Introduction
Victims of crime are often terrified after perpetrators attack them for various reasons. Therefore, they should be protected from offenders during the criminal justice process. Today, federal and state laws afford victims certain rights to shield them from harm through amendments to victims’ rights. At least every U.S. state has some legislation protecting victims. However, such laws differ in terms of enforcement, application, and victims’ eligibility. Thus, it is necessary to evaluate if states are doing enough to protect victims. An analysis of South Carolina’s victims’ rights shows they effectively improve the participation and protection of those affected by crimes.
Your Position
The position adopted in the analysis states that South Carolina has taken sufficient actions to afford crime victims their justified rights. The state does enough to ensure crime victims are respected and treated fairly during the prosecution of the offenders. For instance, South Carolina allows victims of crime to participate in the criminal prosecution process by requesting the judge to be present. In essence, South Carolina’s constitution has a specific bill of rights that is aimed at ensuring victims are informed and heard in the criminal justice system (Tobolowsky et al., 2016). The position was influenced by safeguards that South Carolina has implemented to defend victims’ rights.
Strengths and Weaknesses
Comprehensive Nature
The adopted position on the effectiveness of South Carolina’s victims’ rights has several strengths. First, it focuses on the comprehensive nature of the safeguards provided to victims of crimes. South Carolina makes clear its stance on victims’ rights by going beyond the minimum to shield victims’ rights. For example, the state prohibits retaliation from employers for victims who may testify in court proceedings. Furthermore, victims are entitled to information on their case’s progress, assistance on how to apply for compensation, and a copy of the original incident report (Tobolowsky et al., 2016). Such examples show that South Carolina is committed to protecting victims and encouraging criminal justice system participation.
Financial Compensation
Second, the chosen position is strong because it focuses on South Carolina’s ability to provide financial compensation to crime victims as well as their families. Victims’ rights are often intended to reduce crime’s impact on the affected. There are substantial costs faced by victims after their victimization. South Carolina helps assuage most of the costs by enabling eligible victims to receive financial remedies (Tobolowsky et al., 2016). South Carolina’s commitment to victims’ rights is shown in its actions to compensate costs incurred due to the offenders’ misconduct.
Challenge of Many Victims and Time Extension
The position taken on South Carolina’s management of victims’ rights faces some weaknesses. For instance, while there are resolute safeguards that victims can enjoy if the accused has a significant number of victims, South Carolina’s victims’ rights do not guide how to proceed. As a result, South Carolina courts may deny victims some rights when their number makes it impractical to afford such rights. The lack of explicit direction on the subject may result in controversies where victims feel their rights are not protected enough. Furthermore, the victims’ rights program may not be effective if the crime is not reported within the stipulated time. Although some cases of time extension can be offered, the guidelines for the circumstances where the deadline can be extended are unclear (Daigle & Muftic, 2019). As a result, eligible victims may be denied financial compensation due to systemic issues.
Arguments For
Notification
There are several reasons to indicate South Carolina sufficiently afforded victims their rights. First, South Carolina emphasizes the need for victims to be reasonably informed on various topics of interest regarding the accused. The state requires the victim to be provided with general information such as schedules of court proceedings. A victim must be reasonably informed of the time when the convicted person or accused is released, has escaped, or arrested. The right to notification is a critical aspect of victims’ rights because incarcerated offenders are often vengeful (Tobolowsky et al., 2016). When released, they can decide to avenge their incarceration through possibly fatal means, highlighting the significance of being notified promptly.
Protection
Second, South Carolina has fulfilled the right of protection for crime victims. The right to protection entails general and specific protection measures such as residence relocation, police escorts, and secure waiting rooms for victims and their families. South Carolina requires victims to be protected from the convicted person or accused and other people who may act on his/her behalf. South Carolina acknowledges that victims can fear the offender and the friends of the assailant. Furthermore, participating in the criminal justice system can endanger victims’ lives (Roberts, 2020). Although they can get protective or no-contact orders to protect themselves, victims may need drastic measures to minimize contact with offenders.
Christian Worldview
Third, the state is committed to ensuring victims are treated with fairness, dignity, and respect. Additionally, South Carolina condemns intimidation, abuse, or harassment throughout the prosecution process. The victim must also be informed of their constitutional rights to the extent permitted by law. Biblical principles of justice align with the desire of South Carolina to ensure fairness in the criminal justice process. Biblical values place much emphasis on the need to avoid perverting justice and showing partiality to some people; instead, they focus on treating all people fairly regardless of their race, color, or class (Philpott, 2020). Victim privacy is essential to victim protection which necessitates minimal information in records.
Arguments Against
Although South Carolina has made great strides in protecting victims’ rights, there is little victims can do to ensure their rights are safeguarded. There is no legal recourse for handling the challenge if victims find themselves in the situation. Whatever remedy is offered for victims, the feeling of having their rights unprotected can be considered additional victimization and there is little they can do. Furthermore, the no-trial law makes it difficult to hold government officials accountable for any questionable decisions they make (Tobolowsky et al., 2016). The state victims’ bill of rights stipulates that when the rights of victims are violated, the victim cannot open a civil lawsuit against a government official.
Recommendations
Victim Protection
Several strategies can improve how the rights of victims are delivered. First, South Carolina needs clear stipulations on what should happen when the rights of victims are left unprotected. Victims may feel powerless if there is nothing they can do to ensure their rights are enforceable (Joseph & Jergenson, 2020). Therefore, the state must create guidelines that are fair to the victims by holding the criminal justice system accountable. When state officials violate the rights of victims, there should be a process that holds them accountable (Douds & Shultz, 2021). Although the requirement to not sue public officials reduces litigation against the state government, it is critical to develop clear rules that make victims trust the criminal justice system.
Many Victims
Second, South Carolina needs to include explicit directions on the issue of one offender having many victims. The stipulation can state the number of victims that are required to make an argument of impracticality. A definition of the challenge would eliminate confusion and ensure victims feel safe about the criminal justice process (Tobolowsky et al., 2016). For instance, the number of victims can be fifty to be deemed impractical to afford them all of the rights stipulated in the state’s victims’ bill of rights.
Christian Worldview
Although the victims are justified in seeking punishment for offenders, they should be encouraged to practice authentic forgiveness, especially for minor crimes. Minor crimes lead to the incarceration of many individuals; therefore, victims must be encouraged to show authentic forgiveness to criminals. Authentic forgiveness is a biblical principle that allows a person to forgive another, while the offender must acknowledge the offense. It does not mean that the offender will not be punished, rather it focuses on offering reparations to both sides. In this instance, the offender will be punished but they will be more remorseful for their actions, reducing retaliation (Tran, 2020). It aligns with the biblical principle of forgiving a person but allowing them to take responsibility for their actions.
Conclusion
In conclusion, South Carolina’s implementation of the victims’ rights program has been successful in increasing the protection and participation of crime victims. The strength of South Carolina’s victims’ rights lies in the comprehensive nature of strategies used in service delivery and financial compensation. Despite some weaknesses, South Carolina has ensured victims’ rights are protected by providing rights to notification, protection, and compensation. Recommendations should focus on addressing the minor issues associated with the victims’ rights program. Victims’ rights will continue to attract significant attention due to their importance in the criminal justice system.
References
Daigle, L. E., & Muftic, L. R. (2019). Victimology: A comprehensive approach. (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.
Douds, A. S., & Shultz, H. (2021). Are victims’ rights honored in veterans courts? A statewide assessment of law on the books versus law in action. Victims & Offenders, 16(6), 912-930. Web.
Joseph, J., & Jergenson, S. (2020). An international perspective on contemporary developments in victimology. Springer International Publishing.
Philpott, D. (2020). There is a wideness in God’s justice. Nova et vetera[English Edition], 18(4), 1147-1179. Web.
Roberts, A. (2020). Victims, right?Cardozo Law Review, 42, 1449. Web.
Tobolowsky, P. M., Blackburn, A. G., Jackson, A. L., Gaboury, M. T., & Beloof, D. E. (2016). Crime victim rights and remedies (3rd ed.). Carolina Academic Press.
Tran, J. C. (2020). Authentic forgiveness: A biblical approach. Langham Publishing.