●Who here would consider themselves to have been a victim of crime?
●Who here has worked with victims?
●Are some victims more deserving of justice than others? (e.g. criminal  injuries compensation only
to completely ‘blameless’ victims  Barnes, 2013).
2

●Defining victim terms
●Approaches to victimology
●How we measure victimisation
●Prevalence and Patterns
●Effects on victims
●Offenders as victims
●Victims and the Criminal Justice Service

●Definition difficult -  crime is a social construct
●How useful is the term victim for those harmed by crime?
●What about the term ‘survivor’?

Victims-originally used as a term within ancient civilisations, practises of sacrifice
 “passive and helpless”
Men may resist calling themselves victims due to this stereotype, not all though. It is not
instant, can lay dormant until it is explored-Lamb (1999) case women abused by grandfather, not
considered abuse until therapy-pain and suffering was integral to way of life, may be rejected by
others-abusive relationship, love towards the abuser (Lamb 1999)

●ABOVE ALL,
●BE THE
●HEROINE OF
●YOUR LIFE, NOT
●THE VICTIM
●
●THE VICTIM
5

●
●
●“A person harmed, injured, or killed as a result of a crime, accident, or other event or action.”

Victims-originally used as a term within ancient civilisations, practises of sacrifice
 “passive and helpless” Christies (1986)- “the ideal victim” The victim is weak in relation to the
offender – the ‘ideal victim’ is likely
to be either female, sick, very old or very young (or a combination of
these).
2 The victim is, if not acting virtuously, then at least going about their
legitimate, ordinary everyday business.
3 The victim is blameless for what happened.
4 The victim is unrelated to and does not know the ‘stranger’ who has
committed the offence (which also implies that the offender is a person
rather than a corporation; and that the offence is a single ‘one-off’
incident).
5 The offender is unambiguously big and bad.
6 The victim has the right combination of power, influence or sympathy to
successfully elicit victim status without threatening (and thus risking
opposition from) strong countervailing vested interests.
Were seen as invisible to policy makers
Men may resist calling themselves victims due to this stereotype, not all though. levels of
violence by female perpetrators higher than those reported for
males, particularly in younger age samples. A critical analysis of the methodology of these studies
is
made with particular reference to the Conflict Tactics Scale developed and utilised by Straus and
his
colleagues. Results show that the gender disparity in injuries from domestic violence is less than
originally portrayed by feminist theory. Studies are also reviewed indicating high levels of
unilateral
intimate violence by females to both males and females. Males appear to report their own
victimization
less than females do and to not view female violence against them as a crime. Hence, they
differentially under-report being victimized by partners on crime victim surveys.
 It is not instant, can lay dormant until it is explored-Lamb (1999) case women abused by
grandfather, not considered abuse until therapy-pain and suffering was integral to way of life, may
be rejected by others-abusive relationship, love towards the abuser (Lamb 1999)

●Loosely - any individual harmed by crime may be considered a victim, and so, this includes a
diverse group.
7

●Primary/secondary/tertiary victims
●Who are they?

direct, indirect, wide people-medical personnel-not assumed that the tertiary victim suffers less.
Direct-child, adult, police, strangers, home owners,
Indirect-children of abused, partners of victims, families, work colleagues
Tertiary-society, public, medical personnel, counselling staff/probation, teachers-kirsty plus
articles
Research shows that the shock waves from victimization touch not only the victim but also the
victim’s immediate family and relatives, neighbours and acquaintances. This holds true for the
emotional as well as the financial consequences, and the effects can endure for years or even a
lifetime. In the case of genocide, child abuse, exposure to violence and abuse of power, the
effects can be passed on from one generation to the next. While this is to be expected in
connection with offences such as murder, torture and rape, the crimes of assault, robbery and
burglary can also leave lasting feelings of powerlessness, insecurity, anger and fear. Not only
individuals but also communities and organizations can be victimized, leading to their
deterioration over time as confidence ebbs, fear increases and the economic burden of victimization
becomes insupportable.

●
●Victimology is the study of why certain people are victims of crime and how lifestyle affect the
chances that a certain person will fall victim to a crime.

10



●Positivist victimology
●Lifestyle approach
●Radical approach
●Feminist perspective

Von Hentig (1948) created a victim typology, classes of victims including young, the old, female,
the mentally defective and minorities. Criticised as used anecdotal obs, not empirical research.
Amir (1971) developed this idea stating that victims can range from “consciously” to “unconsciously
seductive”. Feminist researchers disputed this theory believing that it blames the victim. not
about blaming but about finding out what factors contributed to their victimisation. Suggesting
that victims and offenders are not necessarily separate entities. Need to consider a more two way
approach in which criminal behaviour is seen as an outcome of processes of interaction.
Lifestyle impacts on the probability of a crime to take place Lasley and Rosenbaum (1988) studied
victims work schedules-number of weekend evenings spent away from home and level of alcohol
correlated with the chances of being a repeat victim.   Criticised-partial analysis of the role of
human action only looked at specific lifestyles omitted others. Blaming of lifestyle against victim
3. Radical victimology- Capitalism promotes damaging practises, aspirations of wealth but which
deprives some of the ability to achieve this wealth (Gordon, 1973)  Victimisation by social
systems. Criticised-over simplistic, not looking at the impact crime has on people
4. -stresses the violence carried out against women and strategies that can be used to manage their
live around male aggression. Ignored between women. DV perpetrators- The feminist paradigm supports
the notion that domestic violence is primarily a
culturally supported male enterprise and that female violence is always defensive and
reactive. When women are instigators, in this view, it is a pre-emptive strike Q, aimed at
instigating an inevitable male attack Dutton and Nicolas 2005
POSITIONALITY

●
●Surveys
●Criminal victimization survey first deployed in USA in late 1960s.
●
●In England and Wales first survey 1982, now conducted annually.
●What could be the problems with using data from large surveys?

●Only incorporate individuals who identify themselves as victims.
●Only include people from the electoral register
●Only use individuals aged 16 and upwards
●Domestic Abuse-what could be the problems here?
●Questions may convey different meanings

Wood (2005) reports 35% of 10-15 year olds were victims of crime in 2003, 19% experiencing 5 or
more incidents

•Figures show 1 in 4 of us has been a victim of crime. (Source: Crime in England and Wales 2005/06
report.)
•
•Since 1995 the BCS has reported a fall in crime at each successive survey.  There has been a 25%
fall in the crime measured by the BCS over the last 5 years, between 1997 and the 2002/2003 BCS.

When considering primary, secondary and tertiary victims-prevalence much higher.
The MoJ is working hard to get the level of crime down but they’re also reforming the justice
system to put the needs of victims first.
They also want to improve the experience victims have when they come into contact with any part of
the CJS, to ensure they are treated with the respect and dignity they deserve.

●On average counted crimes as four times highrer  than those reported to the police (Kershaw et al,
2001)
●More recently, the Crime Survey for England and Wales (formerly BCS) highlighted there were an
estimated 7.3 million incidents  of crime against households and resident adults for the year
ending March 2014 (ONS, 2014)
15

●What is ‘fear of crime?’
●
●Recognised phenomenon (Hale , 1996)
●
●Compounded by media effects, leading to heuristic bias in estimating the volume of crime.
●
●At least as prevalent as crime itself.
●
●Varies according to factors such as age, gender, mental health, physical functioning, area living
in, socioeconomic status, quality of life and race.
16

●Fear of crime does not necessarily track objective rates of actual victimisation (e.g. young, low
income males tend to be the least fearful yet actually are at greatest risk of victimisation than
other groups (Wolhunter, Olley and Denham, 2009)
●
●Women and elderly fear crime most and yet least at risk.
●
●Chivite-Matthews & Maggs (2002) found 16-29 year olds subject to violence at a rate 17 times
higher than those aged 60 years or over.
17

●There is considerable variation in patterns of crime across England and Wales both geographically
and by type of area.
●
●BCS victimisation rates show household crime to be highest in Yorkshire and Humberside and lowest
in Wales.

Many of these differences will result from the variation in the socio-economic make-up of local
victims and offenders. The risk of becoming a victim can be very different depending on where you
live, and your socio-economic characteristics.
The highest levels of worry about burglary are in Yorkshire and Humberside, North West, West
Midlands and London regions. Levels of burglary as recorded by the police were also higher in
Yorkshire and Humberside than in any other region.

●Focusing only on alcohol-related assaults between strangers and between acquaintances, the
following factors were consistently associated with a heightened risk:
● Being male aged 16 to 29
● Being single
● Being unemployed
● Visiting a pub frequently

60% of  alcohol-related assaults between acquaintances and 54 per cent of incidents between
strangers resulted in some form of injury. One in six alcohol-related stranger and acquaintance
assaults resulted in the victim seeking some form of medical attention from a doctor of
alcohol-related violence than others. article

● Visiting a night club frequently
● High level of alcohol consumption.
●People who most regularly expose themselves to social situations where they are in contact with a
large number of people who have consumed relatively large amounts of alcohol are more likely to
become victims of an alcohol-related assault.

Around three-quarters of victims of alcohol-related assault said that they had been emotionally
affected by their experience. Victims of an assault by an acquaintance were more severely affected
than those assaulted by a stranger. The most common reaction, by far, was anger, followed by shock
and feeling fearful.

●
●According to the UK Home Office (2008), victims experience over 35 abusive incidents on average,
perpetrated by an intimate partner, before actually reporting it.
●Nearly 1 million women experience at least one incident of domestic abuse each year (2009/10
British Crime Survey )
●54 per cent of women victims of serious sexual assault were assaulted by their partner or
ex-partner (Stern, 2010)
●
●Dispelling the myths
●Few men experience DA
●Abuse of men has no serious effects
●Abused men don’t stay

Few men experience domestic violence. Many do. In-depth phone interviews with over 400 randomly
sampled adult male -5% had experienced domestic violence in the past year, 10% in the past five
years, and 29% over their lifetimes. The researchers defined domestic violence to include
nonphysical abuse—threats, chronic disparaging remarks, or controlling behaviour—as well as
physical abuse: slapping, hitting, kicking, or forced sex.
Myth 2: Abuse of men has no serious effects. The researchers found domestic violence is associated
with serious, long-term effects on men’s mental health. Women are more likely than men to
experience more severe physical abuse, said Dr. Reid. “But even nonphysical abuse can do lasting
damage.” Depressive symptoms were nearly three times as common in older men who had experienced
abuse than in those who hadn’t, with much more severe depression in the men who had been abused
physically.
Myth 3: Abused men don’t stay, because they’re free to leave. In fact, men may stay for years with
their abusive partners. “We were surprised to find that most men in abusive relationships also
stay, through multiple episodes, for years.”

The process of overcoming victimisation
Immediate effects
Disorganisation
Reconstruction and Acceptance
Normalization/Adjustment

1)The initial reaction: shock, fear, anger, helplessness, disbelief and guilt.
Some of these reactions may recur at a later stage as well, when attending a trial or going to
hospital for medical
treatment. Anger may be directed at other victims, helpers, bystanders, organizations and also at
oneself. Cultural issues
2) period of disorganization, which may manifest itself in psychological effects (distressing
thoughts about the event, nightmares, depression, guilt, fear and a loss of confidence and esteem.
Life can
seem to slow down and lose its meaning). faiths may no longer provide comfort. Behavioural
responses might include increased alcohol or substance abuse, fragmentation of social
relationships, avoidance of people and situations associated with the crime and social withdrawal.
3) reconstruction and acceptance, which leads to normalization or adjustment. The early stages of
coming to terms with crime are often characterized by retrospective thinking, where victims long
for everything to be as it was before and to turn the clock back. This crucial stage in recovery
involves victims’ accepting fully the reality of what has happened. Cognitive restructuring-victims
reinterpret their experience to ameliorate the effects of the crime and possibly find an
explanation for what has happened or evaluate the event as leading to personal growth.
The boundaries never as clear-cut as suggested, aid to understanding the process rather than
categorical descriptions. victims may not progress smoothly through the stages, may be affected by
crime will vary enormously; at one extreme, they become “stuck” at a particular stage and never
move on
Rape-2 stages- disorganizational stage (few days to several weeks) and reorganisational stage
(integrating the act into her own life, though some victims find it difficult to ever reach these
stages. Mezey (1988)

●
●Psychological Effects
●Physical Effects
●
●Factors that may influence permanence of effects.
●
●http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGDTDawB4wE&feature=related
●http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WL3rfk2iFww&feature=related

These repetitive incidences can involve a range of damaging behaviours including physical force,
psychological harm, and social isolation (Browne & Herbert, 1997; Holtzworth-Munroe, Smutzler &
Sandin, 1997). Physical force and injury are frequently reported by victims to co-occur with
psychological abuse; consequently, the combined impact that this can have is devastating (Coker,
Davis, Arias, Desai, Sanderson. et al. 2002; Felson & Pare, 2005; Holtzworth-Munroe & Stewart,
1994).
At the time of a crime, or upon discovering that a crime has occurred, victims are likely to
experience a number of physical reactions to the event. These may include an increase in the
adrenalin in the body, increased heart rate, hyperventilation, shaking, tears, numbness, a feeling
of being frozen or experiencing events in slow motion, dryness of the mouth, enhancement of
particular senses, such as smell, and a “fight or flight” response. It is common for people to lose
control over their bowel movements. Some of these physical reactions may not occur until after the
danger has passed. They may recur at a later stage when the memory of the crime returns.
After the crime, victims may suffer a range of physical effects, including insomnia, appetite
disturbance, lethargy,
headaches, muscle tension, nausea and decreased libido. Such reactions may persist for some time
after the crime has occurred. Physical injuries resulting from victimization may not always be
immediately apparent. This may be particularly true in cases of domestic violence where the
injuries occur on parts of the body that are normally clothed. Facial injuries are by far the most
frequent in other forms of assault. Victims may suffer a range of physical damage, including
abrasions and bruises, broken nose, cheekbone or jawbone and damage to or loss of teeth. Other
injuries will be associated with assaults involving knives or firearms. Physical injuries may be a
permanent effect of crime and there is evidence that this has a negative effect on long-term
psychological recovery, since the physical scars serve as a constant reminder of the crime.
Cultural, gender and occupational factors may affect the individual’s reaction to permanent
scarring or disability, as will the reaction of others.
At least 42% women and 20% of men sustain minor injuries such as scratches, bruises and swelling.
More severe injury may occur if the abuse is frequent and harsh. Some of the most common injuries
are:
Bruises
Lesions and cuts
Pelvic pain
Headaches
Back pain
Broken bones
Gynaecological injuries
Pregnancy complications
Where there is physical violence there is also emotional abuse. Whether the abuse is physical,
verbal or emotional it can have severe psychological consequences for to victim.
Depression
Loss of hope in the future
Suicidal behaviour
Anxiety
Low self-esteem
Inability to trust
Fear of intimacy
Sleep disturbances
Inability to concentrate
Flashbacks
Social Effects:
The negative social effects can be the very thing that restricts the victims ability to escape
domestic violence.
Controlled access to services meant to help the victim.
Strained relationships with authority figures such as health care providers and employers.
Isolation from family, friends and other supportive individuals.

●Consequences of victimisation have been a topic of research  since 1970’s
●
●Notion of ‘secondary victimisation also studied. That is when the actual investigative process and
prosecution system itself causes  additional distress to the victim
●
●Direct and indirect victims
●
●Response to being a ‘victim’ of crime individual.
24

25



●women who survived  attacks from a serial sex offender Malcolm Rewa in New Zealand gave the
following quotes:
●“you just can’t describe it. It goes through your mind that you are not going to see your family
again” Kathleen
●“even though the sex side of it was revolting, it was that fright, when he burst into the room and
kept beating me - that has been worse to get over than the sexual bit”  - Suzanne
●there was no violence in it, which was actually something i found really difficult to cope with
afterwards” - Karen
26

●Friends, family, partners, relatives (Rock, 1998)
●
●One mother captures the moment se was told her son had been murdered:
●“I didn’t hear what he said…I was in shock…I could hear him calling me…I could hear myself
screaming…I thought wow - my world is going to come to an end”
●(Thompson, 2007)
27

●Indirect victims may experience the following:
●
●PTSD
●Anxiety
●Depression
●Suicide
●Avoidant behaviour
●Substance misuse
●Feelings of self-blame
●Changed world view of the word as a safe and just place
28

●Victimised again by the process of the CJS ( Pointing and Maguire, 1988)
●
●May dissuade victims from reporting and proceeding with  CJ process (Ellison, 2002)
●
●In relation to sexual and domestic violence victims, Herman (2005) commented “the single greatest
shock was the discovery of just how little they mattered”.
●
●How a victim is treated is critical to their recovery
●
●Expereince of being revictimised in court (Jordan, 2008)
●
●Herman  said “if one set out intentionally to design a system for provoking symptoms of traumatic
stress, it might look very much like a court of law”.
29

●Observing the stress and suffering of victim
●
●Mimicked symptons variously called compassion fatigue, vicarious or secondary victimisation
(Pearson, La Bash and Follette, 2010)
●
●Police officers, mental health professionals, forensic psychologists  open to this!
30

31



●Peoples whose lifestyle are associated with offending are exposed to considerable risks of
victimisation.
●
●Homelessness is
●associated with
●offending and is also a
●risk marker for being
●a victim of violence
●(Canton, 2011)

Right ok, I’m in prison. Like society kicked me out.  They’re like “Okay, the criminal element. We
don’t want them in society, we’re going to put them in these prisons.” Okay, but once I get
out-then what do you do? What do you do with all these millions of people that have been in prison
and been released? I mean, do you accept them back? Or do you keep them as outcasts/ And if you
keep them as outcasts, how do you expect them to act? Prisoner, Uggan et al, 2004.
The effects of victimization strike particularly hard at the poor, the powerless, the disabled and
the socially isolated.
Research shows that those already affected by prior victimization are particularly susceptible to
subsequent victimization by the same or other forms of crime. These repeat victims are often found
in many countries to reside in communities with high crime levels
Risk is greater for young adults and women living in deprived areas-rape
Bottoms and costello-sheffied, higher proportion  of property offences in offender household.
Compared with non-offender.

●Rumgay (2004) found a strong association between women’s involvement as offenders in the CJS and
their experiences of victimisation.
●
●“…some offenders may need to work through issues of their own victimisation before they can begin
to contemplate putting themselves psychologically into the position of their own victims.”(Williams
and Goodman, 2007)

Williams and Goodman, 2007, Rumgay (2004

●Disruption of family life can lead to children of imprisoned parents being more likely to offend
themselves later on in life.
●
●What difficulties may offenders’ families face?

“serving a second sentence” some prisons developed “family days” (see Lloyd, 1992). No provisions,
like victim support for this group
What difficulties may offender families face? Everyday 5 years

●“And she said, well actually one of the prison officers, one of the officers was arrogant, enjoyed
his job, and actually said “you’re all alike”.  And that’s it. If you’ve got somebody in your
family that’s committed a crime, you’ll be judged for that crime as well as your family member
because you’re related to him…they judge the whole family for it, not just the offender.”
● Angela, husband accused of sex offence, p/67 Condry (2007)

Recent Developments in
Sentencing (Oct, 2011)
The Sentencing Council has
published a new burglary
sentencing guideline which for the first time takes into account the impact of the crime on
victims.
“It will mean that even if a householder faced with that terrifying situation uses force that in
the cold light of day might seem over the top, unless their response is grossly is proportionate,
the law will be on their side.” Grayling, 2012

Date: The guideline reinforces that criminals who burgle people’s homes can expect to go to prison.
Sentencing will remain at existing levels, but the guideline importantly gives victims the chance
to have a say on how they were affected by the crime.
When sentencing burglars the guideline asks judges to focus on the harm to the victim, as well as
the culpability of the offender.  The seriousness of an offence will be increased if, for example,
a victim is at home when a burglary takes place or if he or she experiences significant trauma. In
such cases, the guideline directs the judge towards a more severe sentence.
It also emphasises the seriousness of situations where a burglar has targeted vulnerable victims
and the significance of victims being obliged to leave their home as a result of burglary.
Commenting, Javed Khan, Chief Executive of Victim Support, said: “Being burgled and having your
personal belongings trashed or stolen can have a lasting impact. With a quarter of burglary victims
losing confidence, a fifth having trouble sleeping and one in ten suffering from depression. It is
only right that the impact is taken into account in sentencing. We are pleased that the new
guidelines take this into account and hope it will lead to more victims being offered the
opportunity to tell a court about the effect through a victim personal statement.”
The guideline will be used in both the Crown Court and magistrates’ courts and covers aggravated,
domestic and non-domestic burglary. The introduction of the guideline follows a three-month
consultation period during which responses from victims, the wider public and criminal justice
professionals were sought.
That is why today I am announcing a change to the law about protecting yourself and your family
from intruders to your home.
None of us really know how we would react if someone broke into our house.
None of us really know how frightening it would be if we were confronted by a burglar in the middle
of the night.
Or how terrified we’d feel, if we thought our family was in danger.
You might well hit out in the heat of the moment, without thinking of anything but protecting your
loved ones. And right now you’re still not sure the law is on your side.
I think householders acting instinctively and honestly in self defence are victims not criminals.
They should be treated that way. That’s why we are going to deal with this issue once and for all.
I will shortly bring forward a
change to the law. It will mean that even if a householder faced with that terrifying situation
uses force that in the cold light of day might seem over the top, unless their response is grossly
disproportionate, the law will
be on their side.
Is grayling redefining the victim?

●Collecting data (e.g. interview techniques etc.)
●
●Analysing the offence (e.g. crime analysts considering patterns of offences  in order to assist in
targeting detection or prevention, analysis of victim selection)
●
●Post trial - assessing and treating the offender. Important to read victim statements to make a
full assessment of the offender, to enable work on victim empathy, to understand and work with
offenders victim experiences  and how this impacts on offending and treatment issues
37

•Victims can been defined in many ways, as can the approach of victimology.

•Measuring the impact of victimisation has it’s problems.
•Restorative Justice shows theoretical strength, though in practice there are problems

Condry, R. (2007). Families shamed: The consequences of crime for relatives of serious offenders.
Willan:Devon.
Rumgay, J. (2004). “Dealing with substance-misusing offenders in the community”, in A. bottoms, S.
Rex and G. Robinson (eds) Alternatives to prison: Options for an insecure society, Cullompton:
Willan.
Gehm, John R. (1998). Victim-offender mediation programs: An exploration of practice and
theoretical frameworks. Western Criminology Review 1(1). Retrieved October 8, 2007 from
http://wcr.sonoma.edu/v1n1/gehm.html.

Canton, R. (2011). Probation: Working with Offenders. Routledge: New York.
Codd, J. (1998). Prisoners families: the forgotten victim. Probation Journal,  45 (3), p148-155.
House of Commons (2011). The role of the probation service house of commons justice committee
8th report of session 2010-2012.  Retrieved Setpember 12, 2011 from
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmjust/519/519i.pdf
Mezey, G. (1988) 'Reactions to Rape: effects, counselling and the
role of health professionals.' In M.Maguire & J.Pointing (eds)
Victims of Crime: a new deal ? Milton Keynes: Open University
Press p66-73.

McCold, P. (2003). In Pursuit of Paradigm: A Theory of Restorative Justice. Paper presented at the
XIII World Congress of Criminology,
10-15 August 2003, Rio de Janeiro.  Retrieved on September 21, 2011 from
http://www.realjustice.org/articles.html?articleId=424
Morris, A. (2002). Critiquing the critics: a brief response to the critics of restorative justice.
British Journal of Criminology, 42, p 596-615.
Morris, A. & Maxwell, G. (2001). Implementing Restorative Justice: What Works? In Alison Morris and
Gabrielle Maxwell (eds.), Restorative Justice for Juveniles: Conferencing, Mediation and Circles.
Oxford: Hart Publishing.
Nauret, R. (2008).  Domestic Violence affects Men.  Retrieved September 11, 2011 from
http://psychcentral.com/news/2008/05/19/domestic-violence-affects-men/2309.html

Pauwels, B. (2002). Blaming the victim of rape: The culpable control model perspective.
Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, 63(5-B).
Rossmo, K. (1997). Geographic Profiling. In J. L. Jackson and D. A. Bekerian (Eds.), Offender
Profiling: Theory, Research and Practice, (p 159-176). New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Spalek, B (2005). Crime Victims: Theory, Policy and Practice. Palgrave: Basingstoke.
Strang, H., Sherman, L., Angel, C., Woods, D., Bennett, S., Newbury-Birch, D. & Inkpen, N. (2006).
Victim evaluations of face-to-face restorative justice conferences: a quasi-experimental analysis.
Journal of Social Issues, 62(2), 281-306.

Strang, H. (2002). Repair or Revenge: Victim and Restorative Justice. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Tjaden, P & Thoennes, N.(1998).  Prevalence, Incidence, and
Consequences of Violence Against Women: Findings From the National
Violence Against Women Survey National Institute of Justice.  Retrieved September 01,  2011 from
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/172837.pdf
Williams, B. & Goodman, H. (2007). “Working for and with victims of crime.” In L. Gelsthorpe and R.
Morgan (eds) Handbook of Probation, Cullompton: Willan.
Wright, M. (1995). Victims, mediation and criminal justice. Criminal Law Review. March, 87-199.