The Victimicy of the Violence Crimes against Person and its Types

Niyozova Salomat Saparovna
Violence Crimes against Person and its Types

 Abstract. In this article author had searched the questions devoted the victimization of the crimes, committed by using the violence against person, the conception of the victimization and its types.
Key words. Against person, using violence, the crime, the victim, the victimicy, individual, ancestral, group, the classification, behavior.    

Introduction.

The conception of the victimization had introduced into the practice of the criminology for the reflection of the specifics about the factors turn into the victims of crimes. The researcher L.Frank offered use this conception in the criminology and he realized it as the actions, enabled turn into the victims of crimes in many instances. In his judgment the victimization is the ability of the one person on account of his social role, physical or moral characteristics turn into the victim of the crime, that is to say be the criminal offence victim [1].
The ideas of researchers about the conception of the victimize, its identity vas very variable and totally differented. Some scientists said victimisation is the high ability of the injured person turn into the victim of the crime in some instances [2]. And another scientists says the victimisation depends of the general criminality situation, in other words the more crimes in the society than more chances of the ordinar person turn into the victim of the crime [3].
The victimacy or the ability of the person to be the complainant is not the voluntary capacity. For completeness understanding of the victimacy is most important separation it to the guilty and not guilty, carelessly types. For instance, the person can be the victim of the crime for his employment status (the police officer, cash messenger and etc.), psychophysiological characteristics (old men, men with mental and physically defects), biophysical characteristics (women, kids). The victims of this kind recognizes the carelessly victims. For example, it is common knowledge that the infant is not guilty in the increasing of the kidnapping crimes or the human thafficing.
But there is the specific type of the victimacy named the guilty victimacy and the same time the ability of be victim appears beforehand. It shows up in the law violations of the victim, moral (ethical) degradation as well as careless, self-satisfied behavoir. For instance, behavoir of the light-headed girls, dress up miniskirts and use full-flavoured perfumes to be attractive, use the drugs, their immoral conduct and so on. Usually, it comes because of committing crimes, violence against them.
A.Repetskaya offered following types of victimacy: 1) victim abnormality of the person; 2) professional or role victimacy; 3) age victimacy; 4) pathological victimacy [4].
V.Polubinsky, evolving the V.Franks’ ideas, had offered to separate such talent into the four types: individual, ancestral, group and popular types [5].
Under the individual victimacy we realize the specifical social, biophysical or psychical affinities of the one person, sometimes create the opportunity to commit a crime and damaging for him.
Under ancestral victimacy we can comprehend the predisposition of some person to be a victim of the specific types of crimes (for example, rape, robbery, burglary and so on).
The group victimacy expresses in an ability of a person to be victim of the specific types of crimes in commexion with belonging to a group of people with the similar social, demographical, psychological, biophysical and other characteristics [6].
The popular victimacy – the opportunity of the definite part of people to take a phisycal, moral or material damage on account of some objective harm-doing crimes because their (people) subjective attributes.
How we can recognize these conceptions, when we identify the conception of victimacy the specific attributes of the victim are serve as only one conclusive criterion.
K.Abdurasulova underscores that “a person could be a victim of crime not in accordance with his characterictics but as a result of its connecting to the other factors or elements of crime” and continue her idea says that status of some person is not be equal to his ability. In her point of wiev, in this situation more correctly to discuss about opportunity of any person to turn into the victim in objective circumctances  [7].
In my opinion such understanding the conception of victimacy is not enough.
The victimacy is not acquired attribute (to put it differently, any person can be victim of crime) and it happen to person with ideally behavior [8].
The victimacy is conditionally objective attribute possessed temper on social, popular and individual level. The criminality level in the society depends upon appearance of the opportunity of the victimacy.
In the judgment of R.Nurtaev, under the victimacy should be comprehend the totally number of the victims of crimes [9].
At the same time, in my opinion the analyse of the totally number of the victims is not enough for understanding the conception of victimacy.
The realization of the opportunity of being victim depends on a number of ways subjective and objective reasons.
When we discuss about victimacy of some person, at that time we have to accentuate of the aggressiveness, using the alcoholic beverage and drugs of these kind of person.  In this regard, we have to agree with the idea of R.Nurtaev that the victimacy is the substance of criminal or immoral activities [10]. Because before-mentioned criminal or immoral activities entail its victim attributes.
  1. Rybalskaya separates the types of victimacy in following way:
1) the aggregate of social and psychological specifics of person connected to his socialization;
2) professional or role victimacy;
3) victimacy connected to age;
4) victimacy connected to patological statuse. At that time, author underlines the victimacy appears in different types, cast of mind [11].
In my opinion there are some defects in the determination of the age specifics connected to the victimacy level. Especially, the age of person as his biopchysical attribute does not entail the victimacy. The children and old men in point of victimacy are weak in terms of personality, psychology and physiology.
Thus and so, they are could not to include in the special group connected to the individual victimacy.
In the judgment of D.Sorokotyagina, the victimacy is the mode of the action or inaction of person turn into victim [12].
In my opinion the point of wiev about determine the individual victimacy as the substance of personal characters and behavior of the person awakes the great interest. N.Kotova had contrastive analysis of the criminal and victims’ person in the felony of violence an said the complex of the psychological factors could make the basis on formation of the criminal and victim persons [13].
At the same time he does not exclude that the social approbated activity could be cause of the committing of crime [14].
Thus, the victimacy is the complex conception included the different elements and it determines the level of the vulnerability of person in front of that or other types of crimes. It shows up in the personal or morally characters, social status or social missions of the person.
E.Bafia recites as a sources of the victimacy following matters:
1) the personality of the victim;
2) relations between the criminal and victim persons;
3) the social microclimate of the victim [15].
How exposes the results of the research and practice the victimological level of the person is different in respect of different types of crimes. For instance, the level of opportunity turn into the victim of the road accident йўл is equal for everybody. But in the felonies of violence the victimological level connected to the special features of the relations between criminals and victims.
Many actions commiting by the criminals are directing against to life or health of the familiar or relatives of these criminal persons. In the rapes the potential of become familiar of the criminal is higher. At the same time the robbery with violence as a rule commits against unknown persons. For example, The results of M.Rustambaevs’ research shows up the 40,2% of victims of the rape is not familiar to the criminal, 2,0 % of victims were daughter (adopted daughter), 1,5 % of victims were son (adopted son), 0,8 % of victims were man and wife (divorced), almost 2,7% of victims were immediate relatives, 22, 8% of victims were a familiar, 30 % of victims were a passing acquaintance [16].
How attests the results of our questionnaire among the officers of the law-enforcement bodies, the 16% of the person committed the crime of violence lived together the victim, 20% of them were familiars, 20% of them were known, 12% of them were not known, 32% of them were a passing acquaintance. The ascertainment of causes increasing the level of victimacy in the crime of violence bring us the following opportunities, firstly, to identify the social values of the victim owned the criminal legal significance and determine its behavior; secondly, explore opportunities of the victimogeneous happens and potential of victims; thirdly, work out the special and general arrangements of the victimological prevention of criminality on the collected sources basis.
There are two main types of the victimacy: common (connected to the age, sex, profession, social status, etc.) and special (connected to the psychical instability, emotional instability, drunkenness) victimacy. When these types of victimacy combines, it extends the level of victimacy.
Such analysis of victimacy the crime of violence against person gives the opportunity to take much information about victim behavoir, identify the unnessesary factors of victimacy, connect the victim behavior to criminal behavior and finally work out the prevention measures.
In my opinion today the research of some types or groups of crimes demands solve two general questions.
First of all, we ought to find out victim of the crime. It must be analysed not only for satisfy the needs of intimate knowledge, but for identity main victimogeneous social groups.
How attests the results of our research the unnessessary victimacy of women shows itself in the committing of fraud, torture and in for men’s turn – in the murder and bodily injures. This position depends on the specifics of the social missions realized by men and women in the formal and informal spheres, their living conditions.

Conclusions.

More than a half of totally number of crimes of violence has a victim among familiar or known of the criminal. It especially appropriates to hooliganism, murder, bodily injures and etc. The rapes in most cases commits against the unknown persons (passing acquaintance).
References:
[1] L.Frank. T: The victimology and victimacy. Dushanbe, Irfon, 1972, 109.
[2] L.Ilina. T: The criminal legal meaning of the victimacy. Pravovedeniye. 1975. - №3, 119.
[3] D.Rivman. T: The victimological factors and crime prevention. Leningrad, 1975, 9.
[4]  A.Repetskaya. T: The victim behavior and the principle of justice in the criminal polity. Irkutsk, 1994, 23.
[5]  V.Polubinski, A.Sitkovski. T: The theoretical and practical basis of the criminal victimology. Monograph. Moscow, WNII MVD of the Russia, 2006, 118.
[6] E.Alauchanov. T: The criminology, the school-book, Almaty, 2006, 188.
[7]  K.Abdurasulova. T: The criminology, the school-book, Tashkent. TSIL, 2008, 93.
[8]  N.Kotova. T: The victimological problems of criminal aggression. Astana, 2001, 27.
[9]. R.Nurtaev. T: Questions of the victimological aspects of careless crimes. Vladivostok, The State university of the Дальневосточный  госуниверситет, 1991, 140.
[10] R.Nurtaev. T: The struggle with the careless types of crimes. Alma-Ata, Nauka, 1990, 179.
[11]  V.Rybalskaya. T: The victimological researches in the system of the juvenile crimes prevention. The questions of the struggle with the criminality, Ch.33, Moscow, 1980, 32-33.
 [12] D.Sorokotyagina. T: The social psychological characteristics of the victims person, Sverdlovsk, 1980, 59.
[13]  N.Kotova. T: The victimological problems of criminal aggression. Astana, 2001, 31.
[14] N.Kotova. T: The victimological problems of criminal aggression. Astana, 2001, 31.
[15] E.Bafia. T: The problems of the criminology. The dialectics of the criminogenous situation. Moscow, Yuridicheskaya literatura, 1983, 105.
[16] M.Rustambaev. The penalty for the sexual violence under the criminal legislation of Uzbekistan, Tashkent, Ilm ziyo, 2009, 274.
Share on Google Plus