ACR102 – 2020

Introducing Crime
& Criminal Justice

Week 6
Innovative Justice Processes
Dr Andrew Groves
 Contact Information

Unit Chair: Dr Andrew Groves

Burwood / Online Campus Coordinator
Room 3.06, Building D, Burwood Campus
(03) 9246 8961 andrew.groves@deakin.edu.au
Consultation time: Tuesdays 1pm on Bb, OR by appointment

“There is no such thing as a silly question…except the one that isn’t asked!”

 I hope you enjoyed the break!

 Well done on the use of the Discussion Boards, in particular those students that have
helped others, keep up the good work!

 Please make sure though, that all correspondence is professional and courteous –
remember, this is an open and supportive forum.

 Make sure you read all information on the Cloudsite – incl. Announcements,
Discussion Boards and Study Guides for each week.
 Important Information
• AT1 (Presentation) – grades and feedback to be released today

• AT2 (Report) is due today Monday 24 August, 8pm (AEST).

Th
is we
• Remember: there is a grace period for all assessments ek
Need access? !!
until 11:59pm on the due date; penalties will apply for
These sessions have their own
submissions made from 12-midnight and after. Bb Collaborate room in the
‘Individual Seminar Rooms’ tab
(where you find your usual
seminar!)
- check page 2!!
Cloud Classroom > Bb Collaborate
• Additional support seminars: Individual Seminar Rooms

o Study Support help with AT3 (Essay) – week 6 (only)

Monday @ 2pm
Tuesday @ 7pm

• For AT3, there are some additional resources to help with your essays! Under ‘Content', click on ‘Study Support', to find useful resources
on:
o Academic Writing
o Reading and Note-taking
o Academic Integrity & Referencing

• Online Extension Request Form – see ‘Tools > Assignment Extension Form’ – keep using for all extensions; must include
supporting documentation.
 AT3: Research & Writing Exercise #1 (Essay)
Due: Monday 14 September, 8pm (AEST)
Length: 1,500 words (±10%, i.e. max 1,650 words)
Weight: 40% of grade

Details
• Choose ONE of four questions from the Instructions guide (now available!)
• Must use a minimum of 8 (eight) academic/reputable sources
• Details on Cloud Deakin: Content > Assessment
• Harvard Referencing – MUST BE USED FOR YOUR ESSAY
• All submissions will be automatically processed through Turnitin
• Submission must be either a Word document or PDF (no other file type accepted)

Resources
• Instructions, FAQs, Rubric, and ‘What is a reputable source?’ document
• Cloud Deakin: discussion boards, textbook, library search engines
• Study support: http://www.deakin.edu.au/students/study-support
• Library Resource Guides: For Criminology, https://deakin.libguides.com/criminology?hs=a
• Referencing: http://www.deakin.edu.au/students/study-support/referencing
 Lecture Outline
• Why do we need innovative processes?
• Restorative Justice
o Restorative Justice conferencing
o Restorative Justice & sexual offending
o Restorative Justice & family violence

• Benefits of Restorative Justice

• Boot Camps
• Justice Reinvestment
• Tackling over-representation of ATSI people in the CJS

Note: The reading for week 6 was provided as a PDF, in the weekly topic.
 Why do we need Innovative Justice Processes?
• Court backlogs cause delays for defendants and victims
o Terms spent on remand
o Increased human cost (particularly to victims + offenders’ family)
o Increased administrative costs URL embedded!

• Increasing prison population

o Especially in Victoria – increase of 44.1% since 2000 (Sentencing Advisory
Council, 2018, see link)

• High levels of recidivism

o In Victoria – rate from 2014-15 of 43.6% (SAC, 2018, see link)

• Community Corrections Orders as gateway to prison?

o Victoria report reveals 15% breach CCO through non-compliance with order
[rather than re-offending] (SAC, 2017, see link)
o Early intervention & adequate resources are imperative (Akerman, 2017)

• Financial imperatives: increasing costs associated with

traditional measures
 Restorative Justice
• “…is one form of informal justice, which refers to practices that give a more central role to
citizens, not just legal professionals, and to methods of resolving disputes and responding to
crime in ways that more directly engage victims, offenders, and the community” (Daly &
Immarigeon, 1998, as cited in Daly & Marchetti, 2012, p. 457).

BUT, there is no strict definition of what it is and how it operates

• Sometimes called ‘transformative justice’
• Focuses on principles of accountability and reparation
• Promotes healing (restoration) not just punishment
• Incorporates and employs different language from that of the traditional CJS: e.g. ‘trauma-
informed’, talks about ‘survivors’ rather than victims, etc.
• Is more inclusive, bringing together all persons affected by criminal offending
• Seeks to condemn the act but not the perpetrator

First used in New Zealand in the 1990s

• Based on Maori traditions
• Now primarily used in Australia and
NZ cases involving a youth offender

URL embedded!
 Philosophy of Restorative Justice
Restorative justice is about thinking about crime and criminality in a different way, in order to
provide different ways of doing ‘justice’:

Excerpt from Bazemore, G. (2001). ‘Young People, Trouble and Crime: Restorative Justice as a Normative Theory of Informal
Social Control and Social Support’, Youth and Society 33(2), pp. 199-226, http://
journals.sagepub.com.ezproxy-f.deakin.edu.au/doi/pdf/10.1177/0044118X01033002004 .
 Benefits of Restorative Justice
For the victim(s) For the offender(s) For the community

• Repairs the harm • Opportunity to be involved • Opportunity to

caused by the in determining the outcome participate
offending
• Hear from the victim and • Reduced recidivism
• Provides an gain an understanding of the rates in the
opportunity to receive harm caused community
an apology and to
describe their • Opportunity to tell own • Cost and resources
experience story to have reasons behind benefit
offending understood
• Active participation • Development of
in the process • Reduced recidivism shared perspectives in
• Avoid criminal record & the community
• Quicker outcome
receive lesser penalty

Source: Stubbs, J. (2004) Restorative Justice, Domestic Violence and Family Violence, Australian Domestic and Family Violence
Clearinghouse Issues Paper 9, New South Wales.
 Possible limitations of Restorative Justice
For the victim(s) For the offender(s) For the community

• Victim will have to • Offender must plead guilty • Not as open as court
face the offender to be eligible – may cause proceedings as not
false confessions publicly accessible
• Risk of secondary • Vulnerable offenders or • May be perceived as
victimisation or those not guilty may use RJ too lenient or ‘soft’ on
further trauma and lose due process rights offenders
• Apology may not be • Benefits offenders who are • Concerns regarding
genuine more articulate consistency of
penalties
• Not all victims able to • Is dependent on victims’
cope with RJ, so agreement – so less • Offenders may ‘game
reduced consistency consistent the system’
• More offenders in the
community
 Restorative Justice Conferencing
• Also referred to as restorative ‘circles’
• The most widely used form of restorative justice
• Promotes communication between offender(s), victim(s) and supporters
in the community
o usually a parent or guardian in cases involving ‘young persons’

• Leads to creation of an Outcome Plan or

Conference Agreement
• Similar process to drug diversion, where if
offender fails to undertake agreed Police
punishments, then original sentence
applies
• Another key exercise of discretion
Court
• How do we ensure accountability?

Caution Warning Conference

URL embedded!

Outcome plan
 Restorative Justice & Sexual Offending
• Research has repeatedly emphasised the inadequacy of current responses to sexual offending (Daly &
Stubbs, 2006; Centre for Innovative Justice, 2014).

• In response, researchers at the Centre for Innovative Justice asked an important, though contentious
question…

Could restorative justice conferencing be used to offer a more effective response to sexual offending?

• Would be overseen & monitored by a specialist gender violence team

• Expert assessment panel to determine suitability of cases
• Skilled & specialist conference facilities to be involved
• All parties would need to consent to a RJ conference

Source: Centre for Innovative Justice (2014) Innovative Justice Responses to sexual offending – pathways to better outcomes for victims, offenders and the community,
RMIT University: Victoria.

Other interesting links/resources:

• https://aifs.gov.au/media-releases/more-support-needed-sexual-assault-victims-navigating-courts
• https://aifs.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/rr27.pdf
• file:///C:/Users/andrewg/Downloads/Violence%20Against%20Women%20Research%20Overview.pdf
 Restorative Justice & Sexual Offending
Some issues to consider:
• Who should determine the suitability of the case for conferencing – police? Prosecution? Courts?
Counsellors? Victims?

• How do we balance the needs of these various groups?

• What would be the age eligibility range for victims and offenders?

• Could persons – victims or offenders - with a mental illness be included in the scheme? Is it
suitable for indigenous offenders?

• What outcomes would be available from the conference?

o Think, for instance, about how outcomes might seek to repair the harms caused by sexually-based
offending – is it possible/ethical?

• Is this providing a genuine, alternative mechanism, or will it simply repeat and/or reinforce the
barriers/issues faced in the CJS?
o Will it be considered a ‘soft option’ in a time of #metoo and the need to respond promptly and
proportionately to sexual violence?

URLs embedded!

Source: Centre for Innovative Justice (2014) Innovative Justice Responses to sexual offending – pathways to better
outcomes for victims, offenders and the community, RMIT University: Victoria.
 Restorative Justice & Family Violence
Some issues to consider:
• Can the safety of the victim be adequately ensured?

• Does the conferencing process act to reinforce the power imbalance between the offender and the
victim?
• Can a conference adequately address and change what could be long held patterns of violence and
abuse?
• Difficulties of friends participating on one side versus another due to close relationship between
victim and offender.
• Symbolic concerns: does a trend away from dealing with family violence in the courts reinforce
problematic views that it is not a ‘real’ crime/it is a ‘private’ issue?
• Royal Commission into Family Violence Report (2016, p. 31)

URL embedded!
Source: Proietti-Scifoni, G. & Daly, K. (2011) ‘Gendered Violence and Restorative Justice: The views of New Zealand opinion leaders’ Contemporary
Justice Review.
 Queensland Boot Camps
• Introduced in 2012, amid growing community concern surrounding youth crime
• Intensive diversion program for two categories of youths (aged 13-17 years):
1. Sentenced juveniles
2. “At risk” youth
“The program intends to instill “discipline and respect”, ensure “direct consequences for offending”
and entails considerable “supervision” (Lincoln, 2012).

Think about the moral underpinnings of this message…

• Boot camps are based on the notion of individual responsibility for crime. It is about failure of
parents or families and the young people themselves.
• They exemplify the “get tough” politicisation of crime and the misguided belief in the
effectiveness of the punitive approaches of past centuries.
• Several decades of evaluations of boot camps has demonstrated quite conclusively that they are
not effective in reducing recidivism and have marginal impact on cost-saving.
• Boot camps that included ‘treatment’ options were evaluated more successfully than those that
were purely ‘discipline’ based
• In QLD they have been deemed an ‘expensive failure’!

URLs embedded!
 Justice Reinvestment
• A relatively new philosophy based on redirecting funds away from more prisons into
community-based initiatives – that is, ‘reinvesting’ in the community

• A ‘front-end’ approach to justice, involving key inter-disciplinary collaboration and stakeholder

engagement

• Preventative not reactive

o tackling disadvantage
o increasing income equality
o providing stable housing to reduce homelessness
o employment opportunities
o funding treatment options

• Has broad support among many political groups and social justice
advocates, with particular emphasis on its benefit for Indigenous
communities.
o For example: Katherine Justice Reinvestment Project

• Linked to the abolition movement – a practical initiative: http://

justicereinvestment.unsw.edu.au

URL embedded!
 Does it ‘work’?
US Case Study: North Carolina
o A focus on reinvesting in post-release support (reactive, but better than nothing!)
o Prison population has declined by more than 3,000 inmates
o 10 state prisons have closed (this says something about US reliance on prison as a
tool of punishment!)
o Dramatic reduction in probation revocations
o Offenders released from custody are receiving supervision, for 9-12 months post-
release
o Hire of 175 new probation officers
o Overall reduction in recidivism
o Reduced correctional expenditure
o Driven by evidence-based policy

Community/government attitudes?
o Can we sell the concept?
 Tackling over-representation of
ATSI people in the CJS
VIDEO
• It’s time for a new approach!

Australian Case Study: Halls Creek Shire

• Remote Justice Reinvestment Project in WA’s Kimberley region: Olabud Doogethu
• Development of and responsibility for this initiative held in the community
• Establishment of team of Youth Engagement Night Officers (YENOs)
o Not police! But working with and supported by them.

Results
• Almost 50% reduction in burglary cases
• 12% reduction in stealing/theft
• Greater collaboration and engagement with community

URLs embedded!
 READ
Next Week Prescribed chapters from the
textbook and study guide
Crime Prevention and material prior to the
Reduction lecture/seminar.

Reminders
• Next assessment: Essay (AT3) – due Monday 14 September, 8pm

• Please attend the support sessions for AT3 (Essay), if you would like assistance
with essay writing and research:

o Monday 24 August @ 2pm

o Tuesday 25 August @ 7pm