RJ City and Restorative Justice This is the story of two men who burglarized a house. This story is fictional and the sole purpose is to provide insight into restorative justice. This piece will illustrate the restorative justice process with how, it works and how this process differs from contemporary criminal justice.
Housebreaking Activities On one seemingly normal afternoon two men decided to break into a house, and to establish whether or not the residents were present they knocked on doors. They knocked on one door, and as expected there was no answer resulting in the young men choosing this house to burglarize. Upon entry the two quickly searched the house for items, which are easy to carry and sell. Upon their exit they left with the loot without regard for the residents or how they felt once they returned to discover they were burglarized (Van Ness, 2009).
The Resident Returns The resident, Mildred, an elderly woman was out visiting her daughter, Betty, and upon her return discovered she was a victim of housebreaking. She knew she was burglarized because she resided alone as a widow for the previous two years, and she immediately contacted the police via 911 (Van Ness, 2009). Upon arrival the investigator, Officer Randy, immediately clears the house to ensure the perpetrators were not still in the residence. John, the neighborhood victim support coordinator arrived, and provided Mildred with information on Rj City and how these crimes are handled. The information also included the provisions of RJ City, which are as follows:
• To protect you
• To keep you informed.
• To include you, if you wish.
• To allow you to not participate, if you prefer.
• To help you find assistance.
• To help you get restitution.
• To treat you
In return they ask that she
• Treat others with respect.
• Does not retaliate.
• Allows others to participate (Van Ness, 2009).
After officer Randy the house was deemed secure Mildred, John, and Officer Randy conducted a walkthrough. Upon the completion of the walkthrough Mildred discovered the door had been breached and her room had been completely despoiled. Further findings revealed some money and jewelry to be missing along with an anniversary watch Mildred was emotionally attached to (Van Ness, 2009).
Victim Support Naturally Mildred grew concerned about clean-up and damage repair and John notified her of a local church, which provides assistance with crime scene clean-up and repair (Van Ness, 2009). Mildred was very concerned about her safety and returning home. John advised Mildred that there was a neighborhood community, which would bring her dinners and a trained ear for week or so after she returned home (Van Ness, 2009).
Leads and Arrests
Two weeks later Ed, a 19 -year old with a history of burglary, and David a high school senior with no prior criminal record. Ed denied the crime with David. David initially denied the break-in but eventually broke down and released a confession along with guilty feelings, for how his family would react. David also gave up the location of the leftover stolen property, but the anniversary watch had already been sold. Officer Randy then informed the two of the RJ City Restorative Justice Process with a brochure. The brochure had these provisions for suspects:
• You may require us to prove our charges against you in court.
• You may accept responsibility.
• If you were responsible, you have an obligation to help make things right (Van Ness, 2009).
The pamphlet also outlined that crime does not define a person unless they let it.
Furthermore, the brochure illustrates the provisions for RJ City justice suspects which are:
• To include you.
• To help you make amends and to return to the community.
• To help you meet with the victims (if they wish) to decide how to do this.
• To treat you with respect (Van Ness, 2009).
It also had RJ City justice suspect requests, which are:
• Treat others with respect.
• Do not retaliate
• Allow others to participate (Van Ness, 2009).
Ed was sent to adversarial court because he continued to deny the crime. David’s interest peeked at the provision about helping make things right (Van Ness, 2009). Both were allowed legal counsel in regard to their options.
The Restorative Justice Process
Offenders like David who show genuine remorse are offered the option to meet their victims and discuss how to make amends for what they have done. In this restorative circleethey would discuss what it would take to make things right from restitution, to community service to allowing their victims to question them. This process is mainly for those who take responsibility for their actions and must be approved by a judge (Van Ness, 2009).
The Victim
Victims are given updates about the investigation as Mildred was informed when the authorities arrested both Ed and David. These victims are also informed of their right to legal counsel to seek restitution and of the restorative circles (Van Ness, 2009). In Mildred’s case David took responsibility for his actions and for Ed it would be different because of his denial of guilt. Mildred Chose not to seek restitution, but to join the restorative circle, which her and David decided to have. The meeting had a large turnout with authorities, new neighbors, family members from both sides and community volunteers. David apologized for his actions and Mildred provided insight into David about how the crime affected her. David also advised Mildred that he would do whatever possible to make amends, which provided comfort for her. The Older adults also established that there needed to be more youth outreach programs and incentives to keep youth on a straight path. With restorative justice the whole community benefits because it is a learning experience for everyone about community weaknesses.
Contemporary Justice
Suspects like Ed, who deny legal guilt or responsibility, are sent to adversarial court with contemporary criminal justice. Ed has the right to legal counsel as he has to defend against prosecution in adversarial court and eventually trial. Ed continued to deny the crime and was later found guilty. His punishment was to pay restitution for half of the stolen property, which was not recovered along with 12 months of confinement to a closed workshop. Ed was also ordered to follow a reintergration plan complete a few therapy programs to include a victim empathy program. If he succeeded in his programs he could be released early (Van Ness, 2009)..
The Aftermath
The restorative circle with David reduced Mildred’s fear of her own neighborhood, and she was able to met all the neighbors who appeared for the circle (Van Ness, 2009). David completed his agreement, attended community college and eventually became a little league baseball coach. Ed did exceptionally well while confined. He excelled in carpentry and developed an idea to make flat screen televisions appear like mirrors while turned off to improve the appearance. His product became a top seller but once he was released he rejoined the bad crowd and eventually began substance abuse again. This led him to burglarize again and while on his last burglary he noticed the residents had his flat screen product. This along with the news that his girlfriend was expecting a child inspired Ed to change his life. He joined a substance abuse support group and a restorative circle to get his life on track and to contact all the people he had burglarized so he could apologize for the crimes he committed. Ed went back to adversarial court, but because he came forward the judge limited his sentencing to probation on the condition that he finish his 12 step program and follow through with his agreements to his victims. Ed eventually settled down and married his girlfriend. He also volunteers at the workshop from time to time (Van Ness, 2009).
Conclusion
This piece illustrated what restorative justice does. It provides insight to the entire community about their neighborhoods strengths and weaknesses as a community. It allows offenders to take full responsibility for their actions by paying their debt to the community. Contemporary justice allows suspects to contest allegation’s. If a prosecutor can prove guilt the offender is sentenced and punished in accordance with the area laws. As the story illustrated both forms of justice can serve a greater purpose.