Restorative Justice

1
Restorative Justice

• in serious cases

Willie Matthews and Billy Nicol (Sacro) Youth
Justice Network March 2006
2
Exercise

• Whos side are you on?
• Those responsible..
• Those harmed.?

3
From conflict to justice
4
Language conflict

• Systems takes everyday conflict and translates
  into language of right and wrong system holds
  the power
• This has made Restorative Justice, its values and
  language difficult to embrace
• Conflict vs. harm

5

• RJ has been the dominant model of criminal
  justice throughout human history for perhaps all
  the worlds people (Braithwaite, 2002)
• RJ was largely abandoned in Europe at the time of
  the Norman conquest (Van Ness, 1986)
• Many indigenous cultures worldwide have never
  stopped using it (Braithwaite, 2002 and Zehr,
  2002)

6
Community

• Restorative Justice requires the active
  participation of the community.
• Developing a consensus on how best to resolve the
  harm
• Focus on harm to community who include the person
  harmed and person responsible.

7
Restorative Justice

• Is not a program.
• Is a mission or philosophical framework.
• Is a different way of responding to crime in
  communities and criminal justice systems.

8
Questions Currently Asked

• Who committed the crime?
• What laws were broken?
• How will we punish the offender?
• Restorative Justice views the crime through a
  different lens.

9
Howard Zehrs Questions

• What is the harm?
• What needs to be done to repair the harm?
• Who is responsible for this repair?

10
Howard Zehrs Questions

• What is the harm?(Assessment)
• What needs to be done to repair the harm? (Case
  Plan)
• Who is responsible for this repair? (Roles and
  Responsibilities)

11
Seriousness
Perceptions
12
Persistence?

• Discussion time
• persistence as a serious issue, however,
  persistent offending is usually just more of the
  same less serious offences
• (SCRA data)
• But, is this a serious issue? Perception.

13
Looked after and accommodated

• Seriousness of young people going into secure
  accommodation on welfare and protection grounds
• Within weeks become persistent
• Restorative practices address issues

14
Enhanced referral route

• Since July 2005
• Can take referrals from a Hearing
• Can take referrals of cases that are also going
  to a Hearing
• Potential for more serious cases

15
Seriousness

• Referrals last year (2004-2005)
• 60 Housebreaking
• 43 possession of offensive weapon
• 18 fire raising
• 5 discharging firearm
• 3 unlawful possession of firearm
• 1 attempted robbery
• 1 indecent assault (over 20 assaults)

16
Outcomes

• What is a successful outcome?
• Re-offending rate?
• How do we measure relationships
• Perceptions, harm reduction?

17

• Polmont and Friarton

18
TASC service (H/O)

• Talking after severe crime
• Facilitates communication between those harmed by
  serious crime and those responsible..
• Discussion in youth justice context? (e.g.
  Polmont protocols already in place)

19
Cases to discuss

• Case studies to assist discussion
• Fire
• Serious assault