The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
4 Points

Does a Victim Impact Statement pose a question on justice

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/22/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 638 times Debate No: 63717
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)




A victim impact statement is a written or verbal statement made as part of the judicial legal process, which allows a victim of crime the opportunity to speak during the sentencing of their attacker or at subsequent parole hearings.

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.

Thank you


So what is your stance?

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.
Debate Round No. 1


No i agree with your stance. Thank you for your comment, will be used in my project.
Debate Round No. 2


IsabellaMabey forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 1 year ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture