David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
The victims’ rights movement argues that because the outcome of criminal prosecutions affects crime victims, the justice system should consider their interests during proceedings. In 2004, Congress passed the Crime Victims’ Rights Act (CVRA), giving victims some rights to participate in the federal criminal justice system. This Note probes both the theoretical assumptions and practical implications of the CVRA. It demonstrates that the victims’ rights movement revisits a long-acknowledged tension between adversary adjudication and third-party interests. It shows, however, that American law has resolved this tension by conferring party or quasi-party status on third parties. Despite some pro-victims rhetoric, Congress reaffirmed the public-prosecution model when it passed the CVRA. Instead of making victims parties or intervenors in criminal prosecutions, the CVRA asks courts and prosecutors to vindicate victims’ interests. This unusual posture creates substantial conflicts for courts and prosecutors and undermines defendants’ rights. To avoid these consequences, this Note argues, courts can interpret the CVRA’s substantive rights narrowly. Rather than reading the CVRA as conferring broad rights on crime victims, courts should interpret the statute to simply require institutional courtesy toward crime victims. This interpretation reflects victims’ nonparty status and preserves the rights and responsibilities of courts, prosecutors, and defendants.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Massimo Renzo (2012). Crimes Against Humanity and the Limits of International Criminal Law. Law and Philosophy 31 (4):443-476.
Tyrone Kirchengast (2010). Proportionality in Sentencing and the Restorative Justice Paradigm: 'Just Deserts' for Victims and Defendants Alike? [REVIEW] Criminal Law and Philosophy 4 (2):197-213.
Martin Wright (1996). Justice for Victims and Offenders: A Restorative Response to Crime. Waterside Press.
Yvonne McDermott, Some Are More Equal Than Others: Victim Participation in the International Criminal Court.
Felix Mukwiza Ndahinda, Victimization of African Indigenous Peoples: Appraisal of Violations of Collective Rights Under Victimological and International Law Lenses.
Christopher Bennett (2012). Vera Bergelson: Victims' Rights and Victims' Wrongs. [REVIEW] Criminal Law and Philosophy 6 (1):103-109.
Robert Weisberg (1995). Review Essay / Victims' Rights in Criminal Trials. Criminal Justice Ethics 14 (2):56-62.
Sandra E. Marshall (2004). Victims of Crime: Their Station and its Duties. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 7 (2):104-117.
Added to index2009-05-24
Total downloads4 ( #531,648 of 1,790,069 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #424,764 of 1,790,069 )
How can I increase my downloads?