This narration paper is an analysis of the information obtained from an interview with Meg Davidson. Davidson is a victim’s right attorney and a member of the National Alliance of Victim’s Rights Attorneys and Advocates (NAVRA). The alliance is a constituent of the National Crime Victim Law Institute (NCVLI). The interview was conducted on Apr. 18, 2016. The aim of this interview was to explore the role that service providers play in advocating for victims’ rights, the extent of their involvement, as well as their perception of the casualties.
NCVLI is a nationwide non-profit organization that promotes crime victims’ right through education and legal advocacy. The organization fights for these rights via amicus curiae as well as providing free lawyers for crime victims. NAVRA attorneys obtain technical help such as legal research and consultation from NCVLI. This collaboration ensures that the victims’ counsel make the best argument in court on behalf of the offended party. Apart from volunteers and the alliance attorneys, NCVLI has a staff team of ten legal and administration professional. The team carries out administrative duties and coordinates the NCVLI training calendar, legal assistance, victims’ rights research, and the membership of NAVRA.
NCVLI headquarters are located in Portland, Oregon. The offices are in the Board of Trade Building, Fourth Avenue Portland. Their telephone number is +1 503-768-6835. The organization’s mission is to enhance an equilibrium and impartiality in the American justice network by providing legal advocacy, resources, and training aimed at promoting crime victims’ rights. They envision a society where every crime victim understands his or her legal right, has access to legal representation, and the justice system honors these rights. The daily activities in the organization involve addressing calls and visits from victims, referring victims to attorneys, facilitating education forum and conferences, legal research on various cases, and filing ‘friend of the court’ brief in court cases that interest the Institute.
The NCVLI refers and pairs crime victims with Ms. Davidson depending on the nature of the case. She specializes in sexual abuse and stalking cases. After the referral, the victim contacts Davidson’s office for an appointment and free consultation. With the client’s approval, she provides legal representation in court proceedings. The attorney ensures that her client is accorded protection, compensation, participation, a speedy trial, and notification rights.
Davidson believes that a stalking victim has a role to play in the administration of justice. The victim can utilize the opportunity provided by the State to participate in the criminal trial via a Victim Impact Statement (VIS). A VIS is a written document or an oral narration that details the social, psychological, physical, and financial impacts that the stalker has caused (Victims’ rights and remedies, n.d). It allows the crime victim to address the court and make a recommendation on the punishment. VISs are presented at both sentencing and parole hearing. According to Davidson active participation by the victim in the trial proceedings, either by providing a witness account or a VIS is crucial in ensuring that the offender is punished accordingly. However, she also insists that crime victims should take up civil litigation to seek redress for victimization costs. Criminal prosecutions focus on determining the offender’s guilt or innocence. Thus, they do not address the injuries and pain that by the victim sustains due to the crime. The filing of civil suits against stalking offenders and third parties are independent of the status of the criminal charges. Often, stalking casualties have to change their routine, relocate, take up psychological therapy, and self-defense training. All these disruptions cause psychological, social, and economic strain on the victim and their families. As such, Davidson views civil suits as effective avenues that assist stalking sufferers in rebuilding their lives.
Ms. Davidson is happy about the adoption of crime victim rights by the State of Virginia. The State accords victims the right to compensation, notification, and VIS submission. The State also gives the offended party the right to restitution and allows them to attend trial proceedings and participate in plea bargains. The restitution right is exercised via a court order, where the offender is sentenced to pay for expenses accrued by the victim because of the crime (NCVLI, 2011). However, it deals with tangible and documented expenses. The Victim Compensation Fund deals with victim injuries, services that the victim paid for following the crime, as well as wage losses (OVC, 2004). Suffering and pain costs are addressed under the compensation and restitution rights. Moreover, Davidson points out that compensation seem to benefit a small fraction of crime victims mainly due to the stringent eligibility criteria that the State uses. She feels that that the State of Virginia should take the psychological impacts of stalking with the weight it deserves.
Many stalking victims shy away from participating in the criminal justice process for a variety of reasons. According to Davidson, the most common hindrance to victim participation is fear. After being stalked, casualties are afraid that the offender or their associates will find a way of reiterating or hurting them for contributing to their capture and punishment. The vulnerability that results from stalking makes it hard for the affected persons to trust other people. As a result, they tend to keep to themselves and shun any place or circumstance that brings them to the proximity of the offender. Stalking trials have a tendency of attracting media attention and exposing the victim personal details to the public. In a bid to guard their privacy, some people often limit their participation to trails to the minimum regardless of the protection rights given by the State and Federal laws. In addition, the restrictions on the eligibility for compensation rights discourage many victims from seeking redress for costs encountered due to stalking.
Ms. Davidson knowledge of victims’ rights and their history is extensive and impressive. She traces the emergence of victim rights to England, where victims initiated and participated in the prosecution process (NCVLI, 2011). This concept was also evident in America in the 19th century. However, public prosecutions in the 20th century diminished the role of crime victims in the justice process. Movements aimed at advocating for crime victims’ rights began in the 1970s (Young & Stein, 2004; NCVLI, 2011). The rise of victim activism pushed the federal and state governments to amend the constitution to embrace the rights of crime victims. Since the 1980s, constitutional amendments have contributed to the recognition, protection, compensation, and participation of crime victims in the judicial process. Ms. Davidson seems well conversant with the casualties’ rights to protection, participation, notification, consultation, and speedy trial.
Despite the giant achievements that have been made regarding the crime victim’s rights, Ms. Davidson insists that the formal rights of victims are still undermined by the government. She says that it is ironical that the Constitution gives legal rights to crime suspects, but it fails to do so for the victims.
References
National Crime Victim Law Institute. (2011). Fundamentals of victims’ rights: A victim’s right to restitution. Victim Law Bulletin Nov. 2011.
National Crime Victim Law Institute. (2011). Fundamentals of victims’ rights: A brief history of crime victims’ rights in the United States. Victim Law Bulletin Nov. 2011.
Office for Victims of Crime. (2004). State crime victim compensation and assistance grant programs.
Victims’ rights and remedies. (n.d).
Young, M. & Stein, J. (2004). The history of the crime victims’ movement in the United States. Office for Victims of Crimes.
