This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn more

Law Notes Criminology Notes

Restorative Justice Notes

Updated Restorative Justice Notes

Criminology Notes

Criminology

Approximately 610 pages

Criminology notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambridge. These notes cover all the LLB Criminology law cases and so are perfect for anyone doing an LLB in the UK or a great supplement for those doing LLBs abroad, whether that be in Ireland, Hong Kong or Malaysia (University of London).

These were the best Criminology notes the director of Oxbridge Notes (an Oxford law graduate) could find after combing through dozens of LLB samples from outstanding law students with the highes...

Available here

The following is a more accessible plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our Criminology Notes. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:

Overview

NOTE: as an alternative? Pre-sentencing? Part of rehab? S&S type? Police?

What is Restorative Justice?

  • Bringing victims and offenders “into communication” to repair the harm and find a “positive way forward” (definition by Restorative Justice Council)

  • Informal resolutions by police, formal RJ conferences (face-to-face facilitated meetings)

    • Less research on the effectiveness of informal resolutions

    • Might be applied inconsistently

Use of RJ

  • Police forces

    • RJ approaches (especially informal resolutions) increased from 0.5% to 12% of case disposals between 2008 and 2011

    • BUT large variations in how these were implemented (including training available)

    • ISSUE: not subject to external security

      • 14 out of 16 cases were inappropriate (V didn’t consent or not a criminal offence)

      • Parties not always properly advised on status of informal resolution

      • Police officers should focus on visible policing and responding to calls, restorative conferences should be organised by volunteers?

  • RJ Conferences

    • Best chance of success when well-organised and simple to follow

    • For offenders in custody, release on temporary licence (ROTL) might be required for RJ conferences to be held outside prison

  • Used by YOTs, but less so by probations and prisons since no clear NOMS guidance

Benefits

  • Victims: high levels of satisfaction

  • Offenders: reflecting on offending

  • Public: more support for use with young offenders, possibility of informal resolutions helping to reduce bureaucracy and delay

Statutory Framework

LASPOA 2012

S79: Referral Orders

  • Referral to Youth Offender Panel

    • Offender and YOP will come up with a programme to address offending behaviour

    • Can include requirements relating to reparation and restorative justice

    • In the event of non-compliance or refusal to agree to a contract, offender will be referred back to Court

Crime and Courts Act 2013

Sch 16 Para 5: Deferred sentences to allow Restorative Justice

  • Adds s1ZA to PCC(S)A 2000

  • Court can defer sentence for 6 months and impose RJ requirement

    • Requires consent of offender and victim(s)

    • “aims to maximise the offender’s awareness of the impact of the offending concerned on the victims” and “gives an opportunity to a victim or victims to talk about, or by other means express experience of, the offending and its impact”

Offender Rehabilitation Act (2014)

S15: introduce availability of a “rehabilitation activity requirement” as part of a community order or suspended sentence order

  • Can be required to participate in specified activities or go to a specified place

    • E.g. activities forming an accredited programme or activities whose purpose is reparative

    • Explicitly includes “restorative justice activities”

Studies

Study Type Findings
South Australia Juvenile Justice Project (1999) (Daly) Interviews with victims and offenders post-RJC

  • Most coordinators and police officers felt there was a high degree of “restorativeness” and “democratic process”

  • Different possible aims: deterrence/compensation vs remorse/forgiveness

  • Positive effects on young offenders
RISE (Sherman and Strang, 2000) Canberra Reintegrative Shaming (police run conferences) Experiments (based on Braithwaithe’s reintegrative shaming theory), used as diversionary alternative to Court

  • Youth violence: 38 fewer offences per year per 100 offenders

  • Drink driving: 4 more offences per year per 100 offenders

  • Results showed clear effects for violent offenders, but may not work for other types of offences

Youth Conferencing as Shame Management:

Results of a Long-term Follow-Up Study

Maruna, 2007

 Interviews with small sample (26) of young people who went thru North Ireland Youth Conferencing Service

  • findings are ‘treated cautiously and sweeping generalisations are avoided’

  • Most post-conference outcomes are Positive

  • self-reported conferencing experiences were so negative that they might have exacerbated the young person’s problems through either labelling or provoking defiance.

  • frustrating experiences described were those conferences that resulted in a

  • conference plan that was later rejected by the courts

  • most of those who avoided offending entirely after the conference had not been involved in much serious delinquency prior to the conference itself, and many were first-time offenders, arguable that they would have desisted regardless of conferencing experience.
Sherman and Strang (Smith Institute, 2007)

Review of research in UK and abroad

Broad definition: Includes RJC, restitution, reparation.

  • RJ substantially reduced offending for some offenders (but not all)

    • More effective for serious offending (especially violent offences)

  • Benefits for victims (especially for RJC)

    • Reduced PTSD, desire for revenge

    • Increased satisfaction

  • Reduced costs when used as diversion

  • Reduced recidivism
Shapland (2007) 7 million, 7 year research programme funded by government, looked at RCTs involving serious offences (robbery, burglary and violent offences)

  • Majority of victims chose to participate

  • 85% of victim participants were satisfied

  • Reduced frequency of re-offending

  • 9 savings for every 1 spent
Robinson and Shapland (2008) Evaluation of 3 restorative justice schemes in England and Wales under HO’s “Crime Reduction Programme”

  • RJ helps to consolidate the offender’s decision to desist (Provides social/human capital for reintegration and desistance

  • Victims are also interested in...

Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Criminology Notes.

More Criminology Samples