A study of exploitation for the criminal law
<p>What is the state's duty to penalize serious interpersonal exploitation using the criminal law? Does the state discharge this duty appropriately? These are large questions and this thesis sets out to reassess one part of the puzzle of exploitation. The focus is upon interpersonal ex...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Thesis |
| Published: |
2015
|
| _version_ | 1826282067266109440 |
|---|---|
| author | Collins, J |
| author2 | Ashworth, A |
| author_facet | Ashworth, A Collins, J |
| author_sort | Collins, J |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | <p>What is the state's duty to penalize serious interpersonal exploitation using the criminal law? Does the state discharge this duty appropriately? These are large questions and this thesis sets out to reassess one part of the puzzle of exploitation. The focus is upon interpersonal exploitation and property offences in England and Wales. Criminal law commentators frequently state that several property offences are justified on the basis that they penalize exploitation. For example, the tendency has been to assume that section 1 of the Fraud Act 2006 performs this function, together with its accompanying sentencing guidelines. One of the objectives of this thesis is to expose the precarious foundations of relying upon existing property offences to censure exploitation. For example, it is not clear what the scope of the wrong of exploitation under discussion actually is. This thesis argues that analysis of the relationship between wrongful interpersonal exploitation and property offences has been woefully superficial in English law and is ripe for reappraisal.</p> <p>The second objective is to identify and to elucidate a hitherto neglected wrong of acquisitive exploitation. An analytical account of the wrong is presented which will be of interest to criminal law theorists. Acquisitive exploitation represents a distinctive method of using vulnerable persons, under the cover of dishonesty.</p> <p>With a careful account of wrongful acquisitive exploitation in hand, the third objective is to raise questions about criminal liability for acquisitive exploitation. Ought the criminal law to penalize acquisitive exploitation, and, if so, how? Are there grounds for penalizing acquisitive exploitation more consistently and with improved labelling? These questions must be thoroughly debated. A credible opening bid is presented in relation to them—first, by considering whether acquisitive exploitation might be used to more fairly label property offences; and second, by assessing justifications for a substantive acquisitive exploitation offence.</p> |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T00:38:15Z |
| format | Thesis |
| id | oxford-uuid:82273f4a-cc0e-4cf8-aadd-82795e35778f |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T00:38:15Z |
| publishDate | 2015 |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:82273f4a-cc0e-4cf8-aadd-82795e35778f2022-03-26T21:35:30ZA study of exploitation for the criminal lawThesishttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_db06uuid:82273f4a-cc0e-4cf8-aadd-82795e35778fORA Deposit2015Collins, JAshworth, A<p>What is the state's duty to penalize serious interpersonal exploitation using the criminal law? Does the state discharge this duty appropriately? These are large questions and this thesis sets out to reassess one part of the puzzle of exploitation. The focus is upon interpersonal exploitation and property offences in England and Wales. Criminal law commentators frequently state that several property offences are justified on the basis that they penalize exploitation. For example, the tendency has been to assume that section 1 of the Fraud Act 2006 performs this function, together with its accompanying sentencing guidelines. One of the objectives of this thesis is to expose the precarious foundations of relying upon existing property offences to censure exploitation. For example, it is not clear what the scope of the wrong of exploitation under discussion actually is. This thesis argues that analysis of the relationship between wrongful interpersonal exploitation and property offences has been woefully superficial in English law and is ripe for reappraisal.</p> <p>The second objective is to identify and to elucidate a hitherto neglected wrong of acquisitive exploitation. An analytical account of the wrong is presented which will be of interest to criminal law theorists. Acquisitive exploitation represents a distinctive method of using vulnerable persons, under the cover of dishonesty.</p> <p>With a careful account of wrongful acquisitive exploitation in hand, the third objective is to raise questions about criminal liability for acquisitive exploitation. Ought the criminal law to penalize acquisitive exploitation, and, if so, how? Are there grounds for penalizing acquisitive exploitation more consistently and with improved labelling? These questions must be thoroughly debated. A credible opening bid is presented in relation to them—first, by considering whether acquisitive exploitation might be used to more fairly label property offences; and second, by assessing justifications for a substantive acquisitive exploitation offence.</p> |
| spellingShingle | Collins, J A study of exploitation for the criminal law |
| title | A study of exploitation for the criminal law |
| title_full | A study of exploitation for the criminal law |
| title_fullStr | A study of exploitation for the criminal law |
| title_full_unstemmed | A study of exploitation for the criminal law |
| title_short | A study of exploitation for the criminal law |
| title_sort | study of exploitation for the criminal law |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT collinsj astudyofexploitationforthecriminallaw AT collinsj studyofexploitationforthecriminallaw |