{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01684717208182912, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.5, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Victim Harm, Impact Statements and Victim Satisfaction with Justice: An Australian Experience*

In the debate surrounding victim input into sentencing, a major argument in favor of using victim impact statements (VIS) centered on the presumed effect of VIS on victim satisfaction with justice. Drawing upon procedural justice theory, this article examines the validity of the arguments concerning increased satisfaction with justice through a survey of felony crime victims in South Australia. The study sheds light on the factors that affect victim satisfaction with sentencing, and questions the presumed increased effect of VIS on satisfaction with justice. Further, it suggests a negative impact via unfulfilled expectations. The implications of the findings for VIS as an element of procedural justice are drawn and discussed.