Principal Divisions of

Criminology
Introduction
The study of criminology has Five
(5) principal divisions, namely:
Criminal Etiology, Sociology of Law,
Penology or Correction, Crminilistics
incipal and Victimology.
At the end of the lesson, The first division of criminology is
f each the criminal etiology which is the
students should be able to:
 define and differentiate the principal scientific analysis of the causes of
ld of crimes. sociology of law is the second
e of victims divisions of criminology;
division of criminology which attempt
 explain the etiology of crime by knowing
to offer scientific analysis of the
ecipitation, the approaches and explanations of
rovocation. conditions under which penal or
criminal behavior.
criminal laws develop as a process of
 explain the relationship between society
formal social control. It is also define as
and law
the study of law and its application. The
 explain penology as a division of third division of criminology is
criminology. penology or correction which is the
 discuss the scope of criminalistics and study that deals with the punishment
how it helps the field of criminology. and the treatment of criminals and
 differentiates victim precipitation, victim youthful offenders. The fourth is the
facilitation and victim. provocation form criminalistics division which is the
each other. study of criminal things. The last
 identify the different personalities that division is victimology which is the
pioneered the study of victimology. study of victim.
 identify and explain the theories of
victimization. Criminal Etiology
Criminal Etiology is the division of
criminology which attempts to provide scientific analysis of the causes of crimes. It is
otherwise known as the area of CRIMINOGENESIS or CRIME CAUSATION. The term
eitiology comes from the Greek word “etio” which means causation and “ology” which
means the scientific study of something.
As regards any attempt at scientific studies of the causes of crime, two things or objects
should be considered, and these are man and his criminal behavior, in relation to criminal or
penal law which is defined as that branch or division of public law which defines crimes,
treats of their nature, and provides for their punishment.
NOTA BENE: Causes of Crime refers to the factors or circumstances that apply significantly
more to offenders than to non-offenders and that potentially a direct but not necessarily
immediate link to crime.

A. APPROACHES AND METHODS IN THE CRIMINOLOGY FOR STUDY OF

CRIMES
1. Biological Approach–It study criminal in biological perspectives. Biological
explanations of crime assume that some people are 'born criminals', who are
physiologically distinct from non-criminals.

2. Psychogenic Approach - Psychologist investigators are pursing the psychogenic

approach to the criminology behavior, in which the emphasis is based on linking
criminal behavior to mental state, especially mental evidence disease; mental
disorders, pathologies, and emotional problems and they repeatedly assert that crime
is outcome of criminal mind. The root cause of the criminal behavior neither
environmental nor biological than question seems to be unclear.

3. Multifactor Approach - A long-standing criticism of the earlier bio-organic and

psychological approach to crime has much of the work entered around the search for
single factor or single set of like factors that could be shown to account for all
criminal behavior. The multifactor approach in criminology grew out of the
discrepancies and arguments attending the single-factor tradition of the earlier days
and its adherent argument for the approach to crime that would reconcile the disparate
orientation and contribute made by a variety of the factors. That underlying
assumption was that different crimes are result of different combination of the factors.

B. TYPES OF EXPLANATION TO CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR

1. Single or Unitary Cause - This approach views that criminal behavior is caused only
by one factor or variable which is any of the following: social, biological, or mental.

2. Multiple Factor Theory - This approach views that criminal conduct is not a product
of a single cause or factor but a combination of several factors. Some factors are
playing a major reason while the other is playing the minor role. This is the accepted
theory of crime causation.

3. Electric Theory - is approach views that criminal behavior at one or more factors,
while in other instances it is cause by another set of factors.

C. EARLY EXPLANATION TO THE EXISTENCE OF CRIMINALITY

1. Crime is caused by Demon - Accordingly, men commit anti-social acts because the
demon, spirits, or some from the "other world" instructed, forced or pushed them to
do so. This belief is true during the pagan age when any wrongful act of men is
attributed to the will of devils or other supernatural beings. To free men from the evil
spirits people resulted to rituals to drive the evil spirits and to avoid them from being
under their influence and control.

2. Crime is caused by Divine Will - Men manifest criminal behavior because they are
sinful so God wants to punish them. During the ancient period criminals are given the
right of sanctuary whereby they can seek refuge in the temples of God so that they
will be free from prosecution and punishment. Early American system of prison
 management does not allow inmates to talk with one another or prisoners are place in
single cell so as to give them opportunity to ask for forgiveness from God.

3. The explanation that crime is the result of the free will of men (Classical school
of thought by BECARRIA) - According to criminologist Bacarria, men are
fundamentally a biological organism with intelligence and rationality which control
their behavior. Before men do something (commit crimes), they try to determine the
amount of pain they will suffer and the amount of pleasure they will receive. Their
future actions will depend on the algebraic sum of the two considerations if there will
be more pain than pleasure, they will desist from doing the act. Finally, crime is cause
by the rational effort of men to augment their pleasure and to minimize their pains.

4. The explanations that crime us result of the free will of men but were committed
due to some compelling reasons prevailed (Neo-classical School of Thought) -
This explanation accepts the fact that crimes are committed in accordance with the
free will of men but the act of committing a crime is modified by some causes that
finally prevail upon the person to commit crimes. These causes are pathology,
incompetence, insanity or any condition that will like it possible for the individual to
exercise the free will entirely. In the study of legal provision this is termed as either
mitigating or exempting circumstances.

5. The explanation that criminals are born (positive school of thought_ by Cesare
Lombroso, 1835-1909;- According to Cesare Lambroso, who is now considered the
father of modern criminology, criminals are born with some physical characteristic
which become the causes of crimes. They advanced the following explanation to such
cause:
a. That the test is distinct born criminal type;
b. That this type can be identified by certain stigma or anomalies;
c. That the stigmata are not the cause of crime but rather the symptoms of atavism or
reversion of his body to his ape-like ancestors;
d. That this atavism and degeneracy of the body are the causes of crime and;
e. That a person who is born criminal cannot refrain from committing crime unless
he lives under exceptionally favorable circumstances.

Examples of physical degeneracy that causes crime:

a. Deviation on head size and shape.
b. Asymmetry of the face.
c. Excessive dimension of the jaws and cheekbones.
d. Eye defects and peculiarities.
e. Unusual size of the ears.
f. Nose are twisted, upturned, flattened or aquiline
g. Thick and fleshy lips, swollen and protruding.
h. Abnormality of the feet.
i. Chin receding or excessively long, short or flat.
j. Abnormalities of the hair, bald.
k. Supernumerary fingers and toes.
l. Imbalance of hemisphere of the brain.

D. APPROACHES TO THE EXPLANATION OF CRIMES

A. SUBJECTIVE APPROACH - This approach derived mainly from the biological,
has sought for the explanation of crime in the form of abnormalities or aberration that
primarily exist within the criminal himself.

1. ANTHROLOGICAL APPROACH – This approach had tried to compare the

physical characteristics of the individual offender to non-offenders.

2. MEDICAL APPROACH – It explains the role of physical and mental

conditions of the individual prior or after the commission of the criminal acts. It
further explains that even if an individual commits an offense, proper medical
examinations will show that the offender is mentally ill at the time of the
commission of the offense.

3. BIOLOGICAL APPROACH – It explains inheritance as a cause of crime. It

also proposes that human beings commit crime because of internal factors over
which they have little or no control.

4. PHYSIOLOGICAL APPROACH – It explains that, instinctively, it is the

nature of a human being to acquire all the physical needs in order to satisfy
all his wants. In short, every man possesses integrity and whenever we lose sight
of a human as a whole we violate that integrity.

5. PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH – Intelligence, emotion and education of

the individual must be taken into consideration in relation to the wrongful act he
has committed. Research showed that once the community and its members
deprive the individual of his natural needs, crime will be committed as a result of
such frustration.

6. PSYCHIATRIC APPROACH – This approach explains that the cause of

behavioural difficulties is to be found in emotional tension originating in early
life conflict with the family. Moreover, behavioural patterns will be established
which will later become permanent and fixed and it is hard for any correctional
institution to change this attitude if he is never caught of violation of law or
ordinance.

7. PSYCHO-ANALITICAL APPROACH – This is based upon the Freudian

theory which traces behaviour as a deviation to the repression of basic drives
and needs – It is the biological requirement for the well-being of an individual.

B. OBJECTIVE APPROACH - It is derived from the social science point of view that
offenders are normal beings upon who have played the external criminogenic
forces. It deals with the study of groups, social process and institutions as
productive deviant behaviour.

1. GEOGRAPHICAL APPROACH – It considers climate as one of the factors

that lead individuals to do a criminal act.

2. ECOLOGICAL APPROACH – It concerns itself with the biotic grouping of

men thus, resulting from migration competition and division of labor. Migration is
 a conduct from one place to another which sometimes create conflict between the
immigrant and the inhabitant of such place thus leading to social discrimination.

3. ECONOMIC APPROACH – Financial hardship is one of the primary causes of

criminality, therefore, it is necessary for every human being to contemplate or
consider with deep regret and compassion the strong temptation which has
frequently prevailed for so many years from want of the necessities to support life.

4. SOCIOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL APPROACH – It is concerned with the

influences on behaviour of group life, including rules and statutes, social classes
and social mobility, subculture, cliques and social changes.

C. CONTEMPORARY APPROACH - It focused on the psychoanalytical,

psychiatric and sociological explanations crime.

E. CRIME PATTERNS

Criminologists look for stable crime rate patterns to gain insight into the nature of crime.
If crime rates are consistently higher at certain times, in certain areas, and among certain
groups, this knowledge might help explain the onset or cause of crime. For example, if
criminal statistic has shown that crime rates are consistently higher in poor
3neighborhoods than large urban areas, then crime may be a function of poverty and
neighborhood decline. If, in contrast, crime rates are spread evenly across society, this
would provide little evidence that crime has an economic basis. Instead crime might be
linked to socialization personality, intelligence, or some other trait unrelated to class
position or income. We will further examine traits and patterns that may influence the
crime rate.

1. ECOLOGY AND CRIME- Patterns in the crime rate seem to be linked to temporal
and ecological factors. Some of the most important of these are:
a. Day, Season and Climate - Most reported crimes occur during the warm
summer months of April and July. During the summer, teenagers, who usually
have the highest crime levels are out of school and have greater opportunity to
commit crime. People spend more time outdoors during warm weather,
making themselves easier targets. Similarly homes are left vacant more often
during the summer, making them more valuable to property crimes Two
exceptions to this trend are murders and robberies, which occur frequently in
December and January (although rates are also high during the summer).

Crime rates also may be higher on the first day of the month than at any other
time. Government welfare and social security cheques arrives at this time, and
with them come increases in such activities as breaking into mail boxes and
accosting recipients on the streets. Also, people may have more disposable
income at this time and the availability of extra money may relate to behaviors
associated with crime such as drinking, partying, gambling, and so on.

b. Temperature - Although weather effects (such as temperature swings) may

have an impact on violent crime rates, laboratory studies suggest that the
association between temperature and crime resembles an involved U-shaped
curve. Crime rates increase with rising temperatures and then begin to decline
 at some point (85 degrees) when it may be too hot for any physical exertion
(R. A. Baron, “Aggression as a function of ambient temperature and prior
Anger Arousal 1972, 183-189).

2. POPULATION DENSITY AND CRIME (Regional Difference) - Large urban

areas have by far the highest violence rates. Areas with low per capital crime rates
tend to be rural. These findings are also supported by victim data. Exceptions to this
trend are low population resort areas with large transient or seasonal populations.
Typically, the Western and Southern States have had consistently higher crime rates
than the mid-West and Northeast. These data convinced some criminologists that
local culture influenced crime rates and that there was a “Southern subculture of
violence”.

3. INTELLIGENCE AND CRIME - Many early criminologists maintained that many

delinquents and criminals have a below average intelligence quotient and that low IQ
is a cause of their criminality.

4. USE OF FIREARMS - Firearms play a dominant role in criminal activity.

According to the NCVS, firearms are typically involved in about 20 percent of 5
robberies, 10 percent of assaults, and more than 5 percent of rapes. According to the
UCR about two thirds of all murders involved firearms, most of these weapons were
handguns.

There is a raging debate about whether guns should be controlled in order to reduce or
eliminate violent crime. International criminologists Franklin Zimring and Gordon
Hawkins (1997) believe the proliferation of hand guns and the high rate of lethal
violence they caused is the single most significant factor separating the crime problem
in the United States from the rest of the developed world. They stressed that the
differences between the United States and Europe in non-lethal crimes are only
modest at best. In contrast, Gary Kleck, and Marc Gertz maintain that handguns may
be more of an effective deterrent to crime than gun control advocates are ready to
admit. Their research indicates that as many as 400,000 people per year use guns in
situations in which they later claim that the guns almost “certainly” saved lives. Even
if these estimates are off by a factor of 10, it means that armed citizens may save
40,000 lives annually. Although Kleck and Gertz recognize that guns are involved in
murders, suicides, and accidents, which claim more than 30,000 lives per year, they
believe their benefit as a crime prevention device should not be over looked. Because
this is so important, the policy and practice in criminology feature ‘should guns be
controlled’ has been a topical issue.

5. SOCIAL CLASS AND CRIME- A still unresolved issues in criminological

literature is the relationship between social class and crime. Traditionally, crime has
been thought of as a lower class phenomenon. After all, people at the lowest rungs of
the social structure have the greatest incentive to commit crimes. Those unable to
obtain desired goods and services through conventional means may consequently
resort to theft and illegal means. These activities are referred to as Instrumental
crimes. Those living in poverty are also believed to engage in disproportionate
amount of Expressive crimes. 

6. AGE AND CRIME- There is general agreement that age is inversely related to
 criminality. Criminologists Travis Hirschi and Michael Gottfredson state “Age is
everywhere correlated with crime. Its effect on crime does not depend on other
demographic correlates of crime.” Regardless of status, younger people commit crime
more often than their older peers. James Q. Wilson and Richard Herrnstein argue that
aging out is a function of the natural history of human life cycle. Deviance in
adolescence is fueled by the need for money and sex reinforced by close relationships
with peers who defy conventional morality

EARLY ONSET- People who commit crimes at a very early age and who establish
official criminal records are most likely to become chronic offenders.

7. RACE AND CRIME

Official crime data indicate that minority group members are involved in a
disproportionate share of criminal activity. African Americans make up about 12
percent of the general population, yet the account for about 38 percent of violent
crime arrests and 30 percent of property crime arrests. It is possible that these data
reflect racial differences in the crime rate, but it is also possible that they reflect police
bias in the arrest process. We can evaluate this issue by comparing racial differences
in self-report data with those found in official delinquency records. Charges of racial
discrimination in the arrest process would be substantiated if whites and black self-
reported equal numbers of crimes, but minorities were arrested for more often.
Racial differences in the crime rate remain an extremely sensitive issue. Although
official arrest records indicate that African Americans are arrested at a higher rate
than members of other racial groups, some question whether this is a function of
crime rate differences, racism by police, or faulty data collection. Research shows that
suspects who are poor minority, and male are more likely to be formally arrested than
suspects who are white affluent, and female. Some critics charge that police officers
routinely use “racial profiling” to stop African Americans and search their cars
without probable cause or reasonable suspicion findings from a recent national survey
of driving practices show that young black and latino males are more likely to be
stopped by police and suffer citations, searches, and arrests, as well as be target of
force even though they are more likely to be in the possession of illegal contraband
than white drivers.

8. GENDER AND CRIME- male crime rates are generally higher than those females.
Lombroso’s book, the female offender argued that in physical appearance and
emotional makeup, delinquent females appear closer to men than to other women.
This theory is known as Masculinity hypothesis; In essence, a few masculine females
were responsible for the handful of crimes women commit. The female’s criminality
was often masked because authorities were reluctant to take action against women.
This is known as Chivalry hypothesis. While Liberal feminist theory focused
attention on the social and economic role of a woman. This view suggests that the
traditionally lower crime rate for women could be explained by their second class
economic and social position.

CRIMINAL CAREERS- Crime data show that most offenders commit a single
criminal act, and upon arrest discontinue their antisocial activity. Others commit a few
less serious crimes. A small group of criminal offenders, however account for a
majority of all criminal offenses. These persistent offenders are referred to as career
criminals or chronic offenders. Kids who had been exposed to a variety of personal
 and social problems at an early age are the most at risk to repeat offending. (Marvin
Wolfgang, Delinquency in a birth cohort)

F. CONTRIBUTORY FACTORS OF CRIME

Criminologist has accepted that criminality tendencies and behavior could be influenced
by social conditions. This one factor seems to account largely for the crime rate situations in
the Philippines although crimes committed are invariably associated with some of the
following contributing factors such as:
1. Social conditions
2. Economic
3. Environment
4. Cultural influences and
5. Individual personal temperaments

G. OTHER BASIC CAUSES OF CRIME

1. Revenge
2. Insanity
3. Passion
4. Hatred
5. Unpopular Laws
6. Personal Gain

H. Methods of studying crime

a) Aggregate Data Research – Tells us about the effect of social trends and patterns on
the crime rate.

b) Cohort Research – Involves observing a group of people who share a like

characteristic over time.

Types of Cohort Research in Crime

a. Longitudinal – Characteristics: subjects are selected; their behaviors are
followed for long period of time. Data include: school experiences, arrests,
hospitalizations, and information about their family life (divorces, parental
relations); and subjects given repeated intelligence and physical exams; their
diets monitored. Data can be collected directly from subjects.
b. Retrospective - A study that uses an intact cohort of known offenders and
looks back into their early life experiences by checking their educational,
family, police, and hospital records. Important sources of Aggregate Data
Research is Uniform Crime Report (UCR); an annual report that reflects the
number of crimes reported by citizens to local police departments and the
numbers of arrests made by police agencies in a given year.
c) Observational and Interview Research – Focuses on relatively few subjects,
interviewing them in depth or observing them as they go about their activities.

d) Experimental Research – To see the direct effect of one factor on another.

e) Survey Research – Designed to measure the attitudes, belief, values, personality

traits, and behavior of participants. There are three types of Survey Research:
a. Self-Report Surveys – ask participants to describe, in detail, their recent and
 lifetime criminal activity.
b. Interviews.
c. Cross-Sectional Research – simultaneously interviewing or questioning a
diverse sample of subjects who represent a cross section of a community. One
and two involve sampling – the process of selecting for study a limited
number of subjects who are representative of entire groups sharing similar
characteristics, called populations.

Sociology of Law (or Legal Sociology)

The sociology of law refers to the sociological study of law and law-related phenomena,
whereby law is typically conceived as the whole of legal norms in society as well as the
practices and institutions that are associated with those norms. Dating back to the classic
works by Emile Durkheim and Max Weber, the sociology of law has partly also evolved in
conjunction with intellectual efforts within legal scholarship, where a specialty of
sociological jurisprudence developed. The sociology of law was for some time primarily part
of the multidisciplinary field of law-and-society studies or the law and society movement, but
it has in more recent years grown into a relatively autonomous branch of theory and research
in sociology. It is from within the theoretical and methodological contours of the sociological
discipline that the sociology of law derives its unique approach and value as a contribution to
the social-scientific study of law. The number, quality, and variety of available writings in
and about the sociology of law reflect its scholarly and institutional growth as a respected
sociological specialty.
The sociology of law, a new science, studies human behavior in society in so far as it is
determined by commonly recognized ethico-legal norms, and in so far as it influences them.
It is the divisions of criminology which attempt to offer scientific analysis of the
conditions under which penal or criminal laws develop as a process of formal social control.
Sociology of law refers to both a sub-discipline of sociology and an approach within the
field of legal studies. Sociology of law is a diverse field of study which examines the
interaction of law with other aspects of society: such as the effect of legal institutions,
doctrines, and practices on other social phenomena and vice versa.

A. SOCIOLOGY OF LAW AREAS OF INQUIRY

Areas of socio-legal inquiry include the social development of legal institutions, forms of
social control, legal regulation, the interaction between legal cultures, the social construction
of legal issues, legal profession and the relation between law and social change.

B. THE IMPORTANCE OF SOCIOLOGY OF LAW (The relationship between

sociology and law)
Sociology and Law are two interwoven topics. Society is directly related to Sociology and
in this matter, every society follows certain laws. Therefore, Laws are the essential part of the
society. Sociology helps law to better understand society for smoother regulation and
formation of laws. Similarly, the law is important to regulate a society. Norms, customs,
traditions all these come under the law if the law did not exist then the society would not be
less than a jungle. A human need certain rules and regulation to keep them on track and hence
laws were made. These laws are made and established by society itself or governments are
elected to formulate laws. From the formation to the execution till its impact on society
everything comes under the umbrella of Sociology.
Laws are produced to and put into action through different societal processes. Every
social institution such as family, polity, crime, corporation also individuals all these
requirements and comprise of different laws.
In Sociology, we would say that law is a Social Control over Society. To have
harmonious society one needs to build laws. Social control is basically a component utilized
by the administration which manages the exercises of all people inside any general public,
with the law being an immaculate illustration. When something is orally people tend to
ignore and take it lightly. So therefore now people have to build Judiciary system and law
enforcement agencies. When something goes wrong these agencies look after that issue and
hence people keep in mind what consequences they can face if they go against the law and
act as an example for others. This is also related to Politics but it is also as important for
Sociology. The different institution may likewise be utilized as types of social control, for
example, the training framework i.e. Schools and colleges, religion or media, contingent upon
how and to the degree which they are utilized. For example, every one of them has the ability
to show individuals an arrangement of good standards and principles, which is likewise a
type of social control.
Law is a societal phenomenon. Often law and sociology are seen as two different trains or
domains and different groups of information. However, law and Sociology has similar subject
matters such as both evolve around social relationships, principles, social controls,
commitments and desires coming from specific social status and connections between or
among people and society. Anything happening in social lives of people liable to lawful
control and legal explanations does have likenesses with the social hypothesis and frequently
read like the social hypothesis.
Often laws get neglected due to developments in society. So, as the social changes occur
there must be changes in the law. Just like modern Sociology of law after Second World War
sociology of law became the field of learning and factual study but a law was not central but
some well-known sociologist wrote about a law in society. Sociologist Talcott Parsons in his
work stated that law is the essential part of social control. Later, critical sociologist evolved
with an idea that law as a weapon of power. Further sociologist Philip Selznick contended
that modern law has become receptive to general public’s need instead it should be drawn
ethically as well. German Sociologist Niklas Luhmann shares that Law is functional system
of society therefore he states
“All collective human life is directly or indirectly shaped by law. Law is like knowledge,
an essential and all-pervasive fact of the social condition.”
Hence, in simple words Law is an essential element of Society and Society work
smoothly with the law. Both go hand in hand. One needs to understand Societies different
elements for better Law formation and enforcement and same goes for society to have
peaceful and well-structured society laws should be followed.

C. LAW defined
In its most generic signification as an ordinance of reason promulgated for the common
good by him who is in charge. To be useful and fair, law has to be promulgated, i.e., made
known to those who are expected to follow it.

D. TWO TYPES OF LAW

1. NATURAL LAWS - Promulgated impliedly in our conscience and body. Rooted in core
values shared by many cultures. Natural laws protect against harm to persons (e.g.
murder, rape, assault) or property (theft, larceny, robbery), and form the basis of common
law systems.
 Examples:

A. Natural Moral Law - applies to our higher faculties. Example: Do good and avoid
evil.

B. Law of Nature - Applies to both our higher and lower faculties. Example: the law of
gravity.

Natural Law and Natural Right

Natural Rights – thoughts that individuals retain in the face of government action
and interests.

Thomas Jefferson – wrote of inalienable rights to “life, liberty, property,” – such

rights were naturally due all men and women because they were inherent in the social
contract between citizens and their government.

Natural Law Today

Many people today still hold that the basis for various existing criminal laws
can be found in immutable moral principles or in some other identifiable aspect for
the natural order.
The Ten Commandments, “inborn tendencies,” the idea of sin, and perceptions
of various forms of order in the universe and in the social world have all provided a
basis for the assertion that natural law exists. Example – debate over abortion

2. Positive Law - promulgated expressly or directly.

Examples:

A. Divine Positive Law - Like the 10 Commandments.

B. Divine Human Positive Law – like the golden rule.

C. Human Positive Law - like Congressional Statutes or Executive orders. Sometimes

called Statutory Laws. Those enacted by legislatures and reflect current cultural
mores, albeit that some laws may be controversial, e.g. laws that prohibit marijuana
use and gambling.

NOTA BENE: In general, human positive law is a reasonable rule of action, expressly
or directly promulgated by competent human authority for the common good, and
usually, but not necessarily, imposing a sanction in case of disobedience. Therefore,
definitions of crimes will vary from place to place, in accordance to the cultural
norms and mores, but may be broadly classified as blue-collar crime, corporate
crime organized crime, political crime, public order crime, state crime, state-
corporate crime, and white-collar crime.

Penology
The Correctional system in the Philippines is composed of agencies under three (3)
distinct and separate executive department of the national government, namely:
 1. Department of Justice – under this are the Bureau of Corrections, the Parole and
Probations.

2. Department of the Interior and Local Government – under this are the Bureau of
Jail Management and Penology which runs the City, Municipality and District ; and
the Provincial Jail through their respective government; and

3. Department of Social Welfare and Development – under this is the Bureau of

Child and Youth Welfare which overseas youth rehabilitations centers.

A. PENOLOGY defined
Penology is the study of punishment for crime or of criminal offenders. It includes the
study of control and prevention of crime through punishment of criminal offenders.

Penology is otherwise known as PENAL SCIENCE. It is actually a division of

criminology that deals with prison management and the treatment of offenders, and
concerned itself with the philosophy and practice of society in its effort to repress criminal
activities.

B. ORIGIN OF THE WORD PENOLOGY

It is derived from two words: PENO and LOGY. The term “PENO” was derived from
Greek word “POINE” which means punishment as well as from Latin word “POENA”,
which means Pain or Suffering. “LOGY” was derived from the Latin word “LOGOS”, that
means Science.
1870 to 1880 – was the golden age of penology because of the following reasons:
a. The formulation and organization of national American prison association in
1870;
b. In 1872, the first international prison congress was held in London;
c. In 1876, the Elmira reformatory was considered as the forerunner of the modern
penology; and
d. The first separate institutions for women were established in Indiana and
Massachusetts.

C. PRINCIPAL AIMS OF PENOLOGY:

1. To bring light the ethical barriers of punishment, along with the motives and purposes
of society inflicting it.
2. To make comparative study of penal laws and procedures through history between
nations.
3. To evaluate the social consequences of the policies enforced at given time.

D. PENAL MANAGEMENT defined

It refers to the manner or practice of managing or controlling places of confinement as
in jails or prisons.

E. CORRECTION defined
It is that field of criminal justice administration which utilizes the body of knowledge and
practices of the government and the society in general involving the process of handling
individuals who have been convicted of offenses for purposes of crime prevention and
control.
 It is a generic term that includes all government agencies, facilities, programs,
procedures, personnel, and techniques concerned with the investigation, intake, custody,
confinement, supervision, or treatment of alleged offenders.

F. DISTINCTION BETWEEN INSTITUTIONAL AND NON-INSTITUTIONAL

CORRECTION OR COMMUNITY BASED CORRECTION.

Institutional Corrections Non-Institutional correction

That aspect of the correctional enterprise
that involves the incarceration and
rehabilitation of adults and juveniles
convicted of offenses against the law, and
the confinement of persons suspected of a
crime awaiting trial and adjudication.
That aspect of the correctional enterprise that
includes pardon, probation, and parole
activities, correctional administration not
directly connectable to institutions, and
miscellaneous (activity) not directly related to
institutional care.

G. COMMUNITY SENTENCE SEEKS TO:

1. Repair the harm the offender has caused the victim or the Community
2. Provide for public safety
3. Rehabilitate and promote effective reintegration

H. CORRECTION AS PROCESS: It refers to the reorientation of the criminal offender to

prevent him or her from repeating his deviant or delinquent actions without the necessity
of taking punitive actions but rather the introduction of individual measures of
reformation.

I. CORRECTIONAL ADMINISTRATION defined

The study and practice of a systematic management of jails or prisons and other
institutions concerned with the custody, treatment, and rehabilitation of criminal offenders.

J. CORRECTION AND THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM defined - It is the machinery of any government in the

control and prevention of crimes and criminality. It is composed of the pillars of justice such
as: the Law Enforcement pillar (Police), the Prosecution pillar, the Court pillar, the correction
pillar, and the community pillar.

CORRECTION as one of the pillars of the criminal justice system is considered as the
weakest pillar.
REASONS:
1. Its failure to deter individuals in committing crimes.
2. Its failure to reform of inmates.

This is an evident in the increasing number of inmates in jails or prisons. Hence, the need
for prison management to rehabilitate inmates and transform them to become law-abiding
citizens after their release is necessary.

The pillar takes over once the accused, after having been found guilty, is meted out the
penalty for the crime he committed. He can apply for probation or he could be turned over to
a no-institutional or institutional agency or facility for custodial treatment and rehabilitation.
The offender could avail of the benefits of parole or executive clemency once he has served
the minimum period of his sentence.

K. JAIL AND PRISON

Jail defined - Institution of the confinement of persons who are awaiting final
disposition of their criminal cases and also for the service of those convicted and punished
with shorter sentences, up to 3 years

Prison defined - Institution for the confinement of persons who have been convicted
by final judgement by the court in which the penalty is more than 3 years

Jail
Penalty up to 3 years
Convicted or pending trial
Provincial Jail is under provincial
government, Municipal and City District
Jail are under Bureau of Jail Management
and Penology
Headed by a Warden
Prison
Penalty more than 3 years
Only convicted
Prisons are under the Bureau of Corrections
Headed by a Superintendent

L. UNITS BUREAU OF CORRECTIONS

The Bureau of Corrections currently has 8 operating units located nationwide:
1. New Bilibid Prison in Muntinlupa City (Old Bilibid Prison)
2. Correctional Institution for Women (CIW) in Mandaluyong City / and the The CIW
Mindanao, Panabo, Davao
3. Iwahig Prison and Penal Farm in Puerto Princesa City, Palawan
4. Sablayan Prison and Penal Farm in Occidental Mindoro
5. San Ramon Prison and Penal Farm in Zamboanga City
6. Leyte Regional Prison in Abuyog, Leyte
7. Ilo – Ilo Penal Colony and Farm – Newest Colony
8. Davao Prison and Penal Farm in Panabo, Davao

M. PUNISHMENT defined
Punishment is the redress that the state takes against an offending member of society
that usually involved pain and suffering. It is also the penalty imposed on an offender for
a crime or wrong doing.

N. ANCIENT FORMS OF PUNISHMENT

1. HARD LABOR- productive works.

2. UNIFORMITY- “we treat the prisoners alike”, “the fault of one is the fault of all”.

3. DEPRIVATION- deprivation of everything except the bare essentials of existence.

4. MONOTONY- giving the same food that is “off” diet, or requiring the prisoners to
perform drab or boring daily routine.

5. ISOLATION OR SOLITARY CONFINEMENT- non-communication, limited

news, “the lone wolf”.
 6. MASS MOVEMENT- mass living in cell blocks, mass eating, mass recreation, mass
bathing.

7. DEGRADATION- uttering insulting words or languages on the part of the prison

staff to the prisoners to degrade or break the confidence of the prisoners.

8. CORPORAL PUNISHMENT- imposing brutal punishment or employing physical

force to intimidate a delinquent inmate.

O. CONTEMPORARY FORMS OF PUNISHMENT

1. PAROLE- A conditional release of a prisoner after serving part of his/her sentence in
prison for the purpose of gradually re-introducing him/her to free life under the
guidance and supervision of a parole officer.

2. IMPRISONMENT- Putting the offender in prison for the purpose of protecting the
public against criminal activities and at the same time rehabilitating the prisoners by
requiring them to undergo institutional treatment programs.

3. PROBATION- A disposition whereby defendant after conviction of an offense, the

penalty of which does not exceed six years imprisonment, is released subject to the
conditions imposed by the releasing court and under the supervision of a probation
officer.

4. FINE- an amount given as a compensation for a criminal act.

5. DESTIERRO- the penalty of banishing a person from the place where he committed
a crime, prohibiting him to get near a center the 25- kilometer perimeter.

NOTA BENE: Ancient Rome is the nation who pioneered banishment as a form of
punishment.

P. PURPOSES OR JUSTIFICATION OF PUNISHMENT

1. RETRIBUTION- the punishment should be provided by the state whose sanction is
violated, to afford the society or the individual the opportunity of imposing upon the
offender suitable punishment as might be enforced. Offenders should be punished
because they deserve it.

2. EXPIATION OR ATONEMENT- punishment in the form of group vengeance

where the purpose is to appease the offended public or group.

3. DETERRENCE- punishment gives lesson to offender by showing to others what

would happen to them if they violate the law. Punishment is imposed to warn
potential offenders that they can afford to do what the offender has done.

4. INCAPACITATION AND PROTECTION- the public is protected if the offender

has been held in conditions where he cannot harm others especially the public.
Punishment is effected by placing offenders in prison so that society is ensured from
further criminal depredations of criminals.

5. REFORMATION OR REHABILATATION- it is the establishment of the

 usefulness and responsibility of the offender. Society’s interest can be better served
by helping the prisoner to become law abiding citizen and productive upon his return
to the community by requiring him to undergo intensive program of rehabilitation in
prison.

Q. CHARACTERISTIC OF PUNISHMENT
1. It must be Severe
2. It must be Uniform
3. It must be Certain
4. It must be Swift

R. PENALTY defined
It is defined as the suffering inflicted by the state against an offending member for the
transgression of law.

S. JURIDICAL CONDITIONS OF PENALTY

Punishment must be:
1. Productive of Suffering - without however affecting the integrity of the human
personality.
2. Commensurate with the Offense - different crimes must be punished with different
penalties (art. 25, RPC).
3. Certain - no one must escape its effects.
4. Legal - the consequence must be in accordance with the law.
5. Equal - equal for all persons.
6. Personal - the guilty one must be the one to be punished, no proxy.
7. Correctional - changes the attitude of offenders and become law abiding citizens.

T. DURATION OF PENALTIES
1. Death Penalty – Capital punishment
2. Reclussion Perpetua – Life imprisonment, a term of 20-40 years imprisonment
3. Reclussion Temporal – 12 yrs and 1 day to 20 yrs imprisonment
4. Prision Mayor – 6 yrs and 1 day to 12 yrs imprisonment
5. Prision Correctional – 6 months and 1 day to 6 yrs imprisonment
6. Arresto Mayor – 1 month and 1 day to 6 months imprisonment
7. Arresto Menor– 1 day to 30 days imprisonment
8. Bond to keep the Peace – discretionary on the part of the court
9. Destierro

Criminalistics
Criminology and criminalistics are often mixed up in the minds of the people.
Comparatively speaking, criminology is the study of criminal people, and criminalistics is the
study of criminal things, or the sum total of the application of all sciences in crime detection.
A criminal commits crime by means of things, or that something he left in the crime scene.
These things he used in these crimes or that something he left in the crime scene which are
the objects of criminalistics are known as physical evidence.

A. CRIMINALISTIC defined
Criminalistic is formerly known as FORENSIC CHEMISTRY. It is the study of
“criminal things” or the scientific examination of physical evidence though laboratory work.
It is the sum total of the application of all sciences in crime detection.

In the field of criminal investigation it is known as “Instrumentation”. It is the scientific

examination of real evidence, application of instrument and methods of the physical science
in detecting crime. It also concern with the recognition, identification, comparison and
evaluation of physical evidence by the application of the natural science.

NOTA BENE:
The term Criminalistics (Kriminalistik) was first used by Hans Gross in 1891.
The most important concept in criminalistics is identification or individualization
(Paul Kirk)

B. PHYSICAL EVIDENCE defined

PHYSICAL EVIDENCE is articles and materials which are found in connection
with the investigation and w/c aid in establishing the identity of the perpetrator or the
circumstances under w/c the crime was committed.

A criminal commits crime by means of things, or he leaves something in the crime

scene. These things he used in his crime or that something he left in the crime scene w/c
are the subjects of criminalistics are known as “Physical Evidence”.

Physical evidence is also the number one provider of extraordinary clearances, where
police can link different offenses at different times and places with the same offender.
Working with physical evidence means being aware at all times of what the prosecutor
needs to win the case in court. This means knowing the types of evidence and the laws of
evidence.
This physical evidence includes but not limited to the following:
1. Blood and bloodstain
2. Firearms and other deadly weapons
3. Fingerprints and footprints
4. Tool marks and many more

NOTA BENE:
Physical evidence is part of the "holy trinity" for solving crimes -- physical evidence,
witnesses, and confessions. Without one of the first two, there is little chance of even
finding a suspect. In homicide and sexual assault cases, physical evidence is the
number one determinant of guilt or innocence.

C. KINDS OF PHYSICAL EVIDENCE

1. Corpus Delicti Evidence – Evidence that attest or verify the existence of a crime.
Usually it is known as the “body of the crime”.

2. Associative Evidence- Evidence found in the crime scene that links the suspects to
the crime scene.

3. Tracing Evidence – Any Articles or Evidence w/c assist the investigator in locating
the suspects.

D. CRIMINOLOGIST AND CRIMINILIST

 CRIMINOLOGIST defined
Any person who is a graduate with the Degree of Criminology, who passed the
examination for criminologist and is registered as such by the Board of Examiners of the
Professional Regulation Commission. The term criminologist is one who has been
engaged in the practice of criminology if he holds himself out to the public in any of the
following capacities under Section 23 of Republic Act No. 6504.

CRIMINALIST defined
Any trained person in sciences of the application of instruments and methods, to the
detection of crime.

Physical evidences are variable. Some are visible; some are very small and have to be
looked for with a microscope. Some must be tested with application of chemicals in order
to find out what they are. Some physical evidences such as latent prints are not visible
and have to be dusted with powders or examined and searched with special lights to be
visualized.

E. DR. HANS GROSS (December 12, 1847- December 9, 1915)

His real name is DR. HANS GUSTAV ADOLF GROSS. He was an Austrian criminal
jurist and an examining magistrate. He is known as the “Father or Creator of
Criminalistic”. He taught as a professor at the Chernivtsi University, Prague University and
the University of Graz, and established the Institute of Criminology in Graz. He was also the
father of the Austrian psychoanalyst Otto Gross. He defined SEARCH FOR TRUTH as the
basis and goals of all criminal investigations. He also asserted that large part of criminal
works is nothing than a battle against lies.
The release of his book in 1893 entitled "HANDBUCH FUR
UNTERSUCHUNGSRICHTER, POLIZEIBEAMTE, GENDARMEN, U.S.W.", marked
as the birth of the field of criminalistics, applying science to the practices of crime
investigation and law. The work combined in one system fields of knowledge that had not
been previously integrated, and which could be successfully used against crime. Gross
adapted some fields to the needs of criminal investigation, such as crime scene photography.

NOTA BENE:
ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF HIS BOOK: A handbook for examining magistrates,
police officials, military policemen, etc.

F. DIVISIONS OF CRIMINALISTICS
There are six (6) divisions of criminalistics. The first three (3) are scientific and the other
Five (5) are technological. In both cases, instrumentation is involved.

NOTA BENE:
INSTRUMENTATION is the application of instruments and methods of
criminalistics to the detection of crime. It is the sum total of the application of all
sciences in crime detection, otherwise known as criminalistics although
instrumentation means more than criminalistics because it includes all technical
methods by which the fugitives may be traced, identified and examined.

I. SCIENTIFIC DIVISION– Scientific subject require the study of science and

mathematics before practical training in the laboratory. The scientific subject are:
a. CHEMISTRY - The original name for criminalistics is Forensic Chemistry, which shows
the importance and significant role of the chemist in the field of criminalistics. A chemist
includes the following exertion but not limited to alcoholic analysis, toxicology, narcotic
and substance abuse testing, firearms discharge residues, identification of paint chips,
chemical development of latent fingerprints and all types of analysis through the use of
chemical reagents and electronic instruments.

b. PHYSICS - The duties of a physicist in a crime laboratory include but not limited to
firearms identification, tool mark comparison, scientific photography, traffic or vehicular
accidents for the purpose of finding out the speed and direction of vehicles, and use of X-
rays to the detection of crime.

c. BIOLOGY - Biology is the study of living things. The science that deals with the origin,
history, physical characteristics, life, processes, habits, etc. of plants and animals. The
biologists in a police laboratory study all kinds of living things- blood, semen, urine,
hairs, and skin. He is particularly skilled in the use of a microscope. His most important
role in criminalistics is to examine bloodstains in order to find out if they are of human or
animal origin.

II. TECHNOLOGICAL DIVISION - Technological subjects are usually learned directly

by practical training in the laboratory thru the supervision of an experienced examiner.
The scientific subject are:

A. QUESTIONED DOCUMENT EXAMINATION - It concerned with the examination

of forged, altered, or suspects papers, in order to determine and see if they are genuine or
not, that is, the tenor or substance on face of the documents have been changed in any
way, that it prejudices the rights of others.

FUNCTION OF DOCUMENT EXAMINER

1. Developed latent writing
2. Reveal the following:
a. Erasures
b. Alterations
c. Intercalations
d. Changes
3. They compare ink, pencil, typewriting and printed material of all the kinds of
questioned and standard documents through the use o:
a. Ultra-violet
b. Infra-red
c. Transparent
d. Sloping light
e. Advance photography.

GRAPHOLOGY OR HANDWRITING ANALYSIS

Questioned document examination should not be mixed up with the term and practice
of Graphology or Handwriting analysis. Graphology aims to determine about person's
characteristics, traits and personality by the way a person writes his/her letters and shapes
of words.
B. FIREARM IDENTIFICATION - It deals with the study regarding comparison and
identification of weapons alleged to have been used in the commission of crime. It is
sometimes wrongly called ballistics such that it is not the proper word for the work done
by a criminalistics examiner.

BALLISTICS defined- it means a branch of engineering that deals with the study of the
art of throwing missiles by means of a machine. It also deals with the study of the motion
of projectiles in flight.

BALLISTICS ENGINEERS - concerned with the design of weapons and projectiles.

FIREARMS EXAMINER - concerned with the findings of whether a bullet or cartridge

was fired from one and the same firearm alleged to have been used in the commission of
crime. It also tries to find out how far away the suspect when he fired his victim. They
can help the investigator as to make, model and kind of weapon used by the perpetrator in
the commission of crime and can help the pathologist decide from a study of wounds on
how the weapon was held when he fired at the victim.

C. FINGERPRINT IDENTIFICATION – It is the cornerstone of personal identification.

The system is based on the undisputed fact that after so many studies and research, "No
Two Persons Have the Same Fingerprint" or "The Principle of Individuality".
Fingerprint is a positive proof wherein law enforcement agencies look upon the science as
the best evidence of positive identification. Fingerprint identification can aid the police
investigator in identifying persons in custody, and when it is found at the crime scene, it
can also help to identify and locate the perpetrator by means of examining and comparing
every minute details of the fingerprint lifted or developed from the crime scene from the
suspect's fingerprint.

D. PHOTOGRAPHY - It is an indispensable instrumentation in the field of criminalistics;

hence you cannot do anything in criminalistics without it. Photography cannot be
separated from the criminalistics because every criminalist should know how to
photograph evidence.

SPECIAL PHOTOGRAPHY in criminalistics includes

1. Microphotography
2. Microphotography
3. Infra-red
4. Ultra-violet
5. Special light procedures

E. LIE DETECTION OR POLYGRAPHY - This is one of the scientific methods in crime

detection although it is not a part of criminalistics. In criminal investigation, test or
question individuals for the purpose of detecting deception or verifying truth of
statements through a visual, permanent and simultaneous recording of person's cardio-
vascular and respiratory pattern. It applies a reliable questioning technique for
diagnosing.

POLYGRAPH MACHINE merely measures certain identifiable physical reactions as

affecting the:
1. Respiratory rate
 2. Blood pressure/pulse rate
3. Galvanic skin resistance

Victimology as a Subfield of Criminology

Before we can understand victimology, we need to appreciate that it is a fairly new
subfield or area of specialization within criminology. Criminology is a rather broad field of
study that encompasses the study of law making, law breaking, and societal reactions to law
breaking. Victimology, much like criminal justice, falls into the third of these areas.
Victimology doesn't have any subfields within itself; in fact, there are few theories, and little
or no schools of thought. Going back to criminology, there are four subfields: penology (and
the sociology of law); delinquency (sometimes referred to as psychological criminology);
comparative (and historical) criminology; and victimology.

What is Victimology?
The term victimology is not new. In fact, Benjamin Mendelsohn first used it in 1947
to describe the scientific study of crime victims. Victimology is often considered a subfield of
criminology, and the two fields do share much in com- mon. Just as criminology is the study
of criminals—what they do, why they do it, and how the criminal justice system responds to
them—victimology is the study of victims. Victimology, then, is the study of the etiology (or
causes) of victimization, its consequences, how the criminal justice system accommodates
and assists victims, and how other elements of society, such as the media, deal with crime
victims. Victimology is a science; victimologists use the scientific method to answer
questions about victims. For example, instead of simply wondering or hypothesizing why
younger people are more likely to be victims than are older people, victimologists conduct
research to attempt to identify the reasons why younger people seem more vulnerable.
Andrew Karmen, who wrote a text on entitled Crime Victims: An Introduction to
Victimology in 1990, broadly defined victimology: Victimology is the scientific study of
victimization, including the relationships between victims and offenders, the interactions
between victims and the criminal justice system — that is, the police and courts, and
corrections officials — and the connections between victims and other societal groups and
institutions, such as the media, businesses, and social movements.
From this definition, we can see that victimology encompasses the study of:
1. victimization
2. victim-offender relationships
3. victim-criminal justice system relationships
4. victims and the media
5. victims and the costs of crime
6. victims and social movements

Legal definition of "victim"

Typically includes a person who has suffered direct, or threatened, physical,
emotional or pecuniary harm as a result of the commission of a crime; or in the case of a
victim being an institutional entity, any of the same harms by an individual or authorized
representative of another entity. Group harms are normally covered under civil and
constitutional law, with "hate crime" being an emerging criminal law development, although
criminal law tends to treat all cases as individualized.
Besides "primary crime victims", there are also "secondary crime victims" who
experience the harm second hand, such as intimate partners or significant others of rape
victims or children of a battered woman. It may also make sense to talk about "tertiary crime
victims" who experience the harm vicariously, such as through media accounts or from
watching television. Victim defenses have recently emerged in cases of parricide (killing
one's parents) and homicide of batterers by abused spouses. Advocates for battered women
were among the first to recognize the issue, and promote the "battered woman syndrome" to
defend women who killed or seriously injured a spouse or partner .liter enduring years of
physical, emotional and/or sexual abuse. Attorneys have also drawn upon theories of Post-
traumatic Stress Disorder to defend their client's behavior. From time to time, media attention
to these defenses becomes intense, and certain "high profile" cases tend to influence public
opinion and spread confusion over who is the "victim" and who is the "victimizer."

The History of Victimology: Before the Victims’ Rights Movement

As previously mentioned, the term victimology was coined in the mid-1900s. Crime
was, of course, occurring prior to this time; thus, people were being victimized long before
the scientific study of crime victims began. Even though they were not scientifically studied,
victims were recognized as being harmed by crime, and their role in the criminal justice
process has evolved over time.
Before and throughout the Middle Ages (about the 5th through the 16th century), the
burden of the justice system, informal as it was, fell on the victim. When a person or property
was harmed, it was up to the victim and the victim’s family to seek justice. This was typically
achieved via retaliation. The justice system operated under the principle of lex talionis, an eye
for an eye. A criminal would be punished because he or she deserved it, and the punishment
would be equal to the harm caused. Punishment based on these notions is consistent with
retribution. During this time, a crime was considered a harm against the victim, not the state.
The concepts of restitution and retribution governed action against criminals. Criminals were
expected to pay back the victim through restitution. During this time, a criminal who stole a
person’s cow likely would have to compensate the owner (the victim) by returning the stolen
cow and also giving him or her another one.
Early criminal codes incorporated these principles. The Code of Hammurabi was the
basis for order and certainty in Babylon. In the code, restoration of equity between the
offender and victim was stressed. Notice that the early response to crime centered on the
victim, not the state. This focus on the victim continued until the Industrial Revolution, when
criminal law shifted to considering crimes violations against the state rather than the victim.
Once the victim ceased to be seen as the entity harmed by the crime, the victim became
secondary. Although this shift most certainly benefited the state—by allowing it to collect
fines and monies from these newly defined harms—the victim did not fare as well. Instead of
being the focus, the crime victim was effectively excluded from the formal aspects of the
justice system.
Since then, this state-centered system has largely remained in place, but attention—at
least from researchers and activists—returned to the crime victim during the 1940s.
Beginning in this period, concern was shown for the crime victim, but this concern was not
entirely sympathetic. Instead, scholars and others became preoccupied with how the crime
victim contributes to his or her own victimization. Scholarly work during this period focused
not on the needs of crime victims but on identifying to what extent victims could be held
responsible for being victimized. In this way, the damage that offenders cause was ignored.
Instead, the ideas of victim precipitation, victim facilitation, and victim provocation emerged.

The Role of the Victim in Crime:

Victim Precipitation, Victim Facilitation, and Victim Provocation
Although the field of victimology has largely moved away from simply investigating
how much a victim contributes to his or her own victimization, the first forays into the study
of crime victims were centered on such investigations. In this way, the first studies of crime
victims did not portray victims as innocents who were wronged at the hands of an offender.
Rather, concepts such as victim precipitation, victim facilitation, and victim provocation
developed from these investigations.
Victim precipitation – It is defined as the extent to which a victim is responsible for
his or her own victimization. The concept of victim precipitation is rooted in the notion that,
although some victims are not at all responsible for their victimization, other victims are. In
this way, victim precipitation acknowledges that crime victimization involves at least two
people—an offender and a victim—and that both parties are acting and often reacting before,
during, and after the incident. Identifying victim precipitation does not necessarily lead to
negative outcomes. It is problematic, however, when it is used to blame the victim while
ignoring the offender’s role.
Victim facilitation – It is similar to victim precipitation is the concept of victim
facilitation. It occurs when a victim unintentionally makes it easier for an offender to commit
a crime. A victim may, in this way, be a catalyst for victimization. A woman who
accidentally left her purse in plain view in her office while she went to the restroom and then
had it stolen would be a victim who facilitated her own victimization. This woman is not
blameworthy—the offender should not steal, regardless of whether the purse is in plain view.
But the victim’s actions certainly made her a likely target and made it easy for the offender to
steal her purse. Unlike precipitation, facilitation helps understand why one person may be
victimized over another but does not connote blame and responsibility.
Victim provocation – It occurs when a person does something that incites another
person to commit an illegal act. Provocation suggests that without the victim’s behavior, the
crime would not have occurred. Provocation, then, most certainly connotes blame. In fact, the
offender is not at all responsible. An example of victim provocation would be if a person
attempted to mug a man who was walk- ing home from work and the man, instead of
willingly giving the offender his wallet, pulled out a gun and shot the mugger. The offender
in this scenario ultimately is a victim, but he would not have been shot if not for attempting to
mug the shooter. The distinctions between victim precipitation, facilitation, and provocation,
as you probably noticed, are not always clear-cut. These terms were developed, described,
studied, and used in somewhat different ways in the mid-1900s by several scholars.

Hans Von Hentig

Hans von Hentig (1948) recognized in his
book The Criminal and His Victim: Studies in the
Sociobiology of Crime the importance of
investigating what factors underpin why certain
people are victims, just as criminology attempts to
identify those factors that produce criminality. He
determined that victimization is also produced by
some of the same traits that produce crime.
Von Hentig then looked at the criminal-victim
dyad in his study of victimization and thus recognized
the importance of considering the victim and the
criminal, not in isolation but together. He tried to
identify a victim's characteristics that could
effectively serve to increase the risk of victimization. He considered that victims can cause
victimization — acting as agents of provocation — on the basis of their characteristics.
He argued that crime victims could be placed into one of 13 categories based on their
propensity for victimization: (1) young; (2) females; (3) old; (4) immigrants; (5)
depressed; (6) mentally defective/deranged; (7) the acquisitive; (8) dull normal; (9)
minorities; (10) wanton; (11) the lonesome and heartbroken; (12) tormentor; and (13)
the blocked, exempted, and fighting. All these victims are targeted and contribute to their
own victimization because of their characteristics. For example, the young, the old, and
females may be victimized because of their ignorance or risk taking, or may be taken
advantage of, such as when women are sexually assaulted. Immigrants, minorities, and dull
normal are likely to be victimized due to their social status and inability to activate
assistance in the community. The mentally defective or deranged may be victimized
because they do not recognize or appropriately respond to threats in the environment. Those
who are depressed, acquisitive, wanton, lonesome, or heartbroken may place themselves
in situations in which they do not recognize danger because of their mental state, their
sadness over a lost relationship, their desire for companionship, or their greed. Tormentors
are people who provoke their own victimization via violence and aggression toward others.
Finally, the blocked, exempted, and fighting victims are those who are enmeshed in poor
decisions and unable to defend themselves or seek assistance if victimized. An example of
such a victim is a person who is blackmailed because of his behavior, which places him in a
precarious situation if he reports the blackmail to the police.
In 1948, He studied victims of homicide, and said that the most likely type of victim
is the "depressive type" who is an easy target, careless and unsuspecting. The "greedy
type" is easily duped because his or her motivation for easy gain lowers his or her natural
tendency to be suspicious. The "wanton type" is particularly vulnerable to stresses that
occur at a given period of time in the life cycle, such as juvenile victims. The "tormentor,"
is the victim of attack from the target of his or her abuse, such as with battered women.

Benjamin Mendelsohn
Known as the father of victimology, Benjamin Mendelsohn coined the term for this
area of study in the mid-1940s. As an attorney, he became interested in the relationship
between the victim and the criminal as he conducted inter- views with victims and witnesses
and realized that victims and offenders often knew each other and had some kind of existing
relationship. He then created a classification of victims based on their culpability, or the
degree of the victim’s blame. His classification entailed the following:
1. Completely innocent victim: a victim who bears no responsibility at all for
victimization; victimized simply because of his or her nature, such as being a child
2. Victim with minor guilt: a victim who is victimized due to ignorance; a victim who
inadvertently places himself or herself in harm’s way
3. Victim as guilty as offender/voluntary victim: a victim who bears as much
responsibility as the offender; a person who, for example, enters into a suicide pact
4. Victim more guilty than offender: a victim who instigates or provokes his or her own
victimization
5. Most guilty victim: a victim who is victimized during the perpetration of a crime or as
a result of crime
6. Simulating or imaginary victim: a victim who is not victimized at all but, instead,
fabricates a victimization event
Mendelsohn’s classification emphasized degrees of culpability, recognizing that
some victims bear no responsibility for their victimization, whereas others, based on their
behaviors or actions, do.

Stephen Schafer
One of the earliest victimologists, Stephen Schafer (1968) wrote The Victim and His
Criminal: A Study in Functional Responsibility. Much like von Hentig and Mendelsohn,
Schafer also proposed a victim typology. His typology places victims in groups based on how
responsible they are for their own victimization, using both social characteristics and
behaviors.

In this way, it includes facets of the typology of von

Hentig based on personal characteristics and behavior- rooted
typology of Mendelsohn. He argued that people have a
functional responsibility not to provoke others to harm or
victimize them, and that they should also actively try to prevent
that from happening. He identified seven categories and labeled
their liability levels as follows:
1. Unrelated victims—no responsibility
2. Provocative victims—share responsibility
3. Precipitative victims—some degree of responsibility
4. Biologically weak victims—no responsibility
5. Socially weak victims—no responsibility
6. Self-victimizing—total responsibility
7. Political victims—no responsibility

Marvin Wolfgang
The first person to empirically investigate victim
precipitation was Marvin Wolfgang (1957) in his classic study of homicides occurring in
Philadelphia from 1948 to 1952. He examined some 558 homicides to see to what extent
victims precipitated their own deaths. In those instances in which the victim was the direct,
positive precipitator in the homicide, Wolfgang labeled the incident as victim precipitated.
For example, the victim in such an incident would be the first to brandish or use a weapon,
the first to strike a blow, and the first to initiate physical violence. He found that 26% of all
homicides in Philadelphia during this period were victim precipitated.
Beyond simply identifying the extent to which homicides were victim precipitated,
Wolfgang also identified those factors that were common in such homicides. He determined
that often in this kind of homicide, the victim and the offender knew each other. He also
found that most victim-precipitated homicides involved male offenders and male victims and
that the victim was likely to have a history of violent offending himself. Alcohol was also
likely to play a role in victim-precipitated homicides, which makes sense, especially
considering that Wolfgang determined these homicides often started as minor altercations
that escalated to murder.
Since Wolfgang’s study of victim-precipitated homicide, others have expanded his
definition to include felony-related homicide and sub intentional homicide. Sub intentional
homicide occurs when the victim facilitates his or her own demise by using poor judgment,
placing himself or herself at risk, living a risky lifestyle, or using alcohol or drugs. Perhaps
not surprising, a study of sub intentional homicide found that as many as three-fourths of
victims were sub intentional (N. H. Allen, 1980).

Menachem Amir
The crime of rape is not immune to today's victim-blaming and it was certainly not in
the past either. Menachem Amir, a Wolfgang 's student, conducted an empirical investigation
of reported rape incidents to the police. Like Wolfgang, he conducted his study using
Philadelphia data, though he examined rapes that took place between 1958 and 1960. He
investigated to what extent victims had their own rapes precipitated and identified common
attributes of victim-precipitated rape. Amir has labeled nearly one in five rapes as a
precipitated victim. He found that these violations were likely to involve alcohol and the
victim was likely to engage in seductive behavior, wear revealing clothes, use risky language,
and have a bad reputation.
What Amir also determined was that it is the interpretation of actions by the offender
that matters, rather than what the victim is actually doing. The offender may see the victim —
his actions, words, and clothing — as contrary to what he deems appropriate female behavior.
In this way, in terms of how women should behave sexually, the victim can be seen as "bad”.
Because of his misguided view of how women should act, he may then choose to rape her,
because he thinks she deserves it or because he thinks she has it coming to her. The study by
Amir has been quite controversial — it has been attacked for blaming victims, namely
women, for their own victimization. Today victims of rape and sexual assault still have to
overcome that view that women (because these victims are usually female) are largely
responsible for their own victimization.

Theories of Victimization
The second generation of theorists shifted attention from the victim's role to
emphasizing a situational approach focused on explaining and testing how everyday lifestyles
and routine activities create opportunities for victimization. The emergence of both these
theoretical perspectives is one of the most important developments in victimology.

1. Lifestyle Exposure Theory

Using data from the 1972–1974 NCS, Hindelang, Gottfredson, and Garofalo (1978)
noticed that certain groups of people, namely, young people and males, were more likely to
be criminally victimized. They theorized that an individual’s demographics (e.g., age, sex)
tended to influence one’s lifestyle, which in turn increased his or her exposure to risk of
personal and property victimization. For instance, according to Hindelang et al., one’s sex
carries with it certain role expectations and societal constraints; it is how the individual reacts
to these influences that determines one’s lifestyle. If females spend more time at home, they
would be exposed to fewer risky situations involving strangers and hence experience fewer
stranger-committed victimizations.

Using the principle of homogamy, Hindelang et al. (1978) also argued that lifestyles
that expose people to a large share of would-be offenders increase one’s risk of being
victimized. Homogamy would explain why young persons are more likely to be victimized
than older people, because the young are more likely to hang out with other youth, who
commit a disproportionate amount of violent and property crimes.

2. Routine Activities Theory

Cohen and Felson (1979) formulated routine activities theory to explain changes in
aggregate direct-contact predatory (e.g., murder, forcible rape, burglary) crime rates in the
United States from 1947 through 1974. Routine activities theory posits that the convergence
in time and space of a motivated offender, a suitable target, and the absence of a capable
guardian provide an opportunity for crimes to occur. The absence of any one of these
conditions is sufficient to drastically reduce the risk of criminal opportunity, if not prevent it
altogether.

Routine activities theory does not attempt to explain participation in crime but instead
focuses on how opportunities for crimes are related to the nature of patterns of routine social
interaction, including one’s work, family, and leisure activities. So, for example, if someone
spends time in public places such as bars or hanging out on the streets, he or she increases the
likelihood of coming into contact with a motivated offender in the absence of a capable
guardian. The supply of motivated offenders is taken as a given. What varies is the supply of
suitable targets (e.g., lightweight, easy-to-conceal property, such as cell phones and DVD
players, or drunk individuals) and capable guardians (e.g., neighbors, police, burglar alarms).

3. Empirical Support
Researchers commonly have used lifestyle exposure and routine activity theories to
test hypotheses about how individuals’ daily routines expose them to victimization risk.
These theories have been applied principally to examine opportunities for different types of
personal and property victimizations using diverse samples that range from school-age
children, to college students, to adults in the general population across the United States and
abroad. The data are generally supportive of the theories, although not all studies fully
support the theories.

Refinement and Empirical Tests of Opportunity Theories of Victimization

Researchers’ continued testing of lifestyle exposure and routine activity theories has
generated supportive findings and critical thinking that has led to a refining and extension of
them. Miethe and Meier (1994) developed an integrated theory of victimization, called
structural-choice theory, which attempts to explain both offender motivation and the
opportunities for victimization. This further refinement of opportunity theories of
victimization was an important contribution to the victimology literature.

One of the first studies of opportunity theories for predatory crimes was conducted by
Sampson and Wooldredge (1987), who used data from the 1982 British Crime Survey (BCS).
Their findings showed that individual and household characteristics were significant
predictors of victimization, as were neighborhood-level characteristics. For example,
although age of the head of the household was an important indicator of burglary, the
percentage of unemployed persons in the area also predicted burglary. Sampson and
Wooldredge’s multilevel opportunity model was among the first to test lifestyle and routine
activity theories. Multilevel modeling of lifestyle exposure and routine activity theories
continues to draw the attention of scholars seeking to test how both individual characteristics
and macrolevel ones—for example, neighborhood characteristics— frame victimization
opportunities (see Wilcox, Land, & Hunt, 2003).

Victimization theories have been expanded to examine nonpredatory crimes and

“victimless” crimes, such as gambling and prostitution (Felson, 1998), and deviant behavior
such as heavy alcohol use and dangerous drinking in young adults (Osgood, Wilson,
O’Malley, Bachman, & Johnston, 1996). The theories have also been applied to a wide range
of crimes in different social contexts, such as school-based victimization in secondary
schools (Augustine, Wilcox, Ousey, & Clayton, 2002), stalking among college students
(Fisher, Cullen, & Turner, 2000), and even explanations of the link between victimization
and offending (Sampson & Lauritsen, 1990). Other scholars have examined how opportunity
for victimization is linked to social contexts and different types of locations, such as the
workplace (Lynch, 1987), neighborhoods (Lynch & Cantor, 1992), and college campuses
(Fisher, Sloan, Cullen, & Lu, 1998).

Moving Beyond Opportunity Theories

Work by Schreck and his colleagues suggests that antecedents to opportunity, such as
low self-control, social bonds, and peer influences, have also been found to be important
predictors of violent and property victimization (Schreck, 1999; Schreck & Fisher, 2004;
Schreck, Stewart, & Fisher, 2006). Schreck, Wright, and Miller (2002) examined the effects
of individual factors (e.g., low self-control, weak social ties to family and school), and
situational risk factors (e.g., having delinquent peers, having a lot of unstructured social time)
on the risk of victimization.

ADDITIONAL READING MATERIALS

1. file:///D:/Intro%20to%20criminology/Approaches%20to
%20Criminology.pdf What are various kinds of approaches to
criminology? By Munir Ahmad Mughal
2. https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?
article=5572&context=jclc (Evaluation of Physical Evidence in
Criminalistics: Subjective or Objective Process)
3. https://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/132448/10/10_chapter
%202.pdf (Concept of Victimology)
4. https://booksite.elsevier.com/samplechapters/9780123740892/
Sample_Chapters/02~Chapter_1.pdf (Victimology: A Brief History with
an Introduction to Forensic Victimology)