingness to report is higher for more serious offences than for less serious offences. These results are comparable to results on willingness to report traditional crimes.
    With regard to psychological determinants, results are not in line with previous results on willingness to report traditional crimes. For the relationship between offender and victim, mixed results are found. If the offender is an acquaintance of the victim, willingness to report to the police increases, but willingness to report to another organization decreases, compared to the offender being unfamiliar to the victim. Another surprising result is that no correlation is found between attitudes towards the police and willingness to report offences. Also unexpectedly, it is found that respondents who have previously reported crime and were unsatisfied about this experience, were more willing to report offences than respondents who never reported crimes before.
    Regarding motivations for willingness to report, it is found that, in general, motivations for reporting cybercrime are strongly comparable to motivations for reporting traditional crime, however, differences in motivations are found between the different types of cybercrime.


Lisanne Jong
Lisanne Jong is statistisch onderzoeker bij het Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek. Email: lps.jong@cbs.nl.

Rutger Leukfeldt
Rutger Leukfeldt is postdoc onderzoeker bij het Nederlands Studiecentrum Criminaliteit en Rechtshandhaving. Email: rleukfeldt@nscr.nl.

Steve van de Weijer
Steve van de Weijer is postdoc onderzoeker bij het Nederlands Studiecentrum Criminaliteit en Rechtshandhaving. Email: svandeweijer@nscr.nl.
Artikel

De digitale schandpaal: opsporingsberichtgeving in een gedigitaliseerde samenleving

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Veiligheid, Aflevering 1-2 2018
Trefwoorden DIY-policing, online policing, wanted notices, right to privacy, procedural defect
Auteurs Gabry Vanderveen en Mojan Samadi
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In the context of criminal investigations police and prosecution can appeal to the public for information to further their case. This decision cannot be taken lightly and requires a balancing exercise between the rights of the suspect (and other people involved), specifically the right to privacy, the interest of criminal investigations, such as the identification of the suspect or witnesses, and public pressure to fight crime.
    In the current digital society, the prosecutor can choose between a wide range of (new) media and modes of communication to ask for information. Next to wanted notices on paper posters and broadcasts on television, appeals for information are published on websites, social media platforms, apps and digital screens. Citizens can modify and share these appeals and they can comment on them. This necessitates careful consideration by the prosecutor on whether and how to appeal for information. After all, these appeals could lead to DIY-policing or online vigilantism (digilantism), leading to infringements on the right to privacy and even possibly to misidentification of suspects.
    This article contributes to the continuing debate. We describe the legal framework the prosecution has to take into account in such cases. The importance of a considered decision is illustrated by three cases in which judicial authorities appealed to the public for help in the criminal investigations, resulting in massive (media) attention and consequently affecting the eventual criminal case against the defendants. In two of these cases the prosecutorial decision to involve the public’s help resulted in a violation of the defendants’ rights to privacy and consequently had to be remedied by the court. Both cases led to social, legal and political debate about the balance between privacy and crime control.


Gabry Vanderveen
Gabry N.G. Vanderveen is als universitair docent verbonden aan de sectie Criminologie, Erasmus School of Law, Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam. Email: vanderveen@law.eur.nl.

Mojan Samadi
Mojan Samadi is als promovendus straf(proces)recht verbonden aan het Instituut voor Strafrecht & Criminologie van de Universiteit Leiden. Email: m.samadi@law.leidenuniv.nl.
Artikel

Access_open Online vergaren van informatie voor opsporingsonderzoek

Een beknopte evaluatie van voorgestelde wetgeving

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Veiligheid, Aflevering 1-2 2018
Trefwoorden opsporingsbevoegdheden, digitalisering, Politie
Auteurs Wouter Stol en Litska Strikwerda
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The Dutch Police Act provides the police with the legal power to gather information about a person on the internet as long as this does not cause more than ‘a limited violation of privacy’. If the police are gathering more information about a person they need a special legal power laid down in the Dutch Code of Criminal Procedure. The dividing line between ‘a limited violation of privacy’ and ‘more than a limited violation of privacy’ is not always clear. The legislator is preparing a new piece of legislation to provide the police with more clarity. This article discusses the suggested law article with respect to the gathering of information from open sources. Furthermore, this article suggests to not only regulate the amount of information the police are gathering but also the kind of tools that the police use (simple search machine versus an advanced web crawler).


Wouter Stol
Wouter Stol is lector Cybersafety aan de NHL Stenden Hogeschool en de Politieacademie, en bijzonder hoogleraar Politiestudies aan de Open Universiteit. Email: wstol@planet.nl.

Litska Strikwerda
Litska Strikwerda is Universitair Docent Metajuridica aan de Open Universiteit. Email: litska.strikwerda@ou.nl.
Interface Showing Amount
U kunt door de volledige tekst zoeken naar alle artikelen door uw zoekterm in het zoekveld in te vullen. Als u op de knop 'Zoek' heeft geklikt komt u op de zoekresultatenpagina met filters, die u helpen om snel bij het door u gezochte artikel te komen. Er zijn op dit moment drie verschillende filters: tijdschrift, rubriek en jaar.