Menu

Victimization of people in power

0 Comment

Yet, they firmly disagree over how to change the institution. The agreement among the professionals who place emphasis on the concerns of victims is that the criminal justice system is inefficient. It fails to satisfy the victims’ needs and demands. Challenging difficulties continue, and the condemnations of the institution expressed over the years are still present nowadays. Law enforcers are the criminal justice authorities that victims encounter at the onset. Law enforces could quickly help the victim and give whatever assistance is necessary. They could capture the criminal and promptly gather evidence that will be used in trial. They may recover stolen properties grabbed by the thieves and quickly bring these properties back to the real owner. Meanwhile, the victim, who is a major witness for the government, must be safeguarded from retaliations and threats. After verdict, the opinion of the victim about a just decision may be completely made public (Walklate, 2007). The judge may give the punishment that would complement the victim’s demands with the demands of the community and the needs of the thief. Correctional officials may ensure that the parolee, prisoner, or probationer does not assault or pester the individual whose grievance activated the mechanism of the criminal justice system (Tonry, 2009). However, these ‘ideal’ scenarios often do not happen. … the problem. legal status of the victim group. the latest official statistics on extent of the problems faced by the victim group. news media coverage. nature and effectiveness of policy interventions. empirical research findings from journals and official reports. and key recommendations. The main objective of this essay is to determine whether victimised people in power receive fair and sympathetic treatment from the criminal justice system, or whether the policy interventions regarding this matter are effective in preventing their victimisation. An Overview of the Problem Even though several kinds of victimisation framing highlight the role of people in power in victimising those belonging to the lower class, there are also analyses that demonstrate how the upper class or people in power is being victimised by those underneath them. The issue of victimisation of the elite by the poor usually appears in media reports (Allen, 2011). However, studies show that people in power are prone to become victims of identity theft. Identity theft is the specific crime that is widespread among the upper class. Generally, identity theft is an offence which can happen to anybody (Roberson, 2008). In spite of the fact that identity theft is unselective as regards its victims, specific people seem to be more vulnerable to be victimised by this criminal act. Keith Anderson carried out a research to determine whether specific people are in fact more prone to be victimised by identity theft (Letschert van Dijk, 2011, p. 162): The risks faced by consumers do differ, and these differences may manifest themselves in differences across groups with different demographic characteristics. Anderson outlines several aspects which could heighten the vulnerability to identity-theft