“Walking in her shoes”: The Impact of Victim Impact Panels on Perpetrators of Intimate Partner Violence

Restorative justice models have had success with some issues within the criminal justice system; however, advocates and researchers within the intimate partner violence practice community have been reluctant to embrace this model. Criminal justice responses for intimate partner violence continue to be founded on a blend of retributive and rehabilitative justice models. Despite this reluctance, use of the restorative justice intervention of victim impact panels, may have targeted utility for increasing perpetrators’ empathy for their victims. The author 2examined responses from perpetrators who were mandated to participate in a victim impact panel experience as part of the coordinated community system response to intimate partner violence.     

Looking Back to the Future: Threats to the Success of Restorative Justice in the United Kingdom

Abstract

Recent years have witnessed an entrenchment of restorative justice principles and practices in the youth and adult criminal justice systems of the United Kingdom. This research presents a comparative analysis of the findings of two empirical studies—one of a police restorative cautioning scheme conducted 15 years ago, and the second a contemporary study of youth offender panels. In this research, we argue that restorative justice practices in the United Kingdom are repeating history, rather than learning from it. Specifically, we argue that if restorative justice programs continue to proliferate with the same shortcomings—most notably, inadequate victim involvement, failure to provide a genuine role for the community, and targeting only relatively low-level crime—the future for restorative justice in the United Kingdom is likely to be bleak.     

Restorative Justice Models in Cases of Intimate Partner Violence: Reviewingthe Evidence

Despite increased public awareness and professional intervention, men's violence against their female partners continues to be a grave reality that challenges those involved to seek better solutions. In recent years, restorative justice has become an established alternative to the criminal justice system for dealing with a number of crimes, and is now starting to be applied to cases of intimate partner violence. However, given the unique social, relational, and psychological contexts of these crimes, doubts are also emerging around the appropriateness of these applications. This paper addresses this debate by reviewing the evidence supporting the use of restorative justice models for various populations, and their ability to address the particular concerns of those affected by intimate partner violence. It explores the fit between restorative justice principles and processes, and what is known about the needs and capacities of this group of victims, offenders, and the communities to which they belong. It is concluded that while the restorative justice model shows promise, there is insufficient evidence at this time to support its use in situations of intimate partner violence.     

Repositioning Restorative Justice in Europe

Abstract

Over the last 20 years, the European Union (EU) has invested considerable amount of resources in supporting policies and legislation that promote mediation and other restorative justice (RJ) practices at the national and regional level. Alongside these developments a series of legal safeguards, standards, and regulations were introduced to mainstream restorative justice in European criminal justice systems. While we are far from claiming that a unified restorative justice model exists across European countries, the standardization of restorative justice through top-down approaches raises serious concerns around its viability as a community-born ethos. This article draws from the findings of an EU-funded research project that focused on the implementation of the restorative justice articles of the. Victims’ Directive. The article argues that if restorative justice is not repositioned in Europe through innovation and bottom-up structures of community, unregulated, unregistered, and localized projects, it will soon face its demise. The mainstreaming, regulation, and state control of restorative justice in Europe must be balanced against what Nils Christie identified as its original intention of returning conflicts re property.     

The Role of Forms of Traumatic Exposure in Relational and Physical Aggression Perpetrated by Incarcerated Men and Women

The relationship between history of trauma and violence is well studied. However, the relationship between trauma and relational aggression is not. And yet relational aggression is of considerable relevance to the criminal justice system. This study was designed to extend the literature on trauma and violence by including a measure of relational aggression and testing for sex differences. The sample was comprised of incarcerated men (N = 125) and women (N = 141). Data were collected from inmate interviews and inmate completion of a battery of instruments. Regression analyses revealed that of three types of trauma, only a history of interpersonal nonsexual trauma predicted the perpetration of both relational aggression and physical aggression while incarcerated, although no sex differences emerged. Results provide guidance for intervention efforts.     

What is Restorative Justice? Fresh Answers to a Vexed Question

Abstract

It has become commonplace to say that restorative justice cannot be defined. I argue that restorative justice can and must be defined concretely as a justice mechanism. I develop this argument with four points: (1) restorative justice is not a type of justice, it is a justice mechanism; (2) retributive justice is not a type of justice or a justice mechanism; (3) restorative justice is one of many justice mechanisms under an innovative justice umbrella; and (4) restorative justice can be defined. The way forward is to assess and compare a variety of justice mechanisms, which reside on a continuum from conventional to innovative. In time, the justice mechanisms studied may come to matter more than the concept of restorative justice.     

Anxiously Awaiting the Future of Restorative Justice in the United States

Abstract

The problems of mass incarceration and other criminal justice system failures in the United States—such as racial disparities, wrongful convictions, and high recidivism rates—have reached a tipping point. For the first time in decades, coalitions of politicians on the left and right are seeking criminal justice reform. What is the place of restorative justice in these efforts? What is the depth and breadth of restorative justice implementation? How familiar is the American public with restorative justice? How successful is the restorative justice movement? In this article, we seek answers to these questions as we try to assess the future of restorative justice in the United States.     

Community Participation in Restorative Justice: Rituals,Reintegration, and Quasi-Professionalization

Abstract

Community has long been identified as the key third party in restorative justice processes. However, when it comes to both theorizing community in restorative justice and the actual practice of community participation, conceptual clarity is lacking. A careful reading of the sociological literature on restorative justice and community point to two main reasons why we want to encourage community participation: the creation of effective ritual and offender reintegration. In this article, we present findings from an empirical study of conferencing. We explore varieties of community participation and discuss the benefits and tensions that arise when community participation becomes a formalized element of a mainstream restorative justice practice.     

The “Independent Variable” in Restorative Justice: Theory-Based Standards for Evaluating the Impact and Integrity of Victim Sensitive Process (Part II)

For almost two decades restorative justice practices have demonstrated positive impacts on crime victim satisfaction when compared to court and other adversarial processes. Although these practices have by no means addressed the myriad needs of crime victims, researchers and policy makers have puzzled about how to interpret these generally positive findings. We suggest that remaining difficulties in concluding that positive findings are a result of restorative process rather than some other factor (e.g., procedural justice) are due largely to (1) the lack of clear standards for gauging the integrity, or “restorativeness,” of interventions and (2) the failure to articulate logical mechanisms (i.e., intervention theories) that connect practices to immediate and intermediate outcomes, and these outcomes to long-term changes in the well-being of victims, offenders, and communities. In part 1 of a two-part discussion previously published in this journal, we described alternative definitions of restorative justice and outlined three core principles that provide a useful normative theory of restorative justice. In part 2, we focus on the “intervening variable” in restorative justice, utilizing qualitative data from a national case study to illustrate some potential immediate and intermediate outcomes of restorative justice practice on victims. We also discuss the implications of these outcomes for intervention theory and future research.     

Rethinking Prison Disciplinary Processes: A Potential Future for Restorative Justice

Abstract

The movement for restorative justice (RJ) has struggled with marginalization on the soft end of the criminal justice system where the threat of net widening and iatrogenesis looms large. To realize the full potential of RJ as an alternative philosophy of justice, restorative practices need to expand beyond the world of adolescent and small-level offenses into the deeper end of the justice system. Disciplinary hearings inside of adult prisons may be a strategic space to advance this expansion. This article presents findings from a study of prison discipline in four U.K. prisons. The findings strongly suggest that in their current form such disciplinary proceedings are viewed by prisoners as lacking in legitimacy. Although modeled after the adversarial system of the criminal court, the adjudications were instead universally derided as “kangaroo courts” lacking the basic elements of procedural justice. Based on these findings, we argue that RJ interventions may offer a viable redress to these problems of legitimacy which, if successful, would have ramifications that extend well beyond the prison walls.     

“Yardsticks” for Victim Sensitive Process: Principle-Based Standards for Gauging the Integrity of Restorative Justice Process

For almost two decades restorative justice practices have demonstrated positive impacts on crime victim satisfaction when compared to court and other adversarial processes. Although restorative justice practice has by no means addressed the myriad needs of the majority of crime victims, researchers and policy makers have puzzled about how to interpret these generally positive findings. We suggest that remaining difficulties in interpretation and application of findings are due largely to (1) the lack of clear standards for gauging the integrity, or “restorativeness,” of interventions and (2) the failure to articulate logical mechanisms (i.e., intervention theories) that connect practices to immediate and intermediate outcomes, and these outcomes to long term changes in the well-being of victims, offenders, and communities. This article focuses primarily on the first problem, defining the “independent variable” in restorative practices aimed at having an impact on crime victims. Using qualitative data from a national case study, a principle-based approach to evaluation with implications for intervention theory and both input and outcome measures in future research is proposed and briefly illustrated.     

Māori,Family Group Conferencing and the Mystifications of Restorative Justice

Abstract

The Family Group Conferencing (FGC) forum is often presented by policy entrepreneurs and advocates as indicative of the ability of restorative justice (RJ) to accommodate the cultural and justice needs of diverse populations. In this article, we present recent empirical research from one of the authors on Māori experiences of the forum. Drawing from this research, as well as other secondary sources, we demonstrate that far from being an exemplar of culturally appropriate justice practice, the forum is experienced by some Māori participants as one that encloses Indigenous culture and Indigenous participants within a Eurocentric, formulaic, and standardized process. The final section of our article reveals changes to the development of restorative policies and the practice in the Aotearoa New Zealand context that Māori participants believe are necessary to make the movement, and interventions such as the FGC, an empowering experience for Māori.     

Psychological Barriers to a Peaceful Resolution: Longitudinal Evidence from the Middle East and Northern Ireland

Does individual-level exposure to political violence prompt conciliatory attitudes? Does the answer vary by phase of conflict? The study uses longitudinal primary datasets to test the hypothesis that conflict-related experiences impact conciliation. Data were collected from Israeli Jews, Palestinians, and Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland. Across both contexts, and among both parties to each conflict, psychological distress and threat perceptions had a polarizing effect on conciliatory preferences. The study highlights that experiences of political violence are potentially a crucial source of psychological distress, and consequently, a continuing barrier to peace. This has implications in peacemaking, implying that alongside removing the real threat of violence, peacemakers must also work toward the social and political inclusion of those most affected by previous violence.     

Transitional Justice as Global Project: critical reflections

This article critically reflects on the ways in which the global project of transitional justice is channelled or streamlined in its scope of application. Using the categories of when, to whom and for what transitional justice applies, it argues that transitional justice is typically constructed to focus on specific sets of actors for specific sets of crimes. This results in a fairly narrow interpretation of violence within a somewhat artificial time frame and to the exclusion of external actors. The article engages themes of gender, power and structural violence to caution against the narrowing and depoliticisation of transitional justice.     

Sexual Violence Against Marginalized Victims: Choice of Victim or Victim of Choice?

Research shows that sex trade workers and homeless populations are at a high risk of severe violence and homicide. Based on a sample of 229 violent sex offenders, we investigate the differences between sexual crimes committed against marginalized (n = 73) and nonmarginalized victims (n = 156). Findings from logistic regression analyses show that offenders who target marginalized victims are more likely to degrade their victim and use a variety of torture methods. However, offenders who target nonmarginalized victims are more likely to use a weapon, and kill the victim by strangulation. Implications for future research are discussed.     

Four Challenges in the Future of Restorative Justice

Abstract

Restorative justice (RJ) emerged in the late 1970s as an alternative to conventional youth and criminal justice practices. Since this time, RJ has experienced rapid growth in theory and practice. At the same time, much of this growth has come from expansion in lower-end criminal justice responses to crime, and in the increasing use of the term “restorative” for a widening host of practices and interventions. RJ has also faced problems related to its increasing institutionalization, resulting in divergence from earlier aims and goals. In this article, we set forth what we see as the four biggest challenges facing the future of RJ, namely problems related to definition, institutionalization, displacement, and relevance of RJ practices. We follow with discussion of possible future directions of RJ.     

What Is the Hidden Figure of Delinquency in Girls? Scaling Up From Police Charges to Self-Reports

Research on males shows discrepancies between official records and self-reports of delinquency, thus creating a scaling-up factor. Comparable information for girls is still needed. We investigated discrepancies (scaling up factors) from official records to self-reports in a large sample of girls between ages 12 and 17 (N = 2,450). On average there were three self-reported juvenile female offenders for every individual charged by the police, and for every police charge there were four offenses that were committed. The scaling-up factor was highest in early adolescence, indicating that female offenders at a young age were more likely to stay undetected by the police. The scaling-up factor was significantly lower for African American than white girls: a higher proportion of African American delinquent girls were charged by the police. Racial differences in scaling up were significant only for prevalence, not for frequency of offending. Knowledge about scaling-up factors is important for the design and implementation of intervention programs. We discuss racial differences, implications for justice administration, and practical implications for intervention science.     

Violence and ordering of the Third World: an introduction

Abstract

The decisive role violence has played in the ordering of the Third World cannot be ignored or consigned to the past. Accordingly, we argue for a more systematic and determined attention to the connections between the devastation unleashed by colonialism, imperialism, and other forms of large-scale violence in the post-independence periods. In contradistinction to situating violence in and against the Third World as a backdrop of incomplete modernization, we recognize that its proper location is in the larger dynamics of racialized and colonial international relations. The articles in this volume address these dynamics of violence.     

International Trends in Prison Upsizing and Downsizing: In Search of Evidence of a Global Rehabilitation Revolution

Abstract

Our review of global trends in the use of incarceration reveals that both the number of people incarcerated worldwide and the global rate of incarceration continue to increase in every global region. In addition, there have been sizable global increases in the use of pretrial detention, the proportion of female prisoners, the proportion of foreign prisoners, prison privatization, and prison crowding. After reviewing these global trends, we examine the available data on correctional performance, focusing on global crime trends in the subgroup of countries (n = 20) where three-quarters of the world’s prison population is currently located. While most (17/20) of these countries continued to increase their prison population despite decreases in most crime categories, three countries—the Russian Federation, South Africa, and Pakistan—have reduced their reliance on incarceration (number and rate) while also reducing their crime rates. Compared to other countries with large prison populations, the United States’ overall increase in both the prison population (+14.4% since 2000) and incarceration rate (+2.2) can be described as modest. Our review of global trends in corrections and sentencing policy reforms revealed an emerging focus on offender rehabilitation in both prison and community corrections settings and a growing recognition of the link between community development and crime. Focusing on the potential impact of rehabilitation-rich policy reforms in the United States, we highlight the results of a recent simulation modeling study (Taxman & Pattavina, 2013 Pattavina, A., & Taxman, F. S. (2013). Using discrete-event simulation modeling to estimate the impact of RNR program implementation on recidivism levels. In F. S. Taxman & A. Pattavina (Eds.), Simulation strategies to reduce recidivism (pp. 267–281). New York, NY: Springer.[Crossref] , [Google Scholar]) designed to estimate the impact of expanding our institutional corrections treatment infrastructure. This study reported significant, but relatively small, long-term reductions in prison populations when treatment capacity and treatment quality are increased. These findings suggest that even major improvement in the quantity and quality of prison programming—by itself—will not fundamentally change the life course of prisoners, resulting in continued high return-to-prison rates for these offenders. We conclude that for the United States to significantly reduce its reliance on incarceration, we will need to rethink our approach to crime and punishment. Our global review of corrections and sentencing strategies identified a number of possibilities. Using the global incarceration rate and the global crime rate as benchmark performance “tipping points,” we call for the development of corrections and sentencing policies—and the hiring of corrections personnel—based on the new goal of corrections: individual and community rehabilitation.