How Victim Impact Statements Promote Justice: Evidence from the Content of Statements Delivered in Larry Nassar\u27s Sentencing

Whether crime victims should present victim impact statements (VISs) at sentencing remains a subject of controversy in the criminal justice literature. But relatively little is known about the content of VISs and how victims use them. This article provides a content analysis of the 168 VISs presented in a Michigan court sentencing of Larry Nassar, who pleaded guilty to decades of sexual abuse of young athletes while he was treating them for various sports injuries. Nassar committed similar crimes against each of his victims, allowing a robust research approach to answer questions about the content, motivations for, and benefits of submitting VISs. Specifically, it is possible to explore the question of whether (roughly) the same crimes produce (roughly) the same VISs. The VISs reveal the victims’/survivors’ motive for presenting VISs, their manner of presenting the impact of sexual abuse, their interactions with the sentencing judge and the defendant, and other features of the VISs. Analyzing the VISs’ contents confirms many of the arguments supporting using VISs at sentencing and challenges some lingering objections to them. The findings support the desirability of VISs for informational, therapeutic, and educational purposes in criminal sentencings

How Victim Impact Statements Promote Justice: Evidence from the Content of Statements Delivered in Larry Nassar’s Sentencing

Whether crime victims should present victim impact statements (VISs) at sentencing remains a subject of controversy in criminal justice literature. But relatively little is known about the content of VISs and how victims use them. This Article provides a content analysis of the 168 VISs presented in a Michigan court sentencing of Larry Nassar, who pleaded guilty to decades of sexual abuse of young athletes while he was treating them for various sports injuries. Nassar committed similar crimes against each of his victims, allowing a robust research approach to answer questions about the content, motivations for, and benefits of submitting VISs. Specifically, it is possible to explore the question of whether (roughly) the same crimes produce (roughly) the same VISs. The VISs reveal the victims’/survivors’ motive for presenting VISs, their manner of presenting the impact of sexual abuse, their interactions with the sentencing judge and the defendant, and other features of the VISs. Analyzing the VISs’ contents confirms many of the arguments supporting VISs at sentencing and challenges lingering objections to them. The findings support using VISs for informational, therapeutic, and educational purposes in criminal sentencings

Adalah – The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel v. Ministry of Social Affairs

[This abstract is not part of the Court\u27s opinion and is provided for the reader\u27s convenience. It has been translated from a Hebrew version prepared by Nevo Press Ltd. and is used with its kind permission.] We are concerned with petitions for the revocation of Section 61(2)(d) of the Arrangements Law (Legislative Amendments for Implementation of the Economic Plan for 2009 and 2010), 5769-2009, as it is unconstitutional, which included Amendment no. 113 to the National Insurance Law [Consolidated Version], 5755-1995 (hereinafter: the “Amendment to the Law”) that ordered, inter alia, the reduction of the child allowances paid for children who have not received the vaccines required based on their age and health condition and according to the Vaccination Program ordered by the Director General of the Ministry of Health. The vaccination program includes a vaccination by the name of MMRV, which is a “quadrivalent” vaccine against four diseases: measles, mumps, rubella and chicken pox. The vaccination is given to infants at the age of one year, and the program will apply to infants born starting January 1, 2012, such that the first reduction of allowances will be made no earlier than July 1, 2013. The HCJ (per the opinion of Justice Arbel, Justices Hayut and Barak Erez concurring) denied the petitions and held: Justice Arbel held that there is no room for judicial intervention in the legislative process for the Amendment. Justice Arbel reviewed the nature of the child allowance arrangement and its purpose, the approach of the Ministry of Health and medical science towards vaccinations generally, and the quadrivalent vaccination specifically. Justice Arbel believed that the starting point should be that the legislator, in setting child allowances, had in mind the welfare and best interests of the children. Justice Arbel stated that in the framework of the constitutionality of the Amendment, the question of whether constitutional rights established in Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty (hereinafter: the “Basic Law”) are violated will be examined, and if the answer is affirmative, it will be examined whether the conditions of the limitation clause of the Basic Law are satisfied. If one of the conditions is not satisfied, the remedy for the unlawful violation will be discussed. Justice Arbel examined whether the Amendment violated rights enshrined in the Basic Law, i.e. the right to a dignified life or the right to social security, the right to autonomy and the right of equality, and held that the Amendment does not violate the right to a dignified life and does not violate the constitutional right to autonomy or to parental autonomy, but does violate the right of equality. It is noted that in this context, Justice Arbel believed that the group of equals included the parents insured through the National Insurance Law. However, Justice Arbel held that the violation satisfies all four conditions of the limitation clause of the Basic Law: the violation of the human right was made in or by a law or by virtue of explicit authorization therein; the violating law befits the values of the State of Israel; the violating law is intended for a proper purpose; the law violates the right to an extent no greater than required. Justice Arbel held that this violation satisfies all of the conditions of the limitation clause in a manner that strikes a proper balance with other interests and rights, and hence the Amendment is proportionate and there is no room to intervene therein. Justice Barak-Erez also found that the Amendment to the Law violates the right of equality, holding that the petitions should be denied because the violation satisfies the conditions of the limitation clause. Justice Hayut believed that the starting point according to which the question of discrimination should be examined is that the right to the child allowances is a right of the parents, and that this is the relevant group of equals. Unlike Justices Arbel and Barak-Erez, Justice Hayut found that the distinction made by the Amendment to the Law between parents who have vaccinated their children and parents who have refrained from doing so, for the purpose of deducting a fixed amount from the child allowances, does not violate the constitutional right of equality of the parents who chose not to vaccinate their children, and therefore in her opinion too, the petitions should be denied

Palestinian Women in Terrorism: A Double-Edged Sword?

Drawing on a decade of research on terrorism in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, we show how subjective “rational choices” motivate some women to engage in terrorist activism. Focusing on the motives of young women who engage in terrorism is consistent with feminist theory’s insistence on women’s agency—even at the extremes. In addition to the well-established motivations for terrorism reported in the literature, interviews with young women involved in terrorism reveal mixed personal motives for their gender-defying choices, including thrill-seeking and some conscious rebellion. However, we contend that women’s subjective rationale for participation in such violent behavior needs to be contextualized. A cost–benefit approach, we maintain, highlights the strategic considerations supporting the deployment of women as combatants by Palestinian terrorist organizations. We argue that the inclusion of women in terrorist activism in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict exposes a major fault line in attitudes to the role and proper place of women in what remains largely a patriarchal culture. This social ambivalence accounts for why, on all measures, women fare worse than their male counterparts. The implications of the findings for feminist research as well as policy are discussed

Domestic violence and the criminal justice system: An overview

Abstract It is only recently that domestic violence has been considered a violation of the law. Although men have battered, abused and mistreated their wives or intimate partners for a long time, historically, wife or partner abuse has been viewed as a "normal" part of marriage or intimate relationships. Only towards the end of the twentieth century, in the 1970's, has domestic violence been defined a crime, justifying intervention by the criminal justice system. This article surveys the history of domestic violence as a criminal offense, and the justice system response to woman battering incidents. It first discusses the definition of the offense including debates around the offense definition, and the prevalence and reported frequency of the behavior termed woman battering. It then reviews the legal and social changes over time that have altered the criminal justice system's approach to domestic violence. Next it outlines the responses of the police, and the prosecution of domestic violence. The article also discusses research findings related to domestic violence and the criminal justice system, along with current controversies concerning the justice approach to domestic violence, its law enforcement, and related unfolding trends in the movement to address domestic violence through the criminal justice system

Victim impact statements. by Edna Erez

A neglected aspect of our criminal justice system has been the impact of crime on victims. But during the last decade much progress has been made both overseas and within Australia