dealing with offending behaviour - restorative justice

Question 1

changing the emphasis

Answer 1

• historically, someone convicted of criminal offence would be regarded as committing crime against state
• restorative justice programmes switch emphasis from needs of state to needs of individual victim (to feel compensated in some way and come to terms with the crime)
• method of treatment seeks to be healing process, John Braithwaite suggests ‘crime hurts. justice should heal’
• restorative justice less about retribution (ie. punishing offenders) and more about reparation (repairing harm they have caused)

restorative justice seeks to focus on 2 things -
- victim or survivor of crime and their recovery
- the offender and their recovery / rehabilitation process

Question 2

key features of the programme

Answer 2

• trained mediator supervises meeting (forensic psychologist, social worker etc.)
• non-courtroom setting, offenders voluntarily meet with survivors
• face-to-face or conducted remotely
• survivor given opportunity to confront offender and explain effect of crime, enables offender to comprehend consequences of actions
• offender can read impact statement, gives victims a voice and allows offenders to see the impact of their crime
• active rather than passive involvement of all parties
• focus on positive outcomes for survivors and offenders, helps to improve offender’s empathy
• relevant community members may have role, such as neighbours, may wish to explain effects of crime

Question 3

sentencing and restitution

Answer 3

• restorative justice may occur pre-trial, could function alongside prison sentence or as an alternative to prison, or as an incentive to reduce length of sentence
• restitution often seen as monetary payment by offender to survivor for harm caused
• offender may make financial restitution to survivor, may reflect psychological damage or physical damage caused
• idea of restitution can be in a more emotional sense
• offender can support healing process by repairing and rebuilding survivor’s confidence or self-esteem

Question 4

restorative justice council

Answer 4

• RJC is independent body who establish clear standards for use of restorative justice, and to support survivors and professionals in the field
• they advocate use of restorative practice beyond dealing with crime
• can be used in preventing and managing conflict in areas including schools, workplaces and hospital

Question 5

evaluation strength - needs of the survivor ⭐️

Answer 5

• Restorative Justice Council reported results of 7 year research project
• 85% of survivors reported satisfaction with process of meeting offender face to face
• 78% would recommend to other people in similar situation
• 60% felt that process made them feel better about incident, allowing them to move on
• restorative justice achieves some of its aims, helping survivors come with aftermath of incident
• allows survivors to have closure, knowing that the offender knows the consequences of their crimes, allows survivor to move on with their life
• Peter Woolf, didn’t feel motivated to participate in RJ originally
• he became motivated to get better due to not originally realising the effect he was having on victims
• support for RJ achieving its aims and improving offenders’ empathy

Question 6

evaluation limitation - counterpoint to needs of the survivor

Answer 6

• Wood and Suzuki argue that restorative processed are not as survivor-focused as often reported
• they say that restorative justice processes can become distorted, eg. when survivors are used as a way of helping to rehabilitate offenders rather than being helped themselves
• needs of survivor may be seen as secondary to need to rehabilitate offenders

Question 7

evaluation strength - recidivism

Answer 7

• meta-analysis of 10 studies by Strang compared offenders who experienced face-to-face restorative justice with those who just experienced custodial sentencing
• restorative justice group significantly less likely to reoffend
• reduction larger in offenders convicted of violent crime
• review of 24 studies by Bain found lowered recidivism rates with adult offenders
• restorative justice has positive impact on reoffending, more so for some types of offence
• more likely to lead to a long term change, if offenders internalise the effect they have had on victims
• if offenders can accept responsibility for their crimes then they may be less likely to try and minimalise their crimes, they accept that it is their fault

Question 8

evaluation limitation - abusing the system ⭐️

Answer 8

• success of restorative justice may depend on offenders’ intentions being honourable, they must be taking part because they have regrets and want to make amends
• Van Gijsehem suggests that offenders may use restorative justice for other reasons such as avoiding punishment
• this explains why not all offenders benefit from restorative justice, and go on to reoffend

Question 9

evaluation limitation - not appropriate for all types of crime

Answer 9

• RJ would work better for crimes such as burglary
• wouldn’t work as well for domestic abuse cases, very complex to get two people who used to be in a relationship to have a conversation with each other
• wouldn’t work for aggressive crimes and murder, offender cannot speak to murder victim, family and friends are unlikely to want to speak with the murder / abuser
• psychopaths do not care for other people’s feelings so are much less likely to internalise the consequences of their crimes and the effect on other people