Just an ‘optional extra’ in the ‘victim toolkit’?: The culture, mechanisms and approaches of criminal justice organisations delivering restorative justice in England and Wales

Abstract

Despite policy and guidance stating that all victims of crime should have ‘equal access’ to restorative justice in England and Wales, victim participation remains low. Here, the ways in which criminal justice agents – responsible for providing victim services, including restorative justice – offer restorative justice to victims are explored. Drawing upon empirical data collected from criminal justice organisations in two police force areas, this article outlines what factors lie behind the inconsistencies found across police forces in terms of structure and delivery of restorative justice. Work pressures, differing views of the suitability or effectiveness of restorative justice and a lack of systematic guidance that underpins the work culture of criminal justice organisations all impede victims’ access to restorative justice. This paper concludes with recommendations for embedding a culture of restorative justice within criminal justice organisations based upon the principles of inclusivity and engagement.

Navigating professionals’ conditions for co-production of victim support: A conceptual article

“…In accordance with the above, the impact of the structural understanding should preferably be minimized in this step. Instead, the victim's agency and empowerment as a support user become important aspects for the professional to keep in mind, in order not to just make decisions and assessments that do not align with how the victims perceive themselves (Banwell-Moore, 2023;Green et al, 2021;Thunberg, 2020). The victim's first contact with the support system plays a crucial role in the subsequent process.…”

“…A Danish study found that some police officers deliberately refrain from informing victims about Victim Support Denmark (Offerrådgivningen) if they do not believe its services would be useful (e.g. based on the gender and age of the victim) (Banwell-Moore, 2023; Holmberg et al, 2020). Although this is possible, both due to the flexible nature of the guidelines for informing crime victims about the victim counseling service (i.e.…”

“…police officers) about who is most ‘worthy’ (e.g. Banwell-Moore, 2023; Bryce et al, 2016; Pemberton et al, 2019); (2) an organization’s lack of resources to accommodate support needs (e.g. Lorenz et al, 2019); (3) victims feeling unable to tell their story and exercise their agency (i.e.…”

“…to feel less assertive, respected, or in control of the situation) (e.g. Banwell-Moore, 2023; Shapland, 2018; Thunberg, 2022); or (4) different expectations about how a case should be handled (Shapland, 1986). Taken together, previous research suggests that the matching of individual needs with the formal support that is offered is not functioning as expected.…”

Restoring victims’ confidence: Victim-centred restorative practices

“…To protect victims from further violence, in many jurisdictions, these victimizations are categorically excluded from existing RP. Victim support workers and criminal justice personnel are often hesitant to inform victims of the existence of RP, but victims want to be informed, even if they choose not to use RP (Banwell-Moore, 2022; Van Camp and Wemmers, 2016). This limits the available options for these victims, and while the exclusion of cases of gender-based violence is intended to protect victims from secondary victimization, patronizing victims by limiting their choices may also contribute to a sense of revictimization (Wemmers, 2017).…”