An Unbalanced Scale

Posted 4:34PM on Monday, July 25, 2011

The age-old scale is most fitting as an icon for true justice. The perfect balance, exemplified in the familiar image held by the Greek mythological Goddess Themis says everything that really needs to be said about what we should all expect from our nation's pursuit of justice. That is nothing more and nothing less than fairness without prejudice, corruption, or favor. For the most part, our system has done a remarkable job of achieving such goals. Obviously, we can all recall cases where it seems that Lady Justice's blindness was epidemic to everyone in the courtroom. But, the cases where balance occurred are still very much in the majority. However, those very scales are now being called to task based on what some perceive as an unbalanced load as it pertains to particular rights that are available, or not, in the conflict of those who are accused of crimes and those to whom the crimes were committed; the victims. In 1982, a movement began to balance the playing field concerning crime victim's rights. Victim's advocacy groups aimed in pursuit of this balancing by calling for Constitutional amendments that guaranteed victims the same rights as those available to the accused. While few gave these groups little hope of achieving success from a Constitutional perspective, they have proved that they are a force to be reckoned with. Currently, 31 of the 50 states in our nation have passed legislation that has made victim's rights an actual amendment to those states constitutions. Of the remaining 19 states, several have legislation in place that are calling for the same mandate. Several other states, while not at a level of a constitutional amendment, have passed statutes typically known as the Crime Victim's Bill Of Rights that require certain rights to be afforded to crime victims. These Bill of Rights documents are a fairly extensive granting of rights to the crime victim that begin at the initial occurrence of the crime and continue through the trial and sentencing phase. While this legislation makes a victim's plight and pursuit of justice much better than it has been, it is also unfortunately common that the statutes do not carry a penalty to those officials who may fail to follow the intention of the law. Based on this perceived gap, as it is seen by national advocacy groups, a major push is also underway to make the issue of a constitutional amendment a federal mandate. A federal amendment would guarantee rights and privileges to the victims just as current constitutional amendments guarantee certain rights and privileges to the accused. This amendment, if passed, would allow judges to rule on a case by case basis on issues where the rights of the accused and the victim were in conflict. No longer would the defendant automatically get the nod based on the constitutional rights that they have available, but are not yet enjoyed by the victim. It will be a tough task for this to be completed. Constitutional amendments are obviously something that none of us should consider lightly. But, as in the cases of previous amendments, we sometimes find ourselves in a position whereby adjustments need to be made that are in the best interest of the people; all of the people. Victim advocates are passionate that the time for this adjustment has arrived. Time will tell if our lawmakers share this concern. Victims have never called for rights that would exceed those of the accused. All of us know that on any given day, we too could become a defendant and would lean on those rights that are currently afforded. Victims are simply looking for a scenario in which the playing field is leveled; where both sides of the issue are dealt with fairly, and most importantly, whereby those all too familiar scales are tilted back to their intended position; completely and unarguably balanced. Then, and only then, will the ultimate pursuit of true justice be possible. Featured columnists' opinions, views and comments are not necessarily those of AccessNorthGa.com or JACOBS Media.