Encyclopedia of Psychology and Law

Further Readings

Mestitz, A., & Ghetti, S. (2005). Victim-offender mediation

with youth offenders in Europe. An overview and

comparison of 15 countries. Dordrecht, The Netherlands:

Springer.

Morris, A., & Maxwell, G. (2001). Restorative justice for

juveniles. Conferencing, mediation and circles.Oxford,

UK: Hart.

Umbreit, M. S. (2001). The handbook of victim-offender

mediation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Umbreit, M. S., Coates, R. B., & Vos, B. (2004). Victim-

offender mediation: Three decades of practice and

research. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 22,279–303.

VICTIMPARTICIPATION IN THE

CRIMINALJUSTICESYSTEM

As a result of a number of developments—including

the rise of restorative justice—victims in common-law

jurisdictions now have far more input into the criminal

process. Victim participatory rights are currently recog-

nized as an important component of criminal justice

proceedings. Research has shown that victim participa-

tion in justice can help victims who want to be included

in proceedings and that victim participation does not

result in difficulties or create problems for the smooth

operation of the criminal justice system. However,

because victim participation in sentencing decisions

challenges traditions and established patterns within the

criminal courts, these rights sometimes encounter resis-

tance in their implementation. As legal cultures are

transformed, however, and victims are increasingly per-

ceived as a legitimate party in proceedings, victim par-

ticipation can become an acceptable practice and a way

to inject restorative justice elements into adversarial

justice systems. Ultimately, it is the underlying value

system and ideology that will determine whether vic-

tims are meaningfully integrated into proceedings.

Attempts to integrate victims outside the adversarial

criminal justice system through restorative justice

schemes have worked for some victims, but they do not

serve those who wish to remain within the protective

structure of adversarial systems.

This entry reviews the historical development of the

role of crime victims in common-law criminal justice

systems. It presents and assesses research on the impact

of these changes on victims and the criminal justice

system. Emerging alternative perspectives and schemes

to integrate victims in proceedings are then discussed.

The entry concludes by noting some implications for

criminal justice policies regarding crime victims.

Victims’ Role in

Criminal Proceedings

In adversarial justice systems, a criminal trial entails a

conflict between two adversaries—the state and the

defendant, and the search for the “truth” is conducted

before an impartial adjudicator—the judge. In earlier

centuries, crime victims had to assume the responsi-

bility of pursuing the offender and bringing him or her

to justice. Over time, this state of affairs changed.

With the centralization of power and creation of the

concept of “the King’s peace,” victims lost their active

role in justice. The state began to prosecute a defen-

dant on behalf of the community, and the crime

victim was relegated to the role of witness for the

prosecution.

For most victims, even their role as witness never

materializes. Most criminal incidents do not result in

a trial as a result of the attrition of cases. The police

may fail to make an arrest, or the prosecutor may

decide not to file a criminal charge. If a charge is filed,

it may be stayed or withdrawn. In the vast majority of

cases, the offender ultimately pleads guilty, and the

case proceeds to sentencing without a criminal trial

being held. Unlike continental legal systems, which

provide victims with a formal role in criminal pro-

ceedings, adversarial legal systems do not accord vic-

tims any formal standing in the prosecution of “their”

offenders. Victims have little influence over whether

(or how) the state chooses to proceed against the

alleged perpetrator. Thus, until fairly recently, crime

victims were denied any input into the sentence of the

offender. Yet the state highly depends on victim coop-

eration, without which a criminal prosecution is

unlikely to succeed.

Changes in the

Role of Crime Victims

Until the 1970s, crime victims were considered the

“forgotten persons” of criminal justice—invisible to

and neglected by the system. The lack of victim stand-

ing in criminal proceedings, and the consequent insen-

sitivity to the needs of crime victims, led to victim

840 ———Victim Participation in the Criminal Justice System

V-Cutler (Encyc)-45463.qxd 11/18/2007 12:44 PM Page 840