Restorative justice is a very selective process, and can only truly work if both the victim and the offender agree to the terms of the conversation. In other words, strict vetting must be done on both the victim and the offender in order for restorative justice to occur. For this type of justice to actually be able to really work and bring about rehabilitation participation must be 100% voluntary otherwise it will fail. This among other things can be listed as a limitation of restorative justice. Another disadvantage is, that restorative justice cannot be implemented in all categories of crimes. Crimes such as; shoplifting, runaways are some of the crimes where restorative justice cannot be used because it is simply unnecessary. For example,
Money is everything in today’s world, more money means more power , so corporations for their major contributions to the economy by giving jobs and paying taxes are favoured by judges whilst an individual is nothing to compare, and yet again corporation can afford to hire better lawyers than what an individual could, rarely does it happen that you hear on the news about an individual who beat a corporation in a court debate, also because of the toll and srees that an individual would have to go through in order to beat a corporation in court. Natalie DeFreitas has made numerous points as to why restorative justice as better than/more effective than the current law system here in Canada. The speaker talked about the 70% recurrence of crimes whereas only 15% repeat crimes after restorative justice, Texas’ crime rates and jail enrollment have dropped, the cost of jail enrollment is 115,000 CAD$ for one year per person, whereas restorative justice only costs about 10,000 CAD$ for the same person throughout the same term and how much more effective can restorative justice be with a provided life example of John’s case, the bottom line is that restorative justice reduces crimes, improves the lives of criminals by healing and makes communities a safer
AJ 207 – Assign 7 1-To what extent do you see restorative justice practices meeting the philosophical goals of the juvenile justice system? Discuss specific features that do and do not correspond to the philosophy of the juvenile justice system? The extent that I see justice practices meeting the philosophical goals of the juvenile justice system has moved toward a retributive justice philosophy that gives punishment priority. The juvenile justice systems new approach is more of a balanced approach with a philosophical framework.
Some benefits reduce crime victims’ post-traumatic stress systems and it reduces crime victims’ desire for violent rage against their offenders. It also reduces repeat offending for some offenders although not all. Circle Justice has many benefits but It also has lots of weaknesses such as how its inability to prevent potential for uneven or discriminating outcomes for sentencing and restitution, it encourages perpetrators of crimes to restore the harm they created. In US Criminal
Before the 80s, most women stayed home and cared for the house, yard, children, and pets. Since women began working outside the home more, they became exposed to more criminal elements that may create more criminal thinking and act upon those thoughts. Therefore, another reason why restorative justice is so important. Too many people are imprisoned, prisons are overcrowded, and diversion programs are cheaper than jail or prison
Restorative Justice past practices and activities that are popular within the Restorative justice movement are Prisoner rights and alternatives to prisons, which is a program to change prison condition and minimize incarceration sentencing, Conflict Resolution is a program that creates neighborhood justice centers available to the community. The Victim offender Reconciliation program (VORPs) is a meeting between the victim and the community, Victim-Offender Mediation (VOMS) is mediation between the victim and the offender, Victim Advocacy is the victim rights group which focused on the efforts for restitution for the crime. The family group conferences (FGCs) allow the victim and family and the offenders to meet. The Sentencing Circle includes
It also had significant benefits for the victims as they were allowed to work through the emotions of their victimization in a more healthy manner and in a safe and supported environment (Strang et al., 2012). While restorative justice conferencing still needs some improvements to have an overall efficient and effective response to criminal offending, early research indicates that it is a more progressive and successful approach to reducing crime in comparison to the traditional goals of criminal
Within the judicial and criminal justice systems, restorative justice is seen as a forward moving process in regards to the way in which the sentencing of offenders is handled (Britto & Reimund, 2013). Restorative justice works to focus on the needs of both the victim and the offender but incorporates the community as well as those who support both the victim and offender (Britto & Reimund, 2013). The approach of restorative justice in not simply a means by which society responds to and reduces crime but instead, provides an equivalently valuable social response to crime (Dancig-Rosenberg and Galt, 2013). Furthermore, the restorative approach places emphasis on the personal and relational harms which were caused by the crime while creating space for dialogue concerning the actual damage, whether directly or
This type of justice system is designed very differently when compared with the retributive justice system. The restorative justice system endeavours to bring the victim and the offender together and allow them to speak with each other in the hopes to support the healing process. It will enable the victims to express themselves to the offender and lets the offender apologize and express their feelings to the victim. The restorative justice system often offers the victims of crime closure. The system encourages both parties to reveal themselves to each other and develop a solution for the future to satisfy both parties involved.
Traditionally, crime has been viewed as a violation against the state. Still too little attention is given to the fact that criminal acts are also violations of the victims and the communities. Punishing and correcting offenders’ criminal behaviors should not only be conducted using the concepts of retribution, incapacitation, and deterrence, it should also be designed to repair the damages done to the victims and the communities. Many benefits are associated with shifting to the restorative justice model, for the victim, the offender, and the community. Restorative justice benefits the victims by giving them a voice regarding the accountability of the offender.
Restorative justice also known as balanced and restorative justice is “a sentencing model that builds on restitution and community participation in an attempt to make the victim whole again (Schmalleger 269).” Restorative justice focuses on “crime as harm and justice as repairing the harm”. This type of justice places crime control primarily in the hands of the community. 3. Indeterminate sentencing encourages rehabilitation using general unspecific sentences.
Restorative Justice processes are likely to reduce criminals from repeating offenses, as numerous recidivism studies have demonstrated. Thus, it would be more than justified to employ restorative processes a response to crimes under
Today our justice system has a multitude of options when dealing with those who are convicted of offenses. However, many argue that retributive justice is the only real justice there is. This is mainly because its advantage is that it gives criminals the appropriate punishment that they deserve. The goals of this approach are clear and direct. In his book The Little Book of Restorative Justice, Zehr Howard (2002), illustrates that the central focus of retributive justice is offenders getting what they deserve (p. 30).
The Restorative Justice System focuses on problem solving, liabilities, and obligations. It focuses on the future instead of the past. It would help the boys take responsibility for their actions and be able to restore the crime they committed in the community. The four boys are also first time offenders, which also plays a huge factor because you can see they never intended for what they did to turn out so bad in the end. For the Restorative Justice System you have to be first time offenders so that they are able to help you.
Batley (2005) stated that restorative justice is about restoring, healing and re- integrating victims, offenders, as well as the society and also preventing further harm. In this assignment, I will be discussing approaches to restorative justice and illustrating their advantages and disadvantages to offending. I will also provide the applications of these five approaches of restorative justice which are retributive approach, utilitarian deterrence approach, rehabilitation approach, restitution approach and restorative approach in the given case study. I will then explain my preferred approach to justice through identifying a personal belief or value that underpins my choice.
Rather than focusing on retribution, restorative justice seeks to reconcile and rebuild the damage to victims, wrongdoers, and communities caused by the criminal behavior (Kaphake, 2004). Historical Social Justice: Restorative justice and giving back