No abstract

No abstract

Secondary victimization refers to re-victimization by society, including the response of the criminal justice system. One form of secondary victimization is interactional injustice. The concept of interactional justice posits that people are concerned about their treatment by others during conflict resolution procedures. Proper treatment by legal authorities refers to receiving adequate information about the procedure (known as informational justice) and being treated in a respectful and dignified manner (known as interpersonal justice). One's ability to cope with the crime may also be influenced by the criminal justice system. Particularly for vulnerable victims, there appears to be a special need for proper treatment and attention to the victim's ability to cope. Female victims of violence, namely sexual and domestic violence, are one example of vulnerable victims. This victimization often consists of immensely violating and sometimes chronic repeated behaviour. The perceptions of interpersonal justice, informational justice and the procedure's effect on the victim's ability to cope for three categories of victims (domestic violence victims, victims of sexual abuse and victims of other serious crimes) in the Netherlands are compared. Multiple regression analyses indicate that there are in fact differences between groups. Victims of sexual assault perceived interpersonal justice as significantly lower than did victims of other serious crimes. The procedural effect on one's ability to cope was experienced to the least extent by victims of domestic violence. Informational justice did not differ among groups.

No abstract

Understanding trust in the legal system has been an important step in comprehending compliance with judicial authorities. Trust results from both procedural aspects such as perceptions of procedural fairness and outcome elements, such as a just verdict. These procedural elements meet the criteria of the relational model of authority, asserting a need for interpersonal treatment and neutrality when assessing justice judgments. While a plethora of research exists, there generally remains less empirical evidence from the crime victim’s perspective. The current study identifies six victim rights mechanisms and examines the association between these variables and the impact of the process on the victim’s trust in the legal system. Results indicate that for Dutch victims of serious crime, victim impact statements are significantly associated with trust. Incarceration as a control variable was also strongly associated with the dependent variable. Assistance from victim support reached marginal significance, though the latter displayed an inverse relationship. Implications for policy are discussed.