Court Issues And Victims

Court Issues and Victims’ Rights
Kimberly Smith
CJA/394
Instructor: Roy Diaz
April 6, 2015

Court Issues Analysis
According to Muraskin and Roberts (2009), one strong current that arose throughout the concluding part of the twentieth century was the mission for individual protection, stability, and hazard lessening in a then randomly unsafe biosphere. Crime deterrence curriculums on a social level challenge the communal origins or communal circumstances that breed chaos. Victimization deterrence approaches have much more meek objectives: to decrease the chances of ferocity and robbery confronted by precise persons, small groups, and societies. Profitable interests have learned that crime victims constitute an important group of patrons of possessions and amenities that supposedly will help diminish the hazards of being maltreated bodily, emotionally, or economically, and rapidity retrieval. The market will assuredly enlarge for futuristic persecution deterrence gadgetry and sequestered security, defense administration, and loss deterrence amenities. Previously, the positions of law enforcement agencies, sheriff’s departments, and other local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies are reinforced by an increasing number of security advisors, sequestered private eyes, and individual bodyguards along with night watchmen, store private eyes, hotel private eyes, chauffeurs, even doormen.
Antitheft strategies previously thrive and will become even more ordinary. Alarm systems are being vended as typical apparatus on cars, ships, and novel homes. Satellite tracking and retrieval systems and license plate recognition strategies that now assistance to recover stolen cars will be used to find entrenched computer chips and to re-claim all kinds of valued possessions and even locate lost peoples. Electronic observing systems, scrutiny cameras, preprogrammed cell phones, and crisis transmitters will safeguard chiefly defenseless groups, such as maltreated females with guidelines of safety against their separated companions, along with latchkey children.
Court Issues Analysis
Insurance companies that have conventionally sold strategies that safeguard patrons against damages from viciousness and robbery now endorse rules that safeguard fearful persons from the possible costs rising from individuality theft, abductions for payoff, and even terrorist attacks (Muraskin & Roberts, 2009, p. 205).
The rising popularity of gated communities epitomizes how commercial interests can package and sell peace of mind for economic gain. There is a growing demand for such living arrangements by people who feel the need to withdraw from the chaotic existence of urban dwellers into exclusive and isolated low-risk environments in which the threats posed by burglars, robbers, rapists, and auto thieves can be minimized. In the early 1990s, about 30,000 gated communities across the country housed an estimated four million residents, as personal security became one of the highest priorities of home buyers. By 2001, a Census Bureau survey projected that about seven million households, or roughly six percent of the nation’s total, lived behind walls and fences; four million of these residents enjoyed the extra degree of protection afforded by limited access mechanisms, controlled by either guards or key cards or entry codes. The siege mentality of defensible space against outsiders who do not belong will pass for a sense of community in the early decades of the twenty-first century.
Similarly, Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) have been set up nationwide by real estate interests, merchants’ associations, and community organizations to attract and reassure apprehensive customers that they will be safe and secure while in the presence of uniformed guards in these reclaimed sections of town. When people venture out from their fortified sanctuaries to

Court Issues Analysis shop or trail relaxation activities, groups of sequestered security forces and banks of scrutiny cameras watch over them (Muraskin & Roberts, 2009, p. 205). In the recent past, victims suffered from neglect, now the potential is developing for some victims to receive first-class, VIP treatment, whereas others continue to be relegated to the status of second-class citizens. This troubling problem of double standards within American society does not have an appropriate, evocative, widely accepted name. It may best be referred to as differential access but is also called class privilege and dual systems. The term “differential” is preferable because it is more accurate; double or dual implies only when two distinct systems operate in reality, usually there are several systems: a top track, a bottom track and one or more gradations in between. The phrase “class privilege accentuates the importance of wealth and power, but it overlooks stratification and discrimination” based on gender, race, disability, and age as well. Differential or dual systems and class privilege in other areas of American society have been studied extensively.
The persistent pattern in each of these areas is that the affluent benefit from the best goods and services that modern technology can deliver and money can buy. Differential access to justice has been the subject of a great deal of interest, research, and debate. Some argue that in the United States, the country is run by laws, not men, and that justice is blind, but others work to expose and put an end to the thinly disguised continuation of the long-standing practice of differential access to justice, which leads to double standards (Muraskin & Roberts, 2009, p. 212).
Differential access to justice could become more unconcealed, in the sense that the way cases will be determined will depend even more on the victim’s status and the offender’s place in

Court Issues Analysis the social order. The victimization of some people will continue to be taken much more seriously than the harming of others. When significant members of humanity turn to the legal system for redress, they will receive a more acceptable and helpful reply than they do now. When the inadequate possessions of marginal members of humanity are stolen, or when they are beaten, robbed, or raped, the same old hard-hearted, impersonal assembly-line discarding of their cases will take place. The current trend toward a high-tech service economy coupled with deindustrialization is bringing about unescapable long-term structural unemployment for those lacking the necessary skills. That could further separate the population into a flourishing upper class, stressed middle class, and growing remaining population. Contained within run-down inner-city neighborhoods and scattered pockets of poverty in outlying districts, these victims of economic dislocations will be viciously preyed upon by even more desperate people who live among them. Their existence will be written off as unimportant, and their lives-and-death struggles will be deemed private matters not worthy of governmental intervention. If the authorities turn their backs on these victims of poor-on-poor crimes, the profoundly alienated residents in these areas will be forced to defend their lives and possessions as best they can. They will be driven routinely to impose their own brands of on-the-spot street justice vigilante style (Muraskin & Roberts, 2009, p. 213).
In my state of N.Y. there is the Victim Information & Notification Everyday system. This is a 24-hour, 7-days-a-week computerized provision which offers facts and announcement warnings to victims for inmates in the custody of the New York City Department of Correction and the New York State Department of Correctional Services. Victims can register to be informed by phone or e-mail of a criminal’s release from imprisonment. This is a very good system to have
Court Issues Analysis in place, especially for the victims that have been raped, or have had the lives of their loved ones taken away by a criminal. This can also be a frightening experience knowing someone dangerous is being released back into society (N.Y. County District Attorney’s Office). These are some of the crime victim rights in my state depending upon the type and disposition of the case: a victim may be entitled to:
Safeguard from bullying, bodily injury, or other types of bullying, with the option of an Order of Protection from the court.
Safeguard from boss discharge or consequences for attendance at an illegal action as long as the boss is informed at least one day in advance. Wages, nevertheless, may be withheld for time spent attending the criminal action.
Monetary reimbursement from the New York State Office of Victim Services.
Recover stolen possessions held as evidence except there is a persuasive purpose for retaining it.
Make a statement to the Department of Probation for consideration by the judge when decisive the defendant's sentence.
Appeal reimbursement as part of a defendant's sentence.
Make an oral declaration to the court at the defendant's sentencing.
Announcement of the final disposition of the case.
Make a written or oral statement to the New York State Division of Parole for consideration when decisive whether to parole an inmate from a state correctional facility.

Court Issues Analysis
I personally would not change these rights in my state. So far they make sense to me. Other states may or may not have the same rights for victims but at least the victims know that their voices will be heard in a court of law.

Reference(s)
Muraskin, R., & Roberts, A. R. (2009). Visions for Change: Crime and Justice in the Twenty-First Century (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.
New York County District Attorney’s Office retrieved from http://manhattanda.org/victims-rights-guidelines