Rights Granted to Defendants Under the United States Constitution

 

(1) “The writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended” (Art. I, Sec. 8)

 

(2) “No bill of attainer…shall be passed” (Art. I, Sec. 8)

 

(3) “No…ex post facto law shall be passed” (Art. I, Sec. 8)

 

(4) “The President…shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States” (Art. II, Sec. 2)

 

(5) “The trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury” (Art. III,  Sec. 2; Amend. VI)

 

(6) “Such trial shall be held in the state where the said crime shall have been committed” (Art. III, Sec. 2)

 

(7) “No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to  the same overt act, or on confession in open court” (Art. III, Sec. 3)

 

(8) “No warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized” (Amend. IV)

 

(9) “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger” (Amend. V)

 

(10) “No person shall…be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb” (Amend. V)

 

(11) “No person…shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against  himself” (Amend. V)

 

(12) “No person shall…be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law”  (Amend. V)

 

(13) “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a public and speedy trial by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed; which district shall have been previously ascertained by law”  (Amend. VI)

 

(14) “The accused shall have the right…to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation” (Amend. VI)

 

(15) “The accused shall enjoy the right…to be confronted with the witnesses against him”  (Amend. VI)

 

(16) “The accused shall enjoy the right…to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor” (Amend. VI)

 

(17) “The accused shall enjoy the right…to have the assistance of counsel for his  defense”  (Amend. VI)

 

(18) “No fact tried by a jury shall be reexamined by any court of the United States (Amend. VII)

 

(19) “Excessive bail shall not be required” (Amend. VIII)

 

(20) “Excessive fines [shall not be] imposed” (Amend. VIII)

 

(21) “Cruel and unusual punishment [shall not be] inflicted (Amend. VIII)

 

(22) “No person shall…be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law” (Amend. XIV)

 

(23) “No state shall…deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws” (Amend. XIV)

 

 

* * *

 

 

Rights Granted to Victims Under the United States Constitution

 

 

NONE!

 

 

* * * *

 

 

Rights That Would Be Granted to Victims Under S.J. Res 1

 

 

(1) “to reasonable and timely notice of any public proceeding” (S.J. Res.1, Section 2)

 

(2) “to reasonable and timely notice of any release or escape of the accused” (S.J. Res.1, Section 2)

 

(3) “to not be excluded from [any] public proceeding” (S.J. Res. 1, Section 2)

 

(4) “reasonably to be heard at public release, plea, sentencing, reprieve, and pardon proceedings” (S.J. Res. 1, Section 2)

 

(5) “ to adjudicative decisions that duly consider the victim’s safety” (S.J. Res. 1,  Section 2)

 

(6) “to adjudicative decisions that duly consider the victim’s interest in avoiding unreasonable delay” (S.J. Res. 1, Section 2)

 

(7) “to adjudicative decisions that duly consider the victim’s just and timely claims to restitution” (S.J. Res. 1, Section 2)

 

(8) “to assert the rights established” (S.J. Res. 1, Section 3)

 

 

# # # # #

 

Following are typical and possible statements and arguments from the opposition of the Proposed Amendment to the U. S. Constitution to Protect the Rights of Victims.

 

We have supplied factual and true answers:

 

If they (the opposition to the Amendment) say:

I'M ALL FOR VICTIMS RIGHTS BUT THEY DON'T NEED TO BE IN THE CONSTITUTION.  STATE AND FEDERAL STATUTES WORK FINE AND ARE MORE FLEXIBLE.

Answer:

We have tried state and federal statutes for more than two decades and they don't work. As long as defendant's rights are in the U.S. Constitution and victims are not, the victims are second-class citizens.  Why do you believe the rights of the criminal should carry more weight than the rights of the victim?

 

If they say:

THE AMENDMENT IS NOT WELL DRAFTED.

Answer:

The amendment has the support of Harvard Constitutional Law Professor Laurence Tribe, who would not support it if it were poorly drafted.  In fact, he helped draft it along with the brightest lawyers in the United States Dept. of Justice and the Senate Judiciary Committee.

 

If they say:

THE AMENDMENT INFRINGES ON THE RIGHTS OF THE STATES.   IT VIOLATES FEDERALISM.

Answer:

Would the Senator say that defendant's rights don't belong in the U.S. Constitution for the same reason?  Why are constitutional rights for defendants not a violation of federalism, or an invasion of state's rights, but constitutional rights for victims are?  Federalism exists to preserve liberty, not power for state government.  Putting rights into the U.S. Constitution advances the cause of liberty.

 

If they say:

VICTIMS RIGHTS WILL UNDERMINE THE RIGHTS OF DEFENDANTS.

Answer:

None of the rights proposed in any way undermines any constitutional right of a defendant. A defendant has no constitutional right to prevent notice to victims, to keep them out of the courtroom, to silence them at a release, plea or sentencing hearings, to deny them safety or restitution, or to force them to endure endless delays.  

 

 

# # # # # #