The UK’s Victims’ Commissioner Annual Report demonstrates that there are several orders of consequences to chronic delays. Court delays and backlogs often leave crime victims reliving their pain rather than finding closure. Far from the vindicating justice they seek, many feel “stuck in a cycle of reliving their traumatic experiences” through endless investigations, prosecutions, and courtroom ordeals. For victims, court should mark progress in healing – it should not resemble a repeated episode of PTSD.
The impacts of delay in the UK are well reflected in the Commissioner Newlove’s report: “almost half (48%) of the victims I heard from, who have been given a set trial date, saw it adjourned at least once – often multiple times.” Of the 145 victims surveyed about trial changes, 70 confirmed experiencing them. Among those, 34% had one change, 20% had two, another 20% faced three, and 26% endured four or more.
“It got progressively more difficult,” reported one of the victims surveyed. “Because I would prepare for this date mentally and I had no way of knowing whether or not that was going to lead to anything… I just disengaged with pretty much everything.” This victim’s experience is similar to the experience of others we have written on in the past. Across the Atlantic, Theresa Ratliff, whose 3-year-old son was killed by a reckless driver who drove into a corral her son was playing in, said “it’s getting very hard for me to continue to come when I feel like I get thrown back every time I’m here (See: Kent Cody Barlow Case).” Though prolonged uncertainty is undeniably cruel to defendants, it is at least equally as cruel to victims.
The report calls for a redesign of criminal process to account for the needs of victims. In general, it calls for better management, use of data and information systems and active consideration of the impact of delays on victims most at risk. At the most basic level listing practices need to balance both victims and witness interests with those of defendants.
There are real risks to allowing the criminal justice system to become effectively privatised by the direct involvement of victims. On the other hand, the fundamental social contract is that the state removes private actors from the process of investigation, trial and punishment in return for a promise that justice will be served. The popularity of films which feature private acts of revenge and punishment demonstrate the ongoing need to demonstrate the adequacy of criminal justice. Justice delayed can and often does deny justice to victims and the community as a whole.
