Judicial Narratives of Ideal and Deviant Victims in Judges’ Capital Sentencing Decisions

Although the Victim’s Rights Movement has led to advances for victims of crime, the use of victim impact evidence in criminal trials remains controversial due to the suspicion that such evidence enhances punitive attitudes and arbitrariness in capital sentencing outcomes. Despite a growing body of literature in this area, it remains unclear if some victims are viewed more favorably than others, particularly from the perspective of judges. The current study examines the construction of victims by judges in capital cases and how this portrayal impacts sentencing outcomes in Delaware, which vests the final capital sentencing authority in judges rather than juries. In examining this gap in the literature, we consider if judges make distinctions between ideal and deviant victims, if these distinctions are associated with victim and offender characteristics, and if the construction of victims impacts offender sentencing. Findings from this study lend support to the idea that judges describe some victims as more “worthy” than others, that victims described in ideal ways are more likely to be white and female, and that “ideal victims” are more likely to result in death sentences.     

THE EFFECT OF VICTIM PARTICIPATION IN SENTENCING ON SENTENCE OUTCOME *

The role of victims in the criminal justice process has been a neglected area of research. In the past two decades, however, victims of crime have received increased attention, and recently this attention has centered on the involvement of victims in sentencing. This paper addresses the concerns of critics of the involvement of victims in sentencing and assesses the impact of victim participation on sentence outcome using felony crimes in one midwestern county. Analysis reveals that filing a victim impact statement has some effect on sentence outcome (probation versus incarceration), although offense and offender characteristics are of primary importance. Victim requests for a particular sentence do not influence the choice of sentence. Legal considerations largely explain length of imprisonment, although several of the victim-related variables have explanatory power. The implications of these results for the debate concerning victim participation are discussed.     

Sentencing Councils and Victims

This article explores the place victims have, and should have, in bodies that formulate sentencing guidelines, with particular reference to sentencing guidelines in England and Wales and the Sentencing Council's obligation under the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 to have regard to ‘the impact of sentencing decisions on victims of offences’ when devising guidelines. The issues are situated in political and penological contexts; the place of victims in sentencing commissions or advisory bodies in the USA, England and Australia is analysed and the meaning and significance of the Sentencing Council's obligation towards victims is considered, relating the specific obligation to broader issues concerning the place of victims within bodies that formulate sentencing guidelines. While incorporating victims within sentencing commissions might undermine commissions’ aims, it can play an important role in helping to boost public confidence in criminal justice, a touchstone for all western governments’ criminal justice policies.     

The Role of Emotion and Cognition in Juror Perceptions of Victim Impact Statements

Recent legislation has contributed to an increasing number of victims participating in the trial process by way of providing victim impact statements (VISs). The present study evaluated jurors’ perceptions of VISs in a jury-eligible sample. Participants were 402 jury-eligible community members in the southwestern United States. Using a vignette-based method, VIS presence and content (i.e., Victim Harm versus Victim Emotion information) were examined for their influence on sentencing decisions and blame attribution. Individual differences of need for affect (NFA) and need for cognition (NFC) were featured as moderators of these relations. Notable results included significantly lengthier sentencing recommendations and decreased levels of victim blame in the presence of a VIS, regardless of content. In addition, juror NFC was significantly positively associated with perpetrator blame, while NFA moderated the relation between VIS content and sentencing length. The presence of a VIS impacted blame and sentencing, although jury panel member individual differences moderated such effects. Implications for victim rights policy, trial consultation, and social–emotional theory are discussed.     

Mourners in the Court: Victims in Death Penalty Trials,through the Lens of Performance

This article presents findings from ethnographic research in death penalty trials around the United States, focusing on the role of victims and their supporters. Victim impact testimony (VIT) in death penalty sentencing has received intense legal scrutiny during the past thirty years. The ruling jurisprudence allows VIT with the explanation that it deserves parity with testimony about the defendant's background. Drawing on observations and interviews with participants in 15 death penalty trials, I demonstrate that this framing confuses the central role of victim supporters in the courtroom. Victim supporters function as mourners, which grants them a socially elevated position in the courtroom. I argue that the consequences of the institutionalization of VIT can only be understood through this lens.     

刑事被害人当事人化的反思与制度重构

刑事被害人当事人化的实质是犯罪损害追诉方式的公私合一,该制度设计混淆了公益和私益两种不同性质的诉讼,导致两种权益保护相互冲突进而对刑事司法结果公正造成负面影响。公私分离是刑事被害人去当事人化的当然制度选择,其立法对策主要包括在刑事立法中确立被害人为特殊诉讼参与人、废除被害人在刑事审判中就定罪量刑发表意见的权利、废止被害人刑事自诉权和切断其引起刑事二审、再审的程序路径。同时需要完善相关配套举措,如允许被害人对其物质和精神损害单独提起民事诉讼、完善精神损害赔偿制度、建立刑事被害人国家补偿制度等。     

Is restorative justice for sexual crime compatible with various criminal justice systems?

In addition to the more conventional approaches of the criminal justice system, this article suggests that there is a need for restorative justice as another method of addressing sexual crime. In support of this view, the present article explores the possibility of a hybrid justice system based on a complementary relationship between restorative justice and the criminal justice system. An analysis of the limits of the criminal justice system and the need for restorative justice in the contentious area of sexual crime will be followed by a detailed examination of key justice considerations when trying to marry both criminal justice and restorative justice perspectives. Such considerations include: the meaning of justice; legislation; sentencing principles; due process; victims’ rights; and the location of restorative justice within/alongside/outside the criminal justice system. The aim of this article is to determine whether it is possible to reconcile two seemingly juxtaposed methods of justice delivery in the context of sexual crime in order to create a hybrid system of justice that best protects and responds to the rights and needs of victims and offenders.     

Who wants to be an ideal victim? A narrative analysis of crime victims' self-presentation

The aim of this article is to analyse how self-presentation is performed in victim narratives and what possible variant features are present in the narratives. This is examined by means of narrative analyses of face-to-face interviews with crime victims (n = 6). The narratives were grouped into two categories: 1) narratives about the crime victim as an established citizen, and 2) narratives about the crime victim as an outsider. How the narrators presented their status in society was relevant for how they understood the offender, the crime, and Victim Support. Importantly, the interviewed victims did not construe themselves as ‘ideal victims’ as they all projected personal strength in their self-presentations. Furthermore, the victim narratives normalized (rather than idealized) the victim while construing the offender as in need of treatment. The article concludes by discussing future research needs and the role of victim self-presentations for psychological well-being and trust in the criminal justice system.     

Post‐Trial Victims' Rights in the EU: Do Law Enforcement Motives Still Reign Supreme?

The EU legislator has been accused of overemphasizing the repressive aspect of law enforcement, while paying less attention to civil liberties, such as fundamental victims' rights. This paper examines the current position of EU crime victims, with a special focus on the execution phase of a criminal procedure. A victimological assessment of (1) the Framework Decisions on custodial sentences and probation measures and (2) the recent EU Victim Directive shows that none of these instruments contains any mechanisms for safeguarding the rights of victims in the post‐trial stage. Regardless of the various praiseworthy efforts to further the emancipation of victims, when it comes to the execution phase, victims' rights are still largely neglected, thereby opening the door again to criticism. Granting victims a right to information and a (non‐influential) right to be heard would already improve matters greatly. A constitutional assessment indicates that Europe is competent to make these changes.     

Some reflections on the legitimacy of international trial justice

This paper addresses a number of interrelated conceptual difficulties that impact adversely on the ability of international criminal trials to deliver outcomes perceived as legitimate by victims and communities in post-conflict states. It begins by exploring the extent to which those moral justifications for punishment espoused by international courts are instrumental in marginalizing the aspirations for justice of victims and victim communities, and suggests how a greater appreciation of the sociological context of punishing international crimes can contribute towards an improved understanding of normative practice. The paper then examines the relationship between perceptions of international crime and punishment, and the broader issue of whether international criminal law provides an appropriate normative structure for giving effect to those universal humanitarian values concerned with punishment in an increasingly pluralistic world. Finally, the paper considers how the theory and practice of punishing international crimes can more effectively satisfy both local and global aspirations for post-conflict justice through enhancing the transformative capacity of international criminal trials.     

Victims' Rights, Victims' Expectations, and Law Enforcement Workers' Constraints in Cases of Murder

Research on crime victims and their experiences with the criminal justice system suggests that victims' rights (e.g., victim impact statements) and victims' services (e.g., crime victims' compensation, counseling) have not significantly improved victims' satisfaction with the criminal justice system or their recovery from the crime. Thus, we appear to know little about how to satisfy and assist victims of crime. This study uses the symbolic interactionist perspective to examine victims' experiences with law enforcement workers (e.g., detectives, counselors) with a focus on people who have lost a loved one to murder ("bereaved victims"). The data come from in-depth interviews with thirty-two bereaved victims, seven law enforcement workers, and three crime victims' advocates in Union County (pseudonym). Bereaved victims define the victim role differently from law enforcement workers, creating two main points of conflict with workers: (1) a conflict over their deceased loved one's body, and (2) a conflict over the flow of information in the case. Bereaved victims' frustrations over these conflicts created problems for their recovery. Bereaved victims' efforts to see their deceased loved one's body, guide detectives' investigation, and learn information about the murder and the investigation took a back seat to detectives' interests in protecting the integrity of the investigation and building a strong case for the prosecution. Policy implications are discussed.     

故意伤害案件中赔偿影响量刑的机制

赔偿作为一种酌定情节,对量刑有重要影响。通过对近3000份故意伤害案件刑事裁判文书的实证研究发现:赔偿对主刑量刑结果和缓刑适用均有重要影响;随着案件严重程度的增加,赔偿对量刑的影响相对下降,谅解对量刑的影响相对上升;赔偿时间对主刑量刑结果的影响不显著,但可显著提高非羁押性强制措施和缓刑的适用率;谅解时赔偿数额的确定机制兼具理性与非理性的双重因素。受法院功利主义量刑思维的影响,故意伤害案件中赔偿影响量刑机制的运行存在失范风险,如赔偿谅解后“量刑剪刀差”的出现、赔偿谅解中的“贫富差距”问题、谅解时赔偿数额的确定中非理性因素的放大等。为防范上述风险,可从实体法和程序法两个层面,完善故意伤害案件中赔偿影响量刑的机制。     

浅析我国死刑量刑体系中经济赔偿的合理性与局限性

按照我国《刑法》的规定,刑罚的本质是基于刑事责任对被告人予以惩罚报应,同时,刑罚的目的在于通过减少被告人的再犯可能性实现预防犯罪。同样,作为实现刑罚过程的量刑也应在这种"本质"和"目的"的体系中进行。人民法院在对死刑案件进行量刑时决定是否将加害方及其家属等积极进行经济赔偿的行为作为酌定情节予以考虑时,也应该首先从量刑的这种"本质"和"目的"的体系出发来判断。具体地讲,经济赔偿只有与案件的"犯罪事实"有着内在关联性,本来属于案件"定罪量刑"的要素时,并且,只有将其置于整个量刑体系下,在与其他众多的量刑要素的相互关系中被认定确实具有直接影响被告人的过去罪责(刑事责任)及其将来预防(再犯可能性)的意义时,才可以作为死刑量刑的酌定情节予以考虑,才可以成为慎用死刑立即执行而选择死刑缓期两年执行的理由。     

人身危险性在量刑中的思考

刑事古典学派认为惩罚犯罪就是惩罚犯罪行为,所以提出在量刑中主要考虑的是社会危害性的大小;而刑事人类学派和刑事社会学派注重对犯罪分子个体的研究,从犯罪个体中去研究惩罚的力度,在量刑的时候着重考察犯罪分子的人身危险性的大小.两者的争论由来已久,在中国的刑法理论界就是主要采取了刑事古典学派的观点,认为惩罚力度大小应该与罪行的大小相适应,造成的社会危害程度决定刑罚的轻重.那么对于犯罪分子的人身危险性在量刑时的作用究竟应该有多大呢?试从实践入手,针对我国现行法律的规定来阐述一下人身危险性在量刑中的作用,从而完善我国刑法的量刑原则.     

Taking the Law Into Our Own Hands: Structured Sentencing, Fear of Violence, and Citizen Initiatives in Washington State

This paper examines the impact of citizen initiatives on Washington State's system of structured sentencing. Criminal justice sentencing guidelines were implemented in Washington's juvenile court system in 1978 and in its adult felony courts in 1984. In the twenty years since, both systems have experienced significant changes, many of which impact judicial and administrative discretion. Early modifications to the guidelines were driven by legislative and administrative concerns (budgeting, prison population management). More recent changes have been driven by citizen initiatives fostered as a response to public fear of crime and violence. Increasingly, the public has rejected the advice and management of adult sentencing guidelines by criminal justice professionals, and taken a direct hand through the initiative process in setting the limits of judicial and administrative discretion. As a result, structured sentencing has become more complicated and less internally consistent. It remains unclear whether this is the inevitable price of growth in single issue politics and more direct public involvement in the determination of sentencing policy     

Personal and Vicarious Experience with the Criminal Justice System as a Predictor of Punitive Sentencing Attitudes

This study examined the impact of prior personal or vicarious experience with the criminal justice system on sentencing attitudes. Existing research on sentencing attitudes has examined factors such as race, gender, income level, political affiliation, and education level, but few research studies have focused on actual contact with the criminal justice system and its influence on perceptions of sentencing as either too harsh or too lenient. The current study utilized data collected by the Roper Center for Public Opinion Research. Over 1,500 respondents were surveyed nationwide in 2006 regarding sentencing attitudes. Logistic regression analysis was utilized to assess the impact of factors of interest on sentencing attitudes. Results indicated that individuals who had been charged with a crime (personal experience), or who had an immediate relative or close friend who had been charged (vicarious experience), were more likely to perceive the criminal justice system as too harsh, regardless of race/ethnicity.     

重考量刑公正与量刑差异——德阳市五个基层法院的定量研究证据

主流观点认为中国普遍存在量刑差异,但该结论实证依据不足。本文借助于德阳市5个法院的1039个样本,检测盗窃、抢劫、故意伤害罪的量刑情况。研究按四组配对比较后发现,三组法院量刑均衡。盗抢罪量刑受数额、前科、审理程序、自白、律师参与、从严处罚等影响,故意伤害罪因伤害程度、受害人个数、赔偿等有别。2010年量刑意见有助于规范量刑,但法官更倾向于从严处罚。中国未来的量刑改革,还需具体规定如何适用从宽从严集合情节。     

Developing Contextualized Rationales for Sentencing in International Criminal Trials: A Plea for Empirical Research

The aim of this article is to illustrate how the pervading ideologyof retributivism has affected the norms and practice of sentencingin international criminal trials. It examines the nature andoperation of international sentencing law and procedure andthe parameters set for the exercise of discretionary power,suggesting how these militate against the development of moreconstructive rationales for punishment because of their continuedemphasis on principles of consistency and proportionality. Itis argued that the rationales for international sentencing needto engage more with the aspirations for justice of victims andpost-conflict societies. This would suggest a re-evaluationof punishment and a change in the sentencing practices of internationalcriminal tribunals. The article concludes that comparative contextualanalysis could provide important insights, which would be ofgreat assistance for international sentencing.