restorative justice

• changing the emphasis:

  person convicted of an offence regarded as committing crime against state. RJP emphasis on needs of the victim and doing this seeks progress
• key features:

  • trained mediator supervises
  • face to face or remote
  • victim has the chance to confront offender and explain how they were affected
  • positive outcome for both
  • relevant community members have a role
• sentencing and restitution:

  occurs pre-trial or alongside prison sentence to reduce length. traditional monetary payments for harm. but presently it can be varied can include repairing damaged property
• restorative justice council:

  establishes clear standard of RJ and supports victim and specialist in field
• +recidivism. strang 2013 meta analysis. compared RJ to convists who ahd just experienced custodial sentencing. RJ less likely to reoffend. reduction larger in offenders who committed violent crime rather than property. bain 2012 review 24 studies published reduced recidivism when in person compared to general community involvement. suggests it has a positive impact on reoffending
• -abuse the system. sucess of RJ system hinges on the intention being honourable that they take part because they regret and want to make ammends. but gijeseham 2003 suggests offenders use RJ for avoiding punishment playing down their faults. this would explain why not all offenders benefit from RJ and go on to reoffend
• +evidence of positive outcomes. shapland 2005 reported results of a major 7 yr research project. headline figures 85% survivors satisfied meeting offender face to face. 78% recommend to others similar situation. 605 made them feel better and allow closure. only 2% made them feel worse. suggests RJ achieves some of it's aims helping survivors of crime cope with aftermath. therefore it is effective