Citation

Hills AM, Thomson DM. Behav. Sci. Law 1999; 17(5): 661-671.

Affiliation

Department of Psychology at the Bankstown Campus of the University of Western Sydney Macarthur, Australia. am.hills@uws.edu.au

Copyright

(Copyright © 1999, John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

10723104

Abstract

Victim impact statements have been introduced in response to growing community concern about apparent neglect of victims in the criminal justice system. Their use in sentencing is a contentious issue, because victim characteristics such as resilience or fragility can contribute to impacts. Is it appropriate for sentences to be influenced by consequences arising from chance victim circumstances unforeseeable by the offender? In the interest of achieving an optimal fit between the justice system and community expectations, this research examined a neglected question: how does the public reason about the issue? Using offense vignettes presented to 260 people in Western Australia, sentencing decisions were found to vary according to consequences arising from victim characteristics. There was little to indicate participants fully appreciated the issue; thus, further research is needed to clarify how justice reasoning principles are used, and to ascertain whether different decisions are taken when people are informed about the problem.

Language: en