Making Sense of 'Joint Enterprise' for Murder : Legal Legitimacy or Instrumental Acquiescence? / Hulley, Susie; Crewe, Ben; Wright, Serena.

In: British Journal of Criminology, Vol. 59, No. 6, 11.2019, p. 1328–1346.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Making Sense of 'Joint Enterprise' for Murder : Legal Legitimacy or Instrumental Acquiescence? / Hulley, Susie; Crewe, Ben; Wright, Serena.

In: British Journal of Criminology, Vol. 59, No. 6, 11.2019, p. 1328–1346.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

Hulley, S, Crewe, B & Wright, S 2019, 'Making Sense of 'Joint Enterprise' for Murder: Legal Legitimacy or Instrumental Acquiescence?', British Journal of Criminology, vol. 59, no. 6, pp. 1328–1346. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azz034

APA

Vancouver

Author

Hulley, Susie ; Crewe, Ben ; Wright, Serena. / Making Sense of 'Joint Enterprise' for Murder : Legal Legitimacy or Instrumental Acquiescence?. In: British Journal of Criminology. 2019 ; Vol. 59, No. 6. pp. 1328–1346.

BibTeX

@article{3eca81ce2eda498196e3ee00b562f897,
title = "Making Sense of 'Joint Enterprise' for Murder: Legal Legitimacy or Instrumental Acquiescence?",
abstract = "The legal doctrine of {\textquoteleft}joint enterprise{\textquoteright} has been heavily criticised for lacking legitimacy, primarily linked to distributive (in)justice. This paper draws on the narratives of {\textquoteleft}joint enterprise prisoners{\textquoteright} serving long life sentences for murder, to address such concerns and extend the discussion to questions of {\textquoteleft}legal legitimacy{\textquoteright}. Such prisoners who were early in their sentences explicitly rejected the legal legitimacy of joint enterprise, while those at a later stage reported {\textquoteleft}accepting{\textquoteright} their conviction and demonstrated {\textquoteleft}consent{\textquoteright} by engaging with their sentence. We argue that, rather than representing normative acceptance of the legal legitimacy of joint enterprise over time, this acceptance is a form of instrumental acquiescence associated with {\textquoteleft}dull compulsion{\textquoteright} (Carrabine 2004: 180), {\textquoteleft}coping acceptance{\textquoteright} (Schinkel 2014:72) and personal meaning making.",
keywords = "Joint enterprise , legal legitimacy, legitimacy, meaning making ",
author = "Susie Hulley and Ben Crewe and Serena Wright",
year = "2019",
month = nov,
doi = "10.1093/bjc/azz034",
language = "English",
volume = "59",
pages = "1328–1346",
journal = "British Journal of Criminology",
issn = "0007-0955",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "6",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Making Sense of 'Joint Enterprise' for Murder

T2 - Legal Legitimacy or Instrumental Acquiescence?

AU - Hulley, Susie

AU - Crewe, Ben

AU - Wright, Serena

PY - 2019/11

Y1 - 2019/11

N2 - The legal doctrine of ‘joint enterprise’ has been heavily criticised for lacking legitimacy, primarily linked to distributive (in)justice. This paper draws on the narratives of ‘joint enterprise prisoners’ serving long life sentences for murder, to address such concerns and extend the discussion to questions of ‘legal legitimacy’. Such prisoners who were early in their sentences explicitly rejected the legal legitimacy of joint enterprise, while those at a later stage reported ‘accepting’ their conviction and demonstrated ‘consent’ by engaging with their sentence. We argue that, rather than representing normative acceptance of the legal legitimacy of joint enterprise over time, this acceptance is a form of instrumental acquiescence associated with ‘dull compulsion’ (Carrabine 2004: 180), ‘coping acceptance’ (Schinkel 2014:72) and personal meaning making.

AB - The legal doctrine of ‘joint enterprise’ has been heavily criticised for lacking legitimacy, primarily linked to distributive (in)justice. This paper draws on the narratives of ‘joint enterprise prisoners’ serving long life sentences for murder, to address such concerns and extend the discussion to questions of ‘legal legitimacy’. Such prisoners who were early in their sentences explicitly rejected the legal legitimacy of joint enterprise, while those at a later stage reported ‘accepting’ their conviction and demonstrated ‘consent’ by engaging with their sentence. We argue that, rather than representing normative acceptance of the legal legitimacy of joint enterprise over time, this acceptance is a form of instrumental acquiescence associated with ‘dull compulsion’ (Carrabine 2004: 180), ‘coping acceptance’ (Schinkel 2014:72) and personal meaning making.

KW - Joint enterprise

KW - legal legitimacy

KW - legitimacy

KW - meaning making

U2 - 10.1093/bjc/azz034

DO - 10.1093/bjc/azz034

M3 - Article

VL - 59

SP - 1328

EP - 1346

JO - British Journal of Criminology

JF - British Journal of Criminology

SN - 0007-0955

IS - 6

ER -