Victimology Restorative Justice Listen to the Restorative

Victimology

Restorative Justice

Listen to the Restorative Justice podcast. View the video The Woolf Within. Citing specific victims and offenders profiled in the video or podcast, and using what you learned about restorative justice from your readings, answer the following:

Why do individuals (both victims and offenders) agree to engage in restorative justice meetings?

What were the positive and negative outcomes of these meetings for the persons profiled?

Please post one original response. Each original response should be a minimum of 125 words in length.

Victims may agree to restorative justice meetings to gain a sense of closure about the crime they suffered. They may also want to confront the perpetrator so they can speak to him or her, and show that his or her crime had real implications for a human being. Perpetrators may feel genuine remorse. Part of the rehabilitative efforts of the criminal justice system are to make it clear to those who are convicted of a crime that they need to accept responsibility for their actions. Restorative justice attempts to merge two perspectives -- the idea that justice means retribution or making the victim feel 'whole' versus the idea that the perpetrator must be 'made whole' through being rehabilitated. In restorative justice, both parties are 'restored' by the perpetrator giving back to the community.

For the victims and the families of victims, restorative justice can be very difficult emotionally, in terms of dredging up past, painful memories like the death of a child, as expressed in the words of the woman in the first video clip. However, through forgiveness the victims can feel a sense of healing and move on with their lives, rather than remain stymied and cut off from the future because they are living in the past, as in the case of the victim of the burglary in the second film clip. Perpetrators are able to confront the reality of what they have done and the humanity of the victims.

Discussion 2: Temporary Restraining Orders

Please post one original response. Each original response should be a minimum of 125 words in length.

To what extent are temporary restraining orders a useful tool in responding to incidents of intimate partner violence? List two situations in which you would recommend the issuance of a TRO and two other situations, in which it would not, in your opinion, are appropriate. Be sure to explain why.

Temporary restraining orders are issued when there is a possibility of irreparable harm to the victim or the individual who is likely to become a potential victim. They can be issued before the party has the ability to respond to the order or even to have a 'fair hearing' before a court of law. In domestic violence disputes, they are often issued against the aggressive partner, to prevent the victim from suffering more violence, until the court gains more information about the situation at hand. TROs should be issued when there is a serious threat that the aggressor may harm the alleged victim before a formal restraining order can be issued. They should also be issued if there is a risk that the aggressor might try to take away the woman's children or otherwise intimidate her into not pressing changes.