OL 125 Journal Rubric Approach For Activities

Ol 125 Journal Rubricapproach These Activities As A An Opportunity T

These journal activities are designed as opportunities for students to reflect on and apply weekly learnings based on assigned readings, discussions, and activities. They also serve as platforms to share personal knowledge and professional experiences. The activities aim to develop critical reflection and writing skills, with journals remaining private between the student and instructor. Each journal entry is graded individually, with feedback provided via an integrated rubric in Blackboard. Grading emphasizes critical thinking, evidence-based reflection, depth of knowledge, voice, and writing quality.

Paper For Above instruction

White collar crimes have historically been considered among the most serious offenses in the United States due to their significant economic and social impacts. These crimes encompass non-violent illegal activities committed by individuals or organizations in a professional capacity, often involving deception, fraud, or breach of trust. The substantial financial losses associated with white collar crimes have prompted federal authorities to oversee investigations and prosecutions, reflecting the gravity of these offenses (Sutherland, 1949; Coffey, 2003).

The Federal government established specialized agencies such as the National White Collar Crime Center (NW3C) to coordinate efforts in combating these crimes. The NW3C functions at the national level, providing support, training, and resources to federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies involved in white collar crime investigations. Its activities include efforts to prevent, investigate, and prosecute economic crimes, with a focus on fostering collaboration among various agencies like the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Department of Justice (DOJ), and Federal Trade Commission (FTC) (Crimes-of-persuasion.com, 2017). The importance of a centralized effort lies in the complex and often transnational nature of white collar offenses, which require sophisticated investigative techniques and inter-agency cooperation.

The legal process for addressing white collar crimes involves multiple stages. Initially, pretrial investigations are conducted, often involving grand juries that determine whether sufficient evidence exists to indict a suspect. Grand juries possess the authority to subpoena witnesses and compel testimony, facilitating thorough investigations (Harlow & Gertz, 2010). Once an indictment is issued, the case proceeds to arraignment, where the accused is formally charged and enters a plea. During the trial phase, both prosecution and defense present evidence, and the judge or jury evaluates guilt based on the burden of proof (Sacco & Bowers, 2012). The post-trial phase includes sentencing, appeals, or acquittal, depending on the case outcome. Sentencing in white collar cases considers multiple factors, including the nature and severity of the crime, the amount of financial loss, planning involved, breach of trust, and the offender’s prior record (Mirko & Theo, 2002).

Judges and juries play vital roles in the prosecution and sentencing of white collar offenders. A grand jury conducts initial investigations, issuing indictments when appropriate, while judges oversee court proceedings, ensuring fairness and adherence to legal standards (Haugh, 2014). The judge or jury ultimately determines sentencing based on the factors related to the crime, such as whether the offense involved long-term planning or betrayal of trust (Wheeler, 1980). Common penalties include imprisonment, probation, community service, or fines, with the precise punishment tailored to the specifics of each case.

Sentencing white collar offenders involves evaluating diverse factors to determine appropriate penalties. One primary consideration is the conduct involved and its severity, which directly influence the court’s sentencing tariffs. For instance, crimes involving large sums of money, long-term deception, or significant breach of trust carry harsher penalties (Mirko & Theo, 2002). Deterrence is a significant goal, aiming to discourage future offenses by imposing sufficiently punitive sanctions. Additionally, the planning aspect of the crime influences sentencing; offenses that are meticulously planned and executed over extended periods tend to attract more severe penalties than impulsive acts.

Other factors influencing sentencing include the offender’s intent, prior criminal history, and whether restitution has been made. Restitution, which involves compensating victims for their losses, can serve as a mitigating factor, potentially reducing the sentence. Conversely, breaches of trust or exploitation of organizational structures also aggravate penalties. Offenders with good character, contribution to the community, or strong family ties may receive leniency, although these are secondary considerations (Mirko & Theo, 2002). Overall, the sentencing process aims to balance retribution, deterrence, and rehabilitation, ensuring that sanctions are proportionate to the offense’s nature and circumstances.

Prosecutors often prefer probation over incarceration when handling white collar crimes, mainly due to the economic and social consequences of imprisonment. Jailing white collar offenders can result in unemployment, loss of reputation, and difficulties in restitution, which negatively impact victims’ ability to recover damages (Brandolph, 2014). Probation allows offenders to remain active in the workforce, make restitution, and contribute positively to society while under supervision. This approach aligns with the belief that many white collar offenders are rehabilitable and that community-based sanctions can be more effective in preventing recidivism.

Civil suits are another mechanism used to address white collar offenses. They focus on economic penalties and structural organizational changes rather than criminal sanctions. Civil litigation can impose substantial financial penalties, which serve as a deterrent and enforce accountability. Recent trends emphasize integrating business ethics into professional conduct to prevent white collar crimes. Implementing strict regulations, internal controls, and compliance programs within organizations helps mitigate risks associated with financial misconduct (Lynch, 1997). Civil remedies also include sanctions such as disgorgement of profits and injunctions against future illegal activities, reinforcing the importance of ethical business practices.

In conclusion, addressing white collar crimes requires a multifaceted approach that incorporates effective legal processes, appropriate sentencing, and preventive measures. Federal agencies and law enforcement play pivotal roles in investigating and prosecuting these offenses, which can cause extensive economic harm. Judicial discretion in sentencing considers many factors, aiming for justice, deterrence, and the potential for offender rehabilitation. Moreover, shifting towards civil remedies, strengthening organizational ethics, and promoting community awareness are critical to reducing the incidence and impact of white collar crimes. Continued enforcement of strict regulations and ethical standards remains essential for fostering trust and integrity within the business environment.

References

  • Crimes-of-persuasion.com. (2017). U.S. Law Enforcement Agencies Responsible for Prosecution of Fraud-related Offences in the United States. Retrieved from https://crimes-of-persuasion.com
  • Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2017). A Brief Description of the Federal Criminal Justice Process. Retrieved from https://www.fbi.gov
  • Haugh, T. (2014). Sentencing the Why of White Collar Crime: IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law.
  • Harlow, C., & Gertz, J. (2010). Understanding White Collar Crime. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38(4), 317-329.
  • Lynch, G. E. (1997). The role of criminal law in policing corporate misconduct. Crime & Delinquency, 43(1), 3-25.
  • Mirko, B., & Theo, A. (2002). A Rational Approach to Sentencing White-Collar Offenders in Australia. Federal Sentencing Report.
  • Sacco, V. F., & Bowers, S. (2012). White Collar Crime: A Text/Reader. Routledge.
  • Sutherland, E. H. (1949). White Collar Crime. Dryden Press.
  • Wheeler, S. (1980). Sentencing the White-Collar Offender: Yale Law School.
  • Brandolph, A. (2014). White-Collar Criminals Often Avoid Prison Terms. Crimes-of-persuasion.com.

Related Assignments