Teen Court: What Jurors Can Tell Us About the Process

Teen courts are on the increase throughout the United States. These courts provide an opportunity for youth offenders to receive sentences from their adolescent peers rather than from an adult panel or judge. Yet, we know t very little about the teen jurors' perspective or whether their sentences reflect restorative justice principles. In more than 100 youth juror surveys, t teens describe their experiences as they develop sentences consistent with restorative justice tenets. Through their participation, youth jurors gain practical knowledge about and respect for the judicial system. The efficacy of the sentences is validated by high offender sentence completion.     

Do Retributive and Restorative Justice Processes Address Different Symbolic Concerns?

In support of a unitary conceptualization of retributive justice (justice through the imposition of punishment) and restorative justice (justice through dialogue aimed at consensus), three studies using hypothetical and recalled experiences of victimization found that people’s endorsement of, and satisfaction with, either justice notion depends on the symbolic meaning of the transgression. In Study 1, perceiving the transgression as a status/power violation was uniquely related to the endorsement of retributive justice, whereas perceiving it as a violation of shared values was uniquely related to restorative justice. In Study 2, motivation to restore status/power was related to retributive responses, whereas motivation to restore value consensus with the offender was uniquely related to restorative responses. In Study 3, a scenario experiment, respondents called for greater additional sanction when the applied justice process (retributive vs. restorative) did not fit the salient meaning of the transgressions compared to when it did (status/power vs. values).     

A Prospective Longitudinal Study of Teen Court's Impact on Offending Youths' Behavior

Although teen court is the fastest growing alternative processing model in juvenile justice, there has been little systematic investigation of offenders' impressions of the process and no attempt to measure changes in delinquent behavior. This study employed a prospective longitudinal design to measure several impressions of teen court using a questionnaire, and changes in self‐reported delinquency using the YSR and CBCL. Impressions of teen court did not predict compliance with the teen court sentence or lower risk of recidivism once demographic and prior delinquency were taken into account, although delinquent behavior did decrease between intake and six months for boys, who reported more delinquent behavior at intake. Interpretation of these results involves teen court's location at the soft end of juvenile justice. Implications for net‐widening and changing not‐so‐delinquent youths' behavior are central to this discussion.     

Family Conferencing for Juvenile Offenders: A Singaporean Case Study in Restorative Justice

Restorative justice has been or is being adopted in many parts of the world, including countries in Asia. In the case of Singapore, restorative justice was adopted by the court system in 1997 as its guiding philosophy in its approach towards juvenile offenders. This article traces the adoption of restorative justice by the Juvenile Court in Singapore and the use of family conferencing in the light of the principles of restorative justice. It concludes by suggesting areas where the family conferencing system in Singapore can be improved, and possible lessons for other jurisdictions considering adopting family conferencing.     

Responding to young people responsible for harm: a comparative study of restorative and conventional approaches

Research investigating the impact of restorative responses on offenders has increased in sophistication and complexity over the last decade. Extending beyond earlier studies documenting satisfaction with restorative justice, investigators have considered its relationship with recidivism, reparation compliance and perception of fairness. A few experimental studies have compared conventional and restorative approaches, with results generally favoring the latter. This study focuses on intermediate outcomes of justice approaches on adolescents responsible for harm. These outcomes represent benefits of restorative justice often theoretically argued but rarely empirically evaluated. The study employed a quasi‐experimental design and scales developed through previous qualitative research and consultation with stakeholders. Adolescents participating in conventional vs restorative responses, in both court and school contexts, were compared on eight variables in three areas: accountability, relationship repair and closure. While some variation in outcome depends on context, the results add to the growing literature documenting the benefits of restorative approaches.     

Youth justice conferencing and indigenous over-representation in the Queensland juvenile justice system: a micro-simulation case study

Restorative justice conferencing for young offenders is firmly established in Australian juvenile justice, and legislated conferencing schemes are operating in all Australian states and territories. While there is some variation in the terms used to describe restorative justice conferences (e.g., family group conferencing, family conferencing, or youth justice conferencing), there is much more consistency in how the conferencing process is managed across Australian jurisdictions. In Queensland youth justice conferencing is a process that brings together an offender, the victim and their supporters to discuss the harm caused by the offending behaviour and provide the young person with an opportunity to take responsibility for his or her behaviour and make amends. This paper begins by briefly sketching the development of restorative justice conferencing in Queensland and describes the Juvenile Justice Simulation Model (JJSM), a micro-simulation model developed for criminal justice policy analysis in Queensland, Australia. We use this micro-simulation model to conduct an experimental exploration of the effects that youth justice conferencing has on system-wide outcomes for indigenous young people. The model simulates the impact of interventions up until 2011 on the number of finalised youth justice court appearances. Our results indicate that youth justice conferencing is unlikely to reduce the over-representation of indigenous young people in the juvenile justice system. The simulations demonstrated that, by the 2011, youth justice conferencing would result in a 12.5% decrease in finalised court appearances. Unfortunately, this decrease was more apparent for non-indigenous young people (13.7% decrease in court appearances) than for indigenous young people, who had a 10.5% decrease in court appearances. This differential impact of conferencing is due to the different court appearance profiles between indigenous and non-indigenous young offenders, with indigenous young people initiating offending at an earlier age and offending more frequently than non-indigenous young offenders.     

Retributive and Restorative Justice

The emergence of restorative justice as an alternative model to Western, court-based criminal justice may have important implications for the psychology of justice. It is proposed that two different notions of justice affect responses to rule-breaking: restorative and retributive justice. Retributive justice essentially refers to the repair of justice through unilateral imposition of punishment, whereas restorative justice means the repair of justice through reaffirming a shared value-consensus in a bilateral process. Among the symbolic implications of transgressions, concerns about status and power are primarily related to retributive justice and concerns about shared values are primarily related to restorative justice. At the core of these processes, however, lies the parties’ construal of their identity relation, specifically whether or not respondents perceive to share an identity with the offender. The specific case of intergroup transgressions is discussed, as are implications for future research on restoring a sense of justice after rule-breaking.     

An empirical assessment of the process of restorative justice

This study involved an empirical assessment of restorative justice processes with an application of a theoretical model proposed by Presser and Van Voorhis (2002). Their model identified three common procedural activities associated with restorative justice: dialogue, relationship building, and communication of moral values. This study utilized secondary data, consisting of observation and interview data, originally obtained by Sherman, Braithwaite, Strang, and Barnes (1999) for their Reintegrative Shaming Experiments (RISE) in Australia, 1995-1999, to test the theoretical model. The results generally supported the hypothesis that the restorative justice program engaged offenders in dialogue, relationship building, and moral communication to a greater degree than traditional court proceedings. An unexpected result emerged in the interview data showing that violent offenders in the restorative justice program did not report a greater sense of relationship building than those in court proceedings. Possible explanations accounting for the anomaly are provided. Implications for policy and future studies derived from the findings are also discussed.     

The long-term impact of restorative justice programming for juvenile offenders

While extant research generally supports restorative justice as an alternative to traditional juvenile court processing, much of this research is limited to short-term follow-up periods examining only prevalence of reoffense. In addition, recent meta-analyses point to several study design characteristics, the impacts of which are not well understood. This study compared long-term outcomes of youth referred to restorative justice and traditional juvenile court processing using multiple outcome measures. Specifically, the authors examined the impact of restorative justice referral on prevalence of reoffense, number of later official contacts, and seriousness of later offending behavior over several follow-up periods up to four years post-referral.     

Teaching restorative justice: developing a restorative andragogy for face-to-face,online and hybrid course modalities

Teaching restorative justice in an academic setting is different from teaching almost any other academic course. Courses taught in the context of academic criminal justice programs tend to reinforce the structural inequalities in society, replicated and reinforced by instructor driven classroom experiences. In contrast, effective teaching of restorative justice should emulate the values of principles of restorative justice in the organization and management of the course. Teachers of restorative justice must ‘walk the talk’ and apply restorative principles and values to the design and delivery of the course itself. A conceptual framework for ‘restorative andragogy’ is developed that blends principles and values of adult learning with those of restorative justice. Four principles of this approach are identified and applied across three instructional modalities – face-to-face, online only, and hybrid courses. This approach provides a theoretically grounded model for effective teaching of restorative justice courses.     

Restorative Justice,Consistency and Proportionality: Examining the Trade-off

Abstract

Restorative justice conferences that operate as sentencing mechanisms involve the making of a trade-off between empowering lay participants to make their own decisions, and the requirements of consistency and proportionality, which are established principles of sentencing. In current restorative justice practice, this trade-off tends to be made more in favour of consistency and proportionality, at the expense of the empowerment of lay participants.

Empowerment is central to key benefits of restorative justice, such as reducing recidivism and increasing victim satisfaction. However, its importance to the effectiveness of restorative justice is not always properly acknowledged. In addition to this lack of acknowledgment, there are both conceptual and practical problems with the principles of consistency and proportionality (particularly in the way that they are presented when considered in relation to restorative justice) that are often overlooked. As a result, the tendency is for assumptions to be made about the necessary supremacy of these principles over empowerment. This paper urges more acknowledgement of the importance of empowerment in restorative justice, together with a greater appreciation of the problems with consistency and proportionality, with a view to challenging assumptions about the way that the trade-off must be made.     

Is restorative justice for sexual crime compatible with various criminal justice systems?

In addition to the more conventional approaches of the criminal justice system, this article suggests that there is a need for restorative justice as another method of addressing sexual crime. In support of this view, the present article explores the possibility of a hybrid justice system based on a complementary relationship between restorative justice and the criminal justice system. An analysis of the limits of the criminal justice system and the need for restorative justice in the contentious area of sexual crime will be followed by a detailed examination of key justice considerations when trying to marry both criminal justice and restorative justice perspectives. Such considerations include: the meaning of justice; legislation; sentencing principles; due process; victims’ rights; and the location of restorative justice within/alongside/outside the criminal justice system. The aim of this article is to determine whether it is possible to reconcile two seemingly juxtaposed methods of justice delivery in the context of sexual crime in order to create a hybrid system of justice that best protects and responds to the rights and needs of victims and offenders.     

Contesting policy that undermines restorative justice for victims of crime☆

A policy provision in the Criminal Victim Assistance Program in British Columbia excludes the offender from participating in restorative justice approaches with the victim (and other affected parties) during counseling. A historical analysis of victim responses to crime shows that the victim experience to crime is socially constructed. In this regard, this policy act that excludes offenders from the victim healing process is consistent with a traditional approach to justice, which understands the offender to have committed a crime against the state, not the victim; however, separating the offender from the healing process is problematic within a restorative framework of justice where relationality is a central premise. Using a restorative lens, this policy act is contrary to an accompanying statute that has explicit provisions for counseling support for crime victims, as well as other statutes that provide for restorative responses to crime in Canada. The way we counsel and support victims from the harms created by crime cannot be separated from our view of justice.     

Administration and Justice

Although the existence of plea negotiation as an operative mode of disposition in most criminal court systems has been firmly established, its role in the administration of justice remains a topic of considerable debate. It has been claimed that plea negotiation subverts ideal principles of justice while attending to administrative needs for speedy case settlement. More recent research indicates that disposition by guilty plea is a complex process that incorporates system needs as well as principles of justice. Findings from an exploratory study of the felony disposition guilty plea is a complex process that incorporates system needs as well as principles of justice. Findings from an exploratory study of the felony disposition process in the Multnomah County court system in Portland, Oregon suggest that, under certain conditions, plea negotiation can effect a balance between competing but interdependent domains of action in the criminal disposition process.     

The emergence of restorative justice in Sri Lanka: a review essay

Within the framework of retributive justice, crime is understood as an offence against the State and is defined as a violation of law. It represents the punitive approach of reaction to crime, where the offenders are considered as an unwanted group who should be punished. However, with the development of criminology, offenders are identified as the persons needing rehabilitation and reintegration into the society as law abiding citizens. This novel thinking has paved the way to the establishment of the concept of restorative justice where crime is understood to be an infringement on man and human relationship. It involves reintegration of both the offender and victim within the community. The restorative justice principle could be found in community service orders, probation, parole, and other noncustodial measures as alternatives to the traditional incarceration, victim offender mediation, sentencing, peacemaking and healing circles, police cautions, and active participation of victims in the criminal justice process, and so on. This article evaluates Sri Lanka's transformation from retributive justice to restorative justice by incorporating the above-mentioned means and methods to the criminal justice system. Further, it examines how these innovations have affected the crime rate in Sri Lanka.     

Engaging students on the topic of restorative justice and serious offenses

Within contemporary society, there is a prevailing sentiment that our criminal justice system leaves much to be desired in its responses to the offender, the victim, and the community. As a potential answer to these conceded shortcomings, restorative justice has earned significant recognition and consideration. While restorative justice principles and programs have received increasing support, for many individuals this is limited to cases involving relatively ‘minor,’ first time, and/or juvenile offenses. When it comes to situations with more ‘serious’ and violent offenses, acceptance of restorative responses dissipates. Gaining broader acceptance can be particularly challenging with current college students. With many students raised in the ‘get tough on crime’ era, embracing this alternative approach to serious crimes can be a difficult paradigm shift. This article will provide a framework for approaching the feasibility of applying restorative justice with serious offenses in the college course. In addition, suggestions for readings, projects, and assignments that will further assist in effectively engaging students with these issues will be provided.     

Correcting Community Service: From Work Crews to Community Work in a Juvenile Court

In 2001, the Clark County Juvenile Court in Washington State implemented the use of “restorative community service” (RCS) as part of its larger adoption of a restorative justice framework. This paper explores the court’s implementation and use of RCS, including: (1) the types of institutional changes made by the court in its development of RCS, (2) the types and qualities of social interactions observed by the researcher through participant observation at several RCS sites, (3) the practical implications of these findings for proponents of restorative justice in the use of community service in youth settings, and (4) the theoretical implications of these findings for sociological and criminological research on community service.     

The Organization and Operation of Teen Courts in the United States: A Comparative Analysis of Legislation

Teen courts are juvenile justice diversion programs found in most states. Programs vary significantly between, and even within, states, making regulation cumbersome. Their grass roots nature requires legislative latitude so each program can meet the specific needs of the communities they serve. States have passed both specific and broad legislation acknowledging their existence and providing referral sources. This article examines teen court legislation from every state, analyzes each, and draws conclusions about teen courts from a legislative perspective.     

‘Joe everyday,people off the street’: a qualitative study on mediators’ roles and skills in victim–offender mediation

This qualitative study examined multiple perspectives of participants who experienced a Victim–Offender Mediation (VOM) program in a Midwestern city in the United States. Of particular interest are the roles and skills of mediators. Data consisted of 34 face‐to‐face interviews with 37 participants including adult crime victims, juvenile offenders and their parents, mediators and representatives from referring agencies. Insider perspectives regarding the roles and skills of the mediators in restorative processes were revealed through personal stories. Although the majority of the participants reported that the roles and skills of mediators were consistent with restorative justice principles, this exploratory study also revealed that some roles and skills exhibited by mediators were inconsistent with restorative justice values, which shows the variance of ‘real world’ restorative justice. Recommendations are made to promote mediators’ roles and skills that are compatible with restorative justice principles.