Victim Policy Transfer: Learning From Each Other

Wemmers, Jo-Anne

doi:10.1007/s10610-005-3624-z

Cited by 16 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The VIS is now a recognized component of most common-law jurisdictions such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada (Roberts, 2009). In Canada, where this study took place, the introduction of the VIS in 1988 marked the first mention of the word victim in the Criminal Code of Canada (Wemmers, 2005).…”

Section: The Victim Impact Statementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Purposing and Repurposing Harms

Miller

2013

Qual Health Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of the victim impact statement (VIS) is to inform judges of victims' crime-related physical, psychological, and financial harms. Findings from interviews with Canadian sexual assault victims, advocates, victim services workers, and prosecutors (N = 37) demonstrated that harm descriptions were manipulated by victims and others in keeping with, and contrary to, VIS design. Victims and prosecutors purposed the VIS to inform court outcomes through harms claims and struggles over those claims. The repurposing of harms claims occurred through practices of strategic disclosure, intended to effect changes in others' behaviors, and harm peddling, the circulation of the VIS in nonsentencing arenas. Victims, adversaries, and criminal justice professionals engaged in harm peddling to obtain compensation, child custody, and parole delay. Implications of purposing and repurposing harms claims include novel opportunities and legal pitfalls for victims, varied responses by judges, and an expansion of social control over victims and offenders.

show abstract

Section: The Victim Impact Statementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Purposing and Repurposing Harms

Miller

2013

Qual Health Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are still distinct differences within the latter groups, and more convergence within the former. While we can assume that these mostly civil law countries were ‘more receptive to outside influences’ (Tonry, 2001: 530), even from common law countries (Wemmer, 2005), transitional countries in particular in the East have not yet adopted the institutional foundations for democratic cultures of control. However, the divide in the penal landscape coincides with marked differences in serious violent crime, indicating overall crime and security problems.…”

Section: Penal Cultures and Cultures Of Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cultural peers and penal policies: A configurational approach toward mapping penal landscapes

Karstedt

2015

Punishment & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Globalization changed the comparative gaze and enterprise in criminology. The dialectics between global convergence and domestic divergence are nowhere more visible but in the realm of responses to crime. Rather than loosening their impact on penal justice and penal policies, cultural differences, national institutional settings and symbols are coming to the fore, and contemporary penal policies and systems develop along the fault lines of regions, the routes of colonial power or supra-national regimes. Recent conceptualizations of globalization focus on actors and mechanisms, thus advancing ‘agency-rich’ models in the comparison of penal systems. Using a ‘configurational comparative approach’ this article explores the role of ‘cultural peers’ in shaping the landscape of penal regimes in Europe. ‘Penal cultures’ and ‘cultures of control’ constitute two layers of configurations, each one with four peer groups. The European landscape of penal cultures and cultures of control emerges from different historic trajectories, different partners in and mechanisms of diffusion. Cultural and spatial nearness both are important, and processes of Europeanization seem to have an impact. Beyond convergence and divergence of penal regimes and cultures of control, Europe appears as a pluralistic community at best and a deeply divided one at worst.

show abstract

“…17 Increased victim participation in the case concerning them does not always improve their experience of the criminal justice system and does not appear to bring them the emotional, psychological and financial benefits desired. 18 Victims often prefer not to be obliged to take part, but rather to leave it to the judges to decide on sentencing 19 -they are content to express their point of view during the trial. 20 This clearly indicates that too great an involvement in the criminal justice system might not be the most judicious path towards the recovery and reparation desired by the victim.…”

Section: Victims' Expectations Of and Needs In Terms Of Criminal Procmentioning

confidence: 99%

Victims and international criminal justice: a vexed question?

Rauschenbach

Scalia

2008

Int. rev. Red Cross

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the growing attention being paid to “victims” in the framework of criminal proceedings, this attention does not seem to be meeting their needs under either national criminal justice systems or the international regime. In the latter, the difficulties encountered by the victims are aggravated by factors specifically arising from the prosecution and punishment of mass crimes at international level. This has prompted the authors to point out that the prime purpose of criminal law is to convict or acquit the accused, and to suggest that the task of attending to the victims should perhaps be left to other entities.

show abstract

Victim Policy Transfer: Learning From Each Other

Cited by 16 publications

References 16 publications

Purposing and Repurposing Harms

Purposing and Repurposing Harms

Cultural peers and penal policies: A configurational approach toward mapping penal landscapes

Victims and international criminal justice: a vexed question?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About