John Gotti’s criminal development Essay Example

interacted with such criminals as Siegel, Reles and Gurino. Under the mentorship of such older gang members, Gotti and one of his friends, Angelo Ruggiero became members of the Fulton-Rockaway Boys street gang.

As the culture of gangs is, Gotti with the members of the street gang would battle against New Lots Boys and Liberty Park Tots. Membership to this street gang would influence him to abandon school. It should be noted that Gotti had joined street gang before he had even reached twelve years old. A robbery in 1954 led Gotti to be hospitalized as his toes got crushed during the robbery. Even after going through such an ordeal, Gotti came back to the street gang and in the same year (at eighth grade), he was suspended from school.

In fact his teachers considered him as “a disturbing distraction”, and “they showed little concern over his absence” (Landers, 2008, p 1). At the age of sixteen, Gotti had decided to quit school and was officially endorsed in Fulton-Rockaway Boys gang. The street gang was renowned for its involvement in serious criminal activities compared to other street gangs. These included stealing automobiles and rolling drunks among others crimes. Gotti became a leader of the street gang mainly due to his reputation of being “tough and smart…like a general” (Daly, 1986, p 30).

John Gotti’s criminal behavior can best be explained by Sutherland’s differential association theory. According to the differential association theory, a person develops deviant behavior due to being excessively exposed to environments that promote deviance and being less exposed to conditions that promote law enforcement (Gordon, 2010). In essence, no one

is born as a criminal and instead delinquent behaviors are learnt due to interactions with delinquent persons. Gotti’s criminal behavior was determined by his continual interaction with deviant persons.

Gotti first encountered members of a gang when he was in fourth grade when they moved to Brooklyn. Interactions with the Santoro brothers may have initiated Gotti’s criminal behavior. It is notable that Gotti’s interaction with the Santoro brothers was short-lived (about 2 years only) and the family moved to Brownsville. As such, there was not excessive influence and in fact there is no recorded criminal activity. Instead, the stern teacher’s influence made Gotti come out as a well performing pupil meaning that exposure to law enforcement influences shaped him to be a law keeper.

Differential association theory disregards criminal behavior as an inheritable trait. Instead, delinquency is learnt. This is in tandem with Gotti’s criminal behavior where no criminal behavior is recorded along his family line. In any case, Gotti’s brothers who were in criminal activities had learnt the criminal behaviors in the same way Gotti learnt (Landers, 2008). Gotti’s intimate communications and involvement with Fulton-Rockaway Boys was principal to his learning of criminal behavior as per Sutherland’s differential association theory.

In this group, Gotti learnt minor techniques for carrying out criminal behaviors. From moving errands for the gang to rolling drunks, Gotti was equipping himself for greater crimes. This is an important aspect of learning delinquency. Merton’s theory of anomie describes Gotti’s behavior only to a small extent. According to Merton, cultural socialization is the most important determinant of human needs. As such, the cultures that accentuate material goals influence the

people to strive to succeed economically.

Merton’s theory of anomie highlights the American society which is mainly driven by the American Dream of success. The American dream has created a materialistic society which strives by all means to achieve material success. Material success being the end, Merton questions the means by which the end is achieved. Some means are legitimate whereas others are illegitimate (Siegel, 2008). Merton’s theory of anomie does not seem to explain deviant behavior from an individual’s perspective since the culture of a society is considered to be the main influence of the people’s means of achieving the goals.

Gotti’s criminal development does not seem to be influenced by the desire to achieve the American Dream. Perhaps this is only in the latter years of Gotti’s career when he rose as the leader of the Gambino crime family (Daly, 1968). At this point of his career, he was seeking to lead a life of affluence, influence and popularity as largely defined by the American Dream (Schnell, 2010). He even seemed to love much publicity from the media due to his wealthy lifestyle. His early years in crime however are best explained by Sutherland’s differential association theory.

He was not moved by the need to be considered affluent but mainly due to the influence of fellow gang members and the gang environment in the neighborhood. Even though Gotti was brought up in a relatively poor family, the family seemed to move to a better life with every movement. Nevertheless, every movement seemed to expose Gotti to an environment with higher order crime thus giving Sutherland’s theory more weight in explaining

Gotti’s criminal development. Conclusion Criminal behavior can be explained by a variety of theories. Sutherland’s theory of differential dissociation is the best theory to explain John Gotti’s criminal development.

Gotti was brought up in an environment that exposed him to more of deviance than non-deviance life thus encouraging criminal development. The latter years of Gotti’s criminal behavior were mainly influenced by a desire to be affluent and achieve a respectable social status. As such, Merton’s theory of anomie describes Gotti’s affluence as a gang leader. He seemed to be influenced by the need to achieve the American Dream than how much the environment had shaped him. Overall, Gotti’s criminal development is best described by Sutherland’s theory of differential association.