Victims of Severe Violence Meet the Offender: Restorative Justice Through Dialogue
| Author | William Bradshaw,Robert B. Coates,Mark S. Umbreit |
| Published date | 01 September 1999 |
| Date | 01 September 1999 |
| DOI | 10.1177/026975809900600405 |
International Review ofVictimology, 1999, Vol. 6, pp. 321-343
0269-7580/99 $10
© 1999 A B Academic
Publishers-
Printed in Great Britain
VICTIMS OF SEVERE VIOLENCE
MEET
THE
OFFENDER: RESTORATIVE JUSTICE THROUGH
DIALOGUE
MARK
S. UMBREIT1,WILLIAM BRADSHAW2and ROBERT B. COATES 1
1Center
for
Restorative Justice &Mediation, 2School
of
Social Work, University
of
Minnesota,
St. Paul, Minnesota 55108, USA
ABSTRACT
Both restorative justice in general and victim offender mediation specifically continue to be
identified with primarily, if not exclusively, addressing non-violent property crimes, and perhaps
even minor assaults. This article will challenge such assumptions by providing empirical evidence
that suggests that many of the principles of restorative justice can be applied in crimes
of
severe
violence, including murder. Some would even suggest that the deepest healing impact of restorati ve
justice is to be found in addressing and responding to such violent crime. An increasing number of
victims
of
sexual assault, attempted homicide, and survivors of murder victims, in Canada and the
United States, are requesting the opportunity to meet the offender to express the full impact of the
crime upon their life, to get answers to many questions they have and to gain a greater sense of
closure so that they can move on with their lives. In most cases this occurs many years after the
crime occurred and the actual mediation/dialogue session is typically held in a secure institution
where the offender is located. This article addresses four topics. First, the case development process
of victim sensitive offender dialogue (VSOD) in crimes of severe violence is described, with an
emphasis of how theprocess is far more intensive insuch cases. Second, the specific type of victim
sensitive mediation employed in such cases is briefly presented. Humanistic mediation is 'dialogue
driven' rather than 'settlement driven' and is essential to the application of restorative justice
principles in cases of severe violence. Third, a review of the few current studies of such an
intervention is offered, including preliminary data that is emerging from a two state multi-year
study by the author. Fourth, two specific case studies related to the above research are presented
with an emphasis upon implications for practitioners. Finally, several conclusions are offered,
including a number of unanswered questions and the need for further research.
INTRODUCTION
Restorative justice focuses upon the harm caused to individual victims and the
community while emphasizing the importance of engaging key stakeholders
(victims, community and offenders) in the process of developing a restorative
response to the crime (Bazemore and Umbreit, 1994, 1995; Van Ness and Strong,
1997; Zehr, 1980, 1990, 1999). Restorative justice theory is having an increasing
impact upon communities, and even entire justice systems, throughout North
America, Europe and the South Pacific (Alder and Wundersitz, 1994; Bazemore
and Walgrave, 1999; Galaway and Hudson, 1996; Hudson, Morris and Maxwell,
1996; Messmer and Otto, 1992; Umbreit, 1998; Umbreit and Stacey, 1996;
Umbreit and Zehr, 1996; Wright and Galaway, 1989).
322
The oldest, most widely disseminated and documented practice throughout the
world, and empirically grounded expression of restorative justice is victim
offender mediation. With more than twenty-five years of experience and re-
search, involving many thousands of annual case referrals to programs in more
than 1,200 known communities throughout North America and Europe (U mbreit
and Greenwood, 1999; Umbreit and Neimeyer, 1996; Umbreit, 1995b, 1995c,
1993a, 1991b, 1986a, 1985), victim offender mediation (often referred to as
victim offender reconciliation or victim offender conferencing) remains a strong
empirically grounded pillar within the growing restorative justice 'movement.
A growing amount of empirical data has emerged from studies of victim
offender mediation in property crimes and minor assaults, in the U.S., Canada,
and England. High levels of client satisfaction with the mediation process and
outcome has been consistently found over the past 18 years in studies throughout
Europe and North America (Coates and Gehm, 1989; Collins, 1984; Dignan,
1990; Fischer and Jeune, 1987; Galaway, 1988; Galaway and Hudson, 1990;
Gehm, 1990; Marshall and Merry, 1990; Perry, Lajeunesse and Woods, 1987;
Umbreit, 1988, 1989a, 1991a, 1993b; 1994a; 1995a; Umbreit and Bradshaw,
1997, 1999; Umbreit and Coates, 1992, 1993; Umbreit and Roberts, 1996;
Wright and Galaway, 1989), with some studies finding higher restitution comple-
tion rates (Umbreit, 1994a), reduced fear among victims (Umbreit and Coates,
1993; Umbreit, 1993b, 1994a, 1994b), and reduced future criminal behavior
(Nugent and Paddock, 1995; Nugent, Umbreit, Wiinamaki and Paddock, 2000;
Schneider, 1986; Umbreit, 1994).
It is becoming increasingly clear that the victim-offender mediation process
humanizes the criminal justice experience for both victim and offender, holds
offenders directly accountable to the people they victimized, allows for more
active involvement of crime victims and community members (as volunteer
mediators) in the justice process, and suppresses further criminal behavior in
offenders.
During the early 1980s, many questioned whether crime victims would even
want to meet face-to-face with their offender. Today it is very clear, from
empirical data and practice experience, that the majority of victims of property
crimes and minor assaults presented with the opportunity of mediation chose to
engage the process, with victim participation rates often ranging from about
60-70%
in many programs. A statewide randomized public opinion survey in
Minnesota found that 84% of citizens, including many who had been victimized
by crime, indicated they would be likely to consider participating in victim
offender mediation if they were the victim of a property crime (Pranis and
Umbreit, 1992). A more recent statewide survey of victim service providers in
Minnesota found that 91%felt that YOM was an important service to be made
available to victims on a volunteer basis and that is should be offered in each
judicial district of the state (Minnesota Department of Public Safety, 1996).
Both restorative justice in general and victim offender mediation specifically
continue to be identified with primarily, if not exclusively, addressing non-viol-
To continue reading
Request your trial