THE VICTIM JUSTICE SHIP IN THE RESTORATIVE JUSTICE HARBOR by David Voth Workshops on the role of crime victims in restorative justice theory and programming usually center on anecdotal victim sensitivity stories, illustrations of victim offender mediation, and exhortations to include victims as stake holders in the justice process. These beacon activities should continue, but reaching a safe harbor where the victim justice ship can dock requires additional channel buoys. Although we see dimly the shores of restorative justice, it must include healing oriented processes for all participants even before the conclusion can be determined collaboratively between victim, community, and offender. To move toward that place in history, some system changes and victim issues need to be addressed. A victim focus is about local response The radar screen for crime victims starts with the desire to prevent crime. After a crime, local victim assistance is needed in each case, not just for victims involved in the justice system. The U.S. Justice Department estimates that only half of the annual 31 million victimizations of persons age 12 and older are reported to law enforcement, and that the hodge podge of victim rights to information, participation, and compensation reach only two million victims. This is true even though every state has a victims rights law, each has a victim compensation program, and 32 have victim rights constitutional amendments. Victims need to talk about the crime, to have their victimization believed, and to connect with similar victims, regardless of whether an arrest is made or the offender takes responsibility. Victims in prosecuted cases usually prioritize participation rights higher than hearing the offender express remorse. Few victims independently request mediation with the offender, but years later some want to know if the offender’s life changed. Issues of evil, sin, and forgiveness need to be “floated” for victims to consider without coercion. Every victim has distinct needs, but clearly, without a comprehensive local response to victim needs, “Victim Justice” will remain a mirage. The Justice System needs restored to its customers Professionals working in the justice system need to recognize that victims, offenders, and the community are the “customers” who measure the effectiveness of the process. Before a crime takes place, there should be crime prevention efforts in the neighborhood, as well as publicity about victim issues and publicity about offender apprehension and rehabilitation efforts. A 911 call should lead to concurrent responses to catch the wrong-doer, rebuild the victim’s life, and respond to neighborhood concerns about the crime. These processes would lead to joint decision making between victims, offenders, and community members on how to resolve the aftermath of the crime. To restore the justice system to its customers some current practices need to be changed. For example, it is illogical to not accept voluntary admissions of guilt, or to allow “not guilty” pleas for months and then suddenly give credence to expressions of remorse in mitigation after guilt is proven or plea bargain reached. “Innocent until proven guilty” has been distorted into, “Don’t admit anything, even if you did it.” Second, truth in sentencing is important to avoid “bait and switch” dispositions which give the public and victim one impression, while actual terms are reduced later. Goals of offender rehabilitation, victim justice, and community safety can usually be met with specific sanctions which have “bad behavior” penalty enhancements, rather than reduced penalties for good behavior. Third, victims’ right to participation must be protected, including the right to an order of restitution. No fine or court cost should ever be paid to the “system” before victims are fully financially restored. In short, the system needs to be reoriented to its users, or some system professionals will continue to consider themselves anointed rather than appointed. A national constitutional amendment for victim rights should replace the inadequate patch work of victim protections, and the measurement of success must include ratings for crime rate, recidivism, victim and community participation, and restitution payments. Global Victim Challenges The book, “New Directions From the Field: Victim’s Rights and Services for the 21st Century (NIJ # 170600),” nicely summarizes five basic challenges: 1) To enact and enforce consistent, fundamental rights for crime victims in all jurisdictions and proceedings; 2) To provide each crime victim with access to comprehensive and quality services; 3) To integrate crime victims’ issues into all levels of the nation’s educational system; 4) To support, improve, and replicate promising practices in victims’ rights and services; and, 5) To ensure that the voices of crime victims play a central role in the nation’s response to violence and those victimized by crime. One program's effort at restorative and victim justice Crime Victim Services’ (CVS) in Lima, Ohio, provides 24 hour rape crisis and domestic violence response and shelter, and comprehensive victim assistance for other crimes. Staff provide opportunities for victim offender mediation (since 1981), victim impact panels (two monthly), and spiritual ministry (first such paid position in a victim assistance program), in addition to crisis counselling, financial assistance, and long term emotional support. The agency has growing involvement in neighborhood groups, offender rehabilitation programs, and justice planning boards. CVS is a United Way organization with offices provided by both Allen County and Putnam County Commissioners. CVS collaborates with law enforcement for violent crime victim contact information, and cooperates and contracts with prosecutors to provide victims in prosecuted cases with court advocacy assistance. CVS is also used by the courts for victim impact statements and restitution documentation while the courts provide CVS with computer linkage to the court docket. CVS has 14 staff and 60 volunteers to assist 4,000 victims annually, with crime-specific outcome measurements and an unique Access based data management system to better assist each victim. ****************************** David Voth is Director of Crime Victim Services in Allen and Putnam Counties, and of Rape Crisis response for Auglaize, Hardin, Mercer, and Van Wert Counties, Ohio. David is a Licensed Social Worker, an Ohio Registered Advocate with Senior Standing, graduate of Associated Mennonite Biblical Seminaries, is active in victims rights legislation in Ohio, is co-founder of the local MADD chapter, and is on the Board of the National Victims Constitutional Amendment Network. For program and E-mail information go to: www.crimevictimservices.org
|
