Victim Impact Statements
Victim impact statements provide the victim of a criminal act the opportunity to tell the judge about the effects of the crime for which the trial is being held (Minn. Dept. of Public Safety, 2011). This is something that may not arise during the course of a criminal trial, and it may present information that is relevant to the sentence imposed. The statement is given at the time of the sentencing or the juvenile dispositional hearing, and it is usually presented by the victim, family members or guardians, or the custodian of a minor or deceased individual. The statement may be presented in oral or written form and should describe the adverse effects, either personal/social or economic, of the crime. Judges are permitted to set limitations on the length and format of the presentation of the statement, and generally the most effective ones are those that are clear and concise.
I believe that victim impact statements are an important part of the judicial process. The trial, necessarily, focuses on the offender, and the victim’s voice, opinions, and state of mind go largely unheard throughout what may be a long and emotionally laden process. But the victim is ultimately the one who has been harmed by the crime, and the statement adds a personal aspect to the otherwise dry proceedings. It also provides the judge with information that will help decide the boundaries and scope of the sentence he hands down. It ensures that everyone involved, not just the offender and the lawyers, can be heard.
Types of Criminal Sentencing
There are four basic types of criminal sentencing (Champion, Hartley, & Rabe, 2012). The first is indeterminate sentencing, where the judge sentences the person to a period of incarceration that includes both a minimum and a maximum possible term. In this situation, the parole board determines the offender’s early release, if warranted. The second is determinate sentencing, where the judge sets a fixed minimum and maximum term, but the amount of time served can be reduced based on the offender’s “good behavior” during the sentencing period. The third is presumptive, or guidelines-based, sentencing, and here the judge commits the offender to a term based on a number of guidelines, such as the type of criminal offense, the severity of the offense, and the individual’s criminal history. The last is mandatory sentencing, where the judge sentences the offender to a specific number of months and/or years for a given offense. The sentence is dictated by the laws of each individual state, and this type of sentencing is used primarily for habitual offenders.
I believe that the presumptive form of sentencing is the most effective, as it takes into account not only the nature of the crime, but also the nature of the individual who committed it and the circumstances surrounding it. Unlike mandatory sentencing, which does not consider extenuating circumstances, or determinate sentencing, which allows an offender to go free before he has fully repaid his debt to society, presumptive sentencing looks at all aspects of the issue, allowing the judge to make a fair and more reasonable judgment.
References
Champion, D.J., Hartley, R.D., & Rabe, G.A. (2012). Criminal courts: Structure, process, and issues (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
Office of Justice Programs. (2011). Victim Impact Statements. Minnesota Department of Public Safety. Retrieved from https://dps.mn.gov/divisions/ojp/forms-documents/Documents/Victim%20Impact%20Statement%20-%20English.pdf
