Wednesday, March 21, 2012

Victim facilitation, victim precipitation, and victim provocation

Annmarie Griffin

Pod 3 Journal Assignment

 

Victim facilitation, victim precipitation, and victim provocation

Victim Precipitation/Facilitation/Provocation- are terms used to describe a victims role in a crime.

Focuses on the prevalence of the victims involvement

Minimize victim blaming and enhance victim personal responsibility

Victim Facilitation was introduced in the writings of Marvin Wolfgang (E Notes 2012). This term is used in a way as to not blame the victim but to blame the interaction that the victim has that makes them susceptible to becoming a victim of crime. Victim facilitation allows for the study of the actions that make a victim vulnerable to being a victim of a crime. The text states that "victim facilitation ought to be reserved for situations in which victims carelessly and inadvertently make it easier for a thief to steal (Karmen, A., 2010)." Their negligence allows for certain crimes to be committed against them. They share a certain amount of blame. Through their thoughtlessness they increase their risks of becoming a victim. "Facilitation is similar to a catalyst in a chemical reaction that, given the right ingredients and conditions, speeds up the interaction (Karmen, A., 2010)." Auto theft and burglary are the two most notable crimes cited in studies of facilitation (Karmen, A., 2010). The text stated that a crime of facilitation may be when a person leaves a house door open and burglar walks in and steals their stuff. It went on to say these any crimes committed would be considered an illegal act of trespass by intruders seeking to commit thefts (Karmen, A., 2010)". If I left my door open it does not mean it is an invitation for someone to come in and steal my possessions. It was interesting to see that younger households in poorer neighborhoods with more residents were more prone to facilitation than their counterparts. I want to go to law school and this notion surprises me. I am unsure if it is in-fact the correct legal definition of the scenario depicted. I do not believe that anyone asks to be a victim of a crime. The notion that one would even blame the victim of a crime is astounding. It reminds me of movies and stories of the past where we have seen rape victims being re-victimized on the stand by being blamed for the act against them simply due to their style of dress or other behaviors.

Victim Precipitation/Provocation are ideas associated with victims of murder, robbery, assault, and rape. Precipitation is based upon the notion that the victim contributed to the acts against them. The text equates this to a person who attempts to rob a drug dealer and gets shot in the process (Karmen, A., 2010). This notion to me is plausible. It seems likely that if you are doing illegal things then you may place yourself in harm’s way to become a victim. If you were to commit and armed robbery with a toy gun and were shot and killed in the process it would be an example of precipitation. It does not justify the crime but makes sense in the realm of things.

"Provocation means that the loser is more responsible than the victor for the fight that ensued (Karmen, A., 2010)". It basically means that if you were to randomly attack someone and they defended themselves where you got more seriously hurt, then it would be your own fault. In my chosen profession this equates to a self-defense strategy for the person that hurt the other more seriously.

 

Karmen, A. (2010). Crime Victims: An Introduction to Victimology. Belmont: Wadsworth.

1 comment:

  1. Example:
    Andrew says something that Bill and his friend found offensive,
    Bill's friend confronts Andrew and Andrew says "I'm sorry" to Bill's friend. Bill's friend refuses to accept the apology and forgive Andrew so Andrew tells Bill's friend to be patient with him as he has Asperger's Syndrome. Bill's friend yells the insult "Asperger's syndrome doesn't excuse you!" he then goes to Bill who defends his friend without question. Bill yells at Andrew the same remark only 5-6 times this time Andrew, then goes to the Pastor who doesn't like what happened and promises to do something about it, but never does. Andrew is then told to forgive Bill after Bill lies to the Pastor and everyone tolerates the situation. Then out of anger, Andrew damages Bill's property by spray painting his house, smashing his car window 4-5 times. Andrew then leaves Bill a letter without signing his name but has his handwriting and fingerprints on it. Bill terrified; then goes to the police with his roommates and accuses Andrew of property damage, then Andrew tells the Police what Bill and his friend did to him, Bill admits to lying, harassment and bullying along with his friend. However, the police tell Andrew "you did it!" when they show up to give him a ticket, Andrew then goes to court and enters a "not guilty" plea due to both being provoked and police making a mistake charging Andrew. Mediation happens and Bill lies by denying saying anything offensive to Andrew when however the report says Bill confessed to provoking Andrew. Andrew's lawyer admits that there was harassment prior to the crimes happening. Bill explains what he meant by those remarks and Andrew sees things clearer now but the Mediator tells Bill that words do matter. Case dismissed.

    So here, what we get from this story is that the victim and his friend admits that he did wrong and still lies about it in mediation. So Bill's behavior provoked a reasonable man like Andrew to commit property damage against Bill because Bill yelled remarks about Andrew's disability and gloated about not needing to apologize to Andrew.

    ReplyDelete