Victims of crime entertain various wishes regarding the criminal justice system. This paper present the results of a study that made use of vignettes. Victim wishes regarding the goals of punishment were examined, and the relation with degree offender intent (intent, negligence) has been established. The results show that when the perpetrator acted intentionally, victims have a greater wish for retribution and the other punishment goals, but they have a smaller need for restoration. Victims wish to be compensated and to receive apologies from the offender, but generally are reluctant to meet with the perpetrator in person. |
Tijdschrift voor Herstelrecht
Meer op het gebied van Mediation en herstelrecht
Over dit tijdschriftMeld u zich hier aan voor de attendering op dit tijdschrift zodat u direct een mail ontvangt als er een nieuw digitaal nummer is verschenen en u de artikelen online kunt lezen.
Column |
Onder filosofen. Oftewel Theut |
Auteurs | Rein Gerritsen |
Auteursinformatie |
Redactioneel |
Omwille van het slachtoffer? |
Auteurs | John Blad |
Auteursinformatie |
Artikel |
Vergelding en herstel: de behoeften van het slachtoffer |
Trefwoorden | slachtoffers, intentie, strafdoelen, herstel, excuses |
Auteurs | Marijke Malsch, Robin P. Kranendonk en Vicky De Mesmaecker |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
Discussie |
Spreken is zilver, praten is goud |
Auteurs | Janny Dierx |
Auteursinformatie |
Discussie |
Korvers nieuwe slachtofferrechten zijn riskant |
Auteurs | Bob Kaarls |
Auteursinformatie |
Discussie |
Victimalisering van het strafprocesEen herstelrechtelijk commentaar |
Trefwoorden | slachtofferrechten, procespartij, strafproces, herstelrecht |
Auteurs | John Blad |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
The author discusses the proposals done by Richard Korver, a Dutch victim-solicitor, with regard to the legal position of the victim in the Dutch penal procedure. They amount to making the victim a fully equipped party to the procedure with – as it were – the same arms as the offender and his solicitor has. These proposals include an autonomous right to appeal against the verdict in first instance, a right to make a victim statement of opinion, the right to rebuke the bench, and the right to be heard in almost every procedural and substantial decision of any authority in the penal process and in the execution of punishment. The authors comment is that these proposals, when realized, will imply an intensification of the polarized legal debate in the penal procedure, with more risks of secondary victimization. The problem is not that the defendant will oppose two prosecutors, but that the victim will find the public prosecutor not on his side when the latter does his job as he should: serving the interests of justice. The inquisitorial procedure does allow for participation of victims, but only in so far as this participation can serve the interests of establishing the truth of the matter and determining proportionate and equal punishment. Meanwhile the risk of instrumentalising the victim and his needs in interests in punitive strategies exists. Restorative practices offer a much better context for an assertive victim to defend his interests and satisfy his needs, staying out of a debate in which the measure of punishment functions as the yardstick of his suffering. Regular civil law procedures could be the second option and criminal procedures should be relegated again to their rightful place as ultima ratio. |
Praktijk |
SIB en Sandro’s weg naar herstel |
Auteurs | Manon Elbersen |
Auteursinformatie |
Praktijk |
Nieuwe pilot Eigen Kracht-conferentie bij Huiselijk Geweld, code geel |
Auteurs | Hilleke Crum |
Auteursinformatie |
Diversen |
Aankondiging studiedag‘Slachtoffers en herstelrecht: op zoek naar een evenwicht’ |