Overview

Every year, the U.S. observes the annual National Crime Victims’ Rights Week to commemorate crime victims, honor those who help and support them, spearhead the campaign for the protection of victim’s rights and to spread awareness about the many services provided to victims and their families.  “A crime victim is a person directly and proximately harmed as a result of the commission of any offense.” Despite their pathetic plight and the traumatic ordeal, the victims of the crime are still perceived as   passive onlookers in the judicial process. This irrelevant status of the victims is partly attributable to the presumption of innocence which tends to be overprotective of the accused.  Legal systems all over the world pay utmost importance for the protection of the rights of the accused. A  plethora of rights are available to the accused persons which includes presumption of innocence, right against self- incrimination or right to remain silent during the trial, right to speedy trial, etc. to name a few. The accusatorial system place undue weightage to the evidence and places the burden of proof on the prosecution. In the event the prosecution failing to adduce incontrovertible evidence to prove the culpability of the person accused of crime, benefit of doubt is given to the accused. This obviously results in a diminished conviction rate.

In the U.S. only nine percent of reported violent crimes are resolved with the perpetrator being imprisoned. Viewed in this perspective, criminal justice is perceived as justice for criminals. The lower conviction rate and increasing crime rate is eroding the credibility of the entire criminal justice system.

The Rising Crime Graph

Statistics show that two out of three Americans will become crime victims at least once in their lifetime. In 2004, U.S. residents age 12 or older experienced approximately 24 million crimes, according to findings from the National Crime Victimization Survey. Of this 77% (18.6 million) were property crimes, 21% (5.2 million) were crimes of violence and 1% was personal thefts. Teens experience the highest rates of violent crime. 51% of incidents of violent crime occurred during the day between 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. Males experienced higher victimization rates than females for all types of violent crime except rape/sexual assault. Black and white persons experienced similar rates of simple assault. Given the rising crime graph and increase in the number of persons with a criminal record, the state has a bounden duty to allay the fear and insecurity in the civil society.

Victim’s Rights Under Federal Law

The guaranteed rights to the victims under Federal Law includes the right to dignified treatment, fairness, and respect for privacy, be reasonably protected from the accused offender, be notified of court proceedings, be present at all public court proceedings related to the offense, unless the court determines that the victim’s  testimony would be materially affected if the victim heard other testimony at trial, restitution, information about the conviction, sentencing, imprisonment, and release of the offender. Most states have laws guaranteeing these basic rights for crime victims. However, the US Constitution is conspicuously silent when it comes to victim’s rights.

Legislative attempts to bridge the divide and to extend legal solace to the victims began of late. California is the pioneer state in establishing victim assistance paraphernalia. In 1965 the first crime victim compensation program was established in California and with in the next few years New York, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Maryland and the Virgin Islands followed suit and five additional compensation programs were created by 1970. The year 1983 was a landmark in the U.S. legal history of victim’s protection as the Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) was established by the U.S. Department of Justice with in the Office of Justice programs to implement recommendations from the President’s task force on Victims of crime. A national resource center is established under the auspices of the OVC which imparts training to professionals, conduct research and sketch model legislation for the protection of the victim’s rights.

The passage of the Justice for All Act of 2004 added a fillip to victim assistance programme. This omnibus legislation not only provides substantive rights for crime victims but also envisages mechanisms to enforce them, and authorizes $155 million in funding over the next five years for victim assistance programs at the federal and state level.  On April 22, 2004, the Senate Approved the  Kyl/Feinstein Crime Victims Rights Bill, which apart from guaranteeing the basic rights to victims, require the criminal courts to  ensure that victim’s rights are assured and that any decision denying relief be made on the record. It also provided for $25 million for grants to States to develop and implement up to date victim notification systems.

The Judicial Approach

The accusatorial system largely limits the role of the judges as neutral referees in the ballgame among the rival counsels. This obviously prevents the judge from conducting a conscientious investigation in to the underlying facts as well as the plight of the victim. This is evident in the approach of the courts as they place little significance to the victim as the victim is not part of the trial process. The U.S. Supreme Court decision in 1987 in Booth v. Maryland (482 U.S. 496) came as a set back to the victim’s role in the awarding of punishment. The court held that victim impact statements and arguments (impact of the crime on the victim) are unconstitutional in the light of the Eighth Amendment when applied to the penalty phase of a capital trial as “only the defendant’s personal responsibility and moral guilt are counted in the case of capital sentencing. However, though the judiciary has shown reluctance to acknowledge the victim’s role, there have been significant steps on the legislative front to protect the rights of the victim. The Victims’ Rights and Restitution Act of 1990 provided for a Bill of Rights for federal crime victims and the passage of the Justice for All Act of 2004 added a fillip to Victim assistance programme. A paradigm shift in the judicial approach towards victims empathizing with their sentiments can only bring the human touch to the justice delivery apparatus.

Conclusion

Victims turning out to be a casualty of the judicial system are alarming as the perpetual neglect of the victims would result in vigilantism where private revenge and retribution will be the order of the day. A criminal justice system which doesn’t jeopardize the rights of the victims and which affords a sense of security by ensuring a certainty of punishment to the wrongdoers alone can make a significant change in the prevailing state of affairs. Of late, the administration is waking up to the wisdom that neglecting the rights of the victims would be counterproductive.

© Attorneys Online™, Inc. | Law Firm Newsletter Provided by Attorneys Online™, Inc.