Theories of the Victimization Reasons

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Book Report

Victimization is the aspect of exploiting someone through the use of various approaches (Geberth, 2004). A victimization is a form of crime that causes much pain to the victim and the people around him or her. The victimization that is narrated in the book involves a young adult who was kidnapped at the age of 14 years (Smart, 2013). The victim was an ordinary student at that time and her kidnapping raised many concerns about insecurity in her neighborhood. The ordeal took place in the early morning of June 3, 2003. She was sleeping in the same bedroom with her younger sister when the kidnapper, Brain Mitchell, went to their room and threatened to kill her using a knife (Smart, 2013). The kidnapper led the victim out of the house and they walked for several hours until they met the kidnapper’s wife, Wanda Barzee, who was waiting for them in the forest. The victim was raped, starved and subjected to all kinds of bad things by her kidnapper for nine months. Thus, the patterns of abuse that followed the kidnapping could be summarized as neglect, physical abuse and mental abuse. Finally, she was rescued and joined her family (Smart, 2013).

There are about four theories that have been used to describe the various reasons for victimization. The victim precipitation theory argues that it is the victim who initiates victimization either actively or passively. Passive precipitation occurs when the victim shows attributes that encourage the attacker (Geberth, 2004). With regard to the victimization in the book, it can be argued that the victim exhibited behaviors that led the attacker to identify and follow her so that he could kidnap her. In fact, kidnappers may take quite some time before they identify their targets. For example, they need to ascertain where their targets could be living, going to school and/or attending social events, among others (Smart, 2013). The successes of the young lady in the book could have motivated Mitchell to kidnap her. Smart was successful at an early age. In fact, it is stated that she used to perform at weddings, an act that could have made her so popular. Also, she was very bright in school.

To illustrate this, the author contends that, the day before the attack, the victim had received several gifts at school due to her excellent academic performance. Therefore, her successes could have made her a target for the attacker. On the other hand, active precipitation occurs when the victim threatens the attacker. This type of precipitation occurs with regard to raping of women. For example, if women dress provocatively, then they increase the chances of being targeted by rapists. Also, they could attract rapists by acting in some ways that suggest intimacy. With regard to the victim in the book, it could be argued that the victim dressed provocatively both at school and local weddings (Smart, 2013). Through such dressing, the kidnapper could easily identify her. In fact, it is clear that Mitchell raped his victim on a daily basis, even several times on some days. It appears that he had admired his victim for a long time.

The routine activity theory suggests that the victim is identified due to his or her routine activities that expose him or her to the attacker (Geberth, 2004). Some of the factors that support the victimization proposed by this theory are the availability of targets, lack of capable guardians and the presence of motivated offenders. The routine activity theory fits in the context of the victimization in the book. First, there was the presence of a motivated offender, Brian Mitchell, who was preparing to attack. Second, the victim was available and the attacker could see her perform at weddings and go to school (Smart, 2013). Third, it is not made clear whether or not the victim’s father and mother were at home at the time when Brian Mitchell attacked the victim in her bedroom. If her parents were at home, then they could have offered some form of resistance to prevent their daughter from being taken hostage by the kidnapper. Therefore, the attacker utilized the opportunity when the victim’s parents were not able to act so that he could kidnap Smart Elizabeth (Smart, 2013). This illustration calls for the active role of guardians and/or parents in protecting their children from rapists and other attackers who could negatively impact their health, both physically and psychologically (Spilman, 2006). In fact, it has been shown that parents and/or guardians who monitor the movements of their children on a daily basis significantly reduce the chances of their children’s victimization (Geberth, 2004).

The lifestyle theory suggests that persons are targets of victimization on the premises of their lifestyle choices (Spilman, 2006). Some lifestyle choices increase the chances of being exposed to criminals. They could also expose them to situations that support crimes. Examples of lifestyle options that could expose a person to victimization are the following: being involved in drugs, being promiscuous, interacting with criminals on a daily basis, living in insecure locations, and being away from home at night. Literature tells about the victims who were attacked because they adopted consistent lifestyle choices that greatly exposed them to acts of crime (Spilman, 2006). Literature also shows that victimization that occurs in the context of this theory does not occur at random (Spilman, 2006). In fact, literature shows that the victims could share personality attributes, which are also common among criminals. Some of the personality traits could be low self-esteem and impulsivity. Thus, similarities between victims and criminals have been established. Antisocial-like behaviors increase the probability of the occurrence of victimization. The behaviors lead to victimization because they make individuals expose themselves through engagement in risky lifestyle choices. In the context of the victimization in the book, this theory cannot be applied because the victim did not associate with criminals or share any antisocial-like characteristics that are common in known criminals in the community (Smart, 2013).

The deviant place theory of victimization asserts that persons have more chances of being the victims of crime when they expose themselves to dangerous places (Geberth, 2004). Thus, this theory considers the negative impact of location with regard to victimization. For example, there are some places in urban centers that are safer than others. Places that have security lights at night are regarded as being safer than those that are not characterized by security lights. More acts of crime are committed in dark areas than in areas that are fitted with security lights. With regard to the victimization in the book, it could be argued that this theory did not have an impact on the manner the victim was attacked. She was attacked at their home, which could be regarded as being secure.

References

Geberth, V. (2004). Sex-Related Child Abduction Homicides. Law and Order, 52(3), 32-39.

Smart, E. (2013). My story (1^st ed.). New York, NY, St. Martin’s Press.

Spilman, S. K. (2006). Child abduction, parents’ distress, and social support. Violence and Victims, 21(2), 149-165.

Click Here To Order Now!

Theories of the Victimization Reasons

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)