By Graeme R. Newman and Claude AI.

Long before probation became the most widely used criminal sanction in America, leading criminologists, judges, lawyers, social workers, psychiatrists, and probation administrators gathered to answer a fundamental question:

Could offenders be rehabilitated in the community instead of being sent to prison?

Originally published in 1933 as a tribute to pioneering probation leader Herbert C. Parsons, Probation and Criminal Justicebrought together some of the most influential voices in early twentieth-century criminal justice. Their essays explored sentencing, rehabilitation, probation administration, judicial discretion, psychiatric treatment, casework methods, and comparative probation systems in the United States, England, France, Belgium, and Germany.

Nearly a century later, the book reads with surprising relevance. The contributors debated many of the same issues that continue to dominate criminal justice policy today: overcrowded prisons, evidence-based sentencing, risk assessment, officer training, community supervision, recidivism, and the tension between punishment and rehabilitation.

This Mini-Classic edition presents an expertly condensed and accessible version of the original volume, preserving the essential arguments, insights, and debates while making them available to modern readers.

Inside you will discover:

• The origins and early development of probation in America and Europe

• Sheldon Glueck's influential critique of punishment and rehabilitation

• The legal and constitutional issues raised by probation

• How probation officers were selected, trained, and supervised

• Competing views of sentencing from judges and criminologists

• Early psychiatric and social-work approaches to offender treatment

• Comparative probation systems in England, France, Belgium, and Germany

• A modern commentary examining what has and has not changed since 1933

Part historical document, part policy debate, and part blueprint for reform, Probation and Criminal Justice captures a pivotal moment when criminal justice thinkers were struggling to replace purely punitive responses to crime with more individualized and humane approaches.

For students, scholars, practitioners, and anyone interested in the history of corrections and criminal justice reform, this volume offers a fascinating window into ideas that continue to shape probation and community supervision today.

Crime and Justice Mini-Classics bring influential but often overlooked works in criminology, policing, punishment, and criminal justice history back into print in concise, accessible editions for contemporary readers.

Read-Me.Org Inc. New York-Philadelphia-Australia. 2026. p.83.

Raymond B. Fosdick. Designed and Edited with an Introduction by Graeme R. Newman and Claude.

A landmark classic in the history of policing, public administration, and criminal justice reform.

When Raymond B. Fosdick published Police Administration in 1921 as part of the renowned Cleveland Foundation Survey of Criminal Justice, he delivered one of the most penetrating examinations ever undertaken of an American police department. More than a century later, his analysis remains remarkably relevant.

Confronted by rising crime and concerns about police effectiveness, Cleveland commissioned an independent investigation of its law enforcement system. Fosdick responded with a rigorous, evidence-based study that compared American policing with the more professionalized police systems of Europe. His conclusions were blunt: crime was not simply the product of social conditions, but also of outdated organization, weak leadership, inadequate training, political interference, and a failure to adapt policing to the demands of the modern city.

This groundbreaking work examines every major aspect of police administration, including:

• Police organization and leadership

• Recruitment, selection, and training of officers

• Promotion and discipline systems

• Patrol operations and crime prevention

• Detective bureau management

• Personnel administration and record keeping

• Accountability, professionalism, and public service

Fosdick's recommendations anticipated many reforms that would shape twentieth-century policing: merit-based advancement, professional training academies, modern management practices, specialized investigative units, and the use of data and performance measurement in public administration.

This new edition includes a substantial introduction by criminologist Graeme R. Newman, placing Fosdick's work in historical context and exploring its continuing significance in contemporary debates over police reform, professionalism, accountability, and governance.

More than a historical document, Police Administration is an essential source for understanding the origins of modern policing and the enduring challenges of managing police organizations in democratic societies.

Ideal for readers interested in:

• Police history

• Criminal justice

• Criminology

• Public administration

• American legal history

• Progressive Era reform

• Law enforcement studies

• Government and public policy

A century after its publication, Fosdick's classic reminds us that effective policing depends not only on laws and officers, but on leadership, organization, and the intelligent administration of justice.

Read-Me.Org Inc. New York-Philadelphia-Australia. 2026. p.104.

By Graeme R. Newman and Claude AI.

A landmark investigation into how America's criminal justice system actually worked, and why it often failed.

In 1921, a series of scandals and rising public concern about crime prompted the Cleveland Foundation to commission an unprecedented examination of the administration of justice in Cleveland, Ohio. Directed by two of the most influential legal minds of the twentieth century, Roscoe Pound and Felix Frankfurter, the resulting study became one of the most important reform documents in American criminal justice history.

Originally published in 1922, Criminal Justice in Cleveland was the first comprehensive effort to analyze an entire urban justice system as an interconnected whole. Drawing on detailed investigations of police, prosecutors, courts, corrections, probation, legal education, medical science, and the press, the survey revealed a system plagued by inefficiency, poor record-keeping, fragmented authority, political influence, and a startling lack of accountability.

This modernized edition, edited and introduced by Graeme R. Newman, makes this classic study accessible to today's readers while preserving its most important findings, statistics, and arguments. Readers will discover:

• How police departments operated in major American cities during the early twentieth century
• Why so many criminal cases disappeared before reaching trial
• The hidden influence of politics, public opinion, and newspapers on justice
• Early debates over probation, parole, rehabilitation, and sentencing reform
• The origins of evidence-based criminal justice research
• Reform proposals that continue to resonate more than a century later

Written during the Progressive Era but strikingly relevant today, Criminal Justice in Cleveland demonstrates that many of the challenges confronting modern police, prosecutors, courts, and correctional institutions are far older than most people realize. Its authors recognized that successful reform requires more than replacing individuals; it requires understanding how institutions work, how they fail, and how they can be improved.

Essential reading for students of criminology, criminal justice professionals, legal scholars, historians, policymakers, and anyone interested in the evolution of the American justice system.

More than a century after its publication, this pioneering study remains one of the most insightful examinations ever written of crime, law, and urban justice in America

Read-Me.Org Inc. New York-Philadelphia-Australia. 2026. p.90.

By Aaron Littman

The roughly two million people incarcerated in the United States are mostly left to advocate for themselves, aided sometimes by a sparse constellation of non-profit organizations and small firms, and accompanied by a smattering of weak oversight entities and a couple of units within the Department of Justice. But there is another entity, virtually unmentioned in the legal literature, that can—and in some jurisdictions, does—play a powerful role in advancing the rights of the large subset of prisoners with disabilities: the federally mandated protection and advocacy system, or P&A. Drawing on findings from twenty-five interviews with affiliated lawyers and other advocates, this Article presents the first scholarly consideration of the P&A’s role in ameliorating prison and jail conditions.

Congress afforded these little-known disability-rights organizations, which exist in each state, startling access authority and privileged ability to assert associational standing. The only entities in the country that provide both independent oversight and enforcement through litigation in prisons and jails, they function simultaneously as ‘lawyers with access’ and ‘oversight with teeth.’ Some P&As work to great effect on behalf of incarcerated people with disabilities, using their distinctive powers to circumvent many of the most troubling obstacles to traditional prisoners’ rights advocacy: unfavorable constitutional standards, obstructed fact discovery, the challenges of mootness and class certification, and the procedural hurdles created by the Prison Litigation Reform Act.

By Ingrid V. Eagly

When criminal courts rely on virtual adjudication, one or more participants attend court on a digital screen rather than by traveling to a shared physical courtroom space. Since the 1970s, criminal courts have used live, two-way video connections to allow vulnerable witnesses to testify from remote locations and, more commonly, merely to eliminate the need to transport criminal defendants detained pretrial from the jail to the courtroom. With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, many criminal courts began to hold fully virtual court sessions, with all court participants joining a shared virtual platform such as Zoom. Digital technologies are now a familiar feature of the criminal legal system. However, their use remains under close review by courts, policymakers, and researchers. Proponents cite the speed and convenience that virtual proceedings offer, often framing videoconferencing as an access-to-justice solution that preserves procedural fairness and delivers the functional equivalent of in-person courts. Yet virtual formats also raise complex technical, sociodynamic, and constitutional concerns. Chief among these concerns are that virtual proceedings suppress access to counsel and courtroom interaction, interfere with credibility assessment and cross-examination, dehumanize persons accused of crimes, and reduce public trust in the court system. 

By Lindsay Nash

The nation's "mandatory" immigration-detention laws sustain its largest civil-imprisonment system-and just radically expanded in scope and breadth. These laws consign broad swaths of suspected noncitizens to no-bail pretrial detention, denying tens of thousands of people facing civil regulatory charges any chance to prove they need not be detained. These laws turn split-second arrest decisions into jail sentences. They force people to give up meritorious claims. And they confound the historic presumptions-liberty, innocence, prosecutorial discretion, and bail-that undergird other pretrial-detention regimes. 

Although mandatory immigration detention conflicts with fundamental constraints on analogous detention regimes, the Supreme Court has treated it as exceptional and distinct. On this account, pretrial detention-detention pending proceedings to determine if a person is deportable-has been a "constitutionally valid aspect" of the deportation process for "more than a century" and was well accepted from a constitutional standpoint before any opportunity for release came along. Yet jurisprudence invoking this narrative tells us almost nothing about how detention actually operated at the time and, consequently, what type of detention or process early history and precedent may have enshrined. This Article takes on that task. It draws on critical sources of administrative law-early agency rules, binding interpretations, policy, and case files mined from the archives-to recover the lost history of pretrial-detention power and process during the deportation system's founding and formative years. T

his examination reveals that, in fact, the opportunity for release was virtually always part of deportation's early pretrial-detention scheme; any pretrial detention deemed constitutionally valid during that period came with the possibility of release. And it offers insight on why, showing that the agency's power to release was understood to be critical for a constitutionally permissible regime. Ultimately, this Article illuminates aspects of the early pretrial system that bear on pressing questions about detention and release in the contemporary scheme, and, as mandatory detention hurtles toward massive expansion, provides historical support for arguments to resurrect release.

By Emily Gwydir

A national reckoning on sexual assault began in October of 2017 when The New York Times and The New Yorker reported groundbreaking exposés on “one of Hollywood’s most powerful producers”—Harvey Weinstein. Weinstein was accused by over a dozen women of sexual harassment, assault, and rape, spanning decades. Soon, people across social media platforms began using the hashtag #MeToo to share their own stories of sexual harassment and misconduct by other powerful men, exposing the pervasive culture of sexual assault and ultimately “build[ing] a community of survivors” around the world. The viral outpouring of discourse surrounding sexual assault came to be known as the “#MeToo Movement,” which critically called attention to the pervasive gender inequities and power dynamics that shaped women’s experiences with sexual violence. By May of 2018, more than 50 women had accused Weinstein of sexual assault. That same month, the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office indicted Weinstein, charging him with first- and third-degree rape, firstdegree criminal sexual act, and two counts of predatory sexual assault.

A month-long trial in 2020 followed, where prosecutors presented evidence to a jury purporting to support these charges. All three complainants had met Weinstein through the entertainment industry. Each detailed their relationships with Weinstein and the incidents of sexual violence that led to his criminal indictment. The combined accounts of three of Weinstein’s victims depicted a consistent pattern of forcible sexual acts, including oral and vaginal rape, committed through coercion, physical restraint, and abuse of power. Over the objection of the defense, the prosecution also offered testimony from three additional women alleging how they, too, were sexually assaulted by Weinstein. In the end, the jury convicted Weinstein of third-degree rape and first-degree criminal sexual act, but acquitted him of first-degree rape and both counts of predatory sexual assault. The court sentenced him to 23 years in prison.

However, on April 25, 2024, the New York Court of Appeals in People v. Weinstein reversed Weinstein’s sexual assault convictions and ordered a retrial, partly based on the trial court having admitted testimony of the uncharged sexual misconduct alleged by the three additional women. To the court, the use of additional testimony constituted an impermissible use of uncharged evidence that violated Weinstein’s right to a fair trial. As a general rule, evidence of uncharged acts—meaning evidence of other crimes or misconduct not charged in the indictment—is inadmissible to show that a defendant acted in accordance with a particular character trait. However, in limited, expressly defined circumstances, such evidence may be admitted. The Court of Appeals rejected the trial court’s application of such an exception in People v. Weinstein—a decision that sparked widespread outrage among victims and drew sharp criticism from sexualassault advocates. The following month, New York state legislators introduced legislation to incorporate Federal Rule of Evidence 413 (“Rule 413”) into New York state law, which would have explicitly allowed admission of uncharged evidence in sexual assault trials for any relevant reason...etc.

By Avlana Eisenberg

The clamor for police reform in the United States has reached a fever pitch. The current debate has mainly centered around questions of police function: What functions should police perform, and how should they perform them to avoid injustice and unnecessary harm? This Article, in contrast, focuses on a central aspect of police culture-namely, how police envision their relationship to those policed. It exposes the vast reach of a deeply engrained "danger narrative" and demonstrates the disastrous consequences that this narrative has helped to bring about. Reinforced by police training, codified by courts, and broadly deployed, the danger narrative is an "us-versus-them" ideology that envisions "them"-all persons whom police are observing, investigating, detaining-as a lethal danger to "us"-law enforcement personnel. Structural and functional reforms have little hope of succeeding unless this toxic narrative can be displaced.

By Avlana Eisenberg

One tends to think of mercy as something that judges and chief executives occasionally dole out to convicted offenders. This picture is seriously incomplete. Many others are in a position to be merciful—from police on the street to corrections officers in a prison. In short, anyone who has power to inflict something disagreeable on another person has the opportunity to be merciful. More broadly still, mercy—understood as an act of leniency prompted by compassion—presupposes a capacity or disposition, namely the capacity or disposition to show compassion and understanding for another. This Essay develops both of the foregoing points. First, it points out that there are opportunities for mercy at every juncture of the criminal process, from policing to prison conditions. Second, it is not only the case that acts of mercy at each of these junctures are called for to help ameliorate the harshness of our criminal justice system. More broadly and more deeply, it is vital that all actors in the system approach their roles with the sort of compassionate mindset that is exemplified by, but hardly exhausted by, acts of mercy.

By Raymond D, Fosdick

The Modus Operandi System in the Detection of Criminals by Raymond B. Fosdick is a pioneering work on criminal investigation and police intelligence. Written during the early development of modern law enforcement practices, the book examines how investigators can identify, classify, and track offenders by studying their distinctive methods of operation, or modus operandi. Fosdick explains how systematic record keeping and behavioral analysis can help solve crimes, connect seemingly unrelated cases, and improve the effectiveness of police work.

Combining criminology, investigative procedure, and early criminal profiling techniques, this historical volume offers valuable insight into the evolution of detective work and forensic intelligence. It remains an important resource for students of criminal justice, law enforcement history, and the development of modern investigative methods.

Read-Me.Org Inc. New York-Philadelphia-Australia. 2026. p.11.

Criminal Justice in Cleveland was one of the most influential studies of the American criminal justice system produced during the Progressive Era. Published by The Cleveland Foundation, the volume brought together leading legal scholars, reformers, and public officials, including Raymond Fosdick, Roscoe Pound, Felix Frankfurter, and others, to examine the administration of justice in Cleveland, Ohio. The work was directed and edited by Roscoe Pound and Felix Frankfurter.

Rather than focusing solely on crime, the study investigated the entire machinery of justice, including police, prosecutors, courts, probation services, corrections, and related public institutions. The authors sought to determine how effectively these agencies worked together, where delays and inefficiencies occurred, and what reforms were needed to create a more fair, efficient, and accountable system of justice.

The survey became a landmark in empirical legal research because it relied on systematic investigation rather than anecdote or political opinion. Its findings helped shape twentieth-century reforms in policing, court administration, criminal procedure, and corrections, making it essential reading for historians, criminologists, legal scholars, and students of public administration.

Today, Criminal Justice in Cleveland remains a classic study of urban criminal justice and a foundational text in the movement to evaluate government institutions through rigorous research and evidence-based reform.

By Raymond B. Fosdick

European Police Systems

Raymond B. Fosdick (1915)

Published in 1915, European Police Systems is a pioneering comparative study of law enforcement in the major nations of Europe during the early twentieth century. Based on extensive travel and firsthand investigation, Raymond B. Fosdick examined how police organizations in England, France, Germany, Austria-Hungary, Italy, Belgium, and the Netherlands were structured, governed, and employed to maintain public order.

Fosdick explores the fundamental differences between the British tradition of local policing and the more centralized police systems of Continental Europe. He analyzes police recruitment, training, discipline, detective work, administrative organization, and the relationship between police authority and civil liberty. Drawing upon interviews with police officials and direct observation of police operations, he provides a detailed portrait of the institutions responsible for public safety in some of Europe's most important cities.

Written on the eve of the First World War, the book captures a European society in transition while addressing questions that remain relevant today: How much power should the police possess? What forms of accountability are most effective? How can governments maintain order while preserving the freedoms of citizens?

Combining careful scholarship with vivid observation, European Police Systems became a landmark work in the study of policing and public administration. More than a historical record, it offers valuable insight into the origins of modern police institutions and the enduring challenges of balancing authority, efficiency, and democratic governance.

New York. Century. 1915 . p.410.

by Graeme Newman (Author)

How did Europe police its cities before the First World War, and what can those systems teach us today?

In Policing Europe: A Retelling of Fosdick's Classic, criminologist and policing scholar Graeme R. Newman presents a concise, modernized edition of Raymond B. Fosdick's landmark 1915 study of European policing. Based on nearly two years of firsthand research across England, Scotland, Germany, Austria-Hungary, France, Italy, Holland, and Belgium, Fosdick's original work remains one of the most comprehensive comparative examinations of police systems ever written. [Policing_Europe Word]

Traveling through the great capitals and industrial cities of Europe on the eve of World War I, Fosdick interviewed commissioners, detectives, patrol officers, judges, and government officials to answer questions that remain deeply relevant today:

• Should policing be controlled locally or by the national government?

• How much authority should police possess?

• What creates public trust in law enforcement?

• How should police leaders be selected and trained?

• What prevents corruption and abuse of power?

• Which organizational structures produce effective and accountable policing?

This edition preserves Fosdick's remarkable firsthand observations while updating the language for contemporary readers. It explores the contrasting traditions of British "policing by consent" and Continental state-centered policing, compares police organizations in London, Paris, Berlin, Vienna, Budapest, and Rome, and examines detective methods, recruitment, training, leadership, forensic science, and police integrity. [Policing_Europe Word]

More than a historical document, Policing Europe offers a fascinating window into the origins of many modern debates about public safety, civil liberties, professionalization, surveillance, police accountability, and the relationship between citizens and the state. Written just before a world war transformed Europe forever, it captures a vanished world while illuminating issues that continue to shape policing in the twenty-first century. [Policing_Europe Word]

Ideal for:

• Students of criminology and criminal justice

• Police professionals and policymakers

• Historians of law, government, and public administration

• Readers interested in comparative policing and European history

• Anyone seeking a deeper understanding of how modern police systems evolved

A century after its original publication, Fosdick's pioneering study remains essential reading for anyone interested in the enduring challenge of balancing order, authority, liberty, and public trust. [Policing_Europe Word]

Read-Me.Org Inc. New York-Philadelphia-Australia. 2026. p172.

by Graeme Newman (Author)

In 1920, an investigator toured seventy-two American cities and concluded that the police in every one of them were failing — not from a lack of good men, but from a century of political interference, organizational chaos, and a refusal to let any competent leader keep the job long enough to matter. A hundred years later, the argument still lands.

Raymond B. Fosdick's American Police Systems was one of the most ambitious studies of policing ever produced in the Progressive Era — a firsthand, city-by-city comparison of American departments against the professional, politically insulated forces of London, Paris, and Berlin. Fosdick found American policing outmatched at nearly every turn: murder rates that dwarfed Europe's, police chiefs who rotated out with every election, civil-service rules that protected the incompetent as readily as the honest, and city after city that tore up its own police governance and started over, never once letting a good structure — or a good leader — mature.

This edition brings that argument back, rewritten for a modern reader.

This is not a facsimile reprint. Every chapter has been surveyed against Fosdick's original text — including its extensive footnotes — and rewritten fresh, in modernized prose, at roughly a fifth of the original length. The topic structure, the argument, and the great majority of Fosdick's specific facts, cases, and comparisons survive intact; the discursive, footnote-heavy academic style of 1920 does not. Readers get the substance of a landmark study without the apparatus of a century-old monograph.
A substantial new introduction places Fosdick's argument in conversation with policing today: the persistence of American police fragmentation across eighteen thousand separate agencies, the technology Fosdick could only gesture toward (national fingerprint databases, predictive policing, body-worn cameras), the surprising afterlife of "heterogeneity" as European cities have grown as demographically diverse as the American ones Fosdick once contrasted them against, the diversity of police workforces themselves in the U.S. and U.K. today, and where Fosdick's own instincts do — and don't — anticipate contemporary arguments over the scope and funding of policing.
What's inside:
- All eleven chapters of Fosdick's original argument, modernized and condensed
- A new, extensive introduction connecting the book to policing in 2026
- The original seven city police-organization charts, reproduced as images
- Modern 5x8 trade formatting with a full table of contents
Policing America, 1920-2026 is for readers of policing history, criminal justice students, and anyone following today's debates over police reform who wants to see how far back — and how little changed — those debates actually go.
A Read-Me.Org Modern Adaptation. Modernized and edited, with an introduction, by Graeme R. Newman. Based on the 1920 original by Raymond B. Fosdick.

Read-Me.Org Inc. New York-Philadelphia-Australia. 2026. p111.

By Raymond B. Fosdick

American Police Systems (1920) by Raymond B. Fosdick is a landmark study of law enforcement in the United States during the early twentieth century. Drawing on extensive research and firsthand observation, Fosdick examines the organization, responsibilities, and challenges of American police departments, comparing them with policing models in Europe. The book explores issues such as crime prevention, public order, police administration, and the evolving relationship between law enforcement and the communities they serve.

A valuable resource for historians, criminologists, and students of public administration, American Police Systems offers a fascinating snapshot of policing at a pivotal moment in American history. Its insights into reform, professionalism, and accountability remain relevant to contemporary discussions about law enforcement and public policy.

Read-Me.Org Inc. New York-Philadelphia-Australia. 2026. p.429.

Gehad Mohamed Abo El Matty Shahbo, 2Bindu Bharathi

Child abuse and neglect refers to “ any physical or mental injury, sexual abuse or exploitation, neglect or maltreatment of a child by a person who is responsible for child’s welfare, under circumstances which indicate the child’s health or welfare is harmed or threatened”(1). Physical abuse is inflicting a non-accidental physical injury upon a child. This may include burning, hitting, punching, shaking, kicking, beating, or otherwise harming a child (2). Child labor has received much international attention in recent years, as a form of child abuse that needs urgently to be brought to an end. It is perceived to hinder the rightful development of children, and particularly their education

Stephen F. Pires, Rob T. Guerette & Auzeen Shariati

Criminal groups around the world frequently rely on kidnapping for ransom (K&R) to fund and further their cause. Some case studies suggest war torn, fragile, and corrupt countries experience K&R epidemics more often. While such factors may be present in some countries experiencing K&R epidemics, it remains to be seen if these failed state factors are generalizable to all nations. To date, no research has systematically examined the conditions that might facilitate K&R epidemics. This study used a case-control design comparing countries with high rates of K&R (experimental) to countries without a K&R problem (control). Findings suggest that problem K&R countries were less secure, less peaceful, and unevenly developed in relation to social and economic indicators. Better understanding of the conditions involving K&R problems offers to improve foresight and the development of effective policy responses.

Routeledge

Lining Han and Ruben Juarez

A mechanism chooses an allocation of the resource to agents based on their reported type. We discover and describe the set of incentive compatible mechanisms when a monetary punishment to agents who misreport type is possible. This class depends on the punishment function and the probability of punishment. It expands previous char- acterizations of incentive compatible mechanisms when punishment was no available. Furthermore, when the planner has the ability to select the punishment, the minimal punishment necessary to achieve incentive compatibility and the corresponding class of first-best is provided. For any punishment, optimal mechanism for the planner are introduced.

Economics and Management School, Wuhan University 2Department of Economics, University of Hawaii

Kate Bowers, Shane Johnson, Rob T. Guerette, Lucia Summers and Suzanne Poynton

One of the most common criticisms of spatially focused policing efforts (such as Problem- Oriented Policing, police ‗crackdowns‘ or hotspots policing) is that crime will simply relocate to other times and places since the ―root causes‖ of crime were not addressed. This phenomenon— called crime displacement—has important implications for many policing projects. By far, spatial displacement (movement of crime from a treatment area to an area nearby) is the form most commonly recognized. At the extreme, widespread displacement stands to undermine the effects of geographically focused policing actions. More often, however, research suggests that crime displacement is rarely total. On the other end of the displacement continuum is the phenomenon of ‗diffusion of crime control benefits‘ (a term coined by Ron Clarke and David Weisburd in 1994). Diffusion occurs when reductions of crime (or other improvements) are achieved in areas that are close to crime prevention interventions, even though those areas were not actually targeted by the intervention itself.

Alex Sarch

Some societies used to impose liability on inanimate objects, a practice we’d now regard as silly and confused. When we punish corporations today, are we making similar mistakes? Here I consider some important sources of philosophical skepticism about imposing criminal liability on corporations, and I argue that they admit of answers, which places punishing corporations on stronger footing than punishing inanimate objects. First, I consider the eligibility challenge, which asserts that corporations are not the right kind of thing to be punished. Second, the reductionist challenge insists that corporate culpability always reduces to individual culpability. I suggest that progress can be made in addressing these challenges by asking the right law-focused questions and attending to recent developments in criminal law theory and moral philosophy.