Legislation permitting joinder of the criminal prosecution by the state and the damage claims of the injured plaintiff before the criminal judge is a possible means of diminishing the victim's labors and costs involved in financial restoration. The effect of the joinder would be to permit the prosecutor to plead the cases of both the state in the criminal action and the victim in the civil action. The legislation permitting joinder would indirectly be providing public financial assistance to the victim through state-paid prosecutors without distinct taxation for that purpose. To avoid resistance from the criminal judge who is constrained to consider civil damages in his/her court, any reparation in the criminal proceedings must have a punitive purpose. A portion of the current fine to the state, which may or may not supplant imprisonment, could be allocated as damages to the victim. A practical reform could be the establishment of distinct statutory fine systems for the benefit of victims of criminal violence. This fine could be considered and rendered at the criminal judge's discretion, without disruption of the trial of the wrongdoer's guilt and without prejudice to a civil suit. The possibility of extending municipal liability to cover failure of police protection is unlikely, except in overt cases, such as the protection of an endangered witness. The problem with the fine and joinder systems is that they presuppose the apprehension of the offender. Because of this, every State should have a compensation plan to assist victims of criminal violence who have no other recourse for financial restoration. The compensation plan should contain a provision that provides for repayment if the victim subsequently recovers civil damages, a penal fine, or a statutory fine. Extensive footnotes are provided.