CJ 480 Seq. Number
Tuesday 7:15-9:45 pm, 3 credit hours
College of Social & Behavioral Sciences, Dept of Criminal Justice
NAU Spring Semester 2009
Mary E. White, J.D.
Yuma County Attorney’s Office
250 W. 2nd St., Suite G
Yuma, AZ 85364
Office hours by appointment
Course Description : Introduction to the principles & practices of Restorative Justice.
Student Learning Expectations/Outcomes for this Course :
(1) Students should be able to describe principles and purposes of restorative justice. They should understand the ways in which restorative justice takes into consideration the needs of victims, offenders and the community.
(2) They should understand where restorative justice may be implemented within the existing structures of our traditional criminal justice system, both juvenile and adult. They should also see possibilities for change of these traditional criminal justice structures to better reflect restorative values.
(3) They should have an overview of the social and criminal justice problems which restorative justice seeks to address.
4) They should have basic knowledge of several restorative applications:
a. Restorative Conferencing between Victims and Offenders, also known as Victim Offender Reconciliation or Victim Offender Mediation
b. Community Justice Boards as originated by the Pima County Attorney’s Office and developed in Yuma County by the Yuma County Attorney in partnership with Juvenile Court.
c. Problem solving/therapeutic courts such as Drug Courts.
d. Prisoner Re-Entry programs
(5) They should have an overview of the variety among restorative justice practices in Arizona, the U.S. as well as internationally.
Course structure/approach: Lecture, class discussion & role play exercises, guest speakers, readings and research reports.
See attached reading list for required and recommended reading.
Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes
- Methods of Assessment
Written assignments based upon class discussions & assigned readings
Timeline for Assessment:
Topic due: Jan. 27, 2009
1st draft research report due: March 3
Final Research report due: April 14
Final Exam: May 5
Points are awarded for accuracy of knowledge, identification of sources & ability to apply concepts of restorative justice to criminal justice issues
Grammar & spelling will also be considered in grading.
Students must show by quote marks and citation whenever a source is quoted.
Grading will be 90-100% A
80-89 % B
GRADE WILL BE BASED UPON THE FOLLOWING:
Written assignments: 1/3 of grade
Final Exam 1/3 of grade
Research report 1/3 of grade
Students who have earned an A or B on total written assignments and Research Paper will not have to take the final exam.
Students must have completed a Research Report and at least 50% of written assignments in order to be eligible for Extra Credit points.
Extra Credit projects:
(1) Additional research reports, projects & oral presentations
(2) Volunteer hours on Restorative Justice related projects such as Community Justice Boards
(3) Extra Credit activities on Professor’s “Extra Credit” list (posted on VISTA)
All projects, reports, presentations must be approved in advance by Professor.
- Retests/makeup tests
Final Exam may be made up if missed due to illness or personal emergency. The make-up exam will not be the same as the exam given in class.
- Attendance. If class is missed, student is responsible for making up the reading and/or assignments missed.
- Statement on plagiarism and cheating. Plagiarism and/or cheating will result in a failing grade.
University policies: See attached Safe Working and Learning Environment, Students with Disabilities, Institutional Review Board, and Academic Integrity policies.
1. Acquire a basic knowledge of restorative justice principles and practices.
2. Identify critical issues in criminal justice and explore restorative solutions.
3. Develop restorative problem solving abilities in the context of local criminal justice issues and programs.
Use of real world situations & problems in Yuma County.
Focus on Yuma County in context of national & global issues
Observation of local criminal justice programs and processes
Classroom problem solving exercises
Written assignments from readings
Define Restorative Justice
Contrast Restorative and Retributive Justice
Experiences & needs
Effects of retributive justice
Effects of retributive justice
How victims and offenders benefit from restorative justice
How restorative justice involves and benefits the community.
Students will learn basic concepts of the current criminal justice system. Emphasis will be upon “real life” and criminal justice in Yuma County.
PRISONS AND JAILS
EFFECTS OF CRIMINAL RECORD
COMMUNITY JUSTICE BOARDS
PROBLEM SOLVING COURTS
MENTALLY IMPAIRED OFFENDERS
TERMINOLOGY: “VICTIM” OR “PERSON WHO WAS HARMED/INJURED
VICTIM OFFENDER CONFERENCING
COMMUNITY JUSTICE BOARDS
PROBLEM SOLVING COURTS
REVIEW FOR EXAM/CLOSING CIRCLE
I. GOALS & THEORIES OF TRADITIONAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE
A. Crime as an offense against the “State”
State dictates the result
Limited defendant participation
Little or no input from victim
One size fits all – lack of attention to individual needs
and circumstances of offenders and victims
a. Mandatory sentences
b. Limitations on restitution
c. Cookie-cutter justice – incarceration/probation
No dialogue between victim and offender
B. Utilitarian Justice
1. Deterrence of that individual
2. Deterrence of general public
3.Incapacitation of the offender
“Fixing” the individual defendant
C. Defendants’ rights in United States criminal justice
1. Balancing the rights of individual defendant with need for
2. Overview of defendants’ rights in criminal cases
3. Reasons why defendants have rights in our system of justice
4. Adversary system (State vs. Individual)
II. WHAT IS RESTORATIVE JUSTICE?
A. Restorative Justice is an approach to crime and justice which seeks to heal and restore rather than punish and degrade. Communities, victims and offenders are brought together to discover what caused the offenses, find ways to repair the harm and transform offenders. Transformation of those who commit crimes is accomplished through positive means such as dialogue with victims and the community. The person who committed the crime learns how the offense harmed another human being and the community. Offenders are encouraged to see themselves as people with talents and potential rather than evil or worthless. “Criminals” gain life skills to enable them to rejoin their communities as productive citizens.
Restorative Justice seeks to help victims, offenders, neighborhoods and communities.
Restorative Justice is a positive approach to crime prevention. Offenders who finish school, receive mental health treatment, gain job skills, reconcile with their families, build positive peer relationships, quit gang involvement, recover from drug or alcohol addiction and live in healthy neighborhoods are far less likely to ever commit future crimes.
Restorative Justice is expressed in various forms. Here are some examples:
* Victim-Offender Conferencing:
* Community Justice Boards or similar programs in which volunteers meet with offenders and their families to offer assistance and to help the offender to learn accountability in a positive manner.
* Problem solving or therapeutic courts:
B. Balanced – Community/Offender/Victim
C. Participatory -all persons affected have a voice
III. CONTRAST TRADITIONAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE & RESTORATIVE JUSTICE
A. Retributive Justice asks:
What law was broken? What crime was committed?
Who “done” it?
What should the punishment be?
B. Key participants in retributive justice: Judge, Prosecutor, defense attorney, defendant and, rarely, jury.
C. Restorative Justice asks:
What harm was done? Who was hurt and how?
How can the harm be repaired? Who is responsible for this repair?
How can this be prevented from happening again?
D. Key participants in restorative justice: offender, victim, community
E. Restorative Justice
1. Healing/restoration/repair of harm
2. Includes emphasis on emotional & psychological &
social restoration rather than only financial restitution.
Forgiveness is recognized.
3. Concern for the individual (both victim & offender)
4. Building competency/transformation of offender
5. Reintegration of offender and victim into relationships
6. Involvement of community
IV. SHARED GOALS OF “CURRENT” U.S. JUSTICE SYSTEM & RESTORATIVE JUSTICE:
A. SHARED GOAL: Protection of the Public/Public Safety
1. Retributive and/or Utilitarian Justice’ Approach to achieve
a. Lock up/restrain the individual offender
b. Punishment as deterrent
2. Restorative approach to protecting public safety:
a. Address problems of offender
1) Teach accountability to offender (learning impact of offense on victim and
2) Build offender competency (education/life skills)
b. Repair Harm to Community (offenders engage in projects to help crime victims/offenders reintegrated into community instead of isolated in negative, criminal subculture)
c. Accomplished through personal interactions of offenders with victims and community
B. SHARED GOAL: Repair harm to victim
1. “Traditional” criminal justice system
a. Often requires financial restitution
b. Victims’ Rights Movement
2. Restorative Justice
a. Though it strives to include restitution, is
also concerned with making the victim, offender
and community whole by restoring
relationships and healing emotional harm.
b. Victim participation
c. Community participation (community justice boards, reparative panels, sentencing circles, etc.)
V. JUSTICE VS LAW IN THE UNITED STATES
A. Definitions & philosophy:
3. “Criminal justice”
4. Purpose of a court system:
to maintain peace within a society by resolving conflicts
B. Where does U.S. law come from?
b. Framers (Theory of natural rights/English common
c. Legislative Ratification
d. England does not have a constitution. Statutes are passed by Parliament with courts having no authority to overturn them.
Criminal law is common law rather than statutory.
2. Criminal statutes (federal & state)
a. Contrast with English common law of crimes.
b. Crimes in “civil law” countries defined by statutes/codes
3. Ballot propositions (Arizona)
4. Local ordinances
5. Courts (federal & state)
a. Case law
b. Court rules (evidence & procedure)
c. England has one national court system
d. Court decisions in “civil law” countries not legally binding
C. Criminal vs. Civil
a. State v. Individual
a. Individual or Legal Entity vs. Individual/Legal Entity
b. Money damages
1) Compensatory damages
2) Punitive damages
3) Court orders
a. Equitable remedies – injunction, specific performance
b. Orders of Protection/injunction against harassment
c. Child support/spousal maintenance
d. Court ordered mental health treatment
3. Historically, civil & criminal were not always so clearly separated.
a. Medieval & Roman times:
1) Perpetrators paid compensation to victims of serious
b. England & America
1) Victims could “prosecute”
2) Debtors’ prison
4. Criminal & Civil actions
a. May apply to the same conduct
b. May take place concurrently – ongoing at same time
5. Both Criminal & Civil:
D. Separation of Powers – U.S. Constitution
1. Legislative -Makes the laws (Congress, state legislature, ballot propositions)
2. Executive -carries out (executes) laws (Governors, governing boards, prosecutors, police, prisons, military)
a. President, Governors, governing boards
1) Police Discretion
a) Choice to issue citation
b) Arrest or release
c) Crime Prevention (school resource officers, community policing, community education)
1) Prosecutorial Discretion
a) Charging & Plea Decisions
b) Ethical duty to do justice (not to “win” case or meet quota)
i. Protect public
ii. Duty not to prosecute innocent persons
iii. Fairness in conducting cases
c) Prosecutors work in community for Crime Prevention
i. Community Prosecution
e. Prison Administration- executive branch/discretion
3. Judicial — interprets laws, imposes sentence in criminal cases &
establishes procedures (rules) for courts &
executive (Judges, probation officers)
a. Judicial Discretion
1). Conditions of Release
b Jury verdicts
c. Probation Officers
1) Discretion – Juvenile Diversion, Adult Probation
referrals to Drug Court, deciding whether to file
Petition to Revoke Probation
d. In many “civil law” countries, judges play more active role in
gathering and determining facts
VI. HISTORY OF TRADITIONAL U.S. CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
A. Traditional Criminal Justice (history)
1. Early “Western” civilization
a. No clear distinction between “civil” & “criminal”
b. Vengeance & blood feud
c. Compensation for serious crime paid by perpetrator/family to victim/family
e. England in Anglo-Saxon & Norman times
a. English trial by jury
b. English common law
c. Crimes against religion
2) Corporal punishment
b) Amputation of limbs
3) Transportation (exile)
4) Prisons were for debtors
5) Cruel & Unusual Punishments
3. U.S. History
a. American colonies & early U.S.
b. Constitutional rights
c. Protection of individuals accused of crime
d. Federal, state & local
e. Early American criminal justice (humane by English
& European standards of the time-for example,
though executed, the accused was not usually
tortured to death)
1) Some matters not recognized or punished today
b) Sexual behavior such as adultery or
c) Failure to attend church
d) Kissing in public
a) Corporal punishment
i. Whipping (horse thieves, failing to
attend church, homosexual behavior)
ii. Branding (hog & horse thieves)
iii. Cutting of ears or hands (thieves)
iv. Pillory & stocks (Puritans) (kissing
one’s wife in public)
v. Dunking (Puritans)
b) Shaming by public humiliation
c) Execution (usually by hanging)
(counterfeiters, bestiality, heretics)
f. Sentences in recent American history
2) Chain gangs
3) Public executions
g. Juvenile Court
2) 1st Juv ct established in 1889 in Chicago
3) Movement spread throughout world
VII. RESULTS OF TRADITIONAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE IN UNITED STATES
A. Imbalance between rights of defendants and rights of victims
B. Impersonal system where both defendants and victims are excluded from direct participation.
C. Numbers incarcerated
1 in 100 adults in USA now in jail or prison
U.S. now has more people in prison than any other country in the world.
1 in 30 men between the age of 20 and 34 are behind bars
1 in 54 of all men ages 18 or older
1 in 9 black males
Arizona had the highest growth in prisoners of all the western states
D. Effects of incarceration
a. Physical & emotional trauma
b. Mentally impaired prisoners
1) Untreated mental illness gets worse in prison.
2) Prison conditions can trigger or cause mental
illness such as PTSD.
c. Prison gangs
d. Schools for crime
e. Schools for racism
f. Drug abuse in prisons
g. Breeding grounds for contagious diseases (HIV, TB,
1. Lower recidivism rates than prison.
2. Probation is less expensive than prison
3. Traditional probation has two (2) purposes:
a. Protect the public
b. Help the probationer become a law abiding person
F. Numbers with criminal records
1. Effects of having a criminal record
a) Employment/professional licenses
b) Housing (ineligible for public housing/private landlords conduct criminal history checks –“Crime Free” housing encouraged by police.
c) Loss of right to vote
d) Loss of right to possess firearms or other weapons
e) Cannot serve on jury
f) loss of access to education (ineligible for student financial assistance/cannot get into professional schools)
g) loss of access to health care (loss of public health benefits while incarcerated–difficult to reinstate)
h)Other consequences of DUI, sex offenses & other crimes:
1). Sex Offender Registration
2). Loss of driver’s license
3) Effect on availability of auto insurance
G. Expense of maintaining traditional U.S. criminal justice system
In 2005, the average per prisoner operating cost per year
In 2005, the approximate per capita expense per bed in a
typical medium ecurity facility was $65,000.
Older prisoners cost more at an average of $70,000 per year
– 2-3 times that of a younger person.
The state spending the most money in 2007 on a corrections
system was California, totaling 8.8 billion dollars.
Texas ranks 2nd at 3.3 billion dollars
“Corrections” had the 2nd highest growth rate of state funds
spent in FY 2006- only transportation grew faster.
Corrections grew more than education and Medicaid.
In the western states, the # of dollars allocated to prisons
rose 205% while higher education spending rose just 28%.
The highest recidivism rates are for person who have done
Prisons release people back into society who are more likely to
commit crimes than when they went to prison.
1. Prisoners make criminal connections while incarcerated and often are forced into prison gangs which control
them after they are released.
2. They learn more crimes while in prison (burglary, auto
theft, meth cooking, etc.)
3. They leave prison handicapped by lack of job skills and a
criminal record which makes it hard to find law abiding
employment and even decent housing.
4. Prisons release persons back into the community who have
been psychologically and physically traumatized, learned
new ways to commit crimes, caught highly contagious
diseases such as TB and HIV, and, in most cases, received
little or no job training, education, drug/alcohol treatment
or mental health treatment.
Released prisoners find it difficult to function in a family or
relationship, find or hold a job, or function with a normal,
VII. CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND SOCIAL PROBLEMS
A. Substance Abuse
2. “Drug” laws in U.S.
b. Decriminalization & Legalization
3. Juvenile Court
a. Juvenile status offenses
4. School Discipline
5. Best interests of the child vs. protection of public
C. Family Problems
1.Domestic Violence laws
b. Collateral penalties (loss of right to possess firearms)
c. Child abuse laws
D. Mental Illness – Mentally Impaired Offenders
1. Large numbers of mentally ill persons in criminal justice system
(The 3 largest psychiatric facilities in the US are big city jails)
a.. Mental hospitals closed down -deinstitutionalization of mentally
b. Laws changed to make it difficult to “commit” a person for
c. Lack of community mental health services to replace the mental
E. Criminal Justice as a reflection of social norms:
a) What is the difference between right and wrong?
b) Is Criminal Justice concerned with ethics? Or
only with whether the law is obeyed?
3. Alcohol/Drugs – Prohibition & cocaine in Coca-Cola
4. Sexual behavior
5. Animal cruelty laws
VIII. RESTORATIVE JUSTICE APPLICATIONS
A. Post Conviction
1. Usually more serious offenses
a. Victim/Offender Mediation
b. Sentencing Circles
3. Reparative Probation
4. Problem solving/therapeutic courts
5. Victim-Offender Conferencing/Mediation
a. During incarceration
1) Victim/Offender Mediation
2) Preparation for Re-Entry
b. Post release
1. Alternatives to Prosecution
2) Juvenile Court
b. Prosecutors’ deferred prosecution or alternatives to prosecution Examples: Community Justice Boards for juveniles,
Pre-Conviction Drug Court.
Therapeutic/problem solving courts
C. Victims’ needs.
1. Victims’ Rights in Arizona
2. Amberly’s Place in Yuma
3. Needs of victims:
4. All Restorative Justice processes should respect the interests of the
5. Victim/Offender Conferencing/Mediation
a. Fundamental principles
1) Goals: Emotional healing of victim, offender accountability,
more than dispute resolution
2) Victim’s participation is voluntary
3) Advance preparation of victim
4) Allows victims to speak
5) Victim support persons
b. Videos & role playing
6. Child victims
7. Legal Entity victims
8. “Victimless” crimes:
a) Parents & other family members
D. Offender’s needs & problems
1. Building competency in offender
b. Behaviors that promote one’s individual well-being
c. Lessons learned from work with addiction
1) 12 Steps
2) Importance of spirituality
3) Taking care of one’s health & physical well-being
d. Therapeutic defense attorney
2. Criminal Courts as Therapeutic/ Problem Solving Courts
a. Drug Courts
b. Domestic Violence Courts
c. Community Courts
d. Mental Health Courts
e. DUI (Driving Under Influence) Courts
f. Gambling Courts
g. Re-Entry Courts
h. Veterans’ Courts
3. Re-Entry Programs for Prisoners
a. Preparation for Release
b. Post-release programs
4. Consensual participation by offenders
a. Opportunity to speak/communicate with victim & community
b. Ageement as to consequences
c. Accept responsibility & be held accountable
d. Reintegration into community
E. Community Justice
1. Inclusion of community in traditional criminal justice
a. Closed criminal justice system vs. open
1) Notice to defendant & opportunity to defend
2) Public trials
b. Juries (trial & grand jury)
c. Elected Judges
2. Recent developments toward more community participation
a,. Victims’ Rights
b. Community Policing
c. Community Prosecution
d. Community partnerships – Weed & Seed
e. Teen Court
3. Inclusion of community in restorative justice practice
a. Sentencing Circles (Canadian model & others)
b. Conferencing & Community Restorative Boards
1) Community & Family Group Conferencing (New Zealand
model & others)
2) Restorative Justice Youth Conferencing in Colorado
3) Neighborhood Accountability Boards in Florida
4) Juvenile Corrections Board at Hanscom AFB in
5) Community Justice Boards in Arizona
a) Basic principles
b) Community Justice Board Conference:
Role Playing Exercise
4. Indigenous & Customary Justice – Participation of the community
a. New Zealand
F. Economics of Restorative Justice
1. Cost of maintaining a restorative justice program
2. Cost comparison of operating traditional and restorative justice
3. Long term savings resulting from restorative justice in having more persons becoming productive, law abiding citizens.
IX. RESULTS OF RESTORATIVE JUSTICE
A. Less Recidivism (due to offenders’ learning/building competencies & strengthening of community)
B. Victim healing
D. Restoring the community
1. Empowerment of community through
knowledge & participation (authority comes from community instead of imposed from outside/above)
2. Enhances ability of community to resolve conflicts
3. Healing/repair of harm to community
4. Strengthens problem solving ability of community
5. Strengthen social cohesion of community
C. Restorative Justice is multi-disciplinary:
X. RESTORATIVE PRACTICES APPLIED OUTSIDE CRIMINAL JUSTICE
1. Peer Mediation
2. Conflict Resolution Circles
C. Substance abuse treatment
E. Neighborhood Mediation Centers
F. Family Group Conferencing/Decision making (Child Protective
Services type agencies)
G. Homeless Shelters
H. Police decision making which incorporates restorative
I. Mediation of cases in which prosecution was declined
XI. REVIEW FOR EXAM
Restorative Activity: Closing Circle
XII. FINAL EXAM
Required Reading List:
Crime and Punishment in American History
by Lawrence M. Friedman
BasicBooks, A Division of Harper Collins Publishing, Inc.
1993 (Selected Chapters on VISTA)
Documenting Results Research on Problem-Solving Justice
A Collection from the Center for Court Innovation
Ed. By Greg Berman, Michael Rempel and Robert V. Wolf
2007 (Selected Chapters on VISTA)
Doing Justice Better: The Politics of Restorative Justice
By David J. Cornwell
Illustrated by Mark S. Umbreit
Contributor Mark S. Umbreit
Published by Waterside Press, 2007 (Selected chapters on VISTA)
“Drug Treatment Courts in the Twenty-First Century: The Evolution of the Revolution in Problem-Solving Courts”
by The Honorable Peggy Fulton Hora and Theordore Stalcup
Georgia Law Review
Spring 2008 Volume 42 Number 3 (Posted on VISTA)
Good Punishment? Christian Moral Practice and U.S. Imprisonment
by James Samuel Logan
(Chapters Posted on VISTA)
Restorative Justice Healing the Foundations of Our Everyday Lives, by Dennis Sullivan and Larry Tifft, 2005 Willow Tree Press, Inc., Monsey, New York (copy on reserve at Academic Library and 2 chapters on VISTA)
Restorative Justice How It Works by Marian Liebmann, 2007 Jessica Kingsley Publishers, London and Philadelphia (copy on reserve at Academic Library and 2 chapters on VISTA)
Restorative Justice in the United States, by Clifford K. Dorne, 2008 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey (copy on reserve at Academic Library and 2 chapters on VISTA).
by Daniel Van Ness and Karen Heetderks Strong
1997 (Selected chapters on VISTA)
See Poverty …. Be the Difference! by Donna M. Beegle, Ed.D. 2007 Published in USA by Communications Across Barriers, Inc., Tigard, Oregon
“The Circle Process: A Path for Restorative Dialogue”, Jean Greenwood, Oct. 2005, Center for Restorative Justice & Peacemaking, University of Minnesota (copy available)
“Opportunities and Pitfalls Facing the Restorative Justice Movement,” Umbreit, M.S., Vos, B. and Coates, R.B., April 2005, Center for Restorative Justice & Peacemaking, University of Minnesota (copy available)
“Restorative Justice Dialogue: Evidence-Based Practice, Umbreit, M.S., Vos, B. and Coates, R.B., (January 1, 2006) Center for Restorative Justice & Peacemaking, University of Minnesota, School of Social Work, College of Human Ecology (copy available)
“Talking Circles”, Mark Umbreit, Aug. 13, 2003, Center for Restorative Justice & Peacemaking, University of Minnesota (copy available)
Recommended Reading List
Changing Lenses: A New Focus for Crime and Justice. H. Zehr, 1990, Herald Press, Scottdale, PA
The Little Book of Restorative Justice by Howard Zehr 2002 Good Book Publishing Co.
“A Community Response to a 9/11 Hate Crime: Restorative Justice Through Dialogue,” Mark S. Umbreit, Ted Lewis and Heather Burns, 2003, Contemporary Justice Review, Vol. 6(4), pp. 383-391 (copy available)
Crime, Shame and Reintegration, J. Braithwaite (1989) Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK
Documenting Results, Research on Problem-Solving Justice, A Collection from the Center for Court Innovation, 2007, Center for Court Innovation (copy available)
Guide to Developing and Implementing Performance Measures for the Juvenile Justice System, APRI (American Prosecutors’ Research Institute), 2006 (copy available)
The Handbook of Victim Offender Mediation, Mark S. Umbreit, PhD., Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA
Handbook on Restorative Justice Programmes, Criminal Justice Handbook Series, 2006, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, United Nations, New York (copy available)
How Nations Make Peace, Kegley & Raymond 1999
“Humanistic Mediation: A Transformative Journey of Peacemaking”, Mark S. Umbreit, Spring 1997, Mediation Quarterly, Vol. 14, No. 3 (copy available)
Just Look What You’ve Done, Determining the Effectiveness of Community Prosecution, Feb. 2007, American Prosecutors’ Research Institute, National District Attorneys’ Association (copy available)
“Justifying Restorative Justice: A Theoretical Justification for the Use of Restorative Justice Practices,” Zvi D. Gabbay, Journal of Dispute Resolution, The Center for Dispute Resolution of the University of Missouri School of Law (2007) (copy available)
Peacemaking Circles: From Crime to Community by Kay Pranis, Barry Stuart, and Mark Wedge, Living Justice Press
A Prosecutor’s Guide to the Juvenile Delinquency Guidelines, May 2006, American Prosecutors Research Institute (APRI), Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) (copy available)
Public Safety, Public Spending: Forecasting America’s Prison Population 2007-2011, Public Safety Performance Project of The Pew Charitable Trusts
Confronting Confinement, A Report of the Commission on Safety and Abuse in America’s Prisons, John J. Gibbons, Nicholas de B. Katzenbach, Commission Co-Chairs (June 2006) Available online at www.prisoncommission.org
Restorative Justice International Perspectives, Burt Galaway and Joe Hudson, Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, NY
Restorative Justice: The Evidence, Lawrence W. Sherman & Heather Strang (2007) www.smith-institute.org.uk (copy available)
Restorative Juvenile Justice, ed. Gordon Bazemore and Lode Walgrave, Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, NY
The Social Contract, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, 1762, Penguin Books
Symposium: Restorative Justice in Action, Marquette Law Review Winter 2005, Volume 89, No. 2, Marquette University Law School, Milwaukee, Wisconsin (copy available)
Teach Yourself Ethics, Mel Thompson, 2006, McGraw-Hill
Victim Meets Offender: The Impact of Restorative Justice and Mediation Mark S. Umbreit, Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, NY
NOVELS & non-fiction which touch upon restorative justice issues:
Crime & Punishment, by Fyodor Dostoevsky