How do We Compensate a Victim's Losses?

Mulder, J.D.W.E.

doi:10.1177/026975800901600104

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Their comments were made in a special issue of the Review that explored alternative models drawn from health, and from welfare economics, for placing monetary values on what the common law of general damages aims to compensate as ‘pain and suffering’ (Dolan and Moore, 2007; Dolan et al, 2007; Loomes, 2007), or as ‘loss of amenities’ and ‘loss of expectation of life’ (‘quality-adjusted life years’, Dolan et al, 2005). 2 In a later review, Mulder (2009: 69) commented that the reason why it is impossible to formulate clear and practical guides for such compensatory damages is that although it is accepted that they are intended to make victims whole, ‘it is still unknown how economic and non-economic forms of compensation actually work and how they are interrelated’. It was in part for these reasons that in 1996 the British state compensation scheme replaced common law damages with a tariff that grouped together injuries of comparable severity to which a corresponding financial value was attached; its purpose was precisely not to compensate for the injury itself but simply to give it monetary recognition.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Offender and state compensation for victims of crime

Miers

2013

International Review of Victimology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article comprises an overview of the principal normative and operational issues that arise in both common and civil law states' arrangements for the compensation and reparation of victims of crime. Balancing what are inevitably generalized statements about jurisdictions within federal common law countries and within the European Union, the article illustrates these issues with details drawn from the civil and criminal justice systems of England and Wales. The article begins with some general observations about the ways in which compensation and reparation by offenders and compensation by the state form elements in a state's overall objectives for victims within its criminal justice system, and addresses the question of what we might understand by 'compensation' in a criminal justice context, and how that sits with civil justice. For this purpose 'compensation' may be understood both in the compendious sense of any offender or state financial payment in respect of a victim's loss or injury or of the offender's direct or indirect restoration of stolen or damaged property, and in its discrete sense of a purely monetary response distinct from the non-monetary responses that characterize 'reparation' À responses now widely associated with restorative justice. The article provides some detail on compensation and reparation by offenders as forms of criminal justice disposals, and on the scope and the functions of state compensation schemes.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Offender and state compensation for victims of crime

Miers

2013

International Review of Victimology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our research was not aimed at examining how to calculate levels of damages for non-economic harm resulting from the death or injury of a loved one. This focus can be found in other literature based on economic approaches of tort law (e.g., Avraham 2005 ; Mulder 2009 , for reviews on insurance theory; see also Oswald and Powdthavee 2008 ; Posner and Sunstein 2005 ; Sunstein 2008 on, for example, hedonic adaptation, but cf. Swedloff and Huang 2010 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can Money Symbolize Acknowledgment? How Victims’ Relatives Perceive Monetary Awards for Their Emotional Harm

Hulst¹,

Akkermans²

2011

Psychol. Inj. and Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Legal systems differ markedly on how they treat the emotional harm suffered by close family members of crime or accident victims. This paper reports the results of two empirical studies examining how citizens whose child, partner, or parent was killed or seriously injured as a result of violent crime or tort (secondary victims) perceive a monetary award for their own non-economic harm relating to the death or injury of their loved one. The objective of our research was to test the Dutch legislator’s assumption that a (modest) monetary award for secondary victims’ emotional harm can have a meaningful symbolic value by providing recognition and satisfaction. Until then, no compensation was available for such harm under Dutch law. In addition, we examined whether victims’ relatives preferred standardization or individuation in determining the amount of the award, how they evaluated the amount, and the manner in which such awards might be offered. In a first quantitative survey study conducted in the Netherlands, 726 secondary victims were asked for their evaluations of such awards for the emotional harm they suffered as a result of the death or injury of their family member. We also asked our representative sample about their actual experience of the legal process in order to put their evaluations of such awards into context. In a second qualitative study, conducted in Belgium, interviews were held with 14 secondary victims who had actually received an award for their own emotional harm under Belgian law (study 2). Results suggest that secondary victims regard an award for emotional harm as a positive gesture and may interpret it as helping to satisfy relatives’ psychological concerns by seeing it, for example, as an acknowledgment of loss and responsibility. Overall findings suggest that victims’ relatives may be seeking acknowledgement of their emotional losses and the norm violation.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, Berryessa (2014), Kwong et al (2015), and Vining, Wilhelm, and Collens (2014) discovered that biased media reporting can influence how people perceive certain justice systems. Moreover, judges' decisions are impacted by the misconception's media stories have given rise to (Matter and Stutzer, 2013;Mulder, 2009;and Wentland, 2012). A substantial persuasive effect from biased media portrayal is possible.…”

Section: The Potential Impact On Judge's Behavior Thoughts and Attitudesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trial by Media: Role and Impact on the Administration of Justice

2023

IJFMR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Trial by media is a dynamic process in which the parties are exposed to public opinion and condemned without being heard. The media, a scapegoat under the guise of press freedom, after hindering justice, defaming one or more individuals, destroying numerous people's reputations, infringing on the right to privacy, and disrupting the fair trial process. Hence, media gains formal prerogative rights to render decisions in cases and convey them to the public as true. The media is the foundation of the news industry, thus everything the public learns about an incident is first scrutinized via its lens and then reported on by the media, which portrays its likelihood as nothing more than trials. This research seeks to explore the role of media trials in judicial proceedings and analyze how they impact in the administration of justice. This was made possible through the use of qualitative research, specifically documentary analysis using secondary data acquired from the study's literature. Findings show that media trials interfere with the judicial process and have a negative impact on the administration of justice and the rights of the accused.

show abstract

How do We Compensate a Victim's Losses?

Cited by 5 publications

References 33 publications

Offender and state compensation for victims of crime

Offender and state compensation for victims of crime

Can Money Symbolize Acknowledgment? How Victims’ Relatives Perceive Monetary Awards for Their Emotional Harm

Trial by Media: Role and Impact on the Administration of Justice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About