Restorative justice

• Ethics from victim's perspective:

  May feel worse after (psychological harm). May feel criminal showed no empathy for harm caused, feel 'injured' for second time- leads to low self-esteem. May feel taken advantage of if criminal offered RJ as opposed to custodial sentence, especially if criminal not taking it seriously. May feel embarrassed by proceedings.
• Ethics from offender's perspective:

  Can lead to abuses of power- victims can gang up on offender, especially if it's a child. Victims may shame offender (not intention of process). Process intended to provide mutual benefits so it's important offender also feels understood.
• Selecting which offenders & which victims:

  System never able to apply to all offenders & victims, e.g, murderers. Firstly, offender needed- Zehr (2002) claims RJ can take place without them. Secondly, some kinds of crime not suitable. Victims may decline offer.
• Sherman & Strang (2007)


  Reviewed 20 studies of face-to-face meetings between offender & victim in US, UK & Australia. All studies showed reduced reoffending & none were linked to higher reoffending. In 1 study (142 males convicted of violence & property offences) there were lower reoffending rates (11%) as compared with a matched control group who served short prison sentence (37% reoffending).
• UK restorative Justice Council (2015)


  Reports 85% satisfaction from victims in face-to-face meetings with their offender(s). These reports covered large range of different crimes from theft to violent crime. 1 police force (Avon & Somerset) reported 92.5% victim satisfaction when victims had been subject of violent crime. Dignan (2005)- victims claim greater sense of satisfaction than when cases go through mainstream courts.
• Wider approach in community (social implications):

  Fully functioning RJ programme should go beyond offender & victim to include wider community. E.,g peace circles (community programme) used in communities where violence & crime levels high. Aim to foster an environment of respect so community offers support to victim & welcomes offender to enable mutual understanding.
• Pranis et al (2003)


  Everyone sits in chairs in circle. 'Talking Piece' passed from 1 person to another around circle so person can speak uninterrupted. 'Keeper' maintains atmosphere of respect & articulate constructive solutions.
• Wilson et al (2007)


  Other kinds of 'circles of support' that have developed with aim of giving community support to offenders to prevent reoffending instead of excluding them.
• UK restorative justice council:

  Reduced reoffending means £8 saved for every £1 spent on restorative processes. Cost of RJ sometimes funded by fines paid by offenders. Financial benefits to community.