Restitution and Victim Participation in Sentencing: A Comparison of Two Models (From Criminal Justice, Restitution, and Reconciliation, P 23-36, 1990, Burt Galaway and Joe Hudson, eds. -- See NCJ-126460)

• NCJ Number: 126463
• Author(s): S A Thorvaldson
• Date Published: 1990
• Length: 14 pages
• Sale Source: Criminal Justice Press/Willow Tree Press
• Publication Type: Research (Theoretical)
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

The two compared models of restitution and victim participation in sentencing are "civil restitution," which assumes that restitution is a civil remedy offered to victims as private persons or third parties in sentencing procedure, and "criminal restitution," which interprets the victim's role and restitution in keeping with the conventional concept of criminal harm and the public aims of sentencing.

Abstract

The two models are compared on 30 variables. The comparison demonstrates the significant and wide-ranging effects for policy and practice of the differences in the basic assumptions of the models. These effects include, particularly, the status and priority of restitution; the legal status, significance, and salience of the victim's role; the nature of the harm and the way it is assessed; the relationships between restitution and various victim compensation procedures; the right of victims to receive restitution; standards of proof; prosecutorial duties; and the status of private counsel. Since under the civil restitution model, restitution is to serve two often conflicting aims, a tortured compromise is often the result. Barring radical change, the best that can be expected is a limited provision for restitution and victim rights amid ongoing controversy. The criminal restitution model avoids such conflicts because restitution and victim participation are compatible with the conventional aims and methods of criminal sentencing. 9 notes and 22 references