Restorative justice (RJ) has found significant utility outside the prison setting. For many reasons, it has not received the same level of consideration inside the institution. While not every case can, or perhaps should be considered for restorative justice processing inside the prison, some could easily fall into the broad purview range of restorative and transformative justice. We provide examples of RJ practices that exist in some prisons focusing on: offending behavior and victim awareness programs, community service work, and victimoffender mediation, as well as prison systems that exhibit a RJ philosophy. Also considered are the effectiveness of prison RJ practices, and the limitations of such efforts. Although RJ has the potential to have a positive impact on the work of prisons and the experience of imprisonment, it has not found wide acceptance and is currently limited to a relatively small number of prisons and then often only delivered in partial form. We believe that RJ has a realistic future in prison settings and that the contradictions that may be identified are not debilitating.

This article explores the diversionary measure of restorative final warnings within the context of the youth justice system. We examine the philosophy and rationale of the new era in cautioning and discuss the potential practice implications since its implementation in 2000, under the statutory legislation within the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. To date there has been very little research or academic debate on the new system of police cautioning of youth. Additionally, as final warnings develop a greater association with restorative justice practices, we explore how this 'pre court' intervention has the potential to broaden oppressive and discriminatory practices within the youth justice system in relation to particular societal groups.We will begin by explaining how police cautioning of youth has changed with the implementation of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and then explore contemporary police practices and outcomes regarding youth and the restorative final warning scheme. We will highlight the conflicting nature of the new scheme which requires voluntary agreement throughout its statutory process to ensure successful completion. We will also demonstrate that the systematic implementation of final warnings has reduced police discretion and increased levels of police accountability, and that this, in turn, appears to have increased the potential for net widening and disproportionate punitive outcomes received by young people, especially regarding young females. Crime and Disorder Act 1998The Crime and Disorder Act 1998 was an attempt by the British government to establish a statutory obligation on local authorities and professional bodies to create a unified and structured approach to responding to youth crime (Card and Ward 1998; Home Office 1998). Section 37 of the Act states that: 'It shall be the principal aim of the youth justice system to prevent offending by children and young persons'. This is to be achieved by placing a duty on local authorities to create 129

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract