Factors Contributing to Victims' Satisfaction with Restorative Justice Practice: A Qualitative Examination

AuthorJac Armstrong
Pages39-54
39



           

Abstract Extant research indicates that restorative justice can deliver benefits which the
traditional Criminal Justice Process cannot, ranging from victim satisfaction to reducing
offender recidivism (Zehr, 2005; Bergseth & Bouffard, 2007). This qualitative review
explored victims’ perceptions of a restorative justice process, implemented as victim-
offender mediation. It provides an insight often neglected within extant studies, into the
contributory factors which victims perceive as being important to the success of a
restorative process. Utilising mix-method data collection (Denzin, 2009; Jupp, 2001),
questionnaires were completed at the pre-panel stage to ascertain victims’ perceptions of
the restorative process. The results informed interview schedules which were employed
within thirty-five semi-structured interviews (Leidner, 1993; Oakley, 2004), conducted with
individuals following the conclusion of their restorative meeting. Within the pre-process
questionnaires, victims indicated feeling well prepared for their panel. They stated that this
process was the most appropriate resolution and all but one victim did not desire an
alternative resolution/process. Within the qualitative interviews victims identified the high
quality of preparation as being crucial for the process to succeed. Additionally, the
independence of the facilitator, combined with the presence of the Police during Panels
was identified as being of central importance. Victim Satisfaction remained high
throughout the review, consistent with previous research (Umbreit & Coates, 1992;
Umbreit et al, 1997; Hayes et al, 1998; U mbreit et al, 2006; Campbell et al, 2005; W ilcox &
Hoyle, 2004), with many victims attributing their satisfaction to aspects of the process
identified above.
Keywords Restorative Justice, Victims, Police, Community Justice
 !" #$%&'!
The restorative justice practice examined in this research has operated since January
2005, available to cases located within t he criminal justice process, cases are referred to
British Journal of Community Justice
©2012 Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield
ISSN 1475-0279
Vol. 10(2): 39-54
Armstrong
40
the Panel by the Police Constabulary. This research focuses exclusively upon those cases
referred to the restorative process by the police constabulary for criminal acts.
Restorative justice represents a relatively new model of conflict resolution within England
and Wales, with the potential to operate not only within the criminal justice process but
across a diverse and expansive range of social situations (Dussich & Schellenberg, 2010;
Crawford and Goode, 2000; Zedner, 1994; Ashworth, 2002). Whilst attempts to define
restorative justice continue to suffer from a latent ambiguity, it is defined (by some) as “a
process whereby parties with a stake in a specific offence collectively resolve how to de al
with the aftermath of the offence and its implications for the future” (Marshall, 1999).
Numerous restorative practices exist, the most prominent and empirically validated
method being victim-offender-mediation (Umbreit, 1994). It involves the discussion of the
offence, its consequences and resolution with victims and perpetrators, facilitated in a
safe environment by a trained mediator. The restorative practice, upon which this
research focuses, operates as a hybrid organisation between Local Government and the
criminal justice system. It works closely with the Police Constabulary, Local Government
and Housing Associations whilst maintaining its independence and autonomy. Headed by
an independent Coordinator, the organisation utilises International Institute of Restorative
Practices (IIRP) accredited trained volunteers as facilitators who undertake individual
cases from their referral, through preparati on of victims and offenders, to its c onclusion at
the restorative meeting itself. Each meeting is attended by the individuals involved, their
supporter (if necessary) the facilitator and a Police representative. At the conclusion of a
successful Panel an Acceptable Behaviour Contract (ABC) is drafted to address the specific
issues relevant to this dispute and is signed by the offender or ‘wrong doer’, the Police
and the Facilitator. This is intended to prevent similar behaviour from recurring within an
appropriate time frame. If this ABC is breached the case is referred back to the
Community Justice Panel who can then take appropriate action. If the case involves a
criminal act, due to the Panels conduct being compliant with the Police and Criminal
Evidence Act (1984), the offence is referred back to the Police and the original offence can
then be processed under the traditional criminal justice process.
Recent years have witnessed a proliferation in research reports on the success of
restorative justice practices to deliver their promises in relation to the improvement of
victims’ position within the criminal justice process (Sherman and Strang, 2007; Hoyle,
Young and R Hill, 2002; Armour and Umbreit, 2006), or its success in reducing offender
recidivism (Hayes, 2005; Nugent et al, 2001) or increasing victim satisfaction (Hoyle, 2002,
Umbreit et al, 2006). However, such research is of predominantly quantitative nature
(Bazemore & Green, 2007), relying upon statistical reference and an emphasis upon pre-
coded out-put measurements (Umbreit, Coates and Vos 2002; Nugent, Umbreit,
Wiinamaki and Paddock, 2001). W hilst not denying the value of such r esearch it is
suggested that to fully understand the strengths of restorative justice, being a clear
example of social interaction (Becker, 1996; Kvale, 1996; Bottoms, 2000), qualitative data
must be generated which examines participants’ perceptions, expectations and
experiences in greater detail.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT