Victim Impact Statement

In this paper I will be discussing everything you need to know about the death penalty such as its pros and cons. While the innocent can be killed, the death penalty has its pros because it prevents them from killing again if they are released or have escaped from prison, it helps overpopulated prisons, and it can help victims’ families get justice and closure. Not only can the innocent be killed, but in the past the death penalty was very inhumane. To some its feels right but to others they feel like 2 wrongs don’t make a right. Most people think that the defendant deserves the death penalty, but what does the defendants’ family think?

Positivist victimology has made a fundamental contribution to the study of victimology by ensuring the development and refinement of quantitative victimisation. It emphasises the role of the state, criminal justice agencies and the voluntary sector in responding to the needs of victims of crime. It is however

The victim impact statements is voluntary; thus it is hard to debate the cons of this option given by the courts to those victimized. If agreed upon it is their opportunity to convey the ramification of the crime. They may elaborate on the effect of the crime; which can include the impact of physical, emotional or financial harm.

According to some investigators, victims do not feel better following the presentation of their allocution evidence during the penalty phase of a capital trial. What these findings suggest is that VIS, fueled as they often are by expressions of pain, anger, resentment, and vengeance, mostly leave the offended party feeling dissatisfied. As such, the emotionally charged and largely negative content of this evidence is suspect for furthering the aims of meaningful victim justice (Arrigo & Williams, 2003, p.

Continual support to victims of crime is a necessary service in any just society; this support is especially needed in the event that a convicted offender is exonerated. In the United States when a crime is committed the state, not the victim, owns and prosecutes the case so historically the victims’ rights have been neglected. In the modern era victims’ rights are being improved during the trial and sentencing phases of the criminal justice process; however in the event of an exoneration the victim is routinely revictimized and this problem needs to be corrected.

O’Hear (2007) argues that there are laws that require the prosecution to consult with the victims before reaching a plea agreement implemented in certain states (p.324). Working with the crown prosecutor is important for the victims. Although there are no direct laws stating that the victims can be involved in how long a punishment should be for a defendant, there are new implications that allow the victim to be made aware of the process. Some laws have come into force involving victim rights, “Federal law now provides that victims should be consulted for their views on the proposed terms of any negotiated plea” (Welling, 1987, p.341).

The criminal trial process has many aspects which aim to balance the rights of victims, offenders and society, including plea bargains and charge negotiations, the ability of defendants to hire legal representation and complete and partial defences. However, these processes do not always succeed in completely achieving justice for victims, offenders and society.

Our current system of law and justice is oriented completely to the offender. “Restorative” justice is a term used to describe a number of programs that seek to do…what? What is “Restorative” justice and how may it work? Pg 67

The sentencing policy must also be victim-oriented. Victims have largely been ignored in the traditional justice system. With changing times and increased emphasis on studies on victimology, taking into account the needs and considerations of victims of a crime has become necessary. The policy must include adequate compensation for the victims for the purpose of their rehabilitation. It must ensure their fair treatment during the entire process of the criminal justice system.

Now serving time is more important than compensation to victims. (National Victim Assistance Academy) Before 1850s in America, two major changes may have influenced this decrease in attention to victims rights. The government began turning law enforcement and prosecution over to public servants, in part because the system of private prosecution favored those with means. (p.

The traditional criminal justice system is criticized for its neglect of victim importance and needs, for example (Symonds, 1980) acknowledges, that the criminal justice system is concerned about looking back at the event rather than focusing on how to rehabilitate and as a consequence making victims be in a ‘secondary victimization’ effect. This is the attitudes, behaviors and the beliefs of the people in the criminal

From the beginning of time there have always been crimes against persons. People went by the saying “An eye for an eye”. You stole from your neighbor, they stole from you. You hurt someone, they hurt you. It wasn’t until the 1940’s people started taking a closer look into these crimes against person, which they later called victimology. This paper will look into victimology and their theories as we go back into the past and how victimology is now.

The history of victimology travels further back in time than most would realize. The concept of the victim emerged from the many attempts of many societies and peoples to explain both the reasons behind victimization and the appropriate action to be taken as a result of it (Burgess et al., 2013). As a concept, it can be difficult to define victimology, since each individual defines the term differently. According to the text utilized for this class, victimology is defined as being the study of the victim, including the offender and society. It is also seen as being a social-structural way of viewing the relationships between crime and the law as well as the criminal and the victim (Burgess et al, 2013)..

Victimisation is the process of learning the various ways that authority figures determine who is a victim, while also educating the person on how to become the victim. Secondary victimisation, also known as double victimisation refers to the way the state responds to victimisation. The states response has the potential to add further burdens on to the victim. Three main components of the criminal justice system will be focused on in this paper; these are enforcement, adjudication and punishment. This paper will identify why the criminal justice system tend to commit secondary victimisation towards the victims. It will also discuss the pains of victimisation and how secondary victimisation has the ability to amplify these pains. The paper will also identify reforms that have been put in place in order to minimise the occurrence of secondary victimisation.

Capital punishment is beneficial to the community. It provides the society with a sense of security. The death penalty contains a positive influence on the future. A heavily debated topic is, “Does capital punishment deter people more than a life sentence to prison?” An explanation on why will be covered later. An issues many people have with capital punishment, is when it is just or not just. This is a topic many stray away from, because it is difficult to decide. Finding the right consequence for an action is difficult. While this paper is for the use of capital punishment, it is clearly not needed for every crime, or even every murder. Overusing capital punishment, such as using it for every murder, will negatively impact the country, and not using it has the same effect.