help with responding to classmates discussion post

1. How has the Right to Be Present changed for victims of crime today compared to Stephanie Roper's trial? In the 1982 trial following the murder of Stephanie Roper, her parents were excluded from the courtroom and denied the chance to be present during proceedings, Roper's case is often cited as foundational in victims' rights history. (Wikipedia, n.d.; NCVLI, 2024). At that time, victims and their families had no statutory claim to attend trials or hearings, and their voices were marginalized. Today, under the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) of 2004, victims have the explicit right not to be excluded from public court proceedings unless the court shows clear and convincing evidence that the victim's presence would materially alter their testimony (18 U.S.C. 3771(a)(3)) (DOJ, 2023; Congress CRS, 2015). This shift reflects a major transformation: victims now possess a recognized, enforceable right to participate in the justice process, rather than being passive observers.

2. What is required for victims to have notice of their rights, and who is responsible for ensuring this across phases of investigation and prosecution? For victims to exercise their rights, they must first receive reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of those rights (18 U.S.C. 3771(a)(2)) (DOJ, 2023). During the investigative phase, law enforcement agencies (officers, victim assistance personnel) are responsible for notifying victims of their rights and offering victim services (DOJ, 2016; Attorney General Guidelines, 2022). When the case enters prosecution, prosecutors' offices and victim-witness coordinators are tasked with ensuring victims receive notice of court proceedings, plea agreements, sentencing, appeals, and changes in case status (DOJ, 2023; DOJ, 2010). The failure to provide such notice can lead to a victim being unaware of hearings or opportunities to participateprecisely what occurred in the Roper case, where the Roper family was not notified of schedule changes or allowed to give a victim impact statement (NCVLI, 2024; Wikipedia, n.d.).

3. How does the CVRA distinguish between relief (compliance) and enforcement (judicial remedies)? What are these two options? The CVRA contemplates two distinct paths when victims' rights are violated:

• Relief / Compliance: This is an administrative or corrective path by which government actors (courts, prosecutors, agencies) take steps to restore or comply with the victim's rights. For example, a court might reschedule a hearing, provide retroactive notice, or permit the victim to participate in a proceeding they missed (NCVLI, 2023). The aim is to cure the violation without the need for formal litigation.
• Enforcement / Judicial Remedies: If compliance is not forthcoming or insufficient, the victim may petition the court of appeals under 18 U.S.C. 3771(d)(3). The statute requires the court to act "promptly" to determine whether a right was violated and to provide an appropriate remedy, such as ordering re-opening of hearings or reconsideration of a plea or sentence (CRS, 2015; NCVLI, 2023). In short, enforcement is the legal recourse victims can use to compel the system to honor their rights where voluntary compliance fails.