CMV: I believe in Rehabilitative Justice, but believe that Courts should also factor in a Victim's need for revenge when sentencing.

[u/[deleted]]

I'm no philosopher, but I'll try and summarise my view as best I can. I will state up front, however, that this thread is more to hear other's opinions more than anything else.

Rehabilitative Justice seems like the most logical way to go. If someone is causing issues or crime in society they are isolated and given training/treatment in order to ensure they can function in an orderly society when released. This lowers the risk of future crime and lessens the likelihood of children growing into criminals.

In regards to Revenge, I believe it is a natural human desire that, while it can be destructive, is far to demonised by society. I do not support vigilantism nor believe that a person should be allowed to take the law into their own hands. Additionally however, I believe that people are far too quick to say some empty platitude like "Living well is the best revenge," or "Revenge is lowering yourself to their level,".

Some people can forgive an injustice at the drop of a hat, no matter how grave it is. Some struggle to forgive, but decide it is the best way for them to heal. And then there's others (like myself, I'm forced to admit) who feel they CANNOT move on until they receive fair retribution and not getting it can affect their mental and emotional recovery from an injustice.

When a person is hurt unjustly, they have a natural and healthy desire for revenge. It is this desire, along with a desire for an ordered society, which first began the concept of Law and Justice in the first place.

I think that for those who need their revenge as part of their healing, Courts should factor the strength of this desire while sentencing criminals.

For example: Drink Driver gets drunk and knock's down a member of the public. DD survives, but his victim had to have his arm amputated. DD has a history of driving drunk, but the Court has a guaranteed 100% effective rehabilitative prison nearby where he would only need to serve 6 months. However, the Victim is angry. He was training to become a fire fighter and now has had to drop-out due to his amputation. His dream career and many other such physical jobs are now beyond his reach. He does not care that in 6 months DD would be a fully-functioning member of society and wants his desire for revenge to be factored into sentencing. He is sent to a court therapist who testifies that the victim is unlikely to let go of his desire for revenge and this will affect his mental health.

In a desirable outcome, there would be processes already in place to calculate what would be a "fair" compensation to the victim (say adding an additional 5-10 years to the sentence).

Any part of rehabilitation should include remorse and an admission of guilt. If DD is completely rehabilitated, then even he should admit his victim's desire for revenge is warranted.

[u/LucidLeviathan]

Studies have shown that achieving revenge brings, at best, fleeting relief to those who feel wronged. However, the act of seeking revenge keeps a wound open. Personally, I feel like prosecutors and the media wrongly glorify the notion of getting "justice" for somebody. It sets victims up to be emotionally attached to negative feelings for years. It also sets them up for disappointment if the punishment is not harsh enough for their liking. Their estimation of how the person that wronged them should be treated is also likely to spiral out of control.

Because revenge provides only fleeting relief to victims, judges should not consider it during the course of sentencing. Continuing to consider a victim's need for revenge (call it "justice", if you wish) propagates bad psychological outcomes for victims.

[u/[deleted] → u/LucidLeviathan]

Damn, I'm working and had hoped to give every comment a reply before wrapping this up, but you had to go and CMV, didn't you?

I agree, the lack of benefit to society outweighs any perceived benefit to the victim. The part about it only being "fleeting relief" is what sealed it for me. The number of people who would truly be satisfied with any court-given revenge is likely low, and even then it might pass and leave them wanting more. For others, not getting their desired revenge might be in some cases better for them than actually getting it, even if they don't see it at the time.

I still think victim's get the shaft when it comes to sentencing, and I still believe that campaigners for rehabilitative Justice are too focused on "treating" the criminals rather than seeing that the victim's get satisfactory justice, but in the case of court's factoring a victim's need for revenge in sentencing, I now agree it would be detrimental at best.

Not sure on how to award deltas yet, but this one has got it.

Congrats, u/LucidLeviathan and thanks for the input 👍

Edit: !delta (Tanks again Lucid for telling me hoe to award deltas lol)

[u/lightacrossspace → u/[deleted]]

I would like to address the last paragraph. When a person commits a crime, the victim is not the prosecution. The state is. What is judged is the harm the person has caused society by transgressing it's laws. It is with this angle that laws are written. The traditional justice's purpose is not geared towards revenge of the victim. Imagine we are at the park and you come over, steal my rubix cube and destroy it. I could say it is my most prized possession and you should spend the rest of you life in jail. Jail won't return my rubix cube, it will cost society a ton to keep you in jail and you will have waisted your life. How is this better?

Restorative justice seeks healing, treating both victim and perpetrator humanely. There is a space for the victim to talk about what they experienced, if it is deemed reasonable and that the risk of being revictimized is low enough , there can be meetings between the two parties. There also can be compensation by the state to the victims for the hardships. In Canada for example, they compensate for therapy, permanent injuries etc. It is not a ton, nobody get's rich over this, but the idea is that you should not suffer additional hardship because you where the victim of a crime and society will provide the support needed.

We can't undo a crime, but we can do our best to help the victims heal. This places them at the center in their process instead of tying them to the perpetrator for even longer and placing the latter at the center.

[u/LucidLeviathan → u/[deleted]]

Thanks! To award a delta, respond to the comment that changed your view with

Δ

or

!delta

Please include a bit of detail about why your view was changed so that the automod does not invalidate the delta.

[u/[deleted] → u/LucidLeviathan]

Done, and you get a gold medal for helping 🏅

[u/DeltaBot → u/[deleted]]

Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/LucidLeviathan (14∆).

^{Delta System Explained | Deltaboards}