The code of silence is a major social issue because it obstructs the work against criminal networks. It is based on the fact that members of the networks tend not to report crimes or testify, partly due to the norm of not talking to representatives of the judiciary and due to the risk of being subjected to violence. The aim of this qualitative study is to gain a deeper understanding of the code of silence as a phenomenon within criminal networks. The study is based on interviews with former members of criminal networks. Previous research has shown that legitimacy of violence does not deter members from prosecution. Members also find it difficult to leave the network due to the social relationship. The interviewees emphasize that there is a code of silence towards the police and other members. A deeply imprinted behavior persists till today. The conclusion is that the code of silence towards the police is considered to be an essential part of the network, which is maintained due to violence and learned behavior. The emotional bonds that remain towards the network are the reasons for the participants behavior still being pervaded by a code of silence. / Tystnadskultur är ett stort samhällsproblem eftersom det försvårar arbetet mot kriminella nätverk. Det baseras på att medlemmar tenderar att inte anmäla brott eller vittna, dels på grund av normen kring att inte prata med rättsväsendets representanter och dels på grund av risken att utsättas för våld om de gör det. Syftet med denna kvalitativa studie att få djupare förståelse för tystnadskulturen som fenomen inom de kriminella nätverken. Studien baseras på intervjuer med före detta medlemmar av kriminella nätverk. Tidigare forskning har visat att våldets legitimitet inte avskräcker medlemmar från lagföring och straff. Medlemmar har också svårt att lämna på grund av den sociala relationen till nätverket. Studien baseras på intervjuer med före detta medlemmar av kriminella nätverk. Intervjupersonerna betonar att det finns tystnadskultur både mot polis och andra medlemmar. Det är även ett djupt präglat beteende som finns kvar även idag. Slutsatsen är att tystnadskulturen mot polisen är viktigt för nätverkets struktur. Den upprätthålls på grund av rädsla för våldet och betraktas som ett inlärt beteende. Den emotionella relationen som finns kvar mot nätverket gör att intervjupersonernas vardagliga beteende fortfarande präglas av tystnadskulturen.

This study aims to explain the demarcations regarding which crimes that are seen as “acceptable” to commit as an police officer, and those who categorizes as “not acceptable”. The study is based on a qualitative, narrative method of semi-structured interviews. Antecedent research shows the strong subculture in the police force and the approach of seeing the police profession as a lifestyle. This study uses Erving Goffmans dramaturgic perspective on society by applying “Team”, “Front Stage and “Back Stage” to explain why the demarcations is the way it is. By studying “Front Stage” as police officers in front of the public and “Back Stage” as a closed space for the police officers, the essay intends to see how police officers, seen as a team, deal with wrongful acts made by an police officer. By using an constructed sorting model the study separated the data from ten interviewed police officers by categorizing into ways of legitimizing crimes commited by an police officer. The study aims to show understanding in why unethic and unlegal deeds by police officers are not reported, and therefore legitimized by the subculture. The conclusion of this essay is that there are two ways to legitimize wrongful acts of police officers. These two ways are by the norms “Us versus them” and the silence code. We created two concepts in combination with the use of the theories of Goffman. This paper will show how the two concepts, ”team offset” and ”team censoring”, can legitimize crimes as a part of the subculture. To be able to legitimize a wrongful act, the police officer needs to use his team. If the team can not legitimize the crime, it categorizes as “not acceptable”.