Introduction Crime is an occurrence that constantly pervades society. Various actors are involved in this, specifically the victim and the offender. After an offense is committed, equal status and personal responsibility work together such that even though the offender is condemned for their actions, they are still considered as human beings (Edgar & Newell, 2006). Resultantly, a fair trial is the best option. A relationship also arises between the offender and the victim, which forms the basis of explaining the motive for the crime. Explanation of each concept The duet frame present in crimes is a concept by Von Hentig, who described two characters who exist in a conventional criminal act. Thus, the concept involves an offender and a victim. The criminal act does not arise from a vacuum; rather, it is a result of the drives and the needs of the criminal. Criminal behavior emerges from the interaction, communications, attitudes, and contacts. The criminal is influenced externally to commit a specific crime, and the victim is at the center of it all (von Hentig, 1948). An offender, according to the law, is the individual who is committing a crime. The offender is party to an offense. Offenders are also categorized into juvenile and adult offenders. Juvenile offenders are under the age of eighteen years. They are put in juvenile homes in the hope that once they grow up, they will become law abiding citizens (Edgar & Newell, 2006). This differs from adult offenders whom in many instances end up serving life sentences in prisons for various offences though some are due for parole if they maintain good behavior. The interaction between victim and offender is viewed as a subject-object interaction, and not just by the offender. They occur as a force that influences each other. The outcomes are seen as beneficial to one party while causing harm to the other. In reality, this is not the case, especially if the psychological context is considered. The victim is seen as influencing what the perpetrator does (Garofalo, 1914). Victim-precipitated (VP) crime is also a concept that details criminal activities, where the victim played a role in encouraging the crime. The perpetrator may not be willing to commit the homicide, but they may be encouraged by the victim. The victim might become violent during the crime, thus the perpetrator could be influenced to become more violent (Edgar & Newell, 2006). Both are humans, and a violent interaction is bound to get dangerous. The perpetrator will feel threatened and commit the homicide unwillingly. In this scenario, the victim can be said to have been the first to have resorted to physical violence, leading to an emotional effect on the perpetrator, who will then resort to a violent response. In other cases, the victim may not be a perpetrator of the crime, thus the crime is referred to as non-victim precipitated homicide (Tarde, 1912). Pros and cons The term ‘victim’ had a variant description over the years. Individuals who were considered criminals during a certain period became victims in another period. Thus, victims can be considered as social constructions in society. During the dark ages, witches were burned as they were blamed for various ills in society. Later on, they were considered as victims of witch hunts, as they had not committed any criminal