Morality, Criminal Justice and Criminal Events

Boutellier, Hans

doi:10.1007/978-94-009-0013-4_1

Cited by 5 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The impact of online victimisation is still rather unexplored, but generally a legal process can be difficult to handle in the already stressful and exposed situation someone might find himself or herself in after having being threatened, harassed or had personal information spread about them. It could be even more so when not having access to the legal support provided by the criminal court and public prosecution (Boutellier, 2000; Herman, 2003: 161–162). As such, to focus on the responsibility of individual victims to protect themselves or claim redress or reparation may be problematic from a victim’s perspective.…”

Section: European Convention On Human Rights and The Individual Victimmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As such, to focus on the responsibility of individual victims to protect themselves or claim redress or reparation may be problematic from a victim’s perspective. Boutellier (2000) also discusses the possible disadvantages for crime victims if they only have access to a civil court instead of a criminal court:The replacement of the criminal court by a civil court […] would only seem to turn against the crime victim. Not every victim can be assumed to have enough time, money, energy and willpower to see to it that justice is done to him or her, for example via the civil court.…”

Section: European Convention On Human Rights and The Individual Victimmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Is it all part of the game? Victim differentiation and the normative protection of victims of online antagonism under the European Convention on Human Rights

Enarsson

Naarttijärvi

2016

International Review of Victimology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article analyses the issue of online antagonism (defined as antagonistic harassment, defamation, insults and threats online) and the positive obligations of states to counter such antagonism under the European Convention on Human Rights, from a legal and victimological perspective. The article illustrates how the necessary balancing between positive obligations to protect privacy under article 8, and the protection of freedom of speech under article 10, will result in different levels of protection depending on the victim and the type of victimisation in question. This may affect the possibilities for individual victims to gain legal redress, specifically access to the criminal justice system. By comparisons to the current Swedish legislative context, the article highlights some avenues for legislatures to enhance protection for certain groups without interfering with article 10. It also concludes that a failure to protect victims of online antagonism through criminal law may ipso facto weaken the foundations of public discourse that article 10 is supposed to protect, which should be taken into account in a balancing of the rights in question.

show abstract

Section: European Convention On Human Rights and The Individual Victimmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: European Convention On Human Rights and The Individual Victimmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is it all part of the game? Victim differentiation and the normative protection of victims of online antagonism under the European Convention on Human Rights

Enarsson

Naarttijärvi

2016

International Review of Victimology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Verrijn Stuart argues in a 1994 essay that victims in present-day society are spoilt and unnecessarily pampered. Verrijn Stuart argues that point in response to the social trend that has been called ‘victimism’ (Garkawe, 2001: 93; Pollefeyt, 2000), ‘the victimalization of morality’ (Boutellier, 1993: 28; 2000: 16), ‘the victims’ rights phenomenon’ (Hall, 1991: 233) and ‘the victim industry’ (Best, 1999: 119). These and other terms express what Elias (1986: 3) noted, i.e.…”

Section: Conclusion and Further Reflectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Antidotes to injustice? Victim statements’ impact on victims’ sense of security

Mesmaecker¹

2012

International Review of Victimology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the mid-to late 1980s a number of Western countries have granted victims a participatory role in the sentencing process by means of written and oral victim statements. These statements have been introduced with a view to increasing victim satisfaction with the criminal justice system. Evaluation research on the use of these statements, however, points towards victims' numerous concerns when deciding whether to submit a statement. These concerns indicate that some victims may feel insecure and uncomfortable about submitting a statement. Focusing on the specific case of victim statements, this article will serve to explore how victim reforms that are designed to protect victims from exclusion by the criminal justice system and to enhance perceptions of justice risk causing some victims to feel endangered by participation.

show abstract

“…Hans Boutellier's concept of victimalisation (2000) stresses the importance of victims in legitimating criminal justice institutions and procedures. In a pluralistic society with weak markers of common identity, a sense of shared vulnerability provides a basis for public morality and the suffering victim becomes a ‘legitimising metaphor of criminal law’ (Boutellier 2000, 15, 45). Boutellier draws on Braithwaite's work, distinguishing predatory from non-predatory crimes.…”

Section: Governing Through Crime Governing States Through Crimementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Boutellier draws on Braithwaite's work, distinguishing predatory from non-predatory crimes. The unequivocally ‘clear damage’ of the former mobilises communities (Boutellier 2000, 46). This is equally apparent in John Pratt's analysis of narratives supporting populist punitiveness in New Zealand (Pratt 2008, 368).…”

Section: Governing Through Crime Governing States Through Crimementioning

confidence: 99%

Governing through Crime Internationally? Bosnia and Herzegovina

Aitchison¹

2012

The British Journal of Politics and International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article adapts and applies the governing through crime framework to analyse the EU and Office of the High Representative (OHR) as international governing actors in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Limited, ambiguous and opportunistic use of techniques associated with governing through crime are most evident in relation to OHR, but only as one of a wider range of governing logics, and are linked to specific challenges of legitimation. The outward spread of criminal justice models and metaphors proposed by Simon is shown to be problematic in light of the breadth of activities that such a stance might admit to the framework.

show abstract

Morality, Criminal Justice and Criminal Events

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Is it all part of the game? Victim differentiation and the normative protection of victims of online antagonism under the European Convention on Human Rights

Is it all part of the game? Victim differentiation and the normative protection of victims of online antagonism under the European Convention on Human Rights

Antidotes to injustice? Victim statements’ impact on victims’ sense of security

Governing through Crime Internationally? Bosnia and Herzegovina

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About