Can Making It Harder to Convict Criminals Ever Reduce Crime?

22 Pages Posted: 31 Aug 2014 Last revised: 11 Mar 2015

See all articles by Derek Pyne

Derek Pyne

Thompson Rivers University - School of Business and Economics

Date Written: January 2004

Abstract

This paper attempts to find the optimal level of the burden of proof needed in criminal cases in order to minimize crime. It also aims to provide an explanation for the higher burden of proof required in criminal cases than civil cases. It assumes that police officers receive incentive payments for convictions in cases they investigate. Although the direct effect of a higher burden of proof requirement is to reduce the probability of conviction, the indirect effect is to force police officers to build stronger cases and put more effort into finding suspects who are more likely to be guilty. Moreover, the increase in the marginal probability of conviction potential criminals face when they actually commit a crime increases. These factors imply that a reduction in the burden of proof will not necessarily reduce crime.

Keywords: crime, incentives, law enforcement

JEL Classification: K4

Suggested Citation

Pyne, Derek, Can Making It Harder to Convict Criminals Ever Reduce Crime? (January 2004). European Journal of Law and Economics, Vol. 18, No. 2, 2004, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2481277

Derek Pyne (Contact Author)

Thompson Rivers University - School of Business and Economics ( email )

900 McGill Road
Kamloops, British Columbia V2C 0C8
Canada

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
7
Abstract Views
293
PlumX Metrics