skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 97751 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: Victim Impact Statements and Restitution - Making the Punishment Fit the Victim
Journal: Brooklyn Law Review  Volume:50  Issue:2  Dated:(Winter 1984)  Pages:301-338
Author(s): A K Posner
Date Published: 1984
Page Count: 38
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice/
Rockville, MD 20849
NCJRS Photocopy Services
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
NCJRS paper reproduction
Box 6000, Dept F
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America

NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: Using three sets of criteria, this paper analyzes the Victim and Witness Protection Act of 1982, which authorizes victim impact statements and restitution in Federal cases, and proposes a change in the standard of proof used in the law.
Abstract: Although the victim impact statement and restitution provisions of the law focus mainly on the victim, they also retain procedural protections for the defendant. The statute is constitutional under the fifth, seventh, and eighth amendments. It is constitutional for a judge, rather than a jury, to determine restitutionary issues. The authorization of a monetary sanction with no express maximum, which may also be a condition of probation or parole, does not violate the eighth amendment. However, the standard of proof and assignment of burdens of proof may make the restitutionary provisions ineffective, when taken together with the mandate against prolonged and complicated hearings. The standard of proof and the burden of persuasion should be changed to favor the victim. A total of 217 case notes are supplied.
Index Term(s): US Supreme Court decisions; Victim impact statements; Victim Witness Protection Act 1982
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.