CHAPTER 5

VICTIMOLOGY: AN INTRODUCTION, VICTIMS AND VICTIMIZATION

Learning Objectives
At the end of this chapter, the student will be able to:
Discuss victimology as a specialized study of criminology;
Present the concept of victims and victimization; and
Discuss the various typologies of victims.

An Introduction
Different scholars have noted that although classical writers of Criminology have
written about 'victims' dating back to the 18th Century, it was only through the seminal
work, "A New Branch of Bio- Psycho-Social Science, Victimology (1956), of Benjamin
Mendelsohn that victimology' as a separate academic discipline came into being. Thus,
Mendelsohn is credited to be the father of victimology (Doerner and Lab, 2017).
Mendelsohn was genuinely interested in the dynamics that existed between the victim
and the offender. In preparing for a case, Mendelsohn, a lawyer, would ask victims,
witnesses and even bystanders with knowledge of a case he is working on to answer a
questionnaire.

Critical Dates in Victimology

1924 Edwin Sutherland includes a chapter on victims in his criminology textbook.

1937 Benjamin Mendelsohn publishes his writings on the rapist and his victim.

1941 Hans von Hentig publishes articles on victim and criminal interactions.

1947 Benjamin Mendelsohn coins the term "victimology" in a French journal

1948 Hans von Hentig publishes his book The Criminal and His Victim.

1949 Frederic Wertham first used the word "victimology" in a book "Show of Violence.

1957 Margery Fry proposes victim compensation in the London Times,

1963 Marvin Wolfgang studies homicide victims; uses the term "victim precipitation"

1958 New Zealand enacts the first Criminal Compensation Act

1965 California is the first state in the USA to start Victim Compensation

1966 Japan enacts Criminal Indemnity Law

1966 USA starts to survey crime victims not reported to the police

1967 Canada creates a Criminal Compensation Injuries Act as does Cuba and Switzerland

1968 Stephan Schafer writes the first victimology textbook The Victim and His Criminal
1972 The first three victim assistance programmes are created in St. Louis, Missouri, San
Francisco, California and in Washington, D. C

1973 The first international symposium on victimology is held in Jerusalem, Israel.

1974 The first police-based victim advocate project was started in Fort Lauderdale, Florida,
USA.

1975 The first "Victim Rights' Week" is organized by the Philadelphia District Attorney,
Pennsylvania, USA.

1976 John Dussich launches the National Organization of Victim Assistance (NOVA) in
Fresno, California, USA

1976 Emilio Viano launches the first scholarly journal devoted to victimology

1976 James Rowland creates the first Victim Impact Statement in Fresno, California, USA

1979 The World Society of Victimology is founded in Munster, Germany

1980 Mothers Against Drunk Drivers (MADD) is founded by Candi Lightner after one of her
twin daughters was killed by a drunk driver who was a repeat offender

1981 President Ronald Reagan proclaims the first national Victims' Rights Week in April

1982 The first Victim Impact Panel established by MADD to educate drunk drivers about
how their victims suffered, started in Rutland, Massachusetts, USA.

1984 The Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) establishes the national Crime Victims Fund from
federal crime fines to pay for state victim compensation and services.

1985 The United Nations unanimously adopts the Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice
for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power.

1987 The US Department of Justice opens the National Victims Resource Centre in
Rockville, Maryland.

1988 The first "Indian Nations: Justice for Victims of Crime" conference is held by the Office
for Victims of Crime in Rapid City, South Dakota, USA.

1990 The European Forum for Victim Services was founded by all the national
organizations in Europe working for victims of crime in consultative status with the
Council of Europe and the UN.

1999 The United Nations and the US Office for Victims of Crime publish the Guide for
Policymakers on the Implementation of the United Nations Declaration of Basic
Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power and the Handbook on
Justice for Victims: On the Use and Application of the United Nations Declaration of
Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power

2002 On 11 April, 66 the Rome Statute was ratified & went into force on 1 July at which
time the International Criminal Court became effective and it included the creation of a
 Victim and Witness Unit.

2003 On October 2nd the Tokiwa International Victimology Institute, in Mito Japan opened
its doors to promote victim rights, to conduct seminars, courses, publish an
international journal, and host annual symposia and lectures and research about
victimology.

2004 The World Society of Victimology at its annual Executive Committee meeting in
Orlando, Florida adopts a dramatic new strategic plan to commit itself to the ideals
and promises of the UN Declaration

2005 Japan puts the UN Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of
Power into their national legislation by adopting a new fundamental law for crime
victims. To ensure that the principles would be initiated, the Prime Minister
established a cabinet level committee. The new law includes services for victims,
restitution from the offender, information about criminal justice and a right to formally
participate in the criminal justice process.

Victims and Victimization

There are a number of definitions of what constitutes a victim, the UN Declaration
on Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of power the victim" are
"persons who, individually or collectively, have suffered harm including physical Injury,
emotional suffering, financial or economic loss or substantial impairment of their
fundamental rights, through conducts that are criminalized by national laws or through
other behaviors that are not criminalized by national laws but violate internationally
recognized norms of human rights and as such they are internationally criminalized"
(The UN Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of
Power. Retrieved from: https://www. unodc.org/pdf/criminal justice/UNODC Handbook
on Justice for victims.pdf. Accessed on December 12, 2019).

The said UN Declaration underscored some basic principles that can be summarized
into the following: a. access to justice and fair treatment; b. restitution; c. compensation;
and d. assistance.

A. Access to justice and fair treatment

It states that victims should be addressed with respect and
compassion to provide them the dignity that should be afforded to
them. They should be allowed access to judicial mechanisms as well as
prompt redress. These mechanisms should be written through a national
legislation, for the harm that they've suffered. Additionally, administrative
and judicial mechanisms should be established and strengthened where
needed to enable victims to get redress through informal or formal
procedures that are actually accessible, inexpensive, fair, and
expeditious. Victims must be informed of the rights in seeking redress
through such mechanisms. The responsiveness of administrative and
judicial processes to the needs of victims should be facilitated by: (one)
Informing victims of the their role and the scope, progress and timing of
the proceedings and of the disposition of their cases, especially where
serious crimes are actually involved and where they've requested such
info; (two) allowing the views and concerns of victims to be presented and
 considered at appropriate stages of the proceedings where the personal
interests of theirs are actually affected, with no prejudice to the accused
and consistent with the relevant national criminal justice system; (three)
providing proper assistance to victims throughout the legal process; (four)
taking measures to minimize inconvenience to victims, protect the privacy
of theirs, when necessary, and ensure their safety, as well as that of their
witnesses and families on the behalf of theirs, from retaliation and
intimidation; (five) staying away from unnecessary delay in the disposition
of cases as well as the execution of orders or perhaps decrees granting
awards to victims. Informal mechanisms for the resolution of disputes,
including mediation, arbitration and indigenous practices or customary
justice, should be utilized where appropriate to facilitate redress and
conciliation for victims.

B. Restitution
Offenders and criminals should be held accountable for their
behavior, and where appropriate, should provide reasonable
restitution to their victims, their dependents or families. Such
restitution could include the return of property or compensation for the
loss that the victims have suffered. This must also include reimbursement
of expenses incurred as an outcome of the victimization, the provision of
services and also the restoration of rights. Governments must examine
their practices, laws and regulations to consider restitution as an
accessible sentencing alternative in criminal cases, additionally to many
other criminal sanctions. In cases of substantial injury to the ecosystem,
restitution, if purchased, should include, as much as you possibly can,
restoration of the environment, reconstruction of the infrastructure,
replacement of community services and also reimbursement of the
expenses of relocation, each time some damage leads to the dislocation
of a neighborhood. Anywhere other agents or public officials acting in a
quasi-official or official capacity have violated national criminal laws, the
victims must get restitution from the State whose officials or maybe
agents are to blame for the damage inflicted. In instances where the
Government under whose authority the victimizing act or maybe omission
occurred is not in existence, the Government or State successor in title
must offer restitution to the victims.

C. Compensation
When compensation is not completely offered from other
options or the offender, States ought to endeavor to offer monetary
compensation to: (i) Victims who've suffered considerable physical injury
or for the serious harm to their mental or physical health as an outcome of
severe crimes; (ii) The family members of victims, particularly dependents
of those that have died or may have become mentally or physically
incapacitated as a consequence of such victimization. The establishment,
building up and expansion of a national fund for compensation to victims
must be encouraged. Wherever appropriate, some other funds might
additionally be created, which includes in all those instances in which the
State of the victim where he is a national is unable to provide the right
compensation due to financial inability.
D. Assistance
Victims must get the required information, medical, social and
psychological assistance through governmental, voluntary,
indigenous and community- based means. Victims must be informed
of the accessibility of community services and health along with other
related assistance and be conveniently afforded a chance to access
them. Police, justice, health, other personnel, and social service
concerned must certainly get training to sensitize them with the
requirements of victims, moreover pointers to make sure prompt and
proper aid. In providing assistance and services to victims, attention must
be provided to all those with specific needs due to the dynamics of the
damage inflicted.

Victimization
The word "victimization" describes the outcome of crime based
on the interaction between the offender & victim. It is almost similar to
a grammatical relationship between subject as well as object. In the
victimological terminology, the phrase "victimizer" continues to be
conceptualized to describe this particular part of the crime effect
Consequently, it could be stated that "victimizer" is a complex term in
victimology. It is referred to as "offender" or "criminal" in some other
branches of criminal sciences like in criminal law and criminology
(Doerner and Lab, 2015).

People may suffer victimization individually or collectively; that is,

harm befall on a single person or a group of persons. Individual
victimization results when a single private person becomes the object of
an act prescribed by a criminal statute. Individual victimization can be
viewed in many such crimes including offences against the person such
as murder, rape, and physical assault, crimes against property like theft,
fraud and robbery, and along with other offences typically criminalized in
national laws. The offender does not victimize the individual victim
because of his group affiliation, or the crime is not directed at him
because of a group affiliation (Daigle and Muftic, 2019).

Collective victimization, on the other hand, results when a group of

persons suffers damage caused by perpetrators whose conduct is
proscribed by worldwide recognized norms of rights that are human.
Collective victimization denotes harm suffered by a group or groups of
victims through perpetrators whose conduct is proscribed by
internationally recognized norms of human rights. Collective victims are
persons who belong to a certain group or collectivity. In other words, they
are targeted because they are a member of a group. Collective
victimization can be found in international crime, particularly in genocide,
crimes against humanity and war crimes. In all such crimes, group
victimization is linked to the conduct of victimizers violating international
human rights and humanitarian law. Historical examples are the
genocides perpetrated against the Jews by the Nazis during the Second
 World War and the ethnic cleansing of Rwandan Tutsis and Hwa tribes
perpetrated by Hutus during the Rwandan Civil War in

Typologies of Victims

The following are types of victims of crimes.

a. Child victims refer to those who are subjected to an act proscribed by

domestic and international laws who are below the age of eighteen (18)
years. These children are victimized primarily due to their childhood, or the
offender is attracted to them due to their youth. Examples are child abuse and
rape, child trafficking, and the recruitment of child combatants in internal
conflicts. In the Philippines, victimizing children is penalized by laws such as
Republic Act 9208 or the Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act and Republic Act 9262
or the Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act.

b. Female victims are those who are victimized by male offenders owing to
their gender. These crimes are collectively described as 'violence against
women' and best characterized in situations of 'domestic violence'. Domestic
abuse or violence is perpetrated by male offenders against female victims of their
own household such as women battery committed by a husband or male
partners.

c. Minority victims refer to those victims who are targeted by criminals since
they are victims of a minority group. Thus, minority victims may be said to be
victims of discrimination. Examples of which are victims of hate crimes such as
homosexuals, Muslims who are attacked by Islamophobes and American Blacks
targeted by White Supremacists.

d. Environmental Victims and Non-human victims. Only since the 1990s

when Green Criminology was developed did we see the environment and non-
human animals as victims too. Green criminology (Lynch et al., 2017) refers to
the study of environmental crimes and harms affecting human and non-human
life, ecosystems and the biosphere. More specifically, green criminology explores
and analyzes: the causes, consequences and prevalence of environmental crime
and harm, the responses to and prevention of environmental crime and harm by
the legal system (civil, criminal, regulatory) and by nongovernmental entities and
social movements, as well as the meaning and mediated representations of
environmental crime and harm. In the Philippines, a number of statues seek to
protect the environment. To name a few, Presidential Decree 705 or the Forestry
Code, The Philippine Mining Act of 1995, The Clean Air Act, and The Clean
water Act, just to name a few. Non-human animals are protected too such as
Republic Act 9147 or The Wildlife Conservation Act and The Animal Welfare Act
of 1995, as amended.
 CHAPTER 6
THEORIES OF VICTIMOLOGY

Learning Objectives
At the end of this chapter, the student will be able to:
 Discuss the basic tenets of major victimology theories; and
 Present the concept of victim shaming and how to address its ill effects.

Nowadays, victimization theories have become typical elements of criminological

work, though it was very controversial at the outset. Despite its apparent appeal today,
perspectives on victim behavior have just lately received enough scholarly respectability
to join forces with the mainstay of the criminological theories of offender behavior.
Seminal works that have integrated victim perspectives, like Wolfgang's (1958) research
on homicide and particularly Amir's (1971) work on rape, encountered political issues
since it came out the victim bore some responsibility for their victimization. This was a
concept that smacked of "blaming the victim,".

In his 2005 book, Criminology: Theories, Patterns and Typologies, Larry J. Siegel
discusses four major theories of victimology; namely, a. Victim Precipitation Theory,
b. Lifestyle Theory, c. Deviant Place Theory, and d. Routine Activities Theory.

Victim Precipitation Theory

Victim precipitation theory, the first theory of victimization, contends that
victims give rise to the criminal events that harm them, either through victim
facilitation or even through victim provocation. Victimology, the study of victims,
originated with victim precipitation theory as well as the typologies put together by the
pioneering victimologists, like those of Von, Hentig, Mendelsohn, Shafer, Wolfgang, and
Amir. Amir's typology of forcible rape and its corresponding criticisms from nay quarters
resulted to a broader series of victimological theory.

Victim precipitation was a term first used by Wolfgang to describe situations

in which the victim was the original aggressor in the action which led to their
harm or perhaps loss. Victim precipitation existed not only in the research of Wolfgang
but also in spirit in the early typologies of Mendelsohn (1956) like the completely
innocent victim (no precipitation) and the victim who was a little guilty compared to the
offender where one provokes another to commit a crime. Precipitation also can be seen
in the typology of von Hentig in the tormentor, who precipitates his victimization by
torturing his family, and in Schafer's typology with provocative victims and explicitly with
precipitative victims. The latter style is an immediate acknowledgement that some
victims have characteristics or perhaps do something that entices an offender to commit
crimes against them and is a lot more akin to what Siegel calls passive precipitation
(Petherick, 2017).
Examples:
"In 1971, Menachem Amir suggested female rape victims often contribute to their attacks
by... pursuing a relationship with the rapist."

"A woman may become the target of domestic violence when she increases her job
status and her success results in a backlash from a jealous spouse or partner."

Source: Accessed from, https://www.thelawproject. com.au/victimology-four-major-

theories. Date accessed, January 6, 2020.

Lifestyle Theory
Lifestyle exposure theory posits that persons with certain demographic
profiles are more prone to experience criminal victimization since their lifestyles
expose risky situations. The probability of victimization increases as a function of
engaging in lifestyles that increase the amount of time spent in public spaces,
particularly at night, and time spent among strangers. Lifestyles are important since they
improve the exposure to would-be offenders with no effective restraints that can stop a
crime. Consequently, it's the exposure to risk and not the lifestyles per se that create
opportunities for victimization. This logic suggests that the well-established relationship
between demographic characteristics, like gender, and victimization, is fully mediated by
exposure and lifestyles to risk. To date, empirical scientific studies have found consistent
support for the theory, particularly with respect to property victimization.

Examples:
"Single women who drink frequently and have a prior history of being sexually assaulted
are most likely to be assaulted on (college) campus."

"People who belong to groups that have an extremely risky life-homeless, runaways,
drug users-are at high risk for victimization; the more time they are exposed to street life,
the greater their risk of becoming crime victims."

Source: Accessed from, https://www.thelawproject. com.au/victimology-four-major-

theories. Date accessed, January 6, 2020,

Deviant Place Theory

The more often victims visit dangerous places, the more likely they'll be
exposed to violence and crime. Victims don't encourage crime but are victim prone
since they reside in socially disorganized high crime areas just where they've probably
the greatest risk of coming into contact with criminal offenders, regardless of their own
behavior or perhaps lifestyle.

The deviant place theory notes that greater exposure to dangerous

locations helps make a person much more susceptible to be the target of any
crime (Seigel, 2005). In contrast to the victim precipitation theory, the victims don't affect
the crime by passively or actively encouraging it, but only are victimized as an outcome
of being in dangerous sections of the city. To negate the possibility that an individual is
going to become the target of any crime, the person must stay away from the "bad"
areas of town where crime rates are high. For instance, if a place is known for its gangs,
ngs, and high crime rate. The greater number of private undertakings one has in that
 place, the greater likelihood that they will become the target of a criminal offense there.
Sociologist William Julius Wilson states that the economic and social inequality causes
more minorities to become victims of crimes since they are unable to move out from their
'dangerous' neighborhoods. This is in comparison to their white peers who are more
economically empowered to get out of areas where crime becomes rampant (1990).
Furthermore, the deviant place theory implies that taking security precautions in these
places might be of very little use since it's the community, rather than the lifestyle
choices, affecting victimization (Seigel, 2006). In a nutshell, if a community is "deviant,"
the sole method to reduce the risk of yours of victimization is leaving the community for a
much less deviant, very low crime rate region (Madero-Hernadez, 2019). Lifestyle
Exposure Theory of Victimization

Routine Activities Theory

Finally, the regular activity theory explains the speed of victimization by
way of a set of situations which reflect the routines of regular individuals. These
are the following: First, the accessibility of suitable targets; Second, the lack of capable
guardians; and three, the presence of inspired offenders. Based on this particular
concept, the presence of one or even more of these elements creates a greater risk of
victimization. For instance, leaving one's home unattended as they head off on a
vacation makes their home a suitable target for burglars. Leaving a house for holiday in
a metropolitan area generates an even higher threat; and doing so in an urban area
where there's a greater number of teenage boys, acknowledged felons, and any other
"motivated offenders" generates an even greater risk for victimization. Towns and or
suburban areas with high police visibility, other protection systems and sensors, and
neighborhood watch teams, reduce the possibility of Current Research Work on Feminist
Victimology Theories

In recent years, the victimology literature has been delving significantly on how
gender impacts victimization as a whole and more specifically on how each type of
victimization is affected by gender. For example, Belknap (2014) focuses on female's
experiences with different parts of the criminal justice system, including just how
victimization shapes the female experience with offending and justice. Additional
research examines specific kinds of victimization including Carbone-Lopez and Lauritsen
(2011) and Mummert and Daigle (2014) which look at risk factors for brutal victimization
and Wilcox, et al. (2009) which explores school victimization. Some functions like May,
et al. (2010) have examined just how gender influences individuals' fear of crime &
perceived victimization risk. One more type of inquiry examines how female's
victimization experiences influence involvement in behavior that is criminal. Chesney-
Lind (1997) underscores the impact of brutal victimization in childhood and just how this
causes offending in adulthood, while Miller (1998) and Decker and Miller (2001) examine
just how female involvement in gangs influences female adolescents' offending, in
addition to victimization risk. Daly (1992) examines female's pathways to crime and just
how these frequently involve trauma and violence for girls and women.

Victim Blaming, Shaming and Secondary Victimization

Victim blaming occurs once the victim of any crime or any wrongful act is
held partially or entirely at fault for the harm or damage that befell them. The study
of victimology seeks to mitigate the prejudice against victims, and the notion that victims
are by any means to blame for the activities of offenders. There is current and historical
prejudice against the victims of domestic violence and sex crimes, like the higher
tendency to blame victims of rape than victims of robbery if victims knew the
perpetrators before the occurrence of the crime. Expressions like, 'she was asking for it',
'she deserved it', 'she walked right into it' ae typical expressions in blaming victims of
sexual abuse.

The term itself was coined and popularized by the psychologist William Ryan in
his book with the same title published in 1971. Ryan stated that blaming the victim had
its origins as an ideological justification for the rampant racism and social injustices
perpetrated against the black people primarily in the southern United States.

Secondary victimization, on the other hand, results through the response of the
victim's loved ones, the general public and even by social institutions. This typically
happens through victim blaming, when they tend to cast doubt on the victim's story and
minimizing the effect of the attack on the victims. Even how medical personnel.
l handles the procedure to examine and treat victims may result in secondary
victimization.