Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Victims Rights Juvenile topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Victims’ rights expanded in juvenile cases, victim‑services director tells committee; gaps in outreach remain
Summary
Jennifer Pullman, director of the Vermont Center for Crime Victim Services, told lawmakers Act 160 (Senate Bill 224) strengthened victim rights in delinquency matters — including notification, restitution enforcement, and limited access to hearings for listed crimes — but she said practitioners and victims still need better outreach and training
Jennifer Pullman, director of the Vermont Center for Crime Victim Services, told the House Judiciary Committee that recent statutory changes (Act 160, enacted as part of Senate Bill 224) expanded victims’ rights in delinquency and certain youthful‑offender matters but that outreach to practitioners and victims has been uneven.
Pullman reviewed several changes the statute made: restoring victims’ ability to seek compensation by allowing access to a redacted affidavit of probable cause even when a young person’s record is sealed; clarifying that restitution judgments remain enforceable when records are sealed, consistent with State v. Riley; establishing more consistent notifications about case status; and granting victims of listed crimes the right to information about release conditions and, in some cases, limited access to hearings to deliver impact statements.
She said those statutory adjustments were the product of a broad consensus process that included the defender general’s office, the courts, DCF (Department for Children and Families), the state’s attorneys and victim advocates. Pullman said the law tried to balance victim‑safety, confidentiality of juvenile proceedings, and the rehabilitative aims of juvenile treatment.
Pullman noted specific limits in the statute: expanded access to hearings and release information apply primarily to “listed crimes,” and judges retain discretion to exclude victims from particular proceedings when doing so would threaten fairness or confidentiality. She said victims of listed crimes may attend disposition hearings to deliver a statement but typically not remain for other confidential portions of the hearing.
On implementation, Pullman said that many frontline practitioners are not yet fully aware of the changes. “It’s incumbent on all of us…to do a much better job” of informing deputies, judges and victims, she said, and noted the Center will raise the issue in the juvenile justice stakeholders group. She also addressed committee concerns about whether certain offenses on the listed‑crime rubric (for example, some trafficking charges) could inadvertently criminalize victims; she said prosecutorial discretion remains a safeguard and the legislature previously narrowed the list to reduce that risk.
Pullman argued that, beyond legal changes, timely juvenile proceedings generally benefit victims because delays can erode witness memory and satisfaction with the process. She called for continuing coordinated outreach so victims know their rights and how to obtain available services.
