Paul F. Cromwell

WHO BUYS STOLEN PROPERTY? A NEW LOOK AT CRIMINAL RECEIVING

ABSTRACT This paper reports the results of field research examining the role of the nonprofessional fence in initiating and sustaining property crime. Interviews with fences, thieves, and ordinary citizens who bought stolen property were supplemented with analysis of official police records regarding the distribution of stolen property by burglars and shoplifters. Findings indicated that “direct marketing” to the ultimate consumer and to part- time and “amateur” fences is more common than previously believed. A typology of fences is developed.

How Drugs Affect Decisions by Burglars

Thirty drug-using burglars participated in reconstructions of past burglaries and were interviewed extensively over a period of 16 months. Unlike previous research with burglars, the informants were ACTIVE burglars interviewed in their own environment. The study attempted to determine whether their decision-making processes were rational and to what extent drug and alcohol use affected those decisions. Their drug use and their criminal activity were found to be inextricably interrelated. Heroin addicts were found to be more rational than previously believed and capable of controlling their drug use to a significant extent. Drug use was found to facilitate the commission of crimes for some burglars. Public policy implications are discussed.

Buying Stolen Property: An Opportunity Perspective

This study is based on findings from a self-report survey regarding participation in the crime of knowingly buying stolen property by ordinary, otherwise honest individuals. Of the sample, 17% reported having bought stolen goods in the past; 12% reported being motivated to buy stolen merchandise; another 15% were unsure whether they would buy stolen property if offered. The data support an opportunity perspective of the crime of knowingly buying stolen goods. Having previously purchased stolen property was significantly related to whether the respondent had an opportunity to buy (had been offered) and whether one was motivated (would buy if offered) to buy stolen goods.

Group effects on decision-making by burglars

30 active burglars were observed and interviewed extensively over a period of 16 months. They were asked to evaluate sites they had previously burglarized and those burglarized by others, as to their perceived vulnerability to burglary. Burglars who evaluated sites singly rated the sites more vulnerable than those same burglars when evaluating the sites in the presence of their usual co-offenders—showing a trend toward more cautious decision-making while in groups—a group polarization effect. On the other hand, self-reports indicated that burglars were more active (committed more crimes) when working as part of a group than when working alone. Their self-reported apprehension rate was 5 times greater when working in groups than when working alone, a finding which may reflect task impairment as a result of social facilitation effects.