White Collar White Collar offender Name Class Date Professor White Collar Offender The white collar offender refers to a criminal that commits a crime while fulfilling a professional position in society. The white collar criminal hides behind a mask of legitimacy and uses their position to commit their crimes. White collars crimes have been around for as long as street crime but they have become far more prevalent in recent years due to advances in technology. These fraudulent employees will take advantage of weaknesses in the operations or they manipulate the system in order to commit crimes. These types of offenders are able to get away with their crimes because they will take steps to disguise their illegal behavior. White collar offenders have particular characteristics that differentiate them from the common street criminals. First these criminals appear to be intelligent and even hard working employees that in fact are manipulating the people in their environment in order to get away with their crimes. They may manipulate the books or collect revenue that should go back into the organization but there crimes will be masked making it harder for them to be detected by the organization (FBI, 2012). These criminals do not see themselves as criminals. Instead these criminals believe that they are merely using the system to their advantage and do not create victims like the street criminal. White-collar criminals do not commit the crime because of their social status, or because they are impoverished, but because they have the opportunity (Minnaar, 2014). These criminals are extremely calculated and do not wish o be caught. These criminals can come from all types of backgrounds and need only have the lack of morals needed to commit a crime. If there are plenty of checks and balances in place to prevent the crime it will make it are more difficult for the white collar offender to commit the crimes. These offenders take advantage of any opportunity to commit a fraud for financial gain. Another characteristic of the white collar criminal is they are all greedy. The fact they want access to money or something valuable is what driving them to commit the crime. Some of these criminals will just skim small amounts of money they believe will never be detected by the company while others will establish large and complex crimes, such as the Bernie Madoff scandal, where millions of dollars was stolen from clients. The white collar criminal has one goal in mind and that is to line their pocket with money even if this means destroying the company or creating hundreds of victims. Another characteristic is the status of the criminal. The street criminal is generally poor or from down trodden circumstances while the while collar offender is usually someone with higher social standing. This does not means they are someone powerful in society even though some are, it means these individuals have take.

1. White Collar
White Collar offender
Name
Class
Date
Professor
White Collar Offender
The white collar offender refers to a criminal that commits
a crime while fulfilling a professional position in society. The
white collar criminal hides behind a mask of legitimacy and
uses their position to commit their crimes. White collars crimes
have been around for as long as street crime but they have
become far more prevalent in recent years due to advances in

2. technology. These fraudulent employees will take advantage of
weaknesses in the operations or they manipulate the system in
order to commit crimes. These types of offenders are able to get
away with their crimes because they will take steps to disguise
their illegal behavior.
White collar offenders have particular characteristics that
differentiate them from the common street criminals. First these
criminals appear to be intelligent and even hard working
employees that in fact are manipulating the people in their
environment in order to get away with their crimes. They may
manipulate the books or collect revenue that should go back
into the organization but there crimes will be masked making it
harder for them to be detected by the organization (FBI, 2012).
These criminals do not see themselves as criminals. Instead
these criminals believe that they are merely using the system to
their advantage and do not create victims like the street
criminal.
White-collar criminals do not commit the crime because of
their social status, or because they are impoverished, but
because they have the opportunity (Minnaar, 2014). These
criminals are extremely calculated and do not wish o be caught.
These criminals can come from all types of backgrounds and
need only have the lack of morals needed to commit a crime. If
there are plenty of checks and balances in place to prevent the
crime it will make it are more difficult for the white collar
offender to commit the crimes. These offenders take advantage
of any opportunity to commit a fraud for financial gain.
Another characteristic of the white collar criminal is they
are all greedy. The fact they want access to money or something
valuable is what driving them to commit the crime. Some of
these criminals will just skim small amounts of money they
believe will never be detected by the company while others will
establish large and complex crimes, such as the Bernie Madoff
scandal, where millions of dollars was stolen from clients. The
white collar criminal has one goal in mind and that is to line
their pocket with money even if this means destroying the

3. company or creating hundreds of victims.
Another characteristic is the status of the criminal. The
street criminal is generally poor or from down trodden
circumstances while the while collar offender is usually
someone with higher social standing. This does not means they
are someone powerful in society even though some are, it means
these individuals have taken advantage of a position they hold
in society, from a secretary to the CEO of the company. These
criminals get away with their crimes more than they street
criminal even when caught. The white collar criminal uses their
job or other position in society to commit a crime (Price, 2009).
Many of these crimes are ignored by the organization instead of
having the employee arrested and creating a sandal or the
business
Another characteristic of the white collar criminal involves
economic factors. The pressure on individuals to obtain greater
economic wealth is very strong and people will cross the barrier
between the legal and the illegal to perform according to social
norms (Minnaar, 2014). When someone is experiencing
financial strain and there is an opportunity to commit crime this
temptation can be too great. Lastly relative deprivation has been
cited as a cause for white collar crime. This means the offender
commits the crime in order to reach the standing in society they
believe they deserve and are being denied. In other words if the
white collar offender believes they should have gotten a
promotion that comes with a raise, they may justify any frauds
by saying they deserve the money.
White collar offenders are just as harmful to society as
street offenders creating victims who suffer economic loss.
These offenders do not appear to be criminals because they hide
their criminal actions behind a legitimate position in society. In
order to prevent white collar crimes the organization must put
into place the appropriate protections to ensure these offenders
cannot commit these types of crimes and when they do they are
charged for their crimes.

4. References
FBI. (2012). White Collar Crimes. Retrieved July 14, 2014 from
http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/wcc
Minnaar, J. (2014). Profile of a White Criminal offender.
Retrieved July 14, 2014 from
http://www.ethicsa.org.za/index.php?page=preventingwhitecolla
rcrimeprofile
Price, M. (2009). White Collar Crime: Corporate and Securities
and Commonalities Fruad.
Journal American Academy Psychiatry Law 37(4):538-544
Voluntary statement
Voluntary Statement and a Custodial Interrogation
Name
Class
Date

5. Professor
Voluntary Statement and a Custodial Interrogation
In order for police to develop information on a crime they
will need to conduct interviews with witnesses of the crimes
and potential suspects. Police officers conducting the interviews
with criminal suspects must tread carefully to avoid violating
their due process rights but interviews with witnesses do not
have the same due process protections. When police interview
suspects, while in custody, they must first warn them of their
right to remain silent and right to have an attorney present
during any questioning. The voluntary statement is given to
police freely by the suspect.
Statements given by suspects can become pivotal to the
court case. Because criminal suspects have due process rights
how these statements are collected becomes vey important in
the criminal investigation and the court process. The voluntary
statement is just that, voluntary but that does not always mean it
will be used in the criminal investigation. When statements are
collected illegally they will be excluded from the court process.
When statements are collected legally they become important
and valuable pieces of evidence that can be used against the
criminal suspect in the court of law.
Prior to the 1960’s police would force, coerce, or illegally
collect statements and confessions from suspects during
questioning despite the Fourth Amendment protection rights of

6. the citizen. As a result many people went to jail on illegal
evidence. In order to resolve this problem the Supreme Court
ruled in the case of Miranda vs. Arizona that police could no
longer collect statements from suspects without first warning
them of their due process right to remain silent and to have an
attorney present during any questioning (Klein, 2001). These
rights are afforded in the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.
The case of Miranda vs. Arizona involved criminal suspect
being charged and convicted of rape after police illegally
obtained his confession. Police were obligated due to a previous
ruling in Escobedo vs. Illinois to warn criminal suspects of their
right to an attorney before any questioning (Klein, 2001). Police
failed to warn suspect Miranda of this right and when the case
went in front of the Supreme Court the court further ruled
police must also warn suspects of their right to remain silent.
As a result the Miranda Warning developed which I a
requirement for police to warn a suspect of their rights while
being questioned. Failure to warn the suspect can result in the
statement being thrown out of court.
Now the voluntary statement is a little trickier than the
custodial statement. Even if a statement is given voluntarily by
the suspect it will not always be considered legally obtained. In
order for a voluntary statement to be legal it must be given
freely without any coercion by police. If a statement is given
spontaneously without any questioning by police once a suspect
has been taken into custody that statement is considered legal.
In the case of Tuttle vs. People the court ruled a statement, to
be voluntary, must proceed from the spontaneous suggestion of
a party's own mind, free from the influence of any extraneous,
disturbing cause (Kluwer, 2010).
A voluntary statement can become a custodial interrogation
if police follow up the statement with questions without first
giving the suspect their Miranda Warning. When police arrest
suspects for a crime they immediately give the Miranda
Warning in the event they make a statement. When this does not
happen and a voluntary statement is made the police officer

7. must follow up this voluntary statement with a Miranda
Warning to protect any further admissions made by the criminal
suspect. For example if a suspect runs up to a police officer and
says “I shot the intruder when he broke into my house”. This
statement is voluntary because it was spontaneous.
The custodial interrogation is different from questioning a
suspect that is not in police custody. In other words a police
officer can suspect a person is responsible for a crime and
question them. The Miranda Warning is not required until the
suspect is being placed in the custody of police whether by
arresting the suspect or by questioning the suspect at police
headquarters in a interrogation room. If the criminal suspect
believes they are in the custody of police they must be given a
Miranda Warning. When criminal suspects are not warned by
police of their rights it can result in the evidence being
excluded based on the Exclusionary Rule.
The Exclusionary Rule is the result of a ruling in the case of
Weeks vs. United States where the Supreme Court found any
confession or evidence obtained illegally by police would be
excluded as evidence in the court process (Kluwer, 2010). After
the ruling in Miranda the Exclusionary Rule was applied to the
custodial interrogation and the voluntary stamen ruled illegal.
Later in the case of Silverthorne Lumber Co. vs. United States
the court also rules any evidence obtained from the illegal
interrogation will also be subject to the Exclusionary Rule
based on the “Fruit of the Poisonous Tree” doctrine.
The custodial interrogation and the voluntary statement are
both statements provided to police by suspects. Both statements
are constitutionally protected but the voluntary statements will
only be excluded by the court process if obtained illegally.
Custodial interrogations cannot be conducted without a Miranda
Warning first being given to the suspect while voluntary
statements can be freely given and used against the suspect in a
court of law. The statements given by suspects can be essential
to the court case so it is important that police are careful to give
the appropriate warnings to protect this evidence.

8. References
Klein, S. (2001). "Miranda's Exceptions in a Post-Dickerson
World." Journal of Criminal Law
and Criminology 2(1): 567–96
Kluwer, W. (2010). The Exclusionary rule. Retrieved July 14,
2014 from
https://www.inkling.com/read/wolters-kluwer-mbe-bar-
prep/mbe-criminal-law-and-procedure/