September 11 09/25/2013
A process/ beings together between crime and community
To collectively identify and address harm
The needs of the victim and community
Harm creates obligations
Through justice process we heal them
Community: we all connected, shared values, interconnectedness
The Pillars of RJ
1. Harm and Needs: victim is the focus
harm: offence committed
needs: victim (focus on victim)
community is second
2. Obligation: wrongs and harms results in obligations; offender is accountable and
offender: admit, responsible, responsible for act, come together to find a solution
community: why did you do that how community failed you
3. Engagement: victim—offender and the community have a significant role in justice
The Who and The How:
The how: RJ prefers inclusive, collaborative processes and consensual outcomes
Inclusive: victim, offender, community, family members
Closure- move one
The who: stakeholders: includes victims, offenders and communities of care Communities: people who have common goals- communities of care.
To Put Things Right:
Offender to repair harm done to victim
Community to repair harm done to victim and offender
Offenders as a victim
Listening to stories, impact to victim
Community programs to repair the harm.
Restorative justice becomes transformative
Able to move on
Transform our communities
Different philosophy about crime
Up to communities on how they want to address the harm
Sexism Social exclusion
Restorative justice sees offenders as victims
Majority of imamates felt victimized
Harm is crime
Once harm is done you can go to RJ
5 Key Principles of RJ
1. Focus on the harms and consequent needs of victims, communities and the
2. Address the obligations that result from those harms
3. use inclusive, collaborative process (no one is forces)
4. Involve those with a legitimate stake in the situation
5. Seek to put right the wrong (at the center)
Underlying Values in RJ
RJ IS NOT
Is not primarily about forgiveness or reconciliation
Reduce recvidism or repeating offences no
Particular program or blueprint (blueprint)
Minor offences or first time offenders
New or north American development
A replacement for the legal system
Alternative to prison Hollow Waters 09/25/2013
Restorative justice program called circling occurs in Manitoba, deals with rape victims.
Through basic principles of restorative justice they were able to heal
Family tree—generations of rape
How long the process takes—effects future generations
All restorative justice programs are reaching out to the families
Very bureatic criminal justice system
Works well in the community because it meshes well with the community. Restorative Justice: The Rise of Restorative Justice 09/25/2013
--Defining our Concepts Restorative Justice: The Rise of Restorative Justice 09/25/2013
Restorative Justice: “RJ is a process to involve, to the extent possible, those who
have a stake in a specific offence and to collectively identify and address harms,
needs, and obligations, in order to heal and put things as right as possible” .
(Zehr, 2002: 37)
Retributive vs. Restorative
Crime: violation of the law and the state.
Violations create guilt.
Justice: state determine guilt and impose pain (punishment)
Focus: offender is getting what they deserve.
Crime: is a violation of people and relationships.
Violations create obligations.
Justice: involves offenders, and community members to put things right.
Focus: victim needs and offender responsibility for repairing harm
Cashier robbed at gun point: stole $32 and a car, apprehended and convicted
19- year old stole jewelry and money from the neighbour next door
Rene Durocher: spent 23 years in 17 different pen. Three robberies...
Historical Development of RJ
1978: Zehr facilitated victim-offender reconciliation programs (VORPs)
Trends in CJS in 1970-80s:
The loss of confidence in rehabilitation and deterrence theory
The rediscovery of the victim as a necessary party: restitution
The rise of interest in community-based justice
Historical Development of RJ
Crime be eradicated by addressing the “underlying causes” of poverty and
Use of “war against crimes” in political agenda Restorative Justice: The Rise of Restorative Justice 09/25/2013
Rise in imprisonment in 80s
The Left attacked CJS by labelling them as repressive state
Rise in prisoners’ group and Christian groups
RJ as a new paradigm, to replace CJS not to reform it Restorative Princples 09/25/2013
The pillars of Restorative Justice
Harms and needs: victim is the focus
Obligation: wrongs and harms results in obligations: offender is accountable and
Engagement: victim-offender and the community have a significant role in justice
The “who” and the “how”
The “how”: RJ prefers inclusive, collaborative processes and consensual outcomes.
The “who”: stakeholders includes victims, offenders, and communities of care.
Who cares about these people and about the offence?
How can we involve them?
To put things right...
offender to repair the harm done to victim...
Community to repair harm done to victim, offender
Offender as victims?
Five key principles of RJ
Focus on the harms and consequent needs of the victims, communities’ and the
Address the obligations that result form those harm
Use inclusive, collaborative process
Involve those with a legitimate stake in the situation Restorative Princples 09/25/2013
Seek to put right the wrong (at the hub)
Underlying values in RJ
RJ is or is not…
Primarily about forgiveness or reconciliation?
Designed to reduce recidivism or repeating offences?
A particular program or a blueprint?
Primarily intended for minor offences or first time offenders?
New or North American development?
A replacement for the legal system?
Alternative to prison? Restorative Justice Styles 09/25/2013
Types of Program
Mediation and community Mediation
Victim Offender Reconciliation programs (VORPs)
Family group conferencing
Truth and Reconciliation commission
RJ & reparation for crimes of mass violence
Mediation and Community Mediation
Establishment of community justice centres in 1970
Dealt with minor criminal and civil conflicts
San Francisco Community Board (SFCB)
Pro-active conflict resolution
Reduce fear of crime
Workshop for conflict resolution
Volunteer based (mediators were selected based on their characteristics with the
Problem with SFCB....
1974: Mark Yantzi
Establishing a safe environment
Preparation (time taken for the participants to feel ready
Voluntary participation Restorative Justice Styles 09/25/2013
Face to face encounter: mutual agreement
Follow up: to ensure all parties are living up to their agreement and to provide support
Family Group Conferencing
1989-New Zealand: Family Group Conference
Police-led conference in Australia: combining reintegrative shaming and FGC
State appointed facilitator
Family group decision-making (FGDM)
Deals with family violence: use a “feminist praxis” to “interrupt” gendered assumptions
Traditional justice practices of indigenous peoples
A circle is an occasion where a community is assembled to discuss matters related to
and a resolution for an injustice that took place in their midst.
A full circle gathering
Circle of support
Truth and Reconciliation commission
South Africa: post Apartheid
Desmond Tutu: head of the TRC, used RJ
“A person is a person through other people”
Human rights committees: select victims and their families to recount suffering and
request reparation, no meeting with offender Restorative Justice Styles 09/25/2013
Amnesty Hearings: perpetrator of political crimes revealed their crime for exchange of
Reparation and rehabilitation committee: recommendation to government for victims
recovery (ex. 3 billion dollars compensation and only 571.5 millions dollar)
Was this commission restorative?
Government funded RJ programs includes evaluative components
Rehabilitating the offender
Restoring communities What Events Trigger a Restorative Response
Idea of justice proposed by sharp
Justice is not elaborated
Incorporate the programs
What triggers a restorative response…
From some communities its better to approach through a restorative lenses
Crimes within communities
Harms in relationships
Less time consuming and expense.
Mass violation of human rights
Stages of RJ Referral
1. pre-sentencing: more common in civil cases
participants are empowered to decide upon an appropriate sanction and strategy
participants receive guidance from justice professional
a judge may need to approve the recommended outcomes
usually referred to by a judge
youth in New Zeeland: refered to by?
Face to face encounters
Decisions reached is proportional to crime committed
Ie: man drunk whom walked home with his children and they died, when through
sentencing circle. Verdict: community service. Didn’t want him in an institution because
it wasn’t a fault of his own. Judge override for 3 year sentence
3. post-sentencing What Events Trigger a Restorative Response
meeting in a mediated session after sentencing in correctional facility
has no bearing upon the sentence
intended to address unanswered questions
after a person has already been convicted
purpose: looking for closure to be issued
transformative justice: transforming how we think about crime as a society and how we
will change that.
RJ needs to identify its object or target independent of CJS
Who is the target people
Most people referred to restorative justice are sent through the CJS system
If we want restorative justice to be transformative justice
We cant let the CJS refer people to restorative justice
ZHER believes that we see restorative justice as an alternative, over years we will be
able to change the criminal justice program.
ZHER: if we want to be transformative we need to change social inequality, economic
unfairness, poverty etc.
But can we do this through restorative justice???
Want to switch it around and have restorative justice to be the main aspect and the CJS
to be the alternative
EX. Marijuana use and alcohol consumption
Does CJS and CC address social inequality, unfair economic distribution
Some trigger events:
Conflict What Events Trigger a Restorative Response
Injustice (main trigger event/ our response to injustice)
Trigger Event- Crime:
Crime: refer to an act that has been designated criminal by the state and is codified
within domestic and international law
“alternative” and “oppositional”
the staring point of RJ by responding to crime as defined in CJS
privilege some harms over others; property crime vs dumping of toxic material in river
ie bus example.
construct the reductive identities of victim and offender
identities, social constructive concepts. (offenders are victims to him/herself)
increase the power and status of governing CJS institution and actors
Foster non-disruptive behaviour that allows for the maintenance of the political and
social status quo.
Can we achieve restorative justice?
Does this help with transformative justice? No according to ZHER
Crime is the starting point for the CJS
Once you start restorative justice (been referred here) you give a lot of power to criminal
Empowering, entwining, control over offenders in the community
Crim is only a symptom of something deeper.
Crime will not be the starting point for restorative justice to become transformative
Harm: criminal and non-criminal suffering
Harm could mean something that is not caused in something with relation to another
person What Events Trigger a Restorative Response
Restorative justice needs to have a relationship with a person
Crime too narrow and harm too broad
Ie: apartment earthquake, cannot get ahold of landlord.
RJ is a relational approach to justice that depends of real or potential relationships
How do you deal with harm when there is no one to face?
RJ address interpersonal harms
Trigger Event- Conflict:
Crime is a form of conflict
Human right conflicts fit under here
Nils Christie: conflict is a form of property that is “stolen” from the communities. As a
result communities are deprived from this resource and lost eh ability to creatively
address their problems?
Take your resources to deal
Loose ability to be creative
It belongs to community, belongs to relationships, takes resources from community to
deal with conflict.
Deeper conflict? Residential schools and Canadian government.
But which conflict deserve restorative justice attention
Is it necessary to resolve all conflicts?
Sometimes it is not possible
They cannot put all their resources into talking to everyone
Some people get pay offs
Sometimes it is really hard to deal with these conflicts
Trigger Event: Normative Violation
Norms: are group established behavioral codes that guide the activities of individuals
belonging to the group What Events Trigger a Restorative Response
Formal (codified law) and informal norms
Basing RJ upon normative violation assumes the value of the normative social order
Norms are socially and politically constituted codes
Even some norms
Can be outdated
Can suppress certain behaviours
RJ must actively and critically asses the norms and harms.
Can it trigger a RJ response?
Can be a crime, harm, conflict
It depends, it can be or can’t be.
Could be an informal social construct
Roman polankski: in 2009 arrested for the rape of a 13 year old in 1977.
Committed a crime
Family group conference
How would the media respond to just a mediation circle?
Victim can choose what they wanna do
Did he show remorse? No.. would this contribute to a possible meeting.
How are close to receive restorative justice to bring us to transformative justice?
Do we need a radical change to implement this? 09/25/2013
Choose a restorative justice program and analyze it.
Choose a specific component
Ie: victim or offender, or crime
Introduction, argument etc… Injustice As A Trigger 09/25/2013 Injustice As A Trigger 09/25/2013
What is justice?..
ensuring that the offender gets what he deserves
it is a process
the actual meaning of justice is embedded in the process
state law is reflecting of values in society
Crime: is to specific
Any people who commit and offence of crime will be subject to the system
Decide to send those with minor infractions
Harm: isn’t a good point of departure because it is too broad
Norms: too broad
Injustice: best way to enter a transformative justice frame of mind.
What is Justice?
According to CJS: “state- delivered retributive punishment”
According to RJ
Restoring the harm
Equality in community
We achieve justice by focusing on victim needs instead of offender
Address the harms in society
Suzanne sharp (midterm): social contract, sees justice as fairness. We enter through
codified law, but at the same time there are unspoken laws and unspoken norms. Once
you apply these everyone would benefit from these laws.
Injustice is: breach of the social contract. The more severe the breach
the more you get punished. Once the rules are disobeyed. Injustice As A Trigger 09/25/2013
What’s wrong? Different countries= different social contracts. Doesn’t
line up as restorative justice because not everything in social contract
is harmful. Some social contract harms people. Consensus in society:
some people need different services and different ways to approach
According to Rawl, justice as fairness
People regulate their behaviour on the basis of widely accepted rules, that are fair and
reciprocal, applying to and benefiting everyone equally and which give each person
equal opportunity to act for the sake of their own good.
We all abide by rules and regulations
The function of society: functionalism theory: what works for society; the unwritten rules.
Definition applies only to democratic society
Democratic society means individuals have rights and it is a rights based institution.
Equal liberty and equal participation
Rights based value system : think of the values.
Assumption of cooperation and fairness in society.
Power of reasoning
Why justice: punish people to achieve justice. The idea of justice is important. The point
of trigger is injustice.
Injustice: there are written and unwritten rules we learn in society
The theory of justice does not apply to diverse society. Because there is inequalities
Any democratic society because we have different values
Belonging to a web of relationships
Rowl works best for restorative justice
Need to step out of mentality into a new person
Veil of ignorance
We are all fair to each other
Rawls political model of justice is only for modern democracies: individuals are to be
provided political equality and liberty.
Assumption that we are a homogenous society, but were not.
Democracy is majority rules with minority rights
He defines society as a system of fair cooperation between free and equal persons
Injustice: violations of the rights of equality and liberty Injustice As A Trigger 09/25/2013
When conflict arise: individuals in the conflict must step away from privately held or
culturally specific conception of the good, and think in terms of the underlying political
values in their society.
Judges in our CJS: fair decisions, impartial without favor
Judicial system is a human process
Political definition of justice and injustice
We tend to forget this.
We have to get out of who we are to be a person who is fair.- attempt to be impartial.
Upholds existing things in society
When conflict arises, the people in the conflict should step away from their mindset. In
order to be fair we have to create a process of fairness.
Need to be as fair as possible in order to judge.
RJ? How can we apply this? Want to heal the injustice that happens. The injustice cat
be entered through this. Through RJ we can continue being equal.
It’s a process to get to justice.
Restorative justice is more about accountability and needs.
As a society we all consent to certain rights. We are aware of the social contract. When
we break the contract we are accountable.
Categorization of “the other”.
Good framework for restorative justice? NO
The active participation of agents taking part in a reasonable discussion about what is
right and wrong that is the ideal for norm validity (reaching agreement about shared
Three communicative requirements:
1. Every subject with the competence to speak and act is allowed to take
part in discourse
2. Everyone is allowed to question any ascertain; to introduce any
assertion into the discourse, and allowed to express his/her attitude,
desires and needs. Injustice As A Trigger 09/25/2013
3. No speaker may be prevented by internal (within the group) and external
(within the society) coercion from expressing his rights as laid down in 1
Gonna bang close the laptop- important terms not the reason
Instead of labeling, going to ask for the reason
Its through discussion and communications we are contributing to discourse.
Combination or rules, laws, behaviours, values.
Society is not homogenous: we do not have the same values: there are certain
We need a dialogical process.
Must be certain conditions for this dialogue to happen.
Believed in the power of reasoning.
Providing their point of view; within reason.
I.e. smoking example.
We should decide why we do not do something, not a higher power.
Discourse: practices, rules, regulations that govern something
norms is society should be decide by those whom live in society.
Everyone has the right to express their opinion. They all engage for coming up with
norms. If you can not go there will be a representative for you. Make the decision then
announce to the public.
The people who come up with the norms- and norms are changing.
Through communication that we can create norms
Need to create norms by meeting three conditions
Reasoning…. Its important, anyone who has the power of reason can come create the
You have to think about the general good; for society.
Through this proves the agreement about right and wrong is achieved
Injustice is negotiated not pre-set
Ex. Mugging: initiate a R.J approach and what injustice occurred is decided during the
dialogue. Injustice As A Trigger 09/25/2013
During the dialogue we can make the change.
Do not want to see lots of interference by justice officials.
Groups come together in programs, whatever punishment they come to they can
change to guidelines to how to deal with mugging the next time. As a group they evolve.
Through interaction you decided what you should not do.
If you do against what people decided it is an injustice.
Its not pre-set =, not in codified law.
I.e. the family comes together to decided what the youth has done.
Example of kid beating up other kid: looking to restore relationship between the family
and youth, what needs they have, look at the offender… what happened. … role
reversal and decide on the injustice.
How do we reach consensus?
Talk it out… mediate find out what happened. Reverse the roles, you decide on the
Injustice is decide during the dialogue.
We can make our own decisions.
But there is issues with his- we are such a diverse society.
How about specific needs of participants?
Can not focus because your looking to focus on a group level. The idea of reasoning,
when you are a reasonable person you do not focus on your emotions. Bracket your
emotional feelings, set them aside and try to reach on consensus to come up with
guidelines and definitions.
Ie: a bit like negotiation, what is the general good, what comes out of it.
Does it work with RJ? Quite compatible, more then Rawls.
Habermas has more compatibility then Rawl.
Set aside your personal views. Problem with RJ? Discussing as a collectivity the needs
of the victim may be looked over. Primarily need to focus on the victim.
Habermas provided a vision of communication as a way to work towards normative
agreement, even to the point of allowing us to decide what is and what is not unjust in
any particular situation.
Does Habermans’s theory of discourse ethics offer a vision of justice and injustice for
No set definition. No yes or no answer—but generally yes it does. Justice and injustice
are not regulated. It is constantly changing. Injustice As A Trigger 09/25/2013
Jacques Derrida: deconstruction of the foundation of “laws” and the forces that brings
law into existence.
Forces: everyday acts of interpretation through which one particular interpretation of
justice is disseminated amongst larger public.
The dominate forces
Law: is a reflection of the economic and political interests of dominate forces in society
Interests have been codified into law through a moment of force
They codified their interest
Many concepts are deconstructable: does not have a natural origin: all have arisen
through human interaction, assumptions in specific times and places
Can look at the history of different forces in time and see why they came into existence
Justice is an “experience of the impossible”
Justice: singularity of the others: addressing oneself to the other in the language of the
You can not deconstruct justice. Justice is something to come, it doesn’t exists.
According to these theory we will not be able to understand others experiences because
we all come with certain experiences.
Deconstruction is justice.
We all have different understandings, upbringings, assumptions.
As soon as we start deconstruction certain meanings of law that’s when we start justice.
I.e.: anti-terrorism act
War on drugs: Regan era
Deconstruction in Justice:
It never allows us to settle upon taken for granted assumptions
Required to question, to probe, to interrogate common sense
Deconstruction denounce injustice
Habermas and Derrida: incompatible perspective about communication Injustice As A Trigger 09/25/2013
Derrida: offer guidance that can help RJ programs to foster communication in a more
open, critical fashion, to look for traces of power
Habermas: provide a vision of communication as a way to work towards normative
probes more into the offenders situation.
The social construction of gender equality.
Transformative justice to implement restorative justice
Community and offender get together= focus on offender
For RJ to reach philosophy- need to reach the deeper inequalities
Provides a very critical lenses
You can bridge these two theories together for RJ
Justice is negotiated it is not pre set
Ability to engage to come up with own guidelines and communications. (Habermas)
Social structural problems (Derrida)
Many in the system focus on Rawl—he is easier to understand and recommend.
Will we be able to reflect justice in our laws according to Derrida? –midterm.
The injustice that triggers a RJ encounter is not the full extent of the injustices… but a
symptom of larger and deeper harms.
C.Wright Mills (1959) “… they do not draw the link between private troubles” of crime
commission and victimization and “public issues” of structural disadvantage and
inequality.—for RJ to be true, we need to do this.
5 m/c, 5 fill in the blank
10 questions, select 7
bonus questions- 1 mark
Reading: the little book of restorative justice*** available online
Critical issues: chapters 1,2,5,6,8,9: including the philosopher theories
4 article not in it.
Answers to be what she taught us Guest Speaker 09/25/2013
Restorative practices is a new concept for the criminal justice program
We are all part of a community and we all contribute to the community
Need the individuals to be part of the community
Traditionally keep people with problems far away from each other
Youth criminal justice act
0 tolerance—the impact it had on us. We believed that punishment was going to change
peoples behaviour. This is not documentation that this does this properly.
If it is not swift and measured there will be no impact on this system.
Jail takes away from the adolescent growth that occurs.
What is the point….
Important for people to understand that we have a bubble something that is going on
that others do not know.
-- what don’t you know about someone or a situation
-- we all react to different things
-- restorative practices gets us to a place were we start talking about our bubbles
victims are the key to helping young people understand their actions.
Youth diversion program
Youth use to sit in front of professionals and talk about what they did.
Mediating through empowering
two things you have to realized about yourself
-- if someone is lying to you, its something your doing wrong because people lie
when they feel unsafe. Guest Speaker 09/25/2013
-- most of the time we can get away with lying-- so why wouldn't we
-- don't believe in the truth, don't believe it exists, the more time we spend trying
to get to a truth we could fix conflict
-- spend too much time trying to get to the bottom of things.
Why do we search to get to the bottom of things?
We are never going to get them to agree what happened.
Video of gorilla dancing. – we were focused on what we were told to focus on.
Are brain will pick up information that will be useful to us—if it doesn’t prove our points
we will not care about it.
People will only focus on the ways that prove their points
** your brain is program to view things in one way.
What do you focuses on: what they feel. You feel the way you feel. How people impact
each other—how they are feeling.
People are more adapt to sit down with people when they feel like they are not going to
This is responsibility taking, this is action, you have to face what happened
Through the jail system the never hear the story, they never understand what they have
done to their victims.
All the work that happens in a circle—you want to know everything.
Shame is not a good thing—it is eternalized. The more times you get shamed the more
harm you create.
Want to use guilt
What you think you saw is not actually happening.
A lot of foundational stuff
The more you start to see the value of something—
We need to be focusing on how people feel Guest Speaker 09/25/2013
Positions and Interests
How many times in a conflict are people fighting for what is not actually going on
Position- what is the imposed solution.
Interests- what was driving this, what was underneath this.
Our needs and values
When we are told to calm down it makes us more angry. – we want people yelling at
each other. Stressful, anxious, we feel it. Trying to convince other person whos right and
People will calm down when their needs are being met.
When you are in a value based conflict they are very hard to solve.
3 fundamental things
motivation: what is going to keep them at the table, making sure it doesn’t happen
empathy: getting an appreciation
most people believe they do not have anything in common with other people. We find
something an expand on it
level of control with support in circle Guest Speaker 09/25/2013
do to: authoritarian
do not: passive
do with: collaborative restorative
do for: protective (we do everything for you)
restorative focuses is getting underneath this.
if we impose solution on people: its not going to work because they didn’t come up with
it and now there is someone to blame.
We need them to come up with something that will work with them.
deterrence doesn’t work
we need to know what the punishments are for deterrence to work.
Most kids are not thinking about the consequences
The old system has the greatest impact on the marginalized society.
Some people are more prone to criminal activity
Impacts that happen to people lecture 12 09/25/2013 lecture 12 09/25/2013
Is the concept of community problematic?
Us vs. them
Race, gender, and socio-economic status. Started in WWII
Them is excluded from our universe of moral obligation
Social capital: RJ must be more about building communities and creating networks
Networks of groups out there that will empower you and those in society. In RJ
programs you eventually develop communities so you do not need a definition.
(Habermas) you do not need a definition. Through gatherings RJ communities can
evolve. They all come together to help each other. You must be there to create a social
network to create a social capital.
According to social capital model you do not create a community definition. But through
social networks you create a way to achieve social capitalism and help the person re-
integrate back into the community.
How does this prevent further social harm? It empowers the offender—gives them
something to look forward too.
Active process of identification with others
Process through which we negotiate our identities
Could be physical or common interest with the group.
Im not bound by the fact that I am not something—but by my interests.
Through belonging to certain groups of community this is what identity is.
As you go through life you regonatite your identity. The more identities you have the
more communities you belong to.
What does this mean to RJ: not stuck in the stigma, you can regnotaie your identity. You
do not have to be the offender and the victim.
Model: Suzanne Sharp
Communities as becoming: is a dynamic process that takes place within particular
social, cultural, economic, political and historical circumstances.
You can redefine what community becomes lecture 12 09/25/2013
Communities defn: any group that shares a common association, geographical
location, share common values and experiences, social bond or relationship, relations.
idea is once you belong to a group certain people do not belong. Belong to certain
groups excludes others from belonging.
Creates us Vs. them
The idea of community is—definition has changed because people belong to certain
groups, share things in common—shared interests.
Don’t feel obligated to the other group.
Does RJ create an us vs. them
Does it exclude certain people from the programs—yes.
It is very difficult to define.
How can you approach the definition of community if the specific thing does not interest
If a harm does not interest you; how can you be engaged in repairing harm in the
We do not need to involve those whom do not have a legitimate stake in the situation.
Community in RJ
Micro community: community of care: those most directly affected by a particular harm
Intense emotional pain, reduced trust, offender family feels shame, and victim family
Justice to be done: everyone must be restore to well being
Focus on process: the actual RJ program (process is more important than the outcome)
Bonded by harm
Purist : going through the genuine RJ program.
Central focus: victim, offender, community
Macro community: defined by geography or membership, not by personal
relationships; little emotional connection
Crime creates aggregate harms, loss of sense of safety, high neighborhood crime lecture 12 09/25/2013
Justice to be done: specific action to be taken to protect the neighborhood
Focus on outcomes: fixing the problems in the community
No strong bonded relationship here
People here are those who belong to the certain community
Central focus: focus on community. Possibly ignore the problems of victim and offender.
Which from of community is aligned with restorative justice philosophy.
We have to find a way to bridge these two theories
But we need to focus on micro because at the heart of RJ is the purist society.
Get macro to be supportive
A theoretical division of what the definition of community is.
You still need CJS for certain people whom need to be locked in prison because you
can not rehabilitate them.
Process itself is good
But at the end you have a happy group of people
Can be very expensive process
To be effective you have to do your research
Someone good to collect all the information
Macro community lecture 12 09/25/2013
Could address the systematic injustices better
Not a concrete focus on victim and offender
Defend one model over the other and justify it.
Daniel is charged with 16 counts involving a number of break and enters, possession of
property under, theft under $5000, possession/use of a credit card, loiter at night on
other person property and fail to comply.
As per recommendation of the prosecutor he is referred to collaborative justice
How does RJ programs—micro and macro communities respond to this case?
Need to address his needs. Who would hire someone like this
Micro: bring everyone affected together, with facilitators. Have them all give ideas and
find a bigger social issues. To find a way were they can get to restorative phase and
begin to work together and find a way to restore the peace.
Macro: make the offender feel for what he does. Do not necessarily have victims. Most likely given
probation. Working, putting money into a fund. Helping him get a job, or social assistance. Going to
focus on the needs of the community but a main focus on the prevention of crime. More in line with
the ideology with neoliberalism. You co