Families 'to have voice in court'

[Monkey see Monkey Do]

Families of manslaughter and murder victims in England and Wales should be allowed to tell the courts of their grief, ministers say.

A government consultation paper will propose bereaved relatives address the judge after the conviction but before the sentencing of a killer.

Families could speak in person or via a lawyer or "victims' advocate".

The Victim Support charity and lawyers expressed doubts about how much effect it would have on sentencing in reality.

The government said the move will be trialled in five courts from April and the results will be closely monitored.

(...)

Judges already take into account the affect on victims. A victim impact statement - a written statement from relatives taken by police - is presented to the judge before sentencing.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4202618.stm

[tjwmason]

1. I'm far from certain about this.

It strikes me as pandering to the emotional Mailesque side. It has always struck me that justice has to be more objective than a bereaved relative can ever be.

The legal editor of the Torygraph has a good article opposing it - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/09/01/nlaw01.xml

[Briar]

2. Yes I agree

of course it is. It's throwing bones to the right and their inability to see past revenge and retribution too. Which the BBC has been doing too, with their "visiting royal" treatment of that insane, fascist sheriff from Arizona who wants us to arm our police and feed prisoners on 7p a day.

And what about the victims who have no one to speak up for them, or those that secretly the Daily Mail mob think should be killed? Will murderers of hate-figures wind up getting a state pension and a medal of slaughtering them?

There is a difference between revenge and the objective administration of justice. Erode that difference and we slide down the slippery slope towards capital punishment, vigilanteism, lynch mobs, witch hunts.