modifying criminality- restorative justice evaluation
- Created by: Elyseee
- Created on: 15-03-21 17:23
View mindmap
- restorative justice evaluation
- Ineffectiveness
- May not apply to all offenders and victims
- Offender must admit to crime, some do not
- Offender must admit to crime, some do not
- Some victims decline the offer
- May not be effective depending on the circumstances of the crime and stakeholder
- From the victim’s perspective - ethical
- May cause the victim psychological harm - make them feel worse
- Victim may feel the criminal showed no empathy for harm caused, may feel ‘injured’ a second time, could lead to loss of self esteem
- Victim may feel the criminal showed no empathy for harm caused, may feel ‘injured’ a second time, could lead to loss of self esteem
- Victim may feel embarrassed by proceedings
- Financial implications - social
- Uk has largest prison population in Europe
- Uk restorative justice council 2015 - reduced reoffending means £8 saved for every £1 spent on restorative justice process
- Costs include cost of keeping someone in custody a second time, court costs, police time etc
- Costs of restorative justice is sometimes paid for in fines paid by offender
- Restorative justice is a cheaper form of justice than the prison system, it would save the uk a lot of money
- Effectiveness
- Sherman and Strand 2007 - reviewed studies of face to fact meetings between offender and victim in US, UK and Australia
- All studies showed reoffending and none were linked to higher reoffending
- One study, 142 males convicted of violence and property offences - lower reoffending rates - 11% compared with 37% of matched control group who served short prison sentence
- Ineffectiveness
Similar Psychology resources:
Teacher recommended
Comments
No comments have yet been made