Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 04/20/2014 8:14:12 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Kaslin

You might forget that providing justice for victims is one of the central purposes of the entire criminal justice system.

**********

The criminal justice system at best provides damage control for the present, deterrence for the future, and a meager measure of consolation and support for victims or their survivors.

This is not for lack of will to do more, it is for lack of ability. Justice is in the hands of God. Man simply cannot right the imbalance of criminal misdeeds.


2 posted on 04/20/2014 8:19:57 AM PDT by Psalm 144 (FIGHT! FIGHT! SEVERE CONSERVATIVE AND THE WILD RIGHT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

I read this, and honestly, it’s kind of nebulous and vague in the exact description and redress afforded a ‘victim’ with respect to courtroom procedure.

The article’s on specificity is the desire to let ‘victims’ be present throughout the entirety of a courtroom proceeding.

I have mixed feelings on this. Traditional witness procedure requires that witnesses only be present for their testimony so as not to be afforded the opportunity to bias their testimony based on testimony of other witnesses. The article supports a review/process/hearing venue to determine the efficacy of a possible Constitutional Amendment that overrides this.

Frankly, without clear stipulation about VICTIM - who they are (e.g., a co-aggrieved party unconnected with the actual crime, an interested ‘party’ such as an amicus curiae input to a proceeding) and why the hell should they be heard.

Frankly, this smacks to me of another liberal intervention into the law process and a subversion of the real intent of crime prosecution. While the acts were perpetrated on a victim, they were also perpetrated on society as a whole, and it is that society, through its laws that redresses the act. Compensation, etc. are actually a matter of civil damage in my opinion that is supplementary to a moral and just nation that enforces its laws.

IOW, through all this, I’m inclined to say NO to this proposal. I just don’t trust anyone’s motives anymore, especially when it comes to a drive to amend the constitution. Flame away


4 posted on 04/20/2014 8:28:56 AM PDT by Gaffer (Comprehensive Immigration Reform is just another name for Comprehensive Capitulation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

If I kill a guy and the victims family can give testimony on the impact it had on them why can’t I produce people to give testimony who are glad I did it?


6 posted on 04/20/2014 8:37:00 AM PDT by ReaganÜberAlles (Remember, you can't spell "progressive" without "SS".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

They better start talking about the victims of government criminals in the line of their daily duties. Because more and more people are being injured and murdered by government people every damn day here and we cannot let them get by with “officer safety” bullsh1t excuses for shoooting everything first and covering it up together later on.


8 posted on 04/20/2014 12:13:27 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson