Victim Precipitation
The work of Wolfgang (1958) formulated the concept of “victim precipitation”. This theory views the victim as a participant in a crime. This is analysed in two ways. The aggressor and the provoked. Victim precipitation is defined as the extent to which the victim may have contributed directly or indirectly to their own victimization. The concept is that victimisation involves the victim and the offender, and it is the action and reaction of the parties that has lead one of them to become a victim. Victim precipitation is a behavioural idea, taking into consideration different factors as to the cause of an incident. This stems from the legal notion of culpability. The theory of victim precipitation is a difficult one to comprehend, especially
…show more content…
A victim can also be described as someone who feels helpless and passive in the face of misfortune or ill-treatment (Shorter Oxford English Dictionary). In terms of victim precipitation, the “innocent” victim is the one that can legitimately claim they did not in any way contribute to their own victimization.
In this essay I will look at theories of various victimologists on victim precipitation and examples to illustrate their theories. The aim of the victimologists on victim precipitation is to determine who is most responsible, the victim or the offender. Wolfgang in his thesis “Patterns in Criminal Homicide” stated that in victim precipitation, the victim is the first person to strike the first blow and the offender is that who responds to that initial first strike. In his study of police records of criminal homicide, he classified 26 percent of cases of criminal homicide as being victim precipitated (Walklate 1989). This is in par with the Law of Provocation. “Where on a charge of murder there is evidence that the person charged was provoked (whether by things done or by things said or by both together) to lose his self-control, and whether the provocation was enough to make a reasonable man commit murder (Homicide Act 1957)”.There may be some validity to this theory, however one size does not fit all. In biblical terms the only way to avoid victim precipitation is to turn the other
A victim can also be described as someone who feels helpless and passive in the face of misfortune or ill-treatment (Shorter Oxford English Dictionary). In terms of victim precipitation, the “innocent” victim is the one that can legitimately claim they did not in any way contribute to their own victimization.
In this essay I will look at theories of various victimologists on victim precipitation and examples to illustrate their theories. The aim of the victimologists on victim precipitation is to determine who is most responsible, the victim or the offender. Wolfgang in his thesis “Patterns in Criminal Homicide” stated that in victim precipitation, the victim is the first person to strike the first blow and the offender is that who responds to that initial first strike. In his study of police records of criminal homicide, he classified 26 percent of cases of criminal homicide as being victim precipitated (Walklate 1989). This is in par with the Law of Provocation. “Where on a charge of murder there is evidence that the person charged was provoked (whether by things done or by things said or by both together) to lose his self-control, and whether the provocation was enough to make a reasonable man commit murder (Homicide Act 1957)”.There may be some validity to this theory, however one size does not fit all. In biblical terms the only way to avoid victim precipitation is to turn the other