California Crime Victim Fund Faces Backlash for Lack of Action
Ruby Marichalar’s heartbreaking experience with California’s crime victim compensation fund sheds light on the challenges faced by many survivors. Denied an in-person meeting after her claim was rejected, Marichalar’s story is just one of many that have raised concerns about the fund’s efficacy and compassion.
The California Victim Compensation Board, responsible for collecting restitution and offering financial aid to crime survivors, denied Marichalar’s claim twice without ever meeting her. This failure to provide a hearing, as required by California law, highlights a systemic issue that has left many survivors feeling neglected and unsupported.
A recent court order revealed that the compensation board had been relying on an invalid regulation for over a decade, preventing individuals like Marichalar from receiving the in-person hearings they are entitled to. Now, the agency is seeking additional funding to address this issue and expedite the appeals process for thousands of applicants.
Established 60 years ago, the victim compensation program is overseen by three members, including State Controller Malia Cohen and Contra Costa County District Attorney Diana Becton. Despite approving over 31,000 applications in the last state budget year, the agency denied more than 9,000 claims, sparking criticism from survivors and advocates.
Gena Castro Rodriguez, an expert from the University of San Francisco, describes the compensation board’s approach as resembling an insurance agency, with stringent criteria that often leave survivors in the dark about why their claims are denied. A recent report found that 70% of surveyed crime survivors were unaware of the reasons behind the rejections.
The number of appeals has skyrocketed in recent years, with a nearly 200% increase since 2019. The prolonged appeals process, averaging 325 days, far exceeds the legal requirement of six months. The compensation board’s plea for additional funding to hire more staff reflects a critical need to address these delays and provide timely support to survivors.
Delaney Green, a clinical supervisor at UC Berkeley Law, emphasizes the importance of prioritizing survivors’ needs in accessing victim compensation. While the agency’s efforts to comply with the law are commendable, survivors like Marichalar have faced significant challenges in navigating the system and obtaining the support they deserve.
Jonathan Raven of the California District Attorneys Association underscores the need for the compensation board to prioritize compliance with the law to best serve crime victims. The recent court ruling invalidating the regulation that limited in-person hearings represents a crucial step towards ensuring due process for all survivors.
Marichalar’s personal story of loss and struggle highlights the emotional toll experienced by crime survivors. Denied the opportunity to present her case in person, she faced financial hardship and emotional distress in the aftermath of her son’s tragic death. The compensation board’s eventual reversal of its decision, albeit partial, underscored the importance of listening to survivors’ voices and providing empathetic support.
As the compensation board grapples with its shortcomings and seeks to improve its services, survivors like Marichalar remain hopeful for a more compassionate and efficient system. While the road ahead may be challenging, the shared goal of supporting crime survivors in their journey towards healing and recovery must remain paramount.
