RE: More on the paradigm

Mr. Hansen-- It is not my evaluation of the legal system, far from it. Actually to a large degree it is the legal system's evaluation of itself. (The paradigm chart is a gift from a like minded organization).Lawyers, Police Officers, Probation and Parole Officers; Judges; scholars and elected officials have embraced restorative justice. One Department of Corrections Executive in Vermont loves to talk about how the community is stampeding toward restorative justice. That might or might not be true in Vermont, but across the country there are only a very few number of people who are familiar with the work. Which is sad in a way because if this is going to work than the community plays such a vital role. Since my involvement in this movement over four years ago there has been discussion on ways to wake the community up to at least the same level of awareness that has led to agencies (including here in Idaho) to adopt a restorative paradigm of justice.

The internet is a wonderful communication tool but it is very hard to do restorative justice in such an impersonal forum. However, there are times when it can be powerful. I was engaged in an IM dialogue with a police officer from another community when your message came in. This particular officer has personally facilitated about 180 restorative conferences ranging from schoolyard bullying to murder.She believes strongly in community ownership of the process but has never found a way of getting people to such a passion for justice. I've told her some about this dialogue. She is interested, but skeptical.

As for my personal knowledge and experience in this field. I was a juvenile offender who frustrated school officials, law enforcement and my family for many years. Interestingly enough in my youth I got away with almost everything and believe me that is not the answer. Eventually I got help and my life experience led me to work with emotionally disturbed kids. I have been through the legal system with countless juveniles through the years and have known that these kids were not getting what they needed. A little over four years ago I went looking for something different with justice and found restorative justice. My experience is that it produces what it says it does and is backed by research.

Tony

-------Original Message-------

From: thansen@moscow.com

Date: Sunday, October 27, 2002 05:55:15

To: Vision2020; Tony C. Brown

Subject: RE: More on the paradigm

Mr. Brown -

Your evaluation of our current system is extremely biased and poorly informed (at bed). I suggest that you conduct a more thorough research into our current system before you present your opinion as fact.

Tom Hansen

Moscow

-----Original Message-----
From: Tony C. Brown [mailto:tony@fcrjquaker.org]
Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2002 5:41 AM
To: vision2020@moscow.com
Subject: More on the paradigm

Hello- I've received several private notes wanting me to talk more about the idea of a paradigm shift toward restorative justice. Plus, a little about the paradigm that defines our current vision of justice and the principles which are reflected in restorative justice. Below is a chart which does offers an excellent comparison of the two paradigms. I want to include a tool that Howard Zehr has created to help understand the thinking behind restorative justice. Zehr says our current model of justice there might be three questions.

1) What laws were broken

2) Who broke them

3) How do we punish the offender

In restorative justice we might have three questions:

1) What harm has been done

2) What needs to be done to heal the harm

'3) Whose responsibility is it to heal the harm

Keep these questions in mind as you look through this chart and see if you can visualize a process of restorative justice.



Crime Defined as a violation of the state. Crime defined as violation of one person by another.

Focus on establishing blame, on guilt, on past (did he/she do it?) Focus on problem-solving on liabilities and obligations on future (what should be done?)

Adversarial relationships and process normative. Dialogue and negotiation normative.

Imposition of pain to punish and deter/prevent. Restitution as a means of restoring both parties; reconciliation/restoration as goal.

Justice defined by intent and by process: right rules. Justice defined as right relationships; judged by the outcome.

Interpersonal, conflictual nature of crime obscured, repressed; conflict seen as individual vs. state. Crime recognized as inter-personal conflict; value of conflict recognized.

One social injury replaced by another. Focus on repair of social injury.

Community on sideline, represented abstractly by state. Community as facilitator, restorative process.

Encouragement of competitive, individualistic values. Encouragement of mutuality.

Actions directed from state to offender:
            • victim ignored.
            • offender passive. Victim and offender's roles recognized in both problem and solution:
              • victim rights/needs recognized
              • offender encouraged to take responsibility

Offender accountability defined as taking punishment Offender accountability defined as understanding impact of action and helping decide how to make things right.

Offense defined in purely legal terms, devoid of moral, social, economic, political dimensions. Offense understood in whole context-moral, social, economic, political.

"Debt" owed to state and society in the abstract. Debt/liability to victim recognized.

Response focused on offender's past behaviour. Response focused on harmful consequences of offender's behaviour.

Stigma of crime un-removable. Stigma of crime removable through restorative action.

No encouragement for repentance and forgiveness. Possibilities for repentance and forgiveness.

Dependence upon proxy professional. Direct involvement by participants.

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