fandomhigh | Concepts of Justice and The Law [Period 4, Class #13, Apr 6]

Current Mood: moody

Entry tags:

concepts of justice

Concepts of Justice and The Law [Period 4, Class #13, Apr 6]

"As you've certainly realized by now," Alex began, "I'm fond of raising issues in this class that seem straightforward at first, but become anything but once we explore. This week is no exception: we're going to talk about something well-intentioned in theory that has problematic implications. Our topic is Victims' Rights."

Conveniently, that was written on the board, and underlined.

"We've talked in the past about what rights the accused may have, in the hypothetical society we're discussing. The right to counsel, or the right to be charged in a timely manner, and so forth. Many victims of violent crimes feel slighted. The criminal gets all these rights, they'll say: where are their rights? As the victim, shouldn't they have larger roles in this piece?

"The Victims' Rights movements varies in its scope and its aims. On one end, you have people who wish to be fully informed about the process, consulted by the prosecution, and given the respect and dignity to which they are due. On the other, you have those who argue there should be three parties in the courtroom -- the defendant, the prosecution, and the victim, all with separate legal counsel arguing the relevant points. Some believe that the victim should be able to veto any sentence or plea agreement which he or she feels is insufficient, or to interfere with the timeline of the trial.

"As a prosecutor, I speak for the victims, but I also speak for justice. Justice isn't vengeance. Justice also isn't emotional, while many victims quite understandably are. A grieving father may push for capital punishment, in a case where the prosecution feels it isn't warranted. A battered wife may reconcile with her abusive spouse and ask the prosecution to drop the charges. As the victims, should their wishes be the ultimate say? What if the grieving father had asked us to chop up the defendant and boil him in hot oil?

"The rights of the accused protect an individual from the full weight of the government. A defendant's rights must never be compromised, or we risk tipping the scales of Blackstone's Formulation -- having ten innocent men imprisoned lest one guilty man goes free, and not the reverse. But clearly the victim has rights, and their voice should be heard and given full consideration by the court. So what are those rights, and how will they affect our hypothetical trial?"

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

What rights should a victim have? Medical care? Financial compensation? If a victim feels the sentence is insufficient, should he or she have the right to veto a plea agreement? Or, conversely, to ask that the prosecution not try the case? Should a victim be allowed to object to a particular line of argument by the prosecution or defense? Should a victim have legal representation in court?

Edited 2010-04-06 09:53 (UTC)

"I don't think the victim should participate in the trial beyond their testimony," Joan said. "They are being represented by the prosecution, so it's not like they don't have any representation at all. But I do think the victims should be allowed to speak before the judge before sentencing if there is a conviction."

"It could be argued that the prosecution speaks more for the state than for the victims personally," Alex said. "Should they get to determine whether the state goes for the death penalty, for example?"

"No, definitely not," Joan said. "They're too emotional and close to the situation to make that decision."

"Some of them would say that prosecutors are too far from it," Alex said, offering a wry smile. "In that we become jaded, and might lose touch with how important each individual crime is."

"I think a victim has the right to medical care, and they should have the right to sue for financial compensation in a civil court," Jack said. "But bringing them into the courtroom as parties with their own voice feels closer to vengeance than to justice for me. Most people find whatever happened to them worse than anything comparable that happened to anyone else -- I wouldn't expect victims to bring the perspective an attorney has."

"I agree," Jennifer said. "The entire point of having a judge and a jury and a prosecutor is to make the trial about justice and not revenge."

"That's a valid point as well," Alex said. "The victim can't be expected to be impartial. In fact, I think it would be wrong of us to ask the victim to try."

Jack ran a hand through his hair. "So what argument do victims who want to be in the courtroom make in support of it? Is it that impartiality doesn't matter?"

Alex tapped her fingers lightly on her desk. "I think it's that, from their point of view, the court system seems stacked in the defendant's favor. A technicality here, or a failing of the police there, and the accused might go free. We see it as part of a larger system, a necessary part of balancing the scales. The victims see it as someone destroying lives and then skipping off without the least bit of punishment. They want to even the odds."

"I, um... I don't know..." Kurt answered. "I mean, if the prosecution does a really bad job, or sweeps the crime under the rug, or the judge is biased, or something like that, the victim deserves a way to fix it? But... We've been talking all term about how hard it is to make sure justice is done. How is this not just going to mess that all up?"

"I'm not sure it isn't," Alex said. "Then again, the process should be fair, and not easy. Messiness alone isn't cause not to introduce an element, if that element will add a measure of balance or fairness to the equation. Do you think it would?"

"I don't thinking listening to their legal counsel on how to win the case is a good idea. They're not lawyers, and they're probably making emotional arguments that might or might not work on a jury. Testimony at sentencing is probably fair, though, since that's just in front of the judge." Dinah tilted her head. "I strongly believe in a victim's right to know the status of the defendant, though. Well in advance of if they're put on parole, or probation, or set free. They deserve to feel safe."

"Do communities have the right to know if a registered sex offender moves into their neighborhood?" Alex asked. "And if testimony at sentencing is before the jury, and not just the judge, does that affect your answer?"

"At some point, don't the victims have to step back anyway? You're not representing the victim, you're representing the people, right?" Karla asked, looking hesitant. "I mean, yes, the victim deserves justice and medical care, and, depending on what happened, maybe even financial compensation. But as awful as it is for the victim, the trial is about making sure the law of the land is upheld. So I don't think they should get the right to ask the prosecution not try the case, or veto, or object. Because, when you get down to it, they're the face of the people that the prosecution is trying to protect, but only that. If people lose sight of that, then the line between vengeance and justice is blurred."

"You're right," Alex said. "I stand for the victims. And the potential victims, and the average citizens. Like your classmate says, having a crime affect you personally makes you lose perspective on the process as a whole. I believe the victim has the right to face her attacker in court, and do see justice done on her behalf. But maybe the process of stepping back is part of healing, as much as the confrontation is."

"I think they have the right to decide that the case not be tried," Ben offered quietly. "They might not feel particularly victimized."

"In all cases?" Alex asked gently. Her question was probing, and not accusing: she sensed that she was nearing a personal spot somehow. "We take the issue under consideration, as prosecutors. But in some cases, it seems as though the best action for the victim would be to press the case. A battered wife may truly believe that this time, her husband will change; with her safety in mind, we may not be so trusting."

"Sometimes she's right, though," Ben replied. "Families can be complicated."

"They can," Alex said carefully. "The circumstances would come heavily into play, at that point. If this is the third incident this month, and he's sworn each time that he'll stop, then I can't look the other way. The fourth time, we might be sending a hearse in place of an ambulance."

Re: Discussion - Victims' Rights - JST13

momslilassassin - 2010-04-07 14:01 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Discussion - Victims' Rights - JST13

glasses-justice.livejournal.com - 2010-04-07 21:02 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Discussion - Victims' Rights - JST13

momslilassassin - 2010-04-07 21:13 (UTC) - Expand

"I don't think medical care and financial compensation are unreasonable rights for a victim to have," Sam said. "I'm not sure if the victim should be able to veto a plea agreement though. I know sometimes pleas get guilty people off, and that isn't really fair, but they're usually part of a bigger picture, aren't they? I wouldn't expect a victim to be able to be objective about that sort of thing."

"You're right, plea bargains usually are," Alex said, nodding. "Sometimes, the evidence isn't as conclusive as we'd like, or we're turning a plea on this case to get testimony for a bigger one. That can make the victims feel like we're dismissing the crimes against them, unfortunately."

Edited 2010-04-07 09:13 (UTC)

"I don't see why the victim has different rights than anyone else." Momoko shook her head. "And isn't a lot of that, like, rules, not rights? I mean, if a judge decides that the victim should have to approve an agreement, don't they have to let them?"

"If a judge decides that," Alex agreed. "I believe the victims want that to be a standing right, regardless of the judge's whims. As for why they should have different rights, they would argue that the crime was committed against them, and no one else understands the implications fully."

"But the charges are for committing the crime, right? Not for committing them against any particular person? I mean, the law is supposed to protect the whole community, so the victim would really just representing the community, which is the job of the prosecutor!"

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only