Are Victims of Sexual Assault More Likely to Be Victimized Again

Patterns of Repeat Victimization

This guide begins by describing the concept of echo victimization (RV) and its relationship to other patterns in public safety problems, such as hot spots and repeat offenders. The guide and so describes sources of information, and ways to decide the amount and characteristics of repeat victimization in your jurisdiction. Finally the guide reviews responses to repeat victimization from evaluative enquiry and police practise.

This guide is intended as a tool to assist police identify and understand patterns of echo victimization for a range of criminal offense and disorder problems. The guide focuses on techniques for determining the amount of RV for specific public condom issues and how analysis of RV generally may exist used to develop more effective responses. This publication is not a guide to specific bug, such equally burglary, domestic violence, or vehicle theft. You are encouraged to refer to other guides for an in-depth understanding of these problems.

For decades, much effort by police and citizens has been invested in crime prevention—such every bit marking property, establishing a Neighborhood Sentinel, conducting offense prevention surveys, hardening targets, increasing lighting, and installing electronic security systems.

While numerous crime prevention efforts are effective, many are adopted by persons, households, and institutions to the lowest degree at risk of existence victimized. Criminal offence prevention strategies are most effective when directed at those almost probable to be victimized.

Linking offense prevention strategies with likely victims is a challenge because of the difficulty in predicting the most likely victims of law-breaking. Taking steps to prevent that offense from occurring would be easier, if only police knew…

• What stores will be robbed?
• Whose homes will exist burglarized?
• Which higher students volition be sexually assaulted?

Information technology is oft painfully obvious that some individuals, households, or businesses are particularly vulnerable to crime. Such vulnerability may exist related to factors such every bit abusing alcohol, declining to secure property, being physically isolated, engaging in risky behaviors, or being in shut proximity to pools of likely offenders.

While most people and places do not go victimized by offense, those who are victimized consistently face the highest risk of being victimized again. Previous victimization is the single all-time predictor of victimization. It is a ameliorate predictor of futurity victimization than any other characteristic of law-breaking.†

† Lynch, Berbaum, and Planty (1998) disagree. Using data from the NCVS, the authors found that housing location, age, and marital condition of the head of household, size, and changes in household composition were stronger predictors of repeat victimization for burglary than initial victimization in the Us. In addition, the authors plant that the all-time predictor of repeat victimization for assault was the reporting of an initial assault to the constabulary.

Non merely is repeat victimization predictable, the time catamenia of likely revictimization can be calculated since subsequent offenses are consistently characterized by their rapidity. Much repeat victimization occurs within a week of an initial offense, and some echo victimization even occurs within 24 hours. Across all offense types, the greatest risk of revictimization is immediately later on the initial offense, and this period of heightened take a chance declines steadily in the following weeks and months.

The predictability of repeat victimization and the curt fourth dimension period of heightened risk after the beginning victimization provide a very specific opportunity for police to intervene quickly to prevent subsequent offenses. Strategies to reduce revictimization tin substantially increase the effectiveness of police. Reducing repeat victimization can result in lower crime, improved efficiency of criminal offence prevention resources, and the anticipation of offenders. Information technology can likewise conserve both patrol and investigative resources.

Defining Echo Victimization

In bones terms, repeat victimization is a type of offense pattern. There are several types of well-known crime patterns including hot spots, crime series, and echo offenders. While echo victimization is a distinct law-breaking pattern, some offenses feature multiple criminal offense patterns; these patterns are discussed later in this guide.

Past most definitions, repeat victimization, or revictimization, occurs when the same type of crime incident is experienced past the same—or nigh the same—victim or target within a specific period of time such as a year. Repeat victimization refers to the total number of offenses experienced past a victim or target including the initial and subsequent offenses. A person'southward house may exist burglarized twice in a year or 10 times, and both examples are considered repeats.

The corporeality of echo victimization is normally reported as the percentage of victims (persons or addresses) who are victimized more than once during a time menstruation for a specific crime type, such equally burglary or robbery. Echo victimization is also calculated as the proportion of offenses that are suffered past repeat victims; this figure is normally called repeat offenses. While both figures are of import, they are non interchangeable and intendance should be taken in the reading of such numbers. In this guide, we report both proportions of repeat victims and repeat offenses when the information are available.

For example, the commencement row in Table 1 would be stated as:

• 46% of all sexual assaults were experienced by persons suffering two or more victimizations during the data catamenia

Similarly, the second row in Table 2 would read:

• xi% of assault victims suffered 25% of all assaults over the 25-yr catamenia

And the first row in Table iii would read:

• xl% of all burglaries were experienced by the nineteen% of victims who were victimized twice or more during the information period

The term "victimization" usually refers to people, such as a person who has been victimized by domestic violence. But repeat victimization can all-time be understood as repeat targets since a victim may be an private, a dwelling unit, a business at a specific accost, or even a business chain with multiple locations. Even motor vehicles may be repeat victims. Subsequently in this guide, we hash out how to distinguish repeat victims in police data past address, victim'south proper name, and other identifiers.

The Extent of Repeat Victimization

Echo victimization is substantial and accounts for a large portion of all crime. While revictimization occurs for about all crime bug, the precise amount of crime associated with revictimization varies betwixt crime problems, over time, and across places.† These variations reverberate the local nature of crime and of import differences in the type and amount of information used for computing repeat victimization. Three primary sources of information demonstrate that echo victimization is prevalent across the globe: surveys of victims, interviews with offenders, and crime reports. Although each of these sources has limitations, the prevalence of revictimization is consistent beyond these different sources.

† With the exception of Lynch, Berbaum, and Planty (1998), virtually estimates of repeat victimization are produced outside the The states and are drawn from the British Criminal offense Survey, International Victims Survey, and other surveys. A few American studies in the early 1980s used the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) to examine repeat victimization but the NCVS is not designed to detect RV every bit it excludes law-breaking "series," collects information merely for incidents occurring in the preceding half-dozen months and uses a sample based on address that cannot control for people moving over time.

Tabular array 1: Estimates of Repeat Victimization—International Victimization Survey1

Offenses	Repeat offenses
Sexual attack	46%
Assault	41%
Robbery	27%
Vandalism to vehicle	25%
Theft from vehicle	21%
Vehicle theft	20%
Burglary	17%

Comparison data from international victimization surveys show that repeat victimization is more common for violent criminal offence such equally assaults and robbery than for holding crime (see Table 1). Set on victims routinely characteristic a loftier rate of revictimization (meet Table 2), and domestic violence is amongst the most predictable crimes for which a repeat volition occur.

Table 2: Estimates of Repeat Victimization for Set on

Law-breaking	Repeat Offenses	Repeat Victims	Data Source and Time Period
Assail	25%	11.iv%	Emergency room reports, 25 years, Netherlands2
Sexual attack	85%	67%	Victim surveys, developed feel, Los Angeles, California3
Domestic violence	n/a	44%	Victimization survey, one year, Great Britain4
Assaults of youth	90%	59%	National Youth Survey, 1 yr, United States5

Repeat victimization is also common for holding crime every bit evidenced in information from the British Criminal offence Survey (see Tabular array 3).

Table 3: Estimates of Echo Victimization for Property Criminal offence— British Offense Survey

Offense	Echo Offenses	Repeat Victims
Residential burglary6	40%	xix%
Vehicle crime (thefts of/from)7	46%	24%
Vandalism8	n/a	xxx%

Although many studies of repeat victimization are based on surveys of victims, police records also testify strong prove of revictimization for issues ranging from bank robberies to domestic violence and burglaries (meet Table 4). As with the victimization surveys, criminal offense reports show the largest corporeality of repeat victimization for domestic violence.

Tabular array iv: Estimates of Echo Victimization—Crime Reports

Criminal offense	Echo Offenses	Repeat Victims	Location
Domestic violence	62%	28%	Merseyside, England9
42%	31%	West Yorkshire, England10
Commercial robbery	65%	32%	Indianapolis, Indiana11
Gas station robbery	62%	37%	Australia12
Bank robbery	58%	36%	England13
Residential burglary	32%	15%	Nottinghamshire, England14
xiii%	seven%	Merseyside, England15
32%	xvi%	Beenleigh, Australia16
	25%	nine%	Enschede, Netherlands17
Commercial break-in	66%	36%	Austin, Texas18
33%	14%	Merseyside, England19
Residential and commercial burglary	39%	18%	Charlotte, North Carolina20

While many repeat victims suffer two victimizations during a reporting period, some repeat offenses are associated with chronic victims who are victimized more oft, experiencing three or more offenses during a period of time. The British Criminal offense Survey reveals that vii pct of burglary and vehicle criminal offence victims are victimized three or more times during a twelvemonth (come across Table 5) while 23 pct of domestic violence victims suffer this concentration of echo victimization.

The more numerous offenses reported by these chronic victims contribute unduly to overall victimization. For case, seven percent of burglary victims comprise 21 per centum of all burglaries (come across Tabular array half-dozen).

Table 5: Concentration of Repeats Among Victims21

Blazon of Victimization

	Burglary	Vehicle Crime (Theft of/from)	Domestic Violence
1 offense	81%	76%	56%
Two offenses	xiii%	17%	21%
Three or more	7%	seven%	23%

Table vi: Contribution of Repeat Victims to Burglaries22

Offense	Victims	Proportion of Offenses
I burglary	81%	60%
Ii burglaries	13%	19%
Three or more burglaries	7%	21%

Despite potent evidence of echo victimization, well-nigh all estimates of repeat victimization are conservative because of data limitations. Victimization surveys testify the nearly repeat victimization, considering they capture offenses unreported to constabulary. But longitudinal surveys lose respondents over fourth dimension, as victims are likely to motility, and panel surveys depend on a victim'south call back of multiple events. Interviews with offenders support repeat victimization just such studies have been express and the veracity of offenders is questionable. Unreported criminal offense reduces police force estimates of echo victimization and evidence fifty-fifty suggests that repeat victims are less likely to call the police again.23 Police estimates of repeats may further exclude revictimization of the same individual at different locations, such every bit offenses reported from hospitals or at law stations while jurisdictional boundaries, recording practices for series offenses, the use of short-time periods such as a single twelvemonth, and a small number of offenses may likewise mask repeats that tin be identified by police force.

When Repeat Victimization Occurs

A disquisitional and consistent feature of repeat victimization is that echo offenses occur chop-chop—many repeats occur within a week of the initial criminal offence, and some fifty-fifty occur inside 24 hours. An early on report of RV showed the highest risk of a echo burglary was during the get-go calendar week later on an initial burglary.24

Later on the initial period of heightened risk, the risk of a echo offense declines rapidly until the victim again has about the aforementioned victimization gamble equally persons or properties that accept never been victimized. This mutual pattern is displayed in Figure ane and shows that 60 percentage of repeat burglaries occurred within 1 month of the initial offense; about 10 per centum occurred during the second month. Later the 2d month, the likelihood of a echo offense is quite low.

RV consistently demonstrates a predictable pattern known as time class: a relatively brusque high-risk catamenia is followed by a rapid decline then a leveling off of risk. The length of the fourth dimension menstruation of heightened victimization risk varies based on local crime problems. Determining the time period of heightened risk is disquisitional because whatsoever preventive actions must exist taken during the high risk menses to prevent subsequent offenses. For offenses with a brusque high-hazard time course, the preventive actions must exist taken very apace. The delay of two days or a calendar week may miss the opportunity to preclude a echo from occurring.

Some research suggests that the anticipated time course of echo victimization may be punctuated by a "bounce"—a slight resurgence in the proportion of revictimization occurring after the hazard appears to exist steadily declining (see Figure ii). The bounce in the fourth dimension course may be associated with the replacement of holding with insurance money. It seems likely that some repeat offenders may utilise a "cool downwardly" menstruum, perceiving victims to exist on high alert immediately afterward an offense merely relaxing their vigilance within a few months.

Prove suggests that the fourth dimension catamenia between an initial and subsequent criminal offense varies past the blazon of law-breaking. The time form of domestic violence appears short (encounter Tabular array 7) with fifteen% of repeat offenses occurring within a mean solar day. The time course of RV may be calculated by hours, days, weeks or months, or even years between offenses, depending upon the temporal distribution of data.

In addition to variation by crime type, it is likely that the time course may also vary by the location of the written report. For example, a study in Florida showed 25% of repeat burglaries took identify within a week while a study in Merseyside showed 11% of repeats occurred during a similar time period.

Although the time period for reporting repeat victimization varies, the argument of such findings is straightforward. For example, the showtime row in Table 7 would be stated as:

• Of repeat incidents of domestic violence, xv% occurred inside 24 hours of the initial incident while 35% of repeat incidents occurred inside five weeks.

Table 7: Time Course of Repeat Victimization by Offense Type—Criminal offence Reports

Offense	Proportion of Repeats by Time Period	Where/Written report
Domestic violence	15% within 24 hours 35% inside five weeks	Merseyside, England25
Banking company robbery	33% within three months	England26
Residential burglary	25% within a calendar week 51% within a month	Tallahassee, Florida27
xi% within one week 33% inside one calendar month	Merseyside, England28
Non-residential burglary	17% within one calendar week 43% within one month	Merseyside, England29
Property crime at schools	70% within a month	Merseyside, England30

Why Echo Victimization Occurs

In that location are ii primary reasons for repeat victimization: one, known as the "boost" explanation, relates to the role of repeat offenders; the other, known equally the "flag" explanation, relates to the vulnerability or bewitchery of sure victims.

In the flag caption, some targets are unusually attractive to criminals or peculiarly vulnerable to crime, and these characteristics tend to remain abiding over fourth dimension. In such cases, the victim is repeatedly victimized past different offenders.

• Some locations, such every bit corner backdrop, may take higher victimization because offenders can hands make up one's mind if no one is home. Similarly, apartments with sliding glass doors are particularly vulnerable to break-ins.
• Some businesses, such as convenience stores, are easily accessible and open up long hours, which increases exposure to offense.
• Some jobs, such every bit taxi driving or delivering pizzas, routinely put employees at higher risk than do other jobs. People who routinely spend time in risky places, such as confined, are at greater risk of victimization.
• Hot products, such every bit vehicles desirable for joyriding, are at higher risk of being stolen.

In the boost caption, repeat victimization reflects the successful issue of an initial criminal offense. Specific offenders proceeds important knowledge about a target from their experience and employ this data to reoffend.

This knowledge may include easy access to a property, times during which a target is unguarded, or techniques for overcoming security. For example, offenders who steal particular makes of vehicles may have noesis of means to defeat their electronic security systems or locking mechanisms. Fifty-fifty fraudulent victimization shows this boost pattern, as insurance fraud may explain some cases of echo victimization.

• During initial offenses, offenders may spot butto carry away all the desirable property. These offenders may render for property left backside; or the offenders may tell others well-nigh the property, leading different offenders to revictimize the same holding. Since many victims will eventually replace stolen property, such as electronics, original offenders may also return after a flow of time to steal the replacement property—presumably make new.31
• Some victims may be unable to protect themselves from further victimization. An unrepaired window or door may increase vulnerability and make repeat victimization fifty-fifty easier than an initial offense. For example, one time victimized, a domestic violence victim faces a high likelihood of revictimization if no protective measures are taken to prevent subsequent offenses.
• Interviews with offenders suggest that much repeat victimization may exist related to boost explanations—experienced offenders can reliably summate both the risks and rewards of offending. Half to ii-thirds of offenders study burglarizing or robbing a specific property twice or more.32 Among domestic violence offenders, as many as ii-thirds of incidents are committed by repeat offenders.33

Heave and flag explanations may overlap and vary by offense blazon. For instance, depository financial institution robberies are virtually likely to recur if an initial robbery yielded a large take; when monetary losses were pocket-size, banks were less probable to be robbed again.34 Research on repeat victimization—for banks and other targets—suggests that well-nigh offenses are highly concentrated on a small number of victims while the majority of targets are never victimized at all.

How Repeat Victimization Relates to Other Offense Patterns

Research has revealed several types of repeat victimization:

• True repeat victimsare the exact same targets that were initially victimized, such as the same house and the same occupants who were burglarized three times within a twelvemonth.
• Virtually victimsare victims or targets that are physically close to the original victim and may be similar in important ways. Apartments shut to a burglarized unit of measurement will tend to contain similar goods, take similar physical vulnerabilities, and a mutual layout.
• Virtual repeatsare repeat victims that are about identical to the original victim in important ways. A chain of convenience stores or fast nutrient restaurants may have identical shop layouts and direction practices, such equally having a unmarried clerk on duty or breezy cash handling procedures. The new occupants of a domicile that had been previously burglarized are another type of virtual repeat.
• Chronic victims are repeat victims who suffer from dissimilar types of victimization over time—such as burglary, domestic violence,and robbery. This phenomenon is also known as multiple victimization.

For some crimes, repeat victimization is related to other common crime patterns:

• Hot spotsare geographic areas in which criminal offence is clustered. Hot spots may exist hot because of the frequency of the aforementioned type of law-breaking, such as burglaries, or hot spots may include unlike types of crimes. For many crimes, repeat victimization contributes to hot spots.
• Hot products are appurtenances that are oft stolen, and their desirability may underlie echo victimization. Stores that sell CDs, beer, or gasoline may suffer repeat victimization. Some products, including vehicles, become hot products because of the production's vulnerability—for instance, vehicles with locks that are easy to defeat.
• Repeat offenders are individuals who commit multiple crimes. Some offenders specialize in a single crime type, while others commit complementary offenses—such as breaking into a house and stealing a vehicle to ship the goods, or stealing a license plate to be used in the commission of another crime, such as a commercial robbery.
• Law-breaking series are offenses of i crime type that appear to be the work of the same offender. The offenses may be clustered in space or time, or reflect a distinctivemodus operandi,such as a serial rapist who targets college students. Common series involve property criminal offence at similar targets, such as robberies of convenience stores.
• Risky facilitiesare locations such equally colleges or shopping areas that routinely concenter or generate a disproportionate corporeality of crime. For example, lots where students routinely park may generate more larcenies from vehicles because the vehicles of students may routinely comprise desirable electronic equipment.

These crime patterns are not mutually sectional and may intersect or overlap; the detection of repeat victimization, however, routinely provides important clues about the reasons for recurrence and permits police to focus on avenues for prevention.

Where Repeat Victimization Occurs

For many crime problems, repeat victimization is most common in high crime areas.† Persons and places in high crime areas face a greater adventure of initial victimization for many crimes, and they may lack the means to block a subsequent offense past improving security measures and doing and so apace.35

† Offenses such as domestic violence and sexual assault do not usually exhibit spatial concentrations, while other targets of repeat victimization, such equally convenience stores, budget motels, and banks, may exist geographically dispersed.

In high crime areas, criminal offence is then concentrated amongst repeat victims that recurring offenses tin can create hot spots—relatively small geographic areas in which offenses are amassed. Equally a result, experts have coined the term "hot dots" because incident maps may exist dominated by symbols scaled to represent the number of offenses at specific addresses.36 (See Figure 3.)

Figure iii: Repeat Commercial Robberies37

Incident maps are often used to place hot spots and tin exist used to observe repeat victimization. Icons or symbols should be used on maps that are scaled in size to reverberate the number of incidents, otherwise points that overlap may not exist visible, masking RV. Data decisions tin can besides distort the amount of repeat victimization that tin can be detected on maps. Short fourth dimension periods—such as a week or month or even a quarter—may mask repeat victimization; imprecise address data, such every bit a single accost for incidents occurring at a large apartment complex, likewise mask specific locations of RV.

Incident maps may mask RV in densely populated areas because nearly maps demonstrate the incidence and spatial distribution of offenses, and exercise not account for the concentration of crimes. In densely populated areas such as those with multi-family unit dwellings, almost maps volition not differentiate betwixt apartment units and apartment buildings that may contain large apartment complexes.

Crime is not ever geographically patterned, and this is too truthful for repeat victimization. For example, victims of domestic violence are unlikely to be geographically concentrated. Even repeat incidents of domestic violence may not occur at a single address; one offense may take place at a residence while the repeat offense may occur at a victim's workplace.

Some crimes, such equally break-in, are clustered geographically; repeat burglaries are fifty-fifty more predictably clustered.38 Thus, citywide data on burglaries may mask the proportion of repeat burglaries occurring in smaller geographic areas. This suggests the need to utilise different geographic levels of assay to examine RV. In contrast to burglary, offenses such every bit bank robberies and domestic violence may necessitate the use of data from the entire jurisdiction.

Overlooking Repeat Victimization

Although the phenomenon of echo victimization is well-established, it is like shooting fish in a barrel to overlook the importance of repeat victimization in crime pattern analysis because most people and backdrop inside a jurisdiction are not victimized past crime, particularly inside a catamenia of one or a few years.

Consider a study in which ten,828 burglaries were reported to law in 1990:39

• 97 percent of the city'southward estimated 300,000 addresses were not burglarized
• 3 percent of the jurisdiction's addresses (viii,116) were burglarized

At starting time, repeat victimization appears minimal:

• 82 percent of the victims (6,616 addresses) suffered only ane burglary during the year
• 18 percent of victims (1,500 addresses) suffered two or more burglaries

Analysis sheds farther light on revictimization:

• 61 pct of all burglaries (half dozen,616) occurred at addresses with only ane offense
• 39 percentage of all burglaries (4,212) occurred at addresses with ii or more than offenses

While repeat victimization may still appear minimal, Figure four demonstrates graphically that revictimization accounts for a unduly large share of all burglaries: 18 percent of victims accounted for 39 pct of burglaries. If offenses after the initial criminal offence had been prevented, the jurisdiction would take experienced two,712 fewer burglaries—a 25 percent reduction in burglaries.

Effigy 4: Distribution of Burglaries by Address and Frequency

In addition to its potential for law-breaking reduction, analysis of echo victimization provides an important analytic and management tool for police organizations past serving the following purposes:

• Provide a reliable performance measure for evaluating organizational effectiveness (as used by police forces in U.k.).
• Serve every bit a catalyst for developing more effective responses for issues that generate much of the workload for police.
• Reveal limitations of existing data and police practices, and accelerate improvements in data quality and victim services. (See Appendix A for ways to hands improve data quality.)
• Provide insight into patterns underlying recurring crime problems.
• Prioritize the evolution and delivery of crime prevention and victim services.

Althoughrecognizing repeat victimization is an important step, working out precisely what to practice nearly revictimization will require additional endeavor on the function of police force.

Special Concerns Well-nigh Repeat Victimization

One time an bureau undertakes analysis of repeat victimization and determines the prevalence and time grade of repeats by offense blazon, the law-breaking pattern can exist used as a tool for developing responses to reduce revictimization. Focusing on victims raises a number of special concerns that police should consider:

• Blaming the victim.Victims may be vulnerable because they are unable, or accept failed to secure their property, or have placed themselves in high-chance settings. The behaviors of individuals—such equally using poor judgment while under the influence of drugs or alcohol—may contribute to victimization. In most cases, police force should provide information to the victim about the increased risk of victimization but must be careful nearly implying blame.
• Increasing fearfulness.For offenses such as burglary that are unlikely to be solved, the primary role of police is ofttimes to comfort victims. Alert victims about the likelihood of existence revictimized may make victims more fearful.
• Violating privacy of victims. Although victimization increases the gamble of revictimization to the original victim, it likewise increases the risks to persons and backdrop that are either nearby or virtually identical to the initial victim. While police may be concerned well-nigh violating the privacy of an initial victim by alert others, this data may forbid other vulnerable persons or places from being victimized.
• Displacing crime. It is oftentimes believed that disappointment 1 law-breaking volition result in a motivated offender simply picking another target. Unless there are virtual victims, the likelihood of deportation is low.twoscore For example, preventing repeat domestic violence is unlikely to upshot in the displacement of violence to another victim. If there are virtual victims available—such every bit similar nearby houses to be burglarized or similar unsecured parking lots for vehicle theft—police should consider these as candidates for similar crime prevention strategies. Rather than causing displacement, crime prevention efforts focused on victims are but as likely to produce bonus furnishings. For instance, reducing opportunities for vehicle theft may also reduce theft from vehicles.
• Unintended consequences.Focusing on repeat victimization to reduce offendingmay have unintended consequences. In a written report in New York City, researchers found that follow-up visits and educational services to victims of domestic violence resulted inincreased calls for police service,41 and mandatoryarrest forsome domestic violence offenders increasesrevictimization.

ullerywitall.blogspot.com

Source: https://popcenter.asu.edu/content/analyzing-repeat-victimization

Share this post