The effect of transfer mechanism from juvenile court on conviction on a target offense in criminal court

The question of whether juvenile offenders should be handled in criminal court has been addressed by a number of studies. However, few have examined the effectiveness of the type of transfer mechanism and how it relates to protecting the public. Whether the mechanism used to transfer juvenile offenders to criminal court has any effect on the likelihood of being convicted of a target offense criminal court is examined here. It was found that the juveniles sampled in this study had a greater chance of being convicted on their target offense in criminal court if they were sent there via judicial waiver than if they were excluded from juvenile court jurisdiction by statute.     

What restorative justice might learn from administrative theory

Two administrative ideal‐types related to competing forms of justice: retributive and restorative include ontological and epistemological foundations and associated organizational theory. The alternate understandings are coherently linked with the principles of justice informing retributive and restorative practices. Retributive justice is linked to formal organization based on instrumental rationality and individualist ontology, while restorative justice is linked to substantive organization based on ethical reasoning and relational ontology. Once constructed, ideal‐types can be used both to assess actual conditions on key characteristics as well as to make recommendations for organizational design. Therefore, conclusions are drawn about the importance of matching context to purpose, pointing toward further empirical research that will inform system design for restorative justice practices.     

Student conduct,restorative justice,and student development: findings from the STARR project: a student accountability and restorative research project

The STudent Accountability and Restorative Research (STARR) Project is a multi-campus study of college student disciplinary practices in the USA, comparing traditional conduct hearings that use restorative justice practices alongside traditional college student misconduct hearings. A coherent set of learning goals in college student conduct administration and a robust data-set capable of measuring student learning across different types of disciplinary practice, in particular, comparing traditional ‘model code’ practice with emerging restorative justice processes are examined. Integrating several student development theories, we identify six student development goals: just community/self-authorship, active accountability, interpersonal competence, social ties to institution, procedural fairness, and closure. The STARR Project includes data from 18 college and university campuses across the USA. We analyzed 659 student conduct cases based on surveys of student offenders, conduct officers, and other participants in the conduct processes. Using multiple regression to control for a variety of influences, we determined that the type of conduct process used is the single most influential factor in student learning. In addition, restorative justice practices were routinely found to have a greater impact on student learning than model code hearings.     

Exploring competency development: it’s the helping part

Restorative justice is an operating philosophy that, while used in other countries for many years, began being implemented in the United States in the early and mid 1990s. This paper takes a look at one part of the restorative justice philosophy, attempts to instill conceptual clarity, and examines one state’s process of implementing competency development programs and the effects that state has seen. In addition, five domains of competency development are explored as well as practical means of attaining the goals of each domain. The paper concludes with specific ways of measuring the outcomes of competency development, along with the progress that one commonwealth’s juvenile justice system has made.     

An identity‐based understanding of intergroup conflict

As conflict has at its basis a contest of ideas, values or resources between two or more groups, a comprehensive understanding of intergroup conflict must take into account the psychological processes that make groups and group behavior meaningful. Because individuals value and internalize identities relevant to their social, geographic, economic, historical and political positions, any devaluation, loss or imposed change to one of those identities is likely to be particularly threatening. The Social Identity Approach formulates an understanding of how these identity‐based motivations interact with social structures to predict intergroup conflict. Importantly, it also provides an explanation of how procedural justice mechanisms can be utilized to guide conflicting interests to common cooperative goals that can be accepted and pursued. By having representation and participation of relevant actors in the development of a shared identity, as is this case when nation states are formed or re‐created, threat is reduced, legitimacy built and the basis for positive intergroup relations created.     

Richard Quinney on the Transformation of Self and Others: An Interview

As an alternative means of achieving justice, restorative practices are touted as community based. The ownership of decisions regarding the response to crime belongs to the key stakeholders, including victim(s), offender(s), and members of the community, both large and small. Each is invited to participate and through their participation, the stakeholders come to own the justice process and its outcomes. One challenge facing restorative practices lies in getting the community to participate. Without the community, several aspects of justice that are restorative, including forgiveness, support for participants, and reintegration are unlikely outcomes. This research examines community involvement in a victim–offender mediation program through observation and analysis of the agreements produced. The findings suggest that while restorative justice is theorized as community based, the community, in this case, appears absent.     

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.     

Victims’ responses after mass atrocities: a note on empirical findings

Empirical research has shown that in the aftermath of mass atrocities, a large majority of the victims of gross human rights violations are much more concerned with their immediate needs than with the criminal prosecution of the perpetrators of these violations. The focus must shift from the perpetrators to the victims and that, in order to bring about desirable compensating improvements in the lives of those victims who are directly affected by these gross human rights violations, greater weight must be given to the interests and concerns expressed by them about matters fundamental to their well-being. The attention of legal scholars, policy analysts, and human rights campaigners and activists of the imperativeness of material reparations to meet the crying needs of a society emerging from political violence, comparative to criminal prosecution of the perpetrators must be engaged.     

Teaching restorative justice to education and criminal justice majors

In academia, departments in Education and Sociology/Criminal Justice are in different colleges, but professionals in these fields frequently interact, such as probation officers working in schools and teachers working in prisons. This paper describes a course that addressed a commonality of the two by focusing on Restorative Justice. The content of the course was multi-disciplinary and co-taught by two professors from these different disciplines, and students were from a wide range of majors. Not only did the course content focus on Restorative Justice, this perspective guided how the course was taught. All classes were conducted within a Circle, students participated in the creation of the syllabus, students contracted for grades, and students organized many of the discussions. Emphasis was on critical analysis of Restorative Justice practices and theories. Quantitative and qualitative evaluations were provided as well as reflections by the teachers.