AS PART OF AN EFFORT TO DETERMINE HOW EXTENSIVELY THE MAGISTRATES' COURTS ARE USING THEIR POWERS TO ORDER COMPENSATION BY OFFENDERS (POWERS THAT WERE EXPANDED UNDER A 1972 STATUTE), THE HOME OFFICE RESEARCH UNIT EXPLORED THE ATTITUDES OF 45 VICTIMS OF PROPERTY OFFENSES AND 30 VICTIMS OF ASSAULT REGARDING COMPENSATION. ALL OF THE VICTIMS HAD BEEN INVOLVED IN CASES RESULTING IN CONVICTIONS DURING A 1-WEEK PERIOD IN MAGISTRATES' COURTS IN LONDON AND SURROUNDING DISTRICTS. THE VICTIMS WERE ASKED ABOUT THE INJURIES AND LOSSES THEY SUFFERED, THE OUTCOMES OF THEIR CASES, AND THEIR VIEWS REGARDING COMPENSATION. THE FINDINGS INDICATE THAT VICTIMS RARELY OBTAIN FINANCIAL REDRESS OUTSIDE THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM AND OFTEN ARE IGNORANT ABOUT THE LEGAL SYSTEM IN GENERAL AND ABOUT THE OVERLAPPING JURISDICTIONS OF CIVIL AND CRIMINAL LAW IN THE AWARDING OF COMPENSATION AND DAMAGES. ALTHOUGH VICTIMS MAY APPLY TO THE COURT FOR COMPENSATION, THEY RARELY DO. THE INITIATIVE USUALLY IS TAKEN BY THE COURT, AT TIMES WITH A REMINDER FROM THE PROSECUTOR. THE DATA INDICATE THAT THE COURTS OFTEN REACH THEIR DECISIONS ABOUT WHETHER TO MAKE AN AWARD OR WHAT AMOUNT TO AWARD ON THE BASIS OF INADEQUATE INFORMATION AND WITHOUT CONSULTING VICTIMS. EVEN WHEN COURTS HAVE FULL INFORMATION ON THE EXTENT OF INJURY RESULTING FROM AN ASSAULT, THEY APPEAR TO NEED GUIDANCE IN DETERMINING A FINANCIAL EQUIVALENT FOR THE INJURY. THE COURTS ORDERED COMPENSATION IN 71 PERCENT OF THE PROPERTY CASES AND IN 30 PERCENT OF THE ASSAULT CASES. VICTIMS GENERALLY WELCOMED THE COMPENSATION, BUT ONE-HALF OF THE COMPENSATED VICTIMS FELT THE AMOUNT DID NOT EQUAL THEIR LOSSES AND ABOUT ONE-QUARTER FELT THE COURT'S DECISION HAD BEEN UNFAIR. THERE APPEARS TO BE A NEED TO EXAMINE THE CONFLICTING INTERESTS INVOLVED IN THE MATTER OF COMPENSATION AND TO DETERMINE THE SIGNIFICANCE TO BE ACCORDED COMPENSATION VIS-A-VIS SENTENCING POLICY. A LIST OF REFERENCES IS INCLUDED. (LKM)