1. Restorative Justice: Reforming the Experience One Child at a Time
Susan Hanley Duncan
Dean & Professor of Law

2. Objectives Define Restorative Justice
Understand the Values and Components of Restorative Justice
Discuss why Restorative Justice Principles Are Part of the Solution for Schools and Juvenile CoURTS
Wrote article in 2005 exploring whether Title IX or anti-bullying statutes were the solution to bullying.[1] At that time relatively few states had anti-bullying statutes.[2] The article concluded that both Title IX and anti-bullying statutes are necessary to protect our children because “Title IX does not require schools to adopt written policies prohibiting sexual harassment, it applies only to the most severe and egregious forms of harassment, and it is debatable whether it applies to sexual orientation harassment.”[3] Yet after analyzing the existing anti-bullying statutes, we concluded many of the statutes were flawed because they were too deferential to local schools.[4]
The article did not reference restorative justice, the process of victims, perpetrators and the broader school community coming together to discuss the bullying and its aftermath. Five years later I realize this was a mistake and that any solution which fails to include restorative justice principles lacks perhaps the most important and promising component for addressing the bullying problem.

3. "Peace is not the absence of conflict but the presence of creative alternatives for responding to conflict -- alternatives to passive or aggressive responses, alternatives to violence."   -Dorothy Thompson

4. What is Restorative Justice?
Restorative justice is a broad term used to describe a way of thinking, a philosophy or a social movement to institutionalize peaceful approaches to harm, problem-solving and violations of legal and human rights instead of, or in addition to, using retributive models.

5. Retributive System Questions
Who did it?
What laws were broken?
How will we punish the offender?
Dr. Howard Zehr
Eastern Mennonite University

6. Restorative Justice Questions
What is the harm?
What needs to be done to repair the harm?
Who is responsible for the harm?
Dr. Howard Zehr
Eastern Mennonite University
What is the harm?
An injury to the victim, community, even the offender
Broken relationships
We must recognize crime as an interpersonal conflict
What needs to be done to repair the harm?
Identify and clarify the harm that’s been done.
Include the victim
Include the community
Assess the offender’s capacity to make reparation
Facilitate opportunities for the reparation to take place
Who is responsible for the repair?
The offender, not the state, has primary and personal responsibility for making things right with the victim and the community.
The responsibility is shared by the agency, the offender, their family, the community & the victim.

7. How Alaska depicts RJ

8. RJ Practices at a Glance
Victim Impact Panels/Classes
Restitution
Restitution
Circle
Sentencing
Victim/Offender Mediation
CONFERENCING
MODELS
All of these practices are discussed in the Little Book of Restorative Justice.
What is already in place in your community?
The conferencing models are examples of bringing people together. The most common might be victim/offender mediation.
In other conferences family members are invited to a family group conference.
Both parties must be willing and able.
Other practices to increase empathy and understanding are Victim Impact classes, letters of apology.
Circle sentencing can include all stakeholders to speak before sentencing or actually decide the sentence.
Reparation Boards can meet locally to determine what needs to be done to repair the harm of local crime. Can also take the form of Neighborhood Accountability Boards.
Community Work Service, try to make it fit the harm done and include learning and competency development.
Family Group
Conferencing
Reparation
Boards
Letters of
Apology
Community
Service

9. How Schools Deal with Bullying Today?
Parents informed
Students referred to counseling or mediation
A penalty imposed
Freedom of movement restricted
Suspension
Expulsion
Ken Rigby & E. Barrington Thomas
How Schools Counter Bullying
Consequences is the key word that cam e to mind when schools considered what to do with students engaged in bullying
Some policies describe a highly legalistic approach, reminiscent of the three strikes and you’re out method of dealing with offenders.
Not all used consequences …some used a more problem solving approach (RJ techniques)
Some had a combination of problem-solving and punitive approaches

10. Click for Video

11. Does it Work? Victim Satisfaction Offender Satisfaction
Restitution Compliance
Recidivism

12. Client Satisfaction Typically 60% - 90% are satisfied
In some studies, satisfaction is higher for offenders than for victims
FGC satisfaction rates for both victims and offenders are typically higher in the U.S. than in New Zealand

13. Client Satisfaction: Meta-Analysis
Study pooled data: 27 VOM and 8 FGC studies
Victims were more satisfied in restorative programs than in traditional justice
Victims were slightly more satisfied in VOM than in FGC
Offenders were slightly more satisfied in restorative programs than in traditional justice

14. Fairness
Both victims and offenders feel they were treated fairly and had a say in the outcome
85% to 90% of participants would recommend the process to others in similar situations

15. Restitution
Restitution may include apology, monetary payment, personal service and/or community service
Apology rates average about 70% and are higher than in traditional court proceedings
Agreement completion averages 85%

16. Diversion
Has greatly reduced court loads in New Zealand since being mandated in 1989.
Has also imposed greater sanctions in New Zealand than was the case before implementation, strengthening the net of social control.
Has not reduced court loads in other jurisdictions.

17. Recidivism
Studies of five programs report reduced recidivism ranging from slight to significant
One large study found reduced rates for violent youth but not for drunk drivers or juvenile property offenders

18. Correlates of reduced recidivism
A conference that is memorable
Not being made to feel a bad person
Feeling involved in conference decision making
Agreeing with the outcome
Completing tasks agreed to
Feeling sorry for what they had done
Meeting the victim and apologizing
Feeling they had repaired the damage

19. Pilot Project
Restorative Justice Louisville began in October

20. Key Players KY Administrative Office of the Courts
Louisville Metro Human Relations Commission
Clifton Universalist Unitarian Church
Louisville Metro Police Department
KY Department of Juvenile Justice
Louisville Metro Public Defender’s Office
Disproportionate Minority Confinement Advisory Board
Luther Luckett Christian Church
Newburg Ministerial Association
Jefferson County Attorney’s Office
Peace Education
Jefferson County Circuit Court Clerk
Peace Works
Jefferson County Public Schools
Spalding University
Jefferson District Court
Stoll Keenon Ogden PLLC
Just Solutions, Inc.
University of Louisville
Louisville Bar Foundation
Louisville Metro Criminal Justice Commission

21. Criteria Usually first or second offenses
No transfer or waiver eligible offenses
No offenders who have been committed to Department of Juvenile Justice
No prior felony adjudication
No felony cases with the exception of Thefts or Assault Third Degree or written approval of Assistant County Attorney
No sexual offenses
All treatment or other requirements reached during Family Group Conferencing to be completed within 11 months.

22. Lessons Learned Funding Education Managing the Case
Collecting and Analyzing Data

23. Sources for this PowerPoint
ppt#430,27,RJ Practices at a Glance