Victim impact statements and sentencing outcomes and processes. The perspectives of legal professionals

Emotional evidence and jurors' judgments: the promise of neuroscience for informing psychology and law

“…In contrast, laypersons' ratings reflected that they were affected by the level of the victim's emotions. In further support, the qualitative field study by Erez and Rogers (1999) based on interviews of Australian judges showed that seasoned judges felt that they did not learn anything they did not already know from victim impact statements because they were already well acquainted with the typical harm associated with crime. In contrast, younger judges reported that they learned a lot from the victim impact statements about harm associated with the given crimes.…”

“…Supporters often cite largely correlational evidence from studies finding little or no effect of victim impact statements on sentencing decisions (Erez & Roeger, 1995;Erez & Rogers, 1999;Henley, Davis, & Smith, 1994). For example, Erez and Roeger (1995) examined court records from assault cases in Australia and found that judges' sentences were similar for cases involving victim impact statements and those that did not.…”

“…In field studies that found no effects of victim impact statements, researchers either gathered qualitative data from interviews with legal professionals about their impressions regarding the effect of victim impact statements in their experiences (Erez & Roeger, 1995;Erez & Rogers, 1999;Henley, Davis, & Smith, 1994) or they coded for the presence or absence of victim impact statements and for judges' sentences in actual court cases Erez & Roeger, 1995). Although these studies are high in ecological validity and helpful in determining whether impact statements affect legal professionals' decisions, they lack the experimental control necessary for isolating the causal effects of victim impact statements.…”

“…Participants in field studies (i.e. Erez & Roeger, 1995;Erez & Rogers, 1999;Henley et al, 1994) were judges, attorneys, and other legal professionals, whose opinions might differ from laypersons' opinions. All of the laboratory (ForsterLee et al, 2004;Greene et al, 1998;Luginbuhl & Burkhead, 1995;McGowen & Myers, 2004;Myers & Arbuthnot, 1999;Myers et al, 2004;Tsoudis & Smith-Lovin, 1998) and field (i.e.…”

The role of the victim in criminal proceedings in Australia and Germany - a comparison

“…Due to the structure of the German criminal justice system and its leading principles, German courts are under an obligation to examine all evidence introduced into proceedings by the 'power of their office', exofficio. 82 That means for the introduction of VIS schemes in Germany that, whenever such a statement was presented during court proceedings, the court would be obligated to examine its content. Victims, however, could see the examination of their VIS by the court as questioning their suffering and doubting their emotions.…”