Scott Cambell, Stephanie Roper, Wendy Preston, Louarna Gillis, and Nilla Lynn Crime Victims' Rights Act

SCOTT CAMPBELL, STEPHANIE ROPER, WENDY PRESTON, LOUARNA GILLIS, AND NILA LYNN CRIME VICTIMS' RIGHTS ACT

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the Scott Campbell, Stephanie Roper, Wendy Preston, Louarna Gillis, and Nila Lynn Crime Victims' Rights Act.

This week is National Crime Victims' Rights Week-a time to recognize the impact of crime and the rights and needs of victims. In 2002, there were 23 million criminal victimizations in the United States, and many of these crime victims feels as if the criminal justice system has wronged them. These people were innocent victims, but they feel deprived of the fundamental need to participate in the process of bringing the accused to justice.

I support crime victims' rights, and I believed that every effort should be made to ensure that crime victims are not victimized a second time by the criminal justice system. At the same time, I agree with James Madison, who wrote that the United States Constitution should be amended only on "great and extraordinary occasions," and I am reluctant to amend our Constitution for only the 18th time since the adoption of the Bills of Rights.

This is why I am proud to be an original cosponsor of the Crime Victims' Rights Act, which reaches all of the goals that the proposed constitutional amendment sought to achieve, by providing crime victims with the same rights, including the following: No. 1, the right to notice of any public proceeding involving the crime or of any release or escape of the accused; No. 2 the right not to be excluded from any such public proceeding; No. 3, the right to be reasonably heard at any public proceeding involving release, plea, or sentencing; No. 4, the right to full and timely restitution; and No. 5, the right to proceedings free from unreasonably delay.

By enacting legislation rather than amending the Constitution, our approach today also addresses my concerns regarding the rights of the accused. The premise of criminal justice in America is innocence until proven guilty, and our Constitution therefore guarantees certain protections to the accused. These include the Fifth Amendment protection against double jeopardy, as well as the Sixth Amendment rights to a speedy trial, the assistance of counsel, and an impartial jury.

Although these protections for the accused sometimes are painful for us to give, they are absolutely critical to our criminal justice system. When the victim and the accused walk into the courtroom, both are innocent in the eyes of the law, but when the trial begins, it is the defendant's life and liberty that are at stake.

During the Judiciary Committee debate on the proposed constitutional amendment regarding victims' rights, I offered an amendment that would have ensured that the rights of the accused as guaranteed under the Constitution would not be diminished or denied. However, this language is unnecessary in the bill we are debating today, because rights provided in a statute can not supercede those guaranteed by the Constitution.

For example, I believe this statute would allow courts to protect defendants from possible violations of due process and to preserve the accused's right to an impartial jury, by excluding victims from a public proceeding if the victim is to testify and the court determines that the victim's testimony would be materially affected if the victim hears other testimony at trial.

This statutory approach also provides Congress with the flexibility to modify this legislation if we find it is not perfect.

I would like to commend Senators FEINSTEIN and KYL for their efforts to provide rights to crime victims and for introducing this statutory alternative. I am pleased to join them in this effort.