A Companion to Crime, Harm and Victimisation

Corteen, Karen, Morley, Sharon, Karen Corteen, Sharon Morley, Paul Taylor, Jo Turner

• Publisher: Policy Press
• Year: 2016
• Print ISBN:
  9781447325727
• Edition: 1
• eBook ISBN:
  9781447325734
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: Criminology
• Index: Social Sciences

This is the first accessible, succinct text to provide definitions and explanations of key terms and concepts relating to the expanding field of crime, harm and victimisation. Written by a wide range of experts, it includes theories, ideas and case studies relating to victims of conventional crime and victims outside the remit of criminal law. It encapsulates the domestic and international nature, extent and measurement of victims of crime and harm, together with responses to victims and victimisation as a result of conventional, corporate and state crimes and harms.

As part of the Companion series, entries are presented in a user-friendly A-Z format with clear links to related entries and further reading, allowing easy navigation for both students and practitioners. Filling a gap in the market, this is a good source and quick reference point for undergraduates studying a variety of courses in criminology, criminal justice, victimology and other related disciplines.

S

SEXUAL OFFENDING, VICTIMS AND THE COURTS

The victims of all crimes were for many years the ‘forgotten player’ in the criminal justice system, whether they were the victims of sexual crime or any other crime. In the UK, that position has changed over the last 30 years and increasing provisions have been made to assist the victim of crime; additional measures have been made for the victims of sexual crimes.

In the criminal courts, procedural support has been included in the court procedures themselves. Some complainants acting as witnesses in a sexual offences trial may feel particularly vulnerable; others may feel intimidated in the presence of the person alleged to have committed the crime. The whole experience of a criminal court itself can also be intimidating. The surroundings are unfamiliar and the formalities of the court itself can be threatening.

Fierce cross-examination by barristers is not a pleasant experience. In one child sexual exploitation hearing, a barrister mocked some children, saying that they were ‘enjoying all the attention from police and social services’; another told them that he supposed ‘it’s better to be a victim than a slag’ (Norfolk, 2015, p 4). ‘Special measures’ have been introduced into courts to make the experience easier for both adult and child witnesses.

Section 32 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 introduced live video-links for children under 14 to give their evidence to court. The government held back from introducing any pre-recorded tapes of statements or cross-examinations being used as evidence in court. Chelmsford Crown Court achieved the distinction of being the first UK court to hear evidence on a live video-link from a 13-year-old victim in a rape case; the judge reportedly tried to put the girl at ease with the words ‘What’s it like being on the telly, not too bad?’ (The Independent, 1989). The Criminal Justice Act 1991 introduced the use of pre-recorded video interviews of children in court by amending the Criminal Justice Act 1988 with a new section 32A; the child was still expected to be available for cross-examination and the Act did not contain provisions for pre-recorded cross-examinations.

The Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 introduced eight more ‘special measures’ for what it termed the ‘eligible witness’ (ss 16–17) – in effect, this meant the child witness and the vulnerable or intimidated adult witness. They were:

• screening to prevent the witness seeing the defendant;

• live CCTV links to speak to the witness in another room;

• the witness giving evidence in private;

• the removal of wigs and gowns by court personnel;

• pre-recorded witness statements (‘evidence in chief ’);

• pre-recorded cross-examination of the witness;

• use of an ‘intermediary’ by a witness; and

• use of an aid to communication by a witness. (Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999, ss 22–30)

The use of an ‘intermediary’ was to assist a witness with, say, learning disabilities or other communication problems to present their evidence as clearly as possible to the court. Although the use of pre-recorded cross-examinations of witnesses was now on the statute book, the government still held back from implementing the relevant section 28 of the Act.

Three years later, the government returned to the subject and the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 amended the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 with more ‘special measures’:

• raising the upper age limit of child witnesses automatically eligible for special measures from those under 17 to include those under 18;

• providing child witnesses with more choice and flexibility about how they give their evidence;

• making specific provision for the presence of a supporter to the witness in the live-link room;

• relaxing the restrictions on a witness giving additional evidence in chief after the witness’s video-recorded statement has been admitted as evidence in chief; and

• making special provision for the admissibility of video-recorded evidence in chief of adult complainants in sexual offence cases in the Crown Court. (Coroners and Justice Act 2009, ss 98–103)

The search to make life easier for vulnerable and intimidated witnesses in criminal courts has continued. In 2012, the question of pre-recorded cross-examination was returned to:

We are working to resolve the complex issues associated with implementation of pre-trial video-recorded cross examination (section 28 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999) with a view to establishing whether the provision can be made to work in practice. (Ministry of Justice, 2012, para 94)

Pilot measures for recorded pre-trial cross-examinations of children and other vulnerable witnesses eventually started in England in Leeds, Liverpool and Kingston on Thames in April 2014 (Ministry of Justice, 2014), 15 years after this had first been recommended.

TERRY THOMAS

See also: Policy and Victims in the UK

Readings

Ministry of Justice (2012) ‘Getting it right for victims and witnesses: the government’s response’, Cm 8397, July, London.

Ministry of Justice (2014) ‘First victims spared harrowing court room under prerecorded evidence pilot’, press release, 28 April.

Norfolk, A. (2015) ‘They are slags, not victims, lawyer tells grooming trial’, The Times, 7 March.

The Independent (1989) ‘Girl gives evidence by video link’, 10 January.

SEXUAL VIOLENCE

There is no universal definition of sexual violence; however, the World Health Organisation (2002, p 149) defines it as:

any sexual act, attempt to obtain a sexual act, unwanted sexual comments or advances, or acts to traffic, or otherwise directed, against a person’s sexuality using coercion, by any person regardless of their relationship to the victim, in any setting, including but not limited to home and work.

‘Sexual violence’ is thus an umbrella term used to describe a range of behaviours, the majority of which have been criminalised in the UK. Rape and sexual assault are two of the more serious offences contained in the primary legislation governing sexual offences in the UK. The Sexual Offences Act 2003, however, includes unwanted sexual touching, voyeurism and indecent exposure (commonly referred to as ‘flashing’) as sexual offences. Sexual violence against certain groups in society has been categorised separately, for example, sexual violence against children is often termed ‘child sexual abuse’, whereas offences against older people is termed ‘elder abuse’. In the context of an intimate relationship, which research suggests is where the majority of sexual violence occurs, it overlaps with definitions and approaches to domestic violence.

Both men and women can be victims and perpetrators of sexual violence; however, globally, the majority of reported sexual violence involves a female victim and a male perpetrator (World Health Organisation, 2003). As such, sexual violence is considered a gendered phenomenon and is typically categorised as a form of violence against women. It is difficult to get accurate statistics on the prevalence of sexual violence. Sexual victimisation is often under-reported and unreported due to the shame and stigma that these offences carry and the culture of disbelief that exists in the criminal justice system. For example, in the UK, the Office for National Statistics estimates that only 15% of victims report the offence to the police. Furthermore, national and international victimisation surveys, which generally obtain much higher statistics and are considered a more reliable form of data collection, are methodologically limited as they only include samples of people aged 16–59 and do not include people living in institutions such as prisons, hospitals or care homes. This is problematic as it excludes significant proportions of the population and often those who are considered the most vulnerable. However, the most recent national statistics from the Home Office in 2015 estimate that, in England and Wales, 2.2% of women and 0.7% of men experienced some form of sexual assault in the previous 12 months, equating to over 400,000 women and over 90,000 men. In 2012/13, there were more than 22,000 recorded sexual offences against a child aged under 18 (Jütte et al, 2014).

The negative consequences and impacts of sexual violence have been well documented and include depression, drug and alcohol misuse, fears and phobias, high levels of anxiety, and suicidal feelings. Negative health impacts include increased risk of high cholesterol, heart disease, stroke and problems with the immune system, while a range of mental health issues have been associated with rape and sexual assault, including overall poor mental health, self-harm, suicidal thoughts, panic attacks and post-traumatic stress disorder (Chen et al, 2010; Machado et al, 2011).

The focus of researchers and campaigners has primarily been directed at sexual violence perpetrated against young people in the context of date rape or domestic violence. Sexual violence in war zones has received much less attention, with developments in this area still very recent. In the context of conflict zones, sexual violence is viewed as a weapon of war, a deliberate strategy used by military personnel and those fighting in wars. It has multiple uses, including ethnic cleansing, which refers to the systematic wiping out of cultures or ethnicities, for example, via the impregnating of women or the purposeful transmission of contagious viruses and infections, such as human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Furthermore, as blame and shame are often attached to women who are raped in these communities, it serves as a strategy to break down and erode communities. Moreover, as men dominate the front line in war zones, this is a way of directly affecting women in the countries and areas where the war is concentrated.

Feminist theories have dominated sexual violence research and discourses and have made unique contributions to the field. They position sexual violence as a consequence of the inequalities that exist between women and men, rooted in a patriarchal society that views women as subordinate to men and attaches value to their sexuality. Sexual violence is seen as a weapon used by men to assert their masculinity and control and to oppress women. Feminist theories have arguably had the biggest influence on policy and practice developments; however, other theories exist in the literature. Some opposing criminological theories position rape within a psychopathology model, viewing perpetrators as mentally ill and unable to control their sexual urges. Similarly, biological theories of rape consider sexual violence to be motivated by sexual desire and an inability to control that desire. Such theorists are now in a minority; however, there is still work published from this standpoint.

HANNAH BOWS

See also: Blame and Victims; Gender and Victimisation; Genocide, Harm and Victimisation

Readings

Chen, L. P., Murad, M. H., Para, M. L. Colbenson, K. M. Sattler, A. L., Goranson, E. N., Elamin, M. B., Seime, R. J., Shinozaki, G. Prokop, L. J. and Zirakzadeh, A. (2010) ‘Sexual abuse and lifetime diagnosis of psychiatric disorders: systematic review and meta-analysis’, Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 85(7): 618–29.

Jütte, S., Bentley, H., Miller, P. and Jetha, N. (2014) How safe are our children?, London: NSPCC.

Machado, C.L., De Azevado, R.C.S., Facuri, C.O., Vieira, M.-J.N. and Fernandes, A.-M.S. (2011) ‘Posttraumatic stress disorder, depression, and hopelessness in women who are victims of sexual violence’, International Journal of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 113: 58–62.

Office for National Statistics (2015) Violent crime and sexual offences – overview. London: ONS.

World Health Organisation (2002) Sexual violence. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO.

World Health Organisation (2003) Guidelines for medico-legal care for victims of sexual violence. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO.

SEX WORKERS AND VICTIMISATION

Sex work is a highly contentious issue that creates massive debate around: choice and lack of agency; abolitionism and rights-based approaches; and arguments for decriminalisation and strengthening existing law. Sex work, in and of itself, is not illegal and is not, in and of itself, inherently dangerous; however, some sectors can be. Street sex workers account for around 25% of all sex workers in the UK, yet around 95% of sex worker homicides occur in this group.

To be a sex worker in the UK today can be ‘a risky business’ (Sanders, 2004). Sex workers are victims of murder, rape, violence and a range of other crimes but are also subject to cultural issues of stigma, discrimination and the law. They are victims from a range of perpetrators, for example: residents who do not want sex workers in their area; passers-by; and police officers. Kinnell (2009) breaks this down to three types of perpetrators, namely, non-clients, pseudo-clients and bad clients. The non-clients are the general passers-by, the vigilantes, partners, family members, ‘muggers’, robbers, drug dealers, pimps. Some of these may be violent towards sex workers in non-working situations, but others may simply attack sex workers on the street or throw objects from vehicles or enter indoor premises by force or by posing as some kind of official. This is by far the largest group, but only some of the violence that they commit is likely to be reported to outreach workers, let alone the police. The continuum of abuse by passers-by, residents, young people and so forth is endemic in many street-working areas, and ranges from insults to assaults, robbery and, in some cases, murder.

Pseudo-clients comprise the people posing as clients in order to attack or rob sex workers. These are people who begin by behaving as clients, using the ‘client disguise’, they pay or offer to pay, but then turn violent and force repayment, force acts that have not been paid for, refuse to use condoms and frequently rob the sex worker of all her money. A client is someone who pays for sex: those who do not pay are therefore not clients but perpetrators. Bad clients are clients who appear to believe that having paid, they are entitled to commit violence. There are a small number of men among the men who have murdered who are known to have paid for sex.

However, even though it is a certainty that sex workers are victims of crime and harm both from a range of perpetrators and through stigma and discrimination, they are not passive victims allowing such victimisation to happen to them. Every day, a proportion of sex workers go to work and do what they have to do to survive. They are resisting victimisation in the form of Ugly Mugs and Dodgy Punter/Bad Date lists throughout the world. Ugly Mugs was set up by the Prostitution Collective in May 1986 in Victoria, Australia. The term ‘Ugly Mugs’ is used to describe punters, or people posing as punters, who commit violent and other crimes against sex workers or who become problematic. As the majority of Ugly Mugs were not being reported to the police, they realised that sharing descriptions of Ugly Mugs could warn other sex workers about people who posed a danger to them.

The first schemes in the UK started in Birmingham and Edinburgh in 1989 and were run by sex work projects. Since then, similar schemes have been developed by many sex work projects throughout the UK. This is true resistance by sex workers for sex workers and has solved many crimes. There now exists a National Ugly Mugs Scheme in the UK also.

Importantly, what was also known was that crimes against sex workers indicated something deeper than just regular crimes. For sex work projects, these crimes fitted the ‘hate crime’ mantel because project workers (and the sex workers themselves) felt that the sex workers were being attacked because they were sex workers. Merseyside Police (Liverpool, England) agreed with this and in the midst of one of the most famous sex worker murder sprees that the UK has ever seen, the then Chief Constable Bernard Hogan Howe (2006) made the following declaration:

Merseyside Police are determined to bring all perpetrators of Hate Crime to justice…. We were the first force in the country to recognise and respond to attacks agai...

Table of contents

• Coverpage
• Title page
• Copyright
• Contents
• Contributors
• Acknowledgements
• Preface
• A
• B
• C
• D
• E
• F
• G
• H
• I
• J
• K
• L
• M
• N
• O
• P
• Q
• R
• S
• T
• U
• V
• W
• X
• Y
• Z
• Appendix