Institutional Affiliation
Professor’s Name
Student’s Name
Date

Assignment Task
Task1 –Written Task Using at least three academic sources, explain crime and the different definitions (maximum/notional 500words) (25marks) (LOs:3)
According to the law, crime has been outlined by the laws whereby anyone who attempts to do on offense, the law has given an order of punishments to such criminals. Criminals are punished by the law using different criteria according to the offense committed. Crime has been outlined from various angles with their explanations by different scholars from time to time as follows; Sir William Blackstone, who is author of his own books, defines crimes in two different perspectives, one being that a crime is a behavior committed by a victim in violation of guidelines provided by the law. He also defines crime as the breakage of citizen’s duties and rights (Kotwasińska 2014).
Sergeant Stephen improved on Blackstone’s view on crime and defined crime as a contravention of rights that has undermined society. This happens in cases such as when a police officer decides to harass a citizen while other police watch this kind of incident for the purpose of gaining something in return instead of putting an end to such harassment.
Raffaele Garofalo expounds on crime in a sociological view as; crimes is a wrongful and dangerous behavior as it is considered by the citizens in a community because they happen to be the victims of a criminal act. In his view, he emphasizes that there are some acts that are not regarded as crimes in society, such as lack of gratitude, coldness, and cruel behaviors toward other people.
Edwin Sutherland gathers statistical views of crime as a criminal act where he defines crime as a criminal act that goes against the law of criminals. He clarifies that all the indiscipline cases within the society are not regarded as a crime until when it is published and done a forbidden act by the law. He goes ahead to define the criminal law as a code of laws formulated to govern all citizens and applied in uniformity to all groups where punishments are applied to those who go against the formulated principles of criminal law (Wall‐Parker 2019).
 	Cross and jones define crime as a valid law in which the state orders punishment of the breakers or offenders of crime. He outlines that until the law considers a person as a criminal for the offenses caused, they are not criminal. Cross and jones state that before the law makes judgments that the specific person is a criminal, it first passes through a string or sequence of events that guide the criminal rule, which is then appended in the code of criminal procedures. The procedural code of laws differs depending on the culture in which modern cultures comprise a significant set of laws that considers someone as a criminal.
Paul Tappan describes the crime as an intended reaction to breaking the criminal rules in which penalties are given to the offenders of the crime by the nation. This method is commonly used in places like India, which has established the use of the Indian penal code, the code of criminal procedure, and the Indian evidence acts, which are bound to implement and apply the law of criminal justice established for the reason of enforcing the criminal legal rules (Feeley 2016).

References 
Feeley, M. M. (2016). 2014 Paul Tappan Lecture Entrepreneurs of Punishment: How Private Contractors Made and Are Remaking the Modern Criminal Justice System–An Account of Convict Transportation and Electronic Monitoring. C.C.J.L.S. Acknowledgements, 17(3), 1-30.
Kotwasińska, A. (2014). Looking for Ghostly Crimes: Cross-Pollination of Crime and Gothic Fiction in Edith Wharton’s Mr. Jones'.
Wall‐Parker, A. (2019). Measuring white-collar crime. The Handbook of White‐Collar Crime, 32-44.

Task 2 –PowerPoint with speaker notes (approx. 5 slides) Examine how the media reported crime during the covid-19 lockdown pandemic in the U.KU.K. Your slides should include the frequency of articles and the impact this had on public perceptions. (maximum/notional 1000 words) (25marks) (LOs:4

Introduction
The unending Covid-19 epidemic has caused profound effects on communities all over the world. Healthcare systems, economic performance, mobility, physical health, mortality rates, mental well-being, and public interactions have experienced extraordinary transformation in response to the virus and efforts to control the spread of the virus. Governments around the globe have put in place strict rules on social interactions and movements to curb the spread of the pandemic. However, evidence has emerged suggesting that such dramatic alterations(lockdowns) in routine human activities have led to similarly melodramatic variations in criminal behavior. Curbs on human movement as well as interactions have been extensively deployed by both the local and nationwide governments to control the spread of the various. However, the extent to which a nation has authorized and imposed these guidelines has varied, though, in the U.K.U.K., the régime adopted a lawfully imposed stay-at-home rule for its citizens as of March 2020. However, there were expectations for these guidelines. For example, vital commercial outlets like supermarkets remained open, and only the key workers in the health care sector continued to work (Armstrong,2021). 
However, one of the positives that came out as a result of the lockdown is (thou temporary) reduction of crime rate in the United Kingdom. Figures published in September 2020 by the United Kingdom’s Office of National Statistics depicted that compared to the year 2019, in Wales as well as England, there was a significant decrease in the rate of crime at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic.  This was due to the reduction of theft offenses, mainly domestic robbery, in addition to theft of individual properties. This reflects the rise in the period that individuals spent at their homes throughout the lockdown period hence creating a decrease in chances for burglary in public places as well as the closure of the night economy (Langton,2021). 
Moreover, despite the decrease in the other form of crimes in the U.K.U.K., the media, through highlights and news together with the police, reported an increase in the number of domestic violence during the lockdown. The N.P.C.C. (National Police Chiefs Council) reported that it had seen a three percent rise in this violence (domestic violence) in the first four weeks after the lockdown was implemented, and a further increase was probable as the lockdown progressed. Although it is not like more men were becoming violent or abusers but, the women who were experiencing domestic violence were being attacked by their partners every so often. However, the police recorded an increase of nine percent of domestic-related crimes, in the period between March and June 2020, compared with the similar period in the preceding year (2019). 
Additionally, the police reported an increase of fifty-nine percent of antisocial behavior, which they believed was associated with reports about the alleged breaking of emergency laws. Implementing the lockdown laws had caused issuing of not less than three thousand and two hundred fines (Dodd,2020). Most of the penalties were issued to young people. A third of the fines were given to people aged eighteen to twenty-four, and another one-third were issued to people aged twenty-five and thirty-four. Nevertheless, the police stressed that most of the people in the United Kingdom obeyed the emergency rules.
Nearly all kinds of crimes decreased at the first lockdown in wales and England, where the only kind of crimes that were recorded was about misbehaviors such as violation of lockdown rules and drug crimes. It was conceived that the restrictions about movement made it easy for the police to arrest those who went against the law. At the start of the month of June and September 2020, when the lockdown guidelines and measures were lowered down, there became an increased rate of crimes recorded across the country at different levels but stayed under the levels of the outbreak with the main increase in misbehaviors. The police dealing with the enforcement of the law have been warned against using so much pressure on people of the wales while trying to ensure the rules about Covid-19 are maintained by the public.
The current numbers of crimes reported by the office of national statistics report that about 245,591 cases were reported at the welsh police station between 2019 and 2020, thus having a decrease of 7% of criminal cases in the previous year. The figures of fraud cases reported added up to a total of 14,845 during the period of this pandemic, while housebreaking and theft cases for the same period of the year were reportedly high with an increase of 11% in the wale’s country. Tom Kirchmaier, the director of the policing and crime group of research, reported that the most underdeveloped communities had a high number of complaints reported on crimes after the outbreak of covid-19. The cases of violence were reported mostly from poor societies, which were reported to be undermined by poverty.
Having the ability to enforce the law, the police have made reports claiming that with the availability of many wealthy people willing to help those in need, some have turned the Act of kindness into a scam business using covid-19 as a better excuse to steal from people’s accounts. A publication of fraud action had indicated that the cyber and fraud crimes in the whales have reported having a loss of 35.4 million euros, and 13,000 figures on crimes have been reported since when the lockdown was invented on March 23. The police and the representatives of health have alerted the swindlers who declare to be working for the National Health Service, aiming at those who are in urgent need of covid-19 vaccines in exchange for money.
In conclusion, covid-19 has decrease crime cases that were being reported more often before the outbreak; since the enforcement of lockdowns, many people had to spend their time at home and focus on online activities. Theft cases were highly decreased with the fact that night-time economy businesses and public places and gatherings were burnt and the only option was to stay indoors as it was reported by professor Innes, the director of crime and research security institute reporting on the call for assistance on domestic abuse on school-going children. She stated that crime had been rising for years, but due to lockdown, crime rates have been lowered since many of the people were forced to stay indoors. The media reported occurrences of crimes to the public via the news. Reports of many types of crime had reduced due to a decrease in the rate of criminal events during the lockdown.  The only recorded and reported crime rates were domestic violence and antisocial behaviors, which comprised breaking lockdown rules. However, as lockdown restrictions were lessened between June and September last year (2020), crime rates began to increase in the U.K.U.K., although it persisted underneath pre-pandemic levels.

References
 Armstrong, M. (2021). The effect of Covid-19 on crime. https://www.statista.com/chart/22763/covid-and-crime-uk/. Accessed online on 5/7/2021.
Dodd, V. (2020). Crime in the U.K.U.K. falls sharply since the start of coronavirus lockdown. The Guardian. https://www. theguardian. com/UK-news/2020/apr/15/in-Uk-falls-sharply since-start-of-coronavirus-lockdown (accessed 23 April 2020).
Langton, S., Dixon, A., & Farrell, G. (2021). Six months in pandemic crime trends in England and Wales. Crime Science, 10(1), 1-16.

Task3 –Essay - Research and explain drug culture in the U.K.U.K. and how society perceives these offenses. Explain the changes relating to drug offenses and how the treatment of offenders has changed in the last 70 years. (maximum/notional 1500words)
Introduction
Culture is the way of life of a group of people—those who share a culture share common beliefs, values, customs, traditions, and history. Just like any other culture, drug culture is the way of life of the people attached to particular drugs. Those who share a drug culture have shared rules, rituals, rites, dress-code, and language associated with a particular drug that they are using. Drug culture may attach drug use to spiritual, mental, or recreational interests. Among teenagers, the drug culture has been romanticized and made appealing such that it determines whether or not a person can be accepted among peers. Alcohol adverts do not show the negative side of alcohol but rather display young, healthy, and glamorous people drinking and enjoying life. This is a troubling issue all over the world, and it has brought problems to the efforts to eliminate illegal drug use around the continent. 
In the U.K.U.K., drug culture is growing and, if not monitored, may move from bad to worse. The strict drug laws put in place have done little if nothing to stop the recreational use of both licit and illicit drugs in the U.K.U.K. Drug use in the U.K.U.K. is mainly associated with music consumption, with the type of music that people listen to determining the type of drug that they use in their drug culture. Jazz music, for instance, is mainly associated with heroin, cannabis, and cocaine use, making pop culture and drug culture similar in many ways. Gone are the days when drug use was common during the weekends; currently, drug use in Great Britain has no timeline or timeframe. The use of drugs has extended to the workplace, where people do drugs as a recreational activity. This has led to the introduction of drug testing in workstations to ensure that workers stay sober during working hours. In 2017 alone, Great Britain witnessed 3,284 drug-related deaths, which were caused by the direct consumption of at least one illegal drug. According to the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (E.M.C.D.D.A.), the number of people dying as a result of direct drug use in Great Britain was the highest in the whole of Europe, with seventy-six deaths per million people (Mounteney et al., 2016). The most used drugs in the U.K.U.K. are opioids, powdered cocaine, benzodiazepines, ecstasy, and ketamine. Most of the drugs are used by teenagers from the age of fifteen years, while ketamine use is mainly common among adults, with cannabis being the most commonly used drug across all ages. 
Though clinical administration of cocaine, morphine, and heroin with the permission of the home office was legalized in the 19th century, various rules started emerging to monitor and moderate the clinical and non-clinical use of such drugs in the U.KU.K. For instance, the 1964 Drugs Prevention of Misuse Act made it illegal to import or possess, except under Home Office license, substances like amphetamines, chlorphentermine, pemoline, L.S.D., psilocybin, mescaline, bufotenine, and their chemically related derivatives. The Act, however, exempted registered doctors, veterinarians, pharmaceutical chemists, retail pharmacists, and people in charge of laboratories dealing with scientific research and education on drugs from the restrictions of use but not of importation of the above drugs (Philips, 1973). 
The 1965 Dangerous Drugs Act grouped different types of drugs and raised the need to control the use of some clinically administered drugs considered to be dangerous and highly addictive (Kamariah, 2019). Part I of the Act identified a number of drugs and chemical substances whose importation and exportation was subject to control. The list included drugs both in clinical use and others not administered clinically. It prohibited, except under license by the Home Office, the importation and exportation of cannabis, raw opium, coca leaves, and poppy straw. Part one, Section 5 of the Act made it an offense for inhabitants or managers of buildings to allow their premises to be associated with the smoking or sale of cannabis resin, while section 6 made it an offense, except for those licensed, to grow the cannabis plant. However, Part II of the Act exempted certain drugs from importation and exportation controls stating that the drugs were considered less harmful than those listed in Part I. Part IV of the Act laid down maximum penalties against those who go against the rules set in the Act. The proceeding Dangerous Drugs Act of 1967 made provisions for the creation of a medical tribunal to study and report cases referred to it by the Home Secretary in case they suspect a breach of the drug-use notification regulations. It also stated the circumstances under which a doctor’s authority to use, prescribe or supply drugs listed in the 1965 Act could be withdrawn by the home secretary and the withdrawal procedure (Act, 1967). 
The Misuse of Drugs Act 1971was implemented to prevent the misuse of drugs outside medical grounds. It controlled both non-medicinal and medicinal drugs. All drugs subject to this Act are referred to as controlled drugs. This Act criminalizes the unlawful supply, intent to supply, import or export, and unlawful production of the controlled drugs. This Act gives the police the authority to stop, search and detain people on suspicion that they possess controlled drugs (Bradshaw, 1971). The Misuse of Drugs Act classified controlled drugs into three categories of classes A, B, and C, where class A contains the most dangerous drugs. 
•	Class A drugs include cocaine and crack, ecstasy, heroin, L.S.D., methadone, methamphetamine (crystal meth), fresh and prepared magic mushrooms. 
•	Class B drugs include amphetamine (not methamphetamine), barbiturates, codeine, ketamine, synthetic cannabinoids such as Spice and cannabis. GBL and G.H.B., Synthetic Cannabinoid Receptor Agonists (S.C.R.A.s), all cathinone derivatives, including mephedrone, methylone, mephedrone, and MDPV.
•	Class C drugs include anabolic steroids, minor tranquilizers or benzodiazepines, khat, and BZP.
These drug classifications are still used to date and are subject to constant amendment. On November 15, 2011, the 1971 Act was amended to allow the Home Secretary to place a new psychoactive substance not already controlled as a Class A, B, or C drug but causing concerns, under temporary control by invoking a temporary class drug order (Hill et al., 2014). Offenses committed under the 1971 Act in relation to a temporary class drug are subject to 14 years’ imprisonment and an unlimited fine on indictment or 6-month imprisonment, and a £5,000 fine on summary conviction. Under this Act, maximum sentences differ according to the nature of the offense. Possession gets a relatively less sentence, whereas trafficking, production, or allowing premises to be used for producing or supplying drugs gets a higher sentence. The Sentencing also varies depending on how harmful the drug is believed to be.
The Drug Trafficking Act 1994 was created to regulate the rising number of black-market trades of illicit substances. The Act made it an offense to sell articles relating to the preparation or use of controlled drugs. The Act also allowed the seizure of income and assets of any individual found guilty of drug trafficking, even if there is no proof that the income and assets are proceeds of drug trafficking (Gordon, 1994). On January 28, 2016, the Psychoactive Substances Act received Royal Assent. The Act was implemented on May 26, 2016, and applied across the U.KU.K. According to this Act, it is an offense to offer to supply, supply, possess the intention to supply, possesses, import or export any substances intended for human consumption that are able to produce a psychoactive effect. Any engagement in the above activities will warrant a maximum sentence of seven years (Hill, 2020). The Act, however, excludes substances like caffeine, tobacco, nicotine, alcohol, food, medical products, and controlled drugs regulated by the Misuse of Drugs Act of 1971from the scope of the offense.
In 2021, offenders are convicted under the Misuse of Drugs Act of 1971, whereby anyone found in possession of a class A drug is subject to 7years imprisonment plus fine, whereas the supply of a class A drug is subject to life imprisonment plus fine. Anyone found in possession of a class B drug is subject to 5years imprisonment plus a fine, whereas the supply of a class B drug is subject to 14years imprisonment plus a fine. Anyone found in possession of a class C drug is subject to 2years imprisonment plus a fine, whereas the supply of a class C drug is subject to 14years imprisonment plus a fine. Less serious offenses are usually taken to the magistrates’ courts, where sentences cannot exceed 6months and/or a £5,000 fine, or 3months and/or a fine. Most drug offenders are convicted of unlawful possession. Although maximum penalties are severe, only around one in five people convicted of possession receive a custodial sentence, and even fewer go to prison, with the majority of fines at £50 or less (Jones, 2021). 
Amidst all these regulations, drug culture continues to pose a risk to the sanity of the British as it spreads fast and is hard to control, especially among the youth.

References

Act, D. D. (1967). Dangerous D Regulations (1968); and Dangerous Drugs Regulations (1968).
Bradshaw, S. (1971). Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. British medical journal, 4(5783), 363.
Gordon, D. R. (1994). The return of the dangerous classes: Drug prohibition and policy politics. New York: WW Norton.
Hill, R. G. (2020). Understanding the U.K.U.K. psychoactive substances act. British journal of clinical pharmacology, 86(3), 499-504.
 Hill, S. L., Harbon, S. C., Coulson, J., Cooper, G. A., Jackson, G., Lupton, D. J., ... & Thomas, S. H. (2014). Methoxetamine toxicity reported to the National Poisons Information Service: clinical characteristics and patterns of inquiries (including the period of the introduction of the U.K.'sU.K.'s first Temporary Class Drug Order). Emergency Medicine Journal, 31(1), 45-47.
 Jones, S. (2021). Criminology. Oxford University Press.
Kamariah, M. (2019). Amendments to the Dangerous Drugs Act, 1952. Journal of Malaysian and Comparative Law, 15, 131-158.
 Mounteney, J., Griffiths, P., Sedefov, R., Noor, A., Vicente, J., & Simon, R. (2016). The drug situation in Europe: an overview of data available on illicit drugs and new psychoactive substances from European monitoring in 2015. Addiction, 111(1), 34-48.
Phillips, G. F. (1973). The legal description of cannabis and related substances. Medicine, Science and the Law, 13(2), 139-142.