Restitution

Restitution Essay
Student's Name
College/University
Course
Professor's Name
Due Date
States have different victim compensation plans that offer financial support and relief to crime victims that lack the means to pay for funeral costs, medical expenses, and other costs linked to the crime. States impose eligibility requirements to ensure the right victims receive compensation. Restitution covers different types of crimes, holds the perpetrator accountable for their wrongdoing, and ensures victims receive compensation for losses. This paper the operation and financing of victim compensation plans and discusses aggressive retaliation and black community reparation proposals as historical perspectives informing today's restitution models. In addition, the paper incorporates the argument that the incarcerated prisoner should not make restitution to the victim since the state failed to protect the crime from happening.
Victim Compensation Program Operation and Funding at State Level
States design and implement crime victim compensation programs tailored to assist victims in reimbursing specific expenses from a crime. In this context, eligibility criteria for victim compensation programs vary. At the minimum, a victim is expected to report the crime, collaborate with the prosecution and investigation, as well as apply for compensation within a specific timescale. Victim compensation programs differ from restitution in that they can happen irrespective of whether there is prosecution or arrest. In addition, victim compensation programs vary across districts, territories, and states, and they reimburse for specific expenses not recognized by public benefits or insurance programs. Victims, dependents and relatives are expected to satisfy their state's qualifications to be compensated (Hancock, 2020). Also, the victim cannot collect restitution and compensation for identical losses.
With respect to funding, after the victim has received compensation from the state for losses incurred, the court may order the individual found guilty of the crime to repay the state compensation program. Also, the court may order the convicted person to reimburse the victim for losses not recognized by the compensation program. Expenses recognized by the victim compensation programs normally include mental health counseling, medical care, the loss of income incurred because of the crime – linked to injuries, funeral expenses, and loss of livelihood for dependents and families of the deceased victim. Many states are increasingly not compensating for expenses because crimes predominantly entail damage to or theft of property (Hancock, 2020). A rising number of states cover expenses associated with relocation, cleaning up the crime scene, and measures implemented to guarantee the victim's security and safety. In this context, the revenue for compensation funds normally comes from criminal fees, forfeitures, and court fines collected from individuals convicted of the specific crime and individuals receiving traffic violations. However, some states make allocations and have devised ways to create extra revenue for their compensation programs. For example, Alaska expects individuals convicted of multiple misdemeanors or felonies to forfeit all citizens' yearly checks from the state oil fund (Hancock, 2020). Nevertheless, it should be noted that most states do not employ tax revenue to finance their victim compensation programs.
Importance of Historical Perspective of Restitution in Understanding Today's Models
Aggressive retaliation and the black community reparation proposal are primary historical perspectives to understand today's restitution models. Historically, it was increasingly difficult to differentiate the victim from the criminal because the individual injured by the perpetrator would seek personal revenge against the aggressor, thus reversing the original positions. This personal satisfaction or revenge is what Stephen Schafer called the historical type of compensation to the victim or labeled aggressive retaliation. Second, Robin D.G. Kelley noted that historical perspectives on reparations in the United States (U.S.) did not emphasize money. Instead, the need f...