We live in a society of victimization, where people are much more comfortable being victimized than actually standing up for themselves. — Marilyn Manson
The word Victim has a very wide meaning to understand. In general sense, the victim means a person, who has sustained mental or physical injury at the hands of others including the State.
As all know, the State recognises only such persons as Victim who have suffered physical injuries at the hands of others. Such injuries should be defined in the codified law. The meaning given to the term victim so is very limited. It does not cover the persons who suffer injuries in the natural calamities or who suffer injuries in the collapses, war or situations like war and the injuries/ death caused by wild as well as pet animals. Similarly, the definition as given to the term victim is so that it also does not cover the injuries/ death caused due to starvation/ hunger and non-availability of medical facilities. The State so far has not been able to extend the definition of victim to the persons who are unable to make their both ends meet and even to the persons who are making their lives running by collecting garbage or even by getting themselves down the sewerage holes. Are they not victims? Definitely, they are the victim of circumstances or even we can say that they are the victim of lack of resources with the State. Perhaps, this is the only reason, that the State is not recognising such persons as the victim.
All the above, as we move in the society, we find that the dependants of the offenders are also victim. The State finds honour in convicting a criminal and feel proud in sentencing him to imprisonment. The said process is going on from centuries now. But, have we ever thought of the persons who were dependent on such imprisoned persons. Perhaps the wife, the children and the parents of the convict are also victims. The victims of circumstances or we may say that the victims of non- recognition. Nobody has ever thought as to how the dependents of such victims would rear them up. It is the primary and basic responsibility of the State to look after such persons. Otherwise, the dependents of offenders would also go on the route of committing offences to fulfil the need of food.
Victims may be of any gender, age, race, or ethnicity. Victimization may happen to an individual, family, group, or community; and a crime itself may be to a person or property. The impact of crime on an individual victim, their loved ones, and their community depends on a variety of factors, but often crime victimization has significant emotional, psychological, physical, financial, and social consequences.
Even the basic relationship with mortality is shaped by our attachment to the world, and our relationship with ourselves, (which is shaped and re-shaped in relation to significant others over the course of our lives). A key feature of this expectation is the attribution of blame either of the world or other people or toward oneself in various forms of self-recrimination or self-abandonment. There is a sense that existence is acting against my best interests, a certain interpretation. Probably untrue, but a rough approximation which allows one to always be ready, in a way, for bad things to happen.
Peer victimisation is the experience among children of being a target of the aggressive behaviour of other children, who are not siblings and not necessarily age-mates
Secondary victimization (also known as post crime victimization or double victimization ) refers to further victim-blaming from criminal justice authorities following a report of an original victimization.Rates of victimization are high, with an estimated 5.7 million individuals experiencing at least one victimization in 2016. Considering these are cases of criminal offenses, the reported rates of violent victimization are disproportionately low. Less than half (42%) report any violent crime of threatened or real force, such as physical assault, battery, or weapons offenses. Additionally, under a quarter (23%) report rape, childhood, or sexual assault to the police. Further, out of the portion that does report sexual assault or rape, about half describe the experience as upsetting, frustrating, and useless. Despite efforts to increase criminal reports of victimization, authorities and law enforcement personnel often discount individuals’ violent experiences and fail to attend to both the necessary legal actions and interpersonal actions.
When institutions or criminal justice system personnel fail to support the victimized individual, victims are vulnerable to secondary victimization.  While the appropriate and legal way to respond to primary victimization is to report the event, authorities often deny, do not believe, or blame the victim. In turn, up to 90% of victims report experiencing negative social reaction and attribute the incident as a “second rape” or “second assault”
As a consequence of social rejections and insensitivities to acknowledging trauma or violence, individuals are increasingly apt to continue not reporting. This can be detrimental to victims’ mental health, as sexual violence often happens more than once and not reporting violence helps to maintain a repeated cycle of abuse. Experiencing violence is associated with negative mental and physical outcomes, including shame, emotion deregulation, psychological stress, loss of resources, and mental health pathology. In a meta-analysis about sexual assault victimization and psychopathology, there was a medium-sized effect overall effect size was moderate after accounting for several mental health diagnoses including depression, anxiety, sociality, disordered eating, and substance abuse.
Interactions with Criminal Justice System
Despite high rates of secondary victimization, reporting rates are low. It is not unusual for criminal justice personnel to discourage victims from prosecuting their sexual assault cases due to victim-blaming behaviors and discounting victims’ traumatic experiences. One incident that attracts much controversy in the criminal justice system is reporting violent crimes on one’s intimate partner. Women who report rape by an intimate partner are seen as less credible by the system and law enforcement are more likely to encourage dropping the case. Societal standards of obeying an intimate partner and thus encompassing rape culture are prevalent in the criminal justice system. Although it is a legal crime that is being reported, victims are often turned away feeling alienated, hopeless, and unworthy and have limited options for resources beyond the system.
A possible explanation of why the criminal justice system is unlikely to believe many victims is due to victims’ fragmented memory. It is not uncommon for victims of sexual abuse to also have a traumatic brain injury or other neurobiological reactions due to assault. In her work, Campbell explains how molecular changes occur in response to trauma, and how this can influence discrepancies in victims’ reports and recollections of the event. After a traumatic incident, chemical alterations in the brain change, impacting encoding and processing the memory
The term revictimisation refers to a pattern wherein the victim of abuse and/or crime has a statistically higher tendency to be victimised again, either shortly thereafter or much later in adulthood in the case of abuse as a child. This latter pattern is particularly notable in cases of sexual abuse. While an exact percentage is almost impossible to obtain, samples from many studies suggest the rate of revictimisation for people with histories of sexual abuse is very high. The vulnerability to victimisation experienced as an adult is also not limited to sexual assault, and may include physical abuse as well.
Anti-social behaviours are actions that harm or lack consideration for the well-being of others.It has also been defined as any type of conduct that violates the basic rights of another person and any behaviour that is considered to be disruptive to others in society. This can be carried out in various ways, which includes but is not limited to intentional aggression, as well as covert and overt hostility. Anti-social behaviour also develops through social interaction within the family and community. It continuously affects a child’s temperament, cognitive ability and their involvement with negative peers, dramatically affecting children’s problem solving skills.Many people also label behaviour which is deemed contrary to prevailing norms for social conduct as anti-social behaviour.
Types of Victimization:
• Sexual Misconduct
• Sexual Touching
• Sexual Harassment
• Physical Assault/Battery
• Dating/Relationship/Domestic Violence
• Threat of Harm
Sexual Misconduct is an umbrella term that includes any non-consensual sexual activity that is committed by force or fear or mental or physical incapacitation, including through the use of alcohol or drugs. Sexual misconduct can vary in its severity and consists of a range of behavior, including rape, statutory rape (sexual contact with a person under 18 years old), sexual touching, sexual exploitation, sexual harassment, and conduct suggestive of attempting to commit any of the aforementioned acts.
Engaging in any sexual activity, clear consent must be given.
Rape – Rape is the sexual penetration (however slight) of the victim’s vagina, mouth, or rectum without consent. Rape involves penetration with (a) the use of force/fear or the threat of force/fear; or (b) with a person who is otherwise incapable of giving consent, including situations where the individual is under the influence of alcohol or drugs and this condition was or should have reasonably been known to the accused.
India is the most dangerous country for sexual violence against women, according to :
The survey, which measures sexual and non-sexual violence, discrimination, cultural traditions, health care and human trafficking, has been criticized for reflecting more perception than data.
But India barely fares better in other studies that rank its treatment of women. It placed 131st of 152 countries in the Georgetown Institute’s global ranking of women’s inclusion and well-being.
India’s National Crime Records Bureau reported 338,954 crimes against women – including 38,947 rapes – in 2016, the most recent government data available. That’s up from 309,546 reported incidents of violence against women in 2013.
High-profile attacks on Indian women have shocked this nation of 1.3 billion in recent years. The 2012 gang rape of a 23-year-old student in Delhi who died from her injuries caused public outrage. The incident helped spur an amendment to India’s criminal law, which broadened the definition of sexual crimes against women to include stalking, acid attacks and voyeurism.
The effects and aftermath of rape can include both physical trauma and psychological trauma. Deaths associated with rape are known to occur, though the prevalence of fatalities varies considerably across the world. For rape victims the more common consequences of sexual violence are those related to reproductive health, mental health, and social wellbeing.
As on May 15, 780 cases of rape were reported – which boils down to an average of over 5 cases each day. Compared to the number of cases in 2017 upto May 15, data shows a 3.03% increase in the number of rapes reported in the country’s capital.
Sexual Touching– Sexual touching, also known as sexual battery, is the act of making unwanted and sexually offensive contact (clothed or unclothed) with an intimate body part of another person or action, which causes immediate apprehension that sexual touch will occur. Intimate body parts include sexual organs, the anus, the groin, breasts or buttocks of any person. Sexual touching includes situations in which the accused engages in the contacts described with a person who is incapable of giving consent.
Sexual Exploitation– Sexual exploitation is the taking advantage of a non-consenting person or situation for personal benefit or gratification or for the benefit of anyone other than the alleged victim; and the behavior does not constitute rape, sexual touching or sexual harassment. Sexual exploitation includes, but is not limited to:
• Photographing or making audio or video recordings of sexual activity without consent;
• Dissemination of images or recordings without consent of the participant(s);
• Allowing others to observe sexual activity without the knowledge or consent of the partner;
• Voyeurism (peeping tom);
• Knowingly transmitting a sexually transmitted infection or HIV to another student;
• Prostituting another person;
• Giving alcohol or other drugs to another student with the intention of rending him or her incapable of giving consent.
Sexual Harassment– Sexual Harassment is any unwelcome sexual conduct or behavior that creates an intimidating, hostile or offensive working or educational environment. A comprehensive list of prohibited behaviors can be found in the Tiger Lore.
Stalking– Stalking is prohibited. It is willful, malicious and repeated following of a person or harassing behaviors against another person, putting the person in reasonable fear for his or her personal safety, or the safety of his or her family. This includes use of notes, mail, gifts, communication technology (e.g. voicemail, text messages, internet and social networking sites – using any electronic or telecommunication is also known as cyber-stalking) to harass or convey a threat. This offense may also be treated as a type of sexual misconduct in certain situations.
Physical Assault/Battery – Physical assault or battery is prohibited. It is to touch or strike a person against his or her will or to threaten violence against that person.
Assault is an attempt to injure and/or frighten someone that can cause fear of immediate harm in the victim. It is often associated with battery. Assault includes threats and threatening behavior towards others. Battery is the intentional physical touching of someone without their consent. If the victim has been only threatened, it is assault. But, if the victim has been injured or distressed by touching, it is battery. Even an offensive touching qualifies as battery.
Dating/Relationship/Domestic Violence– Dating/Relationship/Domestic Violence is prohibited. This type of violence may be emotional, verbal, physical and/or sexual abuse by an intimate partner, family members or parties in a dating relationship.
Theft – Theft is the unlawful and unauthorized removal of any personal property for ones own use.
Threat of Harm – Conveyances of threats, which result in, or may result in, harm to any person by willful and deliberate means is prohibited.
Category of people that are also the victims of circumstances are:
We all know and we all find persons with torn clothes sitting on the stairs of Temples, Gurudwaras, Churches and Mosques and other religious places. Is it not that they are also the victims of circumstances. Perhaps they are not given the opportunity to educate and employ themselves, they would either depend on the alms or otherwise they would engage themselves in petty jobs like selling balloons and like other small toys. If it is raining outside or wheather is not conducive for the human being to live openly, it is a bad day for them, as they may not get the bare bread on that day. No doubt, we feel proud by passing an anti bagging law, but we have no proposal to rehabilitate such persons.
During our daily hither thither, we notice several children working in the toy shops, grocery shops, working on the petty eateries and so. We so notice them working with their tiny hands without a sweater in winters and working before public hearths in summers. Do we do anything to compensate or re-compensate them. We just pass by such several incidents in a day. They really are the victims and they are the persons for whom there is required a compensation scheme. It is praise worthy that the Government has required compulsory education for all children upto 14 years of age and where they are also provided mid day meals, but the menace go on unchecked.
Child maltreatment is a significant global public health problem that impacts children’s health and mental health while young but also can follow them into adulthood, potentially carrying forward patterns of abusive parenting. To effectively manage and eliminate child maltreatment, a uniform definition of abuse and neglect must be developed for proper monitoring of prevalence. Reporting laws and protection of children should be followed with care, and evidence-based prevention strategies and interventions should be disseminated widely.
Article 24 enshrined in the Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles of State Policy, lays down that no child below the age of 14 years shall be employed to work in any factory or mine or engaged in any other hazardous employment.
Children as victims of violence:
In the previous year, a quarter of the children had experienced a completed victimization, one in eight had experienced an injury, and one in a hundred required medical attention as a result. Nonfamily physical assaults were the most numerous. Contact sexual abuse occurred to 3.2% of girls and 0.6% of boys. There were also substantial numbers of incidents of attempted kidnappings and violence directed to children’s genitals.
Juveniles are twice as likely as adults to be victims of serious violent crime and three times as likely to be victims of assault. Many of these victims are quite young. Law enforcement data indicate that 1 in 18 victims of violent crime is under age 12. In one-third of the sexual assaults reported to law enforcement, the victim is under age 12. In most cases involving serious violent crime, juvenile victims know the perpetrator, who is not the stereotypical “stranger,” but a family member or acquaintance.
Who in order to meet their both ends, go on to get their bodies sold even against their wishes. Poverty perhaps is one of the reasons, beside others , they land in such trouble which is hell like situation. Our society has not been able to purify this issue so far, although the high powered authorities claim to have a control over the crime. Is not it a crime? Are the persons involved in this crime are not required to be compensated and requires rehabilitation ?
Stigma is a mark of disgrace, a social discrediting, or a spoiled identity. For sex workers, legal, cultural and social discourse is characterised by “prurience, titillation, outrage and disgust”.
Narratives of sex work as undesirable and sex workers as disposable victims are heavily steeped in our cultural imagination.
Sex workers living with HIV have been incarcerated, despite no evidence they have transmitted HIV or engaged in unsafe practices.
Mere knowledge of someone’s sex work can be used against them by abusive partners, as blackmail or suggesting they are unfit parents in custody cases.
Both from the angle of the society as well as from the natural angle, VICTIMS. These persons are called the Transgender. We forgot that they are the human beings first, irrespective of their sex organs. On the very birth of such child, they are given to the people of those community. This community from the times immemorial is living their life on the alms that they take on the birth of a child or on the marriage ceremony. These people are not given any occupation. Neither they are given any skill nor training so as to make them competent to earn their livelihood. We perhaps consider that they are meant for begging only. No doubt, some steps have been taken in this area by providing them a status in legal terms, but financially they sit on the older footings only. Recently the bill for protection of transgenders have been passed.
As is too often the case in the reporting of anti-transgender violence, many of these victims are misgendered in local police statements and media reports, which can delay our awareness of deadly incidents. In the pursuit of greater accuracy and respect for transgender and gender expansive people in both life and death, HRC offers guidelines for journalists and others who report on transgender people.
Sadly, 2018 has already seen at least 26 transgender people fatally shot or killed by other violent means. As HRC continues to work toward justice and equality for transgender people, we mourn those we have lost:
Christa Leigh Steele-Knudslien, 42, was found dead in her home on January 5 in North Adams, Massachusetts. Steele-Knudslien organized and produced the Miss Trans New England and other pageants, and was loved and known by many in both the local and national trans community.
Viccky Gutierrez, 33, a transgender woman from Honduras was stabbed and had her body set ablaze inside her Los Angeles home on January 10. Friends described her as “a young trans Latina immigrant woman whose warm smile would give anyone comfort.”
Celine Walker, 36, was fatally shot in a hotel room on on February 4 in Jacksonville, Florida. It was not known for several days that Walker was trans because local police claimed to not refer to victims as transgender. Investigators are still looking for a suspect in her death.
And many more..
HRC is deeply concerned about another incident which we are following closely. On July 19, 30-year-old Jessie Sumlar was found stabbed to death in Jacksonville, Florida. According to loved ones, Sumlar regularly performed in drag and identified as queer. HRC calls for further investigation into the causes of Sumlar’s death, including whether discriminatory bias toward transgender and/or gender non-conforming people played a motivating factor.
In November of 2018, HRC Foundation released “A National Epidemic: Fatal Anti-Transgender Violence in America in 2018,” a heartbreaking report honoring the at least 22 transgender people killed in 2018 and detailing the contributing and motivating factors that lead to this tragic violence.
Victims of social aggression and degression
There is no scheme for such people for their financial aid and assistance. Perhaps in a democratic set-up like ours, we tend to make policies to earn favour from larger section of the society only ignoring the all interest of section having a lesser number or we may also say that the category of victims, perhaps do not raise their voice for their financial and legal support.
As a society, we need to take care of all of its constituents. Each and every member of the society is important to the nation. They people are also intelligent one. That is why they have been able to earn their livelihood without any support from any quarters and without even having a piece of agriculture land to survive. We need to recognise their contribution and we need to recognise that they are also the important members of the society. They are the victims of the social acts and such acts needs to be curbed and these people need to be given skill and training, so as to put them on honourable vocations. They need to be compensated, re-compensated and rehabilitated.
The Constitution of India guarantees:
Equality before the law and equal protection of laws to each and every person in the country
Prohibits discrimination on grounds of race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth or residence
Prohibits discrimination on grounds of race, caste, sex or place of birth in any public employment
Abolishes ‘Untouchability’ and declares practice of ‘untouchability’ in any manner whatsoever, a punishable offence
The first Indian law that came into force to provide for punishment for the preaching and practice of ‘Untouchability’ and for any matter connected with it was ‘The Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955’. Even calling a scheduled caste by her/his caste name e.g. calling a ‘chamar’ a ‘chamar’ is a punishable offence under this law.
In 1989, the Government of India enacted ‘The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act’, which recognises various kinds of acts of violence and discrimination inflicted upon the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes by Non-Scheduled Castes and Non-Scheduled Tribes as punishable offences. It also provides for establishment of Special Courts at district level to try the offences under this Act, appointment of Special Public Prosecutors for the purpose of conducting cases in Special Courts, and imposition of collective fine by the State.
Other people also suffer victimization at the hands of others who are powerful
Harassment is unwanted behavior that you find offensive, where the other person’s behavior is because:
You have a protected characteristic there is any connection with a protected characteristic (for example, you are treated as though you have a particular characteristic, even if the other person knows this isn’t true)
Unwanted behavior could include:
1.spoken or written abuse
3.tweets or comments on websites and social media
4.images and graffiti
7.banter that is offensive to you
Anything that is unwelcome to you is unwanted. You don’t need to have previously objected to it.The unwanted behavior must have the purpose or effect of violating your dignity, or creating a degrading, humiliating, hostile, intimidating or offensive environment for you.
To be unlawful, the treatment must have happened in one of the situations that are covered by the Equality Act. For example, in the workplace or when you are receiving goods or services.
This is treating someone badly because they have done a ‘protected act’, or because an employer, service provider or other organization believes that you have done or are going to do a protected act. The reason for the treatment does not need to be linked to a protected characteristic.
A protected act is:
1.making a claim or complaint of discrimination (under the Equality Act)
2.helping someone else to make a claim by giving evidence or information
3.making an allegation that you or someone else has breached the Equality Act
4.doing anything else in connection with the Equality Act
Bullying can be defined as offensive, intimidating, malicious or insulting behavior, an abuse of misuse of power that undermines, humiliates, denigrates or injures the recipient (emotionally or physically) – but it doesn’t have a legal definition in the Equality Act. In fact bullying behavior is very similar to harassment, but it is not related to a protected characteristic.
That said, the absence of bullying from the statute books doesn’t mean that people who are being bullied – rather than harassed – have no protections. Neither does it mean that bullies can get away with doing whatever they like as long as their behaviour is not concerning a protected characteristic.
Employers have a ‘duty of care’ for their employees. No good firm would want its people working in an intimidating, hostile or offensive environment.
In any case, organizations that don’t act on bullying effectively are likely to see lower levels of performance, productivity and engagement, as well as increased absence and high staff turnover – all of which can damage the bottom line.
People who feel they are being bullied are usually advised to raise a formal grievance if the matter cannot be resolved informally.
Dealing with grievances internally can be costly in time and money, and sap morale among staff. A breakdown in mutual trust and confidence at work because of bullying could leave employers open to claims of constructive dismissal at an employment tribunal.
So it’s in every employer’s interests to promote a safe, healthy and fair environment in which people can work without fear of being bullied, harassed or victimized.
Equally it’s also in an employer’s interests to try and nip unwanted behavior in the bud by dealing with matters quickly and informally, where they can, thereby protecting the working relationship.
Four Scenarios Illustrating the Degree of Victim/Offender Responsibility According to Victim Precipitation Theory
Degree of Criminal Intent of the Perpetrator
None à Some à More à Much
A woman who has suffered years of abuse stabs and kills her husband in self-defense as he is beating her again.
Equal Responsibility Victim using the services of a prostitute leaves his wallet on the bed stand and leaves. She decides to keep the money in his wallet.
Victim leaves keys in his car while he runs into a store. A teenager impulsively steals the car and wrecks it.
A sex offender kidnaps a screaming young girl from a playground and molests her.
Much ß More ß Some ß None
Degree of Victim Facilitation or Provocation/Precipitation
Key facts about violent crime victimization
In 2016, the rate of violent crime victimization among adolescents reached 28 per 1,000 population, a substantial decline from a 1994 peak of 181 per 1,000. Much of this change can be attributed to the decline in simple assaults, which fell from 119 to 20 per 1,000 over that time period.
Younger adolescents had higher rates of violent crime victimization than their older peers: In 2016, young people ages 12 to 14 experienced a rate of 35 violent crimes per 1,000, compared with 27 and 23 per 1,000 among adolescents ages 15 to 17 and 18 to 20, respectively.
Among adolescents ages 15 to 17, non-Hispanic black youth are more likely to be the victims of violent crime: From 2014–2016, the rates were 39, 26, and 15 per 1,000 population, for non-Hispanic black, non-Hispanic white, and Hispanic youth, respectively.
Trends in violent crime victimization
By 2016, the rate of victimization from violent crimes (which include rape, robbery, and aggravated and simple assaults) for adolescents ages 12 to 20 had fallen to a little over one-sixth of the rate in the mid-1990s—from a high of 181 victimizations per 1,000 population, to 28 victimizations per 1,000. There were major declines in most types of violent crime during this period, including simple assault, aggravated assault, and robbery. For example, from 1994 to 2016, rates of aggravated assault victimization fell from 38 to 5 per 1,000 adolescents ages 12 to20
Differences by type of victimization:
Most adolescent victims of violent crime are victims of simple assault. In 2016, simple assault accounted for 76 percent of all violent crime victimization for adolescents ages 12 to 14, 67 percent for adolescents ages 15 to 17, and 62 percent for adolescents ages 18 to 20. Aggravated assault was the next-most common, followed by rape/sexual assault and robbery
Differences by age
In 2014–2016, adolescents ages 12 to 14 experienced higher rates of violent crime victimization than their older peers (36 per 1,000, compared with 26 and 21 per 1,000 among youth ages 15 to 17 and 12 to 14, respectively). Children ages 12 to 14 experienced the highest rate of simple assault (28 per 1,000, compared with 17 and 12 per 1,000 among youth ages 15 to 17 and 18 to 20, respectively). Adolescents ages 18 to 20 experienced higher rates of rape or sexual assault than their younger peers (2.4 per 1,000, compared with 1.4 and 1.0 per 1,000 among youth ages 15 to 17 and 12 to 14, respectively) (Appendix 2).
Differences by gender
Among youth ages 12 to 14, males had a higher rate of violent crime victimization than their female peers in 2014–2016: The overall victimization rate was 38 per 1,000 males, compared with 34 per 1,000 among females. Differences were particularly stark for rates of simple assault, at 31 simple assaults per 1,000 males, compared with 25 per 1,000 females (Appendix 2).
Among youth ages 15 to 17, males again had a higher rate of violent crime victimization than their female peers, at 29 and 22 per 1,000, respectively. Males had higher victimization rates for aggravated assault, simple assault, or robbery, but a lower rate than their female peers for sexual assault or rape.
Among young adults ages 18 to 20, males still had a slightly higher rate of overall violent crime victimization than their female peers, at 23 and 20 per 1,000, respectively. Males were more than three times as likely to be the victims of robbery (4.8 versus 1.3 per 1,000), but females were much more likely to be the victims of sexual assault or rape (4.3 versus less than 1 per 1,000)
Differences by race and Hispanic origin
In 2014–2016, non-Hispanic white youth ages 18 to 20 had a slightly higher rate of violent crime victimization than their non-Hispanic black and Hispanic peers (24 versus 20 and 18 per 1,000, respectively). This disparity was driven by differences in the rates of simple assault. Among youth ages 12 to 14 and 15 to 17 in 2014–2016, non-Hispanic black youth had higher rates of violent crime victimization than their non-Hispanic white and Hispanic peers. Among 12- to 14-year-olds, non-Hispanic black youth experienced a victimization rate of 39 per 1,000, compared with 34 per 1,000 for both their non-Hispanic white and Hispanic peers. Among 15- to 17-year-olds, the rates were 39, 26, and 15 per 1,000, respectively
The rate of robbery victimization increased from 1.7 per 1,000 persons in 2016 to 2.3 in 2017.
The portion of persons age 12 or older who were victims of violent crime increased from 0.98% in 2015 to 1.14% in 2017.
From 2015 to 2017, the percentage of persons who were victims of violent crime increased among males, whites, those ages 25 to 34, those age 50 and over, and those who had never been married.
From 2016 to 2017, the rate of overall property crime declined from 118.6 victimizations per 1,000 households to 108.4, while the burglary rate fell from 23.7 to 20.6.
Percentage of Adolescent Victims and Non-victims of Violence Expected to Experience Adult Problem Outcomes.
There is a large body of evidence that demonstrates a close relationship between offending and victimization. One reason for this is that some kinds of crime arise out of mutual interactions between people, to the extent that victims and offenders are almost interchangeable: the clearest example would be fights in and around pubs on a Saturday night. Even where crimes do not arise immediately out of interpersonal interactions, people often tend to commit offences on others within their social circle, because these people are most accessible to them, or because they are paying off an old score. This way we can say that victimization is the relation between victim and the accuse, there is no exact definition available on it.
There’s a real conundrum in trauma therapy. People with unresolved and still resolving complex developmental trauma move toward familiar and undesirable roles as a result of unconscious “programming”—traditionally victim, perpetrator or abuser, and bystander. This isn’t because we want to, but because we are conditioned to, even to take on these roles as a matter of survival.
For example, someone who was routinely abused as a child is likely to have learned to acquiesce to the abuser, and conform her or himself to the expectations of the abuser and the experience of the abuse in ways which were most self-protective—even when that meant possibly seeking out the abuse as a way to predict, control and diminish the impact. The victim may, for example, have learned that to go along with it still meant the bad thing would happen, but maybe not additional bad things. He may have learned to suppress feelings to cry if crying resulted in harsher punishment, leading to adult difficult accessing emotions. She may have learned to believe that she was at fault and deserving of punishment for “doing something wrong”, when that something wrong was essentially ordinary and unavoidable, since children are not adults, and adults aren’t perfect, anyway. People need time to learn.
Victim-Offender Reconciliation Programs (VORPs)
VORPs are an integral component of restorative justice philosophy.
Central to the VORP process is the bringing together of victim and offender in face-to-face meetings mediated by a person trained in mediation theory .