Bill Overview
Title: Justice for Murder Victims Act
Description: This bill allows a prosecution to be instituted for any federal homicide offense without regard to the time that elapsed between the act or omission that caused the death of the victim and the death of the victim.
Sponsors: Rep. Tiffany, Thomas P. [R-WI-7]
Target Audience
Population: Women, children, and families of murder victims globally
Estimated Size: 900000
- The bill impacts murder victims and their families because it allows prosecution without a statute of limitations on the time between the act and the victim's death.
- Homicide victims who succumb to injuries long after the act are directly linked in this legislation, extending justice for cases previously limited by time constraints.
- The legal system, including prosecutors and defense lawyers handling federal homicide cases, would be affected as this changes the timelines around when a case can be brought to court.
Reasoning
- The policy's primary impact is on families of victims whose death occurs long after the homicide act due to lasting injuries. The number of such cases is relatively low compared to immediate death homicides, so the estimated target population size is around 900,000 in the US, which is a small subset of all homicide cases.
- The cost considerations include legal and investigation expenses to reopen old cases, which could be considerable depending on the number of cases reopened and the complexity of each case.
- The policy might indirectly impact those working in the justice system due to increased workload and may influence their wellbeing due to professional stressors.
- The broader population is largely unaffected unless directly connected to a case, making the commonness of significant impact low.
Simulated Interviews
School Teacher (New York, NY)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My brother was attacked years ago and only recently passed away due to his injuries. This policy could finally help us seek justice.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Retired Police Officer (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Many cases I encountered had victims who died much later due to their injuries. This act ensures justice is served beyond the statute of limitations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Lawyer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy will extend my work commitments significantly. It's needed, but it'll be tough on lawyers like me who already have intense schedules.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
IT Professional (Houston, TX)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is important, but personally, it doesn't affect me much. I'm glad justice is a priority though.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Activist (Miami, FL)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Victim families need closure. This act is a step towards justice, especially for those whose loved ones suffered long-term.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Counselor (Seattle, WA)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's vital for healing when justice is served, but reopening cases could also reopen old wounds for some.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Federal Prosecutor (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe this law is necessary, but it will demand more resources and time from prosecutors.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Public Defender (Boston, MA)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- With this policy, clients might face accusations long after incidents occurred. It makes defending them more challenging but necessary for justice.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Graduate Student (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 24 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This legislative change is a fascinating case of balancing justice with practical prosecution limits.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Retirement Planner (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see the importance of this policy, but it doesn't really impact me personally. It's good to know the system is considering such details, though.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $12000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $16000000)
Year 2: $12000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $16000000)
Year 3: $12500000 (Low: $8500000, High: $16500000)
Year 5: $13000000 (Low: $9000000, High: $17000000)
Year 10: $14000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $18000000)
Year 100: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)
Key Considerations
- The policy may encourage a re-examination of currently unsolved or previously closed cases, leading to justice for victims' families.
- Legal challenges could arise due to the longer time elapsed since the original crime, including deteriorated evidence quality.
- Balancing legal system resource allocations for both old and new cases may become more challenging.