This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Erez, E. Articles by Laster, K. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Neutralizing Victim Reform: Legal Professionals' Perspectives on Victims and Impact Statements

Kathy Laster

Despite the high hopes of victims' rights advocates, and contrary to the warnings about negative consequences, the evidence demonstrates that victim impact statements (VISs) have had little influence on criminal proceedings and court outcomes. This study, based on interviews with judges, prosecutors, and defense counsels charged with the implementation of the VIS scheme in South Australia, shows that practitioners routinely objectify, and thereby minimize, the injuries sustained by victims, and impose an implicit "reasonable victim" test to evaluate VISs. Professionals' responses are analyzed according to Sykes and Matza's notion of techniques of neutralization as a case study of the ways in which law reform endeavors are subordinated to the competing value systems and organizational imperatives of court workgroups.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Propen and M. L. Schuster Making Academic Work Advocacy Work: Technologies of Power in the Public Arena Journal of Business and Technical Communication, July 1, 2008; 22(3): 299 - 329. [Abstract] [PDF]