Does a Victim Impact Statement pose a question on justice
Debate Rounds (3)
My question to you is, do you not think this is unfair for the criminal? The fact that if they have honest learnt their lesson or were in a bad place at the time, should they not be released on parole?
If the legal system hear the VIS at the parole and it really moves them and revisits the crime again then surely they would put them back in prison?
I am not a criminal supporter by any means, just interested to hear your views.
Any comments and votes would be massively appreciated. Using this evidence for my Extended Project Qualification on this subject.
Personally I think it has no good impact on Justice. If the punishment they prescribed truly fit the crime there would not be a need for any vindictive statements by the victim. It should be self evident what the damages were. All of the people hearing the trial are already putting themselves in the victims shoes.
Also, it seems to me that this would bring about a level of unfairness in the justice. Youre basically saying that if the person has a heartwarming enough story to tell that the punishment should reflect that? That seems like a slope towards discrimination really. Example: A crying mother looks more hurt than a crying young man. Should one get a longer prison sentence served on their defendant than the other? Where does that stop really? Race?
But plain and simple ... I don't think it does anything but offer the victim some sort of revenge (not sure if that's healthy or not ... totally different debate). It seems to me it actually invites selective justice based on the level of performance you were able to put on in the courtroom. Justice, though, should be equal and fair. If they're doing it proper ... they should be referencing previous cases and prescribing similar punishments. If ever they prescribe something lesser ... they are spitting on all the previous victims aswell (though they're no longer around to feel it).
The punishments should not increase based on a victims statement ... but based on the frequency of occurrence and the overall damage of the deed. The victim is really the worst person to ask damage-wise because their opinion is obviously skewed. Judges need to know they are serving justice to more than just this crying woman in the corner ... this isn't just justice for her ... its justice for everyone.
IsabellaMabey forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||4|
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.