Der Rückfalltäter von Lombrosos "geborenem Verbrecher" bis zu Moffitts "Life-Course-Persister"
Veronika Hofinger
Cite this publication as
Veronika Hofinger, Der Rückfalltäter von Lombrosos "geborenem Verbrecher" bis zu Moffitts "Life-Course-Persister" (19.04.2024), Beltz Juventa, 69469 Weinheim, ISSN: 0341-1966, 2013 #1, p.8
18
accesses
accesses
Description / Abstract
Verbesserte Statistiken und Identifizierungstechniken, der Bedarf nach Klassifikation von Gefangenen und der wachsende Einfluss der Psychiatrie tragen dazu bei, dass die Figur des Straftäters am Ende des 19. Jahrhunderts anders konzipiert und der "Rückfälligkeit" zunehmende Bedeutung beigemessen wird. Die Erforschung der Täterpersönlichkeit und seiner "Rückfälligkeit" sind kein Nebeneffekt, sondern vielmehr Leitmotiv dieser neu entstandenen Kriminologie, die sich stets dadurch legitimiert, wissenschaftlich zwischen Verbrechern und Nicht-Verbrechern (Garland 1994: 18) zu unterscheiden. Der Artikel rekonstruiert die Geschichte des "Rückfalltäters" von Lombroso bis heute anhand prominenter Beispiele: Welche Unterschiede und Gemeinsamkeiten gibt es zwischen dem "geborenen Verbrecher" Lombrosos (1876), den "Unverbesserlichen" Franz von Liszts (1882), der "Core Group" der Gluecks (1930), dem "Jack-Roller" Shaws (1930), den "Chronics" von Wolfgang et al. (1972) und den "Career Criminals" von Blumstein et al. (1986)? Anhand der Studien von Caspi und Moffitt, die nun auch genetisches Wissen in ihre Studien miteinbeziehen, wird schließlich dargestellt, welche Figur des Rückfalltäters die zeitgenössische Biokriminologie hervorbringt. Es zeigt sich, dass trotz der zahlreichen Unterschiede zwischen alter und neuer Kriminalbiologie die konstituierende Aufgabe der Kriminologie nicht aufgegeben wird: Sie hilft weiterhin dabei, jene Grenze festzulegen, die zwischen "Verbesserlichen" und "Unverbesserlichen" offenbar stets gezogen werden soll.
Schlüsselwörter: Rückfalltäter Naturalismus, Kriminalbiologie, Garland, Foucault
The scientific enterprise of criminology was based ab initio on the premise "that criminals can somehow be scientifically differentiated from non criminals" (Garland 1994: 18). Criminology has always provided useful knowledge for the classification of criminals. Recidivism has played a crucial role in the identification of those criminals deemed dangerous and not amenable to rehabilitation. This article reconstructs the history of the recidivist along the line of paradigmatic examples: What are the similarities and differences between Lombroso´s "Criminal Man" (1876), Franz von Liszt´s "Unverbesserlichen" (1882), Gluecks´ "Total Failures" (1930), Shaw´s "Jack-Roller" (1930), the "Chronics" of Wolfgang et al. (1972), the "Career Criminals" of Blumstein et al. (1986) and Moffitt´s "Life?Course?Persisters" (1993)? Finally, the recidivist of the 21st century as conceptualized by geneticists and neuroscientists is analysed. It is shown that we are not witnessing a relapse to Lombroso´s time, but that the new criminal biology fits very well into today´s risk discourse. Even if the binary opposition between normal and abnormal becomes blurred, criminology seems to cling to its founding duty: Criminology is not only discovering more and more risk factors in order to intervene as early as possible, but is still helping to define and identify which "high-risk-offenders" society has to be protected from.
Key words: Recidivism, Naturalism, criminal biology, Garland, Foucault
Schlüsselwörter: Rückfalltäter Naturalismus, Kriminalbiologie, Garland, Foucault
The scientific enterprise of criminology was based ab initio on the premise "that criminals can somehow be scientifically differentiated from non criminals" (Garland 1994: 18). Criminology has always provided useful knowledge for the classification of criminals. Recidivism has played a crucial role in the identification of those criminals deemed dangerous and not amenable to rehabilitation. This article reconstructs the history of the recidivist along the line of paradigmatic examples: What are the similarities and differences between Lombroso´s "Criminal Man" (1876), Franz von Liszt´s "Unverbesserlichen" (1882), Gluecks´ "Total Failures" (1930), Shaw´s "Jack-Roller" (1930), the "Chronics" of Wolfgang et al. (1972), the "Career Criminals" of Blumstein et al. (1986) and Moffitt´s "Life?Course?Persisters" (1993)? Finally, the recidivist of the 21st century as conceptualized by geneticists and neuroscientists is analysed. It is shown that we are not witnessing a relapse to Lombroso´s time, but that the new criminal biology fits very well into today´s risk discourse. Even if the binary opposition between normal and abnormal becomes blurred, criminology seems to cling to its founding duty: Criminology is not only discovering more and more risk factors in order to intervene as early as possible, but is still helping to define and identify which "high-risk-offenders" society has to be protected from.
Key words: Recidivism, Naturalism, criminal biology, Garland, Foucault