View
3
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
HiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictims&Convicted
OffendersinBermuda
LondonMetropolitanUniversity
Policing,Security&CommunitySafety
ProfessionalDoctorateThesis
DavinaAidoo
Studentno:11051376
Submissiondate:2016
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
i
HiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda
Abstract
Thisthesissoughttoexplorehowrestorativejustice(RJ)couldbeimplementedintotheBermuda
DepartmentofCorrectionsusingactionresearch.TheaimwastoexplorehowRJcanworkfor
victimsandincarceratedoffendersinBermudainregardstothepotentialforreductionofharm,
increasingempathyandasanadditiontotheexistingCJS.Trainingwasprovidedandpartnerships
establishedwiththeBermudaPoliceServiceandPrisonFellowshipBermudaforthespecificpurpose
oftheinitiative.Phase-oneinvolvedtheintroductionoftwoprerequisiteprogrammes(Victim
EmpathyandtheSycamoreTree)thatoffenderswereinvitedtovoluntarilyparticipatein.
Respectively,oneprogrammedeliveredbyCorrectionsstaffandconsistingofonlyprisonersandthe
otherdeliveredbyPrisonFellowshipfacilitatorsandinvolving16surrogatevictim-participants.
Amixed-methodapproachwasusedtoexamineimpactandprocess.Theseincludedquestionnaires
preandpostthephase-oneprogrammesandtheCRIME-PICSIIpsychometrictoassessattitudinal
change,participatoryandnon-participatoryobservationsandafocusgroup.Bothprogrammes
increasedtheoffenders’empathywhiletheSycamoreTreeprogrammeinvolvingparticipantsfrom
thecommunity,helpedcreatefurtherpositiveattitudinalchangeonthemainscalesmeasuredby
theCRIME-PICSII.93%oftheSycamoreTreevictim-participantswere‘verysatisfied’overalland
‘woulddefinitely’recommendtheprogrammetoothers.Qualitativefindingsindicatedvictim
healing,withsomereferringtoasenseofclosureandforgivenessforthemselvesandtheoffender.
Thesecond-phaseintroducedRJconferencing,twoconferenceswereheldandtheexperienceof
participantswasagainverypositive.Theoffendersconsideredtrainedconferencefacilitatorsfrom
thePoliceandCorrectionsasbeingimpartial.Overallbenefitsforbothparties(offendersand
victims)indicatedapromisingstarttotheinitiative.
Anumberofpreviousfindingsfromempiricalresearchwerefoundinthecurrentstudy.Victims
valuedhavingavoiceandrehabilitation;andoffendersvaluedthe‘victim’sforgivenessand
reintegration’.ThesocialinterconnectednessofBermudacreatesaneedforRJasthestigmatization
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
ii
ofcriminalityoftenextendsbeyondtheoffendertoincludetheirfamily.Thepilotindicatedtheneed
insomecasesforreparatorypreparationworkwithoffendersandtheirfamiliesbeforetheoffender
feelscomfortable,orabletocalluponfamilymembersasconferencesupporters.Furtherthe
importanceofcommunitylayinthefactthatthelikelihoodofvictimscomingintocontactwiththe
personwhooffendedagainstthem,oncereleasedisvirtuallyinevitable.
ThesuccessoftheactionresearchpilotledtotheDepartmentofCorrectionsadoptingtheinitiative
andcontinuingwithitandproducedninetrainedfacilitators.ThecontentoftheSycamoreTree
Projectwassuperiorasaphase-onepre-requisiteprogrammetoRJconferencing;however,an
adaptiontotheprogrammewouldbeneededtoreducethestrongreligiouscontent.Victimsand
offendersbenefittedfromtheinitiative.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
iii
Acknowledgements
Toalltheparticipantswhoconsentedtobepartoftheresearchandwhoprovidedhonest
informationaboutyourpersonalexperiences–sincerely,thankyou.Thisactionresearchwouldnot
havebeenpossiblewithoutyou.Iamespeciallygratefultothosewhoseinputwentbeyondtheir
participationintheprogrammeandwhoserecognitionofrestorativejusticewouldcontinuetobe
sharedwiththecommunity,notleastMrRossFurbertandMsLauraSmith.
AspecialthankyoutotheCommissionerofCorrectionsLt.Col.EdwardLambforgrantingpermission
fortheresearchtobeundertakenandforadvocatingrestorativejustice.Additionally,tothePolice
CommissionerMrMichaelDeSilvaandthepoliceofficerswhokeenlycontributedinpartnershipto
theinitiativeandsawvalueintheactionforthecommunity;aspecialthankstoDcJuliaSwan.
MythankstothePrisonFellowshipBermudaSycamoreTreefacilitatorswhoworkedhardand
enthusiasticallytoprovidetheprogramme,andwhoofferedmecontinuedsupportand
encouragement.ThankyouSheridanScottonandTruellLandy.
ThesupportandassistanceprovidedtomebyCordellRileywasinvaluableandgreatlyappreciated,
aswasthesupportshownandfeltfromPastorSantucci.
IowegratitudetomysupervisorDrJennyNewtonwhoremainedpatientinexplainingthingstome
andinguidingmywritingofthisthesis.Yourkindnessandencouragementagainstmypessimismat
timeswasmuchneeded.
IamindebtedtoYvetteBrownwhowasnotonlyinstrumentalinthedeliveryoftheaction,but
whoseencouragementandsupportmadethetimeswhenIwantedtothrowinthetoweldifficult.
Iamappreciativeofmylearnedco-studentandfriendKeironMcConnellwhowasaninspirationand
greatsourceoffortitude.Iamsohappywetravelledthisjourneytogethertoitsend.
Fortheeverconstantloveandsupportofmyfriendsandfamily,thankyou.ToConradReidIhope
youknowhowgratefulIamforyourloveandsupport,likethatofabigbrother;andletmenot
forgetpatience.
LastbutfarfromleastSamanthaPatel,Iappreciateandrespectyouandyourknowledge,the
inspirationyouhavebeenformethroughoutmyresearch,beforeandsincehasbeenagift.Thank
youforyourinnovation,encouragement,support,challenge,nurturance,insightfulnessandlove,my
soulsister.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
iv
HiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda
Contents
Abstract
i
Acknowledgements iiiContents ivIndexofTables,Figures&Graphs viiiGlossaryofTerms XChapter1–Introduction Background&Rationale
ChapterOutlinesTheoretical&PhilosophicalFoundationsReparation,Restoration&RestitutionRetaliation,Revenge&Retribution
AimsandObjectivesDefiningRestorativeJusticeLeadingRJTheoristsandPractitioners:&theRestorative-RetributiveDichotomyModels&PhasesofRJApplicationTheRJCommunity
12357
10
1315
16
Chapter2-EmpiricalResearch&Practice:WhatWorks?What’sBeenFound!
IntroductionWhat’stheEvidenceRegardingRJEngagement?DoesRJMeetitsAims?WhatisKnownAboutHowRJWorksinPrisons?WhatFurtherEvidenceistherethatRJImprovesVictimEmpathy?Models&Guidance
SatisfactionRatings:Victim&OffenderExperiencesandOutcomesFindingResolution:Victim&OffenderExperiencesandOutcomesSycamoreTreeProject
2020
2629
32
35
4042
43
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
v
Chapter3–BermudainContext:Crime&theCriminalJusticeSystem
IntroductionDiscovery&BeginningsHistory&ColonisationCrimeinBermuda&the21stCenturyCriminalJusticeSystemCasemates&theBermudaDepartmentofCorrectionsRehabilitation&RestorativeJustice
TheLegacyoftheCriminalJusticeSystemRacialDifferences&theCriminalJusticeSystemInmatePopulationCharityWork:Macro-communityReparation
47484852
57
63
656669
69
Chapter4-TheInterventionModel
Introduction:RestorativeOrientationVictim-EmpathyProgrammeSycamoreTreeProjectRestorativeJusticeConferencingSchemeDevelopmentandBestPracticeGuidance
ProgrammeDifferencesTheScript,Agreement&Gathering
72
74767879
80
82
Chapter5-Methodology IntroductionTheoreticalFrameworkResearchMethodsQuestionnairesInterviews
PhilosophicalBasis&ResearchFrameworkMixedMethodsRationale&ConceptualFrameworkEthicsI–Consent
ChosenMethodsQuestions&DesignAdministrationandConsentPilotingPsychometrics:Measuring:EmpathyinOffenders
InterviewDesign&QuestionsAdvantages&DisadvantagesofFace-toFaceInterviewingMethod
85
86
89
91
9192
939495
9898
99
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
vi
ObservationFocusGroupsTheResearcher&ResearchinPrisonsEthicsII–ActionandResearchResearchParticipants:Selection&DemographicsDataAnalysis
DataCollection–AudioRecording&Transcription
ValidationStrategiesInformationSharingwithStakeholdersSamplingTechniques&IssuesDescriptionofResearchParticipants:Offender-ParticipantsVictim-ParticipantsVictim&OffenderViewsoftheCJS&RJMotivation&RetentionEmpathyProgrammeEvaluationVictim&OffenderViewsoftheConferencingExperience
100
101102102
106107109
109
110
111112112
112113113113
Chapter6–Findings AnalysisbyDomainVictim&OffenderViewsoftheCJS&RJMotivation&RetentionEmpathy&theCRIMEPICSIIProgrammeEvaluation
GeneralQuestionsontheCJSQuestionsPertainingtoPersonalCases&ExperienceswiththeCJSGeneralMotivationfor,andKnowledgeofRJEffectsofRJonPerceptionsoftheCJSDomainOneSummaryMotivationRetentionMotivationforRJConferencingDomainTwoSummaryVictimEmpathyScalePhase-OneProgrammeComparisonTheG,A&ECRIME-PICSIIScalesDomainThreeSummaryPreparationConsultation
115115116
122
124
130
131132136138
140140141142
143
144145147
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
vii
Victim&OffenderViewsofRJ&theConferencingExperience
FacilitatorSkills&PracticeExperiencesOutcome&EvaluationsDomainFourSummaryPre-conferencePost-conferenceDomainFiveSummary
148149151156157157158161
Chapter7-Discussion&Conclusions
ViewsofRJ&theCJSinBermudaExperimentalModel:Phase-OneProgrammesProgressionontoRestorativeJusticeConferencingRecommendations:IssuesforRestorativeJusticePractice&PolicyConclusion
EffectsforSycamoreTreeVictim-participantsCommunityHealingParticipantRecruitmentWithdrawals&RefusalsPracticePolicy
162164
165169
172174175178180
181182184
Statues 186References 186Appendices
1 AuthorisationLetter-CommissionerofCorrectionsBermuda 199
2
3
ResearchBackgroundPaper
RestorativeJusticeConferencingLeaflets
201
204
4 NewspaperArticlesabouttheAction 209
5 FarmFacilityvsWestgateSTPCRIME-PICSIIScores 220
6 PublicSurveyFindings 221
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
viii
IndexofTables,FiguresandGraphs
Chapter Page Table
5 111 Table1-Retentiondataofoffender-participantsforeachoftheprogrammes.
5 111 Table2-Agerange&median,ofalltheparticipantsacrosstheinterventions.
6 119 Table3–Participants’viewsofthelevelofrespectpoliceshowtovictims.
6 119 Table4–Participants’viewsofthelevelofrespectCourtsshowtovictims.
6 120 Table5–OffenderviewsoftheCJS’slevelofrespectforthe‘accused’.
6 139 Table6–WillingnessofstakeholderstoparticipateinRJconferencing.
6 148 Table7–Ratingsonfacilitatorconsultationwithparticipants.
6 156 Table8–Overallsatisfactionratesforeachprogramme/intervention.
Chapter Page Figure
4 73 Figure1.1 –VenndiagramofMcCold’stheoryofRestorativeOrientation.
4 74 Figure1.2 -VenndiagramoftheInterventionProgrammes&theirLevelofRestorativeOrientation.
7 180 Figure2 -VenndiagramofToews‘LevelsofRestorativePractice’.
Chapter Page Chart&Graphs
6 116 Graph1- VictimandOffenderratingstothestatement–SentenceslaiddownbytheCourtsarefair.
6 117 Graph2- VictimandOffenderratingstothestatement–TheCriminalJusticeSystemmeetstheneedsofvictimsofcrime
6 118 Graph3- VictimandOffenderratingstothestatement–Thereisadequatesupportforvictimsofcrime.
6 120 Graph4- VictimandOffenderratingstothestatement–TheCJSrespectstherightsofthoseaccusedofcommittingacrimeandtreatsthemfairly.
6 121 Graph5- VictimandOffenderratingstothestatement–TheCriminalJusticeSystemasawholeiseffectiveinreducingcrime.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
ix
6 121 Graph6- VictimandOffenderratingstothestatement–TheDoCiseffectiveathelpingtorehabilitateoffendersconvictedofacrime.
6 122 Graph7- VictimandOffenderratingstothestatement–TheCJSiseffectiveinbringingpeoplewhohavecommittedcrimestojustice.
6 123 PieChart1
Showsthepercentageofparticipantswhohadknowledgeofrestorativejustice(pre-intervention)
6 125 Graph8- Participants’responsesto–whethertheywouldhavebeenwillingtoparticipateinRJ‘whentheoffenderswerearrestedandcharged’.
6 125 Graph9- Participants’responsesto–whethertheywouldhavebeenwillingtoparticipateinRJ‘whenthecaseisinCourtbutbeforeconviction’.
6 126 Graph10- Participants’responsesto–whethertheywouldhavebeenwillingtoparticipateinRJ‘post-conviction,pre-sentence’.
6 133 Graph11- Participants’responsespreandpost-programmeon‘howtheyfeltaboutbeingaskedtoparticipate’.
6 134 Graph12- Participants’responsespost-programmeto‘howtheyfeltaboutbeingcontactedtoparticipate’.
6 137 Graph13- Participants’ratingspost-programmeon‘howsafetheyfeltduringtheprogrammes’.
6 139 Graph14- Offenderwillingnesstomeetwiththeirdirectvictims.
6 145 Graph15- Participants’ratingson‘howwelltheywerepreparedbythefacilitators’.
6 146 Graph16- Participants’ratingsoninformationreceivedpre-programme.
6 147 Graph17- Participants’ratingsoninformationreceivedpost-programme.
6 150 Graph18- Participants’ratingsonlevelofemotionality.
6 152 PieChart2
Participants’ratingswiththeconclusionoftheSycamoreTreeprogramme.
6 152 PieChart3
Participants’ratingswiththeconclusionoftheVictimEmpathyprogramme.
6 153 Graph19- SycamoreTreeparticipants’ratingsontheimportanceoftherefreshmenttime.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
x
GlossaryofTerms
ATI AlternativestoIncarceration
BPS
BermudaPoliceService
CJS
CriminalJusticeSystem
DoC
FGC
DepartmentofCorrectionsBermudaDepartmentofCorrectionsFamilyGroupConferencing
IIRP
InternationalInstituteforRestorativePractices
MOJ
MinistryofJustice(UK)
NGO Non-GovernmentalOrganisations
NOMS
PACE
NationalOffenderManagementService(UK)Police&CriminalEvidenceAct(UK)
RJ
RJC
RestorativeJusticeRestorativejusticeConferencing
STP
SycamoreTreeProjectorSycamoreTreeprogramme
UN UnitedNations
VEP
VictimEmpathyProgramme
VIS VictimImpactStatement
VOMVictimOffenderMediation
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
1
v CHAPTER1-INTRODUCTION
“Thehistoryofchangeintheareaoflawandjusticeisnotahopefulone.Effortsatchangehaveoftenbeenco-optedanddivertedfromtheiroriginalvisions,sometimesinperverseand
harmfulways.”(Zehr,2005,p222)
Background&Rationale
Inrecentdecadestherestorativejustice(RJ)movementhasgainedimmenseinternational
momentum,withtheUKMinistryofJusticecommissioningresearchandchangeoflegislationin
anumberofcountries.
KeypolicymakersandNGOshavebeendiscussingthepotentialbenefitsofRJforBermuda,
whichhasseenanincreaseinviolentcrimesinrecentyears(Hortonetal,2011).WithaCriminal
JusticeSystem(CJS)basedonthatoftheUK,victimsneedsandrightshaveoftenbeenignored
ormarginalisedwithinjudicialproceedings.VictimImpactStatementswerenotintroducedinto
thelawuntiltheCriminalCodeAmendmentAct2001.1
Equallythestigmatizationofthosewhooffendoperateswithinatightnetworkofsocial
connections.Offendersoftenexpressneglectintheirconsiderationofthoseharmedbytheir
actionsorviewthemselvesasvictimsduetotheirownlifeexperiences,orfromwhatthey
perceiveasunfairtreatmentbytheCJS(Wachteletal,2010).
Currently,incarcerated-offendersoftheBermudaDepartmentofCorrections(DoC)mayhave
beenorderedtopayfinesandrestitution.Reparationandrestitutionascoveredbythelaw,and
inlinewithfines,arelimitedtopaymentofmoney;therearenootherformsofreparation.2
1TheBermudaAmendmentCode2001alsoincludedprovisionsforfines,restitutionandreparation.2TakenfromtheCriminalCodeAmendmentAct2001p18-19:“Restitution70H (1)Whereanoffender–
(a) deprivesapersonofpropertyofwhichthatpersonwasinpossession;and(b) isinpossessionoftheproperty,
thecourtmayordertheoffendertorestorethepropertytothepersonwhowasinpossessionofitimmediatelybeforethecommissionoftheoffence. (2)Thecourtmayenforceanorderforrestitutionby– (a)imposingitasaconditioninaprobationorder;or
(b)bysuspendingthepassingofsentencetoallowthepropertytoberestoredbeforesentencing.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
2
Aswithmanyothercountries,theeffectivenessoftheCJSinBermuda,todeteroffendingand
reducetheharmcausedtovictimsandcommunitiesarequestioned.In2011theInternational
CentreforPrisonStudiesreported“TheUnitedStateshasthehighestprisonpopulationratein
theworld743per100,000ofthenationalpopulation,followedbyRwanda(c.595),Russia(568),
Georgia(547),U.S.VirginIs.(539),Seychelles(507),StKitts&Nevis(495),BritishVirginIs.(468),
Belize(439),Dominica(431),Bermuda(428),Grenada(423)andCuracao(422).However,more
thanhalfthecountriesandterritories(54%)haveratesbelow150per100,000.”(Walmsley,
2011).TherewouldappeartohavebeenquiteadecreaseinBermuda’spositioninmorerecent
yearsbasedonexactnumbersimprisoned,opposedtoadirectcomparisonwiththenational
population(InternationalCentreforPrisonStudies,2014).3
ThereisnonationalcrimesurveyinBermuda,thereforetheopinionsandperceptionsofthe
generalpublicontheCJSarelargelyunknown.
Thisthesisfocusesontheperceptionsandexperienceofvictimsandincarcerated-offendersthat
participateinRJinterventionsinBermuda;thereforetheaimandobjectiveswere–
Aim
ToexplorehowRJcanworkforvictimsandincarceratedoffendersinBermudain
regardstothepotentialforreductionofharm,increasingempathyandasanadditionto
theexistingCJS.
Reparation70I (1)Whereanoffenderisconvictedordischarged,thecourtimposingsentenceonordischargingtheoffendermay,inthecaseofdamagetoorthelossordestructionofpropertyofanypersonaasaresultofthecommissionofanoffenceorthearrestorattemptedarrestoftheoffender,makeareparationorderrequiringtheoffendertopaythatpersonanamountnotexceedingthereplacementvalueofthepropertyatthedatetheorderisimposedlessthevalueofanypartofthepropertythatisreturnedtothatpersonatthedateitisreturned. (2)Wherebodilyharmiscausedtoanypersonasaresultofthecommissionofanoffenceorthearrestorattemptedarrestoftheoffender,thecourtmaymakeareparationorderrequiringtheoffender,topaytothatpersonoutofpocketexpensesdirectlyincurredasaresultofthebodilyharm.”
3Bermudarankedatposition192intheworldforprisonpopulation;withtheUSArankedin1stposition;UKat17th;CaymanIslands199th&Anguilla213.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
3
Objectives
1. ToprovideasynopsisofsometheoryonRJ.
2. ToexploretheexistingresearchevidencethatRJiseffectiveinmeetingitsaims.
3. TodrawonresearchandpolicyguidancetoclarifyhowRJshouldbeimplemented
withinacorrectionssetting.
4. TodescribethecontextofcrimeandcultureinBermuda.
5. Toexplorevictims’andoffenders’opinionsgenerally,oftheexistingCJS,andspecifically
inthemanagementoftheircases.
6. ToexploretheexperienceandeffectsofanexperimentalprogrammeofRJforvictims
andconvictedoffendersinBermuda.
7. Toevaluateandcontrasttheprogrammesusedinordertodrawimplicationsforfuture
practiceandpolicyinBermuda,forinclusionofrestorativejustice.
ChapterOutlines
Theremainderofchapterone(RestorativeJustice:Theoretical&PhilosophicalFoundations)
introducesthedefinitionofRJadoptedbytheresearchandbrieflydiscussescritiquesofthe
definitionandothersoffered.ThechaptergivesabriefoverviewoftheRJcorevalues,some
theoriesandassumptions,alongwithsomepreliminaryresearchfindings.AdescriptionofRJ
modelsisprovidedandinformationonthestagesofjudicialprocesswhenRJcanbeused.This
overviewalsobeginstoillustratesomeofthequestionsthatwouldbeusedinthestudyto
researchtheopinionsandexperiencesofvictimsandoffenders,addressingtheobjective-To
provideasynopsisofsometheorythatguidestheresearch.
Chaptertwo–EmpiricalResearch&Practice:WhatWorks?What’sBeenFound!Thischapter
focusesonkeyup-to-dateempiricalresearchon‘whatworks’inRJ.Thisreferstothe
effectivenessofRJtomeetitsprimaryaimofmakingjusticemorehealing.Byaddressingthe
needsofvictimsandrepairingtheharmcausedtothem,byholdingoffendersaccountablefor
theharmcausedandprovidingopportunityforreparationthatalsoinvolvesandbenefitsthe
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
4
community.4Thechapterwillincludefindingsfromanumberofcountries,withsomefocuson
guidanceofhowRJshouldworkwithconvictedoffenders.Insodoing,itsetsouttoachievethe
followingobjectives:
-ToexploretheexistingresearchevidencethatRJiseffectiveinmeetingitsaims.
-TodrawonresearchandpolicyguidancetoclarifyhowRJshouldbeimplementedwithina
correctionssetting.
ChapterthreeprovidesinformationonBermudaintermsofitshistory,demographics,crime
andtheCJS.Thiswillincludesomediscussionofthesocialfactorslinkedtocrime,claimsof
historicalinjustices,inequalityandreligion.ItwillofferaninsideviewoftheDoCandits
population;addressingtheobjective-TodescribethecontextofcrimeandcultureinBermuda.
Chapterfourdescribesthethreeinterventionsthatareusedaspartoftheexperimental
researchprogramme–aVictimEmpathyProgramme(VEP),theSycamoreTreeProject(STP)
andRJConferencing(RJC).Acomparisonofthetwoinitialprogrammes(VEPandSTP)isoffered,
whichdescribestheaimsandapproachofeach.ItoutlinesthedifferentlevelsofRJorientation,
whichmayaccountforanyvariationsinthefindings.Thisputsintoperspectivethe
appropriatenessoftheinterventionsandprecedesthemainmethodologychapter.
Thefifthchaptersetsouttheresearchmethodology.Thisdetailstheuseofamixed-method
designwithinActionResearch,howparticipantswereselected,pilotingofmeasures,description
ofquestionnairesandplanneddata-analysis.Itincludesasectiononthereflectivepositionof
theresearcherandstrategiestomanageinternalresearch,aswellasethicsandapproval.Whilst
providingtheabove,thischapterfurtheraimstomeettheobjectiveofdrawingonguidanceto
informimplementationwithinacorrectionssetting.Aheadoftheresearchfindings,thischapter
alsoprovidesadescriptionoftheresearchparticipants.
Chaptersixpresentsthefindingsoftheresearch,includingquantitativedataanalysisand
detailingofqualitativefindingssimultaneously,whereitisusefultopairthetwotypesofdata.
Thiswilladdressinthemostpartobjectivesfiveandsix:
4Contrarytothisisthegreateremphasisoftenpaidtoreducingrecidivism;somethingthathasbecomeunavoidableasRJisincreasinglybeingincorporatedintotheCJS.Albeitnotedthat,thismaybeanoutcomeobjectiveforvictimsoftheoffender.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
5
- ToexploretheexperienceandeffectsofanexperimentalprogrammeofRJforvictims
andoffendersinBermuda
- Toexplorevictims’andoffenders’opinionsgenerally,oftheexistingCJS,andspecifically
inthemanagementoftheircases.
Chaptersevenoffersacriticalanalysisanddiscussionofthefindingspresentedinchaptersix.
Includingtherelevanceofthefindingstotheoverallaimoftheresearchanditsimplicationfor
RJinBermuda,answeringtheobjective:
- Toevaluateandcontrasttheapproachesusedinordertodrawimplicationsforfuture
practiceandpolicyinBermuda,forinclusionofRJ.
Thefinalpartofthechapterprovidestheconclusion.Theconclusiontotheresearchidentifies
thecontributiontointernationaldebatesonRJandtotheimplementationofRJinBermuda.It
makesrecommendationsfortheinclusionofRJinlaw,asanoriginalpieceofresearchspecificto
Bermuda.Asapioneeringpieceofresearchinthisareaandpartoftheworld,itwillalsomake
recommendationsforfutureevidencebasedresearch.
Asdetailedabovetheremainderofthischapter-chapteroneaddressesthefollowingobjective:
Ø ToprovideasynopsisofsometheoryonRJ
RestorativeJustice(RJ):Theoretical&PhilosophicalFoundations
DefiningRestorativeJustice
ApopulardefinitionofRJwasofferedbyMarshallin1996“Restorativejusticeisaprocess
wherebyallthepartieswithastakeinaparticularoffencecometogethertoresolvecollectively
howtodealwiththeaftermathoftheoffenceanditsimplicationsforthefuture.”(citedin
Braithwaite,2002,p.11;&Daly,2002,p.57).Interestingly,thedefinitionseemedtoreceivea
criticaldissection(Braithwaite,2002;Daly,2002).Braithwaite(2002)referringtofundamental
principlesofRJ,likethereparationofharmpointedoutthatMarshall’sdefinitiondidnotstate
whatexactlywastoberestoredandfailedtodefineothercorevaluessuchas“…moral
learning,communityparticipation,communitycaring,respectfuldialogue,forgiveness,
responsibility,apology,andmakingamends.”(Nicholl,1998,citedinBraithwaite,2002,p.11).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
6
Nicholl’s(1998)callforforgivenesstobepartofadefinition,isahighlycontroversialissue;one
thatwillreceiveattentionfurtheroninthisthesis.Thedefinitionwasfurthercriticizedfor
focusingheavilyonprocess,suchasthe‘comingtogether’advocatingonlyface-to-face
meetings(Daly,2002),andforfailingtoincludethepotentialneedforcoercion(Walgrave,
2000,inDaly,2002).Doolin(2007)arguesthatthedefinitioncouldpotentiallyresultin
outcomesthatdegradeandhumiliate.Presumably,becauseitdoesnotstatethatthedialogue
shouldberespectful.Overprescribingtheprocessand‘parties’presentations(oncean
assessmentofreadinesshasbeenconducted),couldborderoncontrollingandadverse.This
criticismmostofall,seemstostretchthefunctionofadefinitiontosuchanextentthatitis
unclearhowlengthyaworkabledefinitionDoolinseeks.Shealsofailstoappreciatethe
differencebetweenguidelines/standardsofpracticeandadefinition.
Notablyby1998Marshallhadofferedaslightlyamendeddefinition“RestorativeJusticeisa
processwherebypartieswithastakeinaspecificoffencecollectivelyresolvehowtodealwith
theaftermathoftheoffenceanditsimplicationsforthefuture”(p.28).Albeitthisdidnotdiffer
greatlyfromthepreviouslyaccusedprocess-drivendefinition,itdideliminatethefocusofthe
affectedpartieshavingto‘cometogether’.Marshall’s1998definitionwasadoptedbythis
research.
Moreimportantly,whetherdefinedorjustimplemented,isthecorevaluesofRJ.Seeminglythe
mostcentralvaluebeingthatcrimecausesharmtopeople,asopposedtothecurrentCJS’s
focusontheviolationoflaws.Itisthisharmtopeople,thataretributiveCJSisaccusedof
ignoring.Anothercorevalueistheinvolvementofaffectedparties,andthatbothvictimand
offenderareinvolvedinadialogicalprocess(whichneednotbeface-to-face)toidentifyhowto
repairtheharmcaused.Thesuccessfuloutcomeisconsideredtobehowmuchharmisrepaired
opposedtohowmuchpunishmentcanbeextended.
“Thephilosophybehindrestorativejusticewastomanagetheharmdoneandtorestorethe
offenderandthevictimtotheiroriginalstateasfaraspossible…restorativejustice[presents]
alternativecriminaljusticeoptionstoestablishedmodesoftrialandpunishmentandthatit
soughttoincludethecommunityandsocietyasawholeintherestorativeprocess.”(UN,2002,
p2).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
7
Skepticismofotherswishingtodominateanalreadyrevampedpractice(Erbe,2004;would
likelyagreewiththisperspective)couldbeexcusedasMarshall’searlierdefinitionappearstobe
reflectedinthatoftheUN’srecentdefinition–“Arestorativejusticeprocessisanyprocessin
whichthevictimandtheoffenderand,whereappropriate,anyotherindividualsorcommunity
membersaffectedbyacrimeparticipatetogetheractivelyintheresolutionofmattersarising
fromthecrime,generallywiththehelpofafacilitator.”(2006,p6).
EmphasisinadefinitionofRJunderstandablytranslatesasadefinitionofprocess.Thisappears
tobeinreactiontothedeclareddeficienciesofthetraditionalcriminaljusticeprocessthat
focusesonprocedure.
LeadingRJTheoristsandPractitioners:andtheRestorative–RetributiveDichotomy
WhileBraithwaite(1989),Marshall(1989),Zehr(1985)andUmbreit(1997;inUmbreit&
Armour,2011)areconsideredthemostprominentpioneeringtheoristsofRJinits
contemporaryconception,theseleadersarecognizantofRJprinciplesstemmingfrom
indigenousculturessuchasthoseoftheMaoripeopleofNewZealandandtheFirstNation
peopleofCanada(Umbreit,2000;Braithwaite,1998citedinStrangetal,2013).Practices
howeverhavebeenadoptedandevolved.
In1990,Zehr’sbookentitledChangingLens:ANewFocusforCrimeandJusticewasfirst
published;nowinitsthirdedition(2005),Zehroutlinedawayinwhichcrimeandtheimpactof
itshouldbeviewed.Statingthatjusticefollowinganactofcrimeshouldask“Whatcanbedone
tomakethingsright?”Zehrarguesthatjusticeshouldbeginto“…repairinjuriesandpromote
healing.Actsofrestoration–notfurtherharm–willcounterbalancetheharmofcrime.We
cannotguaranteefullrecovery,ofcourse,buttruejusticewouldaimtoprovideacontextin
whichtheprocesscanbegin.”(Zehr,2005,p186).Zehr(2005)articulatesthatwhetherornota
relationshipexistedbetweenthevictimandoffenderpriortotheoffence,thecrimecreatesa
relationshipbetweenthem.Hefurthersuggeststhatinjuriescausedbycrimecreatesfour
dimensionsofharmandthereforehealing,thatjusticeshouldseektoaddress–healingfor
victims(restitution);healingoftherelationshipbetweenvictimandoffender(reconciliation);
healingoftheoffenderandthecommunity.
WhatIsJustice?Whileadvocatessuggestthattheaimofjusticeshouldbereparation,theytend
nottoprescribewhatformthatshouldtake,opposedtohowitcanbeachieved.Itwas
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
8
thereforeanissueforexplorationinthisstudy.Participantswouldbeaskedabouttheir
interpretationofjustice.
IntheliteraturethereisadichotomyproposedbyprotagonistsofRJ,betweenRJanda
retributiveCJS.Thishasbeendescribedbyanumberofauthors(e.g.Daly,2000,2002;Graef,
2001;Johnstone,2002;Zehr,2002).Anoverviewispresentedhere-
Retributivejusticeisarguedasbeingdefinedbyprocess,theintent,pastbehaviouranddeficits
oftheoffender.WhereRJisdefinedbyrelationshipsandfocusesontheharmfulconsequences
oftheoffender’sbehaviourandtheircapacitytomakereparation.Retributivejusticeisaccused
ofbeingbasedonadversarialrelationships,dependentonproxyprofessionals.WhereasRJ
emphasisesrepairthroughdialogueandnegotiationdirectlyinvolvingthoseaffected.
Itisarguedthatashistoricalreparativejusticechangedintotheretributivesystemofmost
countriestoday,asaconsequenceofstatecontrolandpunishment,socialcohesionandsocial
controlbegantodiminish.Consequentially,communitiesbecamemoreindividualisticfostering
moreegoisticinterests.Furtherstill,itisarguedthatapunitivelegalsystembreedsviolence,
creatingfurtherdisfranchisementofindividualsandfamilies.Thislossofthefamilyasa
protectiveandsocialcontrol,issaidtobreedmorecriminalityandostracisingofoffendersby
meansofstigmatization;aresemblanceofhowcourtsrigidlyoperatetoseparatevictimsfrom
offenders(Shearer,2010).
In1989,JohnBraithwaite’sbookCrime,ShameandReintegrationpresentedtheideaof
reintegrativeshaminginwhichhequestioned‘whymostpeopledotherightthingmostofthe
time’opposedtowhypeoplecommitoffences.Hearguedthatstigmatizingthosewhooffendor
commitwrongdoing,furthermaginalisestheminsocietyandlabelsthemasdeviant;focusing
heavilyontheindividual.Whereasreintegrativeshamingshamestheactofthe
offence/wrongdoing(opposedtotheindividual),holdingthepersonaccountablewithout
ostracizingthemfromthecommunity.Theimportanceofthisresponsetocrimehighlightsa
corevalueofRJthatcrimebeviewedashavingbothindividualandsocialdimensionsof
responsibilitywithafocusonproblemsolving;notanindividualactwithindividualresponsibility
andguilt(Graef,2001;Zehr,2002).Thelatterresponseconsideredreflectiveofaretributive
criminaljusticesystem,wherecrimeisfurtherviewedasaviolationagainstthestate;opposed
toanactagainstthevictimandcommunity.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
9
Victimsarenotconsideredasbeingvindicated(inthedichoticpresentationbysomeRJ
advocates),butratherexcludedfromtheoffenceandpositionofhavingbeenwronged.Not
onlyarevictimsdeniedtheopportunitytotelltheirstory,orasZehr(1985)onceemphasized,
giventheopportunitytoexperienceforgivenessinordertomoveon.Theycanbefurther
victimizedbytheproceedings,ifevenpresent.Equallytheoffenderisoftenleftinapositionof
defensivenessandself-preservation.“Ourlegalsystemtendstodefinejusticenotbythe
outcomebutbytheprocessitselfandbytheintentionbehindit.”(Zehr,1985,p71).Zehr
critiquesthestatelegalsystem,arguingthatwhilsttheintentionmaybetoachieveequalityof
treatmentforbothvictimsandoffenders,thisislessimportantthantheprocess.When
examiningtheeffectivenessofjustice-“Weseejusticeasasystemofrightrules.Weretherules
followed?Ifso,justicehasbeendone.”(Zehr,1985,p71).Hestatesthatthereareanumberof
casesinwhichquestionsofinnocenceandguiltremainunanswered,butappealsaredeniedon
thebasisthatjusticewasservedappropriatelyaccordingtoprocedure.Hefurtheraccusesthe
criminaljusticesystemasfindingguiltandthenimposingpain.Inanattempttosafeguardthe
severityofretribution,hearguesthatpunishmentproportionatetocrime(theEnlightenment
concept)doesnotalleviatetheinflictionofpain.Asapreventivemeasureagainstabuse,Zehr
arguesthatthefundamentalsofthesystemstillremainunquestioned–isretribution
necessary?Thesuggestionofsafeguardingretributionisdiscussedfurtherinthischapter.
InrelationtothedichotomyproposedbetweenretributiveandRJ,itisarguedthatoffenders
areviewedinpurelylegalterms,devoidofmoral,social,economicalorpoliticaldimensions;
diametricallyopposedtoRJthatviewstheoffenderasawholeperson,impactedbyallthe
dimensionslistedabove.Inaretributivesystem,theoffender’s‘debt’isowedtothestate(in
abstract).WithRJtheoffenders’‘debt’andliabilitytothevictimisrecognized.Someofthese
claimsmaybe‘proven’inlightofplea-bargainingandtherewardfornotwastingstatetimeor
expensebyenteringaguiltyplea.
Withretributivejusticethereisnoencouragementofrepentanceorforgiveness;punishment
prevailsasameansofdeterrence(recidivismratesspeaktothis!),andthestigmacanbe
irreversible.WithRJitisarguedthattherearepossibilitiesforrepentanceandforgiveness,asa
meansofrestoringbothpartiesinreconciliationandthestigmacanbereversiblethrough
restorativeaction.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
10
Closeinspectionofthedichoticdescriptionscanilluminatethesignificanceofsemantics–‘an
act’versus‘violation’.IthasbeenarguedthattherearebenefitstobothRJandpunishment,in
theamalgamationofrestorativeandretributivepractices(Barr,2013).“Theevidencesuggests
thatmuchcanbegainedfromadoptinganeclecticapproach.”(Barr,2013,p409).TheUN(2002)
states“Onefunctionofrestorativejusticeistoprovideamechanismthatcancompensatefor
thedefectsinexistingsystems.”(p4).
SuchaneclecticapproachisneededasRJisnotsuitableforalloffendersandtimingcouldbeall
importantwhenseekingthewillingness,muchlesspreparednessofvictimstoparticipate.The
dichotomyoftenpresentedistoostarkandoppositionaltobeworthyoffurtherattention.
However,socialconstructionismtheoryformedtheepistemologyoftheresearchwithitsfocus
ontheimportanceoflanguageandknowledgeconstructedthroughsocialinteractionswith
others.Itthereforehighlightsthesignificanceofdialogue,recognitionofvaluesandhowchange
canbecreated.
“Restorativejusticeismoreofanidea,philosophy,setofvalues,orsensibilitythanasingle
concreteanduniformsetofpracticesorprocesses.”(Menkel-Meadow,2007,p19).This
perspectivemaybetrueinpartandinotherwaysredundant.Thechapternowmovesonto
reviewmodelsandprocessesofRJ.
Models&PhasesofRJApplication
RJcanbeusedatvariousstagesinthecriminaljusticeprocess,forexample,atarrest/court
diversion;post-conviction/pre-sentence;post-sentenceandpre-release(Shearer,2010;
Shaplandetal.,2004).Tickell&Akester(2004)suggestthefollowingas‘principalmodels’.
• “Victimempathyprogrammes,
• Victim-offendermediation,
• Restorativeconferencingandcautioning,
• Familygroupconferencing,and
• Sentencingcircles(alsoknownaspeacemakingorcommunitycircles).”(p21).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
11
Despitethedifferentmethodsandvariousstagesofintervention,therearestillattemptsto
homogenizeRJ,notleastevidentinthedebatearounddefinition.Zehr(2002)considersthe
latterthreemodelsasthemostdominate.5
Abriefdescriptionofthese‘principalmodels’willfollow,wherenecessarywithsomediscussion.
Victimempathy(orawareness)programmes(withorwithout)victimsencourageoffendersto
reflectontheirbehaviorandtheimpactofitonothers,suchastheirownfamily,thevictim’s
familyandthecommunity;aswellasthedirectvictim.Theseprogrammescanberunin
partnershipwithotherorganisations,suchasvictimsupport.Thistypeofprogrammewasused
asthephaseonepreparatoryprogrammesinthecurrentresearch,onewithvictims(STP)and
onewithout(VEP).
Victim-offendermediation(VOM)bringstogethereitherdirectlyorindirectlythevictimand
offenderinrespectfuldialoguetoresolveissuesrelatedtotheoffence,whichisfacilitatedbya
mediator.Themediatorundertakesworkwitheachpartyseparatelybeforetheyare(orarenot)
broughtinmeetingtogether.Victimsandoffendersmeetalonewithamediator;inother
instancessupportersmaybepresent(e.g.familymembers).Indirectmediationispreferable
whentheoffenderlacksremorseorempathy,orinstanceswheneitherpartydoesnotwanta
face-to-facemeetingbutstillwishtocommunicatewiththeother.6
Thisiswheremediationmoststrikinglydiffersfromformsofconferencing(andcircles).Alarger
numberofindividualsusuallyconstitutesconferencing,andspecificallyinvolvespeoplefromthe
communityasthosealsoaffectedbytheoffence&/orassupporters.However,Shaplandetal
(2006)alsofoundintheirevaluationofthreeRJschemesthat“Mediationtendedtobemore
backwards-looking(focusingontheoffence),whilstconferencinghadamajorfuture-orientated
element.”(p4).MediatorsalsoplayamoreactiverolethanfacilitatorsofRJC.
RJCcanbefacilitatedwiththeaidofascriptthatfollowsaspecificorderandspecificquestions.
Facilitatorscanbeprofessionals,suchaspolice,probationandyouth-workers,orvolunteersto5Umbreit(2000)referstoVOM,FGC,peacemaking/sentencingcirclesandreparativecommunityboardsasexamplesofRJC,andintheordertheyarelistedasbeing“theorderofthereyearsofexperienceandfrequencyofuse…”.(p2)6MediationisnotatermorprocessusedbyalladvocatesofRJ(includingthisauthor),asitinvokestheconnotationofconflictresolutionandassumesequalresponsibilityofthepartiesinvolved(e.g.Zehr,2002).WithRJtheoffenderhastoadmitsomedegreeofresponsibility,whichisnotsharedwiththevictim.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
12
trainedspecialists.Conferences(likecircles)can,alsobefacilitatedbypeers,suchasstudentsor
prisoners.Withconferencingallpartieshaveanopportunitytotelltheirstoryandsharetheir
effectsoftheoffence.Theconcludingaimistoreachamutualagreementofhowreparationcan
bemade.Aftertheformalpartoftheprocess,informaltimeisallowedforrefreshments.
Inrestorativecautioning,theprocessissimilartothatofconferencinghowever,victimsarenot
present.
Familygroupconferencing(FGC)haslargelybeenreservedforyoungpeople,operatinginmuch
thesamewayasconferences,toreachagreementsthatcanincludereparation,andwiththe
aimofdivertingyoungpeopleawayfromtheCJSandtominimizeriskofreoffending.
Professionals(e.g.youth-offendingworkers)arepresentandmakecontributions.Plansare
constructedindifferentways(dependingonjurisdiction),forexample,betweentheoffender
andtheirfamilymemberstotheexclusionofothers.However,courts,youthoffenderpanelsor
similaragenciesgenerallyratifyplans.
Sentencingcirclesoccurafteraconvictionandformpartofthecourtprocess,asacommunity-
basedintervention.Theremitbeingtodevelopasentencingplan,basedonallinvolvedhaving
theopportunitytocontribute,thisinvolvesjudgesandsupportstaffaswellasthoseusually
foundinconferences(victim,offender,theirfamilyandsupporters).Tickell&Akester(2004)
notethatunlikemanyotherRJprocessespasthistoryistakenintoaccountandconvictionsare
recorded.
Bazemore&Umbreit(2005)undertookastudytocompareandcontrastfourmodelsof
restorativejusticeforusewithjuvenileoffending–victim-offendermediation;community
reparativeboards(youthpanels,neighbourhoodboardsorcommunitydiversion);familygroup
conferencingandsentencingcircles.Theirconclusionwasthateachmodelhasitsownstrengths
andweaknesses.7Theyfoundthatcaseneedswerebettermanagedbyparticularmodels,for
example,reparationboardsweremostappropriateforlow-risknon-violentoffenderswithfew
previousincidents,versussentencingcirclesformoreserious,chroniccasesthatmayalso
involvedysfunctionalrelationships.Theysuggestedthatresourcesandcostscouldalsoleadto
preferencesinonejurisdictionoveranother,forexamplesentencingcircleswerefoundtobe7Bazemore&Umbreit(2005)pointoutthatthemodelssharemuchincommonasonewasoftendevelopedoutofanotherformofRJorinfluencedinstructureorcontentbyanother,e.g.familygroupconferencinginfluencedreparativeboardsandvictim-offendermediation.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
13
themostholisticofthefourbutalsothemostlabourintensive.Othershavealsopromoteda
‘needs-led,multi-methodapproach’(Roberts,2004).
Whatevertheapproach,itisarguedthatemphasisshouldbeplacedonthecorevaluesofRJ;
otherwiseacase-by-caseapproachcouldfail“…toaddresstheunderlyingaetiologicalfactors
associatedwithcrime,suchaspoverty,racismandculturalandsocialvalues.”(UN,2002,p5).
Thelatterquotehighlightsthesocialimpactofcrime.RJalsoacknowledgescommunitiesas
havingbeenharmedbycrimeandnotjustthedirectvictims.Hencetheinclusionofcommunity
indefinitionsandZehr’s(2002)postulationofthemostdominateRJmethodsbeingtheones
thatheavilyinvolve‘others’.
TheRestorativeJusticeCommunity
WithaprincipleofRJbeingreparationtothecommunity,asharmisnotlimitedtothedirect
victims,manyhavesoughttoclarifythemeaningandparametersofcommunityinmodernday
society.TheclaimbeingofmostWesternsocieties,thatthepre-modernsenseofcommunity
hasbeenlost.
ManyarguethatcommunityinRJtermsisnotmeasuredbygeography,butshouldbedefined
(Dignan,2005;McCold,2004).Braithwaite(1989)forexample,refersto‘communitiesof
interest’asashiftinlocusofinterdependencyawayfromneighbourhoods.In‘communitiesof
interest’suchasleisureactivities,occupationandworkplace,therecanbeagreaterpotential
forproximalsocialcontrolandsupport.Hecitesanexamplefromresearchinwhicha
probation/youth-offendingofficerrequestedrepresentativesfromayoungoffender’ssports
clubtoattendcourt,tostatewhattheycouldcontributetorehabilitatingandmonitoringthe
youthinthefuture.InthesamevainBraithwaite(1999)conceptualizes‘communitiesofcare’as
comprisingofagroupofpeoplewhowouldbecommittedtocaring,encouragingand
supportinganindividual.Themanifestationoftheseconceptsofcommunitycouldbeviewedas
translatingintoorganisationssuchas‘circlesofsupport’.
However,thereisanacknowledgementthatcrimeimpactsthemoremacro-community,
geographicalcommunityonthebasisofareducedsenseofsafetyduetocumulativecrime.Fear
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
14
ofcertainneighbourhoods,duetocrimecreatesareductioninpublicguardianshipofthose
areas,whichinturnleadstofurthercrimeandgeneralneighbourhooddecay(McCold,2004).
Sothereinlaysadistinctionbetweenageographicalcommunityandamorerelational
community.McCold(2004)categorizesthoseaffectedbycrimeasfallingintotwogroups;the
micro-communitymadeupofvictims,offendersandtheirsupportersasprimarystakeholders
andthemacro-communityassecondarystakeholders.
Fromameetingin1996ofprominentRJadvocatestestingthedegreeofconsensusonkey
conceptsofRJ,onlythreeconceptscouldbeagreed:1.“restorativejusticeviewscrimeasa
harmtopeopleandrelationships;2.Offendershaveanobligationtomakethingsrighttothose
affected;and3.Victimsandoffendersaredirectstakeholders,butothersareaffectedaswell.”
(McCold,2004,p.160).McCold(2004)suggeststhatRJbegantodiverge,creatingconflicting
goalsasthetwoperceptionsofcommunitywerefollowed.AccordingtoMcCold(2004)those
followingthemicro-communityperspectivefocusonreparationofharmtovictimsandtheir
families,withareductioninreoffendingoccurringasanextrabenefit,notagoal.8Whilethe
macro-communityfocusisreparationoftheaggregatedeffectofcrime,withthegoalbeinga
reductionofthethreatposedtosocietybytheoffender.Withthemacroperspective,citizens
andrepresentativesofthemacro-communitymanageRJanditdoesnotrequireanencounter
betweentheoffenderandvictim(communityreparativeboards).Furtherdistinctionismadeof
thecommunityfocuslevel,inthatMcCold(2004)suggeststhemacro-communityparadigm
operatesbymakinggeneralsanctionsincaseswherethecriminaljusticesystemguidesthe
interventionand“Fromthisperspective,suchoutcomesprovidesymbolicreparationtosociety
andspecificassistancetoneedyresidents.Thus,offendersarecollectivelyhelpingtorebuild
neighbourhoodsharmedbycrime.”(p159).Conversely,micro-communityleveloutcomesare
determinedcase-by-casebasedonthevictim’sneedsandtendtobedivertedawayfromthe
criminaljusticesystemaslessseriouscases.
TheRJmacro-communitylevelverycloselyresemblesrehabilitation;preciselyindicativeofthis
McColdlistsyouth-sentencingpanelsandyouthoffendingteamsasexamples,afterstatingthat
thoseaffectedbytheoffenceneednotbeinvolved.Thisfurtherseemstobareextreme
resemblanceofthetraditionalcriminaljusticeprocess.
8Thecurrentresearchtakestheperspectiveofthemicro-community.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
15
AtthispointitistotallycomprehensiblewhyDignan(2000)madethestatementthatRJcould
become“...anAliceWonderlandconcept,inwhichitismadetomeanwhateverparticular
groupsorindividualsintendittomean,irrespectiveofitsdefiningcharacteristics.”(p7).
Harmtoprimarystakeholdersisviewedasdirect,theirneedsspecificandtorepairharmtheir
roleshouldbeactive.Theharmtosecondarystakeholdersisvicarious,withaggregatedneeds
andtoreduce/repairtheharmtheirroleshouldbesupportive(McCold,2004).Agreaterissue
betweenthestakeholdersorlevelsofcommunityisthatnotonlyisitthecasethat
reparation/healingforvictimsismostsignificantwhentheyareinvolved(Marshall,1998;
McCold,2004;Zehr,2002)butthereisalsotheissueofthecrimecommittedagainstthembeing
stolenbycriminaljusticeprofessionals.
McCold(2004)arguesthatcommunitiesofcare/micro-communitiesarevitaltoregulationand
socialcontrol,withtheincreasedopportunitiesformicro-communityRJthepotentialisbuiltin
foraggregatedneedsofthemacro-communitybeingserved.Thispositionsupportsthepremise
ofreintegrativeshaming.
However,theneedsandhealingofthemacrocommunityshouldnotsimplybeignored.Chapter
oneconcludeswithadiscussiononthepotentialhealingaspectsofRJ.Themacro-community
perspectivemaybemostappropriateformasscrimes,suchascrimesagainsthumanity.Likein
thecaseofSouthAfrica’sTruthandReconciliationCommission.
Reparation,Restoration&Restitution
Reparationofharmisthemostcentralcorevalue,aswithoutitrestorationcannotbefounded.
Restitutionconsistentlytakessecondplaceofimportancetothevictim’sopportunitytotalk
aboutthecrimeandmeetwiththeoffender(Coates&Gehm,1989;Umbreit,1994,in
Bazemore&Umbreit,2005).
WhatisBeingRepaired?Victim’sfeelings/harmcaused.Therelationship.Thecommunity.Allof
theabove!
Gromet&Darley(2006)conductedanexperimentontheacceptanceofRJfromacommunity
perspective.Itinvestigatedhowperceptionsofcrimeseverityandoftheoffenderaffected
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
16
judgments.Participantswereaskedtoratetheseriousnessofanumberofcrimescenarios
rangingfromvandalismtorapeandattemptedmurder.Theythenallocatedtheoffenderstogo
throughaRJconference,proceedthroughthetraditionalcourtprocessoramixtureofboth.For
thelattertwooptionstheparticipantscouldassignsentences;andwererequiredtoanswera
numberofquestions.TheyfoundthatparticipantsoptedforpureRJwhentheoffenceswere
perceivedaslessserious,forseriousoffencesthemixedandtraditionalpunitiveoptionswere
chosen.Thelevelofpunishmenttheparticipantsrecommendedwasaffectedbyfeaturesofthe
offenceandoffender–suchastheviolence,moraloffensivenessandseriousnessoftheoffence,
whichwereallhighlycorrelated.Answerstoquestionsyieldedtwoclusters(crime&offender),
withonlyoneindependentmeasurefromeachclusterpredictingtheoptionparticipantschose-
theperceivedseriousnessoftheoffence,andtheperceivedlikelihoodthattheoffendercould
berehabilitated.“...ourdatasupporttheviewofthosewhoarguethattoachieveperceptionsof
justice,atleastforseriousoffences,bothrestorativeandretributivemeasuresshouldbe
availablewithinthesystem(Barton,1999;Daly,2002;Duff,2003;Robinson,2003).”(Gromet&
Daly,2006,p422).Inanothertrial,thesuccessorunsuccessfuloutcomeagreements,impacted
people’sperceptions,regardlessofinformationaboutwhetherthelackofasuccessfuloutcome
wasthefaultoftheoffenderorboththeoffenderandvictimfailingtoreachanagreementfor
reparation.Theoffenderswhosuccessfullycompletedconferencesfromthemixedprocess
wereconsideredtohavethesamerehabilitationpotentialasthoseoffenderswhoweresentto
thepureRJprocess.However,offendersfromthemixedprocess,whohadunsuccessful
conferenceoutcomes,wereviewedashavinglessrehabilitativepotential;butashavingmore
potentialthanthosetheychosetoputthroughthetraditionalcourtprocess.
Gromet&Daley(2006)suggestthatparticipantsstilloptingtosendoffendersofsuccessful
conferencestoprisonreflectedtheachievementofjusticeashavingtwogoals–restorationof
thevictimandpunishmentoftheoffender.However,peoplealsowantedtogivetheoffender
anopportunityforrehabilitation.“Bothofthesefindingsprovideevidencethattheconceptof
restorativejusticeandrehabilitationarecloselyassociatedwitheachother”(Gromet&Daley,
2006,p423).TheyciteBilz’s(2002)findingthatthosemostsupportiveofsendingcasesforRJ
procedures,alsobelieveinthepotentialofrehabilitation.Thesefindingsilluminateaneedto
educatethosewhodonotbelieveinthevalueofrehabilitationsoastoincreasewillingnessfor
RJ.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
17
Moreover,whileRJproceduresareviewedaseffectivewithoffencesoflowseverity,itis
claimedtobemosteffectivewithhighseveritycases(Wachteletal,2010;Umbreit&Vos,2000;
UN,2006).9Least,rehabilitationandRJcancreatehealingfortheaggregatedharmofmacro-
community.Whatofhealingforthemicro-communityandtheneedsofvictims?
Retaliation,Revenge&Retribution
VanStokkom’s(2013)undertookastudythatlookedspecificallyattheroleofrevengeandthe
‘zerosumrhetoric’-thatinthesufferingoftheoffenderthereishealingforthevictim.Itis
oftenbelievedandadvocatedthatthereshouldbezerotoleranceandstiffpenalties,forthose
whocommitseriouscrimes.Alackofsuchpenalties,likelongprisonsentences,canoftenbe
experiencedasadevaluationofthevictim’sworthandofthepaininflictedonthevictim’s
family(Pratt,2007;Zimring,2003;inVanStokkom,2013).Aprevailingassumptionisthatthe
rightsandprotectionofanoffenderisattheexpenseofthevictim,andviceversa(Elias,1986;
inVanStokkom,2013).VanStokkom(2013)suggestshoweverthatvictimologistsdonotseek
harsherpunishmentbutratheradvocateformoreattentiontotheneedsandemotionsof
victims.Forexample,VanDijk(2009;inVanStokkom2013)arguesthatvictimsshouldexpress
vindictivefeelingsastheyhavea‘naturalright’tobeenraged.Furthermore,itissuggestedthat
thesefeelingsshouldbetakenseriouslyandabsorbedintheproceedingsofthecriminaljustice
system.Thisinaccordancewithprotagonistsofvictim-impactstatements(VIS),arguethat
victimsshouldbefreetoexpresstheirhurtfulexperiences,andevenhaveasayinthe
sentencing.VanStokkom(2013)citesRJprotagonistssuchasBraithwaite(2003)whoarguethat
naturalretributiveurgesarenothealthy.Yet,tothecontrarysuchadvocatesofRJtalkabout
victimsneedingtobe‘ready’toengageinrespectfuldialogue,whichassumestherealityof
negativeemotionsinvictims.“Onereasonfordoubtsaboutthemeritsofrevengeisthatpeople
oftenbecomeobsessedwiththoughtsofrevengeandmaybringgreatharmtothemselvesand
othersintheirquestforit.Anotheristhatcampaignsforrevengeoftenescalate”(Govier,2002;
inVanStokkom,2013,p172).Itmaybearguedthatvictim-impactstatementsqualifyasonly
havingpartialrestorativeorientation(andalreadyformpartofexistingcriminaljusticesystems).
9“Restorativejustice’sconcernwithlessseverecasesinmostcountrieshasmeantthatafullyrestorativesystemhasnotbeenestablished.”(Hagemann,2003,p223).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
18
Where,conferencingisofferedashavingwin-winoutcomesforallparties(e.g.Strang,2002;in
VanStokkom,2013)andpossessingfullrestorativeorientation.
VanStokkom(2013)referstovengefulfantasiesandthesenseofjusticepeopleexperiencefrom
literatureandfilms,whentheheroesstandsupforthemselforvindicatesawrongdoneto
them.“Thefailuretorespondtoaperceivedinjusticecanactuallyfurtherdiminishthevictim,
bothinhisorherowneyes,astheeyesofothers.”(Miller,2001;inVanStokkom,2013;p171).
VanStokkom(2013)referencesthreedistinctmoralgoalsunderlyingmotivationforrevenge.
Oneisthedesireto‘geteven’or‘balancethescales’,re-equilibrationofgainsandlosses,or
power.Thesecondistorestorethevictim’sself-esteem,demonstratinganintoleranceof
mistreatmentbyothers,whichcreatesasenseofstrengthandsavingface.Thirdly,itcanserve
aneducativefunctiontoteachtheoffenderalesson-aninstrumentalaimofdeterrence.Like
thepurposeofimprisonmentandrecidivism?VanStokkommayfailtoemphasize,ormissthe
truelessonasintendedfromonedirectlytoanotherthat-‘Iwillteachyoualessonnottohurt
meagain’.
“AccordingtoGovier,revengeismorallyobjectionablebecauseitconsistsofadeliberateeffort
todamageanddiminishanotherperson.…toactasagentsofrevenge,wehavetoindulgeand
cultivatesomethingevilinourselves.”(VanStokkom,2013;p172).Asaresult,itwouldseemto
betheveryessenceofthisthatmostpeoplewouldfeeluncomfortablewith,yetareaccepting
ofimprisonment.Thisalsoaccountsforadistinctionbetweenrevengeandretribution.Itis
arguedthatwhilsttheemotionalidentificationofrevengeexists,thepunitivemeasuressuchas
imprisonment,functionstotamepublicoutrageinmoremorallyacceptableways“…thetaskof
retributivejusticeisto‘tame’vengeanceandcanalizevengefuldesiresinalegalframeworkof
justdesertsandproportionality.”(VanStokkom,2013;172).Thiscouldsuggestthataneedfor
prisonscouldalsobetoprotecttheoffenderfromthepublic.Theinclusionandconsiderationof
the‘public’sneeds’shoutsloudthecallforinterventions(suchasRJconferencing)toinclude
thecommunity(atleastmicro,ifnotmacro),andtoalsorecognizetheneedsandfeelingsof
thoseindirectlyorinadvertentlyaffectedbycrime.
VanStokkom(2013)providesareviewofhowlittlecredencethereisinahomogenousviewof
victimresponsestocrime;forexamplehereportsontheresearchofPemberton(2011)who
foundthatvictimssufferingfromhigh-levelsofpost-traumaticstressfollowingseriouscrime
wereoftendisappointedatthepointthejudgeannouncedthesentence.Whereasforsome,the
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
19
lengthofsentenceprojectedamessagetothecommunityaboutthevictims’worthandsocial
standing;aslenientsentencestranslatedintothevictimbeingundeservingofrespect.Orth
(2004)foundthatforvictimsofviolentcrime,punishmentdidsatisfyfeelingsofrevenge,but
onlyinatransitoryway;asfouryearspostvictimizationhadnoinfluenceontheintensityof
vengefulfeelings.Analysedfurther,itisreportedthatthepunishmentisinsufficienttorelieve
vengeanceifruminationcontinues.Ruminativethinkingabouttheoffencehaswithitassociated
feelingsofanger.
Asanintroduction,chapteronesetoutsomeofthefundamentaltheoriesandprinciplesofRJ
thatinformedthecurrentactionresearch.Thiswasprovidedalongwiththedichotomythatis
oftenpresentedbetweenaRJapproachandthetraditionalCJS,viewedasretributivebymany
RJprotagonists.Withthepolarizedissuesraisedbetweenthetwoformsofjustice,thecurrent
studywasconcernedwithhowparticipantsviewedtheCJS.Itwouldalsoattempttoexploreif
theseviewswouldbechangedafterparticipatinginaRJC,andwhattheirviewswouldbeofRJ
afterparticipatinginanintervention.Somepeoplemakeassumptionsaboutvictims’willingness
toparticipateinRJbeingmotivatedbyrevenge.Tothisendthechapterprovidedresearchon
thisissue.Italsohighlightedhowtheneedforretributionismorecloselyassociatedwith
perceptionsoftheoffenders’capacityforrehabilitationandbytheseverityofoffences.
Retributionisadministeredbyneutralagentsandcalledforbythemacro-community;where
revengeispersonalandcanbedamagingfortheindividual.Punishmentdoesnotincreasethe
victim’swellbeingbutmayaffirmtheirsocialstatusandself-worth.IfRJisnotlimitedtothe
victimsandmicro-community,itrunstheriskofmarginalizingthosemostaffected.Withno
universallyaccepteddefinitionanddifferentformsofpracticesbeinglabeled‘restorative’,the
chaptersetoutthedefinitionadoptedbythisresearchandoutlinedtheprincipalmodelsofRJ.
Chapter2providesempiricalresearchofRJpracticeandguidance.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
20
v CHAPTER2–EMPIRICALRESEARCH&PRACTICE:WHATWORKS?WHAT’SBEENFOUND!
“Restorativejusticerealisessharedsocialvalues,butdoessothroughdifferentculturally-basedbeliefsabouthumanneeds.”(Braithwaite,etal,2013,p91).
Introduction
TheUN(2006)advisesthatstandardsforRJprogrammes,andevennationalstandardsguiding
policiesshouldbebasedonempiricalresearch.
Thischaptersetsouttoaddressthefollowingobjectives–
-ToexploretheexistingresearchevidencethatRJiseffectiveinmeetingitsaims.
-TodrawonresearchandpolicyguidancetoclarifyhowRJshouldbeimplementedwithina
Correctionssetting.
However,thechapterwillstartwithconsiderationofthemotivationforpeopletoparticipatein
RJ,includingissuesoftimingandwhentheinterventionisoffered.ItlooksatwhetherRJmeets
itsaimsandthesatisfactionratingsofthosethatparticipate.Theliteraturereviewhighlights
whatisimportantforimplementationbasedontheexperiencesandoutcomesforparticipants.
Internationalresearchisexaminedwithafocusonprisonstudies(includingtheSycamoreTree
programme)thatwoulddirecttheintendedactionandresearch.
What’stheEvidenceRegardingRJEngagement?
Therehavebeenanextensivenumberofstudiesthatprovideempiricaldataonthereasons
peoplearemotivatedtoparticipateinRJ(e.g.Shaplandetal,2006,UK;Umbreit&Vos,2000,
USA).Forbothvictimsandoffendersthesereasonscanusuallybeexplainedintwoclusters–
theselfandtheother.
Forvictimstheirreasonsregardingtheoffenderinclude–wantingtoheartheoffendertake
responsibility;wantingtohelptheoffendertonotreoffend/rehabilitateandoutofasenseof
dutytosociety.Thereasonstheyparticipateforthemselvesis–togetinformationaboutwhat
andwhytheoffencehappened;toreceivereparationandrestitution;tohavetheirvoiceheard;
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
21
outofabeliefthatforgivenesswillprovidehealing/forhealingandtolettheoffenderknowhow
theoffenceimpactedthem.1011
Umbreitetal(2005)providepercentagesforthechiefreasonsvictimsaremotivatedto
participateindialoguewithoffendersincasesofsevereviolence–toseekinformation58%;to
showtheoffendertheimpactoftheiractions43%andtohavecontactwiththeperson
responsible40%.
ForoffendersUmbreitetal(2005)foundthechiefreasonsforoffenderswantingtohave
dialoguewithvictimsincasesofsevereviolencewas–toapologize38%;tohelpvictimsheal
38%andtodowhateverwouldbenefitvictims26%.Forthemselves,theyhoped–the
experiencewouldbenefitthem74%;thatitwouldcontributetotheirownrehabilitation33%;to
changehowthevictimsviewedthem21%andforspiritualreasons18%.Eveninthecaseof
offendersondeathrowparticipatinginRJ,theirreasonsdidnotdifferfromoffenderswith
determinantsentences(Umbreit&Vos,2000).Theygavereasonssuchas–aprocessofself-
examination,inturnbeingpartoftheir‘healingjourney’andaspartoftheirreligiousfaith.
Umbreit&Vosnotedthatreligionbecameimportanttotheseoffenders.Theyfelttheneedto
apologise;tohelpthevictim’shealing;togivesomethingbackforthewrongdoneandoutofa
feelingofowingthevictims.
Bolivar(2013)notedthatpreconceivedideasaboutvictimizationorothernegativeeffectsalso
influencevictims’willingnesstoparticipateinvictim-offendermediation(VOM).12Limited
literatureonwhypeoplerefusetoparticipateinRJ,pointstothreefactors–theactualmeeting,
theoffenderandtheinfluenceofsignificantothers(suchstudiesareprovidedinBolivar,2013).
Themeetingreferstothelackofvaluegiventotheoffenceortheconference;negative
evaluationsofthemeetingrevolvearoundfearofone’sowncapacityforameetingorfeelings
10Bolivar(2013)wouldsuggestthatthislatterreasonisforthebenefitoftheoffender.11AstudyfromtheNetherlandsfoundthatself-orientatedreasonsposethestrongestdetermininginfluence(Laxminarayanetal,2013;citedinBolivar,2013).12Itmayalsobeusefultoconsiderwhetherterminologyaffectsvictims’willingness,terminologysuchas‘mediation’andwhatpreconceivedideasthatmightconjure.Mediationasatermcouldgiveoffenderstheideaofsomeformofdiminishedresponsibilityandequallygivevictimsafeelingoffalseresponsibility.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
22
ofcoercion.Issuesrelatedtotheoffenderinclude,fearoftheoffenderornegativeevaluations
aboutmeetingthem(likeskepticismorrefusaltoentertaintheideaofdevelopingarelationship
post-conference).Theinfluenceofsignificantothersliesinadvisethatthevictimnot
participate.
Bolivar(2013)conductedastudyonVOMinSpainandBelgium,13usingamixed-methoddesign
ofbothquantitativeandqualitativemeasures(includingthePost-TraumaticGrowthInventory).
Victimsofpersonalviolenceeitheragreedordeclinedtoparticipatein-directorindirectVOM.
Bolivarsetouttoinvestigatethesimilaritiesanddifferencesinvictims’perceptionsofthe
offender,theoffenceandtheircommunitiesofcare.Fourmainissueswerefound–thevictims’
perceptionofharm;theoffenceandtheoffender;reasonsfornotifyingthepoliceandother
‘influencingfactors’.
Regardingthevictims’perceptionsofharm,thethreegroups(direct,indirect-VOMandrefusal)
variedmarkedlyoftheirevaluationofharmcausedtothem,likefearandfeelingsofisolation.
Quantitativeanalysisshowedthatknown-offendervictimsregarded‘damage’(victims’
perceptionoftheirownlevelofvictimization-restoration)moreimportantlythan‘unknown-
offendervictims’.Althoughnotstatisticallysignificant,thoseoptingforVOM(directorindirect)
presentedwithhigherscoresofpost-traumaticgrowth(e.g.personalgrowthandappreciation
oflifepost-trauma).
Victim’sperceptionsoftheoffenceandtheoffender,showedthatofthoseparticipatingin
directVOM-“…tendedtopayattentiontothecircumstancesthatsurroundedtheoffenceor
theroletheythemselvesplayedintheoffence.Thesevictimsalsopresentedamorepositive
viewoftheoffender,evenwhentheoffenderwasunknowntothem.”(Bolivar,2013,p203).
BolivarreportsthattherewerethreevictimswhodeclinedandsixwhoacceptedindirectVOM
thathadreceivedthreatsduringandaftertheoffence.BothdirectandindirectVOMvictims,
13Bolivar(2013)providesinformationonlegislationinSpainandBelgium,statingthat–“…theSpanishcriminalcode,introducedin1995,establishes‘reparationofharm’asamitigatingfactorwithincriminalprocedure.Inpractice,mediationhasbecomeatoolfordiversionofminorcrimes,despitethefactthatmediationmaybeofferedatvariousstagesofthecriminaljusticeprocess.InBelgium,since2005(Article553,CodeofCriminalProcedure),victim-offendermediationforadultoffendersisconsideredapublicservicethatmustbeavailableforanypersonwhohasastakeinacrime.Asaconsequence,mediationforredressisavailableatdifferentstagesofthecriminalprocedureandtendstodealwithseriouscrimes.”(p195).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
23
hadquestionsabouttheoffenceandfeelingsofself-blame,muchhigherthanthevictimswho
refused(albeitnotstatisticallysignificant).“Importantly,thisalsoimpliesthatvictimsneedto
understandtheroletheythemselvesplayedintheoffencebyelaboratingself-blamefeelings.”
(Bolivar,2013,p207).14ThosewhorefusedVOMhaddevelopedtheirownexplanationofthe
offence,withtheoffenderbeingtoblameandsawtheoffenderinnegativeterms.Quantitative
datasupportedthequalitative,forexample,knownandunknown-offendervictimsdiffered
significantlyonperceptionsoftheoffenderbeforemeditation,withunknown-offendervictims
havingabetterperceptionoftheoffender.
Bolivarfoundotherfactorsaffectingvictimparticipation,suchastheindividual’sideology,need
forpsychologicalhelp,communityofcareandperceptionsofsocialsupport.Communityofcare
wasashaspreviouslybeenfoundthatthoseparticipatingviewedtheirsocialsupportpositively
–asacceptingandsupportiveoftheirdecisions.15Whatwouldlikelybeofparticularsignificance
tothecurrentresearchwasBolivar’s‘ideological’factor.Ideology,referredtosomevictims
beingactiveparticipantsinsocialmovementsororganizations,whichmadethemappreciative
ofmediationasasocialstrategy.MostofthesevictimswerewillingtoparticipateindirectVOM.
Bolivar(2013)arguesthatthefindingsfromherresearchcontradictpreviousfindings(citing
Hoyle,2002;Shaplandetal,2011)suggestingthatpeople’sreluctancetoengageinmediationis
basedontheirstereotypesoftheoffender-basedonsocialconstructswhenhavinghadno
previouscontactwiththeoffender.AsBolivarfoundthatthosewillingtoparticipateindirect
VOMhadnopreviousknowledgeoftheoffenderbuttendedtohavemorepositiveviewsabout
themandatleastviewthemaslessthreatening.Bolivarmayhaveunderestimatedtheinfluence
ofsocialandculturalconstructs;whenshecitesstudieslikeLaxminarayanetal(2013)
conductedintheNetherlands,ashavingmajorityknown-offendervictimsparticipatingindirect
VOM.TherecouldbeafurtherdimensiontothisforBermudabasedonitssizeandthepotential
influenceofsocialconnectedness.Whilepeoplemaynotknowoffenderspersonally,theyare
likelytoknowsomeonewhodoesortobeawareoftheiroffending.
14Itmayalsobethatinassumingadegreeofresponsibility,victimsinterpretwhattheydidordidnotdo,ashavingsomesemblanceofcontrolovertheirlivesandwhathappenstothem.Totalacceptanceoftheoffenderhavingthecontrolcanleavepeoplefeelingvulnerableandeasilyopentore-victimization,whetherrealityorperception.Thatstagehaspossiblybeenset,withtheuseof‘mediation’.
15ThevictimsparticipatingindirectVOMhadhighscoresontheSocialAcknowledgementquestionnaire.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
24
Inapostalsurveyconductedon897Australianand461Japaneserespondentswhohadbeena
victimofviolentcrimeorhadarelative/friendwhohadbeenavictim,oroffenderofviolent
crime,differencesinsocialvaluesandbeliefswerefoundbetweenthetwocountriesregarding
RJ.“Withineachculture,thedifferencesbetweenoffendersandvictimsandtheircommunities
ofsupportarelessmarkedthancross-culturaldifferences.”(Braithwaiteetal,2013,p114).For
Australians,valuewasplacedonthe‘victimsvoiceandamends’,16plusoffenderreintegration
andrehabilitation.FortheJapanese,victimsandoffendersvalued‘victimforgiveness’17and
offenderreintegrationandrehabilitationrespectively(Braithwaiteetal,2013).Braithwaiteetal
suggeststheabsenceofindividualisticneedsofvictimsvoiceandamendsintheJapanese
populationisreflectiveoftheJapaneseculture’semphasisonapologyandcollectivewellbeing;
andhowtheuseofRJinAsiahasbeencriticized.18Braithwaiteetalalsocitescriticismsraisedof
AustralianRJconferencing,asithasbeenarguedthatitisinadequateinprotectingvulnerable
groups,suchaswomenindomesticviolencecasesandchildrenincasesofchildabuse.“Here
theconcernisthatwithouttheprotectionofrightsfromcourt-basedjustice,restorativejustice
leavesvulnerablegroups(womenandchildren)opentointimidationandbeingthreatenedby
powerfulotherswhorefutetheirclaims.”(Braithwaiteetal,2013,p117).
Presumablythen,ifasocietyvaluesindividualinterests,thentheRJmicro-communitymaybe
mostappropriate.Ifthesocietyvaluesmorethebettermentofthecollectivecommunityover
individuals(asistheorizedofAsiancultureswithConfucianismintheirpast,Braithwaiteetal,
2013),thenthemacro-communitymaybemoreappropriate.
Bolivar’s(2013)andBraithwaiteetal’s(2013)findingsarenotunrelated.Braithwaiteetalstress
howthereislittlevariationinthevaluesofvictimsandoffenders(andthatthesevaluesare
16“…victims’needtofeelempowered,tohavetheirsayabouttheharmdonetothem,toaskforanexplanationandseekreparation(victimvoiceandamends).”Braithwaiteetal(2013,p96-97).17“…victimsneededtoforgivetheoffenderandseetheoffenderrehabilitated(victimforgiveness).”Braithwaiteetal(2013,p96).18“ApologyinrestorativejusticesettingsinJapancanberitualisticandlacksincerity(Hosoi&Nishimura,1999).Inotherinstances,policeandprosecutorsusethewidespreaddesiretoavoidconflictanddamagingrelationshipstoelicitconfessionsandreparationwithinsufficientregardfordueprocessandthetruth(Yoshida,2003).Goel(2005)providesacriticalcommentaryonhowharmonyvalues,assumedtoprevailinAsiancultures,leadtosubservienceandoppressioninwomenexperiencingdomesticviolencebecauseself-sacrificeinwomenislinkedtomaintainingrelationalharmony.”(Braithwaiteetal,2013,p116).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
25
linkedtowillingnesstoparticipateinRJmeetings),howeverculturalvaluesdovary.Spainand
Belgiummaybemoreculturallysimilar(asinBolivar’sstudy).MaybeasBolivarfound,the
greaterimpactwasonwhetherornotvictimshadquestions,asthosethatknewtheoffender
haddevelopedtheirownexplanationsoftheoffence.Bolivar’sresearchhoweverprovides
usefulinformation.Onethingthatmayhavebeenignoredincasesofpersonalviolence(aside
fromculture)couldbetheissueoftime,combinedwithproximity,in‘theneedtoknow'.
“Victimsmaybenervousabouttheoffender’srelease,butmanymayhave‘puttheoffence
behindthem’insomesense.Whattheconferencesthemselves,however,haveshownisthat
theoffenderandthevictimintheseseriousviolentoffencesmaywellhavesomelinks,interms
oflivingnearbyorknowingpeopleincommon,andthattheseareissueswhichpeoplewishto
havetheopportunityofexploring.”(Shaplandetal,2004,p33).Thiswouldthenbeexpectedto
bethecaseinBermuda.
InRestorativeJustice:WhatisitanddoesitWork?Menkel-Meadow(2007)reportsthat
participationratesrangefrom40-60%ofvictimsreferred.“Interestingly,participationratesfor
victimsgoupwhenmoretimeelapsesbetweenreferralandparticipationincasesinvolving
personalinjury(assault),butdecreasewhenmoretimeelapsesincasesinvolvingproperty
(theft,vandalism)(Umbreitetal,2005)”(citedinMenkel-Meadow,2007,p14).Menkel-
Meadowfurtherhighlightsacurvilinearrelationshipofvictimparticipationrateswiththelowest
ratesofparticipationoccurringwiththeleastandmostseriousoffenses–whereatoneendof
thecurvevictimsmaynotfeelbotheredenoughtoparticipateforlessseriouscrimeandatthe
otherend,fearfuloftheoffenderorofre-experiencingthetraumainseriouscasesofbodily
harm(Coates&Gehm,1985,Wyrick&Costanzo,1999,citedinMenkel-Meadow,2007).
Theissueoftimemayalsoinfluenceoffenders’participation,inregardsnotjusttotheir
psychologicalpreparednessbutalsothephaseinthecriminaljusticeprocessthatRJisoffered.
Shaplandetal(2004)intheirActionResearch(discussedfurtheroninthischapter)suggested
that“Inasimilarway,restorativejusticecanbepartofapackageofmeasurespost-disposal,
thoughherethefocusisoftenmoreoffender-orientated,designedtoindicatetotheoffender
theconsequencesofoffendingonvictims,thoughwithsomereparativeorrestorativeaimsas
well.Whatthefirstyearofourschemeshasshown,however,isthatiftheschemeisoperating
post-sentence/disposal,unlessitisalmostan‘automatic’componentofsuchdisposals(as
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
26
victimawarenesselementsofreferralorders,orinfinalwarnings),thentherecanbesignificant
problemsofoffenderrefusal.”(p54).19ThereisonlypartialsupportofthisclaimbyDe
Mesmaecker(2013)whoarguesthatoffenders’reasonsforparticipatinginRJpost-sentencewill
likelybefarlessbasedoninstrumentalreasonsthanpre-sentence,however,whenoffender
involvementmayhavelittleornoimpactonthesentencesomearestillwillingtoparticipate.20
DeMesmaecker’s(2013)Belgiumstudywasbasedonvictimsanddefendantswhowereoffered
VOMpre-sentenceandwhenchargesagainstthedefendantwouldnotbedroppedregardlessof
theVOMoutcome.DeMesmaecker’sfindingsprovideopportunityfordiscussionandreflection
onwhatmightbeusefulforconsiderationofRJpre-convictioninBermuda(andprovides
guidance–‘whatmattersinimplementation’).
DoesRJMeetitsAims?
StartingoutDeMesmaeckerdefinesreparationintheRJworldasconstitutingrepairof
psychologicalharmandharmtorelationships,beyondfinancialcompensation,implyinga
distinctionbetweenRJconferencingandmediation.21“Mediationwithaviewtoarrangingthe
financialsettlementofdamagesisnottheepitomeofrestorativejusticescholars.Ideally,the
partiesleavetheprocessnotjustwithafinancialagreementbutwithanunderstandingofeach
other’ssituationandposition(Daly,2003).”(citedinDeMesmaecker,2013,p353).InBelgium
DeMesmaeckercommentsthat,conferencingislimitedforusewithyoungoffenders(further
suggestiveofdifferentprocesses).
FocusingonthreefundamentalprinciplesofRJ(voluntaryparticipation,facilitatorimpartiality
andconfidentiality),DeMesmaecker(2013)investigatedhowparticipants’perceptionsofthe
principlesmightimpacttheirsatisfactionwiththemediationprocess.
19“Conferencinginvolvingsevereoffenceswillrequiresubstantialpreparationandwillnotoccuruntilatleastseveralyearsafterthecrime.”(Wachteletal,2010,p119).
20Again,thereasonsforthisdifferencecouldbecultural.Shaplandetal’sstudywasconductedintheUK.21“TheprimaryfocusofVOMisoftenmaterialrestitutionratherthanemotionalrestorationorreconciliation(Umbreitetal,1994).”(Strangetal,2013,p13).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
27
AccordingtoDeMesmaeckertheprincipleofvoluntaryparticipationisnotjustaboutensuring
thatpeopleparticipatewillinglytoensurethattheprocessandexchangeisgenuine,butthatit
isalsobasedoninformedconsent–thatparticipantsareawareofwhattheprocessentailsand
thatitcanbeendedatanytime.Thatitcaninvolvegentlepersuasionofoffendersbutthat
victimsshouldchoosefreely.“…itisacceptablethatacertaindegreeofcoerciononoffendersis
inevitable,butunfairinducementssuchascriminaljusticeofficialspressuringdefendantsto
participateshouldbebannedfromrestorativejustice(DeMesmaecker,2011;VanNess,2003).”
(DeMesmaecker,2013,p338).Further,accordingtoDeMesmaeckervoluntaryparticipation
shouldalsomeanmutuallyagreedoutcomes,howeveroffender’sparticipationisoftenmade
againstconsiderationofalternativecriminalprosecutionand,withvictims’awarenessof
implicationsforoffendersiftheychosenottoparticipate.
Withtheuseofscriptsbyfacilitators(todirectthemediation)DeMesmaecker,questions
participants’senseofcontrol,whichwasofgreatimportanceinherstudyandwasalsolinkedto
theimpartialityofthemediator.Circularly,shearguesthatknowingwhattheprocessentails
formspartofinformedconsent.Whilerecognizingthatnegotiationscouldbeneededifthe
victimsandoffenders’wisheswereincompatibleregardingtheprocess;DeMesmaecker
suggestsfutureresearchinvestigatetheimpactonperceptionsoffacilitatorimpartialityand
voluntarinessifparticipantshavelittleornocontrolontheprocess.22
Confidentialityisanimportantprincipleforallowingparticipantstofeelfreetoshareinthe
knowledgethatwhatissharedisnotdisclosedtothirdparties.DeMesmaeckerreferstotheuse
ofpoliceofficersinFamilyGroupConferencinginBelgiumandAustraliaandquestionshow
openparticipantsmightbewithpoliceofficerspresent,whilealsoacknowledgingthatpolice
presencecanhelptoperpetuateasenseofseriousnessandofphysicalsafety.Impartialityrefers
totheperceivedperformanceofthefacilitatorsto“…refrainfromtakingsidesintheconflict
whichtheymediate…”(DeMesmaecker,p341).AccordingtoDeMesmaeckerimpartialitywas
alsolinkedtonotoverlysteeringtheprocessandmaintainingopennesstoeachperson’s
perspective.
22Theuseofscriptsistoguideandstructuretheprocessopposedtomutingparticipants’expressionandexploration.“…thescriptprescribesaseriesofopen-endedquestionsthatencouragepeopletorespond“affectively”,thatis,toexpresshowtheywereaffectedbytheissuethatbroughtthemtogether.”(Wachteletal,2010).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
28
“Withintherestorativejusticemovementitisassumedthattheproceduralguaranteesof
confidentiality,facilitator’simpartialityandvoluntaryparticipationareinlargepartresponsible
forparticipationsatisfactionwithrestorativeprogrammes.Yetlittleisknownsofarabouthow
participantsinrestorativeprogrammesperceivethesethreefundamentalprinciples.”(De
Mesmaecker,2013,p357).
54participantsofpropertyandviolentoffenceswereinterviewedpreandpostdirectorshuttle
mediation23;thisincludedvictimsandoffendersthatwerebothknownandunknowntoeach
other.DeMesmaeckerfoundthatparticipantshadtwoissueswiththeprincipleof
confidentiality–thatthejudgewouldnotknowthetruthabouttheexactcircumstancesofthe
offenceanditprecludedthemfrominformingthejudgeabouttheunwillingnessoftheother
partytoengageinmediation.
Whileliteraturetendstospeakofoffender’sadmittingguiltinmediationandthendenyingitin
court,DeMesmaeckerfoundtheoppositeinherstudy-victimsadmittedtheirknowledgethat
theallegedoffenderwasnotguilty,butrefusedtosignagreementsacknowledgingthisforthe
court.Ifbothpartiesdidnotagreetosharethemediationoutcomewiththecourtthiscouldnot
happen.
DeMesmaeckerwritesoftheimpactthatthiscanhaveonthelegitimacyofthemediation
processasprocedurallyunfair.Further,itwasfoundthatparticipantsinthestudywere
unfavourableofmediationreplacingcourtprosecution,exceptinthecaseofminoroffences.
Thiswouldappeartospeaktoperceptionsofjustice.DeMesmaeckerfoundtworeasonsgiven
forwhytheparticipantsfeltthecourtshoulddealwithcases.One,itwasfeltthatinorderfor
theoffenderstolearnfromtheirmistake,theyhadtobeface-to-facewiththejudge.Secondly,
thatthejudgerecognizetheeffortsmadeinthemediationprocessandtheargumentsresulting
fromit.“Thereasonpeopleattachsuchimportancetotheformalacknowledgementoftheir
activitieswithintheframeworkofmediationisthatparticipatinginrestorativeinterventionsis
notaneasytask,neitherforvictimsnorforoffenders.Bothhavetofacefeelingsofshame,guilt,
anger,andsoforth…Oncetheyhavefacedalltheseobstacles,peoplewantajudgetoshow
respectforthisbereferringtoandacknowledgingtheirefforts.”(DeMesmaecker,2013,p356).
23ShuttleVOMinvolvesthemediatorgoingbackandforthbetweenthevictimandoffender.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
29
Theuseofascript(relatedtoimpartiality)andPoliceinvolvementinfacilitatingconferences
(furtherrelatedtoconfidentiality)wouldbefeaturesofthecurrentActionResearch.
RatingsofsatisfactionwithRJprocesseshaveproventobeakeymeasureofresearch,in
determiningwhetherRJmeetsitsaimsandprovidesparticipantswithwhattheywanttogain.
Factorsrevealedbythesestudiesalsoindicatewhatmattersinimplementationtoensure
success.
SatisfactionRatings:Victim&OffenderExperiencesandOutcomes
Ithasbeenargued,“…perhapsthosewhoareabletochooseamongjusticeoptionsaremore
satisfiedwiththeirexperiences.”(Umbreit,Coates&Vos,2004,pp287;citedinBolivar2013).
Anumberofstudieshavefoundthatbothvictimsandoffendersexperiencehighlevelsof
satisfactionfromparticipatinginRJprocesses,incomparisontotheCJS(Poulson,2003,in
Menkel-Meadow,2007).24ThisincludesstudiesconductedintheUS;Australia;Israel;Canada
andtheUKandthatincludeddiversesetsofvictims(Menkel-Meadow,2007).Fromameta-
analysisofsevenstudies,itwasreportedthatvictimsparticipatinginRJprocesseswere50%less
likelytobefeelupsetabouttheoffence,thanvictimsthatwenttocourt.Also,offenderswere
6.9timesmorelikelytoofferanapologytothevictimsinRJ;anditwassuggestedthatthislikely
accountedforvictimsbeingmorelikelytoforgivetheoffenders(Poulson,2003,inMenkel-
Meadow,2007).
Satisfactionratingshavebeenmeasuredinanumberofways,includingpsychologicalwellbeing,
forexampleparticipants’satisfactionatgettingtheopportunitytotelltheirstoryorbasedon
theirperceptionoffairtreatmentbyfacilitators/mediators;incomparisontojudges(Poulson,
2003,inMenkel-Meadow,2007).Suchfindingsarecontrarytoexpectationsofvictimsonly
seekingfinancialrestitution.25AstudyfromAustraliafoundthatvictims,whoparticipatedin
poorlyhandledRJprocesses,orwhereprocessesdidnottakeplace,werelesssatisfiedthan
24ItispredictablethatifoffendersoflessseriousoffencesparticipateinRJprocessesthatdivertthemawayfromtheCJS,theyarelikelytofindthismorepreferable(Menkel-Meadow,2007).25“Interestingly,victimsfrequentlyreportthatwhilerestitutionwastheprimarymotivatorforthemtoparticipateinVOM,whattheyappreciatedmostabouttheprogramwastheopportunitytotalkwiththeoffender.”(Umbreitetal,2005,p271)
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
30
victimswhowentthroughtheCJSorwhohadparticipatedinsuccessfulRJprocesses(Strang,
2001,inMenkel-Meadow,2007).
AgreementsforrestitutionfollowinganRJinterventionaremuchmorelikelytobereached
(90%)inface-to-faceVOM(Umbreitetal,2005;Umbreit,2001,Umbreit&Coates,1992,citedin
Menkel-Meadow,2007).
Compliancerateswithagreementshavealsobeenfoundtobehighrangingfrom75-100%in
studieswithcourtcontrolgroups(e.g.Haley&Neugebauer,1992,Marshall,1998,Kuhn,1987,
McCold&Wachtel,1998,citedinMenkel-Meadow,2007).Latimeretal’s(2001)meta-analysis
ofeightRJstudiesfounda33%highercomplianceratewithrestitutionincomparisontocourt
case-controlgroups.InacomparisonbetweenRJandcourtcases,USstudiesfoundcompliance
of81%forRJto58%forcourts;andwithanevaluationstudyofsixdifferentprogrammes89%
RJcompletionand75%courtcasecompletions(Umbreitetal,2005;Ervin&Schneider,1990;
respectively,citedinMenkel-Meadow,2007).
OfaUSandCanadianstudyonVOM,Umbreitetal(2005)foundthreevariablescouldaccount
forover40%ofthevarianceassociatedwithvictimsatisfaction–thevictimfeltgoodaboutthe
mediator;restitutionagreementswereconsideredfairandtheyhadastronginitialdesireto
meettheoffender.Umbreitetal(2005)reportonthreestudiesthatfoundover90%ofvictims
andoffenderswouldrecommendgroupconferencingprogrammestootherpeople.
In2001theUKHomeOffice(undertheircrimereductionprogramme)commissionedresearch
ofthreeRJschemeslargelyfocusedonadultoffenders,fundedfortwotothreeyears.Across
theschemestheRJpracticesinvolveddirectandindirectmediationandRJconferencing(RJC).
Ofeachschemeacontrolgroupwasusedtoassessreconvictionrates.Shaplandandothers
providefourreportsontheactionresearchthatranfrom2001-2006.Focusingonthethird
reportandlargelyonthefindingsoftheschemethatusedonlyconferencing,26thefindingsalso
provideguidance.Shaplandetal(2007)foundthatvictimswereapproachedinpersonatcourt,
byletterortelephoneandallmethodsofcontactwerefoundtobesatisfactorytothevictims.A
face-to-facepreparationmeetingafterinitialcontactwasconsideredessentialandvictimswere
appreciativeoftheschemestaffbeingpreparedtomeetwiththemattheirhomestoanswer26TheJRC(JusticeResearchConsortium)schemeprovidedconferencingto152offendersand216victims(withacontrolgroupof118offendersand166victims).Theparticipantsviewswereobtainedjustaftertheconferencesandthenwereinterviewed8-9monthspostconference.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
31
questions(Shaplandetal,2007).Itwasnotedthataskingaboutpreparationinformationafter
theconference,wouldallowparticipantstoknowiftheinformationtheyhadreceivedhadbeen
adequate.Theinformationtheyreceivedshouldhavealsoallowedthemtomaketheirdecision
toparticipate.Shaplandetal(2007)foundover75%oftheoffendersand86%ofthevictimsfelt
they‘definitely’or‘probably’hadenoughinformation.Despitepreparation,Shaplandetal
(2007)reportthatparticipantswerestillnervous,especiallytheoffenders.However,of
informationprovidedaftertheconferenceonly–69%ofoffendersand71%ofvictimssaidthat
weregivenanyinformationaboutwhatwouldhappenasaresultoftheconference.Ratings
withregardstoinformationaboutoutcomeagreementswereevenless(67%offendersand64%
victims)fortheconferenceparticipants.Althoughtheschemeswerepilotswithfixedtermsof
fundingandthefacilitatorsmayhavelackedexperienceandknowledge,Shaplandetal(2007)
suggested“Nonetheless,wethinkitisimportantthatschemesworkoutwhatoutcomesare
likelyandthatfacilitatorslaythisoutclearlytopotentialparticipants.”(p13).Lessthan3%of
participantswerenotclearaboutthevoluntarynatureofparticipationorfelttheyhadsufficient
timetoconsidertheirdecisiontoparticipate.
92%ofvictimsand86%ofoffenderssaidthatthepracticalarrangementsoftheconferencehad
beendiscussed,however13%oftheoffenderssaidtheyhadnotbeeninformedoftheprecise
times.Thesewereessentiallyfromtheprisongroups,andShaplandetal(2007)suggestthatthe
difficultieswerelikelymoreabouttheprisonsthantheJusticeResearchConsortium(JRC)
scheme.Suggestingthattheprisonsoftenhaddifficultiesallocatingappropriatevenuesand
times.
Theconferenceparticipantswereaskedwhomtheythoughttheconferencewasfor(andcould
providemorethanoneresponse)–55%ofoffendersand49%ofvictimssaidthattheythought
theconferencewasforthem.71%ofoffendersand73%ofvictimsthoughtthatitwasforthe
otherpartyand11%offendersand20%victimsthoughtitwasforthecommunity(Shaplandet
al,2007).
Shaplandetal(2007)reportthatmostparticipantsweresatisfiedwiththeconference,however
therewereafewthatwerenot.Whenparticipantsweredissatisfiedittendedtobewithone
particularaspectopposedtooveralldissatisfaction.Onecausalfactorofdissatisfactionamong
offendersrelatedtotheabsenceofvictims,inthattherewasahigherdegreeofdissatisfaction
whenvictimswereabsent.Fromanalysisofcasesinwhichdissatisfactionwasbasedona
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
32
numberofissues,Shaplandetalconcludedthat–“Ifthereisanycommondenominatorhere,it
isthatcaseswithadisputebetweenoffenderandvictimastothefacts,particularlyifthe
offenderwasdrunkandcouldnotremembermuch,mayproveproblematic.”(p28).Theyalso
foundoutcomeagreementstobeamajorsourceofdissatisfaction.
32%ofoffendersand20%ofvictimssaidthattheywerenervousbeforetheconference.64%
and66%ofoffendersandvictimsrespectively,foundtheconference‘very’or‘fairly’emotional
comparedto33%and32%ofoffendersandvictimsrespectivelywhofoundit‘notatall’or‘not
really’emotional.Shaplandetal(2007)foundsignificantcorrelationsbetweenthelevelof
nervousnessanddegreeofemotionalityexperienced–withthosewhoexperienceditasmost
emotional,havingbeenthosethatweremostnervous.“Perhapsanotherproofofthisisthatthe
emotionalscarsfromtheoffencehadnot,formost,healedcompletelybythetimeofthe
conference.Halftheoffendersand31percentofvictimsfounditvery(ortosomeextent)
difficultorpainfultogothroughtheprocess.”(Shaplandetal,2007,p39)
AlthoughdictatedbytheCJS,Shaplandetal(2007)askedparticipantsaboutwhetherornot
theythoughtthetimingbetweentheoffenceandtheconferencewasright;althoughtherewas
greatdisparityintheinterveningtimesforeachcase–76%ofoffendersand72%ofvictims
thoughtthetimewasright.17%ofoffendersand22%ofvictimsthoughtthetimebetweenthe
offenceandtheconferencewastoolong.
Shaplandetal(2007)recognizeddifferentaimsofRJCandprovideddirectfindingspertainingto
theseaims(similartowhatDeMesmaecker(2013)hadlatersetouttodo).SuchasRJC
providingtheopportunityforvictimsandtheirsupporterstoexpresstheharmdonetothem–
83%ofoffendersand60%ofvictimsthoughttheconferencemadetheoffenderrealizethe
harmthatwascausedbytheoffence(accountability).
FindingResolution:Victim&OffenderExperiencesandOutcomes
AnaimofRJCistoallowthepartiesinvolvedto“…collectivelyresolvehowtodealwiththe
aftermath”(Marshall,1998)/solveproblemscausedbythecrime.Shaplandetal(2007)found–
51%ofoffendersand38%ofvictimsthoughtthattheconferencehad‘verymuch’or‘tosome
extent’solvedproblemsstemmingfromtheoffence.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
33
“Adifferentaimofrestorativejusticeistoprovideasenseofclosuretotheoffenceandtoany
conflictcreated…Partofthisisseenbysometheoristsasrelevanttohealingandreconciliation.”
(Shaplandetal,2007,p39).
OftheShaplandetalstudy80%ofoffendersfelttheygainedabetterunderstandingoftheir
offendingandthemselves.69%ofvictimssaidtheyhadabetterunderstandingaboutthe
offence;while19%reportedgainingnounderstanding.39%ofvictimsfeltmoresecurepost-
conference,46%felttheconferencehadnoeffectonthemand9%feltlesssecure.Over50%of
victimsfeltthattheygainedasenseofclosure,andafurther20%felttheyhadgainedasenseof
closuretosomeextent.
Overall73%ofoffendersand64%ofvictimsthoughtthatconferencingwasagoodwayof
dealingwiththeoffence–“Giventhatfewoffendersandvictimshadanypreviousknowledgeof
restorativejusticeandthisworkhadnostatutorybasis,thesearequitehighfiguresintermsof
confidenceintheprocessandwhatithaddoneforthem.”(Shaplandetal,2007,p40).
74%ofoffendersand78%ofvictimsreportedthattheywould‘definitely’or‘probably’
recommendRJtoothersofsimilaroffences.“Conferencevictimsandoffenderswere
significantlymoresatisfiedwithwhatthecriminaljusticesystemhaddonewiththeircasethan
controlgroupparticipants,suggestingthereisapositiveeffectofparticipatinginrestorative
justiceonconfidenceincriminaljustice.”(Shaplandetal,2007,p4).
AspartoftheCampbellSystematicReviews,Strangetal(2013)conductedameta-analysisofRJ
conferencing(RJC)studiesthatusedface-to-facemeetingsandincludedrandom-assignmentto
controlgroups.Theanalysisconsistedof10studieswithatotalof1,879offendersand734
victims,fromthreecontinents.27Themajorityofthestudies(9)usedconvictedoffenders.They
soughttoreviewtheeffectsonrecidivismandvictimsatisfaction.Forthepurposeofthecurrent
research,greaterattentionisgiventoStrangetal’sfindingsregardingthelatter.Thereviewwas
limitedtotwoconsistentdimensionsofvictimsatisfactionacrossthestudies–materialand
emotionalrestoration;andwasfurtherlimitedbystudiesinwhichtheRJC-assignedvictimsand
control-groupvictimscouldbecompared(essentiallytwoexperiments).Theyfoundthat,less
victimsofRJC(38%)soughtfinancialrestitutioncomparedtothecourtvictim-group(47%)and
27ThethreecontinentsweretheEurope(London,UK),Australia(Canberra)andNorthAmerica(Indianapolis,Indiana).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
34
fewervictimsreceiveditinthecourt-group(12%)thantheRJC-group(16%).
Strangetal(2013)highlightdifferencesindynamicswhenvictimsarepresentatconferences,
thanwhentheyarenot.Theystatethatthereisarequirementforvictimstobepresent,citing
qualitativeresearchthathasfoundfarlessemotionalintensityandoffenderremorse,thanin
caseswherepersonalvictimsarepresent.Regardingemotionalreparation,theyreportin-depth
datasuchas–18%ofcourt-assignedvictimscomparedto5%oftheRJC-assignedvictims
believedthattheoffenderwouldreoffendagainstthem.Whenthiswasexaminedbyoffence–
threetimesasmanycourt-assignedvictims(21%)thanRJC-assignedvictims(7%)ofproperty
crimesthoughttheoffenderswouldreoffendagainstthem.Forvictimsofviolence,fivetimesas
manyofthecourt-assignedvictims(11%)thantheRJC-assignedvictims(2%)thoughtthatthe
offenderswouldreoffendagainstthem.90%ofallthevictimswantedanapologyfromthe
offender;72%oftheRJC-assignedvictimscomparedto19%ofthecourt-assignedvictims,said
thatactuallyreceivedanapology(theapologiesforcourt-assignedvictimswerenotgivenas
partofthecourtprocess,butratherasaseparatelynegotiatedoutcome).Instudiesthatlooked
atburglaryandrobbery(intheUK)Strangetalfound–96%ofRJCburglaryvictimsreceivedan
apology,comparedto7%ofcourt-caseburglary-victims.Inrobbery100%oftheRJC-victims
receivedanapology,comparedto14%ofthecourt-assignedvictims.Victims’perceptionsofthe
sincerityoftheapologiestheyreceivedbyoffencetypeyieldedstatisticallysignificantresults.
ForoffencesofviolenceRJC-victimsandcourt-victimsperceivedtheapologyas‘sincere’or
‘somewhatsincere’atratesof58%and11%respectively;forpropertyoffences55%and10%
respectively;forburglary57%and7%respectivelyandforoffencesofrobbery79%and11%
respectively.“Thesefindingsconfirmthatcourtsoftenneglectthenon-materialdimensionsof
victimization,whileRJCismoderatelysuccessfulindeliveringtheemotionalrestorationvictims
seek,andespeciallyinprovidingaforumforthetransactionofapologies.”(Strangetal,2013,
p39).
Offourstudies(conductedinCanberraandLondon)inwhichStrangetalcouldcomparevictims’
anger,whichcouldbetranslatedintovengefuldesires,theyfounddifferencesbasedonthe
offences.Forexample,incasesofburglaryandrobberyintwoLondonexperiments–5%of
control-groupvictimsand0%RJC-assignedvictimssaidthattheywouldharmtheoffenderin
casesofburglary,comparedto14%ofthecontrol-groupvictimsand3%RJC-assignedvictimsin
casesofrobbery.Strangetal(2013)werealsoabletoreportonpost-traumaticstresssymptoms
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
35
(PTSS)ofthevictimsintheLondonstudiesinvolvingoffencesofburglaryandrobbery.With
testscarriedoutusingtheWeiss&Marmar,1997ImpactofEvents(Revised)Scale,onceafter
disposalofthecase(courtor,court&RJC)andsix-monthslater.TheyreportedthattheRJC-
assignedvictimshadreducedPTSScomparedtothecontrol-assigned(courtonly)victims,
concluding“…itappearslikelyRJChasabeneficialoutcomeforvictimsexperiencingPTSS.”
(Strangetal,2013,p44).
Overall,theresultsindicated(butlackedstatisticalsignificance)thatRJCworkedbetterfor
violentoffencesthanpropertycrimes;andRJCwasmoreappropriateforadult-offendersthan
juvenileoffenders(Strangetal,2013).“IfgovernmentswishtofundRestorativeJusticeatall,
thisevidencesuggeststhatthebestreturnoninvestmentwillbewithviolentcrimes,andalso
withoffendersconvictedafterlongpriorhistoriesofconvictions.”(Strangetal,2013,p48).
Thissectionhasshownthattheprocessworkswellforbothvictimsandoffenders,although
offendersfindmostvaluewhentheirvictimsarepresent.IncomparisontotheCJS,RJprovides
victimswiththeopportunityforemotionalrestoration.Timingaffectsvictims’engagement,with
lesstimeneededafterpropertyoffencesthanviolentoffences.
WhatIsKnownAboutHowRJWorksinPrisons?
“Theleastdevelopedbutpotentiallyoneofthemostvaluableusesofconferencingisin
corrections…Prisonsandtheparolesystemareripeforinnovationbecause,ascurrently
constituted,theydonotwork.“(Wachteletal,2010,p113).
In2003Hagemannwroteaboutaprogrammecalled‘FocusonVictims’thatwasintroducedtoa
prisoninGermany,withoffendersofseriouscrimessuchashomicideandrobbery.“Our
experienceofthisprogrammehasconfirmedourassumptionthattherearethreerelationships
thatmustberestored.”(p228).Thefirstbeingtheoffender’sinternalrelationshipwith
themselvesandwhatHagemannreferredtoastwoconflictingconceptsofthemselvesasan
offenderonone-handanda“normal”personontheother.Thesecondrelationshipbeingthe
socialrelationshipbetweentheoffenderandsociety–essentiallyotherprisoners,prisonstaff,
theoffender’srelativesandfriends.Thethirdrelationshipistherelationshipbetweenthe
offenderandvictim.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
36
Whilemaintainingthattheprogrammewasrestorative,afterfive-yearsand150prisoners
participatingnoVOMswereheld,despitethisbeingtheintentionpost-programme.Hagemann’s
assessmentwaslimitedtoconsiderationoftheoffenders;suggestingtheprisonerscouldonly
managetorestorethefirsttworelationships(withselfandsociety).“Butprisonerswhoareable
tocopewiththeiroffendingwillnotbemotivatedtoparticipateinsuchastrenuousprocessas
longastheretributiveaspect–thatis,thesentence–isleftoutoffocus.Suchprogrammesas
theseconductedinprisonsshouldnotbeclassifiedrestorativejusticebecausetheimposed
punishmentformsastructuralimpediment.”(Hagemann,2003,p231).However,subsequent
researchhasdemonstratedsocietal(includingoffendersandvictims)perceptionsofjustice
oftenincludebothretributiveandrestorativeelements(DeMesmaecker,2011).Theabsenceof
victim-participantsmighthavealsocontributed.Hagemannarguesthatwhattheprogramme
highlightedwastheneedformorepervasivepracticestoengagethewholesocietyandprison
community.
Whilesomemayargue,theoretically,thatthepromotionofrestorativepracticesincustodial
settingscouldbetryingtolegitimisepunishment(Guidoni,2003;Immarigen,2004;Armstrong,
2004;citedinBarr,2013)thebenefitstovictimsandoffendersinlightofempiricaldata,atleast
isevident.
Anumberofinternationalstudies,havebeenconductedorreportedon,thathaveinvolved
prisonprogrammestoraisetheprofileofvictimharmandoffenderaccountability,whether
precedingvictim-offendercontactinterventions;aspartofanoverallmomentumtoengender
moreRJorientationwithinprisonsorasstandaloneprogrammes.28Alltheprogrammesinvolve
emphasisonbuildingempathyorsensitivitytovictims’plight(e.g.Barr,2013(NorthernIreland);
Dhamietal,2009(UK);Ellis,2011(Ohio);Hagemann,2003(Germany);Robert&Peters,2003
(Belgium);Suttie,2015(California);Szego&Fellegi,2013(Hungry)).
Inareviewofinterventionsforadult-maleviolentoffenders,Jolliffe&Farrington(2007)found
thatinterventionsemployingempathytrainingresultedinlowereffectsizes,thaninterventions
28VanCamp(2002)suggeststhatthesuccessofRJinprisonswilllikelybedependentonRJbeingadaptedbyotheragenciesoftheCJS(citedinDhamietal,2009).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
37
thatdidnot;withtheintendedeffectbeingareductionofgeneralandviolentreoffending.29
AnotherNOMSstudypublishedin2012foundthatstand-alonevictimempathy/awareness
programmesdidnotreducereoffending.However,‘victim-offenderconferencing’wasfoundto
beeffectiveinreducingreoffendingwithvaryinglevelsofriskforviolentoffences,robberyand
acquisitiveoffences.Withoutanysuggestedexplanation,thereportstatedthatvictim-impact
panelswithdrunkdriversdoesnotreduceoffendingandmayevenincreasereconviction
(NOMS,2012).
Szego&Fellegi(2013)conductedActionResearchaspartofapilotprojectontwoprisons(one
juvenile,oneadult)inHungaryimplementingrestorativepractices.Theysoughttousethe
practicestomanage“inmate-inmateconflict”,‘cellconflicts’andrestorationoffamilyrelations
andvictimreparations.Forexample,theyusedfamilygroupconferencingaspreparationfor
permanent,conditionalortemporaryrelease,withtheaimofexploringfears,desiresand
expectationsoftheinmates,inmates’familyandinmates’localcommunity.Theyreportas
preparationfortheproject,eighteen“inmates”participatedinatwo-daySycamoreTree
programme.However,Szego&Fellegi(2013)suggestamorepervasiveuseofrestorative
practiceswithprisonpopulationsbeyondvictim-offendermeetings,andpostulatepositive
benefitsforstaff.Theyfoundthattheuseofrestorativepracticeshadthepotentialtomotivate
staffbeyondthemaintenanceoflawandorder,andsuggestitcanreducestaffburn-out.“…itis
notonlytheprisonconditionsthataffectrestorativemethods,butthetechniquesalsosimilarly
influencetherelationshipofinmatesandthecorrectionaleducationofficers.”(Szego&Fellegi,
2013,p20).
Szego&Fellegi(2013)howeveradvocatefromtheirexperiencethattheissueoffacilitator
impartialityisbestmanagedbythecorrections-facilitatorsnotfacilitatingintheirown
establishments.ThisoptionisextremelylimitedinBermuda,whereHungarywouldhavealarger
Correctionsestate.“Onthebasisofourfindings,theinmateisthemostlikelytobewillingto
accepttherestorativeapproachandcommunicationmethodsifhehasfamilyrelationsbeyond
theprison,actualgoalsafterbecomingreleased,andconsequently,theinmateislessaffected
bytheprocessofprisonization(Winfree,2002,p.214).”(Szego&Fellegi,2013,p19).
29Responsibly,Jolliffe&Farrington(2007)report“Interventionswithviolentoffendersmayworkbetterwithsomeethnicgroupsratherthanothersduetodifferentsocio-economicbackgroundsandcultures.”(p15).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
38
Barr(2013)inhisstudyentitled‘PuttingVictimsinPrison’suggested,“…acompellingneed
existstounderstandthedynamicsofpermittingvictimsofcrimea‘voice’insidecustodial
settings.”(p390).HelookedataprisoninNorthernIreland(MagilliganPrison)30withallthe
politicalissuesofthecountry,andsettofindoutifbringingtheessentialrestorativeelementof
givingvictimsavoice,couldencouragemorefavourableperceptionsofproceduralfairnessin
theprisonserviceforvictimsandtheiradvocates’and,ifitcouldincreasetheperceptionsof
legitimacyinsentencesforoffenders.Hefoundbothobjectiveswerepositivelyachieved,
throughVOMandavictimimpactprogramme.
PrisonofficersweretrainedasfacilitatorsofVOMandmediationslargelytookplaceinthe
prisonconferencerooms;orifvictimswereunwillingtoattendtheprison,atvictim-support
offices,policestations,probationofficesorcourtbuildings.TheaimoftheVOMwastoimprove
perceptionsoftheother;decreaselevelsoffearandhelppeoplefeelmoreincontroloftheir
lives.Prisonofficersandvolunteersofvictim-supportagenciesdeliveredtheVictimImpact
programme.Itwasatwelve-weekprogramme,runtwodaysperweek,coveringcrimetopics
suchasassault,hate-crimeandgang-crime(Barr,2013).Thestudyuseda‘multi-method’
design,whichwillbedescribedinconjunctionwiththehypothesistheyappearedtoaddressand
findingsassociatedwiththem.
26victimswereaskedtocompleteaquestionnaireontheirpersonalexperienceandevaluation
ofVOM.Twodimensionsofproceduraljusticewereused–victims’voiceandrespect.Barr
basedthisconceptualizationofproceduraljusticeonWemmer&Cyr’s(2006)postulationthat
victimsexperiencemediationasfairbecauseitofferedthemrecognition(victims’voice)and
respect,31throughtheprocess.FromthisanalysisBarrfound–73%ofthevictimsreported
being‘verysatisfied’withtheVOMprocessasamethodofdealingwiththeircase;77%were
verysatisfiedwiththefinaloutcomeagreements;96.2%feltthattheirvoicehadbeen
recognized;92.3%wereverysatisfiedathavingfeltrespectedandallofthevictimsfeltthatthe
meetinghadbeenbeneficial.Havingavoicewassignificantlycorrelatedwithoutcome
satisfactionandevenmorehighlysignificantwasthecorrelationbetweenvictims’perceptions
ofrespectfromprisonstaffandoutcomesatisfaction.“Thiswouldsuggestthatwhilevictim’s
perceptionsoftheopportunitytoexpressthemselveswereimportanttooutcomesatisfaction,30Amedium-secureadultmaleprison.31Victimsbeingabletoexpressthemselvesachieverecognition,andrespectreferredtotheinterpersonaltreatmentorqualityofinteractionbetweenvictimsandthecriminaljusticeauthorities(Barr,2013).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
39
thequalityoftherelationshipwithprisonstaffcontributedequallytotheiroverallassessment.”
(Barr,2013,p401).TheVictimImpactProgrammealsoresultedinpositiveoutcomesonvictims’
viewsofproceduralfairness.
Atotalof31pairsofoffenderswereabletobematchedforindex-offenceandageand
comprisedtheparticipantandcontrol-groups.32TheywereassessedbeforeandaftertheVictim
Impactprogrammeona50-itemLikertscaletypequestionnairetomeasureforanincreased
senseofaccountabilityandgreatersensitivityto‘victim’splight’(Barr,2013).Theparticipant-
groupshowedsignificantpositiveattitudinalchangecomparedtothecontrolgroup,who
showednosignificantdifferencesoverthesametimeframe.Theparticipant-groupshoweda
largesignificanteffectonsensitivityto‘victims’plight’andasignificantmediumeffectin
relationtoaccountability(Barr,2013).
Semi-structuredinterviewswereheldwith10offenderswhocompletedtheVictimImpact
programmeand10victim-supportvolunteersandprisonstaffwhofacilitatedtheprogramme.
“…havingcompletedtheprogramme,offendershadaclearsenseoftheircrimesasharmful
actionsasopposedtolegalwrongs.”(Barr,2013,p406).Regardingthehypothesistestingthat
anincreasedsensitivitytovictims’plightandaccountabilitywouldincreaseoffenders’
perceptionsofthelegitimacyoftheirsubsequentsentence,Barrconcludedthenullhypothesis
false.Thiswasbasedon–offenders’havingasenseoftheirsentenceaslenientincomparison
totheharmcausedbytheiroffencesandthat“Almostalltheoffendersinterviewedbelieved
thatthecontributionandrelationshipsbuiltupwithvolunteershadbeencriticalinencouraging
confidencetotalkopenlyandhonestlyabouttheirfeelings.”(Barr,2013,p407).Theoffenders
expressedrespectforthevolunteerssharingtheirstoriesandofbeingactualvictims.Barr
reportedimprovedunderstandingonthepartoftheoffendersregardingtheregime’sfunction
tochallengeoffendingbehavior.
Barr’sstudyutilizedtwodifferentRJpractices,oneinvolvingthedirectvictimsandanotherthat
utilizedcommunitymembersasfacilitators;andthenassessedtheoffenders’attitudinal
change.BarrarguedthatwhiletheNorthernIrelandPrisonServicesupportedRJ,withnopolicy
itwasreliantonvolunteersandbeingconfidentialit–“…hasnoimpactupontheoffenders
32Offenderswereselectedfromaawaitinglistfortheprogramme,withtheopportunitytoparticipate(duringthetimeofthepilot)giventothosewhowerescheduledtocompletetheprogrammebythattime.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
40
progressionsthroughtheregimeorresettlementplanningtargets.Theprocessstandsalone,
unalignedwithanyotherintervention.”(Barr,2013,p390).
ThissectionhasshownthatthereisgoodevidenceRJworkswellinprisonsettings,thatprison
staffcanleadandimplementtheprocessandthatitcanbepositiveforstaffandvisitors.One
widelyusedRJapproachinprisonsistheSycamoreTreeProjectthathasbeenusedinthe
currentstudy.Evidenceofitseffectivenessisdescribedintheresearchbelow.
SycamoreTreeProject(STP)
Feasey&Williams(2009)reportresearchdataontheSycamoreTreeProgramme(STP)33asa
victimawarenessprogramme(basedonRJprinciples)deliveredinoverfiftyprison
establishmentsthroughoutEnglandandWalessince1998.Toassessforchangepreandpost-
programmeparticipation,offenderswererequiredtocompletetheCRIME-PICSIIpsychometric
questionnaire.34Of5007setsofquestionnairestheyfoundofprisoners(adultmale,femaleand
young-offenders)fromallcategoriesofestablishments(high-securitytoremandcentres)an
overallpositiveattitudinalchange(irrespectiveofgender,adult/young-offenders)post-
progarmmeonallmeasuresoftheCRIME-PICSIIscales.35Forexample-“Akeyobjectiveofthe
SycamoreTreeprogrammeistoimprovetheprogrammeparticipant’sattitudetowardsthe
victim(s)oftheiroffendingbehavior.Therefore,theprimaryconcernofthisevaluationprojectis
theanalysisofattitudinalshiftsbetweenpreandpostscoresonthe‘victimempathy’and
‘anticipationofcrimeasworthwhile’scales.”(Feasey&Williams,2009,p8).Referringtotwo
distinctiveaspectsofempathythathavebeensuggested–“…‘cognitiveempathy’referstothe
abilitytorecognizeandunderstandotherperspectives,whilst‘emotional’or‘affective’
empathy,relatestothecapacitytovicariouslyexperiencetheemotionsofothers.…CrimePics
IIprimarilyseekstomeasurechangesincognitiveempathysothatimprovedscoresmight
indicateagreaterawarenessoftheimpactoftheircrimesonvictimsandrecognitionthatthey
areresponsibleforinflictingharmonothers.”(Feasey&Williams,2009,p8).Thefindingsby
typeofinstitutionyieldedinterestingresults.TheCategoryD(low-risk)prisonersshowedthe
lowestlevelsofpro-criminalattitudespost-programmeonallscalesexceptthevictim-empathy
33FurtherdescriptionoftheSTPisprovidedinChapter4.34TheCRIME-PICSIIisexplainedinmoredetailinChapter5.35Anticipationoffutureoffending(A-scale);Generalattitudetowardsoffending(G-scale);Victimempathy(V-scale);Evaluationofcrimeasworthwhile(E-scale)andaProblemInventory(P-scale).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
41
(V)scale;onwhichprisonersofremandcentresshowedthegreatestempathyforvictims.“This
mayreflectthetypeofoffencescommittedbythoseheldwithinRemandCentresorthe
‘unsentenced’statusofthoseparticipatingontheprogramme.”(Feasey&Williams,2009,
p10).36However,theremandcentreprisonershadthegreatestlevelofempathypre-
programme,andinactualfacthadthelowestdegreeofshiftpreandpost-programmethan
prisonersofothercategoryprisons.“Giventhatthoseparticipantswithinremandcentres
demonstratetheweakestshiftsinvictimempathy,yetthestrongestontheA-scaleindicates
thattherelationshipbetweenthetwoscalesarenotclear.”(Feasey&Williams,2009,p13).37As
remandprisonerswereincluded,Feasey&Williamsdidnotexplicitlyreportonwhetherornot
theseprisonershadacceptedresponsibilityfortheiroffending(aswouldbeexpectedfor
programmeparticipation).Thedatacouldindicatethatremandprisonershavelessempathic
regardfortheir‘allegedvictims’,thantheirdesiretoavoidasimilarpredicamentinthefuture
while‘anticipating’aconvictionorsentence.Feasey&Williamsdonotconsiderthispossible
explanation(especiallyinlightofthefactthattheSTPisnotafullRJinterventionwithdirect
victims),ratherevaluatingtheCRIME-PICSIItooloverevaluationoftheprogramme.Theydo
recognizethatintheirevaluationoftheprogrammetherewasnoavailabledataonstatic(i.e.
age,previousconvictions,indexoffence,sentencelengthandethnicity)ordynamicfactors(such
assubstanceabuseandfamilialrelationships).“Furtherevaluationoftheprogrammewouldbe
enhancedbyaccessingprofileinformationtoinformuponoffencerelatedneedsandrisk
levels.”(Feasey&Williams,2009,p17).
Whatcouldbehavebeenhighlyrelevanttothisthesisifrecidivismwereanintendedoutcome,
wouldbethefindingsoftheMOJ(2013b)regardingSTP.TheMOJconductedanevaluationof
theSycamoreTreeprogramme(STP)onre-offending.Of192offendersfromfiveprisons
matchedonanumberofcharacteristics38forvariousoffences39during2005-2008,therewas
36TheyalsofoundthattheSTPhadamarginallygreaterimpactonyoung-offendersthanadultsfortheVandAscales(victimempathyandanticipationoffutureoffendingrespectively)andmarginallygreaterforfemalesthanmales.MaleshadamarginallyhigherpositiveshiftthanfemalesontheA-scale.37Ifthescaleswerenotmeasuringdifferentattitudesthentherewouldbenoneedfordifferentscales.Feasey&Williams’(2009)statementsuggeststhatimprovementinoneattitudeshouldcreateimprovementintheotherattitudes/scales.38Thecharacteristicsoftheoffendersintheanalysisincludedethnicity,nationality,genderandage(attimeofindexoffenceandatfirstcontactwiththeCJS).Aswellasindexoffence,lengthofsentence,
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
42
onlya2%differencebetweentheSTPtreatmentgroupandthecontrolgrouponaone-year
follow-upofreoffendingpost-release.Thisfindingwasnotstatisticallysignificant,indicatingthat
theSTPhadnorealimpactinreducingre-offending.Areductionofrecidivismisoften
consideredaprimaryaimofRJ;thisauthordisagreeswiththisperspective,rathersharingthe
viewofWachteletal(2010)that“Evenifre-offenseratesdonotdecline,thevaluetovictims
whowanttofaceoffendersisreasonenough.Wehavetokeepremindingourselvesthat
conferencingis,firstandforemost,aservicethatwecanoffertovictims.”(p116).
WhatFurtherEvidenceistherethatRJImprovesVictimEmpathy?
RJprincipleshavebeenusedtodealwithanarrayofissuesanddisputesinanequalarrayof
contexts,suchasschoolandworkplacebullying.Whilstnotthefocusofthecurrentthesissome
evidenceandresearchwillbecoveredwhileintroducingthehumancapacityforempathy.
Strangetal(2013)concludedfromtheirreviewofRJCthat“Onewaytointerprettheresults
reported…istosaythattheeffectsofRJConseriousorfrequentoffenderswastomakethem
hurtpeopleless.Thatisjustwhattheempathy-basedtheoryofsharedvaluesemergingfrom
effectiveinteractionrituals(Collins,2004,Rossner,2013)wouldpredict.”(p48).
Recentresearchispointingtothediscoveryofneurogenesisoftheamygdalathathasbeen
associatedwithempathy(Reisel,2014).Zaki(2011)referstoastudybyKonrathintheUSof
over1,300studentsthatshowedadeclineinself-reportedempathy(usingtheInterpersonal
ReactivityIndex)overathirty-yearperiod.“Konrathcitestheincreaseinsocialisolation,which
hascoincidedwiththedropinempathy.Inthepast30yearsAmericanshavebecomemore
likelytolivealoneandlesslikelytojoingroups…Severalstudieshintthatthistypeofisolation
cantakeatollonpeople’sattitudestowardothers.”(Zaki,2011).Thesuggestionthatwhen
peoplearemoresociallyintegratedwithotherstheyaremoreopenintheirinteractionswith
others,alsospeakstoBolivar’s(2013)findingofRJparticipants’perceptionofsocialsupportand
‘ideology’.Convergingdisciplinesprovideevidencethatthehumanabilitytoempathizecanbe
employmentandbenefithistoryandcriminalhistory(e.g.previous-convictions,custodialsentencesandcourtorders).39Offenceswereviolence(includingrobbery),burglary,theftandhandling,fraudandforgery,motoringoffences,criminaldamage,drugsandan‘other’categorywhichwasnotspecified.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
43
enhancedorreversely,erodedasaresultoftheenvironment.Orasithasbeendescribed–with
thebeginningsofhumanlife,empathyis“soft-wired”anddependentonearlyattachmentsand
experiencesitcanbecome“hard-wired“.40“Thefactthatempathyisdecliningmeansthat
there’smorefluiditytoitthanpreviouslythought…Itmeansthatempathycanchange.Itcan
goup.”(Konrath,quotedinZaki,2011).Ithaslongbeenknownthatoffendershaveoftenbeen
traumatizedbylifeexperiences,suchasviolentoffendershavingbeenexposedtoviolenceor
neglectduringtheirformativeyearsofdevelopment.Moreover,institutionssuchasprisonsare
furtheroppressiveenvironments,isolatingbydesign.
ModelsandFurtherGuidance
InUmbreit’s2000publicationRestorativeJusticeConferencing:GuidelinesforVictimSensitive
Practice:AdaptingConferences,Mediations,CirclesandReparationBoardstoPeople,
Communities,andCulturesheprovidesguidanceforassessingandfacilitatingconferences(using
thetermRJCquiteglobally).Heoutlinesfourkeyelements,underwhich,otherguidelineswill
besuccinctlypresentedinthischapter.
1) “Allthosedirectlyaffectedbythecrimeareencouragedtoparticipate.”(p2)
SafetyasafundamentalprincipleofRJmeansthattheparticipantsshouldfeelsafe,andif
thisisevercompromised,thefacilitatorshouldactimmediatelytoprovideoptions,
terminateaconferenceandprovideanescortforthevictimtoleave.Conferencesshouldbe
conductedinlocationsthataresafeforthevictim,alsoaidedbytheaccompanimentof
supporters.Umbreitsuggeststhatvictimshaveasayinthearrangementoftheroomand
seatingofparticipantsasawayofreassuringthem;orattheveryleast,theirwishesbe
givenseriousconsideration.Otherssuggestfacilitatorsplantheseating(e.g.Wachteletal,
2010).Umbreitsuggeststhattheoffender’sfeelingofsafetyisalsoimportantandthatthis
iswhytheyshouldnotfeelcoerced.Facilitatorsshouldactivelylistentothestoriesofboth
victimsandoffenders,andbemindfuloftheiruseoflanguage,avoidingwordsthat
prescribepressure,suchasforgivenessandreconciliation.Umbreitpointstovictim’srights’
40Softandhard-wringaretermsusedbyJeremyRifkinTheEmpathicCivilisation.Availableforviewingathttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7AWnfFRc7g
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
44
asusefulinformationthatcanbegiventovictims,aswellasotherresourcesandmaking
referralsifrequested.
2) “Thevictimandoffenderchoosewhich,ifany,familymembersorsupportpersonsare
present.”(p2)
Bothvictimsandoffendersshouldhavetheoptiontobeaccompaniedbyfamilyandfriends.
Ascommunitiesofcareandsupport,theseindividualsmayassisttheoffenderintheir
completionoftheagreementortheymayhavealsobeenimpactedbytheoffence.
3) “Theprocessofconferencing/dialogueisadaptedtotheexpressedneedsofthevictim
andoffender.”(p2)
Facilitatorsareguidedtoprovidechoicesandoptionstovictimsthatcancontributetothem
feelingempowered,andfurthertotheirhealing.Thisisveryimportantifthevictimsfeel
disempoweredbytheCJSorhavefeelingsofvictimization.Victimsshouldbegiventhe
optionofwhetherornottospeakfirst–“Insomecases,ajudgmentcallmayberequiredby
themediator/facilitatorastowhoshouldspeakfirst,basedontheage,needsand
communicationstylesoftheparties.…Creatingasafeplacewherebothpartiesfeel
comfortableenoughtoengageinagenuinedialoguetotheextentoftheirabilityis
ultimatelythemostimportantprinciple,regardlessofwhospeaksfirst.”(Umbreit,2000,
p18).Asidefromanylegallimitations,victimsshouldhavetherighttoseekwhateverkind
ofrestitutionmeetstheirneeds,howeverthefinalagreementisbasedontheoffender’s
willingnessandabilitytomeetthoseneeds.
4) “Alloftheprimarypartiesarethoroughlypreparedthroughin-personmeetingspriorto
ajointconference.”(p2)
Victimsandoffendersshouldbeprovidedwithaccurateinformationandsupporttomake
informeddecisionsaboutparticipationwithouttimeconstraints–includingadescriptionof
theRJCprocess;researchfindingsonparticipantsatisfaction;encouragingconsiderationof
possiblerisksandbenefitsandstructuringrealisticexpectations.Thatparticipationisbased
on‘informedconsent’.AsdescribedbyDeMesmaeckerabove(2013),informedconsent
involvesparticipantsbeingadvisedthattheycanterminatetheconferenceatanytime.
Umbreiturgesfacilitatorstomeetwithoffendersfirst,soastoavoidanypotentialfeelings
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
45
ofre-victimization,ifthevictimisseenfirstandthentheoffenderrefuses.Thefacilitators
shouldseekconsentbeforesharinganyinformationbetweentheparties.Umbreitsuggests
schedulingprioritybebasedonconvenienceforthevictim-fortheactualconferenceand
forpre-conferenceface-to-facemeetings.
Theguidanceprovidedaboveisnotanexhaustivelistandfurtherguidanceisillustratedwithin
chapters4and5.Umbreit(2000)encouragespractitionerstode-emphasizeprogrammemodels
overmeetingtheneedsofthemainstakeholders.Heurgespractitionersto“Remember,the
centralissueishowtocreateasafeplaceforpeopletoengageinagenuinedialoguebasedon
theirneeds,nottheneedsoftheprogramadvocates.”(p4)Hesuggeststhataseachcaseis
unique,amulti-methodapproachwouldlikelybemoreappropriate,basedonthestrengthsand
limitationsofeachpractice(e.g.VOMorFGC)orsuchasaone-to-onemeetingorasmall
conferenceaheadofalargerconference.
Theinternationalempiricalresearchpresentedinthechapterpointsoutanumberof
considerations,notleastculturaldifferences.ItwouldappearthathowpeopleviewtheCJScan
influencetheirparticipationandsatisfactionwithRJ,aswellsashowRJparticipationcan
influenceopinionsoftheCJS.YetthesuccessofRJinprisonswilllikelybedependentonthe
supportoftheCJS,aswellasthepublic,victims,prisoners,prisonstaffandadministration.
Theresearchreviewedsuggeststhatparticipantsbeprovidedwithsufficientinformationabout
allstagesoftheprocesstoinformconsenttoensurevoluntaryparticipation.Ithashighlighted
thepotentialimpactofcriminaljusticeagentsasfacilitatorsonparticipants’perceptionsof
confidentiality,andimpartialitywiththeuseofconferencingscripts.Theapproachusedtomake
initialcontactislessofanissuethanface-to-facemeetingswithparticipantsafterinitialcontact.
GuidancestressestheissueofsafetyandadherencetotheprinciplesofRJ.Considerationisalso
giventoevidenceregardingstand-alonevictimempathyprogrammesonrecidivism,and
evidenceofRJbeingmosteffectivewithviolentoffencesoverpropertycrimes.
TheUN(2006)highlightscautionwithvictim-participantsinsmallcommunities“Thereisarisk,
particularlywithinsmallcommunitieswithcloserelationshipsbetweenindividuals,thatsome
victimsmaybepressuredintoparticipatinginaprocesswithwhichtheydonotreallyagree.”
(p66).Ithasalsobeenreportedthatevidenceofsmallhomogeneouscommunitiescanincrease
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
46
theriskofflightbyadolescentsfromthecommunity(Marshall,1998,inMenkel-Meadow,
2007).
ChaptersoneandtwosoughttodescribeRJtheoriesandcoreprinciples,presentempirical
research,someguidelinesandstandardsofpractice,andpointedtohowtheliterature
influencedthecurrentresearch.ItendedwithacautionarynotefromtheUnitedNations
regardinguseofRJinsmallcommunities,ofwhichBermudawouldconstitute.Thefollowing
chapterdescribesthecontextinwhichtheresearchwasconducted,focusingonthecultural
climateandcrimeinBermuda.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
47
v CHAPTER3-BERMUDAINCONTEXT:CRIME&theCRIMINALJUSTICESYSTEM
“Althoughlockedfacilitiesmustbepartofanypublicsafety,safecommunitiesrequiremorethanincapacitation.”(Umbreit,2000,p2)
WhenonereadsareportontheCJSinBermuda(Tumimetal,1992),writtenalmostaquarterof
acenturyago,aspectsofit,andevenearlierreportsscreamforaRJresponse,withcomments
andstatementssuchas–
“Itisasystem:-whichusespunishment,ratherthansocialintervention,particularlyfinancialandcustodialpunishment,asaprimaryresponsetoawiderangeofsocialbehaviour…”(p43)“Thetaskssetbeforethecriminaljusticesystembythecitizensandgovernmentarenoteasyones.Toaccomplishtheprotectionofcitizensandassurejustice,allpartsofthesystem,includingthecitizens,mustformallyworktogetherandshareresponsibilityfortheultimateoutcome.”(ReportoftheBermudaAssociationofHelpingProfessionsCommitteeonPrisonsandSentencing,1983;citedinTumimetal,1992,p47).“ManyofourrespondentsemphasizedthatthecriminaljusticesysteminBermudawasinsufficientlysensitivetotherealneedsofthosewhobecameinvolvedwithit.”(p55).ThischapterfocusesonBermuda,itshistoryandtherelevanceofthistocrimeandtheCJS,to
meetanobjectiveoftheresearch–todescribethecontextofcrimeandcultureinBermuda.
Thechapterprovidesasynopsisofthediscoveryandbeginningsoftheisland,andthenofthe
historicalsocialandpoliticalclimate.Therelevanceofthisbeing,thatsometheoristsargueRJis
insufficientinchallengingsystemicinequities.FocusisthenplacedoncrimeandtheCJS;
includingtheintendedtransitionfromcustodytocorrectionsandinclusionofAlternativesto
Incarceration(ATI).Issuesarebroughtuptodate,bysharingthedemographicsofthe21st
Centuryincarceratedpopulation,andendingwithabriefreviewonthedistinctionbetweenRJ
andrehabilitation.
Bermudaisabeautifulpicturesqueclusterofislands,mostuninhabited;thoseinhabitedare
largelyconnectedbybridgesofallsizesandeachunique41.Itbaressoftsandybeachesandbays
thatareaccommodatingofmanyandsomeintimatelysecluded.Therearevantagepointsthat
41SomersetBridgehasareputationforbeingthesmallestworkingdrawbridgeintheworld.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
48
actassummitsdisplayingbreathtakingviews.Allwhovisitwitnessthis.Theresearcherheard
countlesstimesfromcruiseshiptouristsasshewouldexitthecorrectionalfacility,howthey
couldnotbelievesuchaparadisewouldhaveneedforaprison.
OftenmistakenforbeingpartoftheCaribbean,Bermudaissub-tropical900milesnorthofthe
Caribbean.LocatedintheNorthAtlanticOcean,itisapproximately21sqmileswithanestimated
populationof68,00042(Lawrence&Codrington,2014).
DiscoveryandBeginnings
ItisreportedthattheislandswerefirstdiscoveredbyaSpanishCaptain–JuandesBermudezin
1505(Packwood,2012)andwhomtheislandseventuallycametobenamedafter.Settlement
ontheislandwasaccidental,whenon29thJuly1609aship(SeaVenture)destinedforVirginia
withsettlersfromtheUKgotwreckedontheeastsideofBermuda.TheSeaVenture’s150crew
andsettlersincludedSirGeorgeSomers,ledtotheislandfirstbeingcalledSomersIslesandits
firstinhabitants.Whenallbutthree,thatremainedbehind,continuedontoVirginiainMayof
thefollowingyear(1610)furthersettlersdidnotarriveagainuntilJuly1612.
Theislandisdividedintonineparishes–Devonshire,Hamilton,Paget,Pembroke,Sandy’s,
Smiths,Southampton,StGeorgesandWarwick.43Fromthesettlementof1612,Bermudawas
claimedasaBritishcolonyandistheoldestself-governingUKoverseasterritory.
HistoryandColonisation
AtthefirstinhabitanceofBermuda,hogswerefound.Thefirstsettlerstriedtogrowvarious
crops(potatoes,onions,melonsandcottontonameafew)andsourcepearls(Packwood,2012).
BlackandIndianindenturedservantswereimportedfortheirskillsintheseareas,withthe
earliestrecordingofaBlackandIndianpersonbeingin1616(Smith,2006).Thenstillearlyinits
history,enslavedBlackandIndianpeoplewerebroughttotheislandforthepurposeof
42The2010Censusreportedthepopulationas64,237–availableathttp://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic/sources/census/2010_phc/bermuda/Bermuda_new.pdf43AlloftheparishesarenamedafterBritishnoblemen,directlye.g.JamesHamiltonorbasedontheterritorytheyruledasEarlse.g.RobertRichEarlofWarwick.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
49
agricultureandtoensurethesuccessoftheyoungcolony.In1617slaverywasalsousedasa
formofpunishment(Smith,2006).
Packwood(2012)dedicatesachapterinhisbooktotheearly‘CrimeandPunishment’ofthe
enslaved,obtainedfromtheCaribbean,CentralAmericaandpirateships.Heprovidesexamples
ofcrime(e.g.theft,fornication,rebellion)and,iffoundguilty,thepenaltieswhichcouldinclude
lashes,hanging,thelossoflimbsandbanishment.44Smith(2006)providesexamplesof
‘transportation’asaformofpunishmentforcrimes(exceptmurder)wherebyanoffendercould
betransportedtoanothercountry,nottoreturnforaperiodoftimeorforlife.45Packwoodalso
highlightsActsthatcameintoforce–“By1622,Bermuda’spopulationwasabout1,200.The
followingyear,blackswerenumerousenoughtomeritaspecialAct(12)inthetransactionsof
theSecondAssembly,entitled“AnActtorestraintheinsolenciesofthenegroes.””(p25).Slave
owners,inexecutingpunishmenttotheirslaveswereprotectedbylaw,iftheirslavewere
“accidentally”killedasaresult.
AnotherlawPackwood(2012)highlightsistheAct“againsttheillkeepingoftheferry”(p25).
Beforebridgeswerebuilt,travelbetweentheislandswasbyboat.Theferryconnection
betweenConeyIslandtoBailey’sBayandStGeorge’sdidnotoperateonSundays;blackslaves
wereusingboatstoprovidethisservice.However,thiswouldmeanthatslavescouldaccrue
money.Packwoodsharesthatsuchactivitywouldbeconsideredextortionandtherowercould
bewhippedaspunishmentiffoundperformingthisservice.Transportationwouldbecomean
issueagaininthefuture.
Bythelate17thCenturytherewasnotenoughemploymentforthenumberofslavesonthe
island,solawswerepassedtolimitimportationofslaves.Astheslaveshadbecomeexpertin
tradesandwereinexpensive,manywhitepeopleweresaidtohaveleftBermuda.In1701a
petitionwassenttoEnglandrequesting500blackslavesbeshippedtotheBahamas,sothat
whiteBermudianscouldreturntotakeupemployment(Smith,2006).
44Whenresearchingthepunishmentofslaves,theresearcherwasremindedofcommentsthatsuggestedBermudianoffendersshouldbesenttoplaceslikeJamaicaorTrinidad;however,notfromthosewhohadparticipatedintheinitiative.45Thisformofpunishmentcameintoeffectwiththe1827Actto“AmelioratetheConditionoftheSlavesandTheFreePeopleofColour”(Smith,2006;p33).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
50
Intheearly1820’sconvictsbegantoarriveinBermudafromtheUK,46followedbyothersup
until1863“…whenthesystemofoverseaspenallabourwasdiscountedbyGreatBritain.”
(Smith,2006,p25).Over9,000convictswerebroughttoBermuda,andafterthosethatdied
fromillhealth,thoseremainingwereforcedtoleave.
Interestingly,theBritishSlaveTradeendedin1807;notuntil30thJuly1827didtheBermudian
Assemblyfollowsuitpassing“AnActtoAmelioratetheConditionofSlavesandFreePersonsof
Colour.”(Smith,2006).Itbecamelawfulforslavesora‘personofcolour’topayforthefreedom
ofothersenslaved,likewivesandchildren.Italsobecamelawfulforslavestoownproperty,but
theyremainedsegregatedinchurch.Slavescouldgivetestimonyincourtagainstotherslaves
and‘freepeopleofcolour’butonlyifprovidedwithacertificateofgoodcharacterfromtheir
parishvestry;theChiefJusticechallengedthisin1828.
1stAugust1834broughttheEmancipationActschedulingabolitionofslavery“…throughout
GreatBritain’scolonialpossessions…andprovidedforasystemofapprenticeship…designedto
provideatransitionperiod”forthecoloniestoachieveafreelabourforce(Smith,2006,p35).
TheBritishGovernmentgavecompensationtoslaveownersofthecolonies,providingaportion
of£20milliontobepaidtothoseinBermuda,whoweretoreceivethelowestportionofallthe
colonies(Smith,2006).Alawpresumablyconsideredinhumanewasoverturned;yettherewasa
needtofinanciallycompensatethosewhohadownedenslavedhumansasproperty.Itcouldbe
arguedthatthisisRJinverted,wherebyreparationsaremadetothewrongdoeroroffender,
whetherornotpreviouslylaw-abidingpriortoemancipation.Itcertainlyspeakstohowlawsof
thelandcanbecomeoutdatedandarguablyhowlawscanelucidateasimmoral.
Emancipatedblackpeoplewerestillburdenedanddisadvantaged,asituationfurthersustained
bythe“…politicalimpotenceinducedbylegislation…”(Smith,2006,p51).ThePembrokeYoung
Men’sFriendlyInstitutefoundedinSeptember1832andTheStGeorge’sFriendlyUnion
foundedinJanuary1834,weretwopioneeringblacklodgeshailedbySmith(2006),as
organizationsthatsupportednewlyfreedblack‘citizens’.Therewerereportedly1200freeblack
46300peoplemadeupthefirstgroupofconvicts(Smith,2006).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
51
peoplelivinginBermudajustbeforeemancipation;theblackpopulationwasreportedtohave
reducedby1835andthereasonforthisbeingemigration(Smith,2006).
Employmentforallwasanissue,especiallyforsailors,howeverby1851theoncerejected
agriculturalindustrywouldproduceenoughonionsandpotatoesforexportation(Smith,2006).
PortugueseagriculturallabourerswerealsobroughttoBermudainthelate1840’s.WithNew
YorksteamboatscomingtoBermudaforproduce,Smithhighlightsthebeginningsofthetourist
industryinthesecondhalfofthe19thCentury.Asthedemandincreased,hotelsand
guesthousesstartedtobebuilt.EscapingthewinterUSseasons,theBermudatouristhigh
seasonwastheChristmastoEasterperiod,andastimewenton,thetourismseasongrewinto
thesummermonths(Smith,2006).
Asatraditiontothecurrentday,Smith(2006)suggeststhattheGombey’slikelyemergedinthe
early19thCenturyaspartoftheblackpopulation’sholidaycelebrations.NamedafteranAfrican
rusticdrumcalled‘Gumba’,Gombey’sarecolourfully,dresseddancers.AnothertraditionSmith
(2006)reportsonisCupMatch.Itsoriginsaretracedbackto1901whenblackBermudiansatan
anniversarypicnicofemancipation,tookpartinacricketmatch.Thetwoteamsdrawnfromthe
eastandwestdivisionsoftheOddfellowsLodge,agreedafriendlyrematchthefollowingyear
(1902).Thetraditioncontinuestodaywithanofficialtwo-daypublicholidayaccommodatingthe
two-daycricketevent.
Beforeemancipation,fearsregardingtheeducationofslaveswereboreoutofthebeliefthatto
provideeducationwouldcreateastateofrebellion;aswellasotherprejudices.Smith(2006)
arguesthatthesameissueswererelatedtothedisseminationofreligion,albeittherewere
instancesfromacrossBermudianhistory,whereslaveswereexposedtoreligiousinstruction.47
ManyChristiansritesweredeniedtheslavepopulation,hencemarriagebetweenslaves
involvedjumpingthebroom;theywereallottedseparateburialgroundsandassigned
segregatedseatinginthechurch(Smith,2006).“ThechurchofEnglandnotonlymaintained
segregatedseatingfacilitiesuntilthemid1960’sbutalsohadseparatechurchorganisations.”
(Manning,1973;citedinSmith,2006;p61).
47MethodistmissionarieslikeJohnStephensonin1977andJoshuaMarsdenin1808contributedgospelpreachingamongsttheblackpopulation(Smith,2006).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
52
AdayschoolinStGeorge’swasbuiltin1811forblackchildren.48TheMethodistscontinuedwith
theirpromotionofeducationandby1832establishednineschoolsemployingbothblackand
whiteteacherstowhite,‘freecoloured’andblackenslavedchildren(Smith,2006).
Atthistimewiththeemancipationfastapproaching,educationandreligionwerelikelyseenasa
wayoftemperingtheperceivedpotentiallyvolatilebehaviourofthosewhohadbeenenslaved.
Thisperspective,arguablyinlinewithhowsomeoffendersviewrehabilitation.
“…Emancipationandracialequalitywerenotsynonymous.”(Smith,2006,p63).
InBermuda’s350thAnniversaryyear,boycottingoftheisland’ssegregatedcinemastookplace.
June15th1959(125yearsaftertheEmancipationAct)sawthestartofblackBermudiansand
someradicalwhiteBermudiansstandingupagainstsegregation.Boycottingcausedtemporary
closures.OnJuly2ndthetheatresreopenedwithoutsegregation;desegregationalsooccurredin
churches,hotelsandrestaurants(Jones,2004).
TheLegacyontheCriminalJusticeSystem
CivildisordersdeclaringStatesofEmergencyoccurredinBermudain1968and197749thatwere
foundtobethedirectresultofresentmentslargelybetweenyoungblackmalesandthepolice,
embeddedinthehistoryofBermuda’ssociety(Woodingetal,1969).Insummarythisreferred
totheracialinequitiesofthesociety,despitetheendofsegregationandnationaleconomic
development–“…rootedinthehistoryofBermudiansocietycharacterizedbywhite
supremacy…”(Pittetal,1977;p3).
Thestartofthe1968disordersoccurredonthe25thApril,50whencitizensattendingtheannual
‘FairForAll’eventinHamilton,perceivedpoliceactionsasracialfavoritism;essentially
48TheschoolsareaccreditedtotheworkoftheAnglicanArchdeacon-thenBishopAubreySpencer(Smith,2006).49WoodingetalledtheCommissionofInquiryteamforthe1968disordersandPittetaltheRoyalCommissionforthe1977disorders.50ItisnotconsideredcoincidentalthatthedisordersstartedinthesamemonththatthecivilrightsleaderMartinLutherKingwasassassinated(4thApril1968)intheUS(Jones,2004).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
53
admittingwhiteindividualsandbarringblackindividuals.Thiswasfollowedbyapoliceofficer
beingassaultedashetriedtoarrestayoungblackmanandotherincidentsfurtherfuelledthe
spontaneousdisorder.Thereportontheincidentsdeterminedthatthecontinueddisordersfor
thefollowingtwodays(26th&27thApril)weremoreplanned,asaresultoflongheldgrievances.
Racialconflict,jobopportunities,an‘artificialsociety’,drinkanddrugs,andthe1968Election
campaignwereconsideredtobethebasiccausesofthedisorders.Whileissuesofprovocation,
auxiliarycycles,drugsandageneraldissatisfactionwiththepolicewereconsideredthe
immediatecauses(Woodingetal,1969).
RacialConflict
Inthereport,Woodingetal(1969)pointedoutlawsenactedin1963thatwereconsideredto
havehadaninfluenceonthestateofaffairsinBermuda.AsallBermudians,includingthe
previouslyexcludedblackBermudians,hadbecomeeligibletovote,thevotingagehadbeen
liftedto25yearsfrom21yearsofage51.TheProhibitedPublicationsAct,PublicOrderActand
EmergencyPowersActhadcomeintoforce.Atthesametime,theProgressiveLabourParty
(PLP)hadbeenformed.Theparty,accordingtoWooding,campaignedforaunitedBermudabut
wasquicklylabeledasracist.Attentiontothesemattersweredrawn,toevidencehowthemove
towardsanintegratedBermudahadbegunbutwasnotmovingatthepaceyoungblack
Bermudianswouldhavelikedandwasnotunhindered.Leadingtothestatementthat“…
althoughthereistokenintegrationitismerelylip-service.”(Woodingetal,1969;p70).
JobOpportunities
Discriminationprevailed,asexampleswereevidencedintheareaofjobopportunitiesabove
certainlevels.Forexampleitwasreportedascommonplaceforvacanciesthatcouldbefilled
promotionallybyblackworkersbecomingredundant,tolaterbeadvertisedasanewpost
redesignedtargetingwhites,butessentiallythesameastheredundantpost.BlackBermudians
largelyoccupiedmanualandmenialjobs,whichimpactedtheirlackofmotivationtoremainin
educationbeyondthecompulsoryyears.“SothegeneralityofblackBermudianswere
conditionedtoacceptintheBermudianeconomyawhollyinferiorplace.“(Woodingetal,1969;
p74).Simultaneously,policemen,teachers,accountantsandexecutivesinbusinesswerebeing
51Thelegalvotingagewasrevertedbackto21yearsin1965(Woodingetal,1969).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
54
recruitedfromoverseas.Atthetimeofthe1968Disorders,thepoliceforcewaspredominately
whiteandexpatriate.Woodingetal(1969)reported65%wereEnglishmen,someofwhohad
previouslyservedinNigeria,EastAfricaandCyprus.
AnArtificialSociety
Woodingetal(1969)suggestedtheholidaylifeofBermudaduetoitsrelianceontourismalso
playedapartintheunderlying/maincausesofthedisorders.Hereferstotheideaof‘keeping
upwiththeJoneses’toexplainthetoilonfamilies.However,theJoneseswerenotneighbours
but‘affluentvisitors’.HearguedthatthecostoflivinginBermudawasexpensive(andstillis)
consequentlyresidents-andparentswidelyheldtwotothreejobsleadingtochildrenlacking
parentalattention.Woodingetal(1969)suggestedthatthisledtochildrentakingtothestreets
and“Thedrifttosodoingisallthegreaterintheovercrowdedhouseholds.”(p77).Heimplied
thedevelopmentofsubculturesinthe“CourtStreetboys”andamongthemBlackMuslimsand
BlackPowermilitants.WoodingetalemphasestheyoungblackmeninHamiltonandthe‘back
oftown’areasashavingbeeninhighnumbersduringthenightofthedisorders.Thehighlevels
ofpolicescrutinyin‘backoftown’,trafficlawsandpoliceattitudestowardstheyoungwas
foundtobeofrelevance.
AlthoughWoodingetal(1969)didnotconsiderthetermsofreferenceasgivingauthorityto
prescribelegislativepolicyforBermuda,thisdidnotstopthereportdrawingattentiontothe
lawsgoverningauxiliarycycleuse;policestopandsearchpowers;theprohibitionofpublications
andlawsgoverningresponsestojuvenileoffending.
In1977,Bermudawasmarkedagainbydisorderswithunderlyingcausesthatdidnotdiffer
drasticallyfromthoseofthe1968disturbances.DisorderstriggeredonDecember1stthroughto
the3rdweresparkedbywhatcouldbedescribedasthegovernmentsdisregardofthepublic
opinionofalargesectionoftheblackpopulation.Pittetal’s(1977)reportprovidesclaritytothe
confusionthatlikelyexistedformany.Moreover,thereportprovidesinformationthatmany
mayhavebeenobliviousto;eitherwaytheconsequencesweredetermined,theblack
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
55
communityfeltfurthermarginalizedandoppressed;andinPittetal’s(1977)conclusionhe
urgedBermudatoseekindependence.52
Theimmediatecauseofthedisorderswasidentifiedasthepublic’sreactionstotheexecutionof
twoblackBermudianmen,foundguiltyofmurder.On6thJuly1976,ErskineBurrowswasfound
guiltyandsentencedtodeath,forthemurderofthePoliceCommissionerin1972andthefatal
shootingoftheGovernorandhisADCinMarch1973.On18thNovember1976,ErskineBurrows
andLarryTacklyn53werebothfoundguiltyofthemurderoftwoshopkeepers(shotApril1973)
andsentencedtodeath.Withthetwofatalshootingsin1973,aten-dayamnestywascalledfor
thesurrenderingoflicensedandunlicensedfirearmsinBermuda.Atotalof1,440gunswere
surrendered(Jones,2004).
Early1977therewasapublicprotestagainstcapitalpunishment,fromwhichthings“…
escalateddramaticallyfollowingtheannouncementofthedateforthehangings.”(Pittetal,
1977;p4).ApetitionfromclemencyfromtheUKwasdenied,alongwithcourtappealsfor
Tacklyn.Thereareanumberofconspiracytheories,tothisdayaboutwhythedecisionto
executewasupheld.However,themenwereexecutedon2ndDecember1977;priortothatthe
deathpenaltyhadnotbeenusedinBermudasince1943(Pittetal,1977).
Pittetal’s(1977)reportidentifiedsixlong-termcontributoryfactorsthatwerebelievedto
underliethespecialcharacteristicsofBermudain1977–acolonialsociety;theimpactofpast
racialsegregation;aparticularpatternofcapitalaccumulation;aselectivetouristmarket;a
distinctivetaxationstructureandeconomicgrowthdependentonimportedlabour.Theseare
explainedbriefly,toputPittetal’sreportincontext-asasmallsociety,Pittetaldescribedthe
peopleofBermuda,ashavingdevelopedtraitsof“dependencycomplex”,whereintherewasa
tendencytoplaceresponsibilityforthecountrywiththeBritishGovernment.Regardingthe
segregatedpast–“…whitepeoplerarelyunderstandhowdeepthewoundsofdiscrimination
canstrikeintoanindividual’spersonality.Thesewoundscontinuetobleedinthevictim’sheart
52“WerecognizethatwhereasmanyblackBermudiansseeindependenceasthefinalstepinaprocessofemancipation,thisargumenthaslittleappealtowhiteBermudians,fortheyseethemselvesasalreadyemancipated.”(Pittetal,1977;p36).53TacklynwasneverchargedforthemurderofthePoliceCommissionerandacquittedforthemurderoftheGovernorandhisADC.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
56
longafterthepersonresponsiblehasforgottenthem.”(Pittetal,1977;p7).54Ofpertinenceto
thecurrentresearchisPittetalnamingblackpeopleasvictimsofthesociety’shistory,and
implyingpersistentandpervasivevictimization.Capitalaccumulationreferredtohowthewhite
populationwasinabetterstartingpositiontotakeadvantageofopportunitiescreatedby
changesintheUSmarketthathadaknock-oneffect.Thisincludedthepurchaseoflandin
Bermuda–“Landwasbroughtfromblacksatpriceswhichmayhaveseemedreasonableatthe
timebuthavesubsequentlyproventohavebeenbargainpricesforthepurchasersandthisstill
evokesresentmentamongblacks.”(Pittetal,1977;p7).Selectivetourismwasaboutthe
industryhavingbeenpredominantlywhite,andhowinthemid-1950sonlyonehotelallowed
Jewishguests.Pittetalreferstothisfullyextendingthesocialgapbetweenthetouristsandthe
blackBermudianswhoservedthem.Ironically,theburdenoftaxationwasplacedlargelyon
tourism.Withnoincometaxation,Pittetalarguedcouplestookfulladvantageofearninghigh,
withouttaxationandthisinturnfuelledtheexpectationofahighstandardofliving.Thefurther
consequenceofthelatter,Pittetalsuggested,isthatparentswerenotathomefortheir
children;andtherewasagreaterimpactontheegoofblackmenhavingtoservewhitemen.It
wassuggestedthatthisconsequencewaslessimpactingforwomen,ashistoricallywomenwere
usedtoserving.Asafurtherconsequence,itwasconsideredthatblackmenwouldneedto
exerttheirmasculinitythroughotheravenuesofwhichwomenwerelikelytosuffertheburden
of.ItwasidentifiedbyPittetal(1977)thatthefinal,mainunderlyingcauseofBermuda’ssocial
structurewashowtheeconomicgrowthcouldnothavebeenasrapidwithouttheinputof
expatriates.ItwasacknowledgedhowthiscontributedtoBermudiansfeelingasthoughthey
weresecond-classcitizensintheirowncountry.“Thefactorsandinfluenceswehavediscussed
areboundtocreatespecialdifficulties…Theymakeitmuchhardertoachievetheobjectiveof
integration,andpeoplebecomethemoredissatisfiedbecausegoalsthatappearwithinreach
seemtocomenocloser.ManyoftheseproblemscometoaheadinBermuda’sschools,forin
somerespectsaschoolisamicrocosmofthesociety.”(Pittetal,1977;p8).
Pittetal(1977)madeanumberofrecommendations;thosedescribedhereinarethosemost
pertinenttotheCJS.Pittproposedalternativeaccommodationforfemaleprisonersandforat
leastonefull-timeprobationofficertobededicatedexclusivelytoworkintheprisons.Theneed
forahalfwayhouseforyoungoffenderswassuggestedforthosewhomightbereturningto
54TherestillexiststheappointmentofaBritishGovernorinBermuda.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
57
dysfunctionalhomesandforsocialworkerstoengageinworkwiththefamiliesofyoung
offendersbeforetheirrelease.ThereportrecommendedtheestablishmentofaPolice
Authority;forthepoliceservicetobecomemore‘Bermudianised’55andforanindependent
elementtothepolicecomplaintsprocess.Alternativeprovisionsforconductingmatrimonialand
domesticcasesinprivatewasadvocated,toavoidpublicembarrassmentthatcouldleadto
furtherdetrimentsforthoseinvolved.Mandatorypenaltiesforoffencesshouldbere-examined
–theCommissionteam,includingexperiencednon-Bermudianmagistratescommentedthat
they“…weresurprisedattheseverityofpunishmentsimposedbythecourtsofBermudafor
relativelytrivialtrafficoffences.”(Pittetal,1977;p33).Theyprovidedexamplessuchasthe
assaultofapoliceofficerresultingina$50fine,whilefailingtostopatastoplightgenerateda
fineof$60.56
RacialDifferences&theCriminalJusticeSystem
Inthelatterpartofthe20thCentury,areportwascommissionedbythegovernmentoftheday
tolookintotheCJS’spoliciesandprocedures,andthecontinuedperceptionsthatpeopleof
differentracesandbackgroundsweretreateddifferently.
InareviewofpreviousreportssuchasWoodingetal’s(1969)andPittetal’s(1977)three
consistentissueswerefoundthatwereconsideredtobeofcontemporarysignificance(Tumim
etal,1992).NamelyBermuda’strafficlaws,drugrelatedoffencesandthetumultuous
relationshipbetweenthepoliceandyoungpeopleofBermuda.57
Takingasnapshoton30thJune1992,tolookatthemainreasonsforincarcerationTumimand
theteamreportedontherateofoffencetypes.Thetopsixoffencescouldhavebeen
consolidatedasdrugordrugrelated(theft;drugimportation;drugsupply;breakingand
55TheprisonservicewascommendedforhavingahighBermudianstaffpopulation.56Anotherexampleillustratedhowashopliftermightreceiveprobation,wheresomeonefoundinpossessionof2gramsofcannabiscouldreceiveafineof$200or20daysimprisonment.57TheMotorCarActof1976andtheDangerousDrugsActof1936and1966werecitedasacauseofthe1977disordersastheygavepolicethepowertostopandsearch(Tumimetal,1992).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
58
entering;drugpossessionandconspiracytoimportdrugs)at51%ofalloffences.The7thhighest
singlereasonforconvictionwasdrivingdisqualification.58Onthesamesnapshotday,Tumimet
al(1992)foundthatover9%oftheoffenceswereminor,implyingthattheywereoffencesthat
didnotrequireimprisonmentasaresponse.Moreover,intheprecedingthreeyears(1989-91)
totheinvestigation,incarcerationforminoroffencesrangedfrom33%(1989)to39%(1991);
andoverthesameperiodtrafficoffencesaccountedformorethan21%ofallreceptions.Tumim
etal(1992)arguedthattherewaslittleuseofnon-custodialsanctions;whichconsistedlargely
offinesandrareuseofcompensationorders.Theynotedfromobservationsincourt,thatfines
werenotsetaccordingtothefinancialcircumstancesoftheoffender,andfailurestopaycould
leadtoimprisonment.When,afternon-payment,theyoungnervousoffenderwasaskedhow
longitwouldtakethemtopay,theoffender’ssuggestionwasalsonotbasedonanyrealistic
assessment(Tumimetal,992).
Thesnapshotdayoftheprisonpopulationshowed40.9%ofallthoseconvictedandremanded
were22-30yearsofage;withover50%beingaged30yearsandunder.
Truetothecurrentday,Tumimetal(1992)highlightedtheuseofmotorbikesinBermudaasa
rightofpassageformostyoungpeople.Lawsgoverningroadtrafficwasviewedasasourceof
contentionbetweentheyoungpeoplewhowouldoftenbefoundinviolationandpolicebeing
eagertoenforcethelaw.Drivingoffencesincurredperiodsofdisqualificationandadditional
disqualificationswouldberunconsecutive,leavingmanyunabletodrivelegallyforlongperiods
(Tumimetal,1992).Periodsofdisqualificationwouldalsobeenforcedafterapersonmight
havehadtoserveaterminprison.Itwasalsoconsidereddifficultforpeopleusingcarstoabide
bythespeedinglimitoftheland.
Whenin1991,statisticsshowedareductioninthecourtsuseoffinesinrelationtodrug
offences,statisticsshowedanincreaseincustodialsentences(Tumimetal,1992).Thereport
notedtheapparentreluctanceofthecourtstousenon-custodialoptionsthatwouldrequire
supervision.Also,probationorderswereusedtoamuchgreaterdegreethancommunityservice
orders;possiblynotconsideredviableoptionsascommunityrehabilitationservicesinBermuda
werelimited(Tumimetal,1992).
58Thefollowingtopfive(position8-12)offencescollectivelythereafterwereforviolence(e.g.rape,assault,robbery,murderandGBH–22%).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
59
“Ifacommunitylocksuptoomanycitizensitmaypreserveordershort-termbutwillloserespect.Over-confinementactsasaschoolofcrime,andremovestheshameofimprisonment,particularlyamongsttheyoung.…Itisasocialproblem…”(Tumimetal,1992,p2).
Tumimetal(1992)providedasynopsisofhowyoungpeoplecameintocontactwiththeCJS
early.Theyfirstcameintocontactforfightsatprimaryschool–“Bothparentsandteachersuse
thepoliceasathreattomisbehavingchildren…”(p37).Fromtheageof12,Tumimetal
suggeststhatteenagersbecometiredoftheirbicyclesandstartbecominginterestedin
motorizedtransport.Aroundthistime,hesuggeststhat“Thereisafailuretobringtheparents,
aswellasthechild,toaccountforthischargeand,thus,totakeresponsibilityforthefuture
behaviourofthechild…”(p37).
FamilyGroupConferencingasaRJresponsetoyoungpeoplegettinginvolvedincrimewould
havebeen,andcouldstillbeanidealresponseasearlyinterventiontoaddressTumimetal’s
finding.Itwasfurtherobservedbytheinvestigationteam,thatyoungblackchildrenwere
unsupportedinthecourt,whilechildrenofwhitefamilieshadsupportasearlyasthepolice
stationtotryanddiscourageadvancement,butifnot,werepresentinthecourt.Accordingto
Tumimetal,betweentheagesof14-16youngpeoplestartjoyridingontouristvehicles,by16
theyhavetheirownvehicles,andwithinthreemonthsbecomeinvolvedwiththepolicebecause
ofthis.Atsuchearlystages,policeinvolvementreinforcesattitudestowardsthepoliceas
hostile.Tumimetal’s(1992)reporturgedforimprovementsinpolicetrainingandforinnovative
policecommunitywork.Theyfoundapositiveattitudeofpolicetobeinvolvedinroadtraffic
safetyandtrainingfortheyoung,butthatthepolicewereuninterestedtobeinvolvedwithATI
andthePolice&CriminalEvidenceAct(PACE)oftheUK,thelatterpromotingnon-custodial
sanctionswhenpossible.
Inconclusionthereportfoundthateducationwasstillsegregatedinsomeplacesandthis
createddifferentacademicstandards,whichledtosomeschoolshavingareputationforpoor
schoolingandpoliceinvolvement.Minordrugoffencesagainsttheyoungpreventedthemfrom
traveltotheUSandthereforeexcludedtheoptionoftertiaryeducation.“Theworkofthe
magistratesandthepoliceinBermudainvolvessystematiccriminalizationoftheyoung.”
(Tumimetal,1992;p41).Thereportmadeanumberofrecommendations.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
60
WhiletrafficoffencesmaybeunsuitableforRJbecauseofthelackofidentifiablevictims,there
areotherareasofcriminalitythatcouldbeaddressedusingRJ.However,theoristssuchas
Loftonwoulddisagree.
Lofton(2004)arguesthatRJislimitedinitsabilitytochallengesystemicinjusticesonfour
counts–
1. Asitdoesnotaddresssocio-economicrootsofcrime,andisthereforenotpreventative.
2. Withcrimesseenasviolationsagainstpeopleandrelationships,itdoesnotaddress
largersystemicallyperpetratedcrimes,suchaswhite-collarcrimes.
3. Itfailstorecognizethatoffendershaveoftenalsobeenvictims.Victimsofstructural
violence;thetypeofthingsthathavebeenhighlightedassystemicracialinequityin
Bermuda.
4. Itistoopiecemeal,dealingwithisolatedincidencesofcrime;whichLoftonemphasesis
usuallythedisadvantagedoffendingagainstthedisadvantaged.Conferencing/circlesdo
notincludegovernmentleadersandwealthypowerbrokerswhomshesuggestscan
affectchange.
Itcouldbeargued,ifappliedtoBermuda,59thatLoftonstretchesthelimitations,wherepoint3
couldbeconsideredanextensionofpoint1.Topointone,RJisrecognizedasreactivebecauseit
isusedinresponsetoacrimehavingbeencommitted(restorativepracticeshowever,are
viewedasproactive,andthereforepotentiallypreventative).Alsoinregardstopoint3,there
areprogrammesthatrecognizeoffenderscanbevictimsandviceverse;programmessuchas
theSycamoreTreediscussedinthefollowingchapter.Inthecaseofpoint2,white-collarcrime
neednotbeexcludedfromRJinterventions.Allthatwouldbenecessaryisthatthereare
identifiablevictims;andthattheoffenderwerepreparedtomakerestitutionbasedonthe
requestsofthevictims,whichinthecaseofwhite-collarcrimemightmorereadilybefinancial
restitution.RJcanevenbeutilizedtodealwithcasesofpolicecomplaints.Withregardsto
Lofton’sfourthpoint,thatthedisadvantagedusuallycommitcrimesagainstother
disadvantagedpeoplewouldseemtoimplythatdisadvantagedpeopledonotneedhealing;
59Lofton’scritiqueofRJisfocusedontheUSsystem.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
61
whomevertheharmisdonetoshouldbeaffordedtheopportunityforhealingandreparation
fromtheverypersonthathasdirectlyharmedthem.ThisisrelationalandwhyRJfocusesonthe
reparationofrelationships.Inthepublicationentitled‘RestorativeJusticeinDiverseand
UnequalSocieties’Daly(2000)pointsoutinthecaseofNewZealand,thatconferencing
emergedoutofacombinationof‘top-down’activismbyjudgesand‘bottom-up’activismby
Maorigroups.Daly(2000)citesCunneenwhoarguesthatinAustraliathemoveofRJCinto
policyandlegislationoccurredthroughmid-levelprofessionalsandadministrators,suchasthe
police“largelysidesteppingpolitics‘frombelow’.”(p170).
MorecloselyinBermuda,Pittetal(1978)statedthat“…thoughregrettable…civildisordersin
Bermuda…functionedasakindofextra-parliamentarypoliticalaction;someofthemhave
expressedtheangerofyoungblackmenaboutthecountry’slawsandthewaytheyare
enforced…”(p35).Moreover,Pittetal’sreporthighlightedthevalueofopendialogue“…public
hearingsinBermudaservedacatharticfunction.Theyallowedpeopletovoicegrievancesand
sentimentsthatwereotherwisebottledup,andtheveryopportunitytoexpressthemprompted
aneasingoftension.”(p36).
Daly(2000)doescontesthoweverthatanyjusticesystemhasthepotentialtoreproduce
existingsystemicinequities.IntheirreviewoftheBermudianCJS,Lawrence&Codrington(2014)
bringtothefore,howsystemicmaintenanceofracialinequalitycanalsoexplainthe
internalizationofthisintheattitudesofthosethataredisadvantaged.“Oneparticularchallenge
thatsocialjusticeleadersfaceisreconcilingstructuralcausesofinequitywithseemingly
compellingevidenceof“self-sabotage”byyoungblackmen,especially.”(p25)
Offendersmayhavelittlecontroloversocialstructuresbuttheyareactiveintheirdecisions
aboutoffending,joiningsubcultures(Braithwaite,1989)andengaginginRJ.Thisassertionisnot
intendedtominimizethatBermudaisoneoftheworld’smostpunitivesocieties(Lawrence&
Codrington,2014)orthatsystematicinequitiesexist.60
60“Aperhapsmoreambitiousaim[ofRJconferencing]isthattheprocesscanhelptheoffendertoaddressproblemsbehindtheoffending.Thoughvictimswerenotalwaysabletosaywhetherthiswasoccurring(notsurprisingly,giventhelackoffeedbacktovictimsabouttheprogressofoutcomeagreements),offendersthemselvesfelttheprocesshadmadethemaddresstheseproblemsin61percentofcases.”(Shaplandetal(2007,p38)
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
62
Amongotherconcerns,governmentrecognizedthattheTumimetalreportrecommendations
hadnotbeenimplementedandin1999introducedthe‘AlternativestoIncarcerationinitiative’.
Itspoketoproviding“Amulti-facetedapproachforarestorativejusticesystem–legislation
review,programsandservicesinandoutofcorrections.”(Maybury,2008;p3).
TheTumimetal(1992)reportrecommendedchangestothelaw,suchastheabolitionof
mandatoryprisontermsforroadtrafficoffencesandtheuseofconsecutiveperiodsofdriving
disqualification;adoptionoftheUKCriminalJusticeAct1991andthePACEforgreater
accountabilityofpolicepractice,alongwithanindependentpolicecomplaintsprocess.Itwas
recommendedthatthePoliceCommissionerappointateamtoimprovepublicrelationsandfor
allthecriminaljusticeagenciestofallunderthesameministry.Theycalledforareviewofthe
CJSpoliciesandprocedurestocreateATI,suchasgreateruseofcommunityserviceordersanda
movefromcustodytocorrections.Trainingforprisonstaffwithinvolvementofthetraining
advisorfromtheForeignCommonwealthOffice,pre-releaseregimeprogrammesandincreased
contactwithotherCJSagencies.Theyrecommendedtheabolishmentofcorrectivetraining,that
nooneundertheageofsixteenbekeptinprisonandforaninvestigationonthefeasibilityofa
FamilyCourtsystem.ItwasalsorecommendedthattheHumanRightsCommissiondevelopa
RaceRelationsDivision;aworkingpartybeformedtolookintosocialconditionswithinBermuda
andfortheeradicationofoffencesthatdiscriminatedonthebasisofraceandsex,whichwere
outdated.
The‘ATIinitiative’isconcernedwiththepunitiveapproachoftheCJS,prisonovercrowding,and,
notsocynically,thefinancialburdentothegovernment.Further,forthosepolicymakersand
stakeholdersconcernedwithcost,itisnoteworthythatthecostofincarceratingasingle
offenderin1992wasestimatedat$36,500(Tumimetal,1992);at$60,000in2006(Maybury,
2008)andby2014estimatedat$85,000(Lawrence&Codrington,2014).Maybury(2008)puts
thecostofcommunitysupervisionat$15,000in2006.
“Thebroadaimofthesemeasuresistoreducetheprisonpopulation,decreasecriminalizationandrecidivismandfurtherensurethattheemphasisforspecifiedinfractionsshiftsfromapunitiveapproachtoachievingvoluntarycompliance.”(Wilson,2011;p1).
Whileconsideredbysomeaspartofarestorativeapproach,ATIspeakslittletotheneedsof
victimsandrelatedly,theredemptionofoffenders.However,areductionincrimedoesbenefit
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
63
thewholecommunity.Thisissuecanbebetterunderstoodwhenmeasuresorinterventionsare
viewedintermsoftheirdegreeofrestorativeorientation;thisisexploredinthenextchapter.
Theremainderofthechapterfocusesonsomeofthechangesthathaveoccurred,and
consistenciesthathaveremainedwithintheCJSsincetheturnofthecentury.Itreviewstheup-
to-dateincarceratedpopulationandpracticesthatarereparative.
CrimeinBermuda&the21stCenturyCriminalJusticeSystem
AnumberofchangestookplacewithintheCJS.In2001theDrugTreatmentCourtProgramme
started;thesuccessoftheprogrammewouldbeestimatedat75-80%3yearslater(Stevenson,
2014).Smith(2002)reportsonthetraininggivenonATI,quotingtheMinisterofLabour&Home
Affairs“…theprisonssysteminBermudawillfromnowonbeknownastheDepartmentof
Corrections,inabidtochangemindset.”Asanoutcomeoftheinitiatives,theprophecywasthat
Bermudawouldseeareductionincrimeandprisoncosts(Smith,2002).
VictimImpactStatements(VIS)was(finally)enteredintotheCriminalCodeAmendmentsAct
2001.UsedforthefirsttimeinaSupremeCourtcasein2002,witha13year-oldvictim,the
presidingjudgeviewedthenewlegislationasempoweringvictims.“Priortothistheyhadno
rightorabilitytospeaktoaJudgetoletthemknowhowthecrimeimpactedthem.Itcan
definitelymakeadifferenceonthesentence.”(JusticeSimmons,quotedbyTalbot,2002).The
newspaperarticlegoesontostate,“IncasesheardbeforetheSupremeCourt,therewasseldom
anymentionofthevictim’spainandsufferingandwhetherornottheywerebeing
compensatedforwhattheyhaveendured.…emotionaltrauma,stressorfinancialloss…”.
(Talbot,2002).TalbotnotesthatVISsarenotusedintrialsassufferingcausedtovictimsis
revealedduringthetrial.61
61TheBermudaCriminalCodeAmendmentAct2001“VictimImpactStatement(3)Attherequestofavictim,thecourtmayinstructtheclerkofthecourtorregistrartoreadthestatementintotherecordinopencourt.(4)Wherethevictimimpactstatementdisclosesconfidentialorsensitiveinformationormaterialthatmaycauseembarrassmentordistresstothevictimorhisfamily,thecourtmaydirectthatthestatementbedealtwithincamera.”
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
64
Recognizedatthetimeofenactment,asastepintherightdirection;thedirectionwasstilla
punitiveone.ItisnotalwaysthecasethattheoffenderwillevenheartheVIS.However,evenif
theydidsomewouldlikelyperceiveitasapunitivemeasuretoimpacttheirpunishment.Itdoes
notpromotedialogue,whichwouldhavegreaterimpactforhealing;likelyacknowledgedinthe
judge’sfinalstatement“…thislegislationthatwilltosomeextentempowerthevictim.”(Justice
SimmonsquotedbyTalbot,2002).
Fundingwasobtainedin2011topilotelectronicmonitoring–“…asavaluabletooltoenhance
publicsafetyandoffenderrehabilitation.”(Wilson,2011;p1).Onlytimewilltellifelectronic
monitoringinandofitselfcanenhancepublicsafety.Itcouldbearguedthatitismoreofanaid
forsupervision,anaidthatcontributestostatecontroloversocialcontrol.Asanalternative
however,itcouldbeveryvaluableinreducingincarceration.
In2014theMentalHealthTreatmentCourtpilotwentoperational,withtheobjectiveof
providing;(limitedtonon-violentoffending)aprogrammeforoffenderswithmentalhealth
issues(Bell,2015).Thepursuitoflegislationtosupportthecourtwasincludedintherecent
Governor’sThorneSpeech(Fergusson,2015).
Attheturnofthe21stCentury,Bermudaalsosawanincreaseinviolentoffending(Hortonetal,
2011;Strangeways,2011;Lawrence&Codrington,2014)and“…criminalactivity…an
overwhelmingconcerntoBermudians.”(Wilson,2011;p1).AccordingtotheBPSQuarterly
CrimeStatisticsof2012,Bermuda’smurderratepercapitawashigherthanNewYorkand
London.
In2011aparliamentaryreviewwasconductedonthecausesofviolentcrimeandgunviolence
(Hortonetal,2011).Thecommitteeidentifiedanumberofissuesthatneededtobeaddressed
suchasgangviolenceandgangrecruitment;illicitdrugs;dysfunctionalhomesandat-risk
children;theeducationalsystem;andoperationalissuesoftheBPSandDoC.Theyessentially
reportedsimilarhistoricalfindingsashadbeenidentifiedinthepast,relatedtoBermuda’ssocial
problemsandinequities.Theyfoundthatloweducationalattainmenthinderedemployment
opportunitiesthatassistedrecruitmentbygangs.Economicdisparitieswerefoundtocreatean
underclassandriseindrugtraffickingandanti-socialbehaviour.Policeenforcementfocusedon
minordrugplayersonthestreetandthesuggestionmade,wasthatthereneededtobemore
aggressivebordercontrol.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
65
Hortonetel(2011)reportedsingle-parentfamiliesasanissuecontributingtothecriminal
climate.Childrenwereaffiliatingwithgangsbeforereachingmiddleschoolandstudentswere
sellingdrugsandexperimentingthroughpeer-pressureandbullying.Whenoffenderswere
apprehended,Hortonetalsuggested“Convictionsbyjuriesaresometimesdifficulttoachievein
Bermudabecauseofoursmallpopulation,whichmakesitmorelikelyforjurymemberstoknow
theaccusedorthesuspects’family.”(2011,p5).
Oneissueunderthesubtitle‘prisonservice’wasthat“Uponbeingreleasedfromprison,several
blackmaleshavefounditextremelydifficulttofindemploymentandtoearnenoughmoneyto
supporttheirfamilies,whichcreatesacycleofpoverty,angerandfrustration.”(Hortonetal,
2011,p6).
AconcernwithsomeoftherecommendationsthatHortonetal(2011)goontomakeisthat
theycreatefurtherexclusionofindividuals/gangmembersasaformofstatecontrol.Potentially
deepeningtheindividuals’senseofdisenfranchisement.In2014Lawrence&Codringtonargue
thatthewidestracialdisparitiesstilloccurinemployment,educationalaccessandtheCJS.
Despiteagrowingblackmiddle-class,andstudiesthatsuggestblackandwhitepeoples’
educationalattainmentisonpar(Lawrence&Codrington,2014).Therearestilla
disproportionatenumberofblackmalesarrestedandincarceratedcomparedtowhite
(Lawrence&Codrington,2014;ChiefJusticeKawaley,2014).Lawrence&Codrington(2014)
argue,“…theoldracialordermaybereallyevolvingintosomethingmorecomplex.”(p21).And
againtheycontend,“Theobviouschallengeforequityreformersisreducingsubstantiveracial
disparitiesinthesecriticalsectors.Lessobvious,butequallyurgent,maybeunderstandingand
grapplingwiththecollective,socialpsychologicaleffectsofthosedisparities.”(p21).
Itisimportant,withthefocusofthecurrentstudy,totakeacloserlookattheDoC.
Casemates&theBermudaDepartmentofCorrections(DoC)
IntheCriminalJusticeReviewof1992,theauthorreferredtotheconstructionofanew
maximum-securityprison(Tumimetal).Casematesbuiltin1830servedasamaximum-security
prisonfrom1963untilSeptember1994,whenWestgateopened(Harris,2014).Asa$40million
facility(TheRoyalGazette,1993),itwasviewedasamove“…fromthe18thCenturytothe21st
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
66
Century.”(Gibbons,quotedintheRoyalGazette,1994).Atthetimeofopening,theonly
intendedadditionalstaffrecruitedwastobeapsychologist,socialworkerandvocationalofficer
(TheRoyalGazette,1994).ItwasintendedthatWestgateCorrectionalFacility,unlike
Casemates,wouldhelpcreatefocusonrehabilitationandeducationforprisoners,whichinturn
wastoleadtoareductioninreoffending.Westgateisoneofthreefacilitatesthatmakeupthe
DoC.Aminimum-securityfacilityformen(the‘Farm’),andafemaleandyoungoffendersfacility
(the‘Coed’)existattheeastendoftheisland.
InmatePopulation
AstudyconductedontheprisonpopulationofBermudain2002,wasrepeatedin2012(Riley,
2013).Atthetimeofthesurveyin2012,58%oftheinmatesparticipated;comparedto52%in
2002.Thestudyprovidesanumberofinterestingfindings–
• 92%wereBermudian,with89%beingblackand“…virtuallyallofthoseareblack
males”(Ridley,2013,p5).62
• Comparedto2002,in2012theprisonpopulationwasageing,from32yearsofageto36
yearsofage,respectively.63
• “Withthree-quartersofcrimebeingunplanned,thissuggeststhatthepublicmaybe
abletopreventcertainkindsofcrime,suchasBreakingandEntering.”(Riley,2013,p25).
• Witha1%declinefrom2002,64%ofinmateshadpreviouslybeeninprison.When
recidivismreferstore-imprisonmentwithin3yearsfollowingrelease,theratefallsto
37%.64
• In2002,drivingoffencesaccountedfor5%ofincarcerations;thiswasdownto1%in
2012(theexactsamepatternfor“non-paymentchild”-Riley,2013).Thisfindingis
promisingwhenconsideringpastcriticismsoftheCJSusingimprisonmentforminor
offences.
62In1992theratioofblackmaleswas15:2(Tumimetal,1992)63In199250%oftheprisonpopulationwerereportedtobe30yearsoldandyounger(Tumimetal,1992).64ThispercentageislessthanthecomparableUKandUSrecidivismrateof43%(Riley,2013).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
67
• Thereportstates“Drugoffencescontinuetobethesinglemostreasonforincarceration,
upin2012(from20%to28%).”(Riley,2013,p6).46%ofrespondentssaidthatthey
wereundertheinfluenceoflegalorillegaldrugsatthetimeofoffending.
However,whengroupedtogetherviolentoffencesaccountedfor42%(in2012)ofthereasons
forincarceration.65Reportedviolencewithinprisonhadalsoincreasedoverthedecade(2002-
2012)risingfrom21%to26%respectively(Riley,2013).66Referringtoemergingresultsand
evidenceofbestpractice,theUN(2006)reportthat“Thereissomeevidence(UnitedKingdom
andtheUnitedStates)tosuggestthatrestorativejusticeprocessescanassistinpromotinga
saferenvironmentinsidecorrectionalinstitutions.”(p88)
• In2012,14%ofthoseincarceratedwereservingsentencesofoneyearorless
(comparedto36%in2002),30%wereservingatleast2yearsbutlessthan5years(28%
in2002);and23%in2012wereservingsentencesof10yearsorgreater(comparedto
14%in2002).“Longersentenceshavebeenreflectedinthesharpfall-offinthose
incarceratedforoneyearorless,andlargeincreasesforthosewhohadtoservefive
yearsormore.However,themedianlengthoftimetoserveforbothstudieswas3½
years.”(Riley,2013,p27).
• “Just3%ofinmates(5individuals),statedthattheybelongedtoanorganisedgang.
Gatheredintelligence,however,wouldindicatethatthatnumberismuchhigher”(Riley,
2013,p47).With77%ofcrimesreportedlycommittedalone(Riley,2013),couldfurther
accountforthelownumbersadmittinggangaffiliation.
• 81%ofinmateswereunmarried(consistentwith2002).
• 27%ofinmatesreportedtohavinghadaparentwhohadbeenincarcerated.Parentsof
inmateshadalsoincreasedintheiruseofdrugsandalcohol(39%in2002–48%in
65In2012,violentoffencesseparatedoutincludedrobbery(12%),murder(8%),sexualassault(7%),assault(7%),grievousbodilyharm(6%)andmanslaughter(2%).Thesepercentageswerelargelyidenticalin2002withtheexceptionsbeinggrievousbodilyharm4%;murder6%androbbery10%,allthreehavingincreasedby2012.The42%calculationisnotdirectlyprovidedbyRiley,butcalculatedbasedonthedataheprovides.66Itishighlypossiblethatsomeviolentoffencesarerelatedtodrugactivity,insideandoutsideofprison.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
68
2012);andtheparents’participationinreligiousactivitieshaddecreased(78%-2002–
71%-2012).
• 31%ofinmateswerewithoutacademicqualificationsuponenteringtheprison
(comparedto54%in2002).67
• 15%ofinmateswereunemployedpriortoenteringprison.Riley(2013)notesthatthisis
“…nearlytwicethenationallevelof8%in2012.”(p7).
Insummary,offenceshavebecomemoreviolent,drugusepriortoincarcerationmore
prevalent,sentenceslonger,educationalattainmentgreater,offendersolderandblackmales
stillremainthelargestgroupimprisoned.
Morerecentrecidivismrates(basedonareturnwithin3yearsofrelease)announcedbythe
CommissionerofCorrectionsColonelLambshowedadeclinefrom24%in2013to19%in2014
(Jones,2015).Thedeclineaccreditedto“…acombinationoffactors…programmesareworking
withinCorrections.Itisalsoatestamenttothejointeffortsofcorrectionsandgovernment
agenciesandtheprovisionofalternativestoincarceration.”(Lamb,quotedinJones,2015).
Aspartoftherehabilitationprogrammesoffered,theDoCprovidesaviolence-reduction
programme;theCALM(ControllingAngerandLearningtoManageit)programme;‘Thinkingfor
aChange’(acognitive-behaviouralproblem-solvingandsocialskillscourse),drugeducation,
treatmentandrelapseprevention.Therearearangeofeducationalclassesincludingbasic
literacy;theGeneralEducationDiplomaprogramme;businessandcomputerstudies.Thereare
alsoopportunitiesforlow-riskoffenders(maleandfemale)toattendtheBermudaCollege,
obtainingqualificationsalongwithstudentsfromthecommunity.Socialandvocationalcourses
includeprogrammessuchastheFather’sParentingprogramme;LifeSkills(involvinganumber
ofmoduleslikebudgeting,resumewritingandinterviewskills);sewing;art;auto-mechanics;
culinaryskillsandhorticulture.AttheFarmfacilityprisonersgrowproduceandrearanimals
(suchasgoatsandrabbits).Westgatehasametalworkshopandbothmalefacilitieshave
carpentryworkshops.
67Itwasfurtherreportedthat63%oftheinmatesreportedhavingachievedtheirGEDwhilstincarcerated(Riley,2013).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
69
TheFarmhoststheRightLivingHouse,aseparateresidentialstructuredprogrammefor
offenderswithdrug-misuseproblems.Offendersjointheprogrammeandcompletetheir
sentencesfromtheunit,usuallyhavingtheopportunitytoseekpaidemploymentinthelatter
stagesoftheprogramme(employmentthatcanbecontinuedpost-release).Low-riskoffenders
(someescorted,othersunescorted)alsodocharityworkinthecommunity.
CharityWorkasaFormofMacro-communityReparation68
Thecharityworkprovidedbytheprisonersincludesmaintenanceworkatseniornursinghomes,
schoolsandcharities,aswellaspreparatoryworkformajoreventssuchasCupMatch.At
Westgate,agroupofLife-sentencedprisonersformedasupportgroupcalledLifeline,andthey
regularlydoworkforcharities,suchasrestoringoldbikesanddonatingthemtoschoolchildren.
On28thFebruary2014theBermudaSunnewspaperreportedanexclusivefront-pagearticle
entitled‘We’reNotMonsters’(Jones,2014).Thestoryreportedoneightlifeprisonersserving
convictionsforoffencessuchasmurder.Inthecontinuationofthestoryonpages4-5thetitle
read‘TheKillerstryingtochange:SomeofBermuda’smostrecognisablecriminalsdrawstrength
fromLifelinegroup’.Thecharitableworkofthegroupwaslistedalongwiththeirhopesforthe
future.However,awayfromtheeyesandearsofmostreaders,complaintsweremadetothe
DoC.Victimsunawareofthearticleaheadoftimewereoffendedandoutragedbywhatseemed
tobereceivedasanintrusionintotheirlivesbythosetheyperceivedaslockedawaybehind
closeddoors.
Rehabilitation&RestorativeJustice
ATIinitiativeswereoriginallydesignedintheUS,toreducemassincarceration.However,two
yearsintoitsintroductioninBermuda,thethenMinisterofLabourandHomeAffairsstated“Itis
theintentionofGovernmenttomovefromapredominatelypunitivesystemforcriminaljustice
offenderstoonebaseduponrehabilitationandrestorativejustice.…ATIisnottobeasoft
optiontoprison.Infact,prisonreformisanintegralcomponentoftheprocessandwillrequire
thedevelopmentoftoughandmandatedprogrammesforinmates.”(Smith,2002).Itis
commendablethatthegovernmentmadeadistinctionbetweenrehabilitationandRJasthe
68Referredtoinchapter1,aspartoftheRJcommunitydebate(McCold,2004).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
70
author,withover17yearsofexperienceworkinginrehabilitationwouldconsiderthemas
distinct.Itisarguedmostappropriatelythat-“WehavetoacceptthatATIisreallya
managementofrisk.”(PoliceCommissionerSmith,quotedbySmith2002).Restorativepractices
canbeutilizedtohelppreventcrime;astheoldadagegoes,preventionisbetterthancure.69
If‘fully-orientated’RJiskeptvoluntary,atallstagesofthejudicialprocess(e.g.pre,post-
conviction),itavoidsthedangerofbecomingadversarial–andlessaboutthemainstakeholders
thanthestate.SometheoristswouldarguethatRJincludesrehabilitationandevenretribution
(e.g.Daly,2000).
Wardetal(2014)focusintheirarticleon‘RestorativeJustice,OffenderRehabilitationand
Desistance’.TheyrefertoadvocatesofRJeitheracknowledgingandincorporatingrehabilitation,
orviewingrehabilitationasineffectiveinreducingreoffendingandadequatelyrespondingto
crime.TheyciteMcCold&Wachtel(2002inWardetal,2014)asanexampleofthelatter
perspective,statingthattheydismisstreatmentprogrammesasfailingtoholdoffenders
accountable.Ironically,itisarguedthatrehabilitationfocusesonreducingriskof
reoffending/publicsafetyandprotection(community),howeversomeRJschemesaresetupto
includethegoalofreducingoffending.Itisclearthatthereisadistinctionbetween
rehabilitationandRJ,insofaras,rehabilitationfocusesontheoffenders’riskfactorsandskill
acquisition,opposedtoRJbeingvictim-centered.Rehabilitationofoffendersbenefitsthewider
communityanddesistancefromoffendingalsorequirescommunityacceptanceofreturning
offenderstoavoidcontinuedshaming-stigmatization.
Therefore,theaboveexamplesofcharityworkmaygivebacktothewidercommunityandcan
beconsideredasameansofmakingamends;however,itcanstillbeneglectfuloftheneedsof
thedirectvictims.“Perhapsthefirststepistodismantlethepolarizeddistinctionbetween
offendersandvictims.”(Wardetal,2014,p32).ThisveryapproachisadoptedbytheSTP–
coveredinsessionone;andgoessomewaytoacknowledgetheeffectsofsocialdisparitiesthat
disadvantagepeople,whoaresubsequentlyoverrepresentedintheCJS.
Inthefinalconclusionpointofthe‘ProfileofthePrisonPopulation’presentation,Riley(2013)
writes“Bermuda’srankingasoneoftheworld’stopincarceratorsisperhapssomethingnotto
69Restorativepracticescanbeusedinschoolstomanageanarrayofissuesincludinggangaffiliationandbullying.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
71
beproudof,evenasothersintheregionaredoingsimilarly.Theissuesofalternativesto
incarcerationandrestorativeapproachestojusticemayhavetobelookedatagain.”(p55).
Thischapterprovidedinformationofthewiderclimateandculturewithinwhichtheactionand
researchwouldtakeplace.SometheoristssuggestthattheuseofRJisineffectiveinchallenging
socialinequities.Further,inrecognizingandattemptingtoaddresstheexcessiveuseof
punishmentforminoroffences,ATIwasintroduced.However,thischapterhasarguedthatATIs
aremerelyanotherformofstatecontrolandriskmanagement,whichlikelydoeslittletoreduce
thecommunity’sfearorcrime;anddoesnothingtorepairtheharmcausedbycrimetothose
directlyaffected.
TheUN(2006)advisethattheintroductionofrestorativeprogrammesbeprogressive“…
startingwithmoremodestinitiativesthathavethepotentialtocreatetheexperienceofsuccess
…andprepareeveryoneforsomemorechallenginginitiatives.”(p.17)Thecurrentresearchwas
basedonthispremise,thatstartingsmallanddevelopingincrementally–one,thelevelofRJ
orientationintheprogrammes(phaseoneandtwo)and,twothegradualinclusionofmore
seriousoffencesforthefully-orientatedinterventionofrestorativejusticeconferencing.The
programmesaredescribedinthefollowingchapter.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
72
v CHAPTER4–THEINTERVENTIONMODEL
“Theleastdevelopedbutpotentiallyoneofthemostvaluableusesofconferencingisincorrections…Prisonsandtheparolesystemareripeforinnovationbecause,ascurrently
constituted,theydonotwork.“(Wachteletal,2010,p113).
Introduction:RestorativeOrientation
Thischapterdescribesthethreeinitialinterventionsthatweretoberesearched,thelevelof
restorativeorientationofeachandbrieflydescribesthedifferencesbetweentheprogrammes.
Itprovidesbackgroundinformationonthefollowingobjectivesofthethesisandispartofthe
researchmethodology-
o Toexploretheexperienceandeffectsofanexperimentalprogrammeofrestorative
justiceforvictimsandoffendersinBermuda;and
o Toevaluateandcontrasttheapproachesusedinordertodrawimplicationsfor
futurepracticeandpolicyinBermuda,forinclusionofrestorativejustice.
Thechapteralsoprovidesinformationonhowthewholeinitiativewasconstructedin
accordancewithpastresearchandguidanceofbestpractice.
Asdiscussedintheopeningchapter,thisthesisadoptsthedefinitionprovidedbyMarshall
(1998)“RestorativeJusticeisaprocesswherebypartieswithastakeinaspecificoffence
collectivelyresolvehowtodealwiththeaftermathoftheoffenceanditsimplicationsforthe
future”(p28).
Despite,thecontroversythatcanarisewithdefinitionsorrejectionsofspecificdefinitionsto
avoidrestrictingprocesses,McCold(2000)offersaveryusefulmodel.McCold’sVenndiagram
(figure1.1below)distinguishesbetweenpracticesoffull,mostlyorpartialrestorative
orientation.Thecirclesrelatetothemainstakeholdersofanoffenceorwrongdoingandatthe
intersectionofthethreecircles(-‘victimreparation’‘offenderresponsibility’and‘communities
ofcarereconciliation’),fullyrestorativepracticesareachieved.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
73
AccordingtoMcColdfullpracticeswouldincludepeacecircles,sentencingcirclesandvarious
formsofconferencing.Practicesoccurringoutsidetheintersectionarethoselabeled‘mostly’or
‘partly’restorative.McCold(2000)viewspracticesthatare‘mostly’restorativeincludingtruth
andreconciliationcommissionsandvictim–offendermediation.‘Partial’practiceswouldinclude
reparationboards;youthaidpanelsandvictimreparation.70Toews(2006)usesaverysimilar
VenndiagramtothatofMcCold’s(2000)butToewsclaimstofocusonrestorativevaluesand
usesdifferentlabels–shereferstotheintersectionofthethreecirclesasbeing‘socially
restorative’givingopportunityforthesocialissuesofcrimetobedealtwith.Attheintersection
oftwocirclesToewsreferstoas‘relationallyrestorative’,respondingtotwosetsof“justice
participants”,andpracticeswithinonecircleas“individuallyrestorative”.Themaindifference
betweenMcCold’sandToewsmodelsarethatToewslabelsthethreecirclesas“victimneeds,
offenderfamilyneedsandoffenderneeds”;thensurroundingtheentireVenndiagramis
anothercirclewhichToewslabelscommunity(Toews,2006,p61).Onthebasisofthelatter
difference,Toewsprecisemodelisnotadoptedhereasatfacevalueitisweightedinfavourof
theoffender.However,therelationaltermsusedappeartotallyinkeepingwithrestorative
values.
TheinterventionsthatformedpartoftheexperimentalprogrammeinBermudacouldbe
viewedasreflectingeachofMcCold’s(2000)labelingofpractices–RJConferencinghaving‘full’
orientation(andasbeingsociallyrestorative);theSycamoreTreeProjectreflectinga‘mostly’
70Most‘alternativestoincarceration’wouldmostappropriatelyfallunder‘mostly’or‘partial’orientation.Forexample,communityorderswitharequirementtofulfillcommunityservice,couldbeconsidered‘partial’RJorientation.
Vicxmreparaxon
Communixescare
reconcilliaxon
Offenderresponsibility
Figure1.1VenndiagramillustratingMcCold’s(2000)theoryonthedegreesofrestorativeorientationinpractices.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
74
restorativeorientation(andbeingrelationallyrestorative)andtheVictimEmpathyprogramme
providingpartialorientation(andindividuallyrestorative).ThisisillustratedintheVenndiagram
figure1.2below.
Thechaptermovesontoprovideadescriptionofeachofthethreeinterventions.
VictimEmpathyProgramme(VEP)
DevelopmentoftheVictimEmpathyProgramme(VEP)wascommissionedbytheBritish
OverseasTerritoriesPrisonReformCoordinatoroftheForeignCommonwealthOfficeandwas
specificallyadaptedfromapreviousprogrammeusedintheUK.Constructedin2012itwas
beingdeliveredinTurks&CaicosbeforeitwasfirstdeliveredinBermudainSeptember2014.
FourfacilitatorsweretrainedinthedeliveryoftheprogrammeinJune2014bytheprogramme
author–SimonDrsydale.71
71ThefourfacilitatorstrainedconsistedofoneoftheDepartmentofCorrections–SocialWorkers,PrincipalOfficers,CaseManagersandaPsychologyServiceProvider;theresearcherhadpreviouslybeentrained.FundedbytheForeign&CommonwealthOffice,representativesfromtheBritishVirginIslandsandCaymanIslandsalsoattendedthetraininginBermuda.
VictimEmpathyProgramme(VEP)Partialorientation(McCold,2000)Individuallyrestorative(Toews,2006)
Figure1.2Illustratingtheinterventions’levelofrestorativeorientation.
Victims
CommunitiesOffenders
RJConferencingFullorientation(McCold,2000)Sociallyrestorative(Toews,2006)
SycamoreTreeProject(STP)Mostlyorientated(McCold,2000)Relationallyrestorative(Toews,2006)
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
75
Withanoptimalnumberof8participants,theprogrammeconsistedof12sessionsdeliveredat
arateof2-3sessionsperweekfor2hourspersession(notincludingabreak),with2facilitators.
Itwasdesignedtolookattheimpactofoffendingfromtheperspectiveoftheoffender’svictims
andpossiblefuturevictims.Asacognitive-behaviouralprogrammeitwasinfluencedbyAlbert
Ellis’‘RationalEmotiveBehaviourTherapy’(REBT)developedinthemid-1950sandAaronBecks’
‘CognitiveTherapy’developedinthe1960s.
RegardinghumanbehaviourREBTasserts,basedontheABCmodel,thatitisnotadversityoran
externalactivatingevent(A)thatdeterminesemotionalorbehaviouralresponses/consequences
(C)tothesethings,butrathertheinterveningbelief(B)abouttheadversity/activatingevent.
Thetheorysuggeststhatadversitiesoractivatingeventscanbeexternalsituationsorinternal
thoughtwhetherfromthepast,presentorfuture(Dryden&Neenan,2003).REBTviewsbeliefs
(B)aboutadversitiesthataredysfunctionalasleadingtoemotionalandbehavioural
consequences(C)thatareself-destructive,irrationalandnegative.Totheopposite,beliefs(B)
abouttheadversity(A)thatarerationalandself-helping,leadtoconsequences(C)thatare
constructive,rationalandflexible.Thetheorysuggeststhatpeoplehavebothinnaterational
andirrationalbeliefsandthatwhetherornotthesearefromthepast;coreirrationalbeliefsare
heldontoandmaintainedinthepresent.Thetheoryalsosuggeststhatpeoplehaveachoiceof
whetherornottohelpthemselvestofeelbetterandhealthier.Thetherapyworksbyhelping
peopletoidentifyandunderstandthemediatingroleoftheirbeliefs(B)anddevelopwaysto
challengetheirbeliefsandsubsequentlychangeormodifytheconsequences.Thereforethe
therapyviewspeopleasthecreatorsoftheirownproblems.
AaronBeck,whofoundfromworkingwithpeoplesufferingfromdepressionthattheywould
quiteautomaticallyexpressnegativethoughts,shapedCognitiveBehaviouralTherapy(CBT).
Theseautomaticthoughtsreflectedpeople’scorebeliefs,beliefsthatweredevelopedthrough
lifeexperiences.Byencouragingpeopletoidentifytheirnegativethoughtsordistortionswould
allowthemtodevelopmorerealisticthoughts(Beck,1996).
ThestructureoftheVEPcomprisesofthreemodules:
• Module1focusesonanexplorationofthetypeofthoughtdistortions(i.e.blaming,
minimizinganddenial)thatreducecapacityforvictimempathyandsetsoutto
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
76
motivateoffenderstoreviewandassesstheirownthinking.Thisisdonethrough
variousexercisessuchastheuseofvignettes,disclosureoftheiroffendingandthe
writingofalettertotheirvictim.
• Module2givesoffenderstheopportunitytoapplyperspective-takingskills,to
objectivelygiveanaccountoftheoffenceanddemonstratevictimempathy.Thisis
largelydonethroughanexerciseinrole-reversal;whicheachgroupmembertakestheir
turnindoing.
Wachteletal(2010)describedtherole-playofanRJCinamaximum-securityprisonin
Pennsylvaniabasedonarealcrimeofgunviolenceanddrug-dealing,anddescribeditas“…a
powerfulemotionalexperienceforallofus.”(p114).Becausetheconferencevolunteerswere
abletoimaginetheangeranddisgustofalovedonebeinginjured,ortheshameoftheloved
oneofthepersonresponsibleforsuchanact.
• Module3allowsforanevaluationofskillslearnt,areviewoftheirearliervictimletters
andare-writeoftheletter,andanexplorationofin-directvictims,throughaRipple
Effectexercise.
Theprogrammedoesnotreviewinanydepththereasonswhyoffendersoffended,andwould
thereforebe‘individually’restorative(orofpartialorientation).
Groupparticipantswerelimitedtosix(opposedtothesuggestedeight)tokeepthenumberof
offender-participantsconsistentwiththenumberthatwouldparticipateintheSTP.
SycamoreTreeProject(STP)
“SycamoreTreeistakenfromtheBiblicalstoryofZacchaeus(Zac),thecorrupttaxcollector,
whoclimbedasycamoretreetoseeJesus(Luke,19:3-5).Hebeomesasymbolicoffender.Jesus
noticedhim,calledhimdownandtheymetoverameal.ThemeetingchangedZac’slife,which
hedemonstratedbymakingrestitutiontohisvictimsgivinghalfofhiswealthtothepoor.”
(citedinWilson,2009,p1).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
77
InitsthirdeditionParker&VanNess(2010)onbehalfofPrisonFellowshipInternationalwrote
theSycamoreTreeProject(STP).TrainedfacilitatorsofPrisonFellowshipBermudadeliveredthe
programme.
Theprogrammestructureisillustratedinthetablebelow(Parker&VanNess,2010,p23).
Session Topic ObjectiveSession1
Introduction
ToprepareoffendersandvictimstoparticipateinSTP?
Session2
WhatisCrime?
Toexplorearestorativeunderstandingofcrime.
Session3
Responsibility
Tounderstandwhatitmeanstotakeresponsibilityforcommittinganoffence.
Session4
ConfessionandRepentance
Tounderstandthemeaning,powerandimportanceofforgiveness.
Session5
Forgiveness
Tounderstandthemeaning,powerandimportanceofforgiveness.
Session6
MakingAmends
Tounderstandmakingamendsasaresponsetocrime.
Session7
TowardReconciliation
Tomovetowardhealingandrestorationbysharinglettersandcovenantspreparedbybothvictimandoffenderparticipants.
Session8
Celebration
Toreflectonandcelebratethenewawarenessthatgroupmembershaveaboutcrimeandhealing
PrisonFellowshipministriesusetheSTPinsixcontinents(Parker&VanNess,2010).
Designedasaprogrammetobeconductedinprisons,theSTPusesBiblicalstoriestodiscuss
conceptssuchasresponsibilityandforgiveness.Thetableaboveillustratestheprogramme
structurethatconsistsofeightsessionsdeliveredonceaweek(for2hourspersession)withthe
finalsessionbeingacelebration.
“...SycamoreTreeisbasedonChristianvaluessuchastruth,integrity,responsibilityandaffirmation.ItisnotaprogrammeexplicitlypromotingtheChristianfaith.ThefocusoftheSycamoreTreeistochallengeattitudestooffendingbehaviour,raiseawarenessoftheimpactofcrimeonvictimsandthecommunities,andteachtheprinciplesandapplicationofrestorative
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
78
justiceandprovideoffenderswithanopportunitytomakeaninformedchoicetochangetheirbehaviour.”(CitedinParker&VanNess,2010,p31).
Recognizedbythisresearchasa‘mostly’restorativeintervention,STPbringstogetheroffenders
andunrelated/surrogatevictimsasgroupmembers.72Whileitisnotarequirementofthe
programmethatvictimsandoffendersareChristian,facilitatorsareexpectedtobe.STPis
usuallydeliveredtosixoffendersandsixvictim-volunteers;itislimitedtonomorethanfifteen
participants(withanidealratioofvictimsandoffendersbeing1:1)(Parker&VanNess,2010).
ThechapterwillnowoutlinethemaindifferencesbetweentheSTPandVEP.
ProgrammeDifferences
Thereareanumberofdifferencesbetweenthetwoprogrammesbeyondthemostobvious
differencebeingtheinclusionofunrelatedvictimsintheSTP.
PrisonFellowshipBermudaandtheSTPadoptedadifferentdefinitionofRJtothatofMarshall
(1998),adoptedbytheresearchandtheVEP.Religiousteachingsandvalues(valuesnotlimited
totheChristianfaith)formthecoreprinciplesofSTP,whiletheVEPisbasedonREBTandCBT.
TheVEPlooksatcrimefromtheperspectiveofthevictims,indirectvictimsandthecommunity;
itdoesnotfocusonthereasonsforoffending.STPalternativelyalsoseekstoexploretheimpact
ofcrimeontheoffenders,whichalsogivesoffenderstheopportunitytotalkaboutoffencesor
wrongdoingthathavebeencommittedagainstthem.InSTP,forgivenessisaspecifictopic,
allocatedawholesession.InVEPthereisnoexplicitreferencemadetoforgiveness;howeverit
wouldnotbeuncommonforoffenderstowanttoseektobeforgivenandofferanapologyin
letterstovictims.
IntheVEP,offendersareassigned(bythefacilitators)whichvictimstowritetheirlettersto.This
includeddirectvictims,relativesofvictims,relativesoftheoffendersandindirectvictimswho
witnessedoffencesfirsthand.InSTPlettersmaybewrittenattheendoftheprogramme,while
intheVEP,offenderswritetwoletterstothevictimsoneatthestartoftheprogrammeandthe
otheraftertherole-reversalexercise.
72STPvictimsarevolunteersthatarenotthedirectvictimsoftheoffenderstheyparticipateinthegroupwith;however,whetherconsideredvictimsorcommunityrepresentatives,theRJorientationcouldbeconsidered‘mostly’or’relational’.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
79
UponcompletionoftheVEP,offendersreceiveareportwrittenbythefacilitators,basedon
theirparticipation,comprehensionoftheprogrammeconcepts,theirdistortions,development
andapplicationofskills.Acertificateispresentedtothosethatparticipatethatcouldpotentially
besubmittedtotheparoleboardaspartoftheoffender’sdossier.TheSTPdidnotinclude
reportsattheendoftheprogramme,howeverallparticipantsalsoreceivecertificates.
WiththeSTP,offendersaregiventheopportunity,attheendoftheprogrammetooffer
symbolicactsofrestitution(Parker&VanNess,2010).‘Symbolicrestitutiontakestheformof
writingletterstotheoffender’svictimsandsharingthiswiththevictim-participants;drawingor
paintingpicturesrepresentinglessonslearnedortheoffender’sdesiretochange;offenders
writingandperformingsongsrelatedtotheissues,ormakinggiftsforthevictimssuchas
bookmarks,cardsorpaperflowers.ThefinalsessionoftheSTPbeingacelebration(‘breakingof
thebread’)oftheworkdone,invitationsarealsoextendedtoguests73-peoplethatdidnot
participateintheprogramme.
Ofvictimempathyprogrammes,whichboththeVEPandSTPare,Tickell&Akester(2004)
assert,“Theseprogrammesprepareoffenderstoparticipateinrestorativeprocesseswithor
withoutvictims.”(p.21).Intheexperimentalprogrammeofthisactionresearch,alloffenders
hadtoparticipateineithertheVEPorSTPasphaseoneprogrammes,beforebeingofferedthe
opportunity,iftheysochose,tomeetwiththeirdirectvictimsinarestorativejustice
conference.
RestorativeJusticeConferencing(RJC)
RJCinvolvesrepresentationfromallthosestakeholdersaffectedbyacrime–thevictim,the
offenderandtheirsupporters.Oneortwofacilitatorsarealsopresentandarerequiredtobe
73GuestsoftheSTPcelebrationsincludedCorrectionalstaff,membersofPrisonFellowship,WitnessCareOfficersandPolicepersonnel;aswellasvictimsandoffender-participantsfrompreviousgroups.AreporterfromtheRoyalGazetteattendedonegroup’scelebrationandwroteapieceontheprogramme(publishedon26thMarch2015–O.Johnston-Barnes‘OffendersandVictimsFacetoFace’p2)–thisarticlecanbefoundinAppendix4.Onlythoseparticipantsconsentingtobephotographedwereincluded.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
80
equallysupportiveandrespectfulofallinattendance74.Priortotheactualconferencethereisa
lotofpreparationthatgoeson.
PreparationforRJCisparamount.Allparties(includingsupporters)areassessedforsuitabilityto
ensurereadinesstoparticipatebeforebeingbroughttogether.Thisshouldbedoneinsucha
waythatfacilitatorslistentotheparties’story,gaugecommunicationstylesandtheimpactof
theoffenceonthemandtheircommunityofsupport.Partiesshouldbepreparedfortheactual
encounterbyreducinganxietiesandensuringtherearenosurprisesregardingtheprocess.
Umbreit(2000)urgeshowever,thatthis“…isnotmeantto“script”theactualconferenceso
thatlittlegenuineemotion,includinganger,willemerge.”(p.5).Rather,thefacilitatorshould
createapersonalbutimpartialconnectiontoensurepartiesfeelsafetoengageinthedialogue
withminimalinterventionfromthefacilitator(Umbreit,2000).
Further,towhatcouldbereferredtoasaone-offRJC,whereconsiderednecessaryor
responsivetoculturalorcommunityneeds,amulti-methodapproachisencouraged(Umbreit,
2000;Bazemore&Umbreit,2005).Umbreit(2000)proposesuseoftwo-phaseconferencing.
Thisprocessreflectsameetingbetweenthedirectorprimaryvictimsandtheoffenderor
offendersengagingindialoguetogether;andthenafterabreaktheconveningofalarger
conferenceincludingsupportersandcommunitymembers.Thismethodwouldbeidealfor
offenceswherethereareanumberofsecondary-victims(forexamplecommunitymembers
affectedbyanoffenceornumerousfamilymembersoftheprimaryvictim).
TheScript,Agreement&Gathering
TheInternationalInstituteforRestorativePractices(IIRP)publishascript75forfacilitatoruse
whichconsistsofaseriesofopen-endedquestionstoencourageaffectivedialogueand
generateopportunityforreparation.Thescriptisdevelopedspecificallyforconferences
concerningcriminaloffenceswheretheoffenderacceptsresponsibilityandthereare
74“Despitetheproliferationofrestorativejusticeprogrammes,relativelylittleattentionhasbeengiventotheissueofaccreditationorcertificationoffacilitatorsandmediators.”(UN2006,p49).Inthecurrentresearchexperiment,registeredtrainers’(ofwhichtheresearcherwasone)withtheInternationalInstituteforRestorativePractices(IIRP)trainedfacilitators.FacilitatorswerestaffpersonnelfromtheBermudaDoCandBermudaPoliceService(BPS).
75TerryO’Connell1991–acommunity-policingsergeantinAustraliadevisedthescript(Wachteletal,2010).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
81
identifiablevictims(Wachteletal,2010).Thescripthelpsfacilitatorsremainfocusedamidstthe
emotionalprocessingofparticipants.Wachteletal(2010)reportonresearchthathasbeen
conductedand“…consistentlydemonstratedhighratesofparticipantsatisfaction,perceptions
offairnessandoffendercompliancewithconferenceagreements(McCold&Wachtel,1998;
Moore&Forsythe,1995;Umbreit&Fercello,1998,1999).”(p.178)basedontheuseofthe
script.
Thescriptseparatesthe‘deedfromthedoer’,firstaskingtheoffenderstostatewhathappened,
afterthefacilitatorsetsouttheultimatepurposeoftheconferencetorepairtheharmcaused.
Emphasisisgiventotheincidentthatoccurredspecifyingdate,placeandnatureoftheoffence.
Itismadeexplicitinthescriptthatthepurposeoftheconferenceisnottodecidewhetherthe
offenderisgoodorbad,butrathertoexplorehowpeoplewereaffectedandhowreparation
canoccur.
Offendersspeakingfirsthasafour-foldeffect–itallowsfortheoffendertotakeresponsibility,
mitigatesanydefensivenessorrescuingtendencyoftheoffender-supporters,itcaneliminate
anypreconceptionsofthoseinattendanceandhelpreducethevictim’sanxietiesoranger
(Wachtel,etal,2010).Aftertheoffenders,victimsareaskedquestions,thenthevictim-
supportersandthentheoffenders-supporters.Thefocusthenturnstotheagreementphase.
Theoffenderisaskediftheyhaveanythingfurthertheywanttosay–whichoffersthemthe
opportunitytoextendanapologyifonehasnotbeenofferedbythistime.Thenvictimsare
askedwhattheywouldlikefromtheconference.Theoffenderisaskedwhattheythinkabout
eachrequestofreparationthevictimrequests.Theagreementmustbemutuallyagreed(the
offendershouldnotfeelobligatedtojustacceptthevictims’requests).
Beforetheconferenceisclosedthefacilitatorofferstheparticipantsanopportunityforanyfinal
remarks;andthentheconferenceisclosedbythefacilitatorthankingeveryonefortheir
contributionsandinvitingthemtopartakeinrefreshments.76Thisgivestheparticipantstimeto
interactinformallywhiletheagreementiswrittenup,andduringwhichtimetheoffenderand
otherappropriateparticipantssigntheagreementandreceivecopies.
76“1.Allowtimeattheendofthemeetingforinformaldiscussionbetweenparticipants,andatimeforreflectionfollowingtheendoftheformalmeeting,ideallywithrefreshmentsavailable.2.Remainpresentthroughout...bealerttosignificantfurtherexchanges…ofrestoration…(forexample,arequesttostayintouch).(RestorativeJusticeCouncil,2011,p18).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
82
Implementationoftheentireschemeiscoveredinthefollowingsectionofthischapter,
whichmeetstheresearchobjective–
• TodrawonresearchandpolicyguidancetoclarifyhowRJshouldbeimplemented
withinacorrectionssetting.
SchemeDevelopmentandBestPracticeGuidance
TheschemeinBermudawassetupusingguidanceofbestpracticefromanumberofsources.77
Suchconsiderationsalsoinformedtheethicsapplicationfortheresearch.
TheNationalOffenderManagementService(NOMS)intheirpublication‘Wait‘TilEight’An
EssentialStart-upGuidetoNOMSRJSchemeImplementation(2013)provideguidanceand
materialsforRJimplementationofconferencingpractices.Theyadvise,inaccordancewiththe
systemintheUKthattoestablishascheme,amanagementandplanninggroupareestablished,
thatcanbecomeamulti-agencysteeringgroup.InBermudatheresearcher,tooktheleadin
developingaprogrammewiththeassistanceofotherstafffromtheDoC.Oncethefirstphaseof
theschemewasunderway(deliveryoftheVEPandSTP),withPrisonFellowshipBermuda
contractedtoprovidetheirprogramme,theBermudaPoliceService(BPS)wereinvitedtojoin
thescheme.TheDoCandBPSCommissionerssignedaMemorandumofUnderstanding.Contact
wasmadewithNGOsinthecommunitythatcouldprovidecounsellingtovictimsand
supporters,ifneededpost-conference.78Contactwasalsomadeandadvicesoughtfrom
governmentandnon-governmentagenciesthatcouldprovideinputtotherightsandlegislation
forvictimsandoffenders.79
Inaccordancewithguidance,acaseflowchartwasdevelopedwithconsiderationto
assessmentsofeligibilityandsuitabilityandcriteriaforcaseidentification(NOMS,2013).Asthe
77GuidanceofbestpracticewasprimarilytakenfromtheRestorativeJusticeCouncil(2011);theUnitedNations(2006);theNationalOffenderManagementService(2013);Wachteletal(2010)andUmbreit(2000).78TheagenciescontactedandagreeabletoprovidingsupporttovictimsweretheWomen’sResourceCentreandtheCentreAgainstAbuse.Supportforinmatespost-conference,wouldbeprovidedbyexistingDoCstaff–SocialWorkers,PsychologistandChaplains.79ThisincludedtheHumanRightsCommission,CentreforJusticeandtheDepartmentofPublicProsecutions.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
83
schemebeingintroducedwasnewtoBermuda,asapilotstudy,certainoffenceswereexcluded
(thisisdescribedfurtherinthenextchapter,underresearchparticipants).Needlesstosay,
therearesomerelationshipsandoffencesthatcreatepowerimbalancesbetweenvictimsand
offenders,andthiscangiverisetorepeatvictimization.Obviouscaseswereexcludedfromthe
pilotphaseoftheresearch(e.g.sexualabuseanddomesticviolence).80
Nonetheless,assessmentswerestillmadeofpotentialpowerimbalancesineachcasefor
“presenceofanycomplexissuesofintimidationandvulnerability”.(RestorativeJusticeCouncil,
2011,p11).Protocolsweredevelopedandriskassessmentswereconducted,thisincluded
securitychecksofprevious(criminal)historybetweenpeopleparticipatingintheSTPor
conferences.Asperguidance,anysafetyconcernswererecordedandtobemanaged,ifrisks
couldnotbemanagedface-to-faceinterventionswouldnotbeproceededwith(Restorative
JusticeCouncil,2011;NOMS,2013).However,alternativeinterventionswouldbeoffered.
TheBPStrainedconferencefacilitatorswouldmakethefirstcontactwithvictimsinthe
communitybytelephone;nomentionwouldbemadeatthistimeofaface-to-facemeetingwith
theoffender(Wachtel,etal,2010).Ifvictimswereagreeableameetingwouldbearrangedwith
thefacilitators(andresearcher).TheRestorativeJusticeCouncil(2011)adviseinpreparationof
RJprocessesandfacilitatingasaferestorativeprocess,thatfacilitators“Communicatewith
individualsthroughouttheprocess…”(p13).Theschemeusedleaflets,ofwhichtemplateswere
providedbythe‘WaittilEight’publication(NOMS,2013)togiveouttoparticipantsof
conferences,andtheresearcherpreparedaResearchBackgroundPaperthatcouldbegivento
allparticipantsofthescheme(seeAppendix2foracopyoftheResearchBackgroundPaper).
Clearinformationwasprovidedtoparticipantsthroughouttheprocess;andparticipants’
opinionsoftheinformationtheyreceivedwouldbegatheredaspartofthepost-conference
questionnaire(aswellasposttheVEPandSTPprogrammes).
Guidanceadvises–“Assessthelikelihoodofstrongemotionsorconflictduringthemeeting,and
ensureyouhaveaplaninplaceforseparatemeetings,ortimeoutduringthemeeting,should
thisbeneeded.”(RestorativeJusticeCouncil,2011,p15).TheCouncilalsoadviseonselectingan
80“MinistryofJusticeguidancestatesthatrestorativejusticeshouldnotnormallybeusedincasesof:“Domesticviolenceduetotheriskofongoingharm…sexualoffences,unlessavictimofsuch[an]offencerequestsarestorativejusticeactivityandsuitablyexperiencedandskilledfacilitatorsareavailable.”(RestorativeJusticeCouncil,2015b,p8)
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
84
appropriatevenue;informingandobtainingconsentforobservers.Intheschemeall
conferencesduringthepilotphaseweretobeheldattheDoCasonlyconvictedprisonerswould
participateandparticipantswereinformedofthis.Permissionwassoughtfortheresearcherto
observetheconferencesandanyotherpersonnelnecessaryforsafetyreasons,orrequested,
werediscussedwithallinvolved.
TheRestorativeJusticeCouncilgivesguidanceforallstagesoftheprocess,aswellasforindirect
processes;allofwhichwastakenintoconsiderationinthedevelopmentandimplementationof
thescheme.
Thischapterprovidedinformationonthemaininterventionsthatformedpartoftheaction
researchandhighlightedthedifferencesbetweenthetwo(VEPandSTP)phaseone/prerequisite
programmesforconferencing.WhilsttheSTPcouldbeconsideredarelationallyrestorative
interventioncomparedtotheVEPbecauseitbrings(unrelated)victimsfromthecommunityand
offenderstogether,creatinganimmediatepotentialforreductionofharm;theVEPwas
expectedtoallowforanin-depthassessmentoftheactualcrimeandsuitabilityoftheoffenders
forconferencing.Thedifferencesbetweenthetwoprogrammeswasimportantastheywere
beingexaminedtoassesstheireffectivenessinpreparingoffenders–totakeresponsibility,
increaseempathyfortheirvictimsandbemotivatedtomakereparation.Inasmallislandsuch
asBermuda,thepotentialforunrelatedvictimstooffenderswouldbeunlikelytoprevailfor
long.However,withtheChristianfaithbeingmostdominantthiswasalsoexpectedtohavean
influence.Itwouldbeimportanttoassessifthedifferencesbetweentheprogrammeswere
significant.Thechapterendedwithasynopsisoftheoveralldevelopmentoftheinitiativeand
adherencetobestpractice,thenextchaptersetsoutdetailsonthemethodologyofthe
research.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
85
v CHAPTER5–METHODOLOGY
“Oftenwhenrestorativejusticepracticesareusedinprison,they’reinitiatedbypeoplefromtheoutside.”(Toews,2006,p72)
Introduction
Thisthesishasdiscussedrestorativejustice(RJ)inlightofthegrowingtheoreticalandempirical
research.IthasalsobroughtBermudaintofocusonissuesofcrime,thesocialandpolitical
landscapeanditscriminaljusticesystem(CJS).Theobjectivesofthisthesisnecessitates
empiricalresearchinordertoaddresstheaimofhowRJcanworkforvictimsandoffendersin
Bermudainregardstothepotentialforreductionofharm,increasingempathyandasan
additiontotheexistingsystem.Canprogrammesdesignedtohelpincreaseempathywith
incarceratedoffendersachievethataim;andcantheoverallinitiativehelpvictimstohealand
feelsafer.Todothistheresearchevaluatesthreecompatiblebutdistinctinterventions,(a
VictimEmpathyProgramme(VEP),SycamoreTreeProject(STP)&RJConferencing)thatwere
describedintheprecedingchapterandthatcouldbesaidrepresentthethreesuggested
degreesofrestorativeorientationinpractices(partial,mostlyandfull,respectively-McCord,
2000)discussedinthepreviouschapter.
Specificallythischapterdescribesthemethodsusedtoobtaindataforthefollowingobjectives
oftheresearch:
• ToexploretheexperienceandeffectsofanexperimentalprogrammeofRJforvictims
andoffendersinBermuda;and
• Toexplorevictims’andoffenders’opinionsoftheexistingcriminaljusticesystem’s
managementoftheircases,andingeneral.
Thetheoreticalframeworkprovidessupportforthechosenmethodologyemployedandthe
specificimportanceofreflectivereporting.Thischaptersetsouttherationaleforthemixed-
methodapproachthatwastakenanddiscussessomeofthestrengthsandlimitationsofthe
methodschosen.Thechaptermakesreferencetosecondarydatacollectedandprovides
informationonethicalconsiderations.Assuch,researchinprisonsandtheresearcher’sposition
iselucidated,withreferencetotheusefulnessofvalidationstrategies.Thechapterconcludes
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
86
withadescriptionoftheselectionanddemographicsoftheparticipants,anddetailsofthedata
analysis.
TheoreticalFramework
PhilosophicalBasis&ResearchFramework
Constructionismformedtheepistemologyoftheresearch,astheresearcheralsoacknowledged
theirownconstructsoftheirwork(linkedtothemethodology).Recognisingtheimportanceof
knowledgeandrealitybeingrelationalandthereforevalue-laden.Further,contingentonsocial
experience,socialrelationsandinteractions.Asanepistemology,itsincorporationof
pragmatismalsoencapsulatedtheresearcher’sintentionwiththestudy,asitwastofocuson
“what’sworks”(Cresswell,2013).SpecificallySocialConstructionism,providedrecognitionof
culture,historyandsocietalimpacts.
Anoptimistic(ifnotsimplistic)statementofsocialconstructionismincompatibilitywiththe
aimsofRJisthat–“Iftheconversationcouldbechanged[orevenoccurinthefirstinstance],all
thatweconstructas“problems”couldbereconstructedas“opportunities”.Aswespeak
together,wecanalsobringnewworldsintobeing.”(Gergen,2009,p4).
SocialConstructionismrecognizesthatwhatisoftentakenforgrantedabouttheworldneednot
beandthatwhatisconsideredtobetruths,includingthosetruthspresentedbythescientific
world,shouldbescrutinized.Thosethatmakeclaimsoffacttotheworld,notleastscientists,
oftentryandclaimobjectivityandthatitiswithoutvalues.Yetsocialconstructionismargues
thatthosevaluesareconveyedeveninthelanguageusedtomaketheclaims(Gergen,2009).
Knowledgeisreceivedthroughlanguage.Knowledgeandlanguageevenofthegeneralpublicis
sociallyconstructedmeaning–“…whatwetaketobetheworldimportantlydependsonhow
weapproachit,andhowweapproachtoitdependsonthesocialrelationshipsofwhichweare
apart.”(Gergen,2009,p2).Whenpeoplelackknowledgeorcannotunderstandthelanguageof
asubjectmatter,theytendtojustexceptwhatisofferedbytheexperts.Thiscanputtheexpert
inverypowerfulpositionsandbeameansofmaintainingthepositionsofpeople,suchasthose
disadvantagedwithinasociety.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
87
Itisarguedthatsocialconstructionneednotbedependentontradition,historyor‘whatthere
is’,asconstructscouldtakemanyforms(Gergen,2009).Onedivergencebetweensocial
constructionistsiswhatBurninghamandCooper(1999,inAndrews,2012)termstrictand
contextualconstructionism.Theformeracceptsthattherearealternativepossibilitiesto
constructsweuseandallhaveequalmeaningfulness(relativism).Andrews(2012)arguesthat
strictconstructionismisunhelpful,asitcannotguideknowledgeorpresentsocialphenomenon
becauseeverythingisconsideredpossible.Contextualconstructionismacceptsobjectivereality
–inotherwordstherearethingsthatexistoutsideoflanguage.Andrews(2012)provides
furtherclarityonthecontextual(realist)division–“Theideathatadiseasecanexistasan
independentrealityiscompatiblewiththesocialconstructionistview.Thenamingofdisease
andindeedwhatconstitutesdiseaseisarguablyadifferentmatterandhasthepotentialtobe
sociallyconstructed.Thisisnotthesameasclaimingthatithasnoindependentexistence
beyondlanguage.”(p42).AndrewsciteshowBerger&Luckman(1991)limitthediscussionof
socialconstructionofknowledgetoepistemologicalclaimsandmakenoontologicalclaims.
However,thedifferentbranchesofsocialconstructionismbringwithitdiscourse,whichby
virtuegenerateschallenges,questionsandalternatives.Suchastheclaimfavouredbythe
currentresearcher-thatindividualsarenotpassivetotheknowledgetheyacquire,butalso
possesspsychologicalprocessesthatinfluencehowtheyuseinformationandviewtheworld
(Burr,2003).Insuchdiscourseliestheabilityofsocialconstructionismtocreatechange,for
example,tosocialinequities.
TheSocialConstructionismwasappropriateastheepistemologyalsofortheimportanceof
constructsthatpeopleformofcrime,punishment(Gergen,2009)andjustice.Animportant
questionaskedinthestudy,ofconferencingparticipantswas-Whatdoesjusticemeantoyou?
ThiswasimportantastheRJliteratureandaimsquestionhowjusticeisconstructedandpetered
outbythestatesystemopposedtothestakeholdersofacrime.Thiswasfundamentaltothe
studyasanaim,wastoexplorevictimandoffendersopinionsoftheCJSinBermudaandthe
managementoftheircase.
Constructsarealsoimportanttohowtheoffendersviewthemselves,asidentifiedbyHagemann
(2003)whofoundoffendersneededtoresolvethreerelationshipswithRJ.Oneofthese
relationshipsbeingtheirinternalrelationshipwiththemselveswhichhastwodimensions-their
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
88
identityasanoffenderandasa"normal"person.Theconstructsofwhatconstitutesacrime,
victims,harm,punishment,victimization,responsibilityandreparationcouldallimpacttheir
experienceofRJ.Itwasalsoexpectedthattheessenceofthispotentialdiscourseatan
individual(andlocal)leveliswhatcouldcreatechangeandhealing,whilstalsocreatingempathy
asaresultofperspective-takingandunderstanding.
Asthetheoreticalperspective-Criticaltheorywasmostrelevanttothestudyandthesocietyin
whichthestudywasbeingconducted.Ashighlightedinchapter3,socialinequitiespersistin
Bermuda.Itwasintendedthatthestudycouldeducateandcreatechangeforthebettermentof
thesociety.Warmoth(2000)writingonsocialconstructionismarguesthattodealwithissues
suchaspovertyandviolence,thereshouldbeconsciousandcollaborativeeffortstocreatenew
socialinstitutions.Furthermore,suchchangecallsforunderstandingofthevaluesand
motivationsofindividualsandofthedynamicsofsocialandenvironmentalsystemsthese
individualslivein.
Theresearcherwasanagentoftheconstitutionthatchangewashopedwouldbecreatedin–
thecriminaljusticesystem,andassuchActionResearchformedthemethodologyofthis
thesis.81Actionresearchrecognizestheresearcherasasubjectiveentity,whichdoesnotallow
forobjectiveinterpretation.Asamethodology,ithasbeenusedtoinvestigateRJinanumberof
studiesindifferentcountries(e.g.Robert&Peters,2003;Shaplandetal,2008;Szego&Fellegi,
2013).
“Actionresearchisconcentratedonthedevelopmentandevaluationofnewpracticesandisalsofocuseduponthefinetuningorrestructuringofexistingpractices.…Atthesametime,thismethodhasalsowonapprovalduetoitsinclusivecharacter.Actionresearchallowsseveral(all)partiestobeactivelyinvolvedinthe(searchfora)solutiontotheproblem.”(Robert&Peters,2003,p96).
This‘inclusivecharacter’ofactionresearchappearstosharecommonalitieswithRJ.For
example,Frickedefinesactionresearchas“…empathyandlisteningwhilemeetingtheother,it
isacommitmenttobasicvalueslikehumancreativityanddemocraticparticipation,itisbased
ontheperceptionofsocialrealityasacontinuingprocesswithindividualsbeingsubjectsoftheir
history…”(citedinBrydon-Milleretal,2003,p14).Wachteletal’s(2010)SocialDiscipline
81Crotty(1998)viewsactionresearchasamethodology,Reason&Bradbury(2008,citedinDrake,2014)consideractionresearchasamethod.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
89
WindowproposesthatthemosteffectiveapplicationofRJtocreatesocialchangeistowork
withpeople,opposedtoforthem.Thisiscompatiblewithhowactionresearchrecognizesand
respectstheknowledgepeoplehaveofthemselvesandtheissueswithintheircommunities
(Brydon-Milleretal,2003).
Mixed-Methods:Rational&ConceptualFramework
Toadequatelyevaluatetheinterventionprogrammesaspartoftheresearchobjectiveamixed-
methodapproachwasadoptedtoworkinhandwiththemethodology(McNiff&Whitehead,
2011).Thisthenvaluesthesubjectiveexperienceofthesubjects,acknowledgedtheimpactof
theresearcher’smotivationandbiases,recognizedtheimportanceofpoliticalagendas,hasan
emphasisonchangeandevaluativeessenceof‘whatworks’andhow.
Atthecentreofthe‘what’and‘how’researchquestionMackenzie&Knipe(2006)suggestthat
“...datacollectionandanalysismethodsarechosenasthosemostlikelytoprovideinsightsinto
thequestion…”(p196).Themethodsemployedmustallowforfirst-handaccountsofthe
experienceofrestorativejustice.Asshowninchaptertwo,studiesonrestorativejusticehave
usedarangeofmethodsfrominterviewing(e.g.Barr,2013;Bolivar,2013;DeMesmaecker,
2013;Umbreit&Vos,2000),surveysandquestionnaires(e.g.Barr,2013;Bolivar,2013;Feasey
&Williams,2009;Shaplandetal;2004;2006;2007;),focusgroups(e.g.DeMesmaecker,2013),
casestudy(e.g.Umbreit&Vos,2000),observation(e.g.Shapland,2007);andevenmeta-
analysis(Latimeretal,2001;Strangetal,2013;Umbreit,2005).Dick(1993)suggeststhatthe
mostimportantreasonforchoosingActionResearch,shouldbethatthesituationunder
researchrequiresresponsiveness,wherebyanalysisofdatashoulddeterminemodificationsas
thenextstep.Hefurtheradvocatesmultiplesourcesofdata,whichhereferstoasdialectic,
virtuallyequivalenttotriangulation.
Triangulationismostcommonlydefinedastheuseofmultiplemethodstomeasurethesame
phenomena,or“...multipleanddifferentsources,methods,investigatorsandtheoriesto
providecorroboratingevidence.”(Cresswell,2013,p251).However,ithasbeenarguedthat
researchclaiminguseofmethodologicaltriangulationhaslargelybeeninappropriate(Greeneet
al,1989).Greeneetal(1989)offeraconceptualframeworkformixed-methodevaluation
designsandproposefivepurposes-triangulation,complementarity,development,initiationand
expansion.Greeneetal(1989)originallydevelopedtheframeworkforevaluationofsocialand
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
90
educationalprogrammes.Itwasconsideredthatthisframeworkwouldalsoberelevanttothe
evaluationofrestorativejusticeprogrammes/interventions.
Themixed-methoddesignusedforthisresearchservedprimarilythepurposeoftriangulation
andcomplementarity.ThedifferencebetweenthetwopurposesaccordingtoGreeneetal
(1989)relatestothephenomenonbeingstudied.“Inacomplementaritymixed-methodstudy,
qualitativeandquantitativemethodsareusedtomeasureoverlappingbutalsodifferentfacets
ofaphenomenon,yieldinganenriched,elaboratedunderstandingofthatphenomenon.This
differsfromtriangulationintentinthatthelogicofconvergencerequiresthatthedifferent
methodsassessthesameconceptualphenomenon.”(Greene,etal,1989,p258).Greeneetal
acknowledgethatresearchinvestigationscanutilizemorethanonepurpose.Inotherwords,
mixed-methodsdatacanbeusedtocomplementeachotherbymeasuringdifferentaspectsof
thesamephenomenon(complementarity),ormixed-methodscanbeusedtoassessthesame
phenomenon(triangulation).
ThisresearchsoughttoexploretheexperienceofRJforvictimsandoffenders,byevaluatingthe
potentialofthreerestorativejusticeprogrammestoincreasevictimempathyandreduce
harm/aidhealing.Italsosoughttoexplorevictimandoffenders’opinionsoftheexisting
criminaljusticesysteminBermudaandmanagementoftheircase;asadifferentbutrelated
facetofthephenomenon,thepurposeof‘complementarity’wasthereforeappropriate.
“Thecomplementarityintentcanbeillustratedbytheuseofaqualitativeinterviewtomeasurethenatureandlevelofprogramparticipants’educationalaspirations,aswellasinfluencesontheseaspirations,combinedwithaquantitativequestionnairetomeasurethenature,level,andperceivedrankingwithinpeergroupofparticipants’educationalaspirations.Thetwomeasuresinthisexampleareassessingsimilar,aswellasdifferent,aspectsoftheaspirationsphenomenon.”(Greene,etal,1989,p258).
IntheiranalysisoftheoryandempiricalresearchGreeneetal(1989)alsohighlightedthatnotall
studiesemployingmixed-methoddesignfollowedthroughinthesamevainatthestageofdata
analysis.Inotherwordswhilstemployingmixed-methoddesigns,investigationsoftenseparate
qualitativefromquantitativedataandprovidesegregatedreporting.Whereappropriatespecific
triangulatedandcomplementarydataisanalysedandreportedsimultaneously.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
91
EthicsI-Consent
TheLondonMetropolitanUniversity’sethicscommitteegrantedethicalapprovalforthestudy.
TheresearcherwasgrantedpermissiontoconducttheresearchbytheCommissionerofthe
DepartmentofCorrections(DoC)andtheministryresponsiblefortheDoC–theMinistryof
NationalSecurity(seeAppendix1foracopyoftheauthorizationletter).Thesewereobtained
beforeanycontactwasmadewithanyoftheparticipants.RJguidancealsoinformedoncontact
madewithparticipants.DoCprogrammesstaff/VEPfacilitatorsapproachedtheoffendersthat
wereofferedtheopportunitytoparticipateintheVEPandSTPprogrammes.Thesefacilitators
obtainedinformedconsentfromtheoffenderswhoagreedtoparticipateintheprogrammes
andseparateconsentfortheirinclusionintheresearch,beforetheresearcherhadanydirect
contactwiththemregardingtheresearch.PrisonFellowshipBermudarecruitedthevictimsthat
participatedintheSTPandgainedtheirinformedconsenttoparticipateintheprogramme.The
latterwasobtainedbeforetheresearcherspoketothemdirectlyabouttheresearchand
requestedtheirconsenttobeincluded.
Thechapternowpresentsthemethodsthatwereusedtocollectdata.
ResearchMethods
ChosenMethods
Themethodsusedintheresearchincludequestionnaires,apsychometric,in-depthsemi-
structuredinterviewsandobservation.Thequestionnairesandobservationswereconducted
witheachofthethreeinterventionsforbothvictimandoffender-participants,aswasuseofthe
psychometricquestionnairehoweverthismethodwasonlyadministeredtotheoffender-
participants.In-depthinterviewingwasreservedforthosewhoparticipatedintheRJ
conferencing;asonlyinthisinterventionwouldtheoffendersandtheirdirectvictimscome
together.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
92
Thetablebelowillustratesthemethodsusedwitheachintervention
Subjects↓ ProgrammeInterventionsVictimEmpathy SycamoreTree RJConferencing
Offender-participants
CRIME-PICSIIPre&PostQuestionnaires
CRIME-PICSIIPre&PostQuestionnaires
CRIME-PICSIIPre&PostQuestionnairesStructuredInterviews
Victim-participants
Pre&PostQuestionnaires
Pre&PostQuestionnairesStructuredInterviews
Researcher Nonparticipant-to-participatoryObservation
Nonparticipant-to-participatoryObservation
Nonparticipant-to-participatoryObservation
Questionnaires
Questions&Design
Onepairofquestionnaireswasdesignedfortheoffender-participantsoftheVictimEmpathy
andSycamoreTreeProjectphase-oneinterventions(4questionnaires).Onepairdesignedfor
thevictim-participantsoftheSycamoreTreeProject(2questionnaires),andonesetforthe
offendersandvictimswhoparticipatedintheRJconferences(4questionnaires).Themajorityof
questionnaireitemswasreflectedacrossallthequestionnaires,andrequiredbothquantitative
andqualitativeresponses.
Thequestionnairesalsotookintoaccounttime-intervals-pre-interventionandpost-
intervention.Forexample,apre-interventionquestionasks–Howdoyoufeelaboutbeing
contactedtoparticipateintheprogramme?Bythepost-interventionstage,theitembecame–
Howdoyoufeelnow,aboutbeingaskedtoparticipateintheprogramme?
Thetablebelowillustratesthecategoryofquestions,preandposteachofthethree
interventionsastheyweredescribedonthequestionnaires.
QuestionnaireDomains
Pre SectionA-asksquestionsaboutyourviewsandopinionsoftheCriminalJusticeSystem.
SectionB-asksquestionsaboutyourcaseandexperiencewiththeCriminalJusticeSystem.
SectionC-asksquestionsaboutyourknowledgeofRestorativeJusticeandmotivationtoparticipateintheprogramme/conference.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
93
Post SectionA-asksquestionsaboutthepreparationfortheprogramme/conference.
SectionB-asksquestionsabouttheprogramme/conferenceitself.
SectionC–asksquestionsaboutyourtimesincetheprogramme/conferencereflectingback;andyourgeneralviewsofrestorativejusticenowyouhaveparticipatedinaprogramme/conference.
Manyquestionnaireitemswereadoptedfrompastempiricalresearch(e.g.Miersetal,2001;
Shaplandetal,2007)orbasedontheoreticaldiscourse;whichwouldallowforexplorationof
attitudesamongstaBermudianpopulation.
Thequantitativequestionnaireitemsusedafive-pointLikertresponseformat(e.g.strongly
agree,agree,neitheragreeordisagree,disagree,stronglydisagree)82.Otheritemsusedless
responsecategories(3,4)andmoredichotomouscategories(i.e.yes,no)thatarepermissibleif
thereisgoodrationaleforreducingthenumberofresponses(Dudley,2005;Lewin,2005).These
itemsaimedtoexploretheopinionsandviewsoftheparticipants.
Anumberofopen-endeditemswereincludedinthequestionnaire,forthepurposeofobtaining
qualitativedatafrombothsetsofsubjects(offendersandvictims)acrossbothtimeframes(pre
andpost-intervention).Thesequestionsaimedtoexploreparticipants’motivationand
subjectiveexperienceoftheinterventions.
Obtainingbothquantitativeandqualitativedatafrombothparticipantgroupswouldallowfor
triangulatedandcomplementaryanalysis.
AdministrationandConsent
Thequestionnaireswerecompletedbytheparticipantsbutadministratedbytheprogramme
facilitatorsoftheVEPor,inthecaseofvictim-participantsbytheresearcher.Thefacilitators
wereprovidedwithinstructionsandtoldtoansweranyquestionsthattheparticipantsmay
havehadwithoutprejudicingtheirresponses.Offender-participantswerealsoaffordedthe
opportunitytowithdrawfromparticipatingintheresearchiftheysochose.Consentto
82IntheCarifio&Perla(2007)papertheypresentwhattheycall,misunderstandings,mythsandurbanlegendsaboutLikertscalesandLikertresponseformats.ThequestionnairesconstructedforuseinthisthesiswereessentiallybasedonaLikertresponseformat.However,Carifio&Perlaarguethatitem-by-itemLikertresponseformatsshouldnotbedisembodiedfromthemacrolevelmeasurementofLikertscales,despitethisusehavingbecomecommonplacepractice.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
94
participateintheresearch,wasrequestedfromtheoffendersfollowinginitialconsentto
participateintheprogrammes.Therewasthereforealapseintimebetweentheparticipants
consentingtoparticipateandactualcompletionofthequestionnaires.Thislapsemeantthatthe
offender-participantshadtimetoreconsidertheirinitialconsent.
Administrationofthequestionnaireswiththeconferencinginterventionfollowedasimilar
procedurealthoughtheresearcherwasmoreinvolvedatthisstagewithallparticipants.The
researcheradministeredthequestionnaireswiththevictim-participantsoftheSTP.
Aresearchbackgroundpaperwasprovidedtotheparticipants(seeAppendix2)andleafletson
eachoftheinterventions(includingtheRJconferencing-seeAppendix3)83.Allparticipants
wereadvisedthatdecliningtobeinvolvedintheresearchwouldnotpreventthembeingableto
participateintheprogrammes.
Piloting
Forthepurposeofpilotingthequestionnairetheresearcherselectedtwooffenders,oneofwho
hadpreviouslyrequestedtheopportunitytoengageinaRJconferencewiththevictimsofhis
offence.84Basedonthefirstoffender’sfeedback,someminorcorrectionsweremade.
Afterthefirstpilot,theresearcherapproachedthesecondoffender.Althoughthisoffenderdid
notsuggestanyissuescompletingthequestionnaire,theresearchernotedhisresponsetothe
questionregardingmotivationtoparticipateintheprogramme.Theoffenderstatedtheir
reasoningasbeing“BecauseIwasaskedtodotheprogramme...”Theresearcherdidnot
questiontheoffenderontheirresponsebutaskedtheprogrammefacilitatorstocheckoutthe
offender’smotivationwhenbeingassessedforsuitabilitytoparticipate.Thissecondoffender
hadbeenverykeentohavetheresearcherfacilitatetheprogrammehewouldbein.When
assessedbythefacilitators,thesecondoffenderinformedthemthathismainmotivationfor83TheVEPinformationleafletwasdesignedbythePsychologyIntern;theSTPleafletbyPrisonFellowshipBermudaandtheRJConferenceleafletsbytheresearcher,basedonexamplesprovidedinthe‘WaitTilEight’publication(NOMS,2013).84Thisoffender-participantwasallocatedtotheSTPandthesecondpilotoffender-participantwasallocatedtotheVEP;theseoffenderswerematchedforthenatureoftheiroffence.Thefirstpilot-offender,wastheonlyoffenderofallthosethatparticipatedintheactionthattheresearcherhadpriorprofessionalcontactwith.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
95
participatingintheprogrammewasforthepurposeofimpressingtheparoleboard.Thiscanbe
acommonextrinsicmotivationformanyincarceratedoffenders.Atthistimethefacilitators
remindedtheoffenderthatparticipationwasnottobeusedforthepurposeofparole;the
offenderstatedthathestillwantedtoparticipate.
Thefirstgroupofsixvictim-participantsidentifiedfortheSTPactedasthepilotgroupforthe
victim-questionnaires.Whathadnotfirstoccurredtotheresearcherwasthatnotallofthe
victims(identifiedfortheSTP)wouldhavehadacourtcase,astheiroffenderswerenever
identified.Onthebasisofthisacoupleofamendmentsweremadetothepreandpost
questionnairesforthevictims.
Psychometrics:MeasuringEmpathyinOffenders
AstheaimoftheresearchwastoexplorethepotentialforRJtoincreaseempathyinoffenders,
thiswasmeasuredquantitativelyusingtheCRIME-PICSIIpsychometricquestionnaire.
TheCRIME-PICSIIpsychometricwasdevelopedbyFrudeetalin1994andiswidelyusedasa
standardizedmeasureofchangeforagenciesworkingwithoffenders.Since2003itwasadopted
intheUKasoneofeightmeasurestoevaluatenationallyaccreditedoffendingbehaviour
programmes(Feasey&Williams,2009).Feasey&Williams(2009)usedtheCRIME-PICSIIintheir
assessmentoftheSTPprogrammeandfoundasignificantattitudinalchangeinoffenderspost-
programme.
Itisusedtomeasurechangeinoffender’sattitudetooffendingandisthereforeusedpreand
postintervention.Itconsistsof20questionnaireitemsanda15-itemproblemsinventory(the
lattercomponentwasnotusedforpurposesofthestudy).Responsestotheitemsprovide
scoresthattranslateinto5scales,representedinthetablebelow.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
96
CRIME-PICSII ScaleDescriptionGeneralAttitudetoOffending(GScale)
Measurestheoffender’sgeneralattitudetowardsoffending.Lowscoresindicatinganattitudethatoffendingisnotanacceptablewayoflife.
AnticipationofRe-Offending(AScale)
Measurestheoffender’santicipationofre-offendinginthefuture.Lowscoresindicatingaresolvenottoreoffend.
VictimHurtDenial(VScale)
Measuresthedegreetowhichtheoffenderacknowledgestheharmcausedtothevictimoftheiroffence.Lowscoresindicatevictimempathy,asanacceptanceofharmcausedtovictimsbyoffending.
EvaluationofCrimeasWorthwhile(EScale)
Measuresthedegreetowhichtheoffenderviewscrimeasworthwhile.ALowscoreindicatesaviewthatthecostsofcrimeoutweighthebenefits.
PerceptionofCurrentLifeProblems(PScale)
Measuresthenumberofproblemareastheoffendersee’sthemselvesashaving.Thelowerthescorethelessproblemareasidentified.However,higherpostscoresmayreflectincreasedproblemrecognition.
OfmostrelevancetotheresearchwastheVscaleoftheCRIME-PICSIIthatmeasuresvictim
empathy.
The20questionnaireitemsconsistofstatementsthatrespondentsarerequiredtoindicate
whethertheyagreeordisagreewith,usinga5-point(Likert)scale(‘stronglyagree’to‘strongly
disagree’).Thepsychometricwasadministeredbytheprogrammefacilitators(alongwiththe
questionnaires)usingstandardizedinstructionsandself-completedbytheoffender-participants
ingroups.Thefacilitatorsassistedanyparticipantsthathadliteracydifficultiesindividually.The
computerizedCRIME-PICSIIScoringProgramwasutilizedforeachrespondent’squestionnaire.
OffenderprofilesusingtheCRIME-PICSIIcouldalsohelpdetermineselectionofparticular
offenderstothetypeofprogrammemostappropriateforthem(Frudeetal,2013).Theauthors
providethealphacoefficient,whichmeasurestheinternalreliabilityofeachscale.With0.70
andaboveindicativeofgoodinternalconsistencytheauthorsnotethathighalphacoefficients
canbereflectiveofthenumberofitemsineachscale(Frudeetal,2013).Thetablebelow
illustratesthenumberofitemsineachscaleandalphacoefficientvalues.85
85WhileScaleEdoesnotmeetthealpha“adequacy”criterion,theauthors’emphasesthatthefouritemssignificantlycorrelate;howeverresultsfromthisscaleshouldbetreatedwithcaution(Frudeetal,2013).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
97
CRIME-PICSIIScales No.ofItems AlphaCoefficient
GeneralAttitudetoOffending(GScale)
17 .76
AnticipationofRe-Offending(AScale)
6 .75
VictimHurtDenial(VScale)
3 .73
EvaluationofCrimeasWorthwhile(EScale)
4 .55
PerceptionofCurrentLifeProblems(PScale)
15 .83
Test-RetestReliabilityandTestSensitivityarealsometbyallthescales,despiteachangein
scoresbetweeninitialtestsandre-testtimesbeingexpectedduetotheimpactofan
intervention.ThewidespreaduseofCRIME-PICSIIisevidenceofitsgoodfacevalidity;andithas
concurrentvalidity.Forexample,theauthorspointoutthatscalesG,A&Eareableto
discriminatebetweenoffenderswithhigherriskscoresforreoffending.LowscoresinscaleV
(greateracknowledgmentofharmcausedtovictims)whichisofmostrelevancetothisstudy,
wasfoundtobereportedsignificantlymoreoftenwithoffenderswhohadexperienceda
custodialsentence.Theauthorshighlightthatthis“...isofcourselikelytoreflectthetypeof
offencecommitted.”(Frudeetal,2013).Furthertheauthorsreportthatpertainingtothe
validityofCRIME-PICSIIitshowsdifferencesinscoresonallscalesforthreetypesofoffending
a)thoseagainsttheperson,b)propertyoffencesandc)motorvehiclerelatedoffences.
Areductionbetweenpreandpostscoresindicatesanimprovementintheoffender’sattitude
(withtheexclusionofthePscale).86Therawscoreswereutilizedinthisresearchtoexamine
differencesbetweentheoffenders’preandpostinterventionscoresindividually,and
collectivelybetweentheprogrammes(VEPandSTP).Forthoseoffendersthatparticipatedina
conference,theywerealsoadministeredthepsychometricforathirdtime–post-conference.
Itwasarequirementofprogrammeparticipation(VEP&STP),aspermostprisonprogrammes,
thattheoffenderscompletepreandpostpsychometrics/questionnaires(i.e.CRIME-PICSII)as
partoftheprogrammeandthattheresultsremainonfileaspropertyoftheDoC.Thiswas
86Individualscalescoresallowforparticularfacetstobetargeted,whileaggregatedscoresacrossgroupsofoffenderscanbeusedtoevaluategeneralpatternsofchange,orusedintherawscoreform(Frudeetal,2013).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
98
madeexplicittotheoffender-participantshoweverthattheycouldrefuseconsentfortheir
resultstobeusedaspartoftheresearch.Theoffender-participants’wereinformedofthis,as
partoftheinstructionsgivenatthetimeofcompletingtheforms.
“ItisimportantforfutureresearchtoincludequalitativemeasuresoftheamountofharmthatoffenderscausebeforeandaftertheyengageinanRJC[restorativejusticeconference].…Asnewplaces…attempttoconductexperimentalevaluationsofRJs,thechancetomeasurethe
benefitsinthiswayshouldnotbemissed.”(Strangetal,2013).
Interviews
“Weconductqualitativeresearchwhenwewanttoempowerindividualstosharetheirstories,heartheirvoices,andminimizethepowerrelationshipsthatoftenexistbetweenaresearcherandtheparticipantsinastudy.”(Cresswell,2013,p48).
Theneedforaqualitativemeasuresuchasinterviewingwasimperativetothestudyforthevery
reasonsCresswellhighlights.Therewaseveryneedtoempowertheparticipants,notjustfor
researchpurposes,butalsoforthepurposeofaction.AcentralpremiseofRJistogiveavoice
tovictims,andoffenders,wheretheconventionaladversarialCJScanstealtheircases.Itwas
employedtoalsominimisethepowerrelationshipbetweentheresearcherandoffenders.As
guidanceonRJpractice,theRestorativeJusticeCouncil(2011)alsoadvisethatpractitioners–
“Providethepartieswiththeopportunitytodiscussopenlyandhonestlytheirthoughtsand
feelingsabouttherestorativejusticeprocessanditsoutcomes.”(p21).
InterviewDesignandQuestions
Fourinterviewschedulesweredesignedusingstructuredopen-endedquestionsforthosewho
participatedinaconference.Twoversionsforthevictimscorrespondedwiththepre-conference
(ISVPr)andpost-conference(ISVPo)stages;withtwosimilarversionsdesignedfortheoffender-
participants(ISOPr&ISOPo).
Kvale(1996)pointsoutthatquestionnairesincludequestionsaboutgeneralopinions,whichthe
interviewdoesnot,butratherelicitsdescriptionsofspecificsituationsandactionsequences.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
99
Thevictiminterviewschedulesconsistedofquestionsdesignedtoinvestigatefirst-handthe
opinions,motivationandexperienceoftheparticipantsfromtheirperspective,suchas:
motivationforparticipatinginaconference(whichcouldalsobeusedtoinformontheir
readinesstoparticipate);theirunderstandingoftheconferencepurpose(whichcouldalso
informpractice)andtheirviewsandexperienceoftheCJS.Twointerviewsallowedfor
comparisonpostintervention,withadditionalquestionsrelatedtotheirexperienceofaRJ
conference.GuidanceonRJpracticehighlightstheneedtocheckoutvictims’readinesstomeet
withtheoffendersoftheircase.Theoffenderinterviewschedulesconsistedofsimilarquestions
asthoseforthevictims,exceptwithoppositefocus(e.g.“Howmuch,ifatall,doyouthinkabout
thepersonyouharmed?”).Similarlytothequestionsincludedinthequestionnaires,the
interviewquestionswerebasedontheoreticalandempiricalresearch(e.g.Miersetal,2001;
Shaplandetal,2007)andconductedface-to-face.
Advantages&DisadvantagesoftheFace-to-FaceInterviewingMethod
Whenconsideringamixed-methoddesignitispointedoutthatallmethodshavebiases,
limitations(Greene,1989),positivesandnegatives.Interviewscanbeconductedinanumberof
ways.Thisstudyutilizedface-to-faceinterviewingforonemainreason.Thegreatestbenefitof
face-to-faceinterviewingwastheinterviewer’sopportunitytoassesssocialcuesaswellasthe
verbal,occurringintimeandplace,inthesensethatresponsesaremorespontaneousand
withoutextendeddeliberation(Opdenakker,2006).Thiswouldbevitalfortheresearch,
enablingtheresearchertobeabletoaccesstheparticipants’storyasitnaturallyoccurredin
responsetothequestionsasked.Whilevictimsmayfinditdifficulttoexpresstheiremotions,
theymaybeopentotheopportunitytohaveavoiceandbeheard.Opdenakker(2006)suggests
fromreviewingfourmodesofinterviewing,thattheotheradvantagesofface-to-face
interviewingarethatagoodambiencecanbecreatedandterminationcanbemanagedthrough
socialcuessuchasshiftingpapersandturningoffthetaperecorder.Thisisinadditiontothe
explicitterminationbythankingtheintervieweeandaskingiftheyhaveanyfurtherremarks
relevanttothetopicorinterviewprocess.Theinvitationforremarkscanalsoleadtothe
emergentofawholenewareaofinformation(Wengraf,2001,inOpdenakker,2006).Equally,
theresearchercouldberesponsivetoanydisplaysofdiscomfortintheparticipants.Offenders
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
100
mayhavebeenguardedintheirresponsesandtrytodisguisesociallyundesirablethoughtsand
feelings.
Openakker(2006)suggeststhatinterviewereffectscanbediminishedwithuseofaprotocoland
interviewerawareness.Face-to-faceinterviewingisconsideredtobecostlyandtimeconsuming
whereothermethodscaneliminatethis(suchastelephoneinterviewing).Thestudywas
conductedintheislandsofBermudawithalandmassof21sq.miles,whichmeanttravellingto
conductinterviewsdidnothavetotakeplaceoveravastlandmass.Offender-participantswere
allincarcerated,servingsentencesfortheoffencethatwassubjecttotheinterventions;across
twocorrectionalfacilitiesatoppositeendsofthemainconnectedislands.
DataCollection–AudioRecording&Transcription
InterviewswererecordedusingaPhillipsVoiceTracerdigitalrecorder1700,withinformed
writtenconsentfromtheparticipants.TherecordingsweretranscribedusingtheDragon
NaturallySpeaking12–speechrecognitionsoftware.Participantswereinformedthatthe
recordingswouldbetranscribedomittinganyidentifiableinformation(i.e.suchasnames)and
thatoncetranscribedaudiorecordingswouldbedestroyed.
Themajorbenefitofaudiorecordingwasaccuracyofinformation.Openakker(2006)pointsout
thedisadvantageofaudiorecordingasbeingareducedlikelihoodofnotetaking,whichcould
createseriousproblemsiftherecordermalfunctionsortheinterviewerforgetstoturniton.To
reducethesepotentialissuestheresearcherprintedatthetopoftheinterviewscheduletwo
remindernotes1)toreconfirmconsentand2)toensuretherecorderwasturnedon.
“...face-to-faceinteractionisthefullestconditionofparticipatinginthemindofanotherhumanbeing,and...thatyoumustparticipateinthemindofanotherhumanbeing...toacquiresocialknowledge.”(Lofland&Lofland,1995,p16)
Asthischapterturnstoconsidertheemployedmethodofobservation,itisarguedthat
(participant)observationandintensiveinterviewingarethetwomostinterrelatedmethodsfor
achieving“naturalisticpreference”and“therichestpossible[qualitative]data.”(Lofland&
Lofland,1995).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
101
Observation
Inordertofurtherevaluatetheprogrammesandinformonpendingreformandfuturepolicy,
theresearcherchosethemethodofobservationasanotherrichsourceofdata.Inthearticle
‘SettingStandardsforRestorativeJustice’Braithwaite(2002a)writesgenerallyabouttheneed
forconferences(unlikecourtrooms)beingclosedtothepublic.Thisheargueshelpsavert
stigmatizationanddominateddialogue,howevertakingintoconsiderationtheneedfor
accountabilityhestates“...itseemsespeciallyimportantforresearchers,critics,journalists,
politicalleaders,judges,colleaguesfromrestorativejusticeprogrammesinotherplaces,tobe
abletositinonconferencesorcircles(withthepermissionoftheparticipants)sotherecanbe
informedpublicdebateandexposureofinappropriatepractices.”(Braithwaite,2002a,p567).
Alsocentraltotheresearch,observationwouldallowtheresearchertogaindataregardingthe
participants’experienceoftheinterventioninthe‘actualtime’itplayedout.Inotherwords,the
questionnairesandinterviewsprovideddatabeforeandaftertheintervention,wherethe
methodofobservationwouldprovidedataduringtheintervention.
Theresearcherobservedtheinterventionsinitiallyasanon-participant.“Asagoodqualitative
observer,youmaychangeyourroleduringanobservation,suchasstartingasanon-participant
andthenmovingintotheparticipantrole,orviceversa.”(Cresswell,2013,p167).Cresswell
(2013)further,referstoconsideringthetimetomakethechangeover.Inthelastsessionofthe
STPprogrammesandattheendoftheconference,duringthecustomaryrefreshmentspace,
theresearcherchangedfromnon-participanttoaparticipantobserver,choosingthistimeto
engagewiththeparticipantsandlistentotheirexpressionsabouttheprocessandinterpersonal
exchanges.
Itisimportantintherecordingoffield-notesthattheresearcherisdiscrete,anddespite
participantsbeingawarethattheyarebeingobservedtheiranxietiesshouldnotbeincreased.
Lofland&Lofland(1995)refertotheactofinconspicuousjotting,andlayoutthesequenceof
mentalnotes,jottednotes(includingmemories)andfullfield-notes–“...thefundamental
concretetaskoftheobserveristhetakingoffieldnotes.”(Lofland&Lofland,1995,p89).This
processwasusedinthisstudy.
Attheoutsettheresearcherwasinterestedtoobserveconversationsbetweenpeople;seating
arrangementsintheprogrammes;tardinessandattendance;gesturesandexpressionsof
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
102
empathyandotheremotions,remorse/regret,change/expansion,healing,harmand
empowerment.Theresearcherwasinterestedinthedevelopmentanddynamicsofthegroups
andrepeatedoccurrencesthatoccurredwithinandacrossthegroups.Anobservational
protocolwasdevisedtorecordinformationlikedates,times,attendees,theduration,seating
plansandforjottednotes.
FocusGroups
FromearlyobservationsofthefirstVEPandSTP,theresearcherwasmotivatedtoconducta
focusgroupwiththeoffender-participantsfromeachofthetwoprogrammes;andsought
ethicalpermissionfromhersupervisorstodothis.Suchchangesarerecognizedamongst
researchers.Forexample,Sutrop&Florea(2010)state,“Particularlyqualitativeresearchmay
need“flexibleprotocols”,whereresearchisadaptedaccordingtoastepwiseapproach,
dependingoninterimfindingsfromfocusgroups,surveys,questionnairesetc.”(p24).Thiswas
alsoinkeepingwiththemethodology.
TheresearcherwastoldthatoneoftheSTPoffender-participantshadaskedtheVEPfacilitators
ifhecoulddotheVEPaftercompletingtheSTP.Hetoldthefacilitatorsthathehadbeenhearing
alotabouttheVEPfromtheothergroup-members;hewasapparentlydisappointedwhen
informedbythefacilitatorsthathecouldnotdotheVEPandhadquestionedwhyhecouldnot.
5offendersparticipatedinthefocusgroup–2participantsfromtheVEPand3fromtheSTP.87
Eachparticipantgavewrittenconsenttoparticipateinthefocusgroupandtothediscussion
beingrecorded.Datafromthefocusgroupwasanalysedalongwithallotherdatacollected.
TheResearcher&ResearchinPrisons
Asthisresearcherreadoftenacitybeingacommoncharacteristicofactionresearchers(Brydon-
Milleretal,2003),shesmiledandconsideredthatthisattributewasmuchofhermakeup.With
atenacitytorejectsomeoftheprinciplesandpoliticsinacademiathatgivesfavourtopractices
designedtobemore“scientific”overtheneedsoftheindividualsitstudies.Thistenacityis
87AthirdVEPoffender-participantrandomlyselectedbytheresearcherhadbeenescortedoutoftheestablishmentonamedicalappointment.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
103
similarlyembracedbyUmbreit’s(2005)cryforpractitionersofRJtonotbeconcernedwith
specificmodelstothepointofneglectingstakeholdersneedsforsafedialogue.
Itisarguedthatreflectiveresearcherspositionthemselvesinaqualitativeresearchstudy.
Meaningthatresearchersconveytheirbackgroundinthemethodologysectionoftheirstudy
andhowitinformstheirinterpretationandwhattheyhavetogain(e.g.Cresswell,2013;Sutton,
2011).88
Sutton(2011)illustratedarelatedpointinhispaperwhenhereferredtotheearliest
ethnographiesofresearchintoprisonculture.SuttonreferstoClemmer’s‘ThePrison
Community’publishedin1940asthefirstcomprehensivesociologicalstudyofprisonculture
andClemmer’semploymentastheprisonsociologistinamen’sprison.Suttontalksmore
recentlyofRhodes(2004,inWashington)andCrewe(2007,intheUK)ashavingimmersed
themselvesintotheirrespectiveprisonenvironments,asemployeesinthoseinstitutions.The
currentresearcherhadextensive(over16years)experienceworkinginprisonswithinthree
differentcountriesfull-time89andhadbeenemployedasaforensicpsychologistwiththe
BermudaDoCtenmonthsbeforedatacollectionbegan.Overtheyearsshehadworkedwith
everypopulation–adultmen,womenandyoung-offenders;lifers,determinantsentencedand
remand.
Thisresearcher’smotivationforventuringintoacareerasaforensicpsychologistwastoactively
contributetothereductionofvictimsofcrime.Withthisimpetustheresearcherhadlongbeen
interestedinthepracticeofRJasameansofempoweringvictimsandholdingoffenders
accountableinawaythatreducedalienation.Theresearcher’smaindutiesatthetimeofthe
actionresearchweresupervisionandfacilitationofthesex-offendertreatmentprogramme(an
excludedpopulationoftheactionresearch),conductingrisk-assessments,providingone-to-one
therapeuticinterventions,stafftrainingandrecruitment.
Whilsttheresearcherviewedrehabilitationasnecessary,shewasalwaysaffectedbyoffenders’
perceptionsoftheimportanceofrehabilitationtoherasbeingnecessaryforheremployment.
88Sutton(2011)alsoadvocatesforquantitativeresearchersreflectingontheirexperiencesworkinginprisons.89TheresearcherhadalsobeencommissionedbytheForeignCommonwealthOfficetoconductassessmentsandtraininginthreeadditionalBritishOverseasTerritorieswhilstlocatedpermanentlyintheCaymanIslands.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
104
Fewoffendersvaluedrehabilitationasameansofassistingtheminreducingtheirriskof
reoffending.Somewouldnotwanttorepeattheiroffending,somedid.Whatevertheintrinsic
motivation,therehadbeenfewoffendersintheresearcher’sexperiencewhowantedtobein
prison.Asaresultitwasusuallyextrinsicmotivations(atleasttostart)ofgainingparoleorother
privilegesthatreignedinprisoners’engagementwithrehabilitation.Withthisoftencomesthe
prisoners’projectionofresponsibilityfortheirincarcerationonto“thesystem”or“authorities”.
InrelationtotheUS,Noll(2003)talksaboutthisintermsofconstitutionalprotectionrequiringa
pleaofnotguiltybyanoffendertobeabletoinvokeconstitutionalrights;andthelawyers’
focusandprotectionofthoserightsfortheirclientagainstthepowerofthestate.AssuchNoll
arguesthatthisalsoinvokesdeterrencefrompersonalaccountability.Whilesocialinequities,
negativelifeexperiencesandotherenvironmentalfactorscontributetooffending;asLofton
(2004)assertsitisoftenacaseofthedisadvantagedoffendingagainstotherdisadvantaged
people.InBermudaithasbeenrecognizedthatthereisalso“self-sabotage”atplay(Lawrence&
Codrington,2014).Ineffortstoassisttherehabilitationprocess,theresearcherwasmotivated
toinvolvevictimsandthecommunityintheprocess.Manyoffendershadalsoexpressedtothe
researchertheirpastattemptsatlivinglaw-abidingliveshavingbeenhinderedbyanunforgiving
hostilecommunity;notonlyinBermudabutinherexperienceworkingasapsychologistinother
countries.
TheresearcherwasbornandraisedinSouth-EastLondonasafirstgenerationchild,toGhanaian
parentsofaworking-classfamily.Shegrewupcloselywithanumberofblackmenandwomen
whoasadolescentswereinvolvedinarangeofcriminalactivitiesincludingdruguse,dealing,
theft,burglary,vandalismandviolence.Shewasfortunatelysomewhatresilienttotheclaimsby
someoftheblackmalesespecially,thatasblackpeopletheywouldnotbeallowedtoaspire.
Muchliketheself-sabotagethatLawrence&CodringtonspeakofBermudians,thisbeingmore
pervasivetothepsycheoftheblackmalesthanfemales.Thisresearcher,howevernot
unaffectedbytheself-fulfillingprophecyofothersstereotypesofherandexperiencesofracism,
stillfeltthatshecouldassistthosethatthatgetcaughtupincriminalactivity,largelyasawayof
fulfillingothersexpectationsofthem.Shealsofeltmorallythatoneperson’spainand
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
105
disadvantagewasnojustification(althoughexplanatory)forhurtingothers.Thiswastheenergy
fortheworkandthehopeofthepotentialforRJtohelphealingfromcrime.90
Theapproachwasthentoheightentheawarenessofoffenderstotheplightofthoseaffected
bytheiractions,andcreatetheopportunityforthemtogiveback.Inthiswaytheir
responsibilitywouldnotbediminished,howevertheycouldexperienceredemptionanda
greaterunderstandingofhowtheirownsocialconstructsimpacttheirview.
Noll(2003)inhispaper“RestorativeJustice:OutliningaNewDirectionforForensicPsychology’
callsforpsychologistsincourtsandthecommunitytobecatalystsinestablishingRJinthese
areas.Headvocatesforensicpsychologistsasbeingwellpositionedandpossessingskillssuchas
programmedevelopment,supervision,andtraining,givingpresentationsandforbeing
practitionersofRJ.Thecurrentresearcherasaforensicpsychologistincorrectionswasalso
motivatedinthesamewayandwasbecomingincreasinglyfrustratedbytheshortcomingsof
herwork.Work,whichlargelyfocusedontheoffenderinisolationofotherstakeholders.
Theresearcherasaninsiderhadaccesstotheestablishmentandinformation.Itisarguedthat
theinsider-researcherlacksobjectivity(Aguiler,1981,citedinGreene,2014)thiswas
uncontestablewithregardstoaspectsoftheCorrectionsenvironmentthattheresearcher
wouldoverlookascustomary.However,theenvironmentwasnotunderstudy.Whatwasmore
compellingwastherelationaldynamicsandperceivedpowerimbalances,mostsignificantly
betweentheresearcherandoffender-participants.Itwaspossiblethattheoffendersmighttry
togainthefavouroftheresearcher,inanticipationoffutureengagement.
TheresearcherwascognizantofnotwantingDoCstaff(includingherself)tobeexcludedfrom
facilitatingconferencesonthebasisofsuggesteddifficultieswithimpartiality(e.g.Szego&
Fellegi,2013).Itwasconsideredimportanttothevalidityoftheresearch,basedonthe
researcher’sperspectivesharedabove,thatmeasuresweretakentoreducetheeffectsofher
positionasanemployeroftheDoC,especiallywiththeoffender-participants;albeit,inaction
research,theresearcher’spositionisacknowledged.
90Theresearcherisalsoacharteredcounsellingpsychologist.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
106
ValidationStrategies:FurtherManagementofResearcherBias&Effects
Cresswell(2013)citesandquotes“Glesne&Peshkin(1992)[who]questionresearchthat
examines“yourownbackyard–withinyourowninstitutionoragency,oramongfriendsor
colleagues”...andtheysuggestthatsuchinformationis“dangerousknowledge”thatispolitical
andriskyforan“insideinvestigator”.”(p151).Tomanagethisconcernof‘in-house’or‘own
backyardresearch’,Cresswell(2013)recommendsmultiplestrategiesofvalidation(for
qualitativeresearch)toensureaccuracyandinsightofthefindings.Helistseightstrategies,the
firstthreeofwhichhesuggestsaretheeasiesttoemploy,mostpopularandcost-effective–(1)
triangulation;(2)memberchecking;(3)rich,thickdescription;(4)prolongedengagementand
persistentobservation;(5)peer-reviewordebriefing;(6)negativecaseanalysis;(7)clarifying
researcherbiasand(8)externalaudits.Hefurthersuggeststhatatleasttwostrategiesshould
beemployed;byandlargethecurrentresearchutilizedalleightstrategiesofvalidation.
Thischapteroutlines,inturn,thestrategiesthatCresswell(2013)proposes,andhowtheauthor
utilizedthesestrategies.
Detailedabovetriangulationwasemployedatallstagesofthestudy(design,datacollection,
analysis,interpretationandreporting).“Memberchecking[considered]themostcritical
techniqueforestablishingcredibility”(Lincoln&Guba,1985,inCresswell,2013,p252)isthe
processofvalidationthroughsolicitedparticipants’viewsofthecredibilityoffindingsand
interpretation(Cresswell,2013).Cresswellassertstheusefulnessofconveningfocusgroupsof
participantstoreview,notthetranscriptsorrawdata,butratherthepreliminaryanalysisof
descriptionandthemes,aswellaswhatmightbemissing.Theresearcherconvenedafocus
groupcomprisingofoffender-participantsfromthefirstVEPandSTPgroups.Thegroup
discussedthefindingsandprovidedfeedbackontheirexperiencesandthoughtsonthe
programmes.
“Rich,thickdescriptionallowsreaderstomakedecisionsregardingtransferability...becausethe
writerdescribesindetailtheparticipantsorsettingunderstudy...theresearcherenablesthe
readers...todeterminewhetherthefindingscanbetransferred...”(Cresswell,2013,p252).In
theanalysisandreportingoffindings,richdescriptionisprovidedwithoutjeopardizing
anonymityofparticipants.AdescriptionofthesettingunderstudywasprovidedinChapter3.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
107
‘Prolongedengagementandpersistentobservation’issaidtohelpbuildtrustbetween
participantsandtheresearcher,andfortheresearchertodevelopunderstandingoftheculture,
andprovidesopportunitytocheckoutmisinformationcreatedbydistortionsofparticipantsor
researchers(Elyetal,1991;Erlandsonetal,1993;Glesne&Peshkin,1992;Lincoln&Guba,
1985;Merriam,1988;citedinCresswell,2013).Thisresearchsoughttoachievethismethodof
validationthroughuseofstudydesign(mixed-method),‘peerreviews’and‘memberchecking’.
Theresearcher,byvirtueofheremploymentwasimmersedintheprison;shesoughtcultural
knowledgeandunderstandingofBermudathroughherattendanceatlecturers(e.g.MPWalton
BrownlectureonimmigrationattheBermudaIndustrialUnionon03.12.13&a‘Structural
RacismWorkshop’attheHumanRightsCommission–22.01.14),readingandrelationships
(includingfriendships)withpeopleinthecommunity.TheresearcherattendedtheRestorative
JusticeWeekworkshopsandpanelpresentationsinOctober2013&2014.Asanon-Bermudian
theresearcheralsosoughtcriticalfeedbackfromtwoBermudiansonchapter3,whowerealso
familiarwiththeDoC.Theresearcherwasconsciousofwantingtoberespectfuloftheisland
anditscultureasanexpatriate.
Anothermethodofvalidationthatwouldbeemployedwas‘negativecaseanalysis’.The
researcherreportedonalldataandmadeitexplicitwhenspecificdatawasexcluded.‘Clarifying
ResearcherBias’waspartiallyachievedthroughthereflectiveaccounttheresearcherprovides
aboveinthischapter.Forthepurposeofvalidationitisvitalthatthereaderunderstandsthe
researcher’sposition,biasesandassumptionsthatcouldimpacttheinquiry(Merriam,1988;in
Cresswell,2013).Theresearcher’suniversitysupervisorsprovidedthe‘externalaudit’.
Theremainderofthechapterprovidesinformationonethics,selectionandparticipant
demographics.
EthicsII–ActionandResearch
Aconcernofresearchethicswaswhetherornotresearchmayleadtothedisclosureofillegal
activityorincriminatingevidence.Thiswasaveryobviousconcernasdisclosureofcriminal
activitywascentraltotheexperimentalprogramme.Onlyconvictedoffenderswouldbe
approachedtoparticipateintheinitiativeandresearch.Thelimitsofconfidentialityweremade
explicitontheconsentformsandoffenderswerealsoremindedverballytonotdisclosure
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
108
detailedinformationforanyoffencestheyhadcommittedbuthadnotbeenconvictedfor.
Victimswerealsorequestednottoasksuchinformationoftheoffenders.Therewasalsoriskof
participantsexperiencingdistressbyvirtueofparticipatingintheactionbeingresearched.
Basedonguidance,riskassessmentswereconductedtoensurethemanagementofany
potentialriskstoparticipants.Allparticipantsfortheconferenceswereassessedforsuitability
toparticipateinconferencing.91Theresearchermadecontactwithcounsellingservicesthat
couldbeaccessedbyvictims,andDoCstaffwouldbeavailabletoprovidesupporttothe
offenders.
Whileface-to-faceconferencinghasbeenfoundtobethemostsatisfactoryforparticipants,
guidanceadvocatesthatwhenaface-to-facemeetingisnotappropriatealternativesshouldbe
offeredsuchasshuttlemediationoranexchangeofletters(RestorativeJusticeCouncil,2011).
Thiswastobepartofthecurrentaction,andwherethevictimmaydeclineoroneoftheparties
optsout,analternativewouldbeoffered.
“Theguidancehasbeenstrengthenedtomakeclearthat,otherthanonsafetygrounds,
participationisaparticipant’schoice,notthatofthepractitioner.”(RestorativeJusticeCouncil,
2011,p6).Onthebasisofthisguidance,thefacilitatorsandresearcherwouldnotmakea
judgmentonwhohadbeenaffectedbythecrimeandwhowasnot.92Contactwouldbemade
withthedirectvictimsfirstanddependentontheirwishesandthoseoftheoffender,other
community/witnessvictimswouldbeconsulted.Bothvictimsandoffenderswereaskedwho
theythoughtshouldbeinvolvedintheirconference(RestorativeJusticeCouncil,2011).
Astheinitiativewasnewandonlyconvicted-offenderswereparticipating,theconferenceswere
tobeheldattheWestgatefacility.However,whenevertheriskassessmentdidnotidentifyany
safetyconcernsandthecorrectionssecurityandfacilityChiefwereinagreement,the
conferenceswouldbeheldinaunitexternaltotheestablishmentbuildingbutwithinthefacility
91Thereisplentyofguidanceontheelementsthatshouldformpartoftheassessment(e.g.NOMS,2002;RestorativeJusticeCouncil,2011;Umbreit,2000;Wachteletal,2010)andthesewerefollowed.92However,thefacilitatorsandresearchermay“Assesswhoelseintheparticipants’circleshasbeenharmedbythecrime/incidentandmightbenefitfrombeinginvolved…”(RestorativeJusticeCouncil,2011,p14)andsuggestsuchindividualstothemainstakeholders.“Facilitatorsmayalsoinviteindividualswhodonotclearlyfallintothecategoryofvictim,victim-supporteroroffender-supporter,butwhohavebeenaffectedbytheincidentinsomeway–perhapssomeonewhowitnessedtheincidentoraninvestigatingpoliceofficer.”(Wachteletal,2010,p188).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
109
estate.Withthisset-up,theconferencecouldalsoallowarrivalstobemanagedinsuchaway,
thatparticipantsdidnotallwaitinthesamearea,werenotleftaloneandhadaccesstosupport
andinformationasperguidance(RestorativeJusticeCouncil,2011).
InformationSharingwithStakeholders
Theresearcherextendedinformationabouttheactionresearchtoanumberofagenciesand
hadmeetingswithanumberofstakeholdersincludingcommunityagenciesandnon-
governmentalorganizations,suchastheHumanRightsCommission,CentreforJustice,the
ParoleBoardandBermudaPoliceService(BPS).Theresearcheralsodeliveredapresentationto
theDoCstaff,andseparatelytotheseniormanagersoftheBPS.
InNovember2015theresearcherandRJteamgaveafreepublicpresentationoftheinitiativeat
theCathedralHallinHamiltonaspartofRJweek.Atthistimetheresearchertookthe
opportunitytoputoutasurveyonRJforthosewhoattended(seeAppendix6fortheresultsof
thissurvey)93.
Duringthecourseoftheactionitbecameapparentthatthepublicshouldbeinformedofthe
initiative.Inanearlynewspaperarticle(2ndFebruary2015),theinitiativewaspublishedaspart
ofaseriesofarticlesthatwerebeingwrittenabouttheworkoftheDoC(seeAppendix4for
newspaperarticleswrittenontheinitiative).
ResearchParticipants:Selection&Demographics
SamplingTechniques&Issues
Purposefulsamplingwasemployedandspecificallycriterionsamplingtoselectboth
incarceratedoffender-participantsandvictim-participants.Criterionsamplingisacommon
strategyforqualitativeresearchas“...allindividualsstudiedrepresentpeoplewhohave
experiencedthephenomenon.”(Cresswell,2013,p155).Offender-participantshadtomeet
specificcriteriainordertobesuitabletoparticipateintheprogrammes(e.g.noactivemental
healthconditions;theyhadtoadmittheoffenceortheirpartintheoffenceandhave
93ThiswasadoptedfromasurveyconductedbytheRestorativeJusticeCouncil(UK)withthecouncil’spermission.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
110
identifiablevictims).Asperguidance(e.g.NOMS2013;RestorativeJusticeCouncil,2011)on
implementationanddeliveryofRJinterventionscasesinvolvingsexualviolenceshouldbe
facilitatedbythosewithspecialistknowledgeofthistypeofcrime.Offenderswithsexual
offencesastheirindexoffencewereexcludedfromparticipationintheprogrammesduringthe
pilotphaseinwhichtheresearchwasbeingconducted.Therewerealsootherexemptionsthat
arenotuncommon,identicaltoJolliffe&Farrington’s(2007)researchonviolentoffending
programmes-“Domesticviolence,sexualoffendingandoffendingbypersonswithapersonality
disorderormentaldisorderweretreatedasdiscretegroups,distinctfromgeneraloffending,
andthereforeexcluded.”(Jolliffe&Farrington,2007,piii).Strang(2001,inMenkel-Meadow,
2007)alsopointsoutthatvictimlesscrimes(forexample,drinkdrivingoffencesanddrug-
offences)areunlikelytobesubjecttoRJ,asencounterswithvictimsisminimal.
OffenderswereallocatedtoeithertheVEPorSTP,andmatchedfortheirindexoffences(and
wherepossibleforageandlengthofsentence).Victim-participantswhoengagedintheSTP
werenotselectedbytheresearcher,butratherrecruitedbythePrisonFellowshipfacilitators
whodeliveredtheprogramme.Directvictims,whovoluntarilyagreedtoparticipatein
conferences,andtheresearch,wereidentifiedasthedirectvictimsorwitness/community-
victimsoftheoffenderswhovolunteeredtoparticipateintheconferences.
DescriptionofResearchParticipants
Offender-Participants
Itwasintendedfor36offenderstoparticipateinthestudy,withapproximately4-6ofthese
goingontoparticipateinaconference.Table1illustratesthenumberofoffenderswho
participatedintheprogrammes.Oftheoffenders28wereBermudian,alloftheoffender-
participants’agesareillustratedinTable2.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
111
Table1–Illustratestheretentiondataofoffender-participantsforeachoftheprogrammes.
TreatmentIntendedn=36
Agreedtoparticipate
Non-starters94
Dropouts95 Limitedparticipation96
Completions
VEP 18 12 0 0 1 12(100%)STP 18 17 2(12%) 1(6%) 1 14(82%)
Totals 36 29 2(7%) 1(3%) 2 26(90%)Completionsincludedthose,intheprecedingcolumnwhodidnotfullyparticipate,but
completed;itexcludesdropoutsandnon-starters.
Victim-Participants
Itwasintendedfor18victimstoberecruitedfromthecommunitytoparticipateintheSTP.16
victimsagreedtoparticipate–15started;1droppedout(male)and1wasanon-starter
(female).TheSTPvictimsconsistedof13femalesand3males;ofthese15wereBermudianand
1wasanexpatriate;theiragesareillustratedinTable2.Therewere2primaryconference
victimsandonewitness-victim;97oftheseallwereBermudian.
Table2–Illustratestheagerange,meanandmedianofalltheparticipantsacrossthe
interventions.
STPVictimsn=16
ConferenceVictimsn=3
STPOffendersn=17
VEPOffendersn=12
ConferenceOffenders98
n=2Agerange 32–71 24–56 21–47 Mean 59.62 65 39.2 33.6 32Median 62.5 38 34
94Thetotal3non-starterswerehappyfortheirpre-questionnairedatatostillbeusedaspartoftheresearch.95Dropoutsarethosewhostarttheprogramme/attendsessionsandthenchosetowithdraw.96‘Limitedparticipation’referstothoseparticipantswhofinishedtheprogrammebutdidnotfullyparticipateinallaspectsoftheprogramme,orwerenotpresentfortheminimumnumberofsessionsrequiredforfullcompletion.97Theterm‘primaryvictims’wasusedtodistinguishbetweenthemainvictimsandsecondaryvictimsorvictim-supporters.Theprimaryvictimswerethosethatwereinterviewedpreandpostconference.98Theagesof‘ConferenceOffenders’werealsorepresentedintheSTPandVEPcolumns,astheywererequiredtoparticipateinoneoftheseprogrammesbeforeparticipatingonanRJconference.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
112
DataAnalysis
Asmentionedabove,theresearchusingamixed-methoddesignfortheaddedpurposeof
triangulationandcomplementarity,alsosetouttoanalyseandreportonthequalitativeand
quantitativedatasimultaneously,wereappropriate.
Duringtheperiodofthephaseoneprogrammes(1stSeptember2014-31stAugust2015)the
averagedailyconvictedadultmalepopulationwas162.Theoffendersthatparticipatedinthe
programmesthereforeaccountedfor18%oftheentireadultmalepopulation.However,the
samplewouldnotbesufficientfortestsofsignificance.
Anumberofquantitativeanalysesweretoberunonthedatacollected,specificallyinrelation
toexaminingtheeffectsoftheprogrammesontheoffenders’levelsofempathy.TheIBMSPSS
(StatisticalPackagesforSocialSciences)softwarewasusedtoobtaindescriptivestatistics.The
NVivosoftwarepackagewasusedtoanalysequalitativedata.
Itwasintendedforthedatatoansweranumberofquestions,whichfellinto5broaddomains
(victimandoffenderviewsoftheCJSandRJ;motivation&retention;empathy;programme
evaluation;andtheconferenceexperience).Thechapterprovidesadescriptionofeachofthe
domains.
VictimandOffenderViewsoftheCriminalJusticeSystem(CJS)&RestorativeJustice(RJ)
AsBermudadoesnotconductanationalsurveyofconfidenceintheCJS,theresearcherwas
interestedtoknow,theparticipants’opinionsoftheCJS.Aseriesofquestionswereaskedabout
theparticipants’opinionsofthecourts,policeandcorrectionsdepartment.Thiscouldinformon
theparticipants’viewsofRJandgeneralsatisfactionoftheCJSandjusticeasaconcept.Further,
itcouldsuggesthowreceptivepeoplemightbetoRJinBermuda.ExtremeRJadvocatessuggest
thatRJcouldreplacetheCJS,albeitthattherearenumerousreasonswhythiswouldnotbe
feasible.
Motivation&Retention
The‘motivationandretention’domainwasconcernedwiththeparticipantsmotivationfor
participatinginRJ;andcouldinformonwaysofincreasingparticipantsmotivation;methodsof
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
113
contactandreasonsfordeclining,fearsandanxietiesofthoseparticipatingintheprogrammes.
Thedatawastoalsoinformfuturepractice.
Empathy
Itwasanobjectiveoftheactionresearchtoexplorewhetherparticipationinthetwo
prerequisiteprogrammes(VEP&STP)couldincreasetheoffender-participantslevelofempathy
fortheirvictims;aswasfoundinresearchconductedontheSTP99.Itwasalsonecessarytoseeif
therewasadifferencebetweentheprogrammespotentialtoincreaseempathy,withtheSTP
likelydefinedasa‘mostly-orientated’/‘relational’RJprogrammeandtheVEPbeingdefinedasa
‘partially-orientated’/‘individual’RJprogramme(McCold,2000;Toews,2006;respectively).
Basedonpreviousempiricalresearch,itwasoffurtherinteresttoseeiftherewasadifference
inempathylevelsbetweentheoffender-participantsconvictedforviolentoffencesandproperty
offences.100
ProgrammeEvaluation
ProgrammeevaluationwastocovertheoffenderandSTPvictimsopinionsandexperienceof
thetwoprerequisiteprogrammes,includingtheirevaluationsofthefacilitatorsskillsand
impartiality;howtheprogrammesweremanaged–intermsofinformationreceived;
corroborationandsafety.ItwasconsideredcrucialtothesustainabilityofRJintheDoC,
whetherornotparticipantswouldrecommendtheprogrammestoothers.
VictimandOffenderViewsoftheConferencingExperience
Analyseswithininthisdomainwouldbeconcernedspecificallywiththeexperienceandeffects
ofaconference,asexpressedbythevictimandoffenders.
Thischapterexplainedhowitwasimportanttogatherqualitativedatasuchconducting
interviewsandfocusgroup,toobtainclearmeaningattributedtotheviewsexpressedbythose
99Feasey&Williams(2009)AnEvaluationoftheSycamoreTreeProgramme:BasedonanAnalysisofCRIMEPICSIIData.SheffieldHallamUniversity:HallamCentreforCommunityJustice.100ThedevelopersoftheCRIME-PICSIIquestionnaire(Frudeetal,2013),statethatscoresonallscalescandiscriminatebetweenoffencesagainsttheperson(violence),propertyoffencesandmotoroffences.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
114
thatparticipatedinthestudy.Membercheckingasastrategyofvalidity,alsohelpedelucidate
theparticipants’meaningsandguideagainstanybiasorsocialconstructsoftheresearcher.
Thiswasfurtherinkeepingwiththesocialconstructionistperspectivethatunderpinnedthe
research.Althoughasapilotthesamplewassmall(involving29offendersand4primaryor
witnessvictims,fromwhomdatawasgathered),itwasexplainedthatsomequantitativedata
wouldbeuseful.Quantitativedatawouldbeusefulinsheddinglightonthepossiblechangesin
empathyshownbytheoffendersandtheCRIMEPICSIIpsychometricwasselectedasithas
beeninsimilarstudiesbefore(e.g.Feasey&Williams,2009).Quantitativedatawasalsousedto
gaugetheparticipants’collectiveviewoftheisland’sCJS.Theresearcherastheprison
psychologistwouldnotconductthequestionnairesorinterviewswiththeoffendersbefore
completionofthephase-oneprogrammes,butwantedtoexplorehowtoimprovepracticein
theprison,andbetweentheprisonandcommunity,andthisthereforewasapieceofaction
research.Usingtriangulation,theresearchincludedoffendersandvictimsfromthecommunity;
interviews,psychometrics,questionnaires,observationandfocusgroups,thattogetherwould
allowexplorationoftheparticipantsexperienceoftheexperimentalprogramme,theCJSandRJ.
Asamixed-methodstudy,thefindingswouldbepresentedtogetherinthenextchapter
(Chapter6–Findings).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
115
v CHAPTER6–FINDINGS
“…itisforparticipantsofrestorativejusticetochoosethewordsandtherebydevelopthemeansforresolvingtheconflict.”(Shapland,2013,p62)
“…outcomes,bythemselves,arenotthedefiningcharacteristic…”(Shapland,2013,p63)
Thecurrentchapterprovidesthefindingsoftheactionresearch.
AnalysisbyDomain
Reportingofthefindingswillbepresentedindomainsashighlightedinthepreviouschapter.
Bothqualitativeandquantitativedatawasgathered,andinaccordancewithtruemixed
methodology,wereanalysedsimultaneously(Greene,etal,1989).Thisprovidedboth
complementaryandtriangulateddata(Greene,etal,1989).
Thefindingsaddressthefollowingobjectivesofthestudy–
• Toexplorevictims’andoffenders’opinionsgenerally,oftheexistingCJS,andspecifically
inthemanagementoftheircases.
• ToexploretheexperienceandeffectsofanexperimentalprogrammeofRJforvictims
andconvictedoffendersinBermuda.
Findingsonthefirstaimarepresentedinthefirstdomain‘VictimandOffenderViewsoftheCJS
&RJ’.Findingsonthesecondaimarecoveredoverafurtherfourdomains,whichfocuson
MotivationandRetention;Empathy;ProgrammeEvaluation;andVictim-OffenderViewsofRJ
andtheConferencingExperience.
VictimandOffenderViewsoftheCriminalJusticeSystem(CJS)&RestorativeJustice(RJ)
Asanaimofthethesis,theresearcherwasinterested-toexplorevictims’andoffenders’
generalopinionsoftheexistingCJSinBermuda,andspecificallyinthemanagementoftheir
cases.Itwasconsideredimperative,asanewinitiativetoBermuda,thatanindicationofthe
receptivenessforRJalsobegauged.Domainoneincludesdatafromonevictimpre-conference.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
116
GeneralQuestionsontheCJS
ToexploregeneralopinionsoftheCJS,sevenmainstatementswerepresentedaspartofthe
pre-interventionquestionnaires.Allvictimandoffender-participantswereaskedtoratethe
statementsusingafive-pointLikert-responseformatbasedonwhetherornotthey‘strongly
agreed’;‘agreed’;‘neitheragreednordisagreed’;‘disagreed’or‘stronglydisagreed’witheach
statement.
Theresultsforeachstatementarepresentedbelowingraphs1-7,alongwithrelevant
complementaryandtriangulateddatawhetheratthepreorpost-interventionstage.
46participantsgavearesponsetothestatement–‘SentenceshandeddownbytheCourtsare
fair’.Graph1showstheresponsesbyparticipantgroup.
Graph1.
Participantsweremorelikelyto‘disagree’(especiallyvictim-participants)or‘stronglydisagree’
withthestatement,althoughasubstantialproportion‘neitheragreedordisagreed’that
sentenceshandeddownbytheCourtsisfair.
DuringaSycamoreTreeprogramme(STP)sessionwhenthegroupdiscussedthetopicof
‘responsibility’,oneoftheoffender-participantsstated-“Ifeelvictimizedbythecourts.”In
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
StronglyDisagree
Disagree Neither Agree StronglyAgree
SentenceslaiddownbytheCourtsarefair.pre-intervenxon
Offenders(n=29)
Vicgms(n=17)
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
117
anotherSTPsession,offender-participantsverballydisagreedasoneoffendersuggesteda
prisonsentencecouldbeaformofrestitutionforsomevictims.
Inthefocusgroup(followingcompletionofthefirstVictimEmpathyprogramme(VEP)andSTP),
anSTPoffender-participantmadethefollowingstatement–
“Seetheoffendergetssentencedtotimeinjail,Idon’tthinkthat’senoughforavictimandIsawthat,Isawthatinthatvictiminthatclass,itsnotenoughandIreallyfeltforthemitslikeokayjudgesentencedyoutotime,okaywhathappenstomenow,I’mhappynowforthemoment,butwhathappensafterthreeyearsandyourthinkingaboutyourlovedone,oryourthinkingaboutwhat…comestorestorativejustice,victimsneedthesameamountofhelpormorethantheoffendersget,youknowweoffenderswealwaysgetourThinkingforChange,wegetthisclasswegetthatclassthat’ssupposetocurbourthinkingandourwaysofoffendingbutwhatisthevictimgetting,whatisreallythereforavictimyouknowwhatImean.”Thisprovidedaninsightintothethinkingofoffender-participantsthatwaslinkedtothefirstand
followingstatements,participantswereaskedtorate.
46participantsgavearesponsetothestatement–‘TheCriminalJusticeSystemmeetsthe
needsofvictimsofcrime’;Graph2showstheresponsesbyparticipant-group.
Graph2.
Whilesomeparticipantslackedknowledgeofwhatvictimsmightneed,themajorityofvictim-
participants‘disagreed’or‘stronglydisagreed’,withnovictim-participant‘stronglyagreeing’.
0%5%
10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%
StronglyDisagree
Disagree Neither Agree StronglyAgree
TheCJSmeetstheneedsofvicgmsofcrimepre-intervenxon
Offenders(n=29)
Vicgms(n=17)
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
118
AVEPoffender-participantmadethefollowingstatementwithregardstovictimneedsduring
thefocusgroup(post-programme),despitetheabsenceofvictim-participantsintheprogramme
-“Whenyoutapintoavictim’spainthereain’tnotellingwhatyou’regonnaget.Itsgonnacomeatyou,soum,whatIfeelisthatvictim’sshouldtakesomekindoftwelve-stepcourse,ifyouaskmeyouknowwhatImean,Ibelievevictimsoughttogettogetherandtalkabouttheirpain,theirhurt,what’sbeendonetothemum,causeforthemtowalkaroundwiththattypeofanger,isnotellingwhat’sgonnabeatrigger…causeyouain’thadachancetoventyourfrustrationsaboutyourhurtandwhatputyouinthatplace.”
Asanindicatorofcommunityresources,46participantsgavearesponsetothestatement–
‘ThereisadequatesupportforvictimsofcrimeinBermuda’.Thegroupresponsesareillustrated
inGraph3.
Graph3.
Offender-participantswerelargelyunsure,pre-programme,abouttheservicesavailableto
victimsinthecommunity.However,twiceasmanyvictim-participants‘disagreed’and‘strongly
disagreed’,thanthosethat‘agreed’.
DuringthefocusgroupofthefirstVEPandSTPoffender-participants,whenaskedwhattheyfelt
theylearntaboutvictims,oneoffenderstated-
“Andanothernotewithourgovernmentrighteven,I’msuretheyhaveprogrammesouttherebuthowlongdotheylastbeforetheysayokayyou’rebetternowandthenwhenyoudon’tfeelbetteryougottagopayforpersonalservices,youknowwhatImean,thatshouldjustbesomethingthatIfeelshouldbesetasideinthebudget…justlikeyouhavedrugcounsellingout
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
StronglyDisagree
Disagree Neither Agree StronglyAgree
Thereisadequatesupportforvicgmsofcrime.pre-intervenxon
Offenders(n=29)
Vicgms(n=17)
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
119
thereandstuff,youneedsomeseriousvictim,permanentvictimcounsellingforcrimeswhenpeoplereallythinktheyneeditandlookintothesepeople’slivesdon’tletthemjustwalkawayandsayI’mokay,alotofpeoplewillsaythat,alotofvictimswillsay‘I’mokay’butdeepdown,okaysojustbecausetheysaidtheirokaywhatyoujustforgetaboutthem,Iwouldsaycheckuponem,checkuponemforaperiodoftwoyearsifitsgottabe…yeahthisisforthevictims[anotheroffenderinterjects…likehowtheprobationofficercheckupontheircases]yepexactly…”
Beforeparticipatinginanyoftheinterventions,victimsandoffenderswerealsoasked–‘How
respectfulandconsideratetheythoughtagencies(Police&Courts)oftheCJSaretowards
victimsofcrime?Table3showstheresultsforthePoliceandTable4showstheresultsforthe
Courts.
Table3–Showsthevictimandoffendersresponsesofhowrespectfultheyfeelthepoliceare
towardsvictimsofcrime.
ResponseOptions
ofthePOLICE
VeryRespectful QuiteRespectful ALittleRespectful
NotAtAllRespectful
Victims(n=16) 2 5 8 1Offenders(n=29) 3 11 11 4
Totals(n=45) 5(11%) 16(36%) 19(42%) 5(11%)
Table4–Showsthevictimandoffendersresponsesofhowrespectfultheyfeelthecourtsare
towardsvictimsofcrime.
ResponseOptionsoftheCOURTS
VeryRespectful QuiteRespectful ALittleRespectful
NotAtAllRespectful
Victims(n=16) 4 3 9 0Offenders(n=29) 7 10 9 3
Totals(n=45) 11(24%) 13(29%) 18(40%) 3(7%)44participantsclearlyindicatedaresponsetothestatement–‘TheCriminalJusticeSystem
respectstherightsofthoseaccusedofcommittingacrimeandtreatsthemfairly.’Their
responsesareillustratedinGraph4byparticipant-group.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
120
Graph4.
Noneoftheparticipants‘stronglyagreed’withthisstatement.Whilethemajorityofvictims
wereunsure,closetotwo-thirdsoftheoffender-participantseither‘disagreed’or‘strongly
disagreed’thattheCJSrespectstherightsofaccusedoffendersandtreatsthemfairly.
Onlytheoffender-participantswereasked,pre-programmefortheirratingson–‘How
respectfulandconsideratetheythoughtagenciesoftheCJS(Police&Courts)aretowardsthose
accusedofcommittingacrime?’Table5showstheresultsforthePoliceandCourts.
Table5 ResponseOptions VeryRespectful QuiteRespectful ALittle
RespectfulNotAtAllRespectful
POLICE 1(3%) 5(17%) 14(48%) 9(31%)Offenders(n=29)COURTS 1(3%) 9(31%) 13(45%) 6(21%)Turingtocrimereduction,46participantsgavearesponsetothestatement–‘TheCriminal
JusticeSystem,asawholeiseffectiveinreducingcrime’.Theirresponsesareillustratedin
Graph5byparticipant-group.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
StronglyDisagree
Disagree Neither Agree StronglyAgree
TheCJSrespectstherightsofthoseaccusedofcommimngacrimeandtreatsthemfairly.
pre-intervenxon
Offenders(n=29)
Vicgms(n=15)
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
121
Graph5.
Overathirdofeachparticipant-group‘neitheragreednordisagreed’withthestatement.The
restoftheparticipantslargelyleanedtowardsdisagreementandstrongdisagreementwiththe
statement.
46participantsgavearesponsetothestatement–‘TheDepartmentofCorrectionsiseffective
athelpingtorehabilitateoffendersconvictedofacrime’.Theirresponsesareillustratedin
Graph6byparticipant-group.
Graph6.
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
StronglyDisagree
Disagree Neither Agree StronglyAgree
TheCJSasawholeiseffecgveinreducingcrime.pre-intervenxon
Offenders(n=29)
Vicgms(n=17)
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
StronglyDisagree
Disagree Neither Agree StronglyAgree
TheDoCiseffecgveathelpingtorehabilitateoffendersconvictedofacrime.
pre-intervenxon
Offenders(n=29)
Vicgms(n=17)
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
122
Themajorityofbothparticipant-groupsfeltunabletoprovidedefinitiveresponses.
However,agreaternumberoftheoffenders‘disagreed’or‘stronglydisagreed’collectively;
findingtheDoCineffectiveathelpingtorehabilitateoffenders.
Post-programmeinthefocusgroup,aVEPoffender-participantmadeastatementaboutthe
programmesandCorrectionsregime–
“AllIwannasayisthat,Iwouldreallyliketosee,especiallythesetwoprogrammesrestorativejusticeandvictimempathycontinue,andkeepcontinuingfortheyearstocomeandthatalongwiththattheyreallylookatsincetheybroughtthoseintotheprison,theyreallylookattrainingtheseBasicOfficers,trainingOfficersperiod,more,onwhattheseprogrammesaboutandhowtheyneedtoplaytheirparttoo,asprofessionalsinthiscorrectionalservice.”46participantsgavearesponsetothestatement–‘TheCriminalJusticesystemiseffectivein
bringingpeoplewhohavecommittedcrimestojustice’.TheirresponsesareshowninGraph7.
Graph7.
OneSTPoffender-participantstatedduringasession-“OurjusticesysteminBermudais
retarded.”
QuestionsPertainingtoPersonalCases&ExperienceswiththeCJS
InrelationtothepersonalcasesandexperiencesoftheCJS,victimsandoffenderswereasked
differentquestions–
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
StronglyDisagree
Disagree Neither Agree StronglyDisagree
TheCJSiseffecgveinbriningpeoplewhohavecomminedcrimestojusgce.
pre-intervenxon
Offenders(n=29)
Vicgms(n=17)
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
123
QuestionsaskedofVictimsincluded–
Wereyoucalledtogiveevidenceinyourcase?
Doyoufeelyougottheopportunitytosaywhatyouwantedincourt?
WereyouaskedtoprovideaVictimImpactStatement?
Of17victimswhoprovidedaresponse–11indicatedthattheywerenotcalledtogiveevidence
intheircase.Theremaining6indicatedthatthequestionwasnotapplicabletothem;this
tendedtobeforreasonssuchastheoffenderswereneverapprehended;theoffenceagainst
themhadnotoccurredinBermudaortheythemselvesdidnotreporttheoffencetothePolice.
2victimsindicatedthatthey‘somewhat’gottheopportunitytosaywhattheywantedinCourt.
Basedonascaleof‘Totally’;‘Somewhat’and‘Notatall’.
3victimsindicatedthattheywereaskedtoprovideaVictimImpactStatement(VIS)(inaddition
1othervictimsaidthattheygotthisopportunity,withtheircasehavingbeenheardintheUK).
5statedthattheywerenotgiventheopportunitytoprovideaVIS.
QuestionsaskedofOffendersincluded–
Didyouhaveanopportunitytoaddressthosewhohadbeenaffectedbyyouractions,whenyou
wereincourt?
Wouldyouhavelikedtospeaktothoseaffectedbyyouractions,whenyouwereincourt?Did
youspeaktoyourvictimsincourt?
DidyouhaveanopportunitytowritetotheJudge?
Ofthe29offendersthatagreedtoparticipateintheprogrammes–34%(n=10)indicatedthat
theyhadtheopportunitytoaddressthevictimsinCourt.
59%(n=17)oftheoffendersindicatedthattheywouldhavelikedtospeakwiththevictimsof
theircase,withafurther14%(n=4)indicatingthattheydidaddressthevictimsincourt.
31%(n=9)offendersindicatedthattheyhadtheopportunitytowritetothejudge.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
124
GeneralMotivationfor,andKnowledgeofRestorativeJustice
Beforestartingtheprogrammesorconferencing,bothvictimsandoffenders(n=46)wereasked
iftheyhadknowledgeofRJinBermudaorelsewhere?Theresultsareillustratedinthepiechart
below.
Duringthefocusgroup,adiscussionflowedbetweentheoffenderspertainingtoRJ,the
communityandrepair–
“Youcantaketheclassesuphereandbestrivingforagoallike…changingmylifeorunderstandinghowyou’reacting,andallthat,thevictim,youbumpintothemagainandtheydon’tknowthatyoutookthestepintherightdirection,they’restillgonnalookatyouasthesamepersonfrombefore,soitfeelslike,asanoffenderyourgonnafeelasifyourwastingyourtimeanditseasyforyoutogetlikethat…”[anotheroffenderinterrupts-]“That’swhyIsaidearlierthatyou’regonnahavetomakeamore,biggerstep…asfarasconnectingtheactualvictimandtheactualoffenderinsomewayitmightbestagesyouhavetoimplementtomakeitmoretransitional…meaningyoustartlightbutitsgottabesteps,asmade,tomakerealrestorativejustice.”
Pre-interventionbothvictimsandoffenderswereaskedtoconsider,atdifferenttimeframesofa
case,whetherornottheywouldhavebeenwillingtobeapartofanRJintervention.Some
victimsdidnotfeelthatthequestionsbeingaskedwereapplicabletotheircircumstances,for
thosethatdidrespondtheirresponsesareillustratedingraphs8-10below,byparticipant-
group.
Alot4%
Alinle39%
None57%
KnowledgeofRestoragveJusgce
Alot
Alinle
None
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
125
48%
24%27%
58%
17%
25%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Yes Unsure No
Graph9-Whenthecaseisincourtbutbeforeconvicgon
Offenders(n=29)
Vicgms(n=12)
41%
34%
24%
50%
17%
33%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Yes Unsure No
Graph8-Whenoffendersarearrestedandcharged
Offenders(n=29)
Vicgms(n=12)
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
126
Ateachtimeframe(arrest,conviction,pre-sentence)mostparticipantsindicatedawillingnessto
participateinanRJintervention.
59%
17%
24%
50%
42%
8%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Yes Unsure No
Graph10-Post-convicgon,pre-sentence
Offenders(n=29)
Vicgms(n=12)
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
127
Post-programme,bothvictimsandoffenderswereaskedwhattheythoughtthebenefitsofRJ
were.Thefrequenciesofthewordsusedintheirresponsesaregraphicallyrepresentedinthe
wordcloud(1)below.
Analysisoftheword-cloudilluminatedphrasessuchas,thebenefitsofRJbeingto–helpthe
community;providingopportunityforlearningandforgiveness;givingsecondchancesand
allowingforjusticeandfeelingstobeexpressed.38participants(n=25offenders/n=13STP
victim-participants)offeredspecificexamplesofbenefitstheybelievedRJoffers.Their
responsesincluded-
“Thebenefitsofrestorativejusticeistoallowtheoffendertohearandlearnhowtounderstandthevictimspointofviewandhowtorectifytheirwayofliving,sothatitnolongerwillhaveanegativeimpactonsociety.Anditalsohelpsmeasavictimtolearnhowtoforgive.”(STPvictim-participant)
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
128
“Givesbothoffendersandvictimsanopportunitytosharewitheachother:reasonsforcrimesforoffenders;feelingsofbeingvictimisedforvictims.Bothpartiescanhopefullygrowfromtheprocessandbeinabetterplaceafter.”(STPoffender-participant)
“Tohelppeoplefacethethingstheyhaven’tbeenabletodealwithontheirown.”(STPvictim-participant)
“Ithinkthebenefitsareendless.Notonlyistheinmateorconvictedpersongivensecondchancetoredeemthemselves,buttheyaresparedtheheadachesthatjailcomeswith.Idobelieveinpunishment,butIalsobelievethereareothersolutionsratherthanlockingupapersonastheonlyoption.”(VEPoffender-participant)“Themainbenefitisinbriningtogether“offenders”n“victims”Ittakesalotofcourage–forbothsides–inmatesmustwonderifthey’regoingtobeblamed&shamed&victimsmayworrythey’llbefurthervictimised.Andneithertranspired!Thishelpstodilutethe“us&them”divisiveness.Headingtomoreopenness&anavenuetohealing.”(STPvictim-participant)
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
129
Post-programme,thevictimsandparticipantswerealsoaskedwhattheythoughtthenegative
consequencesofRJmightbe.Thefrequencyofthewordsusedintheirresponses,tothe
questionisrepresentedinthewordcloudbelow.
24offender-participantsansweredthequestion–50%(n=12)ofthemdidnotconsiderany
negativeconsequencesofRJandwroteresponsessuchas“unsure”“none”and“Idon’tsee
any.”Thosethatdidsuggestconsequences,includedissuessuchas-
“Anegativeconsequenceofrestorativejusticeisthatthepersonmaynotlearntheirlesson,andre-offendandthevictim’smaybecomeatargetagain.”(VEPoffender-participant)
“Notallpersonsarereadyorwillingtolookattheeffectsthatacrimehashadonthem.”(STPoffender-participant)
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
130
63%(n=10)ofvictims-participantsprovidedawrittenresponsetothequestion-2ofthese
stated“Theadvantagesfaroutway[any]negativeconsequence.”and“Negative?Really?”
Otherresponsesincluded-
“Someoffendersmaynotbepreparedtoacceptpersonalresponsibility.Victimsmaystillbeangryandunreadytoforgive,stayingstuckandunabletomoveforward.”“Idon’treallythinktherewerenegativeconsequenceshoweverpersons(some)mayrelivetheexperience.Buttheyweregivenplentyoftimetorealisethiscouldhappen.”
EffectsofRJonPerceptionsoftheCJS
Offender-participants(n=4)whoweretomeetwiththeirdirectvictims(afterthephase-one
programmes)wereaskedtocompleteapre-conferencequestionnaire.Thisincludedthe
identicalstatementsabouttheCJS,aswereaskedpre-phaseoneparticipation.
Thetablebelowshowstheirresponsesbeforethephase-oneprogrammes(blackstars)andtheir
responsesafterthephase-oneprogramme/pre-conferencing(redstars).
StronglyAgree
Agree Neither Disagree StronglyDisagree
SentenceshandeddownbytheCourtsarefair. *
*****
**
TheCriminalJusticeSystemmeetstheneedsofvictimsofcrime. *
*****
**
ThereisadequatesupportforvictimsofcrimeinBermuda. *
****
**
*
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
131
StronglyAgree
Agree Neither Disagree StronglyDisagree
TheCriminalJusticeSystemrespectstherightsofthoseaccusedofcommittingacrimeandtreatsthemfairly.
*
***
*
***
TheCriminalJusticeSystemasawholeiseffectiveinreducingcrime.*
* **
**
**
TheDepartmentofCorrectionsiseffectiveathelpingtorehabilitateoffendersconvictedofacrime.
**
**
*
**
*
TheCriminalJusticeSystemiseffectiveinbringingpeoplewhohavecommittedcrimestojustice.
***
**
**
*
DomainOneSummary
TheoffendersandvictimsthatstartedtheprogrammeswereveryreceptivetoRJbefore
embarkingontheprogrammes.Thiswasfurtherevidencedinparticipantsbeingwillingto
engageinRJinterventionsatdifferentstagesofacrimehavingbeencommittedandwithlittle
knowledgeofRJbeforeparticipatingintheprogrammes.Therewasamarkedperceptionofthe
existingCJSasbeingineffectivetomeettheneedsofvictims;upholdtherightsofpeople
accusedofoffending;toproactivelyreducecrimeorrehabilitatethoseconvictedofcrimes.The
mostpositiveperceptionoftheCJSwasthatitwassomewhateffectivein‘bringingthosewho
havecommittedcrimestojustice’.
Post-programme,participantsspokemorereadilyoftheperceivedbenefitsofRJ,thanthe
possiblenegativeeffects.Similarly,offender-participants(whoweretoengageinconferencing)
indicatedmorepositiveperceptionsoftheCJSpost-programme.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
132
Incasesofcrimes,committedanddealtwithinBermuda,thevictim-participantsindicatedthat
theywerelargelyexcludedfromgivingevidenceatcourt,andofthosethatindicatedtheyhad
beeninvolvedinthecase,nonefeltthattheyhadfullopportunitytosaywhattheywantedas
partofthejudicialprocess.Interestingly,despiteasignificantnumberoftheoffender-
participantsindicatingthattheyhadtheopportunitytoaddressthevictimsincourt,agreater
numberindicatedthattheywouldhavelikedtoaddressthevictimincourtandveryfewstated
thattheyactuallydid.
MotivationtoparticipateintheDoC’sRJinitiativeandtheretentionofparticipantswouldbe
crucialtothesustainabilityoftheproject.Forthistohappenitwouldbeimportanttoexplore
whetherornottheprogrammescouldbegintoaddresstheneedsofvictims’andoffenders.
Suchinformationwouldalsohelptoinformfuturepracticeandpolicy.Thisiscoveredinthe
nextsectionofthechapter.
Motivation&Retention
Motivation
Intheinitialassessmentofsuitabilityfortheoffender-participants,theywereaskedtoratehow
motivatedtheyweretoparticipateintheprogrammes(VEP&STP)onascaleof1-5,where1=
‘Notatallmotivated’and5=‘Verymotivated’.Ofthe26offendersthatparticipatedinthe
programmes100%ratedtheirmotivation3andabove;83%4andabove;55%ratedtheir
motivationas5–verymotivated.TheaverageratingofmotivationfortheVEPoffenderswas
4.42andtheaverageforSTPwas4.35.
Preandpost-programmeparticipation,bothvictimsandoffenderswereaskedtoindicatehow
theyfeltaboutbeingaskedtoparticipateintheprogrammes.Thegraphbelow[graph11]shows
thepreandpostratingsforeachseparatedgroupofparticipants(VEPoffender-participants;STP
offender-participantsandtheSTPvictims-participants).101
101DifferencesinthepreandpostnumbersfortheSTPoffenderandvictim-participants,isduetodrop-outs,non-startersandparticipantsfailingtoanswerthequestion.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
133
Graph11
Acrosseachoftheparticipantgroups,thenumberofparticipantsthatwere‘verypleased’to
havebeenaskedtoparticipateincreasedpost-programme.Forexample,ofthetwoSTP
offender-participantswhowere‘notverypleased’pre-programme,bothratedtheirfeelingson
participationas‘verypleased’post-programme.TheoneVEPoffender-participant,who
indicatedbeing‘notatallpleased’post-programme,wastheoneVEPoffenderwhodidnotfully
participateintheprogramme.However,hehadratedhisinitiallevelofmotivationas3.
Duringthefocusgroup,heldwithaselectionofoffender-participantsfromthefirstVEPandSTP
programmesthatagreedtomeet,theyraisedconcernsregardingtheassessmentofoffender
suitabilityforprogrammeparticipation.Theseexcerptscameoutinresponsetothequestion–
‘Priortogoingintothegroupandhearingaboutit,whatwereyoumostfearfulof?’
“Wellforme…confidentialtypeofstufflikeumIhadumIwannasaysomethingaboutumscreeningandpickingtherightguysfortheclassesbecauseIthinkthat’sveryimportant,youknowwhenyourdoingyourscreeningprocesslike,totakepeoplethatarereallyseriousandreallywannahelpthemselvesinsteadofpeopletojustmakeupthenumbersyouknow…”
“ThatwasthebiggestfearrighttherebecausethefirstthingthatIaskedwasumMs*****atthestartoftheclasswasumwaswhowasgonnabeintheclasswithmebecauseyoudon’twannaopenuptosomebodywhoseimmatureyouknowcauseitsveryconfidentialinformationandyoudon’twantthemtogoaroundandblabberaboutwhatwe’retalkingaboutinclass…ifwe’realltryingtohelpeachotherout,thatwasmybiggestfearrightthere.”
0%
50%
100%
VEPpre(n=12)
VEPpost(n=12)
STPpre(n=17)
STPpost(n=14)
Vicgmspre
(n=16)
Vicgmspost(n=14)
Howdoyoufeelaboutbeingaskedtopargcipate?
Verypleased
Pleased
Notverypleased
Notatallpleased
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
134
“Iwasmoreworriedaboutwhatyouweregoingtodowiththeinformationthatyougotoutoftheclass,wherewasthisinformationgonnago?whatpurposewereyougoingtousetheinformationfor…thatwasthegreatestfearIhadbecauseyouraskinginmatesfromdifferentbackgroundsyouknowwhatImean,tocometogethersoyouthrewusallinonepotandletsseewhatwecangetoutofthis…Iwasn’tsoworriedaboutwhowasgonnabeintheclassroom,itseitheryourgonnabeamanbigenough,strongenoughtostandonyourowntwofeetandwhateverhappeninthepastifyoufeltthattherestofthepopulation[inmatepopulation]neededtohearitthat’sonyourshoulders,seewhatI’msaying…andI’mgonnatellyoulikeItelleverybodyelse*****hashisowncrosstocarryandIhavemyowncrosstocarrybutwhat******doeswhat*****dont,thataintgotnothingtodowithmesee,itsnotmybusiness,sotheysay‘heyyouknowwhatthatboydone’…that’snotwhatthis,thisclasswasfor….”
Thefocus-groupoffenderswerereferringtotheVEPoffender-participantwhoratedhisfeelings
as‘notatallpleased’post-programmeandwhodidnotfullyparticipate.Thisalsospoketothe
recruitmentoftheparticipantsandtheirawarenessoftheprogrammesbeingresearched.
Similarly,post-programmeallparticipantswereasked–‘Howdoyoufeelnowabouthaving
beencontactedtoparticipate?’[Graph12],thefindingsconfirmtheresultsabove(pertainingto
howtheyfeltaboutbeingaskedtoparticipatepreandpost).
Graph12
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
VEPOffenders(n=12)
STPOffenders(n=14)
STPVicgms(n=14)
Howdoyoufeelaboutbeingcontactedtopargcipate?post-programme
Verypleased
Pleased
Notatall
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
135
Allparticipantswereaskedbeforestartingtheprogrammeswhattheirreasonswerefor
agreeingtoparticipateandwhattheyhopedtogainfromtheprocess.Thefrequencyofthe
wordsusedintheresponsesisrepresentedinthewordcloudbelow.
Salientphrasesthatcreatedthewordshighlightedintheword-cloud,consistedof
understandingtheeffectsofcrime;tofeelbetter;gainhopeandhelpvictims.Specificresponses
were-
FromtwoSTPoffender-participants-“ToobtainanotherviewonhowthecrimesIhavecommittedeffectothers.”“Ihope2gainabetterunderstandingofthecarnage&emotionalstressthatIcausedothers,&IhopethatIcanhelpsomeonetogainsomeclosure,byexplainingmyactionsandexpressingmyapologies.”
FromtwoVEPoffender-participants-“Abetterunderstandingofhowcrimeeffectspeople.Ihaven’tbeenthevictimofcrimemuchinmylife.AndifIwasIneverthoughtabouttheeffectsithadonmeandmyfamily.”“Iwanttosharethefactsofmycasetoseehowotherpeoplewouldfeeliftheywasinmyshoes.”
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
136
Twovictim-participantsreportedtheirmotivationaswanting-“Togetabetterunderstandingoftheconvictedpersonandtheirthoughtsonhoworwhyithappened.Tohealfromtheincident.”“Tounderstandthemindandreasoningofsomeonewhocommitsacrime.Toseeiftheyrealizeorknowtheimpactoftheiractionshaveonotherpeoplei.e.thevictims,andtheconsequencesoftheiractions.”
Retention
Asillustratedinthepreviouschapter,someparticipantsagreedtoparticipateinthe
programmesbutthenfailedtostarttheprogrammeorchosetodrop-outpartwaythrough.The
tablesbelowsetoutthenumberofparticipantsitwashopedwouldparticipate;thosethat
starteddropped-outandcompleted.Thetableissplitintooffender-participantsandvictim-
participants.
Offenders TreatmentIntendedn=36
Agreedtoparticipate
Non-starters
Dropouts
Limitedparticipation102
Completions
VEP 18 12 0 0 1 12(100%)STP 18 17 2(12%) 1(6%) 1 14(82%)
Totals 36 29 2(7%) 1(3%) 2 26(90%)
Victims TreatmentIntendedn=18
Agreedtoparticipate
Non-starters
Dropouts
Limitedparticipation
Completions
STP 18 16 1(6%) 1(6%) 1 14(88%)
OneoftheSTPoffender-participantnon-startersandtheonedropout,weretwooffendersvery
closetorelease.Thevictim-participantthatdroppedoutdidsoduetoworkobligationsthat
begantoconflictwiththestarttimeoftheprogramme.Theonevictim-participant,whodidnot
starttheprogramme,failedtostartbecauseoftheirfearofgoingintoaprisonand
disenfranchisedgrief.Thelattervictim-participantraisedtheseissuesduringthepre-
programmeassessment,althoughtheyhadmaintainedadesiretoparticipate.
102Limitedparticipationreferredtothosethatfinishedtheprogramme,butdidnotattendtheminimumnumberofsessionstobeconsideredafullcompletion.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
137
Post-programme,theSTPparticipantswereasked–Howappropriatetheprisonwasasa
setting?
‘VeryAppropriate’-43%ofvictims(n=6)and50%STPoffender-participants
‘Appropriate’-57%ofvictims(n=8)and36%oftheSTPoffenders(n=5)
‘Neutral’-14%oftheoffenders(n=2).
Noneoftheparticipantsfeltthattheprisonwas‘notveryappropriate’or‘notatall
appropriate’.
Regardingtheirsenseofsafety,allparticipantswereaskedpost-programme-Howsafetheyfelt
duringtheprogramme?Theresultsareillustratedingraph13below.Safetywasnotdefined
andwaslikelyinterpreteddifferentlybythedifferentparticipants.Theoffendersweremore
concernedaboutconfidentialityanddisclosure,whilethevictimsinterpretedsafetyintermsof
thepotentialforconflictandphysicalsafety.
Graph13
DuringsessiontwoofanSTP,oneofthevictim-participantssaid-“Beinginthisatmospherehastakenthefearrightoutofme.”
Duringthefocusgroupphysicalsafetywasraisedasapotentialissueforvictims.Referringto
whereconferencesshouldbeheld-
“I’msayingIthinkitshouldbecauseletmeshowyouthereasonwhyIsuggestedthishere,Isaiditshouldbedoneuphere(referringtotheprison)becauseyouknowwhat,youcansitbehind
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
VEP(n=12)STP(n=14)
Vicgms(n=14)
Safetyfeltduringtheprogrammes
Notverysafe
Quitesafe
Verysafe
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
138
thatglassupthereandyouknowtheycansaywhattheywant,acthowtheyreallywant…withoutfeelingintimidated,youknowthatglassyoucan’tbreakit,youfeelwhatI’msaying.[anotheroffenderquestions–“yourtalkingaboutglass”]upinvisits.”Thesecondoffenderargues-“Itsnotevenaboutintimidationlike,Ithinkitsmoreabouthealing,I’mtalkingaboutone-on-onewiththeoffender.”
Post-programme,theoffender-participants(n=26)wereasked-Iftheyfeltsupportedbythose
intheprogrammewiththem?
77%(n=20)reportedtofeeling‘alot’ofsupport;19%(n=5)felt‘alittle’supportand4%(n=1)
reportedtofeeling‘notatall’supported(thelatter,anoffenderwhodidnotfullyparticipate).
Ofthevictim-participants(n=14)-
64%(n=9)reportedfeeling‘plenty’ofsupport,whiletheremaining36%(n=5)felt‘enough’
support.
MotivationforRJConferencing
Duringthefocusgrouptheresearcheraskedtheoffenders–Whattheylearntaboutvictimson
theprogrammes.Duringrapidcontributions,oneoffenderstated-
“Iagreewithwhat*****saidasfarasvictims,youknow,causeIsawthatmyselfandIknowyouaskedthisquestionfirstbutIhadtothinkaboutitalittlebitandwhatIdidlearnfromtheclasswasthatIhavetheabilitytoforgive,youknowwhatImeanso,andthat’sthethinglike,itshardforthesepeoplethat’sbeenvictimisedto,tojustforgivesomeoneoffthewhim,that’swhyIfeelthatthisclassis,Imeanit’sagoodstartasfarasinthedirectionofrestorativejusticebutatacertaindatemoreisgonnaneeded,needtobedoneasfarasbringingaboutrealrestorativejusticetotheactualvictimsandtheactualoffenders.”
Asthecontributionscontinued,otheroffendersspokeonthecommentsofthosebeforethem–“That’swhyIsaidearlierthatyou’regonnahavetomakeamore,biggerstep…asfarasconnectingtheactualvictimandtheactualoffenderinsomewayitmightbestagesyouhavetoimplementtomakeitmoretransitional…meaningyoustartlightbutitsgottabestepsasmadetomakerealrestorativejustice.”
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
139
Post-programmealloftheoffender-participantswereaskediftheywouldliketomeetwiththe
victim(s)oftheiroffence?(Graph14)
Basedontheirparticipation,aninitialselectionofoffenderswasaskediftheywouldactually
liketomeetwiththeirdirectvictims.Iftheoffenderswerewillingtoparticipateinaconference,
areferralwasmadetotheBermudaPoliceServiceforinitialcontacttobemadewiththedirect
victimstoinvitethemtoameetingaboutRJ.Eachoftheoffendersapproached,hadindicated
theirwillingnesstomeetwiththevictim(s)oftheiroffence.Table6showsthenumberof
offendersasked-byprogramme,andthewillingnessofthevictimstoparticipateina
conference.
Table6103 Offenders
askedOffendersagreeing
ContactwithVictims
MeetingswithVictims
Victimsagreeing
Conference/Intervention
VEP 3 2 2 2 1 1STP 2 2 2 2 2 1
Totals 5 4 4 4 3 2TheoneVEPoffender-participantthatdidnotwanttomeetwiththeirvictimdeclinedasthe
primaryvictim(ofstealing)wasafamilymember.Thevictimthatdeclinedtoparticipateina
conferenceaftermeetingwithafacilitatorstatedthattheyfelttoomuchtimehadpassedsince
theoffence(burglary).
103Thenumbersundercolumnspertainingtovictims,refertothenumberofcasesopposedtothenumberofvictims.Forexample,onevictimofanoffendermaydeclinetomeetwithconferencefacilitators,whereanothervictimorthree,ofthesameoffendermayagreetomeet.
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
YesUnsure
No
83%
17%
77%
8% 15%
Willingtomeetwithdirectvicgms
VEP(n=12)STP(n=13)
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
140
DomainTwoSummary
Motivationandretentionfortheoffender-participantswashighforbothprogrammes–92-
100%completionfortheVEP,76-82%completionfortheSTPand82-88%completionforthe
STPvictim-participants.Post-programmeallparticipants(n=40)exceptonewaseither‘pleased’
or‘verypleased’abouthavingbeenaskedtoparticipateintheprogrammes.Only3participants
failedtostarttheprogrammeafterfirstagreeingtoparticipate.Oneoffender-participant’s
removalwasduetoadministrativeissues.Theotheroffender-participantwasverycloseto
releaseandthevictim-participantwrestledwithissuesofdisenfranchisedgrief.Dropoutswere
alsoverylow(4%),withthevastmajorityofparticipantsfeelingsupportedbyotherparticipants.
Themesthatarosewhichaffectedmotivationandretentionweretheparticipants’senseof
safetyandtheselectionprocessofoffender-participants.However,theSTPvictimsexpressed
feelingsafeduringtheprogramme,toanevengreaterextentthantheoffenders.Moreover,the
DoCwasviewedasanappropriatesettingfortheprogrammes.Itwasapparentfrom
observationthattheoffendersweremoreconcernedwithissuesofconfidentiality,when
consideringsafety.Theoffendersalsoquestionedtheselectionofoffender-participantsandthis
occurredlargelyinoneVEPprogrammewheretheoffender-participantswereunhappywiththe
inclusionofaparticularoffender.
Thevastmajorityofoffender-participantsreportedawillingnesstomeetwiththedirectvictims
oftheiroffences,post-programme.Amajorobjectiveofthestudywastoexplorewhetheror
notthephase-oneprogrammescoulddecreasetheoffender-participants’denialofharmcaused
tovictimsofcrime,essentiallyincreasingvictimempathy;thisisthefocusofthenextsectionof
thechapter.
Empathy(andtheCRIME-PICSIIQuestionnaire)
Asanexpectedeffectoftheprogrammes,itwasimportanttoexploretheeffectsofempathyon
theoffenderparticipants.Thiswastoseeiftheirempathycouldincreaseforthepeoplethat
havebeenaffectedbytheiractions.Havingregardforthepeopleaffectedbytheiractions
wouldbeimportantbeforeconsideringwhetherornottheywouldbesuitabletomeetwith
theirdirectvictims.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
141
Statisticalanalysiswouldnotbeappropriatebasedonthepurposefulselectionofparticipants
thatwouldviolatetherequiredconditionofnormaldistribution;thereforetestsofsignificance
couldnotbeconducted.Descriptivestatisticswereusedtoanalysethedata.
TheCRIME-PICSIIpsychometricwasadministeredtooffender-participantsbeforeandafter
theirparticipationinthephase-oneprogrammes,andafteraconferenceforthosethat
participatedinafurtherinterventionwiththeirdirectvictims.Themainscaleofinteresttothe
studywastheV-scalethatassessesthedegreetowhichtheoffender-participantsacknowledge
theharmcausedtovictims.Decreasedscorespost-programmeshowgreateracknowledgement.
VictimEmpathyScale
Analysingthemeanscorespreandpostforalltheoffender-participants(n=26)thatcompleted
theprogrammesyieldedthefollowingscores–
n=26
Pre-score Post-score DifferenceM=5.15(SE=0.49) M=4.27(SE=0.4) 0.88
Thisdifferenceinthescorespreandpostindicatesanincreasedacknowledgementoftheharm
causedtothevictimsoftheircrime.
Whenthesameanalysiswasconductedminusthetwooffender-participants(n=24)whohad
notfullyparticipatedintheprogrammes,ofwhichtherewasonefromeachprogramme,the
analysisshowedagreaterdifference–
n=24
Pre-score Post-score DifferenceM=5.17(SE=0.51) M=4.08(SE=0.35) 1.09
Thedifference/reductioninaveragescoreswasgreater,indicatinggreateracknowledgementof
theharmcausedtothevictimsoftheircrimeinthedesireddirection.
Duringthefocusgroupwhenaskedwhattheyfelttheylearntaboutvictims,aVEPoffender-
participantsharedapartofhislearning,whichwasextendedbyanSTPparticipant-
“Forme,likeIsaidum,victimempathy,I’mnotstupidornothingIknowwhatIdidwaswrongbutreallylike,toputmyselfinthevictim’sshoesitgotmeintouchwithfeelingsthatIweren’tawareof,youknow,ifyouunderstandwhatImean…butvictimsgowiderthantherebecauseyougotpeopleinthecommunityto[anotheroffender-participantinterrupts]“sureyeahthat’swhyIsaidtheRippleEffectgoestoeverybody...”
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
142
Phase-OneProgrammeComparison
Astherewasasubstantialdifferenceinthemeanscores,oncethetwooffender-participants
whohadnotfullyparticipatedhadbeenexcluded,theseindividualswereexcludedfromfurther
analysis.Asanaimofthestudywastoevaluateandcontrasttheprogrammesusedinorderto
drawimplicationsforfuturepractice,themeansofeachprogrammeontheV-scalewas
analysed.
ThemeanscoresontheV-scalewereanalysedforthetwophase-oneprogrammes-
Pre-score Post-score DifferenceVEP(n=11) M=4.64(SE=0.49) M=4.00(SE=0.49) 0.636STP(n=13) M=5.62(SE=0.851) M=4.15(SE=0.517) 1.462
Theresultsshowedthattherewasthefavourablereductioninscorespost-programmeforeach
intervention,withagreaterdifferencefortheSTP.Noteworthy,howeveristhattheSTPpre-
scoresweremuchhigherthanthatoftheVEPscores,andtheVEPscorespost-programmewere
lowerthanthatoftheSTP;wherethelowerthescorethemorepositivetheoutcome.
Forthisreason,itwouldbeusefultoexaminetheaveragescoresoftheSTPandVEP,ifanequal
numberofoffenderswereanalysedandmatchedforoffences,ashadoriginallybeenintended.
Inordertoassesswhetherornottherewasadifferenceinempathyscoresbetweenthosewho
hadparticipatedintheSTPandthosethatparticipatedintheVEP,7pairsofoffender-
participantswerematchedfortheirindexoffences.Offencesincludedwounding,burglary,
aggravatedburglary,murder,robberyandrobberywithfirearmcharges.
Becauseoftheactualoffender-participantsthatcompletedtheprogramme,ananalysisof
differencebetweenthoseoffendersconvictedforoffencesagainstapersonandproperty
offences,wasnotpossible.Thevastmajorityhadcommittedoffencesofviolenceagainsta
person.
Themeanscoreswereanalysedforthe7-pairedoffendersontheV-scale-
Pre-score Post-score DifferenceVEP(n=7) M=5.00(SE=0.84) M=4.57(SE=0.76) 0.43STP(n=7) M=4.14(SE=0.54) M=4.29(SE=0.88) -0.15
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
143
ThescoresfortheVEPoffendersshowedfavourablechangepost-programme,althoughthis
changewasnotasgreatasitwasforthegroupcollectively.ThiswasalsothecasefortheSTP
offender-participants,totheextentthattherewasaminimalnegativeimpactonthisverysmall
numberofparticipants.
TheG,A&ECRIME-PICSIIScales
TheotherscalesmeasuredbytheCRIME-PICSIIpsychometricswereanalysed.TheG-scalefor
generalattitudetowardoffending;theA-scaleassessestheoffenders’anticipationoffuture
offendingandtheE-scaleassessingtheoffender’sevaluationofcrimeasworthwhile.
Thefollowingtableshowsthemeanscoresfortheoffenderscollectively;perprogrammeminus
thetwooffenderswhodidnotfullycompletetheprogrammesandthe7matched-pairsof
offender-participants.
G-scale–GeneralAttitudeTowardOffending
Pre-score Post-score DifferenceCollectively(n=24) M=34.29(SE=1.52) M=31.9(SE=1.45) 2.37VEP(n=11) M=36.36(SE=2.05) M=36.91(SE=1.26) -0.54STP(n=13) M=32.08(SE=2.23) M=27.08(SE=1.72) 5
MatchedVEP(n=7) M=35.86(SE=3.16) M=36.57(SE=1.87) -0.71MatchedSTP(n=7) M=31(SE=2.28) M=25(SE=2.01) 6
Collectively,therewasadecreaseintheaveragescorespost-programmecomparedtopre-
programme,indicativeofimprovementpost-programmeinthedesireddirection.However,
whenthescoreswereexaminedacrosstheindividualprogrammes,theVEPfailedtoproducea
positivechange.
Interestingly,itwasinoneSTPsession,whentheoffendersweresharingexamplesofcrimes
thattheylaughedatsomeoftheexamplesbeinggiven.
AsimilarpatternwasfoundwiththeanalysesofscoresfortheA&E-scalesasdisplayedinthe
tablesbelow.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
144
A-scale–AnticipationofFutureRe-Offending
Pre-score Post-score DifferenceCollectively(n=24) M=11(SE=0.79) M=10.21(SE=0.67) 0.792VEP(n=11) M=9.55(SE=0.61) M=10.64(SE=0.92) -1.09STP(n=13) M=12.3(SE=1.29) M=9.54(SE=0.93) 2.77
MatchedVEP(n=7) M=9.57(SE=1.34) M=10.29(SE=1.34) -0.72MatchedSTP(n=7) M=12.86(SE=1.34) M=9.43(SE=1.34) 3.43
AnSTPoffender-participantmadethefollowingstatementduringasession-“Ihavetherighttoapologise.Itdoesn’tmeanIhavetocometoyourfaceandsaysorry,IcanapologisebynotdoingwhatIdidagain.”
E-scale–EvaluationofCrimeasWorthwhile
Pre-score Post-score DifferenceCollectively(n=24) M=9.08(SE=0.7) M=8.54(SE=0.56) 0.54VEP(n=11) M=10.45(SE=1.06) M=10.64(SE=0.56) -.182STP(n=13) M=7.54(SE=0.87) M=6.62(SE=0.61) 0.92
MatchedVEP(n=7) M=9.57(SE=1.51) M=10.71(SE=0.78) -1.14MatchedSTP(n=7) M=7.14(SE=0.8) M=6(SE=0.65) 1.14
DomainThreeSummary
Ofmainconcerntothestudy,wastheoffender-participants’acknowledgementofharmcaused
tothoseaffectedbytheiractions(V-scale).Therewasapositivechangepost-interventionfor
bothprogrammes,buttoamuchgreaterextentfortheSTP.IncontrasttotheVEP,theSTPalso
providedpositivechangeonthreeoftheotherCRIME-PICSIIscales(G,A&E).Interestingly,
whenalimitednumberofoffenderswerematchedforindexoffenceacrosstheprogrammes,
VEPshowedgreaterpositiveattitudinalchangeonvictimempathythantheSTP.
Itisimportanttonotethatthestudywasbasedonaverysmallnumberalbeitthenumberof
offender-participantswas18%oftheaverageconvictedmalepopulationduringSept2014-Aug
2015.Asapilotoftheinitiativeandwithsuchsmallnumbers,thequalitativedatawas
invaluable.Findingsfromtheparticipants’evaluationsoftheprogrammesfollowinthenext
sectionofthechapter.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
145
ProgrammeEvaluation
Thissectionisdividedintoanumberofsectionsthatcovers–programmepreparation;
collaborativeconsultation;facilitatorskillsandpractice;experiences;outcomeandevaluations.
Preparation
Post-programmetheparticipantswereaskedanumberofquestionsaboutthepreparationthey
receivedbeforeparticipating.
Collectivelywithn=40participantsansweringthequestion-57.5%(n=23)ofparticipantsfelt
thattheyhad‘enough’timetothinkabouttheirdecisiontoparticipate;42.5%(n=17)feltthey
had‘plenty’timetoconsider.
Allparticipantswereaskedhowwelltheywerepreparedfortheprogramme,withn=39
responding.Graph15showstheresponsesbyparticipantgroup.
Graph15
50%ofeachoftheoffender-participantgroupsfeltthattheywereprepared‘quitewell’before
theprogrammestarted;whilethegreatestnumberofvictims(46%)felttheywere‘verywell’
preparedfortheprogramme.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Notatallwell
Notverywell
Unsure Quitewell Verywell
Howwelldidthefacilitatorsprepareyou?VEP(n=12)
STP(n=14)
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
146
OneSTPvictim-participant,intheirfinalcomments–asapost-programmequestionnaireitemwrote-“Thefacilitatorsandtheresearcherwerejustgreat–soprepared.Sorespectful.Soencouraging.”
Attheendoftheprogrammes,participantswerealsoaskedtoratetheamountofinformation
theyreceivedbeforethestartoftheprogramme,andattheend.Theresults,byparticipant
groups,areillustratedbelowingraphs16&17.
Graph16
Again,50%oftheSTPandVEPoffender-participantsfeltthattheyreceived‘enough’
informationbeforethestartoftheprogramme.While43%ofSTPvictim-participantsfeltthey
received‘enough’information.Overall,theVEPoffender-participantsfeltthemostinformed.
Inresponsetothequestion-whatwouldyouchangeabouttheprogramme,oneSTPvictim-participantstated–“Moreinformationabouttheprogrammebeforestartingit–perhapseventheworkbookinadvance?”
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
None Notenough Enough Plenty
Informagongiven-pre-programme
VEP(n=12)
STP(n=14)
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
147
Graph17
91%ofvictim-participantsfeltasthoughtheyreceived‘enough’informationpost-programme.
50%oftheVEPoffender-participantsmaintainedthattheyreceived‘enough’informationpost-
programme.36%ofSTPoffender-participantsfelttheyreceived‘enough’and36%‘plenty’
informationpost-programme.
Consultation
VictimsoftheSTPwereaskedasimilarquestionpreandpost-programmeaboutwhattheir
preferredmethodofcontactbythePrisonFellowshipfacilitatorswouldhavebeen.Pre-
programmeofthosethatresponded(n=15)tothequestion-
47%(n=7)indicatedthattheywereokaybeingcontactedbyphone;
40%(n=6)indicatedthatwouldhavepreferredtohavebeencontactedinperson,and
13%(n=2)indicatedthattheywouldhavepreferredtobecontactedinitiallybyletter.
Post-programmethevictims(n=14)responsesindicatedaslightchange–
86%(n=12)optedforthepreferredmethodofcontactbyphone,withtheremaining
14%(n=2)optingforcontacttohavebeenmadeinperson.
Thismarkedchangedsuggestedthatthevictim-participantsfeltevenmorecomfortablewith
thewholeprocesspost-programme.
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
None Notenough Enough Plenty
Informagongiven-post-programme
VEP(n12)
STP(n=14)
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
148
Post-programmeparticipantswereaskedwhetherornottheyfeltthefacilitatorsconsultedwith
them,asanindicationofhowcollaborativetheyfoundtheprocesstobe.Table7showsthe
resultsofeachparticipant-groupofeachprogramme.
Table7 Totally Somewhat Notreally NotatallVEPoffenders(n=12) 8 3 1 -STPoffenders(n=14) 8 5 1 -STPVictims(n=14) 9 4 1 -
Totals(n=40) 25(62.5%) 12(30%) 3(7.5%) 0%
Participantswereaskedtoconsideriftherewasanythingthattheywouldlikedtohavebeen
asked,bythefacilitatorsorresearcherthattheywerenotasked?Mostsuggestedthatthere
wasnot(75%).
TwoSTPoffender-participantssuggested-“Boutmegettingtoknowmemorebuttherewasn’tenoughtimetogetthingsrollingwehad2hours.”“Howdidtheoffenceeffecttheoffenderpersonallyandviceversa.”OneSTPvictim-participantssuggested-“1.HowdoIcopeyearslater.2.Howhasmylosschangedmylife.3.HowdidIgettothepointIcouldforgive.”
CommentsmadebytheVEPoffender-participantstothisquestion,haveallbeenincluded,in
morerelevantsectionsofthechapter.
FacilitatorSkills&Practice
57%oftheSTPvictim-participantsand57%oftheSTPoffender-participantsratedthe
facilitatorsasbeing‘veryskilled’,theremaining43%ofeachparticipantgroup,ratedthe
facilitatorsas‘adequatelyskilled’.
Inresponsetoapost-programmequestionnaireitemaskingaboutperceivedpossiblenegativeconsequencesofRJ,oneSTPoffenderwrote-“TherecanbesomeIbelieveonlyifoffender,victimormediatorisnotequippedwellfortheprocess.”OftheVEP–25%oftheoffender-participantsratedthefacilitatorsas‘veryskilled’,67%rated
themas‘adequatelyskilled’and8%wereundecidedorunsureoftheiropinion.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
149
Whenaskedpost-programmetoratehowjudgmentalthefacilitatorsweretheSTPparticipants
Victims(n=11)Offenders(n=12)
NotatallJudgmental Victims(n=3)Offenders(n=2)
NotVeryJudgmental82% 18%
TheVEPfacilitatorsdidnotfairaswell,offenderratingsweremorevaried-
NotatallJudgmental NotVeryJudgmental QuiteJudgmental VeryJudgmental8% 25% 50% 2%
ComplementarydatadidnotclearlyexplainthereasonsforratingsoftheVEPfacilitators.Asa
response,tothequestionaboutwhatparticipantswouldchangeabouttheprogramme,one
VEPparticipantstated–
“FirstIwouldgetridoftheredchairandstopaskingquestionslikeyourinterrogatingsomebody.”Thisoffenderratedthefacilitatorsas‘notveryjudgmental’.AnotherVEPoffenderstated–“Ibelievetheprogramwasgood.Iwouldnotchangeanythingreally.Ibelievethetaskwehadtocompletewerequitesimple.Meandmyfellowstudentswereabletoexpressourselvescompletely.Soitwasgood.”Thisoffender-participantratedthefacilitators‘quitejudgmental’.
Experiences
Alloftheparticipantsfromeachoftheprogrammesfeltthatthey‘totally’(n=30)or‘somewhat’
(n=9)hadtheopportunitytosayandaskwhattheywantedtoduringtheprogramme,except1
VEPoffender-participantwhofeltthathedid‘notatall’havetheopportunitytoexpress
himself.Thisindividualwasthesameindividualwhodidnotfullyparticipateintheprogramme.
Interestinglythisindividualfeltthattheywere‘somewhat’listenedto.
Inresponsetoaniteminthepost-programmequestionnaire,participantswereaskedifthere
wasanythingthattheywerenotaskedbythefacilitatorsorresearcher,thattheywouldliketo
havebeenasked.OneSTPvictim-participantwrote–
“None.IwasverygladthatIwasaskedaquestionbyoneofthefacilitatorsasIwasnotgoingtospeakandwasgladIwasencouragedtousemyvoice.”
85%(n=33)ofparticipantsfeltthattheywerelistenedto‘totally’duringtheirtimeonthe
programmes,with15%(n=6)feelingtheywere‘somewhat’listenedto.Themajorityofthe6–
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
150
83%thatfelt‘somewhat’listenedtowereoffender-participants.Noneoftheparticipantsfelt
theywere‘notreally’or‘notatall’listenedto.
Post-programme,participantswereaskedhowemotionaltheyfoundthecontentand
disclosures.Theresponses,byparticipantgrouparereflectedbelowinthegraph(18).
BothoffenderandvictimSTPparticipantsexperiencedtheirprogrammeasmoreemotionalthantheVEPoffender-participants.STPvictim-participantswrote-“Idon’tevenknowwhatitwas,Ijustknowwhereittookme.”“It’shelpedmelearntoforgive.”
AnSTPoffender-participanttalkingduringthefocusgroupsaid-“Ilearntthatvictimscarryalotofpain,andmaskalotofhurtandpain…theeffectthatwhatevercrimewasplaceduponthemgetspassedontoothersyouknow…Isawinmyclass,IsawavictimgetrealangryonedayandIsawherpainandherhurtandthroughthatmademeseewow…thewayitcameoutitsort…forasecondIfelt…notviolatedbutvexIwasangrythewaytheycameatmebutallitwas,wasjusttheirhurtandpainasbeingvictimsandtalkingaboutitrightwithactualoffendersyouknowandhearingoffenderstalkabouttheirpunishmentitwasn’tenoughforthisvictimyouknow,soitshowedmethatyouknowsometimesavictimseestheiroffendersbeingpunishedbutthat’sstillnotenough,sothentheirmaskingalotofhurtandalotofpainandtheycarryitfromdaytoday,andthere’sonly,I’malmostsurethatthatenergy’sbeingpassedalongintoavictim’s[anotheroffenderinterrupts].”
Theresearcherobservedhowtheparticipantsstartedtochallengeeachother.InoneSTP
sessionanoffender-participantstatedhowhewasbeginningtobecomeangryat“the
[Corrections]administration.”Anotheroffender-participantusedtheBiblicalstoryusedinthe
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Veryemogonal SomewhatemogonalNotatallemogonal
Howemogonalwasthecontentanddisclosures
VEP(n=12)
STP(n=14)
Vicgms(n=14)
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
151
STPtostatehowZacchaeusstartedtofindotherstoblame.Another,offendertriedtoadvise
thefirstoffenderthatreallyhewassayingthathewastiredof‘comingtojail’–
“ShowmeyourcompanyandI’llshowyouwhoyouare.AmImybrother’skeeper,ifIwashisrealfriend,Iwouldn’tlethimlietohimself.”
OneSTPoffender-participantstatedthatoffendingwas“…startingtofeelinhuman…excuses,IusedtogooutthereanddothethingsIwasdoing…sametimefindingthatmythinkingisI’mopeningwoundsandtherestayingopen…differenceisnowI’mwillingtogothroughit…”thesameoffenderlaterstated“…wecreateavictimstance,carryitwithusanduseitforourownadvantageandmakeourselvesfeelbetter…”
TheresearcherobservedtheVEPoffender-participantslookingateachotherindisbeliefasthey
watchedanotheroffenderparticipatingintherole-shiftexercise.Duringthissession,anumber
oftheoffenderscriedtearsastheylistenedtoavictim’sperspective(playedbyanoffender)ofa
crime.
Anobservationmadebytheresearcherconcernedtheinfluenceofothersintheprogrammes.
OneSTPoffenderrepeatedlystated,andseemedtobelievethathisoffencewasvictimless.His
peerschallengedhisview,pointingoutforhimwhothevictimsofhisoffencewere.However,
thisdidnothaveasconvincinganimpactontheoffender,aswhenthevictim-participants
challengedhim.Itwasalsoobservedthattheoffendersweregenuinelythankingeachotherfor
makinghonestdisclosures.
ThisalsooccurredintheVEPprogramme,whenoneoffendersuggestedthattheothergroup-membersshould“Justtellthemwhattheywanttohear.”Anotheroffenderstated“TheonlywayIcanhealisbyputtingouteverythingIhavedone…gettotherootofanyproblem…Ijustencourageyou,forustoheal…betterourselvesinanyway,gottabehonest.”
Outcome&Evaluations
BoththeSTPoffender(n=14)andvictim-participants(n=13)ratedtheirsatisfactionwiththe
conclusionoftheprogramme;thecollectiveratingsarepresentedinthepiechartbelow
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
152
TheVEPoffender-participants(n=12)ratedtheirsatisfactionwiththeconclusionofthe
programme;resultsofwhicharepresentedinthefollowingpiechart.
OneofthedifferencesbetweentheprogrammesisthefinalcelebrationsessionoftheSTP,at
whichguestsjointhegroup-participantsandrefreshmentsareenjoyed.TheSTPparticipants
wereaskedtoratehowimportanttheyfelttherefreshmentstime,attheendoftheprogramme
was.Surprisingly,thevictim-participantsratedthistimeslightlyhigherthantheoffender-
participants.
78%
18%
4%
SagsfacgonwiththeconclusionofSTP
Verysagsfied
Fairlysagsfied
Neither
59%25%
8%
8%
SagsfacgonwiththeconclusionofVEP
Verysagsfied
Fairlysagsfied
Neither
Verydissagsfied
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
153
Allparticipants(96%)oftheSTPexcept1offender-participant(whowas‘unsure’)said‘yes’that
theywouldparticipateinasimilarprogrammeagain.
67%oftheVEPoffender-participantssaid‘yes’thattheywouldparticipateinasimilar
programmeagain,withtheremaining33%reportingthattheywere‘unsure’.
93%ofSTPvictim-participants(n=13)reportedthatthey‘woulddefinitely’recommendthe
programmetootherpeoplewhohadbeenaffectedbycrime;7%(n=1)reportedthatthey
would‘morethanlikely’recommendtheprogramme.
86%ofSTPoffender-participants(n=12)reportedthatthey‘woulddefinitely’recommendthe
programmetootherpeoplewhohadoffended;theremaining14%(n=2)saidtheywould‘more
thanlikely’recommendtheprogramme.
50%ofVEPoffenders(n=6)saidthattheywould‘morethanlikely’recommendtheprogramme
tootherswhohadoffended;33%(n=4)saidthey‘woulddefinitely’and17%(n=2)were‘not
sure’.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
VeryImportant
QuiteImportant
Neither
Unimportant
ImportanceofTimeforRefreshments
STPVicgms(n=14)
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
154
Duringthefocusgrouptheoffender-participantswereaskedwhattheythoughtwasthemost
importantelementoftheprogramme–
STPOffender-participants
“MinewasjusthearingfromotherpeoplethatI’venevermet…actuallyhearingemandfeelingtheirpain…struckamaincoreforme.”
“That’s,I’magreeingwithwhat****saidinasensethat,asfarasinteractingwithpeoplefromtheoutside,beingabletoheartheirstoriesandsharemystorywiththemwasoneofthemostimportantfactorsmakingmeunderstand…there’sadifferencebetweencourtjusticeandalsosocietyjusticebecausethecourtsjusthandoutthepunishmentbutthere’snorestorativejusticebeingdoneafterthat…theoffender’sgonetojailandtheonesthathavebeenoffendedarestilloutthere,there’snoclaritybutinthisinstanceitsbeenaformofclaritytotheonethathasoffendedandtheonethat’sbeenoffendedon...”
VEPOffender-Participants
“FormelikeIsaid…wesatdownandwewentthroughtellingourstoryandthenwehadtocomebackandsitdownandbethevictimandtellthestory,soforme,puttingmyselfinthatsituationIthinkwasahumblingexperiencealthoughlikeIsaidwhatIdonetocompensatewaslikekindalikewhatifitwasmychild,howwouldIfeel…soforme…thatroleplayingthingwasitforme.”
“I’llsayformeuminthevictimempathyclass…whatIlearntwas…howIminimizealotandIplayeddownalotofthingswhereI’dsayohitwasjustthis,oritwasjustthatanditsfunnywhenyourecognizeit,whenyou’rethereinfrontofagroupofotherpeopleandthat’swhattheirlookingforandyourecognizeyouuseitalot,likeIheardalotofguysuseitalreadytoday…minimizinghowbigofathingitis,sothatreallybroughtalot,openedmyeyesreallyforthatclass,mostly.”
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
155
Inresponsetoprogrammechangesthatparticipantswouldmake,thefollowingresponseswere
givenforeachoftheprogrammes–
VEP
42%ofparticipantsstatedtherewas“nothing”thattheywouldchangeabouttheprogramme.
“ItsmyfirsttimebeinginaprogrammelikethisandIwouldnotchangeanythingIwouldliketoseetheclassgolonger.”“IwouldlikefortheOfficerstobemorecommunicativewithfacilitatorsandinmates.”“Betterscreeningforcandidates.”“TheonlythingIwouldchangeis,toputpeopleofsimilaroffencestogetherinaclass,sotheycanrelatealittlebetter.”
STP–Offender-participantresponses
50%oftheparticipantsstatedthatthey“wouldnotchangeathing.”(orwordstothiseffect).
“Theamountoftimespentwiththemeatofthematter,theice-breakerstakeuptoomuchtime.Theyareneededhowever.”“Moretime.Twiceweeklytogointomoredepthanddiscussion.Supportafterclasses.”“Morevictims.”“Atleasttwiceaweek.Ithinkonceaweekmaynotbeenough.”“TheLength”.“Morespeakingaboutmoreinsideproblemswithinandlessofabookprogram.”“Idon’tthinkthere’sanythingthatshouldchangeaboutthecourse,butIwouldlovetocontinuesometypeofsupportsystem.”
Victim-Participantresponses
43%madecommentssuchas“Can’tthinkofanythingat[this]time.”(orsentimentstothiseffect).
“Maybethetime.”“Itwastoshorttime.”“Ithinkperhapsabitmoretimetowardstheend.Perhapsawaytoengagereluctantinmate.”“NothingbecauseIobservedthatthereisflexibility.Thefacilitatorsareopentooffenderconcernsandcomments,butwilllatergetbackontrack.”“Moretime.”
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
156
Table8showstheoverallsatisfactionratingsforeachprogrammebyeachgroupofparticipants.
Table8 VEPoffender-participants
67%25%8%
(n=8)(n=3)(n=1)
‘VerySatisfied’‘FairlySatisfied’‘VeryDissatisfied’
“Ibelievetheprogrammeisaverysuccessfulclass.”
STPoffender-participants
86%14%
(n=12)(n=2)
‘VerySatisfied’‘FairlySatisfied’
“Theprogramwasexcellent.”
STPvictim-participants
93%7%
(n=13)(n=1)
‘VerySatisfied’‘FairlySatisfied’
“Agreatprogram!!”
Duringthefocusgroupinresponsetowhattheoffenderslikedleastabouttheprogrammesonly
twocommentsweremade,thefollowingfromanSTPoffender-participant-
“FormewhatIlikedtheleastintheSycamoreTree…wastoomuchemphasisontheBible,toomuchemphasisonreligion…Ifoundmoretimecouldhavebeenusedwithweguystalkingaboutourpersonalexperiences…theygavetheexamplesofsomestoriesintheBiblebutliketheywerejustdwellingonthosestoriesandwecouldhavejustusedthatexampleandgoton…becauseitsgonnacomeatimewherethere’sgonnabeguysinthemgroups,theregonnagettherebecausetheyfeeltheyneedtobethereandwhatnot,buttherenotreallyreligiouspeople,theydon’tknowonethingabouttheBible…theirgonnabeinthisgroupandforcedtolistentotheseBiblestories,youknowandallthisemphasisonthisBiblestories,itcanbecomeboringyouknow,itcanbecomeboringtosome,soIthinkmoreemphasis…Iwannatalkaboutme,Iwannatalkaboutwhat’sonmychest,whathappenedtomeinthatsituation…howthat’shadaneffectonmylife’…soIreallydidn’tlikethattoomuch.”
DomainFourSummary
Theparticipants’evaluationsofthephase-oneprogrammeswerepositive.Allparticipantsfelt
‘quitewell’or‘verywell’prepared,with‘enough’or‘plenty’timetohaveconsideredtheir
decisiontoparticipate.Theparticipantsfelttheywereprovidedwith‘enough’,ifnot‘plenty’of
informationbeforeandaftertheprogramme;andthattheywereconsultedwithandlistenedto
duringtheprogrammes.Victimsexpressedhealing,forgivenessfortheiroffendersandfor
themselves,asaresultoftheirparticipation.
Thereweredifferencesintheparticipants’evaluationoftheirindividualprogrammes.TheSTP-
participants(victimsandoffenders)werefarmoresatisfiedwiththeconclusionofthe
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
157
programmeandexperiencedtheirfacilitatorsasmoreskilledandlessjudgmentalthantheVEP-
participants.Withhigh-levelsofoverallsatisfactionacrosstheboard,theSTP-participantswere
moreinclinedtoparticipateinanotherprogrammeofthesamenatureinthefutureandmore
likelytorecommendtheprogrammetoothers.However,asreportedinthisfirstdomain,the
VEPoffender-participantsreportedbeingmorewillingtomeetwiththeirdirectvictims,thanthe
STPoffender-participants.
VictimandOffenderViewsofRJ&theConferencingExperience
DuringSeptemberandNovember2015tworestorativejusticeconferences(RJCs)wereheld,
thatintotalincluded2directvictims,1witness-victim,2offendersand3supporters.
Datawasobtainedfrom-4pre-conferencequestionnaires(3offenders&1victim);4pre-
conferenceinterviews(with3offendersand1victim);2post-conferencequestionnaires
(completedbyoffenders)and2post-conferenceinterviews(conductedwithoffenders).
Pre-Conference
Of4offender-participantswhoinitiallyagreedtomeetwiththeirdirectvictimsinaconference
–3feltthatthephase-oneprogrammewouldhavepreparedthem‘fairlywell’forthe
conferenceand1‘verywell’.
Inresponsetowhat‘justice’meanttotheparticipants–theoffendersspokeofcorrecting“bad”
behaviour,finding“resolution”andcompensatingvictimssothattheyfind“closure”.Two
mentionedpunishment,whilethevictimspokeofimprisonmentfor“theappropriateamountof
timeandhopefullygettingsomerehabilitation…”
WhatdoyouthinkistheappropriatetimeforRJ?
3participants(includingthevictim)feltthatRJshouldoccurafterimprisonmentoftheoffender.
Twooffendersspokeofhaving“sometimetothink”andtobecome“enlightened…acceptit,
whattheyhavedonewrong.”Thevictimspokeofhaving“timeafter”theoffence.Onlyone
offenderspokeofRJuseduring“courtproceedings”atthe“pre-sentencing”stage.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
158
WhatdoyouthinkisthepurposeofaRJC?“Forthevictimstoaddresstheoffender”(statedby1offenderand1victim)Forthevictims’questionstobeanswered–“…tosortofgiveclosure…andclaritytowhyyoudonethings,thenpeoplecanunderstandandcometotermswithit…”(anoffender)Toreceiveforgiveness
Whydidyouagreetoparticipate,andwhatareyourneeds?Victim–“…tomaketheoffenderawareofthelong-termimpacttheircrimeshave,notjustonthevictim,onallthemembersoftheirfamilyandfriends.…Ithinkiftherehadbeenmoresupportaftertheincident,Ifeltthattherewasalotmoreconcentratedonhim[theoffender],notonmyself”
Thevictimfeltthattheoffenderreceivedanappropriatesentence,howeverdidnotfeel–“…justlockingpeopleawayandthrowingawaythekeyisasolution.”
Offenders–“IbasicallyagreedtoparticipatebecauseIgenerallyrunawayfrommyproblemsandIthoughtthatthiswouldbeagoodopportunity…faceupas…challengingandasfrighteningorasscaryasitmightseem…Icangainsometoolsandsomewisdomforthefuturebygoingthroughthisprocess.”
“…initiallyinthebeginning…togetparole,that'sbeingtruthful,butnowIcansee…oneofmyvictimsactuallyagreedtotalktome,itmademefeellikeohallrightcool…yesIwannadoitbecauseitwon'thurt…toaddressmyproblems…”
“Idon'tthinkIknowallmyneedsI'mlearning…butwhatIhavelearntisthatIneedtolisten,Ineedtotrytounderstandandrespect…IcansaythatfromwhenIwasalittlechildI'vebeenthroughalotmyselfandIalwaysusedexcusesforwhyIamwhereIam…”
Thoughtsoftheotherparty-Thoughtsoftheoffenceandtheoffendercausedthevictimtofeel“nervous”andtobe“veryscaredofmennowingeneral.”
Theoffenderslargelysharedininterviewhowtheytriednottothinkabouttheirvictims.One
statedhowever,thatsinceparticipatinginthephase-oneprogramme,hehadthoughtabouthis
victims.
Post-Conference
Bothoffendersfeltthatthephase-oneprogrammepreparedthemwellfortheconference–
“TheSycamoreTree…helpedmetobecomemoreaccountable,beingopen,justmeetingvictimsingeneral…itopenedupmyeyestosomeofthethingsthatIneverreallythoughtaboutbefore.”
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
159
Bothfeltthattheconferencewasforbothparties–“…likemeetingaperfectstrangerandsharingthesameexperiencethatwewentthroughandIguessit'sprettymuchsharingthethoughts,seehowitaffectedthem,seehowitaffectedmyselftoandtojustgetsomeclarity.”
“…Ithinkitwasaboutalotofdifferentthings,youknowitwasachanceformetoexplaintomyvictimswhatwasIdoing...Ithinkitwasachanceforthemtogetsomethingoffoftheirchest,toexpresssomeoftheirfeelingsandsomeoftheiremotionstowardsmeandIthinkoverall,themeetingwastobetterhelpbothpartiesbeabletomoveonsotospeak.”
Tothequestion-Whendoyouthinkisthebesttimeforarestorativejusticeconference?Bothoffendersheldthesameopinionaspre-conference–onefeltitwouldbebestafter“thinkingtime”inprison.Theothermaintainedpre-sentence–“…evenlikepre-adult…let'stryitoutforsomebodyyoungtoo.[Askedwhy]Ijust,Ireallyfeellikeitreallyimpactedmesomuchsometimes,that…IwonderifIwould’vemetsomeofthesepeoplelikethislongtimeagoandsatdownandspokewiththem…couldithavechangedsomeofthethingsthatIdid,soIreallydothinkit'sapositivethingforpeopletojusthearvictim’sshare…thetragediesthey'vebeenthrough,itgivesabetter,abettersenseofsympathyorempathyitjustpaintsabetterpicture.”
Bothoffendersfelttheyhad‘plenty’oftimetomaketheirdecisiontoparticipateandbothfeltit
wasthe‘right’timebetweentheiroffenceandtheconference(questionnairedata).
Askedabouttheirmainreasonsforparticipating–“Mymainreasons…was,thefactthatIstillseethesepeopleonceIgetout,andthatway,onceit'sallputonthetableIdon'thavetoseethemandstilllive[in]darkness…sonowwiththisnewvictoryIhavecreatedafriendshipinsteadofhatred.”
“OkayoriginallyImeanIjustwantedtodoitbecause,youknownormallyIwouldhaverunfromit,sooriginallyIthinkIjustkindofforcedmyselfto…facethem…beingmoreaccountableformycrimes,andevenjustgivingthosepeopleanopportunitytoletmehaveit,ifthat'swhattheywantedtodo.”
Askedwhatwasmostpositiveaboutparticipatingintheconference?“Honestly,thebestthingwasprobablybeingacceptedbythevictimsandbeingIgavethemahugthatwas,thatwasahighlight,yeah.”
“Ithinkitliftsaburdenoffmyshoulders…abigburden,IwishIwouldhavehadmorevictims…forthesimplefactof,ifIwanttogoback…Iknowthatthere'snotgoingtobeanimositytowardsme.Iknowthatwewillbeabletotalkfreely,hadwenotmetwewouldn'thavebeenabletotalk,that'sthepositiverightthere.”
1offenderindicatedfeeling‘verypleased’theother,‘pleased’aboutmeetingthevictimsoftheiroffence;bothwere‘verypleased’aboutbeingaskedtomeetwiththeirvictim(questionnairedata).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
160
Askedwhatwasmostnegativeaboutparticipating?“Thatwouldhavebeen[the]walkoutthere.YepjustthenervesleadinguptoitIwouldsay,notknowingexactlyhowitwasgoingtogo,yeah.”
“Ididn'tgetanynegativeoutofit.Notatalltherewasnonegative.”
Onthequestionnaire,theoffenderswereaskedifknowingwhattheyknew,havingbeen
throughaconference,iftheywouldstillagreetoparticipate–bothindicated‘yes’.Theywere
both‘verysatisfied’overallandwiththeoutcomeagreement;theybothfoundtheconference
‘somewhatemotional’andthatthey‘totally’hadtheopportunitytosaywhattheywanted.They
felttheywere‘totally’listenedto,consultedwithandbothfelt‘verysafe’.
AskedaboutthedifferencetheyfeltRJcouldhaveoncrimeinBermuda?(andseparately)
WhatdifferencedoyouthinkRJcouldhaveforvictimsandoffendersinBermuda?
“Ithinkitcouldlessencrime…becauseitmakesyouthinkaboutotherswiththerestorativejusticeprograms,IthinkitcouldactuallymakelesscrimeinBermuda.…Idon'tthinkitmakeanybodyworse,soIthinkonlygoodcouldoutofrestorativejustice…”“…couldstoptherevolvingdoor…itmayhelpwithjobandhousing…sometimesmoneyistheproblem,sometimeswhereyoustayistheproblem…anoffendercandosomethingandbeout,andyoucanseethatpersonagainand,youcouldstillliveinfearfortherestofyourlifedependingonthecrime…ifyou,gothroughthevictimempathyprogram,restorativejusticeIbelievethatit…wouldeasethevictimsmindalot...”
“Ithinkthatitcouldhelptolessencrimeifitisimplemented,likeIsaidbeforeintheschoolsandthingslikethat...”
“Ithinkthatitcouldhaveadifference,oneway,youneverreallygetanopportunitytositdownandaddresssomebodywhohasvictimisedyou,soIthinkthatcanopenalotofdoorsandsomepositivethingscouldcomeoutofit,itmightnotbeforeverybody,butIthinkthatitcouldaidintheyoung…aidintrustingmore…communicatingwithpeopleaboutdifferentthings,andvictimscouldlearnsomestuffabouttheoffenderandviceversa.”
Askedforanyfinalcommentsthattheymightwishtomakeattheendoftheinterview?“IwouldjustliketosaythatIthoroughlyenjoyedthewholeprocess,thestartofittheSycamoreclassandasI'veneverdoneanythinglikethisbeforeIdothinkthatit'sprobablyoneofthebestthingsaround,thehighlightofmyrehabilitationingeneralthat’sall.”
“…IenjoyedtheconferenceIjustwishthereweremorevictims,notwish,butitwouldhavebeennicenowI'vebeenthroughitIknowwhatit'slikeso,there'splentyvictimsinmycase,ifanother[victimwouldliketomeetwithme]Iwoulddoit.”
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
161
Oneoffenderfeltthattheprisonwas‘veryappropriate’asasettingfortheconference,the
otherfeltitwas‘appropriate’(questionnairedata).Theyfelttheyhad‘plenty’or‘enough’
informationbothbeforeandaftertheconferenceandwere‘quitewell’preparedbythe
facilitator.Thefacilitatorswereratedas‘veryskilled’and‘veryimpartial’.Oneoffenderfeltthat
theinformalrefreshmentstimewas‘veryimportant’,theother‘neither’importantor
unimportant.
Theoffendersshowednofurtherincreaseinvictimempathyafterparticipatinginaconference;
howeverthiswasduetothemhavingachievedmaximum(cognitive)empathyattheendof
theirphase-oneparticipation.
DomainFiveSummary
Theoffendersthatparticipatedintheconferenceswerepleasedtheyengagedandfeltthatthey
gainedfromtheexperience.Forone,themostuncomfortableaspectwashisnervousnesswhen
goingintotheconference.Theotherwasdisappointednottohavehadmorepeoplepresent.
Neitheroftheconferencesresultedinreparationagreements,asneitherofthevictimsrequired
anythingmoreoftheoffendersthanthedialogue.
Thischaptersetouttoachievetheaimsof–exploringvictims’andoffenders’opinionsgenerally
oftheCJSandspecificallyoftheirowncases;andtoexploretheexperienceandeffectsofthe
experimentalpilotprogrammeforbothvictimsandoffenders.Insodoing,boththequantitative
andqualitativedataexaminedsimultaneously(wherepossible)yieldedpositiveeffectsforboth
ofthemainstakeholders.Thedataindicateddifferentdegreesofeffectforeachphase-one
programmeregardingtheoffenders’levelofvictimempathypost-programme.Thisfurther
suggesteddifferentdegreesofrestorativeorientationineachphase-oneprogramme–which
willbediscussedfurtherinthenextchapter.Therichnessofthedata,expressedbyallthe
participants,reducedanypotentialeffectsoftheresearcherandpointedtoimplicationsfor
futurepracticeandpolicy.Thesemattersarediscussedindetailinthefollowingchapter(7)–
Discussion&Conclusions.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
162
v CHAPTER7–DISCUSSION&CONCLUSIONS
“Onthebasisofourfindings,theinmateisthemostlikelytobewillingtoaccepttherestorativeapproach…ifhehasfamilyrelationsbeyondtheprison,actualgoalsafterbecomingreleased,
andconsequently,theinmateislessaffectedbytheprocessofprisonization…”(Szego&Fellegi,2013,p19).
Bermudahasseenhighratesofincarcerationinitsshorthistoryhavingfosteredapunitive
responsetocrime.AsaBritishOverseasTerritorytheexistenceofsocialinequitieshave
permeatedfromonecenturyintothenextdespiterapideconomicgrowthandself-governance.
Astheinternationalmovementtowardstheinclusionofrestorativejustice(RJ)intoestablished
adversarialcriminaljusticesystems(CJS)hasbeentakingplace,thisactionresearchsoughtto
explorehowRJmighthelptorepairtheharmcausedbycrimewithBermuda’sconvicted
population.Precedencewasgiventothereparationofrelationships,healingofvictimsand
increasedempathyofoffenders,withareductioninrecidivismananticipatedconsequential
outcomeoftheprimarygoals(recognizedbyMcCold,2004).
Asasmallcountrywithpervasiveinterconnectednessofitspopulation,itwasexpected,asthe
findingsbegintoindicate,thatRJcouldbeusefultocreatingahealthiersocietywhenharmhas
beencausedbycrime.Thischaptersetsouttodiscussthemainfindingsoftheactionresearch
inrelationtopastempiricalresearch,theoryandwithconsiderationofRJaims.Insodoingit
addressesthefinalobjective-Toevaluateandcontrasttheprogrammesusedinordertodraw
implicationsforfuturepracticeandpolicyinBermuda,forinclusionofRJ.
TheoristsofRJhaveurgedpractitionerstorejectoneformofpracticeovertheneedsofthe
stakeholdersinindividualcases(e.g.Bazemore&Umbreit,2005;Roberts,2004;Umbreit,2000)
andensurefocusonthecorevalues/aimsofRJ(e.g.DeMesmaecker,2011;Menkel-Meadow,
2007;Shaplandetal,2007;UN,2002).Assuchrestorativejusticeconferencing(RJC)was
adoptedasanumbrellatermforpracticeinthesecondphaseofthecurrentaction.Thisfurther
adheredtotheadviseoftheUN(2002),drawingattentiontotheimportanceofthesocial
impactofcrime,asRJCencouragestheinvolvementofallstakeholders(e.g.Umbreit,2000;UN,
2006)includingsecondaryvictimsandcommunitymembers.Victim’ssupportsystemscanalso
impactthevictim’sdecisiontoengagewithRJ(e.g.Bolivar,2013).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
163
Empiricalresearchhasfoundhigh-ratesofsatisfactionforRJamongvictimsandoffenders(e.g.
Poulson,2003,inMenkel-Meadow,2007;NOMS,2012;Strangetal,2013;Umbreitetal,2005),
althoughforoffenderssatisfactionwasfurtherdependentonvictimsbeingpresent(e.g.Strang
etal,2013).Timingisacomplexissue,asithasbeenfoundthattherearelow-ratesof
participationwithlessseriousoffenceswherevictimsaresimplynolongerbothered,andmore
seriousoffenceswhentherecanbefearofre-victimisation(e.g.Coates&Gehm,1985,Wyrick&
Costanzo,1999,citedinMenkel-Meadow,2007;Umbreitetal,2005).Yet,RJhasbeenfoundto
bemosteffectivewithseriouscases(e.g.Hagemann,2003;Strangetal,2013;Umbreitetal,
2005;Umbreit&Vos,2000;UN,2006;Wachtleetal,2010);andthetimebetweenoffenceand
RJhasbeenconsideredrightforthosethatparticipate(e.g.Shaplandetal,2007).
Inprisons,theuseofvictimawarenessprogrammesinpreparationofdirectvictim-offender
dialoguehasbeenfoundtobebeneficial(Szego&Fellegi,2013;Barr,2013)–theapproach
adaptedbythecurrentactionresearch.TheUN(2006)alsoadviseincrementaldevelopmentof
RJwhenitisbeingintroduced.EmpiricalresearchontheuseofRJpracticesinprisonshasfound
thatitcanproduceimprovedperceptionsofproceduralfairnessforprisonersandvisitors,
increasethelegitimacyofsentencesamongstprisonersandunderstandingoftheregime’s
functiontochallengeoffendingbehaviour(Barr,2013).Ithasbeenreportedtoimprove
relationshipsbetweenstaffandprisoners(Szego&Fellegi,2013;Barr,2013)andproduce
positivebenefitsforstaff,byincreasingmotivationfortheworkandreducingburnout(Szego&
Fellegi,2013).AsanaimofRJ,increasedvictimempathy(Feasey&Williams,2009)or
‘sensitivitytovictims’plight’(Barr,2013)canestablishaccountabilityforoffendingbeyond
legality.
Itisimportantfromtheoutsetofthischaptertostatethatthenumberofpeopleinvolvedinthe
actionresearchwassmall.Thereisnoextrapolationintended,howeverasapilotofaRJ
initiativeinBermudathefindingsprovideevidenceofthosewhoactuallyparticipated,and
pointersforfuturepracticeinsmall,highlyinterconnectedsocieties.Italsoeffectively
demonstratesthefeasibilityofintroducingaRJapproachtocorrections,andtoexploring
attitudesamongoffendersandvictims.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
164
ViewsofRJ&theCriminalJusticeSystem(CJS)inBermuda
AsaresultofthedichotomyoftenportrayedintheliteraturebetweentheCJSandRJ,the
currentresearchsoughttoexploreopinionsoftheexistingCJSandforRJ.Opinionswere
generallycriticaloftheCJS,withthemostconsistentpositiveperceptionbeingthat–theCJS
waseffectiveinbringingpeoplewhohavecommittedcrimestojustice.Therewasan
overwhelmingreceptivenesstoRJinBermudaamongstthoseparticipatingintheresearch.This
wasreflectednotonlyintheirsatisfactionwiththecurrentactioninitiative,butalsowiththe
participantsreportedwillingnesstohaveparticipatedinRJ,iftheyhadbeengiventhe
opportunity,atdifferentstagesofthecriminaljusticeprocesspre-conviction.Nonetheless,
qualitativedataindicatedadesireforbothrestorativeandcriminaljusticeresponsestocrime,
amongsttheoffendersandvictims.Analysisoftheoffenders’perceptionsoftheCJSpostphase-
one/pre-conferencebegantoshowhowRJparticipationcouldimproveconfidenceintheCJSin
Bermuda.Shaplandetal(2007)obtainedsimilarfindingsintheiractionresearchusing
randomisedcontroltrials,wherevictimandoffenderswhoparticipatedinconferencinghad
moreconfidenceintheCJS,thanthosethathadnot.Barr(2013)foundthatafterprisonershad
participatedinRJ,theyhadanincreasedperceptioninthelegitimacyoftheirsentences.This
wasreflectedinthecurrentstudythroughqualitativeandquantitativedata,astheoffender-
participantsspokeoftheirincarcerationhavinglittlecomfortorcompensationforthevictimsof
crime,andreflectedinthepre-conferencedatawheretheoffenders’opinionsofstatements
suchas–‘SentenceshandeddownbytheCourtsarefair’and‘TheCJSrespectstherightsof
thoseaccusedofcommittingacrimeandtreatsthemfairly’-becamemorepositive.Theleast
positiveperceptionofoffenderspostphase-one/pre-conferencewasthat–Thereisadequate
supportforvictimsofcrimeinBermuda.
Inpersonalcasesofcrime,thevastmajorityofvictimsreportedtonothavinghadthe
opportunitytogiveevidenceincourtorprovideaVictimImpactStatement(VIS)(itcouldhave
beenthecasethatsomeoffencesoccurredbeforeVISwerelegislated).Onlytwovictims
reportedhaving‘somewhat’gottheopportunitytosaywhattheywantedtoincourt.The(STP)
victim-participantswerethehighestrating(93%)groupofparticipantsthatwould‘definitely’
recommendtheprogrammetootherpeopleaffectedbycrime.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
165
TheExperimentalModel:Phase-OneProgrammes(STP&VEP)
TheactionresearchsetouttoimplementRJCwithintheDepartmentofCorrections(DoC)asa
newinitiativeandwithoutoffendersbeingpermittedtousetheirengagementforpurposesof
parole.Twonewprogrammeswereintroducedtoactasprerequisitesforconferencing.Itwas
intendedthattheprogrammeswouldraiseawarenessoftheharmcausedbycrimefromthe
perspectiveofvictimsandencourageaccountabilityonthepartoftheoffendersbyincreasing
victimempathy.Thetwoprogrammeshadbothsimilaritiesanddifferences.Amajordifference
wastheinclusionofunrelatedvictimsintheSycamoreTreeProgramme(STP),reflectiveofa
‘relational’levelofrestorativepractice(Toews,2006);whereastheVictimEmpathyprogramme
(VEP)hadoffendersworkingtogether,withtheonlyadditionalinteractionbeingwiththeDoC
facilitators.Bothprogrammesproducedpositiveattitudinalchangeinregardstovictimempathy
(asmeasuredbytheCRIME-PICSII).However,therewasamarkeddifferencebetweenthe
programmesinthedegreeofattitudinalshiftachieved.TheSTPshowedthegreatershiftforall
theoffender-participants(n=13;1.46),incomparisontotheVEP(n=11;0.64).However,whena
smallsampleofoffender-participantswasmatchedforindexoffencefromeachprogramme,the
VEPindicatedpositivechange(n=7;0.43)wheretheSTPoffender-participantsscoresshoweda
negativechange(n=7;-0.15).Furtherstill,onalltheotherscalesmeasuredbytheCRIME-PICSII
(e.g.A-scale-anticipationofre-offending)foralloftheoffender-participants,theVEPshowed
negativepost-programmechange,wheretheSTPscoresallyieldedpositivechange.Thepositive
attitudinalchangeonallscalesmeasuredbytheCRIME-PICSIIfortheSTPwassimilartothat
foundbyFeasey&Williams(2009).Theyfoundoverallpositiveattitudinalshiftsfor4,439male
offenderswhoparticipatedintheSTPtobestatisticallysignificant(amongstalllevelsofprison
security).
ThecontradictioninfindingscouldbeindicativeoftheVEPresemblingarehabilitative
programmemorethanarestorativeprogramme.Wheretheheavyfocusonvictimempathy
ignoredanyotherfactorsthatcouldimpacttheoffenders’recognitionofaccountabilityand
needforchange.
Anadvantageofgroup-workisthatquestionsandchallengesfrompeersaremorereadily
acceptedthanfromthefacilitators.TheVEPoffender-participantsviewedthefacilitatorsas
judgmental,asthefacilitator’srolewastoguidetheoffenders’exploration;objectionsor
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
166
discomfortofwhichwasmostobservedduringtherole-reversalexercise.ForsomeintheVEP,
opposedtorecognisingtheirresponsibilitytheymorereadilydeflectedthisontothefacilitators
asDoCstaff.ThiswasevidentinoneVEPoffender-participant’scommentobservedinasession
–“Justtellthemwhattheywanttohear.”However,withtheinclusionofvictim-participantsin
theSTP,itwasobservedthattheoffenderswerewillingtotakechallengesfromthevictim-
participantsmorereadilythantheirpeers.
TheCRIME-PICSIImeasuresthecognitiveaspectofempathy(“…theabilitytorecognizeand
understandotherperspectives…”-Feasey&Williams,2009,p8)andwhilethesame
psychometricswasusedforbothprogrammes,theadditionalelementofunrelated/surrogate
victimsworkingtogetherwiththeoffendersintheSTPmayhavealsocreatedanaffective(“…
vicariouslyexperiencetheemotionsofothers.”-Feasey&Williams,2009,p8)developmentof
empathythatcouldhavehadaninfluenceontheotherattitudinalscalesmeasuredbythe
CRIME-PICSII.Feasey&Williams(2009)alsofound,despitepositiveshiftsonallscales,thatthe
relationshipbetweenscaleswerenotalwaysclear104.Thefindinginthecurrentresearchcould
furtherreflectHagemann’s(2003)findings,whereinaprisonprogrammefocusedonvictim
harmbutvoidofvictim-participants,Hagemannsuggestedoffenderswereonlyabletorestore
theirrelationshipwiththemselvesandtheir(immediate)society(-friends,family,prisonstaff
andotheroffenders).Thedegreeofemotionexperiencedinthephase-oneprogrammeswas
lessfortheVEPoffender-participants,thantheSTPoffenders,andwasgenerallyexperiencedas
moreemotionalforthevictims-participantsthantheoffenders.Albeit,nottheirdirectvictims,
theSTPoffender-participantswerelikelyabletodevelop/restorethethirdrelationship
highlightedbyHagemann(2003)thatbeing-therelationshipbetweenselfasoffenderand‘the
victim’.DisclosuresmadeduringSTPsessionsrevealedthatsomeoftheoffendersandvictim-
participantsweredistantrelatives.Othercommonalitiesincludedvictim-andoffender-
participantshavingexperiencedthesameseveremedicalconditionsandothersharedtraumatic
experiences,whichbroughtthemclosertogether.Italsoseemedtoprovidethevictim-
participantswithagreaterunderstandingoftheoffenders’lifeexperiencesthatwouldhave
contributedtotheirfunctioningandoffendingbehaviour.
104Suchasoneparticulargroup(remandprisoners)showingthegreatestamountofpositivechangeincomparisontootherprisoner-groupsonallscalesexceptthevictim-empathyscale.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
167
Yetdespitethesefindingsandindicators,slightlymoreVEPoffender-participants(83%)thanSTP
offender-participants(77%)indicatedawillingnesstomeetwiththeirdirectvictimspost-
programme.Ofcoursewithsuchsmallnumbersitisunclearwhetherthisoutcomemightbe
attributabletotheprogrammeoroccurredbychance.ItisalsopossiblethattheVEPoffender-
participantshadaneedforthesamesocialexchange(Maruna&McNeil,2008)experiencedby
theSTPoffender-participantswhoworkedwithcommitteemembers.Whatwasapparentwas
thatifthephase-oneprogrammesweretoactassuitabilityassessmentsforconferencing,this
wouldbemoreeasilygaugedfromtheVEPbecause,aswithrehabilitativeprogrammes,the
focusisentirelyontheoffender.Whilstobjectivelyconsideredavalidstatement,atfacevalue,
theresearcherisremindedoftheirownpotentialbiases,asaforensicpsychologistworkingwith
rehabilitationwithinacorrectionsfacilityandthereforeessentiallyanagentoftheCJS.
However,asoneinthesameperson,theactionresearcherwasalsomotivatedtoincorporateRJ
intothecorrectionssystem.
Notinitiallyafocusofattentionforthecurrentresearch,Feasey&Williams(2009)intheirstudy
ofprisonersparticipatingintheSTPusingtheCRIME-PICSIIpsychometrics,founddifferent
degreesofattitudinalshiftamongsttheprisonerstheyexaminedbasedonthesecuritycategory
ofestablishmentstheprisonerswereheldin.Atthisjuncture,thecurrentresearcheralso
soughttolookatdifferencesonCRIME-PICIIscoresbycategoryofestablishment-security.Only
theSTPwasconductedintheWestgatemaximum-medium-securityestablishmentandthe
minimum-securityFarmfacility105.Ascouldbeexpected,overall,theoffendersfromtheFarm
facilityhadlargerdegreesofpositiveattitudinalchangethantheoffender-participantsat
Westgate(seeAppendix5-fortheCRIME-PICSIIpreandpostscoresoftheFarmandWestgate
STPoffender-participants).ThiscouldsuggestthattheSTPisbestrunattheFarmfacility,
howeverthisbringsadditionalissues.AstheFarmfacilityisbasedattheEastendoftheisland,
itmayprovedifficulttorecruitsufficientvictim-participants,asthoseresidingtotheWest
maybediscouraged.106Also,thevastmajorityofoffendersattheFarmfacilityaregenerally
closertorelease,thanthoseatWestgate.
105Thiswasbecausetheestablishmentregimeandfacilitatorresourcesweremoreamenable–VEPwasdeliveredduringthedaywhenmanyprisonersattheFarmfacilitywouldbeoutengagedinexternalactivities,suchascharityworkandSTPwasdeliveredintheevenings.106DuringrecruitmentthePrisonFellowshipfacilitatesweremindfulofthevictim-participantsareaofresidencewhenallocatingthemtotheprogrammesheldatthedifferentfacilities.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
168
Retentionforbothprogrammeswashigh(VEP100%;STP82%)howeverofthetwooffender-
participantsthatdidnotcomplete(1non-starter&1droppedout)bothwereveryclosetotheir
releasedate.Thiscouldindicate,asShaplandetal(2007)suggestedfromtheirstudy,that
convictedoffendersclosetoreleasearelessmotivatedtoparticipateinanyformofRJprocess.
However,inlinewithDeMesmaecker’s(2013)postulationthatRJparticipationisbasedlesson
instrumentalreasonspost-sentencethanpre-sentence;inthecurrentstudytheoffenderswere
advisedthattheirparticipationintheprogrammeswouldnotbeincludedintheirdossierfor
parole,butwerestillmotivated.Thetwooffendersmentionedabove,werebeingreleasedat
theendoftheirsentence.
RetentionfortheSTPvictim-participantswasalsohigh(88%)withonlyonedropoutandone
non-starter.Theonevictim-participantthatfailedtostarttheSTP,appearedtotheresearcher
tobeexperiencingdisenfranchisedgrief,107basedonthevictim’sdisclosureduringassessment
withthePrisonFellowshipfacilitator(inthepresenceoftheresearcher).Theindividual
expressedconcernsofjudgmentatbeingtheparentofanoffenderandfeelingsofsadnessand
self-judgedhypocrisyregardingvictimization.Therewasalsoapprehensionaboutenteringa
prison.Unfortunatelyasthisindividualfailedtoattend,itwasassumedthattheirconflictandor
fearkeptthemaway.Interestingly,avictim-participantwrotethefollowing,post-programmeas
aquestiontheywishedtheyhadbeenasked-“Haveyouhadafamilymemberincarceratedor
involvedinserious/fatalcrimes?”Theonevictim-participantthatdropped-outafterattending
thefirsttwosessions,informedthefacilitatorsthattheywerehavingtowithdrawbecauseof
unforeseenincreasedworkresponsibilities.
TheSTPcommunity-participantswerevictimsofburglary,childhoodsexualabuse,robbery,
domesticviolence,violence(i.e.assault,wounding)andsurvivingfamilyvictimsofmurder;
somehadexperiencedmulti-incidentsofvictimization.
107Underthesubtitle‘DisenfranchisedVictims,DisenfranchisedGrief’Miller(2008)describeshow“Familiesofmurdervictimswhowereinvolvedindrugs,prostitution,domesticviolence,orothercriminalactivity,orwhomaybemembersofethnically,economically,orsociallymarginalizedgroups,maysufferdisenfranchisedgrief…Suchdisenfranchisedmournersmayreceivelittleornosupportfromthecommunity.”(p144).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
169
EffectsforSTPVictim-Participants
Barr(2013)founda‘compellingneedforvictimstobepermittedtoentercorrectionalfacilities,
however,Feasey&Williams’(2009)studyoftheSTPdidnotincludeanydataonvictim-
participants.Inthecurrentactionresearchdatawascollectedontheopinionsandexperiences
ofvictim-participants.
Victim-participantsreportedfeeling‘very’(71%)or‘quite’safe(relatedtophysicalsafety)during
theirparticipationandfoundtheprison‘veryappropriate’(43%)or‘appropriate’(57%)asa
settingfortheprogramme.Basedonpre-programmequestionnairedata,53%ofvictims
‘disagreed’or‘stronglydisagreed’thattherewasadequatesupportforvictimsofcrime,orthat
the‘CJSmeetstheneedsofvictims’(52%disagreedorstronglydisagreed).
ForeachofthethreeSTPsduringtheactionresearchphase,theresearcherwasableto
administerthepost-programmequestionnairestothevictim-participantsattheircollective
debriefingsessionswiththefacilitators(conducted1-2weeksaftercompletionofthe
programme).Furthercommentswerealsomadeduringthesemeetingsanddirectlytothe
researcher.Fromthesediscussionsanddatacollected(includingobservations),thevastmajority
ofvictim-participantsexpressedhavingexperiencedhealingandclosure.Whileunrelatedtothe
offenderstheyparticipatedintheprogrammewith,thevictim-participantsstillhadmotivations
andexperiencedoutcomessimilartodirectvictimsthatparticipateinfullRJinterventionswith
thedirectoffender.Forexample,researchhasshownthatvictimsoftenwanttohavecontact
withtheoffender,andtoexpresstheimpactoftheoffenceonthem(Umbreitetal,2005;De
Mesmaecker,2013).ThesemotivationswereevidentfortheSTPvictim-participantsinthe
disclosurestheysharedandquestionstheyaskedoftheoffendershypotheticallyorsometimes
fromabyproxyposition.Itwasalsoevidentinthequestionnairedatawithstatementssuchas–
“Givesperspectiveofcrimeandpeoplewhocommitcrime,breaksthefearfactorandseparationfromoffendersandvictims.”“Itgivesanopportunitytolistenandspeaktruefeelings.”
“ItwasaverygoodprogrammeIthinknotfortheinmatesonly,formyselfaswell.Oneoftenwonderswhypeoplecommitcrime,withoutrealizingwheretheycomefrom(background,etc).”
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
170
Bolivar(2013)foundthatvictimswhoagreedtoparticipateindirectvictim-offendermediation
(VOM)often“…tendedtopayattentiontothecircumstancesthatsurroundedtheoffenceor
theroletheythemselvesplayedintheoffence.…evenwhentheoffenderwasunknownto
them.”(p203).Althoughtheoffenderswerenotthoseresponsibleforthecrimesagainstthem,
theSTPvictim-participantsstillgainedasenseofwhytheiroffencemayhavehappened.This
wasevidentfromtheircommentsandfeedbacktheygotfromtheoffender-participantswhen
theyworkedinpairsontheprogramme,andwrittenstatementssuchas-
“Anopportunitytolookwithin.Anopportunitytoforgive...Helpsyoulookatyourrole.”
“Itgivesavoicetothehurtandpainandallowsbothvictimandoffendertotakeresponsibility.”
“Itallowsyoutoseebothsidesofthesituation.”
OfdirectRJconferencing,Shaplandetal(2007)foundthat69%ofvictimssaidtheyhadabetter
understandingoftheoffence.
AsawholesessionontheSTPisfocusedonforgiveness,thevictim-participantsalsoexpresseda
lotaboutreleasing‘something’almostspiritualandintangible;theysometimesstruggledto
articulatepreciselywhattheyfeltwasreleased,butvaluedit–
“Idon’tevenknowwhatitwas,Ijustknowwhereittookme.”
“Icameintotheprogrammetodoitforme.IreceivedfarmorebenefitsthanIexpectedtoreceive.Ifeltafundamentalshiftinmyinternalworld.IfounditfarmorebeneficialthanIexpectedittobe.Itwasagreatgift.”
Therewerealsodirectreferencestoforgiveness,thatinturnresonatedwithBolivar’sresearch
ofVOMinwhichitwasalsonotedinregardstovictimsdesiretounderstandthecircumstances
oftheoffenceandtheirrolethat–
“Importantly,thisalsoimpliesthatvictimsneedtounderstandtheroletheythemselvesplayedintheoffencebyelaboratingself-blamefeelings.”(p207).
“Anditalsohelpsmeasavictimtolearnhowtoforgive.”
“Ittakesthejudgmentandcondemnationoutoftheequationandopensthedoortoforgivenessandself-forgiveness.“
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
171
Animplicitassumptionoroversightmadebytheresearcheratthestartoftheinitiativewasthat
theoffendersofpeoplevictimizedwithinthecommunitywouldhavebeenapprehended.108
However,anadditionalbenefitoftheSTPwasthatthosevictimswhoseoffenderswerenever
identifiedcouldstillgainhealingfromparticipatingintheprogramme.DeMesmaecker(2013)
highlightedtheepitomeofRJbeingtherepairofpsychologicalharmandharmtorelationships.
Shaplandetal(2007)foundfromtheirresearchofconferencing,thatover50%ofvictimsgained
asenseofclosurefollowingparticipation.TheSTPvictim-participantsexpressedthebenefits
thattheyreceivedfromtheprogramme.Theirexpressionsweremostcondenseduringthefinal
sessions,whentheirgratitudefortheprogrammeandforprovidingtheopportunityfortheir
healingwassharedwiththoseontheprogrammeandtotheinvitedguestsaspartofthe
session8celebration-
“ProgrammesliketheSycamoreTreeareneededsoclosurecantakeplace…”
“Tohelppeoplefacethethingstheyhaven’tbeenabletodealwithontheirown.”
“IenjoyedthisprogramIlearnedalotaboutmyself.”
93%ofthevictim-participantsreportedtobeing‘verysatisfied’withtheprogrammeoverall.
Atalive-televisedconference(12.11.14)onRJinBermuda’sCityHall(independentoftheaction
research),avictim-participantofthefirstSTPpubliclydeclaredherinvolvementinthe
programmeandhowpositivetheexperiencewasforher.Suchtestimoniescouldaidchangeof
attitudesinthecommunity;andwaswhyrecognitionofaneedtodisseminateinformation
abouttheschemebecameincorporatedintotheaction-research.
Whilenotadirectaimoftheactionresearch,theoutcomeslendthemselveswell(seeBazemore
&Maruna,2009)towhatresearchisshowingabouthowdesistancefromcriminalbehavior
works.Maruna&McNeil(2008)intheirchapterreviewingtheresearch,layoutthefactorsthat
contributetoex-offendersdesistingfromcrime.Theynotethatitisaprocess,agewith
mediatingfactorssuchasstableintimaterelationships,parentingandemploymentprovide
protectiveelements,asthingsthatoftenoccurinmid-adulthood.However,theopportunityto
108Alackofconsiderationlikelyexistsforvictimsofdeceasedoffenderswhohavenothadtheopportunityforreparation,butremainaffectedbytheincident.Thiswasnotknowntobethecaseforvictimsinthecurrentstudy,butisapointforreflectioniftheprimaryaimofaRJinitiativeisthereparationofharm.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
172
givebacktotheircommunityorsocietyhelpsex-offenderstoestablishanewpositivepersonal
andpublicidentity(Bazemore&Maruna,2009);andRJcanhelpinprovidingthisopportunity.
Maruna&McNeil(2008)pointoutthatinhelpingothers,offenders/ex-offendersgainintrinsic
rewardandsocialrespectability.Theyexplainthatsuchtypesofactivitiesandexperiencesbuild
socialcapital,relationshipsandnetworksthatfillavoidfortheex-offender;ithelpsthem
developasenseofpurpose,meansforredemptionandlegitimizestheirclaimtochange.Allof
thisencouragesdesistanceandsocialinclusionfortheoften-disadvantagedex-offenderwho
previouslyexperiencedtheircommunityhostile,unforgivingandostracizing.
CommunityHealing
ReparationofrelationshipscanbeachievedwithfullRJinterventions.Whetherornotvictims
andoffendersareknowntoeachotherbeforeanoffenceoccurs,itisarguedthattheyare
broughtintoarelationshipwitheachotherbyvirtueoftheoffenceandthesharedexperience.
InBermudatheneedtorepairrelationshipscanbefurthercompoundedbeyondreparationof
harmtothedirectstakeholders,butalsovitalbecauseofstakeholderproximityandbecauseof
thesocialandfamilialinterconnectedness.Relatedly,VanStokkom(2013)theorizedthatitcan
bethe(macro)communitythatholdmaliceorvengefulfeelingstowardsoffenders.TheSTP
seemedtoaddressacoupleoftheseissues,ifunintentionally.Inthefirstsessionparticipants
discusshowtheywillworktogether(almostdrawingupanagreementofgroundrules)and
brainstorm/thought-showertheeffectsofcrimeonvictimsandoffendersseparately.This
essentiallyledtotheconclusionthatoffendershavealsobeenvictims;whichbegantocreate
bondsamongtheparticipants(whichconsistentlydidnotfullymaterialiseovertlyuntilaround
session4).Reflectedinareoccurringcriticism(largely,butnotexclusivelybytheoffenders)that
theprogrammewastooshortandtherewasnotenoughunstructuredtimeallowedfordialogue
betweentheparticipants.However,itwasfurtherevidentinthecontinuedrelationshipsthat
wereformed,asatleast25%(knowntotheresearcher)ofthevictim-participantsstartedtovisit
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
173
theoffenderstheyhadworkedwithintheprogramme,aftertheprogrammewasover.109This
occurrencewasalsoreflectedinthebenefitsvictim-participantssaw-
“Creatingnewconnections–bondsbetweenvictimsandoffenders.”
“Themainbenefitisinbringingtogether“offenders”n“victims”Ittakesalotofcourage–forbothsides–inmatesmustwonderifthey’regoingtobeblamed&shamed&victimsmayworrythey’llbefurthervictimised.Andneithertranspired!Thishelpstodilutethe“us&them”divisiveness.Headingtomoreopenness&anavenuetohealing.”
ResearchingVOM,Bolivar(2013)foundthatonereasonvictimsrefusetoparticipateinRJ(with
directoffenders)revolvesaroundafearoftheoffenderornegativeevaluationsofameeting
suchasrefusaltoentertainthedevelopmentofrelationshipswiththeoffenderpost-
intervention.Thevictim-participantstalkedabouthavingsharedtheirexperiencesonthe
programmewithfriendsandfamily.Itwashopefulthatthiscouldstarttohaveaneffecton
perceptionswithinthecommunity.OftheSTPvictim-participants–93%saidthattheywould
‘definitely’recommendtheprogrammetootherpeoplewhohadbeenaffectedbycrime,the
remaining7%saidthattheywould‘morethanlikely’recommendtheprogramme.
WhilemanyoftheSTPvictim-participantsexpressedfeelingbetterabouttheirexperienceof
victimizationaftertheprogramme;atleastonespokecandidlyaboutstillcarryingnegative
emotions(notasaresultoftheprogramme,butabouttheiractualexperienceofvictimization).
Thisindividualofchildhoodtraumaspokemorereadilyabouttheneglectordenialofnotbeing
recognizedasavictimandnotbeingprovidedwithappropriatesupport,thanofnegative
feelingstowardtheactualoffenderoroffence.ThiscouldindicateasVanStokkom(2013)
suggests,thatfailingtorespondtoinjustice(ormarginalizedrecognitionofextendedvictim
impact)candiminishvictimsordevaluetheirpain.Similarly,itwouldalsobeunjusttonegate
theoffenders’ownexperienceofvictimhoodinanunequalsociety,whereyoungblackmen
remaindisadvantaged.Aspreviouslymentioned,theSTPacknowledgedthatoffendershavealso
beenvictims,whichtheVEPdidnotdo.
109Neitherthefacilitatorsnorresearcherhadanyinputintheestablishmentoftheserelationships;theyneitherencouragednordiscouragedthemoncetheybecameaware.Seemingly,alltherelationshipswereplatonic.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
174
ParticipantRecruitment
Anotherinterestingfindingwiththevictim-participantsinBermudawastheprevalenceof
Bolivar’s(2013)conceptof‘ideology’.Thisconceptseemedtoplayamajorrolewiththe
recruitmentofvictim-participantsfortheSTP(andasenseofdutywhenitcameto
conferencing).Themajorityofthevictim-participantsweremembersofPrisonFellowshipor
communityactivists–peoplecommittedandinvolvedwithorganizationsthatworkedforthe
bettermentofthesociety.Thispartlyspoketothesocialandculturalvaluesoftheisland.
Howeverarelatedissueforfuturepracticeisthatinsuchasmallcountrythecontinued
availabilityofunrelatedvictimstoincarceratedoffenderswouldlikelybecomeunachievable.
Thismayfurthernecessitatetheneedforconferencing.
Itwasanticipatedthattheremightbesomeresistanceonthepartoftheoffenderstoengagein
theinitiative,especiallyastheywereadvisedthattheirparticipationcouldnotbeusedfor
purposesofparoleandwastotallyvoluntary.Surprisinglythiswasnotfoundtobethecase,and
waslikelyassistedbythepromotionoftheprogrammesbythefirstoffendersthatparticipated.
OftheSTPoffender-participants86%saidthattheywould‘definitely’recommendthe
programmetoothersandtheremaining14%would‘morethanlikely’.Thisdidoccur,as
offendersbegantoaskiftheycouldbeapartoftheSTPandwoulddisclosetotheDoC
programmesstaffthattheyhadbeentoldabouttheprogrammebyotherprisoners.
RecommendationwaslessforthcomingfortheVEP,withonly33%sayingthattheywould
‘definitively’recommendtheprogramme,50%reportingthattheywould‘morethanlikely’
recommendtheprogrammeand17%being‘unsure’.
Of5offendersinitiallyapproachedtoseeiftheywerewillingtomeetwiththeirdirectvictims
postphase-oneparticipation,80%wereagreeable.110Theoneoffender,whodeclinedafter
indicatingawillingnesstomeetwithhisdirectvictimsaftercompletionofthephase-one
programme,disclosedthatthedirectvictimofhiscurrentoffencehadbeenanextendedfamily
memberandforthisreasondidnotwishtopursuetoconferencing.
110Engagementwithoffendersfirst,isadvocatedintheguidanceforvictimsensitivepractice(Umbreit,2000).
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
175
ProgressionontoRestorativeJusticeConferencing(RJC)
BetweenSeptemberandNovember2014,twoconferenceswereheld,onewithawitness-victim
andoffender,theotherwith2victims,3supportersandtheoffender.Thefirstconferencehad
onefacilitator,thesecondinvolvedtwo;theresearcherobservedboth.111Oncevictimswere
identifiedthePolice(BPS)facilitatorsmadetelephonecontactwiththem,invitingthemtoa
meetingaboutRJinrelationtotheoffenceagainstthem.Initialphonecontactwasacceptable
tothevictimsashasbeenfoundwithpreviousresearch(e.g.Shaplandetal,2007).Atotalof
fourseparatecasemeetingswereheld.
Oftheothertwocasesthatdidnotresultinaconference,onevictimdeclinedtoparticipate;
andintheother,thevictimagreedhowever,duringthepreparation/assessmentphasethe
offenderdecidedtowithdraw,thisisdiscussedfurtheroninthischapter.Oftheinitial4cases
datawasobtainedfromthefouroffendersandonedirectvictimpre-conference,andthetwo
offenderspost-conference.
Alloftheconferenceparticipantsinterviewedand/orcompletedquestionnairespre-conference
feltthatjustice(asaresponsetocrime)shouldincludebothpunitiveandrestorativeaspects.
TwooffendersandthevictimfeltthatRJshouldnotbeconsidereduntilafterimprisonment
whentheoffenderhashadsome“thinkingtime”andthevictimhasbeenaffordedsome
recoverytime.OnlyoneoffenderthoughtthatRJshouldbeusedaspartofthecourtprocess
andmadeavailableforjuvenile/youngoffenders.
Theparticipants’viewsofwhatthepurposeofconferencingwas,didnotmarkedlydifferfrom
theirreasonsforagreeingtoparticipatepre-conference.Bothpartiesthoughtthatitwasfor
themselvesandtheotherparty.Thevictim’sreasonsforparticipatingwere–toshowthe
offendertheimpactoftheiractions,andtobeheard(tohaveavoice).Umbreitetal(2005)
identifiedthefirstpointhere,asthesecondchiefreasonvictimsparticipateincasesofserious
violence.Thevictimspecificallyexpressedhowatthetimeofthecourtcaseminimalsupport
wasreceivedandallfocuswasconcentratedontheoffender.
111Theincreaseofconferenceparticipantswasbeneficialforonethefacilitator’sdevelopmentandconfidence,butcoincidental.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
176
Theoffenders’(n=4)reasonsforagreeingtoparticipate(pre-conference)presentedasseven
themes–tohelpthevictim(29%);tobeheldaccountable(18%);tocontributetotheir
rehabilitation(18%);toapologize(12%);forforgiveness(12%);tochangehowthevictims
viewedthem(6%)andtorepairrelationships(6%).ThechiefreasonsUmbreitetal(2005)found
forviolentoffendersagreeingtoparticipateindialoguewiththeirvictims,weresimilartothe
currentoffendersreasons,butincludedreasonsregardingspirituality.Violentoffending
accountedfor75%ofthecurrentconferencingoffendersample.
Ininterviewpost-conference,theoffenders’(n=2)reasonsforparticipatingbecame
reducedtothreethemes–beingheldaccountable;tohelpthevictims;proximityand
relationshiprepair.Itwasexpectedthatthelatterreasonwouldbeparticularlyimportantin
Bermuda.Shaplandetal(2007)foundintheirstudyofconferencingthatvictimsandoffenders
ofseriousviolentcaseswelcomedtheopportunitytodiscussissuesonthebasisofhavinglinks
suchasmutualrelationshipsorlivingclosebyeachother.Oneoffendermadethefollowing
writtenstatement-
“Mymainreasons…was,thefactthatIstillseethesepeopleonceIgetout,andthatway…Idon'thavetoseethemandstilllive[in]darkness…Ihavecreatedafriendshipinsteadofhatred.”Inthepost-conferencequestionnairestheoffendersalsowroteaboutgainssuchas-“victims[gaining]closure”;creating“anenvironmentofempathyandunderstanding”“reliefandacceptance”and“achancetoreflectonthesituationyouareincarceratedfor…”
Bothoffenderswere‘verypleased’tohavebeenaskedtoparticipateinaconference;however
ashasbeenfoundinpreviousresearch(e.g.Shaplandetal,2007)thepresenceofvictimscan
makeadifferencetotheoffender’slevelofsatisfactionwiththeprocess.Whenaskedhowthey
feltabouthavingbeenaskedtomeetwiththevictims(complementarydata),oneoffender
indicatedfeeling‘verypleased’theother,‘pleased’.Thelatteroffendercommentedinthepost-
conferencequestionnaireandininterviewabouthisdisappointmentofnothavinghadmoreof
hisvictimspresent–“…IenjoyedtheconferenceIjustwishthereweremorevictims,notwish,
butitwouldhavebeennicenowI'vebeenthroughitIknowwhatit'slikeso,there'splenty
victimsinmycase,ifanother[victimwouldliketomeetwithme]Iwoulddoit.” Thepositivein
thiswasthattheoffenderrecognizedtherippleeffectofhiscrimeandthenumberofpeopleit
likelyimpacted.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
177
Bothoffendersininterviewpost-conferencemadereferencetorecidivism.Onefeltthathadhe
participatedinRJearlierinhislife,hemighthaveceasedtocommitasmanycrimesashedid.
TheotherfeltthatRJcouldhelppreventothersfromreoffendingandreducecrimeinBermuda.
Fromobservationoftheconferencesandfollow-upconversationswiththeconference-victims,
theywerelargelysatisfiedwiththeprocess.Theyfeltthattheywereprovidedwithsufficient
informationandpreparationbeforetheconferenceandwelcomedthefollow-updiscussion.
Eachconferencewentwell,intermsofthehonestandopendialoguethatwashadandall
participantsremaininguntiltheend,includingtheinformalrefreshmentsection,inwhichmore
informaldialoguecontinuednaturally.Theoffencesagainstthedirectvictimswerecommitted
intheirhome.Assuchtheirinitialmaininterestwastoknowthattheyhadnotbeentargeted.
Receivingtheanswerstotheirquestionsappearedtoprovideasenseofrelief.Inboth
conferencesaftersomeinitialdialogue,andverbalexpressionsofanger(inonecase),the
victimsseemedtobecomemoreconcernedwiththeoffender’srehabilitationandgenuinely
concernedfortheoffender’sfuture-fortheoffender,theoffender’sfamilyandforthe
community.Therewerephysicalembracesfollowingoneconference(attheoffender’srequest
butreciprocated)andapledgetoprovidesupportandencouragementtotheoffenderonce
releasedintheother(seeAppendix4,forthenewspaperarticle(29thDec2015)onthelatter
conference).Therewerenorequestsforreparationbeyondtheencouragementoftheoffender
torefrainfromreoffendingoncereleasedandtocontinueengagementwithrehabilitation.The
offendersinbothconferencesextendedapologies.
Whatseemedtoberequiredmostforthevictims,wasunderstandingofthecircumstancesof
theoffence;knowledgeoftheoffenderandtheircircumstances,andanopportunitytoaddress
theoffender.Asoneoffender-supportersaid–“Thisisthemissingpiece.”Referringtothe
society’sresponsetocrime,rehabilitationandreparation.Braithwaiteetal(2013)found
culturaldifferencesbetweenAustraliaandJapanintermsofsocialvalues(lesssothanbetween
victimsandoffendersintra-culturally)regardingRJ.Withalimitednumberofactual
conferences,thevaluesofthoseinterviewed-victimsandoffenders(whetherornotagreeing
toparticipate),beginstosuggestthatmuchvalueisplacedon‘victim’svoiceandrehabilitation’,
and‘victim’sforgivenessandreintegration’respectively.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
178
Withdrawals&Refusals
Therewererelativelyfewrefusalsfromvictims,112butthereasonsfortheseseemedconsistent
withpastresearch.Twovictimsofpropertycrimethatdeclinedtoparticipateinaconference
aftermeetingwithafacilitator(andtheresearcher)bothstatedthattheywouldconferwith
theirfamiliesbeforemakingafinaldecision.Itwasdeducedthattheirdecisionnotto
participate(confirmedbyone)wasduetothembeingdissuadedbytheirfamily(Bolivar(2013)
reportsonthisphenomenon).However,thiswasalsoinlinewithpreviousresearchregarding
propertycrime(e.g.Umbreitetal,2005)thatparticipationratesdecreaseovertime.Thiswas
evidentbythedeclineofvictimsfromearlieroffencesandacceptancebymorerecentvictims,
ofthesameoffender.
Inanothercase,asBolivar’s(2013)findingsprofiled,thevictimfeltthattheyhadresolvedthe
incidentforthemselvesconcludingthattheoffenderwassolelytoblame,andviewingthe
offendernegatively.Thevictimalsofeltthattoomuchtimehadpassedsincetheoffence,and
commentedthathadtheofferbeenmadeclosertothetimeoftheoffencetheywouldhave
likelyparticipated.Timinghasbeenfoundtoeffectvictims’willingnesstoparticipate,relatedto
motivationtoparticipatebecauseofthelessseriousnatureofanoffenceandthedegreeof
physicalinjuryincurred(Umbreitetal,2005).Itcouldberemissforthefacilitatorand
researchertosuggestthatthevictimhadnotresolvedtheoffence,howevertheirevaluationof
thevictim’sexpressionwasnotsuggestiveofsomeonehavingreconciledorashavingresolved
theaftermathoftheirvictimization.Otherinformationsuggestedthattheremighthavebeen
moretotheoffencethanwasbeingdisclosedintheinterviewsbythemainstakeholders(i.e.
thattheoffenderandvictimwereknowntoeachother),whichmayormaynothavebeen
revealedatthetimeofthecourtcase.Circumstancesthatarenotilluminatedduringthecourt
processcould,incasesofpost-sentenceRJ,allowforfullopendialoguethatcouldredeemand
assistthereparationofallinvolved,ifthoseinvolvedarewilling.
Asthemajorityofoffendersincarceratedwereblackmales(Riley,2013),thiswasalsothecase
withthetotalnumberofconferencesthatwerenearlyheldduringtheperiodinwhichthe
actionwasresearched.Inpreparationforconferencesonepatternthatbegantoemergewas
112Oneoftheactualconferencecaseshadmultiplevictims.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
179
theneedforsomeformoffamilyreparationconferencing.Pre-existingfamilydynamics
influencedtheoffenders’decision-makingandmotivesforhavingconferencesand/orfamily
membersassupporters.Inonecasetheoffenderrequestedaconference/meetingwiththeir
parentsbeforetheconferencewiththeirvictims.Theoffenderstatedthathehad
offended/takenadvantageofhisfamilydespitetheircontinuedsupportandexpressedaneed
fordialoguewiththemthathefelthewouldavoidifhehadtowaituntilhewasreleased.In
anothercase,afterinitiallyagreeingtomeetwiththevictim,theoffenderwithdrewbecauseof
familyissuesthathewantedtoresolve.Inthelattercaseitalsobecameapparenttothe
assessing-facilitatorandresearcherthattheoffendermightusetheconferencetotryand
addressfamilialwoundsfromthepastthatcouldhavebeenoffensivetothevictim.These
occurrenceswerealsoindicativeofTuminetal’s(1992)findingregardingtheabsenceandlack
ofsupportofblackparentsinthecriminaljusticeprocessoftheirchildren.Asadults,the
offendersstillhadissuesseekingorwithfamilysupport.Inbeingresponsive,theinitiativebegan
incorporatingadditionalpreparatoryinterventionsasrequiredtomeettheneedsofthe
offendersandtheirsupporters,inlinewiththetypeofguidanceproposedbyUmbreit(2000).
Braithwaite(1989)highlightedthedistinctionbetweenstigmatising-shamingandreintegrative-
shaming;withthelatterinvolvingarejectionofthebehaviour(offence)opposedtotheperson,
andawelcomingbackintothefold.Iftheoffenders’significantothersareinvolved,as
importantpeopletotheoffender,thiscancreatemoreaccountabilityfortheoffenderand
thesepeoplecanhelpmonitortheoffender’sbehaviouroncereintegratedintosociety.
InasmallplacesuchasBermuda,thestigmatisationofcriminalbehaviourweightsheavily,not
onlyontheoffenderbutalsotheirfamily.Assuch,considerationofToews(2006)‘Levelsof
RestorativePractice’maybemoreappropriateforconceptualisationinBermudathanMcCold’s
(2000).Withthefocusonrelationships,ToewsVenndiagramincorporatesthreegroups–
victims,offendersandtheoffender’sfamily,surroundedbyanoutercirclerepresentativeofthe
community(illustratedinthediagrambelow).TheinitialrejectionofToewstheorywasbased
onitappearingtogivetoomuchemphasisonoffenders,aboveandbeyondthevictims.What
theevidenceofthecurrentresearchbegantoshowwasthatalackoffamilysupport,possibly
continuedlackofsupport,couldhinderoffenders’motivationtoparticipateinRJ.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
180
Toews(2006)Figure2.VenndiagramofLevelsofRestorativePractice
Duringthewritingofthisthesis,familymembersoftheoffendersthathadparticipatedinthe
STPwererequestingorbeingidentifiedbyPrisonFellowshipBermudatoparticipateintheSTP
asvictim-participants.Identifyingthemselvesasvictimsofthecrimescommittedbytheirsons
orofothers.Thiscouldsuggesttheneedforaprogrammethatinvolvesoffendersandtheir
families,oronethatrecognisesdisenfranchisedgrief.
Recommendations:IssuesforRJPractice&Policy
ThisactionresearchwasalsoconductedtoinformpracticeandpolicyinBermudaforthe
inclusionofRJ.Thisisaddressedintheremainderofthischapter.
ContinueduseoftheSTPwithintheDepartmentofCorrectionsasaphase-oneinterventionis
recommendedforanumberofreasons,notleastbecauseitcanprovidehealingforvictimsin
thecommunityaffectedbycrime,butalsoasameansofgreateraccountabilityforoffenders.It
canhelpoffendersassesstheirpreparednessandwilltoengageindialoguewiththeirdirect
VictimNeeds
OffenderFamilyNeeds
OffenderNeeds
Community
1
2
31.SociallyRestorative
2.RelationallyRestorative
3.IndividuallyRestorative
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
181
victims.Itisusefulforthosevictimswhoseoffendershaveneverbeenidentified113orasan
alternativeoptionofvictimsupportwhentheoffenderrefusestomeetwiththevictimoftheir
crime.AsfoundinBarr’s(2013)study,theoffendersinthecurrentstudyappreciatedcontact
andhonestdialoguewithcommunitymembersaffectedbycrime;andanynewprogramme
developmentshouldincludethisaspect.
ItisalsorecommendedthattheDoCinpartnershipwiththeBPS,continuetooffervictimsand
offenderstheopportunityfordirectdialogue,intheformofconferencingthatcaninvolveall
stakeholdersaffectedbythecrime.
Practice
TheSTPyieldedpositiveattitudinalchangeintheoffender-participants,onallthescales
measured(withtheexclusionofthe‘probleminventory’)bytheCRIME-PICSII.Whileusedby
theactionresearch,theCRIME-PICSwastoremainthepropertyoftheDoC,anditis
recommendedthattheassessmentcontinuetoformpartoftheprogrammeevaluation.
Whatthisresearchsuggestsisthatitisimperativetoensurethatoffender’srelationshipswith
theirintendedsupportersareadequateforconferencingbeforeapproachingthevictims.Itmay
benecessarytoofferfamilyreparationinterventionbeforeanRJC.Alternatively,one-to-one
conferencingmaybemoreappropriate.Furtherbasedonthekeyroleplayedbythefamilyto
ensuringoffenderparticipation,itisrecommendedthattheoffendersandvictimsoftheSTP
havetheopportunitytoinvitetheirfamilymemberstotakepartinthefinalcelebrationsession.
OneconcernwiththeSTPwasthepotentialforthefacilitators,directlyorindirectly(bynot
managingthediscussions)toevangelise.ThisisdiscouragedbyPrisonFellowshipInternational
andshouldbenoted.ThefirstSTPoffender-participantswarnedthatasyoungeroffenders
wouldparticipatetheywouldlikelybedeterredbythereligiouscontentifthiswerenot
appropriatelymonitored.Itshouldalsoberecognisedthatthevaluesofthebiblicalstories113Facilitatorswouldalwaysneedtobemindfulthatunidentifiedoffenderscouldstillbeincarceratedfordifferentoffences,andinadvertentlycomeintocontactwiththevictims.Offendersarecautionedaboutthedisclosureofoffencesforwhichtheyhavenotbeenconvictedandtheresponsibilityoffacilitatorstoreportanysuchdisclosures.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
182
portrayedarenotlimitedtotheChristianfaith.CautionisurgedthatRJdoesnotbecome
synonymouswithreligion.
Bothconference-offendersratedthefacilitatorsas‘veryimpartial’.TheDoCfacilitatorwho
facilitatedthetwoconferenceswasalsoafacilitatoroftheVEP.114Thisissuggestiveofthe
processbeingmostinfluentialinhowtheoffendersviewedthestaff,thantheindividualstaff
member’spersonally;asagentsoftheCJSorsymbolicofauthority.Thisfurthersuggests
contrarytoSzego&Fellegi’s(2013)recommendation,thatprisonstaffworkingintheirown
facilitiescanfacilitateconferenceswithoutissuesofimpartialitybeingraised.115Further,the
involvementofDoCandBPSpersonnelcanhelptofosterbetterrelationships,includingthose
withthecommunitymembers(asfoundinSzego&Fellegi’s(2013)study).Itcouldfurther
encouragethedevelopmentofotherRJpracticeswithintheagencies.Hagemann(2003)
assertedthatthesustaineduseofRJincorrectionswouldlikelybedependentonbuyinfrom
othercriminaljusticeagencies.Duringthewritingofthethesis,oneoftheDoCfacilitatorshad
startedaninitiativeconductingfamilygroupconferencingwithfamilies,thecommunityand
offenderssoontobereleased.
Policy
Whatwouldbeinvaluable,andbegantooccurjustbeforetheresearchwascompleting,was
victimsfromthecommunitydirectlyorindirectly(throughathirdparty)approachingtheDoC
wishingtoexploretheopportunityofmeetingwiththeinmateoftheoffenceagainstthem.It
wasapparentthatthenewspaperarticlescoveringtheinitiative(andpresentationsgiven)were
reachingthepublic.Theaddedbenefitwasthattheseapproachesfromthecommunitywerefor
veryseriousoffences,astheyweresurvivingfamilymembersofmurdervictims.Itwouldnotbe
appropriateforfacilitatorstoreachouttothesevictimsdirectly(albeitonebenefitofasmall
communityagainistheinterconnectednessthatcouldfacilitateacceptabledirectcontactsfrom
the‘right’people);butitwouldbeperfectlyacceptableforthemtomaketheapproachifthey
wereawareoftheopportunity.Therefore,disseminationofinformationandpromotionofthe
scheme,andfutureschemesisvitaltoraisepublicawareness.
114ThesecondfacilitatorwasfromtheBPSandthiswasknowntoallinvolvedintheconferenceincludingtheoffender.115ThiscouldalsobeanotherproductofthelevelofsocialinterconnectednessofBermuda.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
183
SincetheintroductionofAlternativestoIncarceration(AtI)toBermuda,aconceptusedto
reducemassincarceration,suchmethodshavebeenhailedasrestorative.Thesemethods
adoptedbygovernmentoperatetoreducethepunitiveresponsestowardsoffenders,by
reducingtheuseofincarceration(e.g.mentalhealthanddrugcourt;electronicmonitoring)but
donothingtoaddresstheharmcausedtotheothermainstakeholder–thevictim.These
methodsmaintainfocusontheoffenderandassuchremainrehabilitativeandbasedonstate
control.Itisonthebasisofthisthatthecurrentresearchadvocatesfortheimplementationof
fullrestorativejusticepractice.AssuggestedbyUmbreit(2000)referringtoallformsofvictim-
offenderdialogueas‘conferencing’couldenablepracticestobemore‘dialoguedriven’than
‘process-orsettlement-driven’andengendertheethosofbeingmostresponsivetotheneeds
ofthosemostaffectedbyanoffence.“Weareproposingtheuseof“restorativejustice
conferencing”asanumbrellatermtoincludeallformsofdirectrestorativecommunication
betweencrimevictimsandoffendersthatisfacilitatedbyoneormoreimpartialthirdparties.…
allthedifferentformsand“models”havestrengthsandlimitations.Byembracingamulti-
methodapproach…wewillbefarmorelikelytodrawuponthestrengthsofallwhileminimising
theirlimitations.Mostimportantly,amulti-methodapproach…ismorelikelytorespondtothe
uniqueneedsofindividuals,communitiesandtheirculture.”(Umbreit,2000,p23).
Theimportanceoffamilies,tooffendersandvictims,andissuesaroundstigmatisation
highlightedinthisresearch,alsospeakstotheneedforcommunityinvolvement.Themicro-
communityreferringtothesupportsystemsofthemainstakeholdersandwitnessorsecondary
victimstocrimesshouldnotbeexcludedormarginalisedinthepracticeofRJ,orbyanyagencies
oftheCJS.Inrecognitionofthis,whilstmaintainingfirstregardfordirectvictims,thecurrent
actionresearchadvocatestheuseofadefinitionforRJthatacknowledgesthecommunity
involvementsuchasMarshall’s(1998)–
“RestorativeJusticeisaprocesswherebypartieswithastakeinaspecificoffencecollectivelyresolvehowtodealwiththeaftermathoftheoffenceanditsimplicationsforthefuture”(p.28).Basedonthefindingsofthecurrentresearch,victimsarelargelydissatisfiedwiththeCJSin
Bermudaanditisrecommendedthatconsiderationbegiventothesignificanceofdevelopinga
Victim’sCharter,tolegislatetherightsandentitlementsofthosepeopleaffectedbycrime.IfRJ
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
184
istobecomeincorporatedintotheexistingprocess,theofferofRJcouldbeincludedinthis
charter.
InlightofexistinginequitiesthatexistinBermuda,itishighlyrecommendedthatany
implementationofrestorativejusticepracticesarenotbasedonanycriteriathatcouldleadto
theexclusion(ordiscrimination)ofanysectorsofthepopulation;unlessindividualexclusions
arebasedonriskassessmentsindicativeofpotentialre-victimizationofthoseharmedbycrime.
Equally,asthepopulationofBermudaistoosmalltoyieldnumbersnecessaryforanalysisof
statisticalsignificanceandrandomisedcontroltrials,withoutaprotractedperiodoftime,
alternativesshouldbeconsidered.FutureResearchcouldmorerigorouslyexaminevictimand
offendersperceptionsoftheCJSandRJbetweenthosethatparticipateinconferencingand
thosewhorefuse.Offenderscanalsobetrackedpost-releasetoassessthenatureandratesof
re-convictions,post-conferenceinvolvementcomparedtonon-RJinvolvement.Itwouldalsobe
highlybeneficialforfutureresearchtomeasurethepsychological(traumatic)effectsofcrimeon
victims’preandpost-intervention,asawayofqualitativelyexaminingthepositiveeffects;
whichcanalsodeterminecostsconsideredastangibleforpolicymakers.
CanRJbringpeople(victims,offendersandaharmedcommunity)closertogetherintoshared
responsibilityandaccountability?Certainly,thecurrentresearchhasprovidedexamplesofhow
thiscanbeachieved.Assuchitcouldalsoengenderagreatsenseofsocialcontrol.AsRJbegins
togrowinBermuda,futureresearchcouldexaminehowsuchexamplesofpatriotismcanbe
fostered.WiththeendorsementoftheCommissioner,theDoCwillcontinuetoprovideRJ
interventions.
Conclusion
Fromareviewoftheliterature,thecurrentstudyappearstobethefirstconductedexamining
RJinacorrectionssettingwithinasmalldependentterritory.WhileRJhasbeendiscussedin
Bermudaforsometime,thisactionresearchhasbeenthefirstsystematicapplicationofany
formoffullyorientatedrestorativeintervention.Itmaynotbecoincidentalthatsincetheaction
startedandhasbeenpublicisedagreatermomentumhasbeengenerated,withotherCJS
agenciesbecomingmoreproactiveintheirpursuitofrestorativejusticeimplementation.The
currentthesishascontributedtotheresearchwithfocusonthedifferentialneedsofasmall
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
185
communitywithahighlevelofsocialconnectedness,systemicinequitiesandtheidiosyncrasies
ofdependentterritories.Althoughtheresearchinvolvedrelativelysmallnumbers,thestartof
theinitiativeyieldedpositiveresultsforthoseinvolved,andcouldhavefurtherpervasiveimpact
onthecommunity.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
186
Statues
BermudaCodeAmendmentAct2001
References
Andrews,T.(2012)WhatisSocialConstructionism?TheGroundedTheoryReview,Vol.11(1),39-46.
Bacon,J.R.(2010)MakingProgressinRestorativeJustice:aQualitativeStudy.MScThesis:
UniversityofCambridge.Availableathttp://www.restorativejustice.org.uk/resource/making-
progress-in-restorative-justice-a-qualitative-study/.AccessedFebruary4th2014.
Barr,T.S.A.(2013)PuttingVictimsinPrison.RestorativeJustice:AnInternationalJournal,Vol.1
(3),389-413.
Bazemore,G.&Umbreit,M.(2005)AComparisonofFourRestorativeConferencingModels,in
Johnstone,G.(eds)ARestorativeJusticeReader:Texts,Sources,Context.UK:Willan,pp.225-
243.
Bazemore,G.&Maruna,S.(2009)RestorativeJusticeintheReentryContext:BuildingNew
TheoryandExpandingtheEvidenceBase.VictimsandOffenders,Vol4,375-384.
Beck,A.(1996).ThePastandtheFutureofCognitiveTherapy.JournalofPsychotherapyPractice
andResearch6(4),276–284.
Bell,J.(2015)PilotMentalHealthCourtsSeenasSuccess.Availableat
http://www.royalgazette.com/article/20150822/NEWS/150829904.Accessed30thNovember
2015.
Bolivar,D(2013)ForWhomisRestorativeJustice?RestorativeJustice:AnInternationalJournal,
Vol.1(2),190-214.
Braithwaite,J.(1989)Crime,ShameandReintegration.NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
187
Braithwaite,J.(1999)RestorativeJustice:AssessingOptimisticandPessimisticAccounts,Crime
&Justice:AReviewofResearch,Vol.25,1-27.
Braithwaite,J.(2002)RestorativeJusticeandResponsiveRegulation.Oxford:OxfordUniversity
Press.
Braithwaite,J.(2002a)SettingStandardsforRestorativeJustice.BritishJournalofCriminology,
42,p563-577.
Braithwaite,V.,Huang,H.&Reinhart,M.(2013)‘LoveThyNeighbour’Values,Needs,and
WillingnesstoParticipateinRestorativeJustice:aSurveyofAustralianandJapaneseVictimsand
Offenders.RestorativeJustice:AnInternationalJournal,Vol.1(1),91-121.
Burr,V.(2003).Socialconstructionism.(2ndEdition).EastSussex,UK:Routledge.
Byrdon-Miller,M.,Greenwood,D.&Maguire,P.(2003)WhyActionResearch?ActionResearch,
Vol.1(1),9-28.
Carifio,J.&Perla,R.C.(2007)TenCommonMisunderstandings,Misconceptions,Persistent
MythsandUrbanLegendsaboutLikertScalesandLikertResponseFormatsandtheirAntidotes.
JournalofSocialSciences3(3),106-116.
Christie,K.(2000)ReviewofMeredith,Martin,ComingtoTerms:SouthAfrica’sSearchforthe
Truth.H-SAfrica,H-NetReviews.Availableathttp://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php
?id=4008.Accessed23rdMarch2013.
Coyne,I.T.(1997)SamplinginQualitativeResearch.PurposefulandTheoreticalSampling;
MergingorClearBoundaries?JournalofAdvancedNursing,26,623-630.
Cresswell,J.W.(2013)QualitativeInquiry&ResearchDesign:ChoosingAmongFiveApproaches
(3rdedition).ThousandOaks,CA:Sage.
Crotty,M.(1998)TheFoundationsofSocialResearch:MeaningandPerspectiveintheResearch
Process.London,UK:SagePublications.
Daly,K.(2000)RestorativeJusticeinDiverseandUnequalSocieties.LawinContext,17(1),167-
190.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
188
Daly,K.(2002)RestorativeJustice:TheRealStory,Punishment&Society,4(1),55-79.
DeMesmaecker,V.(2013)Victim-OffenderMediationParticipants’OpinionsontheRestorative
JusticeValuesofConfidentiality,ImpartialityandVoluntariness.RestorativeJustice:An
InternationalJournal,1(3)p334-361.
Dhami,M.K.,Mantle,G.&Fox,D.(2009)RestorativeJusticeinPrisons.ContemporaryJustice
Review,Vol.12(4)p438-448.
Dick,B.(1993)ActionResearchThesis.Availableathttp://www.aral.com.au/DLitt/DLitt_
P50arth.pdf.Accessed9thAugust2014.
Dignan,J.(2000)RestorativeJusticeOptionsforNorthernIreland:AComparativeView.UK:
HomeOfficeResearchReport10.
Dignan,J.(2005)UnderstandingVictimsandRestorativeJustice.Maidenhead:OpenUniversity
Press.
Doolin,K.(2007)‘ButWhatDoesitMean?SeekingDefinitionalClarityinRestorativeJustice’.
JournalofCriminalLaw,71.
Drake,D.H.(2014)ResearchingPrisonerExperienceswithPrisonOfficers:AnActionResearch-
inspiredApproach.ActionResearch,Vol.12(1),94-109.
DrydenW.,&NeenanM.(2003)EssentialRationalEmotiveBehaviourTherapy.Wiley.
Dudley,J.R.(2005)ResearchMethodsforSocialWork:BecomingConsumers&Producersof
Research.Boston,US:PearsonEducation,Inc.
Ellis,A.(2003).Earlytheoriesandpracticesofrationalemotivebehaviortheoryandhowthey
havebeenaugmentedandrevisedduringthelastthreedecades.JournalofRational-Emotive&
Cognitive-BehaviorTherapy,21(3/4).
Ellis,M.(2011)VictimAwarenessProgram.ADescriptiveStudy.Ohio,USA:OfficeofCriminal
JusticeServices.
Erbe,C.(2004)inZehr,H.&Toews,B.(ed)CriticalIssuesinRestorativeJustice.NewYork:
CriminalJusticePress&Devon,UK:WillanPublishing;pp.289-298.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
189
Feasey,S.&Williams,P.(2009)AnEvaluationoftheSycamoreTreeProgramme:Basedonan
AnalysisofCRIMEPICSIIData.SheffieldHallamUniversity:HallamCentreforCommunity
Justice.
Fergusson,G.(2015)SpeechfromtheThrone.OntheOccasionoftheConveningofthe
Legislature:RestoringConfidenceandOpportunity.Availableathttp://subportal.gov.bm/
books/thSpeech15/files/assets/basic-html/index.html#1.Accessed12thDecember2015.
Frude,N.,Honess,T.&Maguire,M.(2013)CRIMEPICSIIManual.UK:M&AResearch.
Gergen,K.J.(2009)Aninvitationtosocialconstruction(2ndEdition).London,UK:SagePublicationsLtd.
Godden,N.M.(2013)SeekingJusticeforVictim-Survivors:UnconventionalLegalResponsesto
Rape,DurhamThesis:DurhamUniversity.AvailableatDurhamE-ThesisOnline:
http://ethesis.dur.ac.uk/6379/Accessed23rdMarch2013.
Graef,R.(2001)WhyRestorativeJustice?Repairingtheharmcausedbycrime.London:Calouste
GulbenkianFoundation.
Greene,J.C.,Caracelli,V.J.&Graham,W.F.(1989)TowardaConceptualFrameworkforMixed-
MethodEvaluationDesigns.EducationalEvaluationandPolicyAnalysis,Vol.11(3),p255-274.
Greene,M.J.(2014)OntheInsideLookingIn:MethodologicalInsightsandChallengesin
ConductingQualitativeInsiderResearch.TheQualitativeReport,Vol.19p1-13.
Gromet,D.M.&Darley,J.M.(2006)RestorationandRetribution:HowIncludingRetributive
ComponentsAffectstheAcceptabilityofRestorativeJusticeProcedures.SocialJusticeResearch,
Vol.19(4),p395-432.
Hagemann,O.(2003)RestorativeJusticeinPrison?InWalgrave,L.(ed)Repositioning
RestorativeJustice.Devon,UK:WillanPublishing;pp221-236.
Harris,E.(2014)CasematesBarracksGoesNational.Availableathttp://www.royalgazette.com
/article/20140531/ISLAND/140539957.Accessed20thDecember2015.
Horton,R.,Foggo,L.F.,Barritt,J.,Dunkley,M.H.,Dillas-Wright,J.E.,DeVent,A.E.&Pettingill,
M.J.(2011)ExecutiveSummaryJointSelectCommitteeonthecausesofviolentcrimeandgun
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
190
violenceinBermuda.Availableathttp://www.parliament.bm/uploadedFiles/Content/Home/
Report%20on%20Violent%20Crime%20and%20Gun%20Violence%20in%20Bermuda.pdf.
Accessed29thNovember2015.
InternationalCentreforPrisonStudies(2014)HighesttoLowest-PrisonPopulationTotal.
Availableathttp://www.prisonstudies.org/highest-to-lowest/prison-population-
total?field_region_taxonomy_tid=All&=Apply.Accessedon31stOct2014.
Johnstone,G.(2002)RestorativeJustice:Ideas,Values,Debates.Devon:WillianPublishing.
Jolliffe,D.&Farrington,D.P.(2007)ASystematicReviewoftheNationalandInternational
EvidenceontheEffectivenessofInterventionswithViolentOffenders.MinistryofJustice
ResearchSeries16/07.
Jones,R.(2004)BermudaFiveCenturies.Bermuda:PanatelVDSLtd.
Jones,S.(2014)‘We’reNotMonsters’.Bermuda:BDASunnewspaper.
Jones,S.(2015)PrisonNumbersContinuetoFall.Availableathttp://www.royalgazette.com/
article/20150130/NEWS/150139970.Accessed2ndFebruary2015.
Kawaley,I.(2014)ChiefJusticeofBermudaIanKawaley’sOpeningSpeechof2015.Availableat
http://bernews.com/2015/01/photos-speeches-opening-of-2015-legal-year/.Accessed22nd
November2015.
Kinyanjui,S.M.(2008)AGenealogicalAnalysisoftheCriminalJusticeSysteminKenya:Rebirth
ofRestorativeJusticeforJuveniles?Availableat
https://lra.le.ac.uk/bitstream/2381/4495/1/2008kinyanjuismphdinlaw.pdf.Accessed23rd
March2013.
Knight,S.(2013)Recidivism:AnIn-depthInvestigationintotheEffectsofSocialandGeographic
LimitationsonViolentGangOffendersinBermuda.UnpublishedMScThesisPaper.
Kvale,S.(1996)Interviews:AnIntroductiontoQualitativeResearchInterviewing,California.
Availableathttp://www.inside-installations.org/OCMT/mydocs/Microsoft%20Word%20-
%20Booksummary_Interviews_SMAK_2.pdf.Accessed15thJuly2014.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
191
Latimer,J.,Dowden,C.&Muise,D.(2001)TheEffectivenessofRestorativeJusticePractices:A
Meta-Analysis.DepartmentofJusticeCanada:ResearchandStatisticsDivision.
Lawrence,K.&Codrington,R.(2014)RadicalDynamicsinBermudainthe21stCentury:Progress
andChallenges.Bermuda:TheAspenInstitute.
Lewin,C.(2005)ElementaryQuantitativeMethods,inSomekh,B.&Lewin,C.(eds)Research
MethodsintheSocialSciences,London:Sage,pp.215-225.
Lofland,J.&Lofland,L.H.(1995)AnalyzingSocialSettings:AGuidetoQualitativeObservation
andAnalysis.California:WadsworthPublishingCompany.
Lofton,B.P.(2004)DoesRestorativeJusticeChallengeSystemicInjustices?InZehr,H.&Toews,
B.(eds)CriticalIssuesinRestorativeJustice.NewYork:CriminalJusticePress&Devon,UK:
WillanPublishing,pp.377-385.
Mackenzie,N.&Knipe,S.(2006)Researchdilemmas:Paradigms,methodsandmethodology.
IssuesinEducationalResearch,Vol.16(2),p193-205.
Marshall,T.F.(1998)RestorativeJustice:AnOverview,inJohnstone,G.(ed.2003)ARestorative
justiceReader:Texts,Sources,Context,Devon:WillianPublishing,pp.28-46.
Maruna,S.&McNeil,F.(2008)GivingUpandGivingBack:Desistance,GenerativityandSocial
WorkwithOffenders,inMcIvor,G.&Raynor,P.(eds)DevelopmentsinSocialWorkwith
Offenders.London:JessicaKingsleyPublishers,pp.541-583.
Maybury,A.(2008)AlternativestoIncarcerationInitiativeABetterBermuda.Availableat
http://www.cicad.oas.org/reduccion_demanda/eulac/forum_exchanges/santodomingo/files/D
OC_33ALFRED_MAYBURY.pdf.Accessed28thNovember2015.
McCold,P.(2000)TowardaHolisticVisionofRestorativeJuvenileJustice:AReplytothe
MaximalistModel.ContemporaryJusticeReview,3(4),357-414.
McCold,P.(2004)WhatistheRoleofCommunityinRestorativeJusticeTheoryandPractice?in
Zehr,H.&Toews,B.(eds)CriticalIssuesinRestorativeJustice.NewYork:CriminalJusticePress
&Devon,UK:WillanPublishing,pp.155-172.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
192
McNiff,J.&Whitehead,J.(2011)AllYouNeedtoKnowAboutActionResearch.London,UK:
SagePublicationsLtd.
Menkel-Meadow,C.(2007)RestorativeJustice:WhatisitandDoesitWork?Availableat
http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/583.Accessed2ndJanuary2015.
Miers,D.,Maguire,M.,Goldie,S.,Sharpe,K.,Hale,C.,Netten,A.,Uglow,S.,Doolin,K.,Hallum,
A.,Enterkin,J.&Newburn,T.(2001)AnExploratoryEvaluationofRestorativeJusticeSchemes.
UKHomeOffice:CrimeReductionResearchSeries,Paper9.
Miller,L.(2008)CounselingCrimeVictims:PracticalStrategiesforMentalHealthProfessionals.
NewYork:SpringerPublishingCompany.
MinistryofJustice(2013)CodeofPracticeforVictimsofCrime.Availableathttps://www.gov.
uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/254459/code-of-practice-
victims-of-crime.pdf?utm_source=Justice&utm_campaign=0e331ea62a-CPD_Victims_Directive_
and_Restorative_&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_d8a820b373-0e331ea62a-345494173.
Accessed28thJanuary2015.
MinistryofJustice(2013b)JusticeDataLabRe-offendingAnalysis:PrisonFellowship–Sycamore
Treeprogramme.Availableathttps://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/
attachment_data/file/249235/prison-fellowship-sept-2013.pdf.Accessed11thFebruary2014.
NationalOffenderManagementService(2002)BriefGuideforPractitioners.RestorativeJustice
intheNationalOffenderManagementServiceNOMS.London:NationalOffenderManagement
Service.
NationalOffenderManagementService(2012)Segmentation:NeedsandEvidenceTablesforthe
CommissioningRoundfor2013-14.London:NationalOffenderManagementService.
NationalOffenderManagementService(2013)WaitTilEight:AnEssentialStart-upGuideto
NOMSRJSchemeImplementation.London:NationalOffenderManagementService.
Noll,D.E.(2003)RestorativeJustice:OutliningaNewDirectionforForensicPsychology.Journal
ofForensicPsychologyPractice,Vol.3(1),p5-24.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
193
Omale,D.J.O.(2009)RestorativeJusticeasanAlternativeDisputeResolutionModel:Opinions
ofVictimsofCrime,andCriminalJusticeProfessionalsinNigeria.Availableat
https://www.dora.dmu.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/2086/2411/PhD%20Don%20John%20
Otene%20Omale.pdf?sequence=1.Accessed23rdMarch2013.
Opdenakker,R.(2006)AdvantagesandDisadvantagesofFourInterviewTechniquesin
QualitiativeResearch.Availableathttp://www.qualitative-
research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/175/392.Accessed12thApril,2014.
Orth,U.(2004)DoesPerpetratorPunishmentSatisfyVictims’FeelingsofRevenge?Aggressive
Behavior,30,62-70.
Packwood.C.O.(2012)ChainedontheRock.SlaveryinBermuda.Bermuda:NationalMuseum
ofBermudaPress.
Parker,L.&VanNess,D.(2010)SycamoreTreeProjectProgrammeGuide(ThirdEdition).
Washington,DC:PrisonFellowshipInternational.
Pitt,D.,Robinson,W.N.H.,Cooper,R.C.,Pearman,J.I.,Scott,W.A.&Banton,M.(1978)Report
oftheRoyalCommissionintothe1977Disturbances.Accessed28thNovember2015.Availableat
http://decouto.bm/reports/Pitt-report-1978.pdf
Radelet,M.L.&Borg,M.J.(2000)CommentonUmbreitandVos:RetributiveVersusRestorative
Justice.HomicideStudies,Vol4No.1,p88-92.
Reisel,D.(2014)TheNeuroscienceofRestorativeJustice.Availableat
https://www.ted.com/talks/daniel_reisel_the_neuroscience_of_restorative_justice/transcript?l
anguage=en.Accessed14thDecember2015.
RestorativeJusticeCouncil(2011)BestPracticeGuidanceforRestorativePractice.London:
RestorativeJusticeCouncil.
RestorativeJusticeCouncil(2015)IpsosMORIPollSummary.Availableat
http://restorativejustice.org.uk/news/new-polling-demonstrates-overwhelming-support-
restorative-justice.Accessed18thJuly2015.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
194
RestorativeJusticeCouncil(2015b)RestorativeJusticeandtheJudiciary.InformationPack.
London:RestorativeJusticeCouncil.
Riley,C.(2013)AProfileofthePrisonPopulation:AStudyofInmatesinBermuda.Unpublished.
Robert,L.&Peters,T.(2003)HowRestorativeJusticeisAbletoTranscendthePrisonWalls:a
Discussionofthe‘RestorativeDetention’ProjectinWeitekamp,E.G.M&Kerner,H.J.(ed)
RestorativeJusticeinContext:InternationalPracticeandDirections.Devon,UK:Willan
Publishing.
Roberts,A.W.(2004)IsRestorativeJusticeTiedtoSpecificModelsofPractice?InZehr,H.&
Toews,B.(eds)CriticalIssuesinRestorativeJustice.NewYork:CriminalJusticePress&Devon,
UK:WillanPublishing.
Shapland,J.(2013)Participants’ChosenWords:aResponseto“WordsonWords’.Restorative
Justice:AnInternationalJournal,Vol.1(1),62-69.
Shapland,J.,Atkinsin,A.,Atkinson,H.,Chapman,B.,Colledge,E.,Dignan,J.,Howes,M.,
Johnstone,J.,Robinson,G.&Sorsby,A.(2006)RestorativeJusticeinPractice-Findingsformthe
SecondPhaseoftheEvaluationofThreeSchemes.London:HomeOfficeFindings274.
Shapland,J.,Atkinsin,A.,Atkinson,H.,Chapman,B.,Dignan,J.,Howes,M.,Johnstone,J.,
Robinson,G.&Sorsby,A.(2007)RestorativeJustice:theViewsofVictimsandOffenders.The
ThirdReportfromtheEvaluationofThreeSchemes.MinistryofJusticeResearchSeries3/07.
Shapland,J.,Atkinson,A.,Colledge,E.,Dignan,J.,Howes,M.,Johnstone,J.,Pennant,R.,
Robinson,G.,&Sorsby,A.(2004)ImplementingRestorativeJusticeSchemes(CrimeReduction
Programme):AreportontheFirstYear.HomeOfficeOnlineReport32/04.
Shearer,A.(2010)AdjustingtheScales:RestorativeJusticeandtheBalanceofPower.
InternationalJournalofJungianStudiesVol.2(1),45-58.
Smith,J.E.(2006)EchoesofBermuda’sPast:FromSlaverytoEmancipationandBeyond.
Bermuda:BermudaPress.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
195
Smith,K.(2002)PrisonsNameChangeHeraldsNewMindset.Availableat
http://www.royalgazette.com/article/20020326/NEWS/303269990.Accessed24thDecember
2015.
Somekh,B.&Lewin,C.(2005)ResearchMethodsintheSocialSciences,London:Sage.
Stevenson,C.(2014)Exclusive:InsideBermuda’sDrugTreatmentCourt.Availableat
http://www.royalgazette.com/article/20140328/NEWS/140329735.Accessed20thDecember
2015.
Strang,H.,Sherman,L.W.,Mayo-Wilson,E.,Woods,D.&Ariel,B.(2013)RestorativeJustice
Conferencing(RJC)UsingFace-to-FaceMeetingsofOffendersandVictims:EffectsonOffender
RecidivismandVictimSatisfaction.ASystematicReview.CampbellCollaborationSystematic
Reviews2013:12.
Strangeways,S.(2011)Murderrateisdoubletheworldaverage.Availableat
http://www.royalgazette.com/article/20111121/NEWS03/711219957.Accessed28thNovember
2015.
Sutrop,M.&Florea,C.(2010)GuidanceNoteforResearchersandEvaluatorsofSocialSciences
andHumanitiesResearch.Accessed8th2013.http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants
/data/ref/fp7/89867/social-sciences-humanities_en.pdf.Accessed8thAugust2013.
Suttie,J.(2015)CanRestorativeJusticeHelpPrisonerstoHeal?Availableathttp://greatergood.
berkeley.edu/article/item/restorative_justice_help_prisoners_heal#.Accessedat31stDecember
2015.
Sutton,J.(2011)AnEthnographicAccountofDoingSurveyResearchinPrison:Descriptions,
Reflections,andSuggestionsfromtheField.QualitativeSociologyReviewVol.VII,Issue2,p45-
63.
Szego,D.&Fellegi,B.(2013)TalksBehindtheWalls:RestorativeEncountersinPrisonSettings.
Availableathttp://www.rj4all.info/library/talks-behind-walls-restorative-encounters-prison-
settings.Accessed22ndJanuary2015.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
196
Talbot,N.(2002)NewLegislationGivesSexAttackVictimsaVoice.Availableat
http://www.royalgazette.com/article/20020116/NEWS/301169981.Accessed24thDecember
2015.
TheRoyalGazette(1993)Prison’sAimistoReformInmates.Availableat
http://www.royalgazette.com/article/19930223/NEWS/302239980Accessed24thDecember
2015.
TheRoyalGazette(1994)NewPrisonAimstoOfferInmates‘PositiveGoals’.Availableat
http://www.royalgazette.com/article/19940131/NEWS/301319985.Accessed24thDecember
2015.
Tickell,S.&Akester,K.(2004)RestorativeJustice:TheWayAhead.London:Justice.
Toews,B.(2006)RestorativeJusticeforPeopleinPrison:RebuildingtheWebofRelationships.
Intercourse,PA:GoodBooks.
Tumim,S.,Bassett,M.,Robinson,L.,Wade,N.,Bass,S.,French,T.&Jenkins,D.(1992)Reportof
theCriminalJusticeReviewBoard:ReportontheCriminalJusticeSysteminBermuda.Available
at:http://decouto.bm/reports/Tumin-Report-1992-10-02.pdf.Accessed22ndNovember2015.
Umbreit,M.S.(1998)"RestorativeJusticeThroughVictim-OffenderMediation:AMulti-Site
Assessment."WesternCriminologyReview1(1).[Online].Availableat:http://www.western
criminology.org/documents/WCR/v01n1/Umbreit/umbreit.html.Accessed1stMarch2015
Umbreit,M.S.(2000)RestorativeJusticeConferencing:GuidelinesforVictimSensitivePractice
“AdaptingConferences,Mediations,CirclesandReparativeBoardstoPeople,Communities,and
Cultures”.Availableat:http://www.cehd.umn.edu/ssw/rjp/Resources/RJ_Dialogue_Resources/
Restorative_Group_Conferencing/RJC%20Guidlines%20Victim%20Sensitive%20Practice.pdf.
Accessed22ndFebruary2015
Umbreit,M.S.&Armour,M.P.(2011)RestorativeJusticeDialogue:AnEssentialGuidefor
ResearchandPractice.NewYork:SpringerPublishingCompany.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
197
Umbreit,M.S.&Vos,B.(2000)HomicideSurvivorsMeettheOffenderPriortoExecution:
RestorativeJusticeThroughDialogue.HomicideStudies,Vol4No.1,p63-87.
Umbreit,M.S.,Vos,B.,Coates,R.B.&Lightfoot,E.(2005)RestorativeJusticeintheTwenty-First
Century:ASocialMovementFullofOpportunitiesandPitfalls.Availableat
http://www.antoniocasella.eu/restorative/Umbreit_2005.pdf.Accessed23rdDecember2015.
UnitedNationsCommissiononCrimePrevention&CriminalJustice(2002)BasicPrincipleson
theUseofRestorativeJusticeinCriminalMatters.Vienna:UN.Availableathttp://www.unodc.
org/pdf/crime/commissions/IIcomm/5e.pdf.Accessed4thFebruary2014.
UnitedNationsOfficeonDrugsandCrime(2006)HandbookonRestorativeJusticeProgrammes.
CriminalJusticeHandbookSeries.NewYork:UnitedNationsPublication.
VanStokkom,B.(2013)Victim’sNeedsandParticipationinJustice:isthereaRolefor
Vengeance?RestorativeJustice:AnInternationalJournalVol.1(2),168-189.
Wachtel,T.,O’Connell,T.&Wachtel,B.(2010)RestorativeJusticeConferencing;RealJustice&
TheConferencingHandbook.Pennsylvania,USA:ThePiper’sPress.
Walmsley,R.(2011)WorldPrisonPopulationlist(ninthedition).InternationalCentreforPrison
Studies.Essex:UK.Availableathttp://www.idcr.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/WPPL-9-
22.pdf.Accessed31stOctober2014.
Ward.T.,Fox,K.J.&Garber,M.(2014)RestorativeJustice,OffenderRehabilitationand
Desistance.RestorativeJustice:AnInternationalJournalVol2(1),24-42.
Warmoth,A.(2000)SocialConstructionistEpistemology.Availableat
http://www.sonoma.edu/users/w/warmotha/epistemology.html.Accessed30thJanuary2015.
Wilson,C.(2013)DeSilva:Myguncrimefrustration.Availableat
http://www.royalgazette.com/article/20130918/NEWS/130919710.Accessed28thNovember
2015.
Wilson,K.N.(2011)ThroneSpeechInitiatives(Justice).Availableat
http://subportal.gov.bm/dci-documents/item/289-throne-speech-initiatives-justice.Accessed
28thNovember2015.
DoctoralThesis–DavinaAidooHiddenHurts,HealingfromWithin:RestorativeJusticeforVictimsandConvictedOffendersinBermuda.
198
Wilson,M.(2009)InsideOut:HowdoesanIn-prisonVictimAwarenessProgrammeAffect
Recidivism?Availableat
http://www.restorativejustice.org.uk/resource/inside_out_how_does_an_inprison
_victim_awareness_programme_affect_recidivism/.Accessed4thApril2015.
Wooding,H.O.B.,Springer,H.W.&Browning,L.P.R(1969)BermudaCivilDisorders1968
ReportofCommission.Availableathttp://decouto.bm/reports/Wooding-report-1969.pdf.
Accessed28thNovember2015
Zaki,J.(2011)What,MeCare?YoungareLessEmpathetic.Availableat
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-me-care/.Accessed3rdJanuary2016.
Zehr,H.(1985)RetributiveJustice,RestorativeJustice,inJohnstone,G.(ed.2003)ARestorative
justiceReader:Texts,Sources,Context.Devon:WillianPublishing,pp.69-82.
Zehr,H.(2002)TheLittleBookofRestorativeJustice.Intercourse,PA:GoodBooks.
Zehr,H.(2005)ChangingLens:ANewFocusforCrimeandJustice(3rded).ScottdalePA:Herald
Press.
Zehr,H.&Toews,B.(2004)CriticalIssuesinRestorativeJustice.NewYork:CriminalJusticePress
&Devon,UK:WillanPublishing.
Recommended