THESE ASSUMPTIONS INCLUDE THOSE THAT CRIMINAL DEEDS CAN BE EXPLAINED BY THE PRECIPITATIVE BEHAVIOR OF THE VICTIM; THAT THE CRIMINAL IS IN A PASSIVE STATE AND SET INTO ACTION BY THE VICTIM'S BEHAVIOR; THAT BEHAVIORS DISPLAYED BY A VICTIM ARE NECESSARY AND SUFFICIENT FOR CRIMINAL ACTS; AND THAT THE INTENT OF THE VICTIM CAN BE ASSUMED FROM HIS OR HER RESULTANT VICTIMIZATION. IT IS ASSERTED THAT SEVERAL FALLACIES APPEAR TO PLAGUE THE UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS OF VICTIM-PRECIPITATION EXPLANATIONS, INCLUDING CIRCULAR REASONING, STIMULUSRESPONSE INTERPRETATIONS OF HUMAN INTERACTION, INCONGRUENCE BETWEEN THEORETICAL EXPLANATIONS OF VICTIM BEHAVIORS AND THE EMPIRICAL REALITY OF THESE BEHAVIORS, AND INADEQUATE ASSESSMENT OF VICTIM-PRECIPITATIVE BEHAVIORS. THEORY REVISION AND RECONCEPTUALIZATION OF VICTIM PRECIPITATION EXPLANATORY FORMULATIONS IS URGED. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT)