This contribution provides an overview of the legal and criminological research into the decision following the determination of a supervisor that the conditions of a freedom-restricting sanction are not met. It is an important decision, on the one hand because it can result in a more severe sanction than was initially imposed, on the other hand because a decision that is perceived as unfair can influence the extent to which suspects and convicts are willing to comply with conditions, and recidivism. Yet little research has been conducted into this decision. The legal safeguards with which it is accompanied are lagging behind those of the original sentencing decision. Undeserved according to penitentiary experts. The scarce empirical research shows that decision-making involves many different layers and that the actors involved have different goals, ranging from deterrence and emphasizing the credibility of the system to the successful completion of the sanction. Even in countries where regulations have been tightened considerably, the discretionary power of direct supervisors, such as employees of the working project or therapists, is still large. This raises the question to what extent the final decision maker (usually a judge) still has sufficient room to make an independent decision.

In the current study it was investigated to what extent the presence or absence of victim compensation influences public judgments about punishment by the general public. Results show that whether or not the victim is awarded compensation, both in the case of physical assault and burglary, did not influence the extent to which the general public agrees with the punishment imposed by the judge. Participants do consider it important that a victim has the opportunity to apply for compensation for non-material damage suffered.

This study describes how penal protection orders contribute to victim perceptions of safety, drawing upon data collected via a victim survey (n=101). Perceived victim safety is explored based on the factors of personal vulnerability, procedural justice, and experiences with compliance and enforcement. Results show that more than half of the victims in this study does not feel safer because of the protection order. The effects of the orders are even weaker for feelings of relaxation and feelings of anger about the situation. An increase in perceptions of control over the situation appears to be the most important predictor of an increase in feelings of safety and a decrease in feelings of anger, but is unrelated to an increase in feelings of relaxation. The effect of procedural justice differs per outcome measure. It is associated positively with increased feelings of safety, but negatively with decreased feelings of anger because of the protection order. The positive association with feelings of safety is partly indirect via personal vulnerability. Findings result in various suggestions for future research.

Using frame analyses, the authors explore how people confirm, question or deny victimization, or refrain from interpretation. A frame consists of a problem definition (acts), the diagnosis of causes (identifying actors), and moral judgments. Results confirm that the interaction between factors defines the interpretation of victimization. Similar acts (for instance the consumption of alcohol) are ascribed different meanings depending on the type of frame. The positioning of actors in a frame determines who or what is perceived responsible for the (moral) judgment.

For co-victims of severe traffic offenses in the Netherlands, peer support is offered. However, no research into the meaning of peer support for this specific group of victims has been conducted. In this study, nineteen narrative interviews with co-victims of traffic offenses were collected. These interviews show that through dialogue and the sharing of experiences, as well as the care and support for each other, peer support offers the possibility to work on the meaning-making of the traffic offense and its aftermath. The article ends with policy implications and steps for follow-up research.

There is no clear answer to the question if corruption makes victims. Currently an (international) discussion is taking place about this matter. On the one hand it can be discussed that corruption in general does not know any direct victims and that corruption can even take place without any damage. On the other hand it is known that corruption can cause tremendous public and financial damage, with society as a whole as the victim of this crime, whether or not in primary gradation. In the underlying article these two perspectives will be discussed and applied on two cases. Special attention will also be paid to the impact and relevance of pointing out the victims.

This article focuses on the ways the NVU, Pegida and Voorpost - three far-right groups from the Netherlands - make use of social media platforms in the year 2017. Our results show that these extreme right-wing groups use social media to spread their ideology, to construct a group identity, and to call for (democratic) forms of resistances. In addition, our findings illustrate that these far-right groups seem to adjust to their digital surroundings: they do not change or conceal their extremist ideas, but rather manage their online content to ensure that their ideologies can be disseminated through social media.

In our 2017 report “Profielen van outlaw bikers and outlawbiker clubs” we concluded, “Dutch members of outlaw motorcycle gangs disproportionally frequently have a history criminal justice contacts”. The attorney representing the Hells Angels in the civil law suit filed by the Dutch public prosecutor requesting a civil ban of the Hells Angels, after consulting an expert methodologist, challenged this conclusion due to the possibility of type 2 and type 1 errors in constructing our sample from a police gang database. Here we calculate the proportion of convicted Hells Angels members under different levels of potential bias resulting from these errors. We find that a realistic estimate of the proportion of convicted individuals among the Dutch Hells Angels membership is between 58-96%, which, at a minimum, is roughly twice that in an age-matched population of male motorcyclists who are not members of an outlaw motorcycle club.

This study describes the trend in victimization of homicide in the Netherlands in the period 1992-2016. Using data from the Dutch Homicide Monitor, the findings show that the homicide rate has been falling since the 1990s. This decrease is the greatest among male and female victims between the ages 20 and 39. This findings emphasize the importance of shifting the discussion about the general homicide drop to an in-depth analysis of gender and age of victims of homicide.

This article relates criminological research on youth delinquency to the social development of adolescents. Starting point is a goal-framing approach which assumes that young people aim for the achievement of two goals: status (‘getting ahead’) and belonging (‘getting along’). Peers form an important context for achieving these goals. Therefore, the role of delinquency in peer networks is examined: on the one hand, the extent to which delinquency contributes to peer status, and on the other hand, how delinquency contributes to the formation of network relationships and, vice versa, how network relationships influence adolescents’ delinquency. Finally, several directions for further research are discussed.

Recent studies show that neurocognitive functioning of people within the criminal justice system might be relevant for judicial intervention and reintegration programs, but the use of this information is hindered by – among other things – a lack of appropriate norm scores for neuropsychological tests. A total of 272 detainees completed the d2 attention and concentration test. This article shows that for the d2 attention and concentration test, the already available norm scores are not appropriate for the use within the criminal justice system. New norm scores for Dutch detainees are provided, based on outcomes of a regression based norm procedure. These norm scores are made freely available.

This contribution reflects on the criminological meaning of the still ongoing trend of digitalisation. What does this mean for crime as a phenomenon and for the explanation of criminal behaviour? Not only did we see the emergence of new types of offending, also the context of crime has changed. In principle, the underlying explanatory processes can remain the same, but their application in the online world is complex and deserves further attention. Online social interactions are not only important for online crime, but also for traditional offenses. However, systematic research on how this actually takes place is scarce.

If, as criminologists, we really want to contribute to solutions for the great challenges of our time, we should be…surfing more. In a dynamic environment full of contradictions, we should be constantly in motion, moving left and right between different theoretical-normative perspectives as well as between methodological perspectives. This paper clarifies that surfing movement with some illustrations. It then proposes three goals for a criminological research agenda that should help us address the great challenges: actual (as opposed to superficial) relevance for practice, causal ambitions and multidisciplinarity. The paper concludes with some reflections about the organization and funding of criminological research.