Criminology

A survey of new methods and their potential

Notions of what justice is are always evolving. There always questions as to whether the criminal justice system is capable of providing true justice. There are three constituencies involved - the offender, the victims and the community as a whole. Providing justice to all three is a tricky proposition. In recent years, some communities have tried to implement more holistic systems to serve victims and perpetrators.

Restorative justice is one way in which communities have tried to go beyond the lock em all up notion of criminal justice. Generally stated, this type of justice seeks to rehabilitate offenders within the community while also allowing victims to seek restitution in various forms. This paper will discuss various forms of restorative justice and evaluate the potential of such methods as shaming and peacemaking as alternatives to traditional criminal justice system treatments.

Why Alter4native Methods
The resources of the criminal justice system are being stretched to their limits. In the vast majority of cases plea bargains are taken in lieu of criminal trials. Since the war on drugs began all phases of the justice system are being strained. The plea process makes the system more efficient, but whether it affords justice is another question. According to Boutellier The demand for criminal justice cannot be fulfilled by the traditional criminal justice system it is too limited in scope, means and effectiveness (1996).

Justice for the victim may in some cases be a casualty of the current system. Rarely can victims have all their questions answered and feelings expressed in the courtroom context. In recent years, criminal justice research has focused on alternative methods to achieving justice. The purposes are twofold. First, alternative justice aims to give crime victims a greater voice and more participation in the resolution of their cases.

Secondly, it tries to address the root causes of crime and explore avenues of rehabilitation for the offender. An important side benefit is that the more of these cases that can be handled by alternative means the less the strain on the traditional criminal justice system. These are currently still just theoretical constructs but alternative justice methods have shown some promise.

New Methods
In some cases victimoffender conferences are used to bring the two sides together in a professionally mediated forum. The victims needs take precedence and the offender is expected to admit guilt. A restitution plan can then be set up between the parties. The victim is provided with an ongoing support network in order to process the events and facilitate forgiveness.

The offender may be able to decrease or eliminate his jail time for participation in the conference format. The offender also gets to talk openly, as facilitated by the mediator, about the events and what caused them. This can be an important factor in preventing recidivism. One study found that offenders who felt that police had not taken the time to listen to their side of the story were 36 more likely to be reported for assaulting the same victim (Sakai, 2003).

Shaming is a technique designed to increase offender awareness of the damage they have caused and ultimately re-connect them with the community. Reintegrative shaming requires both an offender admission of guilt and the eventual forgiveness of the community. Research results on shaming are spotty at best. Zhang and Zhang found that neither parental nor peer reintegrative shaming had the effect of reducing predatory delinquency (Zhang and Zhang, 2004). If justice is defined in solely statistical terms it would appear that shaming is not an effective tool. Researchers point out however that in combination with other expectations reintegrative shaming can help to re-set community expectations which could decrease crime in the long run.

The concept of shaming is based in part on Procedural Justice Theory. Under this framework a key element of the process is to convey respect to the offender, not for his actions but for him as a human being. During shaming and conferences the offender can enlist support from people to speak on his behalf in a way not present at criminal trials, which are solely focused on character assassination.

In Canberra Australia methods such as these have been used to address youth offenders without stigmatizing them. It is still a question as to how these methods are reflected in hard data. None the less citizen satisfaction with the fairness of these methods remains high (Sakai, 2003).

Peacemaking is a technique based on traditional Native American practices. This method usually takes the form of discussion circles. The circle includes the victim and the offender along with supporters of both. Other community members with a vested interest may also be present. A structured dialogue then takes place.

An object called a talking piece is passed around the circle and used to stimulate the discussion. The absence of tables and other furniture is meant to foster feelings of openness among the group. Participants are only allowed to speak when they have the talking piece. Interruptions are not allowed. The goal of the circle is to reach a consensus on what will happen to the offender and what community responsibilities are going forward.

Potential Problems
Shaming done improperly or without effective reintegration risks stigmatizing an individual permanently. This can have the opposite of the desired effect where the offender begins to think of himself as a career criminal because that is all society allows him to be. In that case shaming is no better than imprisonment. Shaming without emotional repair for the offender can in fact be dangerous. It can send the offender into a never-ending cycle of shame and anger. These are two emotions closely associated with criminal behavior.

Many things can go wrong in a conferencing process. The process can, in some cases, result in the victim being even more frightened than they were before. In cases where there is not effective mediation the session can descend into chaos. Offenders may become uncooperative. Sakai writes that offenders who failed to apologize during conferences were three times more likely to reoffend (2004).

Due to their open nature, peacemaking circles are only appropriate for a limited range of offenses. They require a concerted effort of all in order to function well, especially given the unfamiliarity of this method to most Americans. They may be an effective tool to re-engage young low-level offenders with the community before they go on to commit more serious crimes.

Conferences lack some of the procedural safeguards that are present in the court system. Innocent defendants could choose restorative justice simply because they see it as the best option. Once an offender enters restorative justice they are presumed guilty without the evidentiary safeguards they would have in court. For some types of crimes restorative justice is an awkward fit. For victims of domestic violence Nothing in existing research suggests that the change process for batterers is affected through a couple sessions with the victim andor members of the community (Frederick and Lizdas, 2003).

In its current forms restorative justice is not set up to provide the long-term services victims like these need. Frederick and Lizdas conclude that restorative justice practices are not primarily designed to account for (or protect from) the real and ongoing risks battered women face long after the crimes have been committed against them (2003). Differing motives for entering restorative justice formats may also compromise their effectiveness. Technically the process is voluntary for both offenders and victims. Offenders may be pressured into it by the potential consequences of not agreeing to it.

Whether they can communicate openly and truthfully and become empathetic to the victim is very much in question. Repeat offenders have often developed a thick shell and become masters of deception. Victims may enter the program solely because it gives them a chance to vent anger on the offender. If this is all they wish to accomplish then the ultimate goal of preventing future offences will not be reached by this method.

Analysis and Conclusion
On the effectiveness of restorative justice and techniques like shaming and peacemaking the results are mixed. Part of the reason for this is the shifting definition of justice. Restorative justice, for example, is a process that focuses on the needs of individuals. Justice related needs among victims and offenders vary widely.

The degree to which these techniques meet a community standard of justice is also unclear. Sakai believes that research does demonstrate both the promise and the perils of restorative justice 2004). There is the potential for alternative justice methods to match up well with community and individual needs. For domestic violence Many of the principles and much of the language of each movement resonate for the other (Frederick and Lizdas, 2003).

Typically, research has focused on comparing one type of restorative justice against another on a purely empirical basis. More work needs to be done on how to integrate ideas from varied programs into a cohesive framework. More study also needs to be done on long-term outcomes for victims, offenders and the community as a whole.

Restorative justice is a philosophy rather than a specific method. Its hallmark is, and has to be, flexibility. The jury is still out on the effectiveness of restorative justice and other non-traditional methods of criminal justice. None of these methods is likely to lead to a wholesale change of the criminal justice system. Alternative methods have shown some potential with certain people in certain situations.

Any community seeking to use these methods must study their own community thoroughly while also assessing all available information on the particular method it wishes to employ. Something will need to be done in the future to lessen the strain on the criminal justice system while also protecting the rights of individuals. Restorative justice is one potential tool for doing this, but it must be done with extreme diligence and care.