[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Canehdianman

since you asked so nicely...

It is because the purpose of a Victim Impact Statement is to allow the victims' to provide an account of the personal harm they suffered as a result of the crime. It is designed to give victims a chance to be heard, which I think is an important step forward that we have taken in recent years. Further, the judge HAS to take the Victim Impact Statement into account when it comes to sentencing.

It isn't there so you can condemn someone to hell, or discuss his appearance during the trial. Neither of those comments detail the impact that the crime had on the victim. But they might induce some bias when it comes to sentencing. And I don't think anyone wants this case to leave even the slightest chance of an appeal, so I can understand why the defence argued that the statements should be removed, and I understand why the judge agreed to remove some of it.

(didn't take it as a dick post - it is a highly emotional issue and people get riled up about it)

Thanks.

I guess in my mind "his appearance during the trial" also impacts the family. IE: it might be easier to take if he showed some emotion/remorse, but by all accounts he was like a rock.