This introduction aims to position the present-day ‘liquid’ security culture in the context of cultural and political developments. Key-words in the cultural patterns in which the new ‘liquid policy’ and ‘new toughness’ is embedded are fear, precaution, late modern anomie and a social hypochondria towards everything that deviates from one’s ‘own’ culture and identity. These cultural phenomena have been translated in political terms, that are divided into neoliberal and neoconservative tendencies. The neoliberal turn in safety politics have resulted in a depoliticisation of democratic decision making, a desolidarisation of ideas on community safety and a deregulation of safety policies. Neoconservative tendencies are reflected in a resentment towards ‘the elites’, ‘the underclass’ and foreigners and a punitive populism, in which claims for stiffer sentences are continuously swept up, regardless of the effect they may have.

Measures to combat international crime include customer identity controls by banks and repressive measures against informal money transfer systems. While there is debate surrounding the latter strategy, customer identity controls are largely taken for granted in the Netherlands. The author argues that these controls can negatively affect migrants. Moreover, exclusion of migrants from regulated banking systems has development implications. Phone-based remittances, that are linked to the regulated banking system, could serve as an alternative for informal transfer systems. Too stringent identity controls in host countries seem to prevent this however. The author recommends that controls focus on the amount being transferred, rather than on the person making the transfer.

Immigration detention is formally not a punishment, but governments do seem to use it to deter irregular migrants from staying in the territory. This study explores whether and how practices of immigration detention in the Netherlands affect detainees’ decision-making processes regarding return and result in ‘specific deterrence’. 81 unauthorized irregular migrants were interviewed in immigration detention and their casefiles were examined. We find evidence for a limited deterrence effect: a minority of the respondents indeed wanted to return to their countries of origin in order to end their (repeated) stay in immigration detention. For some respondents the detention experience contributed to a desire to migrate from the Netherlands to a different European country. We go into the relevance of these findings for the continuing societal debate on the use of immigration detention.

This article reflects on some of the qualities and strengths, as well as some potential weaknesses, of a research methodology used to study ‘hard-to-reach’ groups, such as the undocumented. This approach, known as the PEER (Participatory Ethnographic Evaluation and Research) approach, is introduced in terms of its key elements of trust, anonymity, in-depth data and flexibility. Its suitability for sensitive, or ‘liminal’ research issues, involving groups of vulnerable informants, is explained. The method is based on relations of trust, which are maintained through anonymity in data collection, and extend from social researchers to informants, through the intermediation of trained community-based peer researchers. It is they who interview others in their own social networks; since trust is the key ingredient in making this ethically-informed methodology work well, trust must be invested also in the peer researchers, who form part of the research team.

On the basis of article 1F Refugee Convention alleged perpetrators of serious crimes can be excluded from refugee protection. Under certain circumstances this exclusion can be regarded a unique type of contemporary banishment and branding. The rationale to exclude is primarily motivated by moral arguments, rather than security related arguments. In case Dutch government cannot deport the excluded persons, the exclusion is not limited to a certain place but (de facto) universal in nature. When the banished alleged perpetrators are declared undesirable aliens they are ‘branded’ as actual perpetrators.

The current phase in which Dutch government increasingly criminalizes the illegal residence of migrants is simultaneously characterized by decreasing numbers of illegal migrants in this country. In the process of crimmigration, some newly developed policies indirectly influence daily lives of specific groups of illegal migrants while other policies and laws more directly try to hinder illegal stay. These policies that aim to exclude and ban illegal migrants are continued even though they are increasingly criticized by academics and divergent (inter)national actors. These policies and laws can be contradictory, sometimes conflict with international treaties, and lead to unforeseen and undesirable outcomes in which human dignity is challenged.

David Brotherton – professor of Sociology at John Jay College of the City University of New York – was named Critical Criminologist of the year in 2011 and is known for his work on the Almighty Latin King and Queen Nation and his research on Dominican deportees. By using excerpts of a lengthy interview with Brotherton, a personal and detailed account is presented which sheds light on the roots of his work, his (scientific) influences and especially his highly engaged methods of critical ethnography.

This column reacts to the use of the word ‘Djuka’ (spelled variously) for the Suriname Maroons. This word, although derived from the perfectly respectable tribal name of Ndyuka, is widely considered today as a term of abuse and interpreted to mean ‘shit of the Jews’. It has therefore become unusable in serious literature.

This article discusses David van Reybrouck’s history of Congo. The focus is on violence and there is special attention for the period of the Congo Free State, 1885-1908, under king Leopold. A comparison is made between Van Reybrouck’s views and those of Adam Hochchild. It is concluded that the former passes a milder judgment on the actions of Leopold’s troops than the latter, while he also presents a more diversified account. Both authors, however, reject the label of genocide for Leopold’s ‘rubber terror’. The article concludes with some reflections on the concept of genocide, proposing to replace it with organized murder.

Biographies of ‘criminals’ are an immensely popular genre. As ‘true crime’ stories they are generally found on the shelves of fiction literature. In this article the authors examine their cultural criminological significance. First, they examine what makes a ‘good’ biography, analyse how biographical material is used in the work of people like Robert Park and his Chicago School, Michel Foucault and Pierre Bourdieu and indeed historians. Then the authors list different traditions of criminal biographies. They conclude by arguing that ‘good biographies’, i.e. biographies that are both sufficiently emic and offer enough context information, have a lot to offer, because they show ‘the other side’ of criminology, provide information that cannot be obtained through strictly scientific methods and counter the reductionist images prevailing in the discipline.

In his first book Knock-out from 2009, Rein Gerritsen tells his story of how easy it is to end up on the wrong path. Conversely, in the second part of his autobiography, 13 accidents, he explains how hard it is as an ex-convict to stay on the right track. This goes to show that there is much truth in what they say: ‘The real punishment only starts after you’re out.’ This article is an excerpted pre-publication from 13 accidents.

In biographies a structure perspective is common to place the key person in a context of time and place. Apart from opportunities and obstacles, also cultural frames for interpretation vary with context. In this article a second, interaction perspective is added. This can best be applied if the key person cooperates in the research and if an emic approach is used. A recent life history of Jan Hoolwerf demonstrates how the key person comes to various presentations of self that can be understood as poses that fit specific settings.

The central question of this article is whether biographies can be a source for criminological research on white-collar crime and how they can contribute to the explanation of white-collar crime. To answer this question, 35 Dutch biographies were studied. Following the legal ambiguities of white-collar crime, not all of these biographies are about criminal offences. And following the dominant anthropomorphic approach to corporate crime, some of these are corporate biographies. Many biographies confirm current criminological explanations of the causation of white-collar crime. Yet, biographies also offer additional insights, for instance about the causal relevance of the private life of white-collar offenders.

This article analyses a criminal family. It is not the individual, but the family as a social entity that is central to this approach. The Van D.’s are a family of eleven brothers with a collective history of crime. Raised with anti-authoritarian norms, violence, alcohol and a strong sense of loyalty, they were known as an ‘army of brothers’ dominating the streets of H-town. The criminal family as object of study proves valuable in understanding the influence of contextual factors, subculture, and stigmatization. In the case of the Van D.’s, blood ties create cohesion and conflict at the same time.

Most biographies on criminals have been written by journalists. Dutch writer and former journalist Sytze van der Zee wrote portraits of two serial killers. In order to reconstruct the criminal facts and the police investigations in both cases, he collected data by gathering as much documents as possible, and by interviewing the main characters. For the second biography, he had many conversations with the serial killer. In this interview, Sytze van der Zee tells about his motivation to write these books, the research methods he used, the reliability of the collected information, and his experiences while researching.