vision2020
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index] [Subject Index]

Schools and the Restorative paradigm



The principles and values of restorative justice have been and are being used very effectively in public and private schools. Restorative conferences are used to reduce suspensions/expulsions and are effective with routine discipline manners all the way to acts a violence. In Colorado a few years ago there an ugly incident where a third grader was making sexual advances at some of the girls in his class. Some of the parents wanted to call the police and prosecute to the maximum extent of the law. However, the Principal was well versed in restorative justice and calmly suggested that the community needed was healing, not more wounds. A conference was held and the young perpetrator learned first hand about how his behavior had effected others.
 
Research is being done in British Columbia looking to support a theory which says schools are safer when the principles of restorative justice are used as the first option in discipline. Teachers are spending more time on curriculum if minor conflicts are addressed and restored when they occur, rather than allowing events to build. Early evidence suggests that teachers are finding that they can easily cover required curriculum and have time to do the circles and other community building activities. The study is ongoing, and is being watched as a sign of great hope for our public schools.
 
I've been asked if there are any good case studies of rj in public schools. The answer is yes, kind of, but most of them are not written up. I am going to offer one from Vermont that was big news when it occurred two years ago (almost to the day). The conference had approximately 90 participants. It tested the strength of a community and caused "creative tension" with the facilitators. I'm going to edit this case a little bit because it is very long. If anyone wants the unedited version feel free to ask.
 
The author and one of the Co-facilitators is Chris Dinnan, an employee of the Vermont Department of Corrections. A side note is that Chris is kind of a story himself. Somehow in his lifetime he went from marching on Washington under the Black Flag of Anarchy to being regarded as one of the most seasoned and reasonable voices of justice for the Vermont DOC. Keep in mind this is one example, there are many others which do not involve the level of outside government agencies. Though in some ways that is the charm of this case.
 
TB
 
 

The Incident

On Tuesday, September 26, 2000, 14 varsity and 10 junior varsity soccer players from a rural Vermont regional high school, along with the varsity and junior varsity coaches, were on the bus coming home after a victorious away game. They were halfway through the season and had just improved their record to 4 wins – 4 losses. As darkness fell, several varsity players diverted the coaches, who were sitting in the front of the bus, and two junior varsity players were individually dragged to the back of the bus and beaten by some of the other varsity players. They were kicked and punched repeatedly. One boy ended up with a black eye, the other with cleat marks on his back. Apparently, such incidents of hazing or "initiation rites" had occurred over the years on various teams at this high school but had never risen to this level of violence.

 

The Initial Response

School officials didn't find out about the attack until Wednesday, when a parent of one of the victims contacted them. On Thursday, varsity players arriving for a scheduled scrimmage were instead separated and interviews were conducted by school officials to piece together the events on the bus. Disciplinary action was taken against the 14 varsity players who were on the bus, with the severity of the punishment depending on their roles in the attack. The seven students who allegedly did anything physical were suspended from school for different lengths of time. All 14 varsity players were suspended from participating in extracurricular activities for six weeks. This mandate, based upon a relatively new hazing policy adopted by the school district, effectively canceled the remaining varsity soccer season. In addition, all 14 varsity players faced the possibility of receiving civil citations from the Vermont State Police, and several of the boys possibly faced criminal charges as well (for access to recently passed Vermont legislation re: hazing, see www.leg.state.vt.us/docs/2000/bills/passed/s%2D076.htm).

On Saturday, September 30, coverage of the incident hit the front page of the regional daily newspaper and continued for almost two weeks thereafter. Other newspapers statewide picked the story up shortly after it broke locally. This is a good indication of the public nature of and public interest in the incident and its aftermath. There had, in fact, been a number of hazing incidents recently reported in Vermont at both the college and high school levels which had received a great deal of media coverage, including a spot on national television network news. The coverage of this incident in the regional daily newspaper included ongoing articles, an editorial piece from the newspaper’s editors, a number of letters to the editors from community members, and even a "street talk" section that featured five individuals’ pictures and responses to a question about the school administration’s handling of the incident. The coverage was generally favorable to the administration’s handling of the incident.

About 40 community members attended a special meeting of the School Board that was convened six days after the incident to hear from school officials about how they were handling the situation. The principal gave a full report to the Board and audience about what the school officials’ investigation had revealed. The beatings were apparently planned as part of an initiation rite inflicted on younger players by older varsity team members. The superintendent reportedly noted at the meeting that, "The number one question I’ve heard is, ‘Where were the coaches?’" A number of parents had become quite angry about how the incident was being handled. In fact, one parent at the meeting circulated a petition calling on the school to fire the head coach, and a number of people signed it. As it worked out, such action was not necessary as the head coach resigned shortly thereafter.

The Next Step

Just after the hazing incident was reported in Vermont newspapers, Dr. Charles Johnson, the Safe Schools Coordinator with the Vermont Department of Education, contacted the principal of the high school. Charles had an established relationship with the school community as he had previously facilitated a series of meetings with students, parents and teachers to encourage civility in all aspects of school life. A meeting was arranged with the principal and his staff to discuss the incident, the disciplinary steps that had been taken, the disgruntled parent reactions and the fragmenting, rippling effect that was taking place in the school and the community. Charles suggested the use of restorative justice conferencing as a method for bringing everyone together and reaching a conclusion that would be acceptable to the entire community. The idea was well received.

The victims and their parents were not satisfied with the suspensions alone as an appropriate response to the incident. They had desired a face-to-face meeting from the beginning. Charles had a meeting with the victims and their families to hear what they were experiencing and whether the conferencing idea might be acceptable to them. They were relieved that finally something was being suggested that would help them communicate to others what their sons and families were going through. They agreed to the conferencing idea.

On October 10, an 18-point "Action Plan for Dealing with Issues of Hazing" was developed by the school administration. The principal, vice principals, guidance counselor and athletic director all worked together to determine a course of action to follow in response to the incident. The first step in this plan was to "continue to offer counseling and support services to the two targets of the hazing assaults (and) provide (an) opportunity for the two targets to meet in a supervised environment with the varsity players who participated in the hazing assault."

One week later (three weeks after the incident), a memo was sent from the superintendent of schools to the principal (with a copy to the school board). The superintendent directed that the seven varsity players who had been suspended must provide "verification from an appropriate counselor, psychologist or psychiatrist that they have successfully participated in a program of counseling that has specifically addressed issues related to violence prevention, anger management, hazing and harassment." Until this verification was received, they would not be permitted to "participate in any extra-curricular or athletic activities or events sponsored by the school." The superintendent went on to explain that, "If the students so choose, these conditions may alternately be met by their successful participation in the restorative justice program currently being arranged by Dr. Charles Johnson of the Vermont Department of Education. ‘Successful participation’ means: (1) that the students actively and voluntarily participate in the restorative justice process, (2) that they follow through in a timely manner with any and all conditions and agreements resulting from that program, and (3) that I receive certification of successful completion from Dr. Johnson and/or the designated restorative justice facilitator."

Pre-conference Preparation

Two days later, an organizational meeting to plan for the restorative justice conference was held at the high school. This meeting included the principal, two vice-principals, a guidance counselor, the athletic director, Dr. Johnson and Chris Dinnan. Chris, who is a Community Resource Coordinator with the Vermont Department of Corrections, became involved at this point to assist in preparing the participants and, as it worked out, to co-facilitate the conference. It was agreed that the conference should be held as soon as possible. It was decided to announce it for Tuesday, November 2, 2000 at 6:30 p.m. This would allow for only two weeks for conference preparation. Everyone present agreed that the participants would include the two coaches, the bus driver, school administration officials and all soccer team members. The victims and the boys accused of active hazing would be allowed up to three supporters as it was envisioned that they would be more actively engaged during the conference, and the other team members would be allowed up to two supporters. It was also determined that the two coaches would not be actively engaged as the incident was between players. There was initial discussion about the seating arrangement since we realized we were looking at upwards of 80 participants.

The principal then sent out letters to all participants outlining the process and the options as directed by the superintendent. He indicated that the participants should expect to be contacted by Charles or Chris. A variation of the same form letter was sent to the victims, the active hazers, the passive hazers and to the other team members (junior varsity players not victimized and the two varsity players not on the bus). A copy of the superintendent’s memo was included with the letters to the active hazers. While the four categories of letters were different, they also contained some identical language that is included below:

The recent hazing incident that involved your son and other members of the boys’ varsity and junior varsity soccer teams has left us with many unresolved issues to deal with. While the initial response to the hazing incident focused on ascertaining what happened and on dealing with the immediate disciplinary consequences as outlined in school policy and state law, our attention has now turned to restoring a sense of community to the school. It is vital to the well-being of all of our students, especially those who were in any way involved in the hazing, to find a way to bring closure to the situation in such a manner that all students are able to participate successfully and comfortably in all aspects of school life.

"…While participation in this Restorative Justice Conference is voluntary, we highly recommend that all involved students and their families take this opportunity to bring closure to this situation in what we believe will be a very positive and restorative manner.

"There are a number of advantages to participating in the Restorative Justice Conference, including the following:

"The Restorative Conference will…

    • provide an opportunity for all of the involved students to express and discuss their feelings and concerns about the hazing incident and the resulting actions taken by the school.
    • allow victims, active participants and observers to face each other on an equal basis as they strive to restore a sense of mutual trust and respect.
    • engender a feeling of community among the parents of the soccer players.
    • permit students to resolve the remaining disciplinary issues resulting from this case.
    • provide closure to the situation that enables the school community to move on beyond the hazing incident while at the same time setting the groundwork that will prevent future hazing incidents from occurring.

"…I strongly encourage your son and you to participate in the Restorative Justice Conference scheduled for Thursday, November 2. I believe this process offers us the best opportunity to move our school community forward."

Prior to the conference, there were a number of e-mail and telephone communications between the facilitators and the school administration. As co-facilitators, Charles and Chris began to develop a "creative tension" which persisted throughout the pre-conference period. A number of issues were worked through. For instance, the facilitators and school administrators all agreed on who the participants should be but disagreed on the issue of observers. It had been suggested that perhaps local municipal and law enforcement officials, school board members, student council representatives, etc., be invited to attend. Charles felt that being as inclusive as possible would provide an education for the observers, develop goodwill for the process and reduce the amount of time and effort needed to explain what happened at the conference. Chris suggested that observers should only be present if all conference participants agreed. In the end, the sensitivities of the majority of the participants were respected, and no observers were allowed. In fact, a third facilitator was posted at the entrance with a checklist of names to ensure that no one who was not invited (like the press, for instance) would be in attendance.

All participants were afforded the opportunity for a pre-conference face-to-face meeting with a facilitator or were given as much phone time as was necessary to prepare them for the conference. Due to the number of participants and the fact that the conference was slated to occur in just two weeks, Chris recruited two other individuals trained in the conferencing process to assist in this effort. Chris concentrated his efforts on the victims, the active hazers and the parents of both, while the two individuals he recruited contacted the coaches, the bus driver and the other players (including the passive hazers) and their parents. Charles was also in contact with many of the participants through numerous telephone calls prior to the conference.  50 hours altogether is a conservative estimate for the amount of time spent by the four individuals preparing the participants. When meetings were requested, they lasted between 1 – 2.5 hours. Telephone conversations were also extensive in terms of time.

The Criminal Justice Aspect

Chris agreed to connect with the Vermont State Police to determine the status of the case. The troopers had taken the case based on the fact that the incident had occurred on the bus returning from an away game outside of the town in which the high school is located. Sergeant James Hogan, the investigating officer, was the key decision-maker in the justice system but was away at training until three days prior to the conference. Based upon his investigation, he would ultimately determine how the case would proceed. Prior to Sergeant Hogan’s return, Chris sent the 14 varsity players a report to prepare them for possible scenarios. The following e-mail from Chris to Sergeant Hogan is included in its entirety below, as it contains references to recently enacted state policy re: restorative justice and contains the report which was given to the 14 varsity boys who were on the bus and faced the citations. Worth noting is that Sergeant Hogan had indicated to the principal that the citations would be issued and that the active hazers would be fined $500, while the passive hazers would be fined $2,000. This issue of $500 versus $2,000 citations was the source of a good deal of confusion and was dealt with in the report to the 14 varsity players who were on the bus.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Full text of e-mail from Chris Dinnan to Sergeant Hogan (dated 10/30/00)

"Sergeant Hogan-

"I realize you were at training all last week, but I am assuming you have received word (from Lieutenant Stanton) about the Restorative Justice Conference which is being convened re: the (high school) soccer team hazing incident. The incident occurred on 9/26 on the bus back from an away soccer game. The conference is scheduled for this coming Thursday, November 2, at 6:30 p.m. at (the high school).

"I am enclosing a report that has been shared with the 14 varsity players who were on the bus. There is a great deal of apprehension going in that what is said may be used against them. In fact, some may not attend unless they are reasonably assured that they can be comfortable speaking freely. Ultimately, full participation would give this conference the most potential to resolve this issue so that the community can begin to heal. At this point, there is a tremendous amount of conflict in the community. It has become a festering wound.

"My understanding is that you will return to work on Tuesday, October 31. Please make it a high priority to contact me by return e-mail or by giving me a call. I believe it would be best for you (or a representative Trooper) to attend, but only if you (or they) would be willing to agree not to use the boys’ statements against them. This is the most important issue we need to deal with. In some jurisdictions, anything said in a conference such as this can not be used against a participant, whereas in Vermont there is nothing on the books to restrict this. There is, however, new legislation enacted during the last session of the Legislature (coincidentally along with the hazing statute) which reads:

* * * Beginning of Restorative Justice; Amendments * * *

"Sec. 62. 28 V.S.A. § 2a is added to read:
§ 2a. RESTORATIVE JUSTICE
(a) State policy. It is the policy of this state that principles of restorative justice be included in shaping how the criminal justice system responds to persons charged with or convicted of criminal offences. The policy goal is a community response to a person's wrongdoing at its earliest onset, and a type and intensity of sanction tailored to each instance of wrongdoing. Policy objectives are to:
(1) Resolve conflicts and disputes by means of a nonadversarial community process.
(2) Repair damage caused by criminal acts to communities in which they occur, and to address wrongs inflicted on individual victims.

(3) Reduce the risk of an offender committing a more serious crime in the future, that would require a more intensive and more costly sanction, such as incarceration.
(b) Implementation. It is the intent of the general assembly that law enforcement officials develop and employ restorative justice approaches whenever feasible and responsive to specific criminal acts, pursuant to sections 163 and 164 of Title 3, concerning court diversion, chapter 221 of Title 13, concerning sentencing, and the provisions of this title, concerning persons in the custody of the commissioner of corrections. It is the further intent of the general assembly that such restorative justice programs be designed to encourage participation by local community members, including victims, when they so choose, as well as public officials, in holding offenders accountable for damage caused to communities and victims, and in restoring offenders to the law-abiding community, through activities:

    1. Which require offenders to:
      (A) acknowledge wrongdoing and apologize to victims;
      (B) make restitution for damage to the victims, consistent with provisions of chapter 221 of Title 13 and of this title;
      (C) make reparation for damage to the community by fulfilling a community service; and
      (D) when relevant, successfully complete treatment addressing the offense or other underlying problematic behavior, or undertake academic or vocational training or other self-improving activity.
    2. Which aid in the recovery of victims, recognizing that victims, particularly of violent crime, often suffer lifelong effects and, accordingly, must feel safe and involved in any program offered to assist them.
    3. Which help in identifying the causes of crime and ways community members and municipal and state government can reduce or prevent crime in the future.

* * * End of Restorative Justice; Amendments * * *

"This legislation clearly states that the new policy relates to how the criminal justice system responds to persons "charged with or convicted of criminal offenses." Since the two targeted victims and their parents are supportive of employing the restorative methodology of "conferencing" in this case, however, I would hope that we could work something out "pre-charge" before this conference in order to encourage the greatest amount of participation.


"The report I sent to the 14 varsity players on the bus (and their parents) is included below. It was the best I could do for them without having had the opportunity to speak with you first.

"Thanking you in advance for responding at your earliest possible convenience,

Chris Dinnan
VT Dept. of Corrections

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Enclosure in e-mail to Sergeant Hogan…

(High School) Hazing Incident

Possible Scenarios for Varsity Players on the Bus

Report from Chris Dinnan, Conference Co-facilitator (10/26/00)

"In advance of the restorative justice conference scheduled for Thursday, November 2, 2000, at (the high school), I have been attempting to establish the possible scenarios within the justice system for the 14 varsity soccer players on the bus (7 active and 7 passive hazers). Their options within the school community have been clearly stated by (the superintendent and the principal). At this point in the justice system, they have not been formally charged with any civil or criminal offense. Since the alleged offense occurred outside of (the town), State Police Sergeant Jim Hogan has become the investigating officer. Sergeant Hogan met with (the principal) and indicated to (him) that 14 citations would be forthcoming. Sergeant Hogan has been in New Hampshire all this week at training so I have been unable to contact him personally. I have sent an e-mail to him. I have also spoken to his supervising officer, Lieutenant Stanton, to see what action is contemplated (and when). He is supportive of employing the conferencing process to attempt to resolve this situation.

"The new hazing law under which these boys may be charged was enacted this past legislative session. 16 VSA Sec. 153 indicates that "a person who commits an unlawful act under this subchapter shall be subject to a civil penalty of not more than $5000.00." At his meeting with (the principal), Sergeant Hogan indicated that the 14 tickets would be in the amount of $500 for the 7 "active" hazers and $2000 for the 7 "passive" hazers. I have obtained an "Informational Bulletin" from Dean Martin at the Judicial Bureau which indicates that the waiver penalty for hazing or soliciting hazing in a secondary school is $500 while the penalty for "failing to prevent hazing" is $2000. He feels, and I agree, that this latter category is probably meant for coaches or administrators rather than for students. In fact, the specific language of the statute is that it shall be unlawful to "knowingly fail to take reasonable measures within the scope of the person’s authority to prevent hazing" [16 VSA Sec. 152 (c), Italics are mine]. Anne Winchester with the Legislative Council also agrees that this was the intent of this language in the new statute.

"Thus, it is reasonable to assume that, if tickets are issued, all 14 students will be receiving the same $500 citation. Seven allegedly did "engage in hazing" and seven allegedly did "solicit, direct, aid or attempt to aid, or abet another person engaged in hazing" [16 VSA Sec. 152 (c)]. A real possibility is that the tickets will not be issued. This is left to the discretion of the investigating officer. The investigating officer is also able to amend or dismiss the ticket after it has been issued. If the citations are issued and the investigating officer decides against dismissing or amending the tickets, the matter then goes to the Judicial Bureau. The individual cited would then have three options: plead not guilty (in which case a hearing would be scheduled), plead guilty (and pay the fine), or plead "nolo contendre" (and pay the fine). If determined innocent at the hearing, the individual would obviously not pay any fine but if found guilty, might be subject to a civil penalty up to $5000.

"I also have a call into the State’s Attorney’s Office as the statute is clear that, "Nothing in this subchapter shall limit or preclude a criminal prosecution or any criminal or civil action based on any act that may constitute hazing." (16 VSA Sec. 154) The Judicial Bureau deals solely with civil offenses (like traffic and other ordinance violations, possession of malt beverages, etc.) which deal with fines. There could also be criminal charges (such as Simple Assault) filed by the State’s Attorney which would be dealt with in Family Court (for those individuals charged as minors) or District Court (for those individuals charged as adults). This would all be contingent upon the State Police sending an affidavit to the State’s Attorney’s Office, which they may or may not do in this case.


"The question has been raised as to whether anything said in the conference can be used against the alleged hazers in subsequent criminal action. The short answer is, "Yes." However, the likelihood that this would happen is so minimal that the more accurate answer would be, "Yes, but it is almost certain that it will not be." According to Jane Woodruff, Executive Director of the State’s Attorneys and Sheriff’s Association, there is also the possibility that Jim Mongeon, the State’s Attorney for Rutland County, could issue a "grant of use immunity" for what is said at the conference. This would exempt any statements from future use. Mr. Mongeon is on vacation until next week so I will be unable to determine whether this is a possibility until then. It could also be argued that anything said could not be used against them because they had not been advised of their Fifth Amendment rights, although they have not been charged at this time. The bottom line is that it is an understandable concern but that it is not, in fact, a huge issue. Participants should feel that they can speak freely at the conference.

"I will continue to clarify the situation up until the conference takes place and, if necessary, afterwards. As explained in detail above, the primary player in the justice system at this point in time is Sergeant Jim Hogan of the Vermont State Police. I have encouraged him via e-mail to attend the conference and will follow up next week. I do believe it would be beneficial for all alleged offenders to actively participate in the conference in that it will be much less likely that citations will be issued (and that a criminal affidavit will be forwarded to the State’s Attorney’s Office) in the cases of those boys who participate. (The principal) has indicated in his letters to the parents of the 14 boys involved that if they do choose to voluntarily participate in the conference, ‘school and Vermont Department of Education personnel will work with the State Police and courts to bring any possible legal issues resulting from the hazing to a satisfactory conclusion.’ I am confident that we will be able to do just that."

End of 10/30/00 e-mail to Sergeant Hogan

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Upon returning to the area, Sergeant Hogan made it clear in a meeting with Chris that it had been his intent to issue the $500 citations. Chris indicated to him that there was some feeling (in the school administration and by the victims) that it would be best to issue the citations and then dismiss them if appropriate action by the offenders was taken. This would emphasize the seriousness of the offense and provide an additional incentive to comply with the agreement. Sergeant Hogan decided after this meeting to hold off on issuing the citations so long as the victims and school administration were satisfied with the outcome of the conference. He prepared a memo to Chris, which was subsequently provided to the conference participants, to clarify his position. His memo reads in part:

"…I believe involving the community and having the offenders admit their part in an incident and how it affected them and the victims is beneficial. I realize that this is a relatively new concept and not fully understood by everyone, myself included. However, I feel that as individuals and communities become more involved and have a better understanding of the program this could be used in a wide variety of ways.

"Having stated this, regarding the conference on 11/02 at (the high school) concerning the hazing incident on 9/26/00, I want to reiterate that my chief concern is for the victims and victims’ families. This was a serious incident and the offenders need to know that their actions or non-action caused a lot of pain not only for the victims and their families, but for the school and the community.

"As was discussed at our meeting, it was my plan to issue hazing tickets to the 14 individuals involved in the incident. This determination was made from information I had gathered from the school administration as well as from one of the parents of one of the victims. After speaking with you… I learned that (the conference) may be of more benefit to them than a simple ticket. However, this is contingent upon the satisfaction of the victims, their families and the school administration. If those parties are agreeable to a solution…they deem appropriate and the offenders complete (this agreement)… to all the parties’ satisfaction, then there will be no tickets issued.

"I wish you well at the conference and sincerely hope a resolution can be reached that will help ease the pain suffered by the victims, their families, the school and the community caused by the offenders. I look forward to hearing from you about the conference and it’s outcome."

After the meeting between Chris and Sergeant Hogan (and before receiving the memo referenced above), Chris sent a letter to the 14 varsity boys on the bus and their parents (with a copy to the victims and their parents). It read in part:

"I have just returned from a meeting with Sergeant Jim Hogan of the State Police, the investigating officer for the (high school) hazing incident. I laid everything out to him in terms of the restorative justice conference, which is planned for 6:30 p.m. on Thursday, November 2, at (the high school). He considered the options and has chosen not to issue the 14 citations, with the possibility of later dismissing or amending them as a result of what transpires during and/or after the conference. He is, however, prepared to put in writing that no tickets will be issued and no affidavit will be forwarded to the State's Attorney in the cases of those boys who participate in the conferencing process to the satisfaction of the victims and their parents. I will physically pick this letter up (rather than rely on the mail) on Thursday morning and will make copies available at the conference.

"Particularly with this development in mind, I would encourage you all to attend and actively participate in the conference. Please do not consider this an ultimatum, as I am personally in no position to issue one. The very real possibility does exist, however, that if you choose not to participate, a citation may be issued and criminal action may be pursued. This is, quite simply, where things stand at this point in the justice system."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Conference

A total of 91 participants and three facilitators attended the conference, which began shortly after 6:30 p.m. (to accommodate some latecomers) and lasted for over three hours. 28 of 35 total soccer team members, including the 14 varsity players charged with hazing, attended with their supporters. The junior varsity coach, the bus driver, the superintendent and five school administrators attended. The varsity coach, who as noted previously resigned shortly after the incident, had been invited but chose not to attend. A single cordless hand-held microphone was passed back-and-forth between the facilitator and the one person speaking. The microphone served as a "talking stick" during the conference. No one spoke except for the person holding the microphone during the entire course of the conference.

 

The final seating arrangement was a cause for considerable dialogue and discussion right up until 48 hours prior to the conference. It was clear from the outset that the number of participants precluded forming one large circle. One option that was suggested by Chris was to create two concentric circles. The "inner circle" would consist of the primary hazers and their supporters along with the victims and their supporters. The victim supporters would include the principal and one of the vice-principals, as the victims and their parents had requested these two individuals. The "outer circle" would consist of other affected parties - the bus driver, the two coaches on the bus, administration officials not requested by the victims as inner circle supporters and the other soccer team members and their supporters. The inner circle participants would be actively involved in the scripted Real Justice process throughout, while the outer circle participants would be brought in only toward the end of the process. Charles, on the other hand, had seen research on large group conferences that suggested the use of a "V format" as a more useful seating arrangement. The later arrangement was ultimately used.

Another issue that was resolved less than 48 hours before the conference concerned the seven varsity players who were on the bus but did not physically take part in the assault. As previously noted, it was the seven boys who allegedly did something physical during the incident who were suspended. The others knew the hazing was happening and did nothing to stop it. Under the recently enacted Vermont statute (also referenced previously), all 14 were equally guilty. When the concentric circle model was being considered, it was envisioned that the seven "passive hazers" would sit in the outer circle and take a less active role in the conference. In the final seating arrangement, however, they were up front and actively involved. Unfortunately, this was a surprise to them. One reason for doing this was that there was some indication that one or more of the passive hazers were more active during the incident than had been originally determined.

The "creative tension" between Charles and Chris became particularly tense at this point in time They discussed delaying the conference to "re-prepare" the participants but, in the end, agreed to proceed on schedule. After all, it was the eleventh hour and rescheduling the event would have been difficult. An effort was made to inform participants that the seating arrangement and script might be altered, but that the process would be essentially the same. It was not logistically possible to contact all participants.

Perhaps the tension increased significantly at this point because Charles became particularly creative in his approach. Conferencing is, in fact, a very pliable, multi-faceted process that is used in many different forms in many different venues. Chris’ experience had been in the application of conferencing in the criminal justice area, while Charles’ interest was to explore applications in public school settings. The tension between Charles and Chris may very well have been the natural result of a corrections and an educational professional teaming up to produce a conference such as this. The incident itself demanded a response from both "worlds" and both parties were, in the end, able to resolve the issues in order to accommodate both cultures. Our goals were the same - to address the needs of the victims, to hold the offenders accountable for what they had done, and to assist the school and greater community to begin a process of healing from the damage which resulted from this incident.

The following diagram represents the final seating arrangement at the conference. The third facilitator shown helped in the preparation effort, checked in participants at the door and helped with refreshments after the conference. (The following sign was posted in plain view of everyone attending the conference.)

Restorative Justice Signposts

We are working toward restorative justice when we

  1. …focus on the harms of wrongdoing more than the rules that have been broken;
  2. …show equal concern and commitment to victims and offenders, involving both in the process of justice;
  3. …work toward the restoration of victims, empowering them and responding to their needs as they see them;
  4. …support offenders while encouraging them to accept and carry out their obligations;
  5. …recognize that while obligations may be difficult for offenders, they should not be intended as harms, and they must be achievable;
  6. …provide opportunities for dialogue, direct or indirect, between victims and offenders as appropriate;
  7. …involve and empower the affected community through the justice process, and increase its capacity to recognize and respond to community bases of crime;
  8. …encourage collaboration and reintegration, rather than coercion and isolation;
  9. …give attention to the unintended consequences of our actions and programs; and
  10. …show respect to all parties, including victims, offenders, and justice colleagues.

Crime wounds… Justice heals.

Drawn from Kaleidoscope of Justice and "Restorative Justice Signposts" by Harry Mika and Howard Zehr.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

After the Conference

All 14 varsity boys who had been on the bus had signed the conferencing agreement, which stressed activities to prevent future hazing incidents. The father of one of the victims sent the following e-mail out the evening of the conference to friends and supporters. He has agreed to make it public on the condition that it be printed in its entirety. Only names have been omitted, as they have been in this entire report. The e-mail includes the 5-point signed agreement:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Beginning of e-mail from a parent of one of the victims

"Dear Family & Friends: Well, after what seems like an eternity (a couple of weeks?) of meetings, planning, negotiations, behind-the-scenes string pulling, and a lot of angst, we finally got our Restorative Justice conference tonight (6:30 to nearly 10:00).

"We estimated that most of the junior varsity team and their parents, ALL 14 members of the varsity (including the 'evil seven') and their parents, the 5 or 6 relevant school administrators, (the two victims), and three facilitators were in attendance -- a total of nearly 90 people. We met in a 'triangle' in the gym: (the victims) and their parents on one side (single row), seven 'actively involved' varsity players 'opposite' us, with their parents behind them in two rows; two facilitators at the 'hinge' between these two sides, and all the rest of the passive participants and families forming the large/multi-row 'end' of the triangle. Sometime we can get specific/detailed about the process, the order of presentations, the 'scripted-ness' of the process, etc. etc. if you are interested. The essential thing is that every 'offender,' 'victim,' 'victim supporter', (us), and 'offender supporter' was asked a series of questions and could respond at whatever length they felt appropriate. [I, for example, was allowed to say that I was physically sick as a result of the anger I felt for these boys, and that they should consider themselves lucky that they had not picked on a boy whose parent was a psychopath; I then told them that I had been advised, variously, to sue them, expel them from school, treat them as criminals and file charges, and/or abandon the legal process and just beat them. Instead, we chose this process of community healing....].

"This led, in turn, to the question: 'What do you think are the major issues to be addressed?' And finally, 'What are your suggestions for what these boys can do to address these issues?' Some other suggestions were filed more specifically under a category of what the administrators could take responsibility for.

"Bottom line was that (the two victims) got their fundamental request(s) met: All the offending players and by-standers showed up and had to acknowledge their role in, and feelings about, what happened on that bus -- and do so in front of a large group of pretty unsympathetic people (I was really kind of stunned at the level of dismay and trauma on the part of the parents of the offenders... interesting). (The two victims) also emphasized that what they wanted as a result of this process was remorse on the part of the other players, and respect and civility in the hallways and around school -- including being greeted normally and ensuring that the hall talk about what actually transpired was accurate. There was discussion about what this meant, and how the players could live up to that. Also players let them know that they were already making sure that the 'real' story was making the rounds and that no one was blaming the victims for the craziness and the ensuing penalties.

"The resulting "Agreement" is a kind of gentleman's agreement that everyone in attendance could live with, the administration will implement with them, and all 14 varsity players signed. There are 5 action items (details will be fleshed out later):

"We agree to show respect and civility to (the two victims) in future daily activities at school.

"We agree to participate in an activity at all five elementary schools [that feed (the high school)] and at (the) Middle School to educate younger students about hazing in order to prevent such activity from occurring again in the future.

"We agree to work with the School Board Policy Committee in the revision and further development of the Hazing Policy.

"We agree to participate in future 'team building' activities.

"We agree to work with the administration in the development of a team captain leadership program.

"This might not seem like a lot when you are sitting there reading this, but the fact that everybody was in one place, could see each other's faces, and express their fairly raw emotions was pretty impressive -- and then on top of it to come up with constructive ideas we could agree on was more so. We know going in that we were trading off some things for others (i.e., I had to leave the 'vindictive stick' in the car; on the other hand, those boys ate a bunch of humiliation burgers tonight).

"So now I am going to go downstairs and have a beer. Thanks for all your positive energy -- it really helped us [and (my son) even said so as part of his several very articulate opportunities to speak....]."

End of e-mail from a parent of one of the victims

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Shortly after the conference, Chris sent the following letter to State Police Sergeant Jim Hogan:

"I am enclosing a copy of the Conference Agreement which was generated as a result of the Restorative Justice Conference held on November 2 at (the high school) re: the soccer team hazing incident of September 26. As you can see, all 14 "active" and "passive" hazers attended the conference and signed the agreement. A total of 91 participants and three facilitators attended the conference, which lasted for over three hours.

"In your memo of 11/1/00, you indicated that the hazing citations would not be issued ‘contingent upon the satisfaction of the victims, their families and the school administration.’ I can only attest to the fact that all 14 attended, participated in the conference and signed the agreement. There were varying levels of remorse expressed and clearly not all of the boys offered a sincere apology or admitted exactly what part they played in the incident. It remains to be seen whether they all live up to the agreement. At the very least, the conference gave the victims and their parents an opportunity to express their anger and disappointment and gave the offenders and their parents the opportunity to express their feelings as well. I sincerely hope that this was a positive intervention and that all participants were reasonably satisfied with the outcome.

"If you would like to contact me for further information or input, feel free to call or e-mail me. I would also encourage you to contact the victims and the school administration to assess their satisfaction with the process.

 

____________________________________________________
  IncrediMail - Email has finally evolved - Click Here

GIF image




Back to TOC