Restorative Justice Process

While The Little Book of Restorative Justice for Colleges and Universities has many merits it also posses some off-putting weaknesses. Karp opens his work up for criticism and makes it less likely to be accepted or seen as a serious alternative to the traditional disciplinary systems with the inclusion of frivolous illustrations and talks of the spiritual. The Little Book also lacks much evidence outside of personal testimony or the authors own reasoning —while that can be strong evidence, empirical evidence have a place in this discussion.

Julie Hilt is the executive director of the Solano County Bar Association. Julie realized that Solano County didn’t have a restorative justice program. Julie realizes this program is new to Solano County and hope the program is supported in the community. Julie states the purpose of the restorative justice program in Solano County focus is to restore the community and promote healing after a crime; the process has additional benefits, such as increased restitution for victims, greater satisfaction with the system and potentially lower recidivism. Julie believes the restorative justice program is designed to teach the offender to be accountable for their wrong doings. Julie says the practices of the program are allowing the victim(s) who is willing the opportunity to come forward and participate in a face to face meeting with offenders.

It has been three years since James Holmes entered a theatre in Aurora, Colorado and began firing at every person in the theatre. The theatre was showing a debut for “The Dark Knight Rises” when Holmes entered wearing head-to-toe gear and a gas mask. This story rattled the nation as it made movie theatres a thing to fear. Now, three years later, it has been announced that Holmes will spend life in prison (Pearson, 2012). The process of restorative justice was not used in the case itself, but examples of restoration can be seen in areas surrounding the case.

In After the Crime: The Power of Restorative Justice Dialogues between Victims and Violent Offenders, its author Susan Miller, provides the reason to why it might be beneficial for both a victim and their offender to meet face-to-face after the crime. Not to mention, what has to happen in order to achieve that through two types of restorative programs. One of the programs is intended to benefit an offender and is known as Diversionary Restorative Justice. This program operates much different from the common Criminal Justice process as it focuses on minimizing the sentence given and seeks to rehabilitate the offender and offers less punishment. This program benefits the offender in their rehabilitative treatment but at the same time benefits

Since these judges have no idea what the restorative justice model is an explanation would be necessary in order to make sure that everyone is one the same page. For example, I would let them know that the restorative justice model is an approach to justification that solemnly focuses on what the victims and offenders need. Also, it would involve the community but the main goal is to punish the offender for the wrong doing that they have committed. Once they understand exactly what the restorative justice model is it is easier to explain who would be involved in the process. Obviously, the victim and the offender would be two main people who would be involved in this process.

Restorative justice takes responsibility to prevent these harmful attitudes and feelings. Criticism of RJ in Hate Crimes The most obvious issue in regard to using RJ with hate crime is tackling the power imbalance between the parties. Remedi, a non-profit organization that facilitates mediations, notes that mediations would not occur in many instances of violent crimes or harassment will not go through mediation because of the risk of repeat victimization. Another issue in regards to using RJ to deal with hate crime is whether it responds to hate offenders to changes their views, stop

Umbreit etal have conducted a study on the significance of the lens on restorative justice dialogue in Minnesota in 2009. In most RJ programs, victims and offenders engage in direct dialogue about a specific offense or infraction, with the presence of at least one-third person who serves as a mediator, facilitator, convener, or circle keeper. The purpose of the study was to learn whether the use of Restorative Justice Programs would bring positive outcomes when restoring broken relationship and trust between victim and offender. The survey also covered participation

Restorative justice is based on the principle that criminal behavior injures not only the victim but also the community and the offender, and any effort to resolve these problems caused by criminal behavior should involve all of these parties. Common restorative justice initiatives are victim-offender mediation, circle sentencing, community holistic healing programs, and family group conferences. A key to all these responses to criminal behavior is to address not only the offender, but all parties involved including the victim and their families, offender's family, community citizens, and even the police officers themselves.

The purpose of the restorative justice involves three basic goals: reestablishing the victims, reuniting offenders to the community, and helping to heal the community (Goodstein, and Butterfield, 2010). After being charged with an offense, the offender will always have that label on them and how everyone acts towards the offender will change. Restorative justice practices gives the offender a chance to change their outlook on life after being charged. These type of practices involve repairing and restoring relationships. Victims have the chance to come face-to-face with their offenders which could possibly lead to closure.

According to Victim-Offender Mediation and Violent Crimes: On the way to Justice by Ilyssa Wellikoff says, "Victim-offender mediation, which developed in the United States around 1970, has obtained a reputation as being an effective and viable form of restorative justice. This program unites victims with their offenders in order to facilitate dialogue that will aid in both the victim's and the offender's healing. " The United States focuses more on just punishing the offender and does not consider how the victim feels of the situation. The United States first instinct is to keep reincarnating the offender instead of trying to figure out a better solution for them. Victim-offender mediation allows the victim to be part of the process after the offence has been made.

My initial reaction to the concept and process of restorative justice was positive. I am in full agreement to the process and feel this is a program that should be implemented in schools, justice systems, at home, and in the community. Van Wormer describes this program goal is to work together as a community (community building) to restore what was once whole and holding the offender accountable for damages (Van Wormer & Besthorn, 2011). Restorative justice is a humane way of problem solving and giving the opportunity for the offender to understand the effects made on the community, it's a form of therapy to discuss the underlying causes and issues. This provides the opportunity for both victim and offender to heal and create solutions.

A key aspect of restorative justice lies in the offender apologizing for the crime and members

The criminal justice system views any crime as a crime committed against the state and places much emphasis on retribution and paying back to the community, through time, fines or community work. Historically punishment has been a very public affair, which was once a key aspect of the punishment process, through the use of the stocks, dunking chair, pillory, and hangman’s noose, although in today’s society punishment has become a lot more private (Newburn, 2007). However it has been argued that although the debt against the state has been paid, the victim of the crime has been left with no legal input to seek adequate retribution from the offender, leaving the victim perhaps feeling unsatisfied with the criminal justice process.

The criminal justice system is a set of agencies and processes established by governments to control crime and impose penalties on those who violate laws. Different jurisdictions have diverse laws, agencies, and ways of managing criminal justice processes. In recent years, it has been debated that the criminal justice system has two primary and possibility conflicting perspectives known as the retributive justice approach and the restorative justice approach. Retributive justice and restorative justice have contrasting approaches when imposing punishment, that will be explored within this research paper, in regards to the disadvantages and potential advantages resulting from the implementation of it’s polices within the criminal justice system. These two perspectives have been implemented amongst many different criminal justice systems internationally, however the questions still remain, what is justice? And how should justice be served? This debate has created a divide between countries, due to the differing interpretations of justice and it’s response to criminal activity. The statistical information has been extracted from various online sources listed within the references as well as primary and secondary sources, “Prisons” by Haley, James and “Alternatives to Prisons” by Jennifer Skancke.

Restorative justice has some key restorative values that are vital in the restorative justice conference to make the experience ‘restorative’. Concerning addressing victim needs and concerns means for listening, respecting, being non-judgmental, not blaming the victim and apologizing. The RJ system was bought as an alternative to the criminal justice system to give greater emphasis on victim rights and needs, offender accountability and community involvement. Throughout the essay, there will be an insight into how Restorative Justice addresses needs of victims in terms of the different proponents such as Information provided to victim, restitution/compensation, emotional and practical needs met, participation and involvement of victim and protection of victim, which (Wemmers and Marisa, 2002) as essentials to victims participating in the practice. The two countries that will be addressed will have had restorative justice built out of injustices and over-representation of the current criminal justice system to the indigenous peoples of those countries.