« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND TO THE RESEARCH
1.1 The purpose of this report is to present the findings of an evaluation of the pilot victim statement scheme in Scotland. The research was commissioned by the Scottish Executive. The evaluation was undertaken by Mr James Chalmers, Professor Peter Duff and Dr Fiona Leverick of the University of Aberdeen School of Law, with input from Simon Anderson and Christine Sheehy of the Scottish Centre for Social Research; Mary Munro, an independent consultant; and Professor Andrew Sanders of the University of Manchester School of Law. Research assistance was provided at various stages of the project by Kevin Brown, Yvonne Melvin and Shona Wilson.
BACKGROUND TO THE PILOT VICTIM STATEMENT SCHEMES
1.2 Victim statements were introduced into the Scottish criminal justice system by section 14 of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2003, building on the Scottish Executive's previously stated aim of encouraging greater participation by victims in the criminal justice system (Scottish Executive, 2001, paras 3.3 et seq). The Executive made a commitment that victim statements would be piloted before a decision was taken on whether to roll them out across Scotland (Justice 2 Committee, 2003, col 1352; Justice 1 Committee, 2003, col 66). Accordingly, an order was made in November 2003, under which the statutory right to make a victim statement was to take effect from 25 November 2003, but only for the sheriff courts of Ayr, Edinburgh and Kilmarnock, and the High Court of Justiciary sitting at Edinburgh and Kilmarnock. 1 The pilots ran for a 2 year period before being brought to an end as planned. 2
1.3 The right to make a victim statement attached after a procurator fiscal determined that proceedings were to be taken in respect of a prescribed offence in one of the prescribed courts. 3 The relevant offences were prescribed by statutory instrument. In practice, a "statement pack", which included a covering letter, 4 a leaflet explaining the victim statement scheme (Scottish Executive, 2003b), and a victim statement form, 5 was sent to relevant victims after a decision to prosecute was taken. A separate guidance leaflet was prepared for practitioners (Scottish Executive, 2003a). The literature was in English, accompanied by a multilingual (30 languages) "translation request form" which victims could tick and return to the procurator fiscal's office for a translation of the documents. In Edinburgh, victim statement packs in solemn cases (High Court or sheriff and jury prosecutions) were not sent out until the stage at which the indictment was served on the accused, which might have been some months after the decision to prosecute, depending on whether the accused was in custody pending trial.
1.4 Where a victim statement was returned, it was placed in the relevant file and presented to the court at the relevant time, where appropriate. 6
1.5 The format and content of the pack varied slightly between the pilot sites - in Edinburgh, the pack was sent by Victim Information and Advice, while in Ayr and Kilmarnock, it was sent by the procurator fiscal directly. 7 In both cases the letter would have appeared on "Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service" headed paper.
1.6 Victim statements were intended as statements of impact, and not of opinion (for an explanation of the distinction, see Sanders et al, 2001). A victim was to be afforded an opportunity to make a statement "as to the way in which, and degree to which, that offence (or apparent offence) has affected and as the case may be continues to affect, that person", 8 and not a statement as to their opinions on (for example) the appropriate sentence to be passed were the offender to be convicted. From the evidence given by the Minister for Justice and Executive officials to the Justice 1 Committee, it appears that victim statements were envisaged as having two principal purposes: first, providing information to be taken into account by a sheriff or judge when sentencing, and secondly what might be termed the "therapeutic" objective of improving victims' satisfaction with the criminal justice system (Chalmers, 2003).
RESEARCH AIMS
1.7 The main aim of the evaluation, as set out in the Invitation to Tender, was to establish the extent to which the pilot schemes were working effectively and to inform the decision on whether victim statement schemes should be rolled out across Scotland.
1.8 The specific objectives of the evaluation, as set out in the Invitation to Tender, were as follows:
1. To establish and evaluate how the schemes worked in each pilot area
This included analysis of: the service provided by the pilot in the area with a VIA service (Edinburgh) compared to the service in the area without (Kilmarnock/Ayr); the additional costs incurred by the victim statement scheme; and the experience of victim support organisations.
2. To evaluate the impact of the victim statement scheme on court processes
This included establishing: the impact, if any, of the victim statement scheme on court processes; how often victims were cross-examined about statements; the views of relevant professionals about the victim statement scheme; and an estimate of the number of cases lost to the victim statement scheme due to the offender pleading guilty from custody at the first opportunity and being sentenced immediately (so called 'lost cases').
3. To investigate the characteristics of victims and their statements
This included establishing: the number of statements made; whether particular categories of individual (in terms of age, sex or offence type) were more or less likely to make a statement; victim perceptions and feelings about making a statement; the reasons why eligible victims did not make a statement; the views of victims on the statement scheme literature; and the views of victims on the level of support offered and its usefulness.
A NOTE ON TERMINOLOGY
1.9 Under the pilot scheme, a victim statement was (at least where procedures operated as planned) made before court proceedings resulted in the case coming to a conclusion: in other words, before any determination had been made of the accused's guilt or innocence. Although it might, strictly, be appropriate to refer to "alleged victims" and "alleged offenders", the researchers did not feel that this would be helpful. Accordingly, throughout this report, the term "victim", and sometimes also the term "offender", is used for the purpose of readability. Such terminology is not, however, intended to imply any conclusion about the particular cases under discussion.
1.10 The abbreviations COPFS (Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service), VIA (Victim Information and Advice) and VSS (Victim Support Scotland) are also used to refer to relevant agencies where appropriate.
« Previous | Contents | Next »