r 

r 

\ 

" 

i 

i 

I 

l 

l~ irrb 

i~ 

I~ ! 

, U.S. Department of Justice 

Bureau of Justice Sta.tisties 

________________________________________________ '. • "', • ~ ..~ , __________ • C< ~~~,iII ~". 

New State Laws and the System's Response 

Victim and Witness Assistance 

Traditionally, the criminal justice 

system in this country has been offenderoriented, focusing on the apprehension, 

prosecution, punishment and rehabilitation 

of wrong doers. Victims and witnesses 

have been considered only when they play 

a role in the identification and prosecution of offenders. The justice system 

cannot function without tire assistance 

and cooperation of victims and witnesses, 

yet little if any recognition has been given' 

to their rights and less has been done to , assist them in overcoming the frustrations 

and economic sacrifices that involvement 

in criminal proceedings causes. 

This attitude has begun to change in 

the last decade, particularly in the last 

few years. A strong national victim and 

witness assistance movement has had 

remarkable success in establishing programs to assist victims and witnesses 

and in increasing the public's awareness 

of their problems and rights. Hundreds 

of local assistance programs have been 

established throughout the country to 

respond to the special needs of crime 

victims and witnesses. Community organizations, church groups, bar associations, service ,groups and national lobbying 

groups have beel1 active in the field. At . the national level the President last year 

appointed a Task Force on Victims of 

.ICrime and the Congress enacted the Federal Victim and Witness Protection Act 

of 1982. 

State legislatures have been active in 

The administration of American 

criminal justice has acquired a new 

focus: victim and witness assistance. 

In seeking the cooperation of victims 

and witnesses, criminal justice agencies 

are increasingly sensitive to the need of 

victims for information, notification, 

compensation, participation, and simple 

understanding. Concerns of victims, 

witnesses, and their extended families 

are here framed in the context of issues 

treated by the Bureau of Justice 

Statistics over the past decade-

(1) developing computer-based 

information systems .in support of 

operational law enforcement agencies, 

(2) acquiring statistical data for 

national purposes from such systems 

and from other administrative records, 

and (3) assuring the privacy and 

security of data present in such systems 

and records. 

When the expectations of the victim 

assistance movement are reviewedexpectations best summarized in 

the December 1982 report of the 

neceSsary,however, to ensure that the 

broad scope of victim/witness concerns 

are met in a comprEihensive and effective 

manner in all jurisdictions. 

May 1983 

President's Task Force on Victims of 

Crime-it is clear that a substantial 

alteration is expected in the practices 

of police, prosecutors, judges, probation 

and parole officials, members of the 

bar, and health and support agencies. 

Requirements for notifying victims of 

the status of their cases, for reflecting 

the views and experiences of victims, 

and for facilitating the participation of 

victims at each stage of the criminal 

proceeding will place new burdens on 

both law enforcement and social 

service agencies. Policymakers at all 

levels of government as well as the 

major participants in the criminal 

justice system-law enforcement, 

courts, and corrections-will need to 

ponder their responses to the 

expectations of the victim assistance 

movement. 

On the next page is a statement by 

Lois Haight Herrington, Assistant 

Attorney General Designate. 

Steven R. Schlesinger 

Director 

witnesses. To ,ensure program effectiveness, such data must be accurate, 

complete and timely. 

! responding to victim and witness needs. 

Legislatures in 38 states have enacted 

measures to provide compensation to 

victims of crime. Others have enacted 

specific authority for courts to order 

criminal offenders to make restitution to 

their victims. states have also enacted 

legislation to' assist victims and witnesses 

in understandil,lg and participating in the 

criminal justice process. A few states 

have enacted comprehensive legislation 

recognizing a "bill of rights" for crime 

victims and witnesses. Further efforts are 

The implementation of new programs in 

this area will impose substantial operating 

demands upon all coml?onents of the 

criminal justice system. For this reason, 

it is critical th~t prompt recognition be 

given to the technical, administrative and 

policy changes which may be required in 

order to ensure that new programs meet 

the objectives established in (lurrent and 

future vicUm/witness legislation. 

There will also be an added demand for 

statistical information about criminal 

victimization and victim/witness programs 

for use in research and plal1fling as well as 

in evaluating existing programs and 

services. Since the mission of the Bureau 

of Justice Statistics includes the 

collection and production of statistiCal 

data of this type, this agenl!y is interested 

in the victim/witness movement and has 

monitored its progress. 

Specifically, the new programs will 

require rapid availability of information 

describing the criminal justice process and 

the individuals involved as victims' and/or 

Provision must be made also to ensure 

that policies regulating data disclosure are 

modified where necessary to best balance 

the data needs of 'Victim/witness progl1ams 
t 

We as a nation are faced with a 

dangerous and often deadly menace. It affects everyone of us regardless 

of our age, race, gender or economic 

group. While some are more vulnerable 

than others, none of us is immune, no 

matter who we are or where we live. 

This threat is violent crime. 

Every 23 minutes one of us is murdered. Every 6 minutes a woman is 

raped. While you read this, two 

Americans will be robbed and another 

two will be shot or stabbed or seriously 

beaten. Yet only 9% of the crimes 

reported to police in four major states 

resulted in a criminal going to jail or 

prison. These numbers capture our attention, but when we focus on the 

numbers, we forget the central fact 

that for every statistic there are 

and the privacy interests of individual 

victims and witnesses. 

This Bulletin is intended to provide an overview of new legislative programs 

in the states which respond to the needs 

of victims and witnesses. It describes 

those programs that provide financial 

assistance to victims and witnesses as well as programs that recognize the rights 

of victims and witnesses and seek 1:0 protect them and help them to understand 

the criminal justice process and their 

role in it. 

The Bulletin also discusses some of 

the informational ramifications of the new programs, both in terms of their immediate impact on law enforcement agencies, as well as their possible long-range 

influence on the development of criminal 

justice information systems. The final 

section of the brief discusses some of 

the security and privacy questions raised 

by the information impact of the new initiatives. 

This Bulletin is not intended to, and 

does not, present a comprehensive or indepth description or analysis. Rather, 

the Bulletin presents a brief summary 

of relevant law and policy and a brief 

analysis of relevant policy issues. Accordingly, the issues posed are not explored 

in great detail. 

Overview of legislation 

to aid victims 

and witnesses 

Financial assistance programs 

The majority of the states have enacted 

legislation providing some form of financial assistance for crime victims who 

suffer economic loss--medical bills, 

loss of income or earning capacity or 

lost money or property. These legislative 

reforms have included principally crime 

victim compensation programs which 

establish state funds to compensate cl'ime 

victims in specified circumstances, and 

victims whose personal tragedies should 

be the focus of our concern. 

Untold hours and uncounted millions 

of dollars have been spent trying to 

understand and reform the criminal. 

Yet often little or nothJng has been 

done to assist the innocent victim. 

When a child is brutalized, when an elderly person is robbed and knocked to 

the ground breaking a hip, when a 

woman is raped and tortured, their lives are forever changed. In a moment or an hour of terror honest people lose 

property; suffer injuries that may last a 

lifetime; sustain physical scars that 

may mar them forever; become 

incapacitated and unable to work; or, in 

the most tragic cases, leave behind a family to mourn, pay funeral expenses 

and wait years to see the killer tried 

restitution programs under which offenders are required to reimburse their victims. 

A few states have enacted legislation 

giving victims access to revenue realized 

by offenders because of publicity about 

their crimes. Other states have enacted a variety of legislative initiatives aimed 

at reducing the financial burden of court 

appearances by victims and witnesses. 

The following sections briefly describe 

these legislative reforms. 

Victim compensation programs 

At least 38 states have enacted legislation providing for compensation of victims 

of violent crimes under specified circumstances. Payments are made from stateadministered funds upon application by 

eligible claimants. Payment does not 

depend upon the arrest and conviction 

of the offender and there is no need for 

the claimant to secure a civil judgment. 

Coverage generally extends to both 

victims and dependents of victims, and 

the laws generally define both terms 

broadly. Most of the statutes condition 

eligibility on the victim's having reported 

the crime to the police and some also 

require that the victim have cooperated 

in the investigation and prosecution of 

the case. Commonly, the laws require 

the claimant tf? show financial hardship. CompensatlOn generally is provided 

for unreimbursed medical expenses, funeral 

expenses, loss of earnings and support 

of dependents of deceased victims. Property loss generally is not reimbursed. A 

few states provide compensation for such 

additional expenses as psychiatric services 

occupational training and required house- ' 

hold services. Most of the laws set a ceiling on the amount of recovery by an individual claimant, in a few states up to 

$50,000, but more commonly in the range 

of $10,000 to $15,000. 

Most of the victim compensation programs are financed from general revenue funds, althoug'h some are financed in whole or in part from offender assessments. 

2 

and brought to justice. People are victimized in their homes or on the 

street and then the more insidious 

victimization begins when the criminal 

justice system starts to grind away at 

them. 

This indifference to the suffering of 

the innocent must stop. We must 

restore a balance to a system that tries 

to be both responsive and fair but is 

often neither. We must bear in mind 

that when we take the justice out of 

the criminel justice system we ieave 

behind a system that serves only the 

criminal. 

Lois Haight Herrington 

Chairman, President's Task 

Force on Victims of Crime; 

Assistant Attorney General 

Designate 

Some states have created new agenci('<; 

to administer the programs, while others 

have incorporated the programs in existing 

administrative structures or designated 

existing agencies (such as the courts) to 

administer the programs. 

Restitution 

Restitution is a sanction imposed 

by the court upon an offender who has 

been apprehended and convicted. As a condition of probation or in addition 

to incarceration, the offender is ordered 

to compensate the victim for injury or 

loss caused by the offense. 

Although judicial authority to order 

restitution has long been explicitly established by legislation in many states and 

is generally thought to be inherent in the 

sentencing power of criminal courts, it 

has been sparsely utilized as a sanction 

until recently. In the past few years, 

however, pressure from victims'rights 

groups and other factors have caused a 

marked increase in the utilization of courtordered restitution. In the states without 

victim compensation programs, restitution 

may be the only practicable means by 

which a victim can obtain any financial 

assistance and, in virtually every state, 

it is the only means of recovering for 

property loss or damage without going 

t~ court. a~d obtaining a civil judgment (sInce VIctIm compensation laws do not cover property loss). 

Most state laws authorizing restitution 

permit the court to impose restitution or not in its discretion. A few laws make 

restitution mandatory in certain cases, 

and others require the court to consider 

restitution as a condition to probation 

and in some cases to state the reasons for not ordering restitution. 

A significant problem with the increased use of restitution is the additional expense 

to court systems, particularly the cost 

of administrative follow-up to insure that 

restitution orders are not ignored by offenders. A few states (including Wiscon-

'. ..' • it' 4.' • ';. .' ..' • " • ~ ~... '. .. " ~ .. .." ~ 

sin and Maryland) impose a surcharge on convicted offenders to support court 

administration of the restitution program. 

Lien on offender profits 

A number of states (including Georgia, 

Illinois, New YOl'k, Oklahoma, South 

Carolina and Tennessee) have enacted 

legislation granting victims access to 

income generated by offenders as a result 

of publicity about their crimes. The 

legislation generally provides that any 

profits made by an offender through 

to a subpoena in a criminal case and 

would require the employer to compensate 

the employee for time lost in court appearances. The Wisconsin statute protects 

the employee's job but does not require 

the employer to pay for time lost in court 

appearances unless the crime is workrelated. The Illinois law specifically 

states that it does not require the employer 

to pay for lost time. 

Recognition of the rights of vi~:lms 

and witnesses 

consider the extent of the injury to the 

victim in imposing sentence. Some states 

(California, for example) permit the victim 

to make an oral presentation in court; 

in other states the presentence report 

is required to include a "victim impact 

statement" prepared by the victim or a probation officer. Indiana law permits 

the victim to offer his views on any recommended plea bargain. California permits 

victims to appear personally or by counsel 

at parole hearings and requires the parole 

board to consider the victim's statement 

books, articles, movies or other publications In addition to pl'oviding financial assisexploiting the criminal offense shall tance to victims and witnesses, most states 

in reaching a parole decision. South Carolina requires the victim's recommendations 

to be considered before an offender is 

admitted to a pretrial intervention program. 

be paid into an escrow fund to cover have enacted bills that seek to assist such 

successful civil judgments by victims persons in their dealings with the criminal 

of the crime. Victims are given periodic justice system. These reforms include 

notice of the existence of the fund. victim and witnes.~ notification, protection 

~omm~nl~, if no v~c~im ci,-:i1 action is of witnesses from intimidation, providing 

Protection of victims and witnesses 

from intimidation 

flIed wlthtn a speCifIed perlOd, the funds counselor ombudsmen for victims facili- are paid into the state's victim compensation tating the participation and impac't of Intimidation of victims and witnesses 

fund. victims in criminal proceedings and in- to prevent or discourage them from cooperating in the prosecution of criminal cases 

has long been a widespread problem. Return of seized property 

At least one state (Kansas) has enacted 

legislation to expedite the return to victims of recovered property. Commonly 

such property is retained as evidence until 

the prosecution of the case is concluded--Il. 

period of months in many cases. The Kansas law provides that the seized property 

may be photographed and then returned 

to the victim/owner. The photograph, 

with a description of the property endorsed on it, is authenticated under oath by the 

investigating police officer and is subsequently admissible in evidence. 

Increased witness fees 

In most states witness fees are so low as to be little more than symbolic--

commonly $5 to $10 a day and in some states as low as 50 cents a day. These 

modest fees do not begin to compensate 

witnesses for the financial burden involved 

in being a witness in a criminal case, 

particularly if the case is lengthy and 

involves numerous appearances. To reduce 

this burden, several states (including 

Florida, Nebraska and Nevada) have enacted 

legislation to significantly increase witness 

fees and other states (including California 

and New York) have similar legislative 

proposals pending. The California proposal 

would incrElase witness fees to $35 per 

day and the New York proposal would 

set the fee at the prevailing minimum 

wage and would include parking expenses. 

Employer obligations to victims 

and witnesses 

Other states (including Hawaii, Illinois, 

New York and Wisconsin) have enacted or are considering legislation to protect 

the jobs of victims and witnesses while 

they are participating in criminal proceedings. The Hawaii proposal would prohibit an employer from dismissi!lg or penalizing 

an employee absent from work in response 

creased use of depositions in lieu of court 

appearances. 

Most states have enacted one or more 

of these reforms and several (including 

California, Wisconsin, Washington, Oklahoma, New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts and Maryland) have enacted or are considering comprehensive legislation 

establishing a "bill of rights" for crime 

victims and wi tnesses. These omnibus 

measures commonly include all or most 

of the rights and protections discussed 

in this section. 

Victim notification programs 

This legislation is aimed at keeping 

the victim informed of the status of court 

proceedings against the offender. In some 

states the notice requirement applies 

to all major activities or decisions in the 

case; in others it applies only to specified 

In 1980, the American Bar Association 

recomme .• Jed a model statute to help 

prevent such intimidation. The model 

has provided the basis for anti-intimidation 

legislation in Pennsylvania, Rhode Island 

and California and at the federal level. 

This legislation makes it a crime to 

attempt maliciously to prevent or discourage a witness from cooperating in a criminal prosecution. It also expressly authorizes criminal courts to issue protective 

orders forbidding defendants or other 

parties from communicating with or coming near witnesses and, in extreme cases, 

authorizes courts to order law enforcement 

agencies to protect threatened witnesses. 

The legislation is much broader and tighter 

than previous intimidation statutes and 

closes loopholes that previously existed. 

events such as plea negotiations, sentenc- Counsel for victims 

ing or parole decisions. The New York 

proposal would require the police officer Victims and witnesses are not officially 

or prosecuting attorney to provide the parties to criminal cases and thus have 

victim with a victim notice form on which no right to be represented by counsel 

he may indicate which events and decisions even if their conduct is drawn into question 

he wishes to receive notice of. The Cali- during the proceedings. To alleviate 

fornia law provides that victims must this situation, California has enacted 

receive notice of an offender's sentencing and New York is considering legislation 

hearing and, upon request, may receive to allow the victim to retain counsel 

30 days' notice of the offender's parole (at his expense) if his conduct is alleged 

hearing. Ohio and Iowa have proposals to be improper in the course of a criminal 

pending that would require the prosecutor proceeding. The New York law would 

to notify a victim of his intention to recom- permit the victim to be represented by 

mend a plea bargain. Connecticut law counsel at any stage of a prosecution 

provides for notices to victims of sentenc- where evidence is offered concerning 

inghearings in major felony cases. the victim's sexual conduct or where 

any other improper, culpable or illegal 

Victim participation in criminal 

proceedings 

Some states have enacted laws that 

go a step further than victim notification 

by ensuring that the victim may participate in specified decisions affecting the 

disposition of the case. Most of this legiSlation pertains to sentencing. It allows, 

or in some states requires, the court to 

3 

conduct by the victim is alleged. Under 

both laws, the victim's counsel would 

be permitted to appear and offer legal 

arguments but would not be allowed to 

call or cross-examine witnesses. 

Use of depositions 

At least four states (Connecticut, 

Florida, Missouri and New York) have 

.• 
- t:i: . .. ( - - j ~ ... '. \. . -- ' . . 

recently enacted legislation to encourage 

the use of depositions in lieu of courtroom 

appearances for certain victims and witnesses. The Florida law applies to children 

who have been sexually abused or battered. 

Other laws apply to mentally disturbed 

or seriously injured witnesses. In some 

cases, the deposition may be videotaped. 

The purpose of the laws is to spare unstable 

or traumatized victl.ns or witnesses the 

emotional strain of a public courtroom 

appearance. The deposition is sworn 

and is subject to cross-examination and 

the use of videotaping permits the judge 

and jury to observe the deponent's demeanor 

and appearance. 

Ombudsman for victims 

As noted above, numerous states have provid~d financial assistance and other 

forms of protection and assistance to 

victims and witnesses, and other states 

have sought to help vietims understand 

and participate in criminal proceedings 

by providing notice of the status of proceedings and allowing them to participate 

in certain actions such as plea bargaining 

and sentencing. Oklahoma has gone a 

step further by providing for the appointment of victim/witness advocates to advise 

victims and witnesses of their rights in 

relation to tlJe criminal justice process 

and to coordinate the operation of existing 

victim and witness programs. The Oklahoma law allows each district attorney 

to appoint a victim/witness coordinator 

to oversee implementation of the Oklahoma Victims' Bill of Rights. These rights 

include notification, participation, protection and information regarding financial 

assistance and other social services available to victims or witnesses. 

Legislation pending in Ohio would allow 

designated advocacy groups to hire attorneys to assist crime victims by advising 

them of their rights and available services 

and keeping them informed of the status 

of their cases. 

The aim of this type of legislation 

is to facilitate more extensive recognition 

of victims' rights and greater utilization 

of programs to aid victims and witnesses, 

as well as to improve their understanding 

of the criminal justice system. 

Special-victim legislation 

Some of the more common types of 

"special victim" legislation include the 

following: 

The elderly 

The elderly are more vulnerable to 

crime and generally less able to recover 

from injuries or recoup financial losses. 

State legislatures have sought to assist 

elderly victims by establishing victim 

assistance programs to respond to the 

particular needs of the elderly. They 

have also sought to protect elderly persons 

against criminal conduct by stiffening 

criminal laws and procedures relating 

to crimes against the elderly. For example, a few states (including Nevada, Rhode 

Island and Wisconsin) have enacted'laws 

that require or permit the imposition of 

an additional penalty of up to five years 

for an offense against an elderly person. 

Other states (California and New York) 

have prohibited plea bargaining for offenders charged with crimes against the elderly. Still other states have created a new 

criminal offense--to abuse, neglect or 

exploit the elderly. Nevada and Vermont 

go even further by subjecting to criminal 

fines any persons who have knowledge 

of abuse or neglect of the elderly by others 

and fail to report it to authorities. 

Domestic violence 

State legislatures have sought to deal 

with the pervasive problem of domestic 

violence in a variety of ways, including 

principally authorizing the issuance of 

protective orders, funding programs to 

provide domestic violence services and 

requiring better recordkeeping about the 

incidence of domestic violence. 

Numerous states (including Alaska, 

Arizona, California, Connecticut, Georgia, 

Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, 

North Carolina, New Jersey, Pennsylvania 

and Wisconsin) have laws that explicitly 

authorize courts to issue protective orders 

in domestic violence cases to prevent 

further incidents. Most of the statutes 

allow any family or household member 

to petition for a protective order and 

commonly the order not only enjoins violent conduct but may also prohibit one 

party from coming near the other or award 

exclusive possession of a family residence 

to one party. Violation of a protective 

In addition to enacting legislation aim- injunction can result in punishment as 

ed at victims and witnesses as a class, a contempt of court and in several states 

many states have recently enacted some (including North Carolina and Minnesota) 

form of legislation to protect or benefit can result in immediate arrest on a miscertain classes of individuals felt to be demeanor charge. 

especially vulnerable to crime. These Other states (including Florida, Indiana, 

"special victims" include the elderly, spouses,· Kansas, Michigan, Nevada, Ohio, Oklachildren, victims of sexual assaults, the homa, Texas, Washington and Wisconsin) 

handicapped or even police. Legislation have enacted legislation establishing and 

to aid these special victims has taken funding domestic violence services, such 

numerous forms, such as creating new as shelter facilities, counseling and hotcrimes (child abuse or abuse of the elder- lines. Some of the programs are funded 

ly), instituting special procedures (protec- from general revenues, but some are fundtive orders for domestic violence situa- ed from such sources as marriage license 

tions) or setting up programs to meet surcharges, divorce surcharges, or assessthe needs of special victims (such as rape ments against offenders convicted of dovictims or chila abuse victims). mestic abuse offenses. 

4 

Several states (including Connecticut, 

Illinois, Kentucky, Michigan, New York, 

Ohio and Washington) have enacted legislation to require more complete recordkeeping of domestic violence cases. Although 

domestic violence is known to be a serious 

problem, the extent of the problem has 

not been very well documented. This 

is due principally to the fact that most 

domestic violence situations are resolved 

informally without arrest and are not 

recorded by police agencies. The new 

laws require law enforcement agencies 

to maintain written records of all incidents 

of domestic violence encountered or reported to them. In some states (New York 

and Washington) the courts are given re- sponsibility for collecting data on the 

incidence of domestic violence. The aim 

of the legislation is to encourage police 

to treat domestic violence cases more seriously, to increase public awareness of the problem of domestic violence and 

to document more accurately the magnitude and nature of the problem. 

Sexual assault 

A number of state legislatures have 

enacted measures providing increased 

services and assistance for victims of 

sexual assault. New Mexico has enacted 

a law which requires the development 

of a statewide comprehensive plan to 

deal with the prosecution of sexual crimes 

and the treatment of victims. The legislation provides for free medical and psychological treatment for victims of sexual 

assaults. A victim need not pursue criminal prosecution of a suspect in order to 

qualify for treatment and the law covers 

all treatment needed, not just the initial 

examination. Florida, Maryland, North 

Carolina and Oklahoma also have enacted 

legislation to provide medical services 

for victims of sex crimes, although these 

lavls are aimed more at assisting law enforcement agencies in gathering evidence 

for prosecution than at providing treatment for victims. 

California and Pennsylvania have enacted legislation providing that communications between the victim of a sexual 

assault and a counselor are privileged 

and may not be disclosed or admitted 

as evidence in court. The privilege covers 

information concerning the victim's prior 

sexual experiences and personal beliefs 

and feelings, but does not cover information about the alleged offense. 

Federal actions 

The Federal Victim and Witness 

Protection Act of 1982 

On October 12, 1982, Congress enacted 

an omnibus measure to protect and assist 

victims and witnesses of federal offenses. 

The legislation expressly states that the 

Federal Government should exercise a 

leadership role in the victim/witness movement and one of the stated purposes of 

the law is to provide a model for legislation for state and local governments. 

The federal law: (1) provides for inclusion of a victim impact statement in presentence reports; (2) makes it a felony 

offense to threaten, intimidate or otherwise tamper with a victim, witness or 

informant; (3) makes it a felony offense 

to retaliate against a victim, witness or 

informant for giving. information about 

an offense or testifying in a criminal proceeding; (4) imposes a mandatory condition 

on the release of defendants prior to trial 

or pending sentencing or appeal that the 

defendant refrain from committing victim 

harassment offenses; (5) authorizes federal 

courts to issue protective orders to prevent 

harassment of victims or Witnesses; and 

(6) provides explicit authority for federal 

trial courts to order offenders to make 

restitution to victims and requires courts 

to state on the record the reasons for 

not ordering restitution. 

The legislation also requires the Attorney General to (1) report to Congress 

regarding any necessary law to prohibit 

offenders from deriving profits from publicity about their offenses, and (2) issue 

comprehensive federal guidelines for fair 

treatment of crime victims and witnesses. 

The President's Task Force 

on Victims of Crime 

On April 23, 1982, the President appointed a special Task Force on Victims 

of Crime. During 1982 the Task Force 

held hearings in Washington and in 5 cities 

across the country, receiving the testimony 

of almost 200 witnesses, including federal, 

state and local officials, professionals 

engaged in all aspects of victim and witness assistance and private organizations 

and individuals interested in the rights 

of victims and witnesses. Most important, 

the Task Force heard from some 60 victims 

of crime. 

In December 1982, the Task Force 

issued its final report setting out comprehensive and detailed recommendations 

for action at the federal, state, local and 

private levels to assist victims of crime 

and witnesses. The recommendations are 

far-ranging, including proposed actions by 

state and federal legislatures, criminal 

justice agencies and other agencies and 

groups such as hospitals, schools, bar 

associations, mental health facilities, the 

ministry and the private sector. The 

majority of the recommendations deal 

specifically with the recognition of the 

rights of victims and witnesses and the 

establishment and funding of the types of 

assistance and services discussed above. 

Additional recommendations address 

issues which are of primary concern to 

victims since they relate to the victim's 

perception of the functioning of the 

criminal justice system,. 

For example, the Task Force 

recommends the abolition of the 

controversial "exclusionary rule," which now operates to rend6r relevant evidence 

inadmissible in criminal trials if it was 

gathered as a result of impl'oper police 

conduct. Other recommendations would 

toughen bail laws, in part by allowing 

courts to deny bail to persons considered 

dangerous to the community. The Task 

Force also recommends the enactment of 

legislation to abolish parole and limit 

judicial discretion in sentencing, with the 

result that offenders would serve the full 

sentence imposed for their crimes reduced 

only by good time credits act4ally eftrned. 

The recommendations of the Task 

Force are the most complete yet issued 

on the subject of victim and witness assistance. Since they bear the authority and 

prestige of the President, they should 

add significant impetus to the victim/ 

witness movement. 

Information impact 

of victim and 

witness programs 

As evidenced by the above discussion of 

legislative activity, the victim/witness 

assistance movement has achieved 

remarkable momentum and is likely to 

grow. As also indicated, however, the 

implementation of the programs defined in 

existing new legislation imposes 

substantial new responsibilities upon the 

criminal justice system particul.arly as 

respects the timely production of data 

necessary to support program objectives. 

Specifically, many of the new laws 

require police agencies, prosecutors or 

probation officials to give notice to 

victims and witnesses concerning the 

status of criminal cases and scheduled 

court appearances. Other laws require 

that notice be given to victims of 

particular actions or decisions, such as 

plea bargains, sentence hearings or parole 

or probation hearings. Still other laws 

require law enforcement agencies to 

maintain records of all domestic incidents, 

even those resolved without arrest or 

other formal proceedings. 

To meet these notice and recordkeeping 

responsibilities law enforcement agencies 

in many jurisdictions are now required 

to collect more accurate and complete 

personal information about victims and 

witnesses and to maintain it in a more 

systematic manner. They also must maintain information about victim compensation programs in order to give required 

notice of the programs to claimants. 

Even where the responsibility for the administration of victim compensation programs is vested in other agencies, law 

enforcement agencies must provide or 

confirm information concerning the nature 

and circumstances of the offense and 

the cooperation of the victim to enable 

the administering agency to make eligibility decisions. Law enforcement agencies 

in some jurisdictions are required to advise 

victims of available services and they 

must acquire and maintain this information. Finally, pursuant to some new laws, 

courts and parole officials must collect 

and use information from victims at sentencing hearings and parole hearings. 

ThE',y also must bear the added burden 

of the increased use of restitution orders 

and provide the administrative machinery 

and information necessary to follow up 

restitution orders to ensure that they 

are complied with. 

In addition to these added o[?erational 

information requirements, law enforcement agencies will most likely bear a 

large share of the responsibility for collecting and perhaps collating and analyzing 

statistical data about crime victims necessary for such purposes as predicting and 

assessing the seriousness of crime from 

the victim's perspective, developing victim 

profiles for identifying potentially vulnerable victims, and developing and implementing new response programs, including 

educational programs to enable police 

officers to diagnose and treat crisis symptoms in victims. 

Some information of this type for some 

crimes is now collected by the Bureau 

of Justice Statistics as part of the National 

Crime Survey. These annual surveys 

include interviews with about 132,000 

individuals in a probability sample of 60,000 

households designed to collect comprehensive information about the circumstances 

and consequences of criminal victimization 

nationally. Information collected includes 

data about the crime as well as the victim's age, race, sex, marital status, education, employment and relationship to 

the offender. The survey also collects 

information about the consequences of 

the crime, including data about injuries, 

cost of medical attention, property loss 

and time lost from work. In addition, 

law enforcement agencies in some jurisdictions now routinely collect some limited 

statistical information about victims, 

such as age, sex and race. It seems certain 

tha t other agencies will need to collect 

such data and that other data elements 

will need to be collected, such as previous 

victimization experience, economic status, 

the relationship between the victim and 

the offender, and other data elements 

now included in the National Crime Survey. 

In the long run, the information needs 

of the victim/witness rights movement 

will have a significant influence on the 

development and structure of criminal 

justice information systems. Certainly, 

the notice requirements of the new laws 

will give added impetus to the implementation of automated systems that track 

the status of criminal cases through the 

justice system. They may also result in 

significantly restructured information 

systems that are indexed by victim and 

witness identity as well as by offender 

identity, particularly since some of the new laws require the maintenance of information about victims of offenses for which 

no offender has been identified or apprehended. Finally, the need for more statistical information about victims may necessitate the redesign of existing criminal 

justice statistical systems to facilitate 

the collection of data of the kind discussed 

above. 

5 ~~~ ________ ~_ ~ ______ --~ 

-------------------~ 
4 • 

Security and privacy considerations discharging statutory duties, criminal 

justice agencies should run little risk in 

Just as the criminal justice system releasing to them any requested informahas historically been offender-oriented, tion reasonably necessary in connection 

criminal justice information systems also with their duties. In the absence of an have been offendel·-oriented. So too have express law to the contrary, this probably 

state laws dealing with criminal records. could include the offender's criminal 

These laws apply principally, and in most history record where the counselor 

states exclusively, to criminal history ombudsman needs this information to 

records--to alphabetically indexed records assist a victim or witness in petitioning 

that identify individuals charged with for a protective order or in resisting re- criminal conduct and contain information lease of the offender on bail, probation 

about the progress of these offenders or parole, in states that permit victims 

through the criminal justice system. or witnesses to participate in this way 

Victim/witness programs require a in the criminal process. 

different type of data--data concerning A more difficult question arises when 

the identity and personal characteristics the requestor is a private organization 

of victims and witnesses. Since these performing victim/witness services or 

individuals have not been charged with assistance without statutory authorization. 

criminal offenses, information about them Literally hundreds of such organizations 

is not covered by most state criminal have sprung up around the country in re- record laws. A few states have laws gov- cent years. Typically, they provide specialerning intelligence and investigative data ized services or assistance to particular 

!hat mig~t apply to victim and v.:itness classes of victims (and, to a more limited 

mformatIon and a few have pu!>hc reco:d extent, to witnesses), including rape viclaws that ~'lould apply to such l?formatIon. tims, the elderly or children who have 

~ow~ver, m most states, qu~stlOns ~on,cern- been abused. Sometimes these organmg dlSclosure, use and securIty of victim izations are sought out by victims or witand ~itl!ess data are not c!early answered ne~es who can themselves provide some by eXlstmg la~. Statel:glslatures may: of the data to the organizations and can 

need to deal With these :ssues,by: enac~mg give their consent to the release of ad-

!lew measures or amendmg eXI~tmg cr!m- ditional data. More typically, however, ~nal ~ec~rd laws. ,In the meantime, crlm- the service organizations seek out the 

mal Justice agenCies may ~e called ~on victims and witnesses; and in order to 

!o resol,:e some new securl!y and privacy do this they apply to criminal justice agenIss~es wI!hout ~tatutory guidance. cies, principally to police agencies, for 

'1 he ~rlmar~ ISSue c~nt~rs on th: victim and witness identifying data and ~uthorltY, to dlSclose victim ,a~d witness addresses to enable them to contact per- ~nformat~on, and perhaps crlmma~ re,cord sons who may need their services. 

mformation ?-bo~t offend~rs! ~o victims Assuming that the state criminal recand to organlzatlOns and IndiViduals ord law does not cover such a disclosure 

p~ov:iding serv!ces and a~istance t~ ,. request, other state laws may provide vlct~m~ and wltl!esses •. Tlm.e~y a-:ailablbty the answer or guidance. As noted, some 

?f vI~~lm and, witness Ide~bflcatIo~ data states have public record laws that make 15 critical to Implementa,tI~n of assistance many criminal record files available to 

~d support programs. Similarly, the public. Other states have laws expressdisclosure of off~l!der recor~ data ~ay.be ly providing that the names and addresses 

?ecessary t,o faCilitate meanIng~ul victim of certain victims and/or witnesses shall 

mput to ,b~ an~ parole pr~ceedIngs. be made public. For example, California Whe~e vlcbm/wI~ness se~vlces are has a law making the names and addresses pro~lde? by pUbli~ agenCl:s pursuant to of all crime victims publicly available, 

leglSla!lve aut,horlty, the Issue o~ with the exception of the addresses of 

authority to dlSclose may be easily victims of sexual assaults. On the other 

resolv~d., Mo~t ~f the state lay-rs hand, some state laws expressly forbid establishin~ vlct~m compensation. , the public release of certain types of vicprograms (mcluding the laws of dcav~lf~r~la, tim information, typically personal inforKansas, Marylan?, New Y,ork an ,I,rgInIa) mation about rape or sexual assault vic- ~xp~essly aut?orlze and ,direct crlmmal tims. Other states have exemptions to 

Just!ce agencies to prOVide requested " , information to the agency administering their public ~ecord laws ~hat author,lze 

the program. Where such authority is not the ~Ylthholdmg of ~ert~m tYpes ?f Il!forexpressly stated, it may be considered to mat~on, ~uch as police Investigative mforbe implied. Similarly, the laws providing mation, If release of the data would cause 

for various kinds of notification to victims enumerated t~es ~f harm" such as an and witnesses of the progress of criminal unwarranted mvaSlOn of ~r1Vacy., The 

d' . t an 11 ed offe d U. S. Department of Justice has mterpretproce,e mgs agruns a e~ n er ed the federal Freedom of Information 

C?nstItute adequate authorlt~ for the, Actl and the federal Privacy Ace to permit 

dlSclosure of such necessary Informa~l~n. federal agencies to make selected discloThe same should be true of laws provldmg , " " , for the appointment of counsel and sures of victim IdentifICatIOn data. Agenombudsmen to assist victims and witnesses 

in applying for services and assistance and 

in dealing with the criminal justice 

process. Since these persons are 

IThe Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 

§552. . 

ZThe Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. §552a. 

6 

cies are instructed to balance the requestor's need for the data against the potential harm caused to the individual by the 

release. 

In the absence of statutory guidance, 

disclosure of victim and witness 

information will depend upon local agency 

policy and agency officials may need to 

follow a similar balancing-of-interests 

procedure. To date, there is little caSe 

law to guide them. No court has yet 

squarely resolved the question of whether a victim or witness has a privacy interest 

in personal identifying data that outweighs 

the public's interest in seeing the data or 

the state's public safety interest in 

supporting victim/witness programs. The 

Supreme Court has said that a rape victim 

does have a constitutional privacy interest 

in maintaining confidentiality and has 

suggested that a state law forbidding any 

disclosure of information concerning the 

identify of such victims would be 

constitutional.3 Other state and federal 

courts have upheld state statutes making 

certain other types of criminal justice 

data non-public, in,fluding cumulative 

criminal his~ories, non-contemporaneous 

arrest data, and i~telligence and 

investigative data. On the other hand, 

the S~reme Court's decision in Paul v. Davis has been widely interpreted to 

mean that there are no constitutional 

privacy interests that forbid the disclosure 

by criminal justice agencies of information about individuals arrested for 

criminal offenses. 

The import of these decisions seems to 

be that there is no constitutional interest 

that dictates agency policy with respect 

to disclosure of victim and witness 

information. The public (including victims 

and victim/witness support organizations) 

has a constitutionally based right to be 

informed about the operation of the 

criminal justice process. However, 

statutory or policy standards that limit 

the disclosure of particular types of 

records normally are permissible. It is 

likely that a reasoned policy forbidding or limiting the disclosure of victim or 

witness information based upon potential 

harm caused by disclosure would not be 

viewed by the courts as an unconstitutional impingement on the public's right to 

obtain information about the functioning 

of the criminal process. On the other 

hand, a soundly based policy of disclosing 

such information also probably would be 

3COX Broadcasting Corporation v. Cohn, 420 

U.S. 469 (1975). 

"Houston Chronicle Publishing Co. v. City of 

Houston, 531 S. W. 2d 177 (Tex. Ct. App. 

1975). 

s Menard v. Mitchell, 430 F.2d 486 (D.C. Cir. 

1970). 

6 Houston Chronicle case and Congressional 

News Syndicate v. Department of Justice, 

438 F .Supp. 538 (D.D.C. 1977). 

7424 U.S. 693 (1976). 

, ...... . ..... . '. (~ .' ." . 

viewed by the courts as constitutionally 

permissible. 

Victim and witness assistance organizations should be able to make strong policy 

arguments in favor of obtaining necessary 

information from criminal justice agencies. 

Although victims and witnesses arguably 

do have a privacy interest in maintaining 

the confidentiality 'of information about 

them, this interest may not be particularly 

compelling since for most crimes (sexual 

assaults and child abuse offenses are exceptions) identification as a victim or witness 

does not result in stigma, embarrassment or loss of opportunities. In addition, the 

degree of potential' harm caused by disclosure of victim or witness identification 

data to service organizations is slight, 

particularly if the organizations have 

procedures to protect the confidentiality 

of the information. Indeed, disclosure 

may serve the interests of the data subjects since the purpose of the organizations 

is to assist them and provide services 

to them. For these reasons, victim and 

witness organizations can argue persuasively that their identity and purpose entitle 

them to greater access rights than the 

public generally, and criminal justice agencies can defend policies that permit disclosure to such agencies of information 

that is not available to the public, including the news media. 

The Report of the President's Task 

Force on Victims of Crime did not deal 

directly with the issue of confidentiality of criminal justice agency data on victims, 

although it is clear that the Task Force 

expected data to be made available where 

necessary. The report did, however, include two recommendations raising secur- ity and privacy considerations of interest 

to criminal justice policymakers. In its 

recommendations for legislative action, 

the task force proposed that state criminal 

record laws be amended, if necessary, 

to make available to employers the sexual 

assault, child molestation or pornography 

arrest records of prospective and present 

employees whose work will bring them 

into regular contact with children. And 

in its recommendation for federal action, 

the task force recommended that a study 

be commissioned at the federal level to 

evaluate the juvenile justice system from 

the perspective of the victim, and urged 

specifically that reconsideration be given 

to policies supporting the sealing of juvenile records. In its commentary, the task 

force stated that the juvenile records 

of serious juvenile offenders should be 

available in adult criminal proceedings 

if the offender continues to commit crimes as an adult. This recommendation is consistent with research data now becoming 

available that indicates that juvenile misbehavior is a predictor of adult criminal 

conduct. 

Conclusions 

The victim/witness movement has 

achieved considerable success in the state 

legislatures in recent years. Little 

attention has been paid however, to the 

operational implications inherent in such 

programs or to the substantial financial 

and administrative responsibilities which 

programs impose on both the overall 

criminal justice system and those 

components having primary responsibility 

for the collection and analysis of 

information. 

In order to ensure the successful 

development of nationwide victim/witness 

programs therefore, it is critical that 

attention be directed at this time to the 

operational and policy implications 

new programs will have on existing 

criminal justice information systems and 

cap'.bilities. 

In particular, it would seem advisable 

for state legislatures and criminal justice 

record system administrators to give some consideration to the impact of the new programs on criminal justice record 

systems. These officials might also 

consider whether presently structured 

information systems and practices are adequate to collect and make available 

the kind of information necessary to 

support victim/witness programs and 

research. As in the case of all major 

program initiatives, major system changes 

may be necessary in order that the 

criminal justice system can effectively 

respond to the newly identified data 

requirements of expanded victim/witness 

programs. 

Other publications 

Victim/Witness Legislation: Considerations 

for Policymakers, American Bar Association, 

Section on Criminal Justice, 1800 M St., N,W., 

Washington, D.C. 20036. Sept. 1981. (The 

descriptions of state legislative programs set 

out in this issue brief are based largely on this 

pUblication. The publication contains the text 

of sample laws and an extensive bibliography.) 

Restitution to Victims of Personal and Household Crimes, Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. 

Department of Justice. 1980. 

Crime Victim Compensation: Program Models, National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice. 1980. 

Final Report of the President's Task Force 

on Victims of Crime, December 1980. 

7 --~-~-----

Bureau of Justice Statistics Bulletins are prepared principally by the staff of 

the Bureau. Carol B. Kalish, chief of 

policy analysis, edits the bulletins. 

Marilyn Marbrook, publications unit 

chief, administers their publication, 

assisted by Julie A. Ferguson and 

Lorraine Poston. This bulletin was prepared by Paul Woodard and Gary 

Cooper of SEARCH Group, Inc., under 

the direction of Carol G. Kaplan of 

BJS. 

NCJ-87934, May 1983 

-~~--~---
M 

Bureau of Justice Statistics reports 

(revised March 1983) 

Single copies are available free from the National 

Criminal Justice Reference Service, Box 6000, 

Rockville, Md. 20850 (use NCJ number to order). 

Postage and handling is charged for multiple 

copies (301/251-5595). 

Public-use tapes of BJS data sets and other 

criminal justice data are available from the Criminal 

Justice Archive and Information Network, P.O. 

Box 1240, Ann Arbor, Mich. 48106, (313n64-5199). 

National Crime Survey 

Criminal victimization In the U.S.: 

1980-81 changes based on new estimates 

(BJS technical report), NCJ-87577, 3/83 

1980 (final report), NCJ-84015, 4/83 

1979 (final report), NCJ-76710, 12/81 

1973-79 trends, NCJ-77639, 4/82 

BJS bulletins: 

Households touched by crime 1981 , 

NCJ-64406, 9/82 

Violent crime by strangers, NCJ-80829, 4/82 

Crime and the elderly, NCJ-79614, 1/82 

Victims of crime, NCJ-79615, 11/81 

Measuring crime, NCJ-75710, 2/81 

The National Crime Survey: Working papers, 

vol. I: Current and historical perspectives, NCJ-75374,8/82 

Crime against the elderly in 26 cities, 

NCJ-76706, 1/82 

The Hispanic victim, NCJ-69261, 11/81 

Issues in the measurement of crime, 

NCJ-74682,10/81 

Criminal victimization of Califomia reSidents, 

1974-77, NCJ-70944, 6/81 

RestHution to victims of personal and household 

crimes, NCJ-72770, 5/81 

Criminal victimization of Ngw York State 

reSidents, 1974-77, NCJ-70944, 9/80 

The cost of negligence: Losses from preventable 

household burglaries, NCJ-53527, 12n9 

Rape victimization In 26 American cities, 

NCJ-55878, 8n9 

Crimllial victimization in urban schools, 

NCJ-56396, 8n9 

Crime against persons in urban, suburban, and 

rural areas, NCJ-53551 , 7 n9 

An introduction to the National Crime Survey, 

NCJ-43732, 4n8 

Local victim surveys: A review of the issues, 

NCJ-39973, 8n7 

u.s. Department of Justice 

Bureau of Justice Statistics 

Washington, D.C. 20531 

National Prisoner Statistics 

BJS bulletins: 

Prisoners at midyear 1982, NCJ-84875, 11/82 

Prisoners In 1981, NCJ-82262, 5/82 

Prisoners 1925-81, NCJ-85861, 12/82 

Death-row prisoners 1981, NCJ-83191, 8/82 

Prisoners in State and Federal institutions on 

December 31, 1980 (final report), NCJ-80520, 7/82 

Capital punishment 1981 (final report), 

NCJ-86484, 4/83 

1979 survey of inmates of State correctional facilities 

and 1979 census of State correctional facilities 

(BJS bulletins): 

Prisoners and drugs, NCJ-87575, 3/83 

Prisoners and alcohol, NCJ-86223, 1/83 

Prisons and prisoners, NCJ-80697, 2/82 

Veterans in prison, NCJ-79632, 11/81 

Census of jails and survey of jail inmates: 

Jail inmates 1982 (BJS bulletin), NCJ-87161, 2/83 

Census of jails, 1978: Data for individuaf jails, 

vols. I-IV, Northeast, North Central, South, West; 

NCJ-72279-72282, 12/81 

Profile of jail inmates, 1978, NCJ-65412, 2/81 

Census of jails and survey of jail inmates, 1978, 

preliminary report, NCJ-55172, 5n9 

Parole and probation 

Characteristics of persons entering parole 

dUring 1978 and 1979, NCJ-67243, 4/83 

Probation and parole, 1981 (BJS bulletin), 

NCJ-83647, 8/82 

Characteristics of the parole population, 1978, 

NCJ-66479, 4/81 

Parole in the U.S., 1979, NCJ-69562,3/81 

Courts 

State court case load statistics: 

1977 and 1981 (BJS speciai report), 

NCJ-87587, 2/83 

State court organization 1980, NCJ-76711, 7/82 

State court model statistical dictionary, 

NCJ-62320, 9/80 

A cross-city comparison of felony case 

processing, NCJ-55171, 7n9 

Federal criminal sentencing: Perspectives of 

analysis and a design for research, NCJ-33683, 

1On8 

Variations in Federal criminal sentences, 

NCJ-33684, 10n8 

Federal sentencing pattems: A study of 

geographical variations, NCJ-33685, 10n8 

Predicting sentences in Federal courts: The 

feasibility of a national sentencing policy, NCJ-33686, 1On8 

State and local prosecution and civil attomey 

systems, NCJ-41334, 7 n8 

Official Business 

Penalty for Private Use $300 

Expenditure and employment 

Justice expenditure and employment In the 

U.S., 1979: Preliminary report, NCJ-73288, 1/81 

expenditure and employment data for the 

criminal justice system, 1978, NCJ-6&, 182, 7/81 

Trends In expendllure and employment ,iata for 

the criminal justice system, 1971-77, 

NCJ-57463, 1/80 

Privacy and security 

Computer crime: 

Computer security techniques, 

NCJ-84049, 9/82 

Bectronic funds transfer systems and crime, 

NCJ-83736, 9/82 

Legislative resource manual, NCJ-78890,9/81 

Expert witness manual, NCJ-77927, 9/81 

Criminal justice, NCJ-61550, 12n9 

Privacy and security of criminal history 

information: 

A guide to researctl and statistical use, 

NCJ-69790, 5/81 

A guide to dissemination, NCJ-40000, 1n9 

Compendium of State legislation: 

NCJ-48981, 7n8 

1981 supplement, NCJ-79652,3/82 

Criminal justice information policy: 

R5search access to criminal justlce data, 

NCJ-84154,2/83 

Privacy and juvenile justice records, 

NCJ-84152, 1/83 

Survey of State laws (BJS bulletin), 

NCJ-8Q836, 6/82 

Privacy and the private employer, 

NCJ-79651, 11181 

General 

BJS five-year program plan, FY 1982-86, 7/82 

Violent crime in the U.S. (White House briefing 

book), NCJ-79741, 6/82 

Sourcebook of criminal justice statistics, 1981, 

NCJ-78672, 6/82 

Federal justice statistics (BJS bulletin), 

NCJ-80814,3/82 

Dictionary of criminal justice data terminology: 

Terms and definitions proposed for interstate 

and national data collection and exchange, 2nd 

ed., NCJ-76939, 2/82 

Correctional data analysis systems, 

NCJ-76940, 8/81 

Technical standards for machine-readable data 

supplied to BJS, NCJ-75318, 6/81 

Justice agencies in the U.S., 1980, NCJ-65560, 

1/81 

Indicators of crime and criminal justice: 

Quantitative studies, NCJ-62349, 1/81 

A style manual for machine-readable data, 

NCJ-62766, 9/80 

Myths and realities about crime, 

NCJ-46249, 10na 

Postage and Fees Paid 

U.S. Department of Justice 

Jus 436 

THIRD CLASS 

BULK RATE 

: 

-,