C H A P T E R 1
Introduction to Victimology
What Is Victimology?
The term victimology is not new. In fact, Benjamin Mendelsohn fi used it in 1947 to describe the scientific study of
crime victims. Victimology is often considered a subfield of criminology, and the two fields do share much in com-
mon. Just as criminology is the study of criminals—what they do, why they do it, and how the criminal justice system
responds to them—victimology is the study of victim Victimology, then, is the study of the etiology (or causes)
of victimization, its consequences, how the criminal justice system accommodates and assists victims, and how
other elements of society, such as the media, deal with crime victims. Victimology is a science; victimologists use
the scientific method to answer questions about victims. For example, instead of simply wondering or hypothesizing
why younger people are more likely to be victims than are older people, victimologists conduct research to attempt
to identify the reasons why younger pe seem more vulnerable.
The History of Victimology: Before the Victims’ Rights Movement
As previously mentione e term victimology was coined in the mid-1900s. Crime was, of course, occurring
prior to this time; thus, people were being victimized long before the scientific study of crime victims began. Even
though they were not scientifically studied, victims were recognized as being harmed by crime, and their role in the
criminal justice ocess has evolved over time.
Before and throughout the Middle Ages (about the 5th through the 16th century), the burden of the justice
system, infor al as it was, fell on the victim. When a person or property was harmed, it was up to the victim and
the v im’s family to seek justice. This was typically achieved via retaliation. The justice system operated under the
principle of lex talionis, an eye for an eye. A criminal would be punished because he or she deserved it, and the
punishment would be equal to the harm caused. Punishment based on these notions is consistent with retribution.
During this time, a crime was considered a harm against the victim, not the state. The concepts of restitution and
retribution governed action against criminals. Criminals were expected to pay back the victim through restitution.
During this time, a criminal who stole a person’s cow likely would have to compensate the owner (the victim) by
returning the stolen cow and also giving him or her another one.
Early criminal codes incorporated these principles. The Code of Hammurabi was the basis for order and
certainty in Babylon. In the code, restoration of equity between the offender and victim was stressed. Notice that the
early response to crime centered on the victim, not the state. This focus on the victim continued until the Industrial
Revolution, when criminal law shifted to considering crimes violations against the state rather than the victim. Once
Copyright ©2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means without express written permission of the publisher.
2 VICTIMOLOGY: THE ESSENTIALS
the victim ceased to be seen as the entity harmed by the crime, the victim became secondary. Although this shift
most certainly benefited the state—by allowing it to collect fines and monies from these newly defined harms—the
victim did not fare as well. Instead of being the focus, the crime victim was effectively excluded from the formal
aspects of the justice system.
Since then, this state-centered system has largely remained in place, but attention—at least from resea chers
and activists—returned to the crime victim during the 1940s. Beginning in this period, concern was shown for the
crime victim, but this concern was not entirely sympathetic. Instead, scholars and others became preoccupied with
how the crime victim contributes to his or her own victimization. Scholarly work during this period focused not on
the needs of crime victims but on identifying to what extent victims could be held responsible for being victimized.
In this way, the damage that offenders cause was ignored. Instead, the ideas of victim precipi on, victim facilita-
tion, and victim provocation emerged.
The Role of the Victim in Crime: Victim Precipitation, Victim
Facilitation, and Victim Provocation
Although the field of victimology has largely moved away from simply stigating how much a victim contrib-
utes to his or her own victimization, the first forays into the study o ime victims were centered on such inves-
tigations. In this way, the first studies of crime victims did not portray victims as innocents who were wronged at
the hands of an offender. Rather, concepts such as victim precipitation, victim facilitation, and victim provocation
developed from these investigations. Victim precipitation is defined as the extent to which a victim is respon-
sible for his or her own victimization. The concept of vict precipitation is rooted in the notion that, although
some victims are not at all responsible for their victim tion, other victims are. In this way, victim precipitation
acknowledges that crime victimization involves at least two people—an offender and a victim—and that both
parties are acting and often reacting before, during, and after the incident. Identifying victim precipitation does
not necessarily lead to negative outcomes. s problematic, however, when it is used to blame the victim while
ignoring the offender’s role.
Similar to victim precipitation is the
concept of victim facilitation. Victim
facilitation occurs when a victim unin-
tentionally makes it easier for an offender
to commit a crime. A victim may, in this
way, be a catalyst for victimization. A
woman who accidentally left her purse
in plain view in her office while she went
to the restroom and then had it stolen
would be a victim who facilitated her
own victimization. This woman is not
blameworthy—the offender should not
steal, regardless of whether the purse
is in plain view. But the victim’s actions
certainly made her a likely target and
made it easy for the offender to steal her
purse. Unlike precipitation, facilitation
▲ Photo 1.1 A person left his keys in his car while he went shopping. By helps understand why one person may
doing so, the person inadvertently made it easier for an offender to steal his car, be victimized over another but does not
thus precipitating his victimization. connote blame and responsibility.
Copyright ©2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means without express written permission of the publisher.
Only two pages were converted.
Please Sign Up to convert the full document.
www.freepdfconvert.com/membership
