Victimology : Concept and History of Victimology.

Md.Atiqur Rahman

1. Introduction:
Now people are suffering various types of problem in modern world. People become
victim of the various types of disease, diseseter and others. But every parts of the world
people become the Now it commonly refers to individuals who suffer injuries, losses, or
hardships for any reason. People can become victims of accidents, natural disasters,
diseases, or social problems such as warfare, discrimination, political witch hunts, and
other injustices.
2. Concepts of Victimology:
Victim:
The concept of a “victim” can be traced back to ancient societies. It was connected to the
notion of sacrifice. In the original meaning of the term, a victim was a person or an
animal put to death during a religious ceremony in order to appease some supernatural
power or deity. Over the centuries, the word has picked up additional meanings. Now it
commonly refers to individuals who suffer injuries, losses, or hardships for any reason.
People can become victims of accidents, natural disasters, diseases, or social problems
such as warfare, discrimination, political witch hunts, and other injustices.

Victimization:
Victimization is an asymmetrical interpersonal relationship that is abusive, painful,
destructive, parasitical, and unfair. While a crime is in progress, offenders temporarily
force their victims to play roles (almost as if following a script) that mimic the dynamics
*Md.Atiqur Rahman is a student of Institute of Social Welfare and Research. He has been completed his
graduation year 2013.Interested area is Social Development,migration,Social change,Human rights.
e-mail:atiq.rahman17@gmail.com

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2257668

between predator and prey, winner and loser, victor and vanquished and even master and
slave. Many types of victimization have been outlawed over the centuries—specific
oppressive and exploitative acts, like raping, robbing, and swindling. But not all types of
hurtful relationships and deceitful practices are forbidden by law. It is permissible to
overcharge a customer for an item that can be purchased for less elsewhere; or to
underpay a worker who could receive higher wages for the same tasks at another place of
employment; or impose exorbitant interest rates and hidden fees on borrowers who take
out mortgages and use credit cards; or to deny food and shelter to the hungry and the
homeless who cannot pay the required amount.

Victimology:

The word “victim” has its roots in many ancient languages that covered a great distance
from northwestern Europe to the southern tip of Asia and yet had a similar linguistic
pattern: victima in Latin; víh,wéoh, wíg in Old European; wíh, wíhi in Old High German;
vé in Old Norse; weihs in Gothic; and, vinak ti in Sanskrit (Webster’s 1971).
Victimology as an academic term contains two elements:
• One is the Latin word “Victima” which translates into “victim”.
• The other is the Greek word “logos” which means a system of knowledge, the direction
of something abstract, the direction of teaching, science, and a discipline.

Victimology is the scientific study of the physical, emotional, and financial harm people
suffer because of illegal activities. Victimologists first and foremost investigate the
victims’ plight: the impact of the injuries and losses inflicted by offenders on the people
they target. In addition, victimologists carry out research into the public’s political,
social, and economic reactions to the plight of victims. Victimologists also study how
victims are handled by officials and agencies within the criminal justice system,
especially interactions with police officers, detective’s prosecutors, defense attorneys,
judges, probation officers, and members of parole boards. Victimologists want to know

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2257668

whether and to what degree crime victims experience physical wounds, economic
hardships, or emotional turmoil. One aim, of course, is to devise ways to help them
recover. In the aftermath of the incident, are they frightened, terrorized, depressed,
traumatized, infuriated, or embittered? Also, victimologists want to find out how
effectively the injured parties are being assisted, served, accommodated, rehabilitated,
and educated to avoid further trouble. Victimologists are equally curious to determine the
extent to which their plight is being ignored, neglected, belittled, manipulated, and
commercially or politically exploited. Some individuals who sustain terrible injuries and
devastating losses might be memorialized, honored, and even idolized, while others
might be mocked, discredited, defamed, demeaned, socially stigmatized, and even
condemned for bringing about their own misfortunes. Why is this so? Victimologists also
want to examine why some injured parties find their ordeals life transforming. Some
become deeply alienated and withdraw from social relationships. They may become
burdened by bouts of depression, sleep disorders, panic attacks, and stress-related
illnesses. Their healing process may require overcoming feelings of helplessness,
frustration, and self-blame. Others might react to their fear and fury by seeking out fellow
sufferers, building alliances, and discovering ways to exercise their “agency”—to assess
their options and make wise decisions, take advantage of opportunities, regain control of
their lives, rebuild their self-confidence, and restore a sense of trust and security. Why do
people experience such a wide range of responses and what personality and social factors
determine how a person reacts?

II. KEY CONCEPTS IN VICTIMOLOGY

A. Concepts

1. “Victim” has it roots in the early religious notions of suffering, sacrifice and death.
This concept of “victim” was well known in the ancient civilizations, especially in
Babylonia, Palestine, Greece, and Rome. In each of these civilizations the law mandated

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2257668

that the victim should be recognized as a person who deserved to be made whole again by
the offender.
2. “Crime victim” is a person who has been physically, financially or emotionally injured
and/or had their property taken or damaged by someone committing a crime.
3. “Victimogenesis” refers to the origin or cause of a victimization; the constellation of
variables which caused a victimization to occur.
4. “Victim Precipitation” a victimization where the victim causes, in part or totally, their
own victimization.
5. “Vulnerability” is a physical, psychological, social, material or financial condition
whereby a person or an object has a weakness which could render them a victim if
another person or persons would recognize these weaknesses and take advantage of them.
6. “General Victim” is a person who has been physically, financially or emotionally
injured and/or had their property taken or damaged by someone, an event, an
organization or a natural phenomenon.
7. “Victimization” refers to an event where persons, communities and institutions are
damaged or injured in a significant way. Those persons who are impacted by persons or
events suffer a violation of rights or significant disruption of their well being.
8. “Victimology” is an academic scientific discipline which studies data that describes
phenomena and causal relationships related to victimizations. This includes events
leading to the victimization, the victim’s experience, its aftermath and the actions taken
by society in response to these victimizations. Therefore, victimology includes the study
of the precursors, vulnerabilities, events, impacts, recoveries, and responses by people,
organizations and cultures related to victimizations.
9. “Abuse of Power” is the violation of a national or international standard in the use of
organized powerful forces such that persons are injured physically, mentally,
emotionally, economically, or in their rights, as a direct and intentional result of the
misapplication of these forces.
10. “Victim Assistance, Support or Services” are those activities which are applied in
response to victimizations with the intention of relieving suffering and facilitating

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2257668

recovery. This includes offering information, assessments, individual interventions, case
advocacy, system advocacy, public policy and programme development.
11. “Victim Recovery” is the resumption of the same or better level of functionality as
was enjoyed prior to victimization. Persons who have been victimized vary in their level
of mental health and wellbeing prior to their victimization. Consequently, victimization
affects each person in a different way and causes differing degrees of injury or trauma. In
their recovery it is necessary for victims to first try to regain their previous level of
functioning plus learn from their misfortune and hopefully exceed their previous level of
functionality. To be recovered suggests that a person has at least regained their prior level
of well-being and at best, has exceeded it. This state may be measured by identifying
their previous mental condition and determining if they have at least regained that prior
status using the criteria of: trust in others, autonomy of self, individual initiative,
competency in daily activities, self-identity, interpersonal intimacy, control over personal
situations, successful relationships, safety in daily activities, acknowledgment of
memory, trauma symptoms have become manageable, self esteem is restored,
resourcefulness is achieved, and there is an improved ability to ward off potential threats.

12. “Child Abuse” is the intentional application of sexual, physical, emotional or

psychological injury to a child to include neglect at the hands of her or his parents or
care-provider within the confines of their family or place of care.
13. “Victim Offender Mediation” (VOM) is a formal process for face-to-face meetings in
the presence of a trained mediator between a victim of a crime and his/her offender who
committed that crime. This is also called victim-offender dialogue, victim-offender
conferencing, victim-offender reconciliation, or restorative justice. Often the victim and
the offender are joined by their respective families and community members or other
persons related to the crime event. In these meetings, the offender and the victim talk to
each other about the victimization, the effects it had on their lives, and their feelings
about it. The aim is to create a mutually agreeable plan to repair any damage or injury

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2257668

that occurred as a result of the crime in the hopes of permanently eliminating the conflict
that caused the crime in the first place.
14. “Restorative Justice” is a systematic formal legal response to crime victimization that
emphasizes healing the injuries that resulted from the crime and affected the victims,
offenders and communities. This process is a departure from the traditional retributive
form of dealing with criminals and victims which traditionally have generally perpetuated
the conflict which resulted in the original crime.
15. “Victim Trauma” includes emotional and physical experiences that produce pain and
injuries. Emotional injury is a normal response to an extremely abnormal event. It results
from the pairing of a painful or frightening emotional experience with a specific memory
which emerge and have a long lasting effect on the life of a person. The more direct the
exposure to the traumatic event, the higher the risk for emotional harm and prolonged
effects.
16. “Crisis Intervention” is the provision of emergency psychological care to traumatized
victims so as to help them return to an adaptive level of functioning and to prevent or
mitigate the negative impact of psychological and emotional trauma.
17. “Compensation” is a formal administrative procedure provided by law which
provides only money to victims for “out of pocket” real expenses directly resulting from
the victimization to be paid by the state after the victim is found to qualify according to
specific criteria determined by the respective state or federal law.
18. “Restitution” is a formal judicial procedure used by a judge after guilt is determined
as part of a sentence which can provide money and/or services to the victim for damages
or suffering which resulted from the victimization to be paid or performed by the
offender.
19. “Victim Survey” is a periodic data collection and analysis process conducted usually
by a government entity within the general population to study information about crime
victims regardless whether they reported their victimization to the police or not. It
typically uses a face-to-face or telephone interview (or sent questionnaire) and covers

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2257668

demographics, attitudes about crime and details about the victimizations experienced
over the previous six months.
20. “Victim Rights” are privileges and procedures required by written law which
guarantee victims specific considerations and treatment by the criminal justice system,
the government and the community at large.

3. What is the mean by Victimology in a police?

When homicide squad detectives say they are engaged in victimology, they mean piecing
together clues and leads from the dead person’s life in order to help discover the killer’s
identity. Police investigators want to find out as much as possible about the deceased
from interviews with the next of kin and eyewitnesses, e-mail messages, diaries, banking
deposits and withdrawals, computer files, and records of telephone calls. Detectives look
into the victim’s associates (by compiling lists of contacts, including friends, family
members, acquaintances, rivals, and enemies), social background (lifestyle, occupation,
education, marital status,secret lovers), criminal history (any prior record of arrests,
convictions, and incarcerations plus any cases in which the departed served as a
complainant, plaintiff, or witness against others), financial situation (sources of income,
debts owed, investments, and who is next in line to inherit any property), and health
issues (drinking habits, substance abuse, and other problems). Autopsy findings shed
light on the final meal, the presence of any traces of recent drinking and drug taking, the
cause of death, and the approximate time interval when the fatal confrontation took place.
For example, if a drug dealer is found shot to death in an alley, detectives would
construct a timeline of his last known whereabouts and activities. What were his known
hangouts (bars, clubs, parks, etc.)? Investigators would seek clues to determine whether
he was killed by someone above him in the hierarchy of drug trafficking or someone
below who worked for him or bought controlled substances from him. Was he recently
embroiled in any disputes or court cases, and did he secretly serve as a confidential
informant? Who had a motive and an opportunity to slay him? (NYPD homicide

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2257668

detectives, 2008). When police discovered the scattered remains of a number of young
women in a stretch of deserted sand dunes near a popular beach, their victimological
inquiries soon established a common thread: that they all had been prostitutes apparently
slain by a serial killer (Baker, 2010).

Clearly, whereas victimologists want to uncover trends, patterns, and regularities that
hold true for many injured parties in general, police investigators seek to establish in
great detail everything that can be unearthed about the life and death of a particular
person. “Forensic victimology” in this very pragmatic and immediate sense is undertaken
to increase the odds of solving a case, apprehending a suspect, and testifying in court on
behalf of a person who is no longer able to pursue justice on his or her own (see Petherick
and Turvey, 2008).

4.Historical step of victimology/Critical date of Victimology:

Critical Dates in Victimology
• 1924 Edwin Sutherland includes a chapter on victims in his criminology textbook.
• 1937 Beniamin Mendelsohn publishes his writings on the rapist and his victim.
• 1941 Hans von Hentig publishes article on victim and criminal interactions.
• 1947 Beniamin 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.
• 1958 Marvin Wolfgang studies homicide victims; uses the term “victim precipitation”.
• 1963 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.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2257668

• 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 is 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.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2257668

• 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.

5.Victimology:Past,present and Future:

a.Victimology’s Past

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2257668

Early victimological notions were not developed by criminologists or sociologists, but
rather by poets, writers, and novelists. Thomas de Quincey, Khalil Gibran, Aldous
Huxley, the Marquis de Sade, Franz Werfel, are only a few of those writers who can be
described as literary victimologists. The first systematic treatment of victims of crime
appeared in 1948 in Hans Von Hentig’s book The Criminal and His Victim. In the fourth
part of the book, under the provocative title The Victim’s Contribution to the Genesis of
the Crime, Von Hentig criticized the static unidimensional study of the offender that had
dominated criminology until then. In its place he suggested a new dynamic and dyadic
approach that pays equal attention to the criminal and the victim. Von Hentig had treated
the topic earlier in a paper published in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology in
1940/41. In it, he noted that:

It is true, there are many criminal deeds with little or no contribution on the part of the
injured individual... On the other hand we can frequently observe a real mutuality in the
connection of perpetrator and victim, killer and killed, duper and dupe. Although this
reciprocal operation is one of the most curious phenomena of criminal life it has escaped
the attention of socio-pathology. In his book Von Hentig points out that:

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,co-operates, conspires or provokes. The victim is one of the
causativeelements. (p. 436)

Von Hentig insisted that many crime victims contribute to their own victimization, either
by inciting or provoking the criminal or creating or fostering a situation likely to lead to
the commission of the crime. Other pioneers in victimology, who firmly believed that
victims may consciously or unconsciously play a causal role, outlined many of the forms
this contributions can take: negligence, carelessness, recklessness, imprudence, and so

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2257668

forth. They pointed out that the victim’s role could be a motivational one (attracting,
arousing, inducing, inciting, enticing) or a functional one (provoking, precipitating,
triggering, facilitating, participating) (Fattah, 1991).

Von Hentig’s book was followed by a number of theoretical studies that dealt with victim
types, victim-offender relationships, and the role victims play in certain kinds of crime.
The book also provided an impetus for several empirical studies that paid special
attention to the victims of specific offences such as criminal homicide, (Wolfgang, 1958;
Fattah 1971), rape (Amir, 1971), robbery (Normandeau, 1968), aggravated assault
(Pittman and Handy, 1964; Curtis, 1974), fraud (Padowetz, 1954), blackmail (Hepworth,
1975), among others.

The term victimology was coined in 1949 by an American psychiatrist, Frederick

Wertham, who used it for the first time in his book The Show of Violence, in which he
stressed the need for a science of VICTIMOLOGY. During the early years of
victimology, literature on crime victims remained relatively small when compared to that
on criminology.

During the 1980s, however, a great wave of important books and articles marked the
coming of age of victimology (Rock, 1994). At present, it is fair to say that the study of
crime victims has become an integral part of criminology.

Today, the need for criminology to thoroughly study the victims of crime may appear
obvious and axiomatic. It may seem surprising; therefore, that such an obvious need has
escaped the attention of criminologists for over a century. But it is not rare for social
scientists to miss the obvious. This point is well made by Rock (1994: XI) who points
out:

Even criminology and the sociology of deviance – disciplines

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2257668

 concentrated most squarely on the analysis of crime, criminals and
criminal justice – tended somehow to obliterate the victim for a very
long while, failing to see what, in retrospect, should probably have
been evident all along. Such omissions occur continually. They are an
ineluctable part of any discipline, a consequence of the truth marked by
Burke when he said that “a way of seeing is always a way of not seeing.”
The price of organising, specialising and accumulating knowledge
CRIMINOLOGIE, VOL. 33 N° 1 (2000)

about any area is a systematic neglect of the other matters thrown out of focus and
beyond the margins. Precisely because criminology is an empirically-driven discipline, it
has tended to ignore those things that do not bear the name of crime, criminals and
criminal justice.

Although victimology has by now firmly established itself as a major research area
within criminology, its nature, importance and standing continue to generate a great deal
of comment and controversy. Rock (1994: XI) describes victimology as a “relatively
amorphous discipline”. And at the Fifth International Symposium on Victimology
(Zagreb, August 1985), Cressey openly declared that victimology is neither a scientific
discipline nor an academic field. He called it instead “a non-academic program under
which a hodgepodge of ideas, interests, ideologies and research methods have been rather
arbitrarily grouped”.

Be that as it may, the study of victims and victimization has the potential of reshaping the
entire discipline of criminology. It might very well be the long awaited paradigm shift
that criminology desperately needs given the dismal failure of its traditional paradigms

b.Victimology Today

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2257668

Victimology today is very different from victimology in the 1950s or the 1960s.
Scientific disciplines undergo constant evolution, though the pace of change may vary
from one discipline to another. Victimology has undergone not only a rapid but also a
rather fundamental evolution in the last two decades. The decades of the 1980s and 1990s
could easily be described as a period of consolidation, data gathering and theorization,
with new legislation, victim compensation, redress and mediation, help, assistance and
support to enable victims to recover from the negative effects of victimization.

In an attempt to integrate the various models into a comprehensive system I grouped all
the seemingly relevant factors into ten different categories (Fattah, 1991). These are:

1) Opportunities, which are closely linked to the characteristics of potential targets

(persons, households, businesses) and to the activities and behaviour of these targets.

2) Risk factors, particularly those related to sociodemographic characteristics such as age

and gender, area of residence, absence of guardianship, presence of alcohol and so forth.

3) Motivated offenders. Offenders, even non-professional ones, do not choose their

victim/targets at random but select their victims/targets according to specific criteria.

4) Exposure. Exposure to potential offenders and to high-risk situations and environments

enhances the risk of criminal victimization.

5) Associations. The homogeneity of the victim and offender populations suggests that
differential association is as important to criminal victimization as it is to crime and
delinquency. Thus individuals who are in close personal, social, or professional contact
with potential delinquents and criminals run a greater risk of being victimized than those
who are not.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2257668

6) Dangerous times and dangerous places. The risks of criminal victimization are not
evenly distributed in time or space – there are dangerous times such as evening, late night
hours and weekends. There are also dangerous places such as places of public
entertainment where the risks of becoming a victim are higher than at work or at home.

7) Dangerous behaviours. Certain behaviours such as provocation increase the risk of

violent victimization while other behaviors such as negligence and carelessness enhance
the chances of property victimization. There are other dangerous behaviours that place
those engaging in them in dangerous situations where their ability to defend and protect
themselves against attacks is greatly reduced. A good example of this is hitchhiking.

8) High-risk activities also increase the potential for victimization. Among such activities
is the pursuit of fun, which may include deviant and illegal activities. It is also well
known that certain occupations such as prostitution carry with them a higher than average
potential for criminal victimization.

9) Defensive/avoidance behaviors. Since many risks of criminal victimization could be

easily avoided, people’s attitudes to these risks may influence their chances of being
victimized. It goes without saying that risk-takers are bound to be victimized more often
than risk-avoiders. This also means that fear of crime is an important factor in reducing
victimization since those who are fearful, for example the elderly, take more precautions
against crime, even curtailing their day and night time activities thus reducing their
exposure and vulnerability to victimization.

10) Structural/cultural proneness. There is a positive correlation between powerlessness,

deprivation and the frequency of criminal victimization. Cultural stigmatization and
marginalization also enhance the risks of criminal victimization by designating certain
groups as ‘fair game’ or as culturally legitimate victims.
What the Police Mean by the

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2257668

Conclusion:

Finally we can say that in modern perspective people are victim of legally or illegally
physical, mental or both offences by single people, group, and community.Vicitimilogy
knowledge are helpful for proper know the reason behind crime and victim situation.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2257668