1. 1 Facilitating Restorative Group Conferences Lesson 2: Conferencing and Restorative Justice Minnesota Department of Corrections with the National Institute of Corrections

2. 2 Lesson Objectives n Understand and articulate the values and principles of restorative justice. n Understand accountability within the framework of conferencing. n Identify the benefits and risks of conferencing. n Explain similarities/differences between some face to face restorative practices. n Explain the history of victim/offender processes. n Explain how conferencing relates to or fits within the restorative justice framework.

3. 3 When faced with harm or wrong doing: n Revenge n Retribution n Restoration

4. 4 Revenge: Weaknesses include: n People take justice into their own hands - vigilantism

5. 5 Retribution: Weaknesses include: n Punitive, impersonal, state-centered n Discourages offender empathy and responsibility taking n Leaves out victim and community and does not address their needs n Worsens wounds by separating justice from healing

6. 6 Restoration: n Emphasizes harms and resulting obligations n Keeps victims needs/interests central n Encourages offenders to understand and take responsibility for harm n Involves dialogue and the community n Promotes individual and societal healing

7. 7 Retributive Lens n What laws were broken? n Who did it? n What punishment do they deserve?

8. 8 Restorative Lens n Who has been hurt by this event? n What are their needs? n Whose obligations are they?

9. 9 Restorative Core Principle 1 Harm-focused - laws broken are less important than how people were harmed n Victim = central n Offender = accountable to understand and make right n Repairing the harm = central n Community suffered harm and is part of obligation to repair it

10. 10 Restorative Core Principle 2 Engagement - assumes that the n offender n victim, and n community must all be actively involved in the process of resolving the harm

11. 11 Primary Stakeholders Victim(s) Offender(s) Community

12. 12 Restorative Measures Like Group Conferencing … Allow us to: n talk it through n identify solutions n restore order

13. 13 Conferencing Participants: Victims and Supporters n Primary victim or victims n Secondary victims: adversely affected by the harms aftermath n Affected parties: arresting officers, school administrators, etc. n Supporters: friends, peers, siblings, neighbors, counselors, teachers, extended family

14. 14 Conferencing Participants: Offenders and Supporters n Person or persons who caused harm n Friends, peers, associates or family members who were not actively involved but knew about the harm n Supporters: family, extended family, (including older and younger siblings), friends, teachers, counselors, neighbors, probation officers, etc.

15. 15 Conferencing Participants: Other Community Members n Community = Any group of people that share common interest, geography or topic n System and authorities: criminal justice system and school administrators n People who live in the area where the harm happened: neighborhood, classroom, playground witnesses. n Organizations that support victims or offenders n Cultural leaders

16. 16 Risks and Benefits n Brainstorm a list of risks and benefits for the victim who may participate in a conference. n Brainstorm a list of risks and benefits for the offender who may participate in a conference. Brainstorm a list of risks and benefits for community members who may participate in a conference.

17. 17 Where Conferencing Fits (CJS) PAROLE & REENTRY PRE-TRIAL OR PRE- ADJUDICATION PREVENTION & EARLY INTERVENTION DIVERSION PROBATION PRISON OR COMMITMENT Conferencing Opportunity

18. 18 Where Conferencing Fits (Schools) Conferencing Opportunity ISS OR IMMEDIATELY PRE- RETURN TO CLASS, PROGRAM CLASSROOM ROLEPLAYS, TEACH RJ SKILLS SUSPENSION EXPULSION RE-ENTRY TO DISTRICT

19. 19 Participation Is Based On: n Choice – it is voluntary for victim and partly voluntary for offender n An admission of harm done n A willingness to problem solve n Awareness that any participant may stop at any time n Participants decide outcome

20. 20 Zehr & Mika Signposts n Focus on the harms of wrongdoing more than the rules that have been broken n Show equal concern and commitment to victims and offenders, involving both in the process of justice n Work toward the restoration of victims, empowering them and responding to their needs as they see them

21. 21 n Support offenders while encouraging them to understand, accept and carry out their obligations n Recognize that while obligations may be difficult for offenders, they should not be intended as punishment and they must be achievable n Provide opportunities for dialogue, direct or indirect, between victims and offenders, as appropriate

22. 22 n Involve and empower the affected community through the justice process and increase its capacity to recognize and respond to community bases of crime n Encourage collaboration and reintegration rather than coercion and isolation

23. 23 n Give attention to the unintended consequences of our actions and programs n Show respect to all parties including victims, offenders, and justice colleagues Harry Mika and Howard Zehr, May 1997

24. 24 Crime is a wound. Justice should be healing.

25. 25 Some Current Face to Face Practices n Victim/offender mediation (dialogue) n Family group conferencing n Community conferencing n Community panels n Large group conferencing n Peacemaking circles Demonstrations!

26. 26 Victim/Offender Mediation n First program: 1974, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada n Joint program – probation and the Mennonite Central Committee n First in U.S: 1978, Elkhart, Indiana, U.S. n Operated by probation first, then transferred to non-profit community organization n Elkhart program included adult offenders, Kitchener only juveniles n Cases of severe violence take more training and preparation

27. 27 VICTIM/OFFENDER MEDIATION (DIALOGUE) Facilitator Offender SupporterVictim Supporter

28. 28 Family Group Conferencing n FGC was developed in New Zealand out of Maori tribal traditions n used there for child welfare and juvenile delinquency cases n Transformative Justice Australia modified model for JD matters (Wagga Wagga Model) n Wagga Wagga Model brought to U.S. by REAL JUSTICE in 1995

29. 29 FAMILY GROUP CONFERENCE FACILITATOR SUPPORTER ON/ HUMAN SERVICES &/OR PROBATION SERVICES SUPPORTER VICTIM MEMBER OF COMMUNITY OFFENDER ON/ SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION OR LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES

30. 30 COMMUNITY PANEL Community Member/ Facilitator OffenderSupporter Community Panel Member Community Panel Member Supporter Direct Victim

31. 31 OFFENDER FACILITATOR VICTIM LARGE GROUP CONFERENCING SUPPORTER PARENT VICTIM MEMBER OR COMMUNITY A.F. = ASST. FACILITATOR OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO A.F. A.F. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O = OTHER VICTIMS, OFFENDERS, SUPPORTERS, FAMILY MEMBERS AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS SUPPORTER

32. 32 CIRCLES OF UNDERSTANDING KEEPER HUMAN SERVICES PROBATION OFFICER SUPPORTER OFFENDER COMMUNITY MEMBER FAMILY MEMBER COMMUNITY MEMBER SUPPORTER VICTIM POLICE OFFICER FAMILY MEMBER COMMUNITY MEMBER

33. 33 Evolution of Conferencing n Includes adult offenders n Personal as well as property crimes n Expanded scope of what is addressed n Broadened to other non-justice settings n Incorporated into multi-method programs n 100s of programs in North America, more in Europe and elsewhere

34. 34 Cases of Severe Violence Takes more intense training and preparation Specialized expertise related to working with victims who have been severely traumatized Special considerations for dealing with offenders in incarceration Slower moving process, dealing with grief and healing

35. 35 Goals of Restorative Group Conferencing: Offender Accountability n Understanding better the harm done and those affected n Being accountable to the person harmed n Being accountable to the community n Having responsibility to repair the harm

36. 36 Restorative Conferencings Goals: Community Accountability n Attending to the victims wounds n Participating in a resolution n Providing opportunities for offenders community service/restitution earning n Identifying and addressing underlying community conditions

37. 37 Restorative Conferencings Goals: Victim Opportunities n Choice in how they want to proceed n Opportunity to talk about what happened n Voice in how to right the wrongs n A way to feel some power, safety, reassurance n Chance to have questions answered

38. 38 Restorative Conferencings Goals: Community Protection/Safety n Timely response n Reassertion of community expectations n Stressing individual, parental, and community responsibilities n Reducing recidivism n Strengthening community by building relationships and providing opportunities for empathy between all participants

39. 39 Restorative Conferencings Goals: Competency Development n Direct community involvement creates community competency and builds relationships n Offender agrees to processes that can develop competency: problem solving, empathy, communication, etc.

40. 40 Activity Simple, Challenging, Outrageous