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.
Crimes such as; shoplifting, runaways are some of the crimes where restorative justice cannot be used because it is simply unnecessary. For example,
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
For example, a teenager steals an old lady’s purse and when exposed to restorative justice, the teenager has to give back all the money that they stole. It has nothing to do with handing out justice equally, it’s about restoring the feeling of safety and peace of mind to the victim and the community as a
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.
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.
This process will ensure that each offender receives the proper punishment and that the community is satisfied with the decision. The offender-based models, retributive and utilitarian, does not help the victim recover. Restorative justice is designed
4 Criticism and Challenges 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
Both deterrence and retribution aim to prevent future crime while promoting justice and maintaining order in society. Both philosophies recognise that criminal acts have a negative impact for the individuals involved and the community as a whole. However, deterrence and retribution do have many differences for example their main focus. Deterrence focuses on preventing crime by enforcing punishments so serve they deter the community as a whole not to commit crime not just the offenders. Deterrence follows the idea that people are rational and will not commit a criminal act if the price of their action is bigger then the benefits of it (Philosophies of punishment 2005).
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).
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. I think that restorative justice needs to be used correctly because if it is not done right it could actually cause more harm.
The concept of ‘recidivism’ is central to understanding the criminal justice system. Recidivism occurs when a person commits a crime again despite having been punished before. One of the main goals of the criminal justice system is to reduce recidivism but in fact longer sentences may increase the probability of recidivism (Griffiths & Cunningham, 2000). One reason is that the climate within a prison is not helpful to the inmate in making personal changes that can lead to reduced recidivism. However, psychologists are trying to develop intervention programmes that in fact lead to such personal changes so as to reduce recidivism.
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.
The basic premise of the utilitarian approach to justice is that punishment is intended to try and change a criminal’s behavior, so that they don’t repeat their offense. Utilitarian justice focuses on deterrence and rehabilitation. Deterrence works like in retributive approaches, where punishment for crimes are severe enough to deter potential offenders from breaking
