Victimology Revisited

Victimology is a fairly new branch of criminology which studies the relationship between the offender and injured party of any crime. Unlike civil law where damages or judgments are rendered specifically upon the evidence introduced in court by both parties, criminal case judgments are often based solely on common criminal law without affording the victim a chance to influence the jury to mitigate the damages or increase the penalty during the sentencing phase. The lawyers, law enforcement officers, the judge and media all have their say, but the victim or the surviving family members are often left out in the cold to tell the true story of pain and suffering.

In 1991, the US Supreme Court allowed for a Victim Impact Statement to be introduced during the sentencing phase of a criminal trial. In that case, Payne v. Tennessee 501 US 808 (1991), the murder of a mother Charisse Christopher and her 3-year-old son was very brutal. They were murdered by Perus Tyrone Payne who had been under the influence of narcotics and alcohol. The court decided that the crime was so violent that the victim's family should be allowed to introduce evidence as to the character of the people involved and personal injury sustained by all the victims of the crime by first-hand knowledge. This allows the ability for the jury, investigators and those who track violent crimes to profile the victim or defendant as well as the perpetrator of the crime. It also allows for special consideration to be given during the sentencing from the bench which could exceed criminal law guidelines. It also affords the family an opportunity to meet face-to-face with those who wronged them.

The Victim Impact Statement falls under what courts call "mitigating damages" and is introduced during the final sentencing phase of a trial. In some cases, such as white collar crime, a victim impact panel is introduced which can aid in some kind of restorative justice. We saw this kind of group cryout during Apartheid in South Africa involving Nobel Prize winner Desmond Tutu. It is hoped that when the victim can come face-to-face with the criminal that some kind of rehabilitation can take place or perhaps it can help deter the offender from committing crimes in the future, especially when they realize the personal cost of pain and injury to the victim.

Victimology usually involves one perpetrator and one victim, but can reach out to society as a whole. Unfortunately there sometimes arises a culture of victimization which gives injured parties some kind of special status whereby they gain attention from the media, experts, peers and professionals that is unwarranted. You see this often among those who are discriminated against because of their race, gender or disability. Jeremiah Wright who rose to fame during the Barack Obama campaign would be an example of this. Sociology, class and even economics come into play, especially when victims are identified by gender like prostitutes or income like those who have been carjacked. More recently we see those who may even feel guilt for being taken advantage of by some kind of investment or gambling scam. White collar crime does immense damage in wiping out retirements and can cause the loss of someone's job or home.

Many academic institutions have arisen as a result of the study of victimology and are even included with college study coursework like Women's Studies so that society can better understand a victim's increased risk, false sense of guilt or post-traumatic stress disorder due to psychological injuries. Victims have a voice too and it is good to know that the Supreme Court has set a precedent which allows those who have been hurt by others to have a voice personally in court as well. Not all courts need to accept the statements or allow the injuried parties to appear, but it would seem only fair and ethical to allow the victim of the crime their day in court as well.