If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Victims- give them the right to speak out?
BillieTheBot
Posts: 8,722 Bot
Minsters are planning to allow the families of victoims of serious crime to be speak out in court at sentencing.
Story.
My first reaction was that this is a stupid idea, and that witness impact statements are enough, as Victim Support say. It's an awful thing to say, but the emotion of the grieving families shouldn't be put in court, because it isn't relevant. The more grief the family feels, the higher the sentence- that's not how it should be. And those who murder those without families are likely to get shorter sentences because there isn't the emotional plea.
Argument.
But I think this magazine article makes a very good point. Defendants can have a parade of character testimonies before sentence, so why shouldn't the victim have a parade of testimonies too?
On balance I think it's going to be a waste of money, but I can see the benefits of it. The costs of letting victims do this- in barristers fees and court time- probably isn't worth it, which is the trouble, and it would unduly affect those victims who don't have a huge family to come and gnash teeth.
I don't think they should do it I think the victim impact statements are enough. I can see the benefits of it, but I get the feeling its all one big publicity stunt for the government. The money this would cost- money that would come out of the Legal Aid budget- could help the poor get representation during divorce and other civil proceedings.
Story.
My first reaction was that this is a stupid idea, and that witness impact statements are enough, as Victim Support say. It's an awful thing to say, but the emotion of the grieving families shouldn't be put in court, because it isn't relevant. The more grief the family feels, the higher the sentence- that's not how it should be. And those who murder those without families are likely to get shorter sentences because there isn't the emotional plea.
Argument.
But I think this magazine article makes a very good point. Defendants can have a parade of character testimonies before sentence, so why shouldn't the victim have a parade of testimonies too?
On balance I think it's going to be a waste of money, but I can see the benefits of it. The costs of letting victims do this- in barristers fees and court time- probably isn't worth it, which is the trouble, and it would unduly affect those victims who don't have a huge family to come and gnash teeth.
I don't think they should do it I think the victim impact statements are enough. I can see the benefits of it, but I get the feeling its all one big publicity stunt for the government. The money this would cost- money that would come out of the Legal Aid budget- could help the poor get representation during divorce and other civil proceedings.
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
0
Comments
It seems the justice system is moving more towards punishment which I disagree with, of course there is the element there but a purely punishment system doesnt work.
Because it isn't relevant to the crime? Even a drug dealing whore beating pimp is a human being.
The character witness for the defendant is more about how much of a threat they present - at least that's my understanding.
As you say, emotion should be irrelevant.
That's pretty much it, really.
And I don't think they're used much for murder trials, given that murder carries a minimum sentence of life imprisonment.
It's all about the defendant and this move undermines that?
If a defendant is found guilty of murder, the only option is for a life sentence. For other serious crimes, there are tarriffs, indicating suitable sentences for the specific crime.