Case Studies On Victim Impact Statements
Case Studies on Victim Impact Statements (VIS)
Introduction
A Victim Impact Statement (VIS) is a formal statement made by victims (or their families) describing the emotional, physical, financial, and social impact of a crime. VIS are presented during sentencing and play a critical role in informing judicial discretion, ensuring victims’ voices are heard, and sometimes influencing the sentence imposed.
VIS are widely recognized in Canadian criminal law, the United States, and increasingly in international tribunals.
1. R v. Tran, [2003] B.C.J. No. 136 (Canada)
Jurisdiction: Canada – British Columbia
Facts:
Tran was convicted of assault causing bodily harm. The victim submitted a VIS detailing physical pain, emotional trauma, and financial impact due to medical expenses and lost wages.
Legal Principle:
Courts in Canada may consider victim impact statements as part of sentencing (Criminal Code, Section 722).
VIS can describe physical, psychological, and financial consequences, but cannot introduce new allegations of criminal conduct.
Outcome:
The court increased the sentence relative to what might have been imposed without the VIS, highlighting the emotional and financial toll on the victim.
Established precedent in B.C. for thorough consideration of VIS in sentencing.
2. R v. Mills, [1999] 3 S.C.R. 668 (Canada)
Jurisdiction: Canada – Supreme Court
Facts:
Mills involved sexual assault victims who submitted statements detailing emotional trauma, disruption of personal life, and ongoing fear.
Legal Principle:
The Supreme Court clarified that VIS cannot violate the accused’s Charter rights, particularly the right to full answer and defense.
Judges must weigh VIS alongside other sentencing factors, ensuring proportionality and fairness.
Outcome:
The court affirmed the legitimacy of VIS in emphasizing harm to the victim and providing context for restorative or punitive sentencing.
Led to guidelines for balancing victim input with the accused’s rights.
3. United States – Payne v. Tennessee, 501 U.S. 808 (1991)
Jurisdiction: United States – Supreme Court
Facts:
Victims’ families submitted statements in a capital murder case describing the emotional impact of their loss, seeking the death penalty.
Legal Principle:
The U.S. Supreme Court held that victim impact statements are constitutional in capital sentencing.
VIS may influence the jury’s decision regarding the appropriate sentence, including death or life imprisonment.
Outcome:
Established precedent allowing victims’ statements to directly affect sentencing outcomes.
Highlighted the power of VIS in emphasizing the human consequences of crime.
4. R v. Araujo, [2000] O.J. No. 2973 (Ontario, Canada)
Jurisdiction: Canada – Ontario
Facts:
Araujo was convicted of aggravated assault. The VIS provided by the victim included psychological trauma, loss of confidence, and ongoing anxiety.
Legal Principle:
Courts can use VIS to augment sentencing within statutory limits but must avoid double-counting aggravating factors already considered under the Criminal Code.
Outcome:
The judge cited the VIS when imposing a longer custodial sentence, demonstrating that detailed victim narratives can materially influence sentencing.
5. The Prosecutor v. Jean-Paul Akayesu, ICTR-96-4-T (1998, International)
Jurisdiction: International – Rwanda Tribunal
Facts:
In the genocide case, survivors of the Tutsi genocide submitted statements describing physical, emotional, and social devastation, including sexual violence.
Legal Principle:
ICTR recognized victim impact statements as critical evidence during sentencing for crimes against humanity.
VIS helped the tribunal assess the gravity of harm and aggravating factors, supporting life imprisonment for the accused.
Outcome:
Victim statements shaped sentencing for genocide, highlighting individual and community-level harm.
Established VIS as an integral part of international criminal jurisprudence.
6. R v. Bissonette, [2012] QCCQ 7072 (Quebec, Canada)
Jurisdiction: Canada – Quebec
Facts:
Bissonette was convicted of impaired driving causing death. Families of the victims submitted VIS describing irreversible trauma, grief, and societal impact.
Legal Principle:
Quebec courts reinforced that VIS must reflect the actual impact on victims and their families.
Judges must balance the emotional content of VIS with legal proportionality in sentencing.
Outcome:
The court increased the sentence to reflect both deterrence and recognition of victim harm.
Demonstrated how VIS can bridge restorative justice and punitive considerations.
7. R v. L.A., [2009] N.B.J. No. 178 (New Brunswick, Canada)
Jurisdiction: Canada – New Brunswick
Facts:
A minor was convicted of sexual assault. Victims’ VIS described emotional trauma, school disruption, and fear for personal safety.
Legal Principle:
Courts in cases involving minors must carefully present VIS to avoid re-traumatization.
VIS are admissible but must not be overly graphic or prejudicial.
Outcome:
Sentence reflected both rehabilitative measures for the offender and acknowledgment of harm via VIS.
Demonstrates VIS applicability in youth sentencing.
Key Observations Across Cases
| Case | Jurisdiction | Crime Type | Role of VIS | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| R v. Tran | Canada | Assault | Highlighted emotional & financial harm | Increased sentence |
| R v. Mills | Canada | Sexual assault | Emphasized psychological trauma | Affirmed VIS legitimacy |
| Payne v. Tennessee | USA | Capital murder | Family impact statements | Influenced death penalty sentence |
| R v. Araujo | Canada | Aggravated assault | Psychological trauma | Longer custodial sentence |
| Akayesu (ICTR) | Rwanda / International | Genocide | Survivors’ statements | Life imprisonment |
| R v. Bissonette | Canada | Impaired driving causing death | Family grief & societal impact | Increased sentence |
| R v. L.A. | Canada | Youth sexual assault | Emotional trauma | Sentence balanced rehabilitation & victim harm |
Conclusion
Victim Impact Statements play a critical role in sentencing, both in domestic and international law.
VIS help personalize the harm, inform the judge’s discretion, and recognize victims’ voices in criminal justice.
Courts consistently balance VIS with the accused’s rights, ensuring statements do not introduce prejudicial evidence or new allegations.
In international cases like Akayesu, VIS also provide context for aggravating factors in crimes against humanity, reflecting the gravity of harm on a societal scale.
RELATED Blog
comments