More handpicked essays just for you.
Victims rights and restorative justice
The pros and cons of victim compensation
Victims rights and restorative justice
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
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
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
110). According to the author, the aim of restorative justice is to heal communities from an incident where people were harmed and, ideally, help prevent the same thing from happening again. I believe that, there is going to be a higher possibility of crime reduction in schools and in different neighborhood if victims and offenders mediate a restitution agreement to the satisfaction of each other. In conjunction to this, if the government can be more committed in supporting these approaches, I believe that there will be a massive drop in crime
This system is meant to empower victims since their actions are not taken seriously in a court of law and form a procedure for repartitions without any lawyers (Hyde & Quest, 2012, page 293). The victim meets with her offender and they have an extensive counseling session. This technique may see unorthodox but it holds the defendant responsible for his actions and could be therapeutic. Another conflict of this case was that Brock Turner not only spent a short amount of time paying for his crime but he never took ownership.
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 is a sentencing model that builds on restitution and community participation in an attempt to make a victim “whole again” (Schmalleger, 2010). Restorative justice can be explained as a form of punishment, which everyone involved or affected by a crime gets a feeling of peace after all if finalized. Both the victim and the offender have to agree to participate in restorative justice. There are needs that have to be met through restorative justice, which are the victim must be
Victim witness programs are used by the government in order to provide support and assistance to those who fall victim to a crime. According to Victim Witness Program, the primary goals of such programs, include but are not limited to, encouraging victims to participate in any parole and supervised release processes of their offender, notify and facilitate victims in participation of any hearing or release dates in regards to their offender, provide options for supportive services, and advocate for crime victims (2015, para.1). The organization under which the victim-witness program is located is under a system, which has many internal constituencies, thus creating competing and conflicting purposes. The goals of the victim-witness program are quite simple and seek out to give the victim the right to be represented during the processing of the offender, however, given the multiple roles the court, for example, must serve, the goals of the victim-witness program can be both complex and conflicting.
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,
Restorative justice is an alternative approach to criminal justice, which focuses less on abstract legal principles and more on the needs and interests of all parties affected within a particular situation (Williams & Arrigo, 2012 p.206). Restorative justice focuses attention on who was affected or harmed by an action; it allows the person who caused the harm and the community to create a meaningful solution. The victim offender mediation is a restorative justice program where the person who has suffered physical or emotional harm, property damage, or economic loss as a result of a crime meets with his or her offender face to face in the presence of a trained mediator in a safe structured environment. In this program the victims have the chance to talk about
First, offenders are to take responsibility and accountability for their actions and responds to the damage they’ve caused the victim(s). The offender must then act to ‘repair the damage’ this may include letters of apology, restitution, or community service. Next, victim-offender mediation programs involve the competency of the offender. This means the offender’s ability to function as a dynamic and fully capable citizen – this is related to inducing empathy in offenders, teaching them both communication and conflict resolution skills. Lastly, public safety includes having new relationships between the community, offender, and the victim.
Restorative Justice For a long time, there have been two criminal justice systems, but now there has been a new system, restorative justice, which has grown in popularity since the 1970’s. The three systems are the retribution model, the rehabilitation model, and the new one, restorative justice. The retribution system emphasizes on punishment through the criminal justice process, and the rehabilitation process focuses the need for society to assist criminals in changing their attitudes and behavior into better habits for their future. The restorative justice though, is a system that promotes equal concern for the victims and the offenders.
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).
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
The victim deserves similar level of protection and attention from the court like that of an accused i.e. a victim 's interests need to be balanced vis-à-vis that of accused. Victims of crime go through mental and physical trauma and suffer throughout their lives , as there place in the society changes. A victim is certainly entitled to reparation, restitution and safeguards of his rights and criminal justice would look hollow if justice is not done to the victim of the crime. In recent years, the Legislature and the judiciary have taken gradual steps to develop the necessary principles by which appropriate compensation could be paid to the victims of crimes. The gradual shift in the approach of the Supreme Court is a positive sign but other organs i.e. the government and the legislature have to make conscious efforts to consider the rights of the victims.
The shortcoming of this approach is that it is not appropriate for more serious crimes such as rape and murder, because in cases like those, most of the time there is nothing that offenders can do to restore the loss or make things right The benefit of this approach is that all parties who are involved get the chance to face each other. The victims get an opportunity to be directly involved in the process and get a chance to respond to the crime committed against them. The offender becomes aware of how their offense has impacted the victim, and this in turn allows the offender to take responsibility and to apologize or show remorse to their wrong doings. Through the process healing is promoted to all the parties involved, the offender might be required to pay for the harm caused.
