Victims of Crime (AQA A Level Sociology): Revision Note

What is a victim?

• The United Nations defines victims as:

Individuals who have suffered harm – including mental, physical or emotional suffering, economic loss or violations of their basic rights – as a result of acts or omissions that violate the laws of the state

• The study of victims is called victimology

• There are two main approaches:

  • Positivist victimology – focuses on the personal and social factors that make some individuals more likely to become victims

  • Critical victimology – examines how wider power structures (e.g. the state, capitalism, patriarchy) shape victimisation and the definition of who counts as a 'victim'

Positivist victimology

Core ideas

• Miers (1989) identified three key features of positivist victimology:

  • Identifies factors and patterns of victimisation, focusing on who is more likely to be victimised across age, gender, class, and ethnicity

  • Concentrates on interpersonal crimes of violence

  • Aims to identify victims who may contribute to their own victimisation through behaviour or lifestyle

Examples

• Hentig (1948)

  • Argued that certain groups (e.g. women, the elderly, or those labelled 'mentally subnormal') are more likely to be victims

  • Hentig suggested that low social status, or lifestyle factors like displaying wealth, can invite victimisation

• Wolfgang (1958)

  • A study of 588 homicides in Philadelphia found that 26% involved victim precipitation, where the victim triggered the event (e.g., by starting a fight)

Evaluation of positivist victimology

Strengths

• Highlights patterns of victimisation

  • Draws attention to the fact that some groups are more at risk (e.g. women, the poor, and minorities)

  • Makes it possible to design crime prevention policies targeting at-risk groups

• Identifies interactions in crimes

  • Wolfgang’s homicide study shows that victim–offender relationships can play a role in triggering violence

  • In some violent encounters, it is largely by chance which party becomes the victim

Criticisms

• Victim blaming

  • Risks of portraying victims as responsible for their own victimisation

  • E.g., rape victims accused of 'inviting' assault are effectively put on trial themselves in court

• Ignores wider contexts of power

  • Fails to explain why some groups are consistently victimised

  • Neglects the role of poverty, patriarchy, and racism in shaping vulnerability

• Marxist critique

  • Official surveys (e.g., CSEW) only recognise victims that the state chooses to see

  • Others — such as people killed by the police — are often denied victim status

Critical victimology

Core ideas

• Critique of positivism: Critical victimologists argue that positivist victimology conceals the true extent and causes of victimisation

• Victimhood is socially constructed: Whether someone is recognised as a victim depends on their position in power structures (class, gender, ethnicity)

• Focus of analysis:

  • Structural factors (patriarchy, poverty, racism) that put powerless groups at greater risk

  • How the state defines who counts as a victim: the state has the power to grant or deny victim status

    • E.g., police choosing not to prosecute a man for domestic abuse effectively denies the woman recognition as a victim

• De-labelling:

  • The state and powerful institutions often deny or downplay victimhood, concealing the crimes of the powerful and denying redress to the powerless

• Hierarchy of victimisation:

  • The most powerless are both most likely to be victimised and least likely to be acknowledged as victims

Example

• Tombs and Whyte (2007)

  • Health and safety crimes by employers are often hidden

  • Injured workers are denied victim status because cases are labelled as 'accidents'

• Hillsborough disaster (1989)

  • 97 football fans were unlawfully killed

  • They were only officially recognised as victims in 2016 after decades of state denial and media victim-blaming

• Grenfell Tower disaster (2017)

  • 72 people died in a fire in a tower block largely inhabited by working-class and minority ethnic residents

  • Cladding was highly flammable, linked to cost-cutting and regulatory failure

  • Survivors and bereaved families faced years of delay, denial, and inadequate support — reflecting how the state and corporate actors de-label victims and protect the powerful

  • Critical victimologists argue Grenfell highlights structural inequality, class, and race in determining who is most at risk and how long it takes for victims to be acknowledged

The role of the media

• Christie (1986) argues that some victims are seen as more 'ideal' than others

  • E.g., child victims like Madeleine McCann attract widespread sympathy and media coverage

  • Victims from poorer or minority backgrounds are often ignored or devalued

Marxist victimology

• Argues the poor and powerless are disproportionately victimised by crimes of the powerful (e.g., corporate crime, state crime, green crime)

• Often victims are invisible, unaware they are victims (e.g. consumers paying inflated prices due to price-fixing)

• Grenfell Tower illustrates how working-class, ethnically diverse residents suffer most from state neglect and corporate negligence

Evaluation of critical victimology

Strengths

• Recognises the role of power

  • Highlights the role of the state, police, and media in shaping who counts as a victim

  • Shows how structural inequalities (poverty, gender, ethnicity) explain patterns of victimisation

• Challenges 'official' definitions

  • Exposes how the state often denies victim status to protect powerful interests

  • Reveals how harms are redefined as 'accidents' instead of crimes (e.g., workplace deaths, Grenfell)

Criticisms

• Over-emphasises structural factors

  • Tends to portray people as passive victims of social forces

  • Neglects individual choices or circumstances that may increase risk

• Limited practical application

  • Provides critical insights but is less effective than positivist victimology in designing specific prevention policies

  • Harder to translate into concrete interventions

• New Right critique

  • Argues that some victims share responsibility for their victimisation

  • E.g., people who fail to use available security (locks, alarms, CCTV) are 'soft targets'

  • From this view, prevention lies in personal responsibility rather than structural reform

Patterns of victimisation

• A strong positivist illustration of victimology comes from the Crime Survey of England and Wales (CSEW), carried out annually by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) and the Home Office

• The CSEW highlights consistent patterns in social class, age, gender, ethnicity, and repeat victimisation

• Social class:

  • The poorest groups face higher risks of violent crime, including homicide

  • Those most at risk include:

    • The 'hard-pressed' – unemployed, long-term sick, low-income families, and people in rented housing

    • Residents in areas with high physical disorder, such as widespread vandalism, graffiti, and damaged housing

    • Communities with high overall deprivation

  • Poorer households are also far more likely to be victims of burglary compared to wealthier households

• Age:

  • Young people are more likely to be victimised, while the elderly are more vulnerable to neglect and abuse

  • Young males are twice as likely to be victims of violence as females

  • The group most at risk of murder are infants under one year old

• Gender:

  • Men are more likely to suffer violent attacks, especially from strangers

  • Around 70% of homicide victims are male

  • Women are at higher risk of domestic violence, sexual assault, and harassment

  • About 90% of rape victims are women

• Ethnicity:

  • Minority ethnic groups are at greater risk of racially motivated crime, over-policing, and harassment

  • They are less likely to report crimes due to distrust of the police and fears of not being taken seriously

• Repeat victimisation:

  • A small proportion of victims suffer multiple incidents, accounting for a large share of total crimes

  • The poor and homeless are most prone to repeat victimisation

  • Female victims of domestic violence suffer repeat victimisation because of:

    • lack of resources for economic independence

    • fear of further violence

    • fear of losing their children

The impact of victimisation

• Physical & emotional harm:

  • Victims may experience injury, trauma, anxiety, PTSD, disturbed sleep, and difficulties in social functioning

• Indirect victims:

  • Family, friends, and communities can also suffer

  • Fear of crime often spreads, even among those not directly affected

• Secondary victimisation:

  • Victims can be further traumatised by insensitive responses from the police, courts, or media

  • Feminists argue that rape victims often experience a 'double violation', being treated so poorly by authorities that the justice process itself becomes abusive

• Fear of crime:

  • Victimisation often leads to long-term fear, restricting behaviour and lowering quality of life

  • E.g., women may feel unsafe going out alone after experiencing an attack