Search results

There is a body of evidence that suggests a range of psychosocial characteristics demarcate certain adults to be at an elevated risk for victimisation. The purpose of this paper is to examine consistency between one police force, and a corresponding Victim Support service based in England, in their assessment of level of risk faced by victims of violent crime.

This study explored matched data on 869 adult victims of violent crime gathered from these two key services in Preston, namely, Lancashire Constabulary and Victim Support, from which a sub-group of comparable “domestic violence” cases (n=211) were selected for further examination.

Data analyses revealed methodological inconsistencies in the assessment of victimisation resulting in discrepancies for recorded levels of risk in domestic violence cases across these two agencies.

These findings provide a compelling argument for developing a more uniformed approach to victim assessment and indicate a significant training need.

This paper highlights areas of good practice and forwards several recommendations for improved practice that emphasises the integration of empirical research conducted by psychologists to boost the validity and reliability of risk assessment approaches and tools used.

This chapter provides a brief overview of community sanctions in Australia and examines the extent to which McNeill’s analysis in Pervasive Punishment (2019) is applicable in the Australian context. Two key issues in the Australian context are, firstly, state and territory-level variations within a federal political structure, and secondly, disproportionate Indigenous imprisonment and community sanction rates and the generally destructive impact of the criminal legal system on Indigenous communities and peoples. The chapter argues that developing a better agonistic politics around community sanctions requires descending from the broad level of historical and sociological analysis to examine state and territory-level variations in judicial and correctional structures, histories and cultures. Further, that Australian community sanctions cannot be understood without a primary focus on the differences between Indigenous and non-Indigenous rates, experiences and meaning. The key to addressing the destructive impact of criminal legal processes and practices on Indigenous peoples lies in developing Indigenous governance, empowerment, self-determination, sovereignty and nation-building. Two recent developments promoting Indigenous governance are examined: the Uluru Statement from the Heart and Justice Reinvestment projects initiated by First Nations communities, highlighting the importance of activism, contest and struggle by community organisations.

This article sets the scene for the contributions in this special edition of Community Safety Journal. It examines the political contexts of community safety initiatives, compares transatlantic and European traditions and discusses convergent and divergent themes.

Social movements are sites of knowledge production. Green criminologists are interested in activism both as an informal response to environmental harms/crimes and in their explorations of the possibility of activist green criminology. In this chapter, the author calls attention to a related issue – the significance of knowledge produced in social movements. Drawing on her study of the resistance movements against hydropower in Turkey, the author discusses how movement knowledge can contribute to green criminology in relation to the (i) complexity of harm and victimisation; (ii) politics of knowledge in identifying harm; and (iii) limits of formal processes in preventing harm. The author concludes by highlighting the importance of recognising activists as subjects who produce knowledge, in academic engagement with activism.