The available services for victims are provided on a case to case basis. Training is also provided for staff members that are handling domestic violence cases and simplify compensation collection or resolution between the lawbreaker and the suspect. In reference to Simpson case, victims’ rights were severely violated. Nicole Simpson was neglected of her victim’s rights; she was not given protection nor a police escort after she filed a complaint of intimate violence. The accused O.J. Simpson should have been given a restraining order to protect Nicole, there were still access to her even after she made a complaint of intimate violence. Changes have to be made for the future, police that is handling cases such as intimate violence should have a prompt response. The restraining order wouldn’t do any good if it isn’t enforced, the perpetrator should be return to police custody to guarantee the safety of the victim. Compensation can be used as a tool to discourage offenders from committing acts. Families and victims should be compensated for the grief that they were put through and the losses they may have had (Fattah & Peters,
Do you want to know the differences between the Circle Justice System and the US Criminal Justice System?
Everyone is innocent until proven guilty in the court of law. The Circle Justice system is the native American way of justice. The Criminal Justice system is the American way of justice. Both of the systems are alike, but they sometimes have different outcomes. Seventy- seven percent of all people that were in prison end up going back within five years.
The first point of criticism against victim participation in restorative justice processes arises from scepticism about an apology to the victim as a way of dealing with criminal matters. The perception sometimes exists as to it simply being a way to get away with the crime.106 Members of the public should thus be educated to understand that restorative justice is more than a mere saying sorry, but in the context of victim offender mediation or family group conferences it rather affords the victim the opportunity to confront the child offender with the real and human cost of his or her criminal actions. Another concern deals with the possible secondary victimisation of the victim in the case where the offender pretends
I believe that restorative justice could be a good idea for the United States if it is used correctly. I think that if restorative justice is used correctly, it could really benefit everyone involved: the victim, offender, family, and the community. Some of the restorative justice ways can also help victims move past what has happened to them and live a more normal life again. I think restorative justice would also benefit the United States because it can help the offender have a better life after.
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). This reflection paper will first address the advantages of using retributive justice approach in three court-cases. Second, it will discuss the disadvantages of using retributive justice approaches by analyzing the three court-cases listed above. Third, it will elaborate on ways that the system could have used restorative justice processes in the cases, as well as present potential outcomes that could have been reached if restoration justice was taken into consideration.
Taking this first step in reconciliation allows for a face to face encounter where restorative dialogue can occur between the victim and the offender in a genuine interaction (Dancig-Rosenberg and Galt, 2013). Furthermore, this process requires that the offender take explicit responsibility for the actions committed while listening and responding to the victim affected by their crime so as to present their own approach for repairing the damage caused (Dancig-Rosenberg and Galt, 2013). This process promotes honest dialogue and an empowering experience for the victim as they feel that their needs are heard and feelings expressed (Dancig-Rosenberg and Galt, 2013). In all, restorative justice benefits the victim, the offender and the community as community ties are strengthened while the process of the restorative approach discourages the offender from committing further crimes through the use of an open-minded and rehabilitative process (Dancig-Rosenberg and Galt,
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. A study done by Criminal justice inspection Northern Ireland found the rate of recidivism went down when young offenders were diverted into restorative justice furthermore study concludes that people were often quite pleased with the outcome of the restorative justice(Restorative Justice Council,
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
Restorative justice is a theory of the criminal justice system that focuses on the rehabilitation of the offenders, victims, and community. This fairly new theory is a new way of tackling criminal behavior, because unlike the traditional form of justice that we have become accustomed to restorative justice allows the affected persons of a given crime to be fully involved in the process of justice. Personally, I agree greatly with the concept of restorative justice, because the face to face interactions of victims and offenders can be a powerful way of addressing the material and physical injuries caused by a crime. However, with all the healing that can be achieve using the method of justice, it does have qualities that can cause it to have
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
There is some theoretical ambiguity in the meaning of Restorative Justice in spite of the many definitions and studies done on the subject. Restorative Justice has been defined as “an ethos with practical goals, among which to restore harm by including affected parties in a (direct or indirect) encounter and a process of understanding through voluntary and honest dialogue.” It is primarily concerned with the reinstatement of victims to life before the crime, restoration of the Offender to a well behaved and lawful life, restoration of the injury caused to the community and the creation of a better society in the present and the future.
Offenders who are fortunate enough to experience these programs have showed significantly lower rates of recidivism than those who do not receive any reintegrative support. One of the prime examples is Circles of Support and Accountability; by working directly with sex offenders in a safe environment, helping them share their voice, and equipping them with tools to succeed in society, these offenders, “had a significantly lower rate of any recidivism (11.4%) compared with controls [offenders who did not experience a circle process] (38.6%). They also… had a significantly lower rate of sexual recidivism (2.3%) compared with controls (13.7%)” (Clarke et al, p. 21). These programs are imperative in helping offenders build up confidence and self-esteem so that they can reintegrate properly and safely into their community. By learning how to be genuinely accountable for their actions, past offenders who go through the COSA program are substantially less likely to reoffend, or at least reoffend to the same degree, than offenders who do not receive that kind of support. There are programs across the country that are dedicated to restoration and healing for victims and offenders alike, and it has become abundantly clear that these programs are vital for introducing effective reintegration practices into
Proponents of restorative justice contend that it is more likely than retributive justice to reduce the incidence of crime because of its central concern for the safety of victims. The studies have demonstrated that restorative justice can have a reductive effect in certain cases and can change the behaviour of offenders. On the whole, however, there is more evidence that restorative justice is effective in reducing either the frequency or severity of reoffending for juveniles than in the case of adult offenders.
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.