Justice from the Victim's Perspective

Judith Herman

This piece is based on a set of interviews with 22 people, mostly victims but some witnesses, of sexual assault. In it, Herman explores the role of our legal system in sexual assault proceedings, pointing to the dissatisfaction that most victims interviewed expressed about their experience with the justice system.

Beyond her discussion of the legal system, Herman explores alternatives to the system, taking into account existing paradigms such as restorative justice, as well as the complicated priorities of victims themselves.

Herman focuses on the ways in which victims are shamed in any case of sexual assault. Pointing out the strength of power dynamics, she reminds readers that even in a court of law the tendency is for the victim to have to explain herself and prove the guilt of her assaulter, while in many cases that person is protected by her family and/or community. In other words, the victim is from the outset ostracized, despite her experience of trauma that necessitates support from her community.

Throughout her exploration of two justice paradigms, redemptive and restorative justice, Herman makes the interesting point that both systems are directed at the offenders - the first focuses on punishing them, while the second on reintegrating them. Because neither focuses on the wants of the victim, neither system truly functions to redeem the victim. Indeed, many victims in the study, instead of expressing a desire to see their offender locked up, simply want him to acknowledge his crime, and thus to experience the pervasive shame felt by victims of sexual assault. Further, they hope for the perpetrator's privileged place in the community to be taken from him, both as a symbolic punishment and as a preventative measure against further abuse.

This article was really interesting, especially when read in conversation with the documents I found at FHL, which are heavily influenced by a religious understanding of the goodness of forgiving. Herman argues that expecting a victim to forgive is not necessarily a useful or fair idea. Rather, she posits it as something to make society comfortable - once the victim has forgiven the perpetrator, society feels that it has closure, but who benefits from this closure, and the ultimate forgetting that it can lead to?

I unequivocally feel that this article should be added to the syllabus. It has really made me question the idea of restorative justice with which, if you look at my previous post, I was feeling rather enamored yesterday. I think it fits into the alternatives section, which, the more I think about, I think should be given some time for discussion and thought in this course. I think that after all of the really challenging sections of this course, both academically and emotionally, a time to really engage with debate over how to improve and change the system would be empowering and uplifting. I also feel that a series of shorter articles outlining firm positions (the Quaker piece on restorative justice, versus this article, for example) will allow for engagement that really includes students' own thinking and opinions.