How does cyber technology impact interactions between offenders and victims?

The invention of technology has made our lives a little better by providing us with devices like hearing aids, television remote controls, telecommunication devices that can communicate with practically anyone anywhere on earth, and even self-driving cars are not too far off on the horizon. However, with these positive inventions there are also those that use them for negative or nefarious purposes. Technology has allowed for a major shift in the way crimes are committed, specifically how it has impacted the interactions between the offenders and the victims. Traditional crimes usually have a physical aspect to the act; for example, in 1997, a famous bank robbery took place in Los Angeles, California where two heavily armed individuals physically stormed into a bank to steal the money (KABC, 2022). This led to a 44-minute gun battle between police, the bank robbers, and innocent civilians trapped in the middle. Cybercrimes are similar to traditional crimes except the criminals utilize a computer or other system connected to the internet. An example of a cybercrime against a financial institution was the theft of approximately $200 million dollars in crypto currency from Bitmart, a crypto trading company, by using a stolen private key (Timeline of Cyber Incidents Involving Financial Institutions, 2016). The difference between these two crimes is the types of physical interactions between the perpetrator and the victims. As in the traditional crime example above, the physical interactions were the offender storming into the bank, pointing their weapons at the customers and bank tellers demanding money, and threatening (and promising) the use of violence if anyone stood in their way. In the cybercrime example the criminal did not have to go anywhere. In the cybercriminal example the only interaction between the offender and the victim was through two computers, the victim computer and perpetrator computer. The differences in interactions are that traditional crimes usually lead to or possess acts of violence, human casualties, fatalities, post-traumatic stress disorders (PTSD) from the ordeal, and damage to apparatuses or structures. Whereas in cybercrimes the interactions between the victims and offenders do not usually have the same collateral effects of traditional crimes; this is the reason cybercrime is sometimes considered a faceless crime. Although our society has invented some remarkable devices to help make our lives and society better, they have also enabled a shift in how criminals use these to commit nefarious or immoral activities.

References

Weulen Kranenbarg, M., Holt, T. J., & van Gelder, J.-L. (2017). Offending and Victimization in the Digital Age: Comparing Correlates of Cybercrime and Traditional Offending-Only, Victimization-Only and the Victimization-Offending Overlap. Deviant Behavior, 40(1), 40–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2017.1411030 (Weulen Kranenbarg et al., 2017)

Miró-Llinares, F., & Moneva, A. (2019). What about cyberspace (and cybercrime alongside it)? A reply to Farrell and Birks “Did cybercrime cause the crime drop?” Crime Science, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40163-019-0107-y (Miró-Llinares & Moneva, 2019)

What Is The Difference Between Cybercrime And Traditional Crime. (2021, November 21). NE Guard. https://www.neguard.com/what-is-the-difference-between-cybercrime-and-traditional-crime/

KABC. (2022, February 10). 1997 North Hollywood bank robbery: A look at one of the most prolific gun battles in LA’s history. ABC7 Los Angeles. https://abc7.com/north-hollywood-bank-robbery-shootout-1997-la-true-crime/11550573/

Timeline of Cyber Incidents Involving Financial Institutions. (2016). Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. https://carnegieendowment.org/specialprojects/protectingfinancialstability/timeline