Victim Impact Statements at Sentencing: Judicial Experiences and Perceptions A Survey of Three Jurisdictions
Table of Contents
- Acknowledgements
- Highlights
- Executive Summary
- Conclusion
- Introduction
- Methodology
- Findings
- 1. Volume of Hearings and Frequency of Statements
- 2. Informing the Victim
- 3. Issues Surrounding Oral Delivery of the VIS
- 3.1 Victims seldom ask to read their victim statement aloud in court
- 3.2 Most judges report no change in the number of victims wishing to make an oral presentation of their victim impact statements
- 3.3 A small minority of judges report longer sentencing hearings as a result of victims making an oral presentation
- 3.4 Only a small proportion of crime victims are cross-examined on their victim impact statements
- 4. Judicial Perceptions Regarding Utility and Relevance of VIS
- 4.1 Judges generally find victim impact statements useful
- 4.2 Judges believe VIS contain information relevant to the principles of sentencing
- 4.3 Judges perceive VIS to constitute a unique source of information relevant to sentencing
- 4.4 Perceptions of judges consistent with those of Crown counsel and judges in other jurisdictions
- 4.5 Victim impact statements particularly useful for crimes of violence
- 4.6 Judges report that victims’ views on sentencing appear in a significant percentage of statements
- 5. Judicial Recognition of Victim Impact
- 6. Judicial Perceptions of the Victim’s Perspective
- 7. Judicial Perceptions of the Purpose of VIS
- 8. Discussion
- References
- Appendix A
- Date modified: