Restorative Justice In America

They are ‘informal’ in the sense that they apply non-state methods of conflict resolution (Kariuki, 2015). These procedures typically aim at restoring social peace instead of enforcing abstract legislation and in many cases reflect prevailing community norms and values. While some may view the restorative approach as ‘soft’ on crime, in reality it promotes the possibility of a win-win outcome for the offender, the victim, and the society in general (Lab, 2015). It is important to realize that this approach does not necessarily reject punishment entirely. Instead, it views it as an addition to restorative measures, such as forgiveness; therefore relieving victims, offenders, and the community at large from the psychological effects of crimes committed (Van Wormer & Walker, 2013). Additionally, restorative justice is a progressive and preventive response that strives to understand crime in its social context. It challenges one to examine the root causes of violence and crime in order to break these cycles (Berlin, 2016). This requires the assumption that crimes or violations are committed against real individuals, rather than against the state. The goal of restorative justice is not just to punish the perpetrator, but to compensate the victim for their loss, to prevent the accused from committing the crime again, and to reintegrate both the victim and offender

Rooted in our civilization, restorative justice was once viewed as a sin against a sovereign society of a King, Queen, or Emperor. Albert Eglash (1975) first articulated restorative justice over retributive and rehabilitative justice, an indeed search for the original status of security of the victim’s feelings. Restorative Justice, a more victim-centered aspect of punishment than the offender, however, the victim should consider, what it is that restorative justice will restore to its original state of security, and would it be enough justice that the victim seeks.

Some may see restorative justice as good and bad. It is good because the victim and offender can both express what they are feeling about the crime that was done. But it could also be bad because talking about the event brings back memories to the victim and may make them angrier rather than feeling justified. The offender also may not even be sincere with their apology they’re probably just telling the victim what they want to hear. Most of the cases that I have read and watched about restorative justice were beneficial to the victims.

Unacknowledged Shame Theory is seen in a perspective that shame can cause a destructive emotion and can promote crime instead of preventing it if it is not managed positively. By using apology in return for forgiveness symbolises that reparation can commence (Braithwaite, 2004).

This is due to it being a complex argument, with many layers and many factors that need to be considered. Before determining whether restorative justice is harmful or beneficial for a victim, factors such as; the offence type, the offender, the victim, the seriousness of the offence and even the interaction between the offender and victim, all play an important role and must be carefully considered (Garkawe, 1999). It demonstrates that all cases will be different, and will offer a different outcome as to whether the restorative justice process will be proved to be a positive or negative experience. Furthermore, determining what a successful outcome of restorative justice is, of what is determined to be harmful or beneficial, will also alter depending on circumstances. In regards to harmful or negative impacts on victims whom participate in restorative justice, taking in to consideration the above mentioned factors, there are a few claims focusing on the participation of youth victims in restorative conferences that could be determined as harmful in certain cases. Between 1995 and 2000 Strang conducted a set of randomised experimental designs known as the Reintegrative Shaming Experiments Project (RISE) in the Australian Capital Territory to compare the effects on victims / offenders between court proceedings or innovative conferences (Strang, Sherman, Woods, & Barnes, 2011). Gal (2006) then

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.

Our current system of law and justice is oriented completely to the offender. “Restorative” justice is a term used to describe a number of programs that seek to do…what? What is “Restorative” justice and how may it work? Pg 67

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.

One of the major roots founded in the core of restorative justice is the connection, no matter how damaging, that links a victim to their offender. There is forever a connection developed between the victim and offender despite the lack of a previous knowledge of each other. The practice of RJ has been developed on three baselines; preparation, encounter, and follow-up. During preparation the provider focuses on explain accountability to the offender, focusing on the difference in

This essay aims to make clear the system of restorative justice and its aims towards youth offending, whilst arguing points for and against the current system and whether or not it is more appropriate in terms of dealing with youth offending. It will also define restorative justice as well as defining what is meant by conventional justice. Making clear how and why these two systems came to be a part of youth justice whilst concluding as to which if either is more appropriate in dealing with youth offending behaviour.

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.

With the rise of Civil Rights Movement in western countries, the circumstances of the criminal victims are getting more attention gradually. Due to this emphasis, it directly led to a first revolution in the criminal justice, the revival Restorative justice. For a criminal justice system, victim support and healing is a priority which might seem an obvious aim. "Restorative Justice" was first introduced by an American professor, Randy Barnett in 1977. Nowadays, restorative justice systems have been applied to criminal justice system in many countries (Tai Wan, Australia, the US and the UK etc). In spite of many researches of restorative justice composed by western scholars, however it has not yet been defined properly and cover over the cons of this system. Restorative Justice repairs the harm that caused by crime and reducing the future harm on victims, there are advantages yet there are also bad. In this essay, I will use the application of the principles of sociology, literature, ethics knowledge to demonstrate argumentation to restorative justice and to reflect the pros and cons. (160words)

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.

How many inmates were isolated from their communities when they had committed a crime or when they got released from the prisons? And how many effective programs can be helpful for them?Many posts-release prisoners have experienced recidivism and social stigmas due to lack of programs. In fact, restorative justice for people in prison has played a big role in our correctional systems in many different ways.Restorative justice in prison shapes our prisoner 's morals and abilities by providing a suitable technique. Although punishment may play a part in restorative justice techniques, the central focus remains on relationships between the affected parties, and healing reached through a deliberative process guided by those affected parties.( Tsui,2014). For instance, many inmates have attended into reentry programs and educational orientations when they finished their time in prison. These programs cost less money for the government, and inmates can be reintegrated into societies easily. Many post-release prisoners have avoided recidivism after these effective programs taught them the value of lives. This study will examine the importance of restorative justice in prison, which is essential for our correctional facilities. Numerous studies have been done recently which focused on this restorative justice.For example, restorative justice answers the justice question in a different way.(Toews,p.5,2006).

When considering studies in corrections on a global scale it is important to understand how to utilize the most applicable method to gather knowledge. Comparative studies are often used to explore methods for explicating or developing knowledge and attitudes. Comparative research examines cases with the intention to reveal the structure and invariance or unchanging relationship for an entire group or population. In this case, and for the purpose of this paper, the comparative research is suggested to be used in corrections on a global scale. Several problems arise when using comparative research studies on a global scale. Some of these issues are cross-cultural research between countries, selecting a compatible research design whether