VICTIMOLOGIE
ORIGIN AND CONCEPTS
THE HISTORY
Victimology
= The scientific study of the extent, nature, and causes of (criminal) victimization, its consequences for the
individuals involved, and societal responses, particularly those of the police, criminal justice system, as well as
voluntary and welfare services (VWS: victimology world society).
Debate about ‘criminal’ victimization are we only including victims of crime (bv. murder) or also victims of
accidents (bv. falling of a roof), is this a victim as well?
- Often considered a subdiscipline:
o Psychiatry, law, social work.
o However, criminologists have the greatest influence.
o An essential component of offender studies within criminology, it has thus become an
integral part of criminological sciences.
Two strands:
1) Based on police research (= victims of crime)
2) Humanistic approach: we are here to support the victim, it doesn’t matter if the victim has been
affected by a crime or accident, we support them as human beings.
Who’s the victim (4 pictures) – who has more chanche to become a victim of a violent crime:
Iit has been demonstrated that the one who has more chanches to become a victim of a violent crime is the
bad guy/criminal itself → general life style theory: chanches of becoming a victim is dependent on what you
do, how you behave, where you go, …
Our ideal victim is not the same as what is happening in real life, we are biased, we all thought the old lady was
most likely to have the biggest chanche of becoming a victim, but in reality it’s the bad guy itself. Our
preconceptions are wrong.
THE ORIGIN
In the beginning we are only looking at offenders: why does someone kill another human. From the 1940’s
attention is being payed to the victim, before that the victim had a passive role.
- Leopold Szondi: genotropism (1930s).
o = thinking about genes, being attracted to another, why do you pick your victim? There is
something biological about it. As of today, there is no evidence of it, this theory has not been
proven.
→ Theory: Reciprocal attraction of the same/similar recessive genes influencing human
behavior (instinct).
, - Ted Bundy (1946-1989): Confirmed 36 victims in the 1970s.
o The victim selection is not at random, people are starting to think about it, like in the Ted
Bundy case, at some point he had said that he could recognise his ideal/next victim: someone
who was already victimised before, he could recognise it by their behaviour.
▪ A matter of opportunity.
▪ He claimed that he could identify a potential victim by the way she walks down the
street, the way she carries her head, her body language, etc. (Holmes & Holmes,
2010).
▪ Research confirms that victims exhibit certain typical body language, especially in
the way they walk (Grayson & Stein, 1981).
▪ Psychopaths are more accurate in recognizing potential victims (Wheeler et al.,
2009; Book et al., 2013; Denardo Roney, J. L. et al., 2018).
• If you ask psychopaths who the victim is out of 10 people, they will more
likely recognize that person than a non-psychopath. They see it in the way
they move. They are better in recognizing potential victims.
First mention of 'victimology':
- Mendelsohn, 1947: during the presentation of a paper. He wanted to include the victim as well to
better understand the crime and the reasons/motive of the offender to commit the crime.
- Considered the spiritual father (= grondlegger) of the victim movement.
- Werthem (1949) also advocates for a "crime victim-centered" science (= focusing on the behaviour of
the victim before they were murdered, maybe they have something to do with their own
victimization).
o Focused particularly on murder.
First systematic investigation into crime victims by von Hentig (1941, 1948):
- "The Criminal and his Victim" (1948). Part 4: "The Victim's contribution to the genesis of the crime."
o Critique of the one-dimensional perspective within criminology.
- The victim is activly contributing to their own victimisation, before this the victim was only passive.
Von Hentig was the first one to look at how a crime occured, is related to the victims behaviour? The
criminal law is really focused on the offender BUT the victim (‘the one who suffers’) is not always
passive. The victim is one of the causative elements (new in criminology). This is dangerous thinking,
what is the difference between victim blaming and the assessements of the genesis of the crime? Our
sympathy tends to fall by the victim, not the offender. This new way of thinking opens a whole new
world of investigating.
- We are now looking athe behaviour of victims (bv. close your car or otherwise you are provoking the
offender).
- Von Hentig was the first one to systematicly investigate the victims of crime (examen).
"The law considers certain results and the final moves which lead to them. Here it makes a clear-cut distinction
between the one who does and the one who suffers. Looking into the genesis of the situation, in a considerable
number of cases, we meet a victim who consents tacitly (stilzwijgende instemming), cooperates, conspires, or
provokes. The victim is one of the causative elements."
,Number of theoretical studies:
- on victim types, the relationship between victim and offender, and the role victims play in certain
criminal phenomena (did they contribute? Bv. fishing).
Number of empirical studies:
- looking at the profiles of victims
- Murder, rape, theft, assault, fraud, extortion, ...
- Martin Wolfgang: "victim precipitated criminal homicide" (1957). He studied murder cases and said
that in 26% of the cases there is victim precipitation (= the victim is the first to engage with violence
and ended up being murdered). The victim contributes to its’s own victimization.
o 588 murder cases between 1948-1952 in Philadelphia
o 26% VP cases where the victim was the first to engage in violence.
- Menachem Amir: "Victim precipitated forcible rape" (1967).
o Active 'contribution': accepting a drink from a stranger, riding with a stranger.
o Passive 'contribution': not reacting strongly enough to sexual advances.
o Examples: alcohol, "reputation," place of residence, meeting place, ...
o NO excuse for the offender. This is turning into victim blaming (thin line).
▪ Trigger for feminist organization to say that this is enough, there is never an excuse
for rape.
Victim precipitation or victim-blaming?
- Especially in the 1970s, victim precipitation was increasingly seen as victim-blaming.
VP research has contributed to two major criminological theories:
o Lifestyle theory (Hindelang et al., 1978)
▪ Donkere steegjes vermijden, interactie met gevaarlijke individuen/offenders
vermijden
o Routine activities theory (Cohen & Felson, 1979)
At the core of these pioneers: victims of crimes.
- 1950s-1960s: murder, robbery, rape, but what about people who became suppressed in the colonial
system, racism, … are these victims of crime?
- Also, during the 1970s-1980s due to the emergence of professional assistance for crime victims. By the
crime increase (‘police do something’), they said the people had to solve it (‘close your doors’ →
community policing). There were a lot of cries for help, but who are we going to help? Who is victim of
crime? The victim support movement came in this timeframe, because of this increase in crime and
they wanted the government to help them.
1979: establishment of the World Society of Victimology (WSV): first time that academic came togheter to see
how they can study the victim, discussion about victims of crime occurred.
1) ’80: neoliberal ideas: the individual is responsible for his own succes and downfall, if you fail in life it’s up
to you. They speak about equal opportunities, everyone starts the same and can all do something (→
routine activity theory and lifestyle theory: what you do matters).
2) Social democracy: the baseline is different, we are equal but not everyone starts at the same point (bv.
language barrieres).
→ it has an tremendous impact on society!
, THE EVOLUTION
Gradual broadening during the 1970s of the research focus. We were thinking about including other categories
of victims, not only those of crime.
- Similarities with war victims, prisoners in camps, and certain types of aggression and discrimination
(Nazism, Apartheid).
- Criminologists explore other crimes/phenomena: white-collar crime (bv. how are they treating their
employees?), environmental crime (chances are that we can only see the effect/consequences later).
o Who is the victim here, and what about perception?
o Critical reflection about state crimes (bv. vietnam: state tried to deforest vietnam, it had side
effect up to today, children were born deformed, cancer went up, … this contributed to
victimisation).
o Those types of crime are not in the criminal code
Also, within the WSV, discussions about the research object of victimology.
- Difference between scientific victimologists and humanistic aid providers.
- Victim precipitation: definition connected to crime because this is easy, those are the scientific
victimologist. The stricter definition, the better. Trying to look for patterns.
Division among victimologists: restrict to victims of crimes or include other victims?
- Refer to the definition of victimology by the World Society of Victimology (WSV).
- Prominent debate in the 1970s-1980s, but largely disappeared by the late 1990s-2000s (see UN
Declaration).
- They say referring to victims of crime is better because it’s clear, it’s in the criminal code.
- BUT humanistic, people-oriented approach: we should look at harm in any aspect not only linked to
the criminal code, but also environmental crime, etc. we need to support victims of crime.
- The global south is saying that they agree with this approach, but they think that someone who was
victim of colonialism for example, doesn’t need support, the state doesn’t want to compensate for
their own behaviour. They didn’t want to include victims of abuse of power.
UN Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power (1985)
- Unanimously adopted in the General Assembly.
- Objective: set minimum standards for states to meet in providing assistance to victims. It was a
compromise; they didn’t want to fully support/compensate victims of abuse of power, but they
admitted that there should be minimal assistance.
- Was a compromise.
o Developed countries: victims of crime.
o Developing countries: victims of abuse of power should have the same rights as the first
category.
o Much more provision for the first category than for the second.
See:
- 11. Where public officials or other agents acting in an official or quasi-official capacity have violated
national criminal laws, the victims should receive restitution from the State whose officials or agents
were responsible for the harm inflicted.
- 19. States should consider incorporating into national law norms proscribing abuses of power and
providing remedies to victims of such abuses.
