In the traditional form of legal court proceedings, many victims complain of feeling ignored, neglected, or even abused, because the State doesn’t care about the crime as personally as the victim does. Currently, a crime is considered to be a law broken, and the offense is against the State. The State considers the crime to be primarily its concern, and the victim has limited input.

• Also, the courtroom is a warlike setting where one side “wins” and the other “loses.” What’s more, the defendant is trying to admit or explain as little as possible, leaving the victim with many unanswered questions. In this type of traditional justice system, the person who is harmed or left behind has little say in the process.

Restorative Justice is an alternative to the traditional justice system. The restorative process aims to bring humanity back to the legal process with a belief that it is relationships that are broken, and that the offense is against another human being.

The primary focus here is on what the victim needs and what the individual convicted for committing the crime can do to repair the harm that has been done, as much as possible. The survivor has a voice in Restorative Justice.

Note: Restorative Justice cannot be done if there are appeals, civil suits or parole processes pending.

VICTIM-OFFENDER DIALOGS

The needs of the survivor are addressed in a series of meetings called “victim-offender dialogs,” held separately with the survivor and with the individual who committed the crime, under the guidance of a facilitator.

• In order for the dialog to take place, the individual who committed the crime must admit responsibility for the offense, and is asked to consider their past actions and their possible impacts. Note that they need not be remorseful, but only admit to wrongdoing.

• Each party talks separately with the facilitator. These separate sessions may occur a number of times to encourage introspection, insight and reality-based observations. Letters between the victim and the individual who committed the crime might be exchanged at some stage, but only if this is agreeable to the victim-survivor.

Finally, with the facilitator present, the process may result in a face-to-face meeting. The survivor can express the impact of the crime on his or her life; it obliges the individual who committed the crime to understand that the crime has harmed another person, not the State. It also allows the person harmed to learn details of the crime that only the person who committed the crime will know.

This meeting can happen at any time. It is not unusual, for example, for meetings to take place years after the event, after the individual who committed the crime has been sentenced and is in jail. That person may be the only one who can answer questions about the last moments in a loved one’s life, and/or the reasons behind their actions.

PREPARATIONS

It’s important to know what your expectations are, and to share these with your facilitator. For example, you might want to find answers, and/or focus on the impact of the crime, and/or hear an apology, and/or even offer forgiveness. Be aware that you might not hear what you want to hear, which might distress you more. For example, the individual may admit to harming you or your loved one, but not express regret. Engaging in this process may be emotionally difficult and is a very personal choice.

A facilitator will typically ask you to write out a list of questions that the facilitator will ask on your behalf. This offers a way to communicate directly about what happened, rather than get information that would filter out from a trial. You may wonder how truthful the individual would be, but the chances are greater to have more honesty, since it does not involve court punishment. Also, an experienced facilitator is trained to get greater openness.

It may be possible to get some financial restitution, where the individual who committed the crime helps pay back for losses. But beware of making this your only expectation. Sometimes an apology can be a way of making amends, but even this may not be forthcoming.

Restorative Justice is not for everyone, but it can be invaluable in some situations, such as those in which the court system is unable to proceed in your case. Of course you should not feel it reflects badly on you if this is not something that interests you.

I found out about Restorative Justice through a grief group meeting and thought it an excellent idea. The killer died before going to trial, and there was no trial for his wife (who was indicted as an accessory after the fact) after Hurricane Katrina destroyed evidence. I then turned to Restorative Justice using a local group, now part of Community Mediation Services.

I found this to be tougher and more emotional work than I imagined. However, despite my resistance to it, there was information I’m convinced I would never have received otherwise. I was able to get more in-depth information about the killer’s mindset and problems, things that I had just been guessing at before going through this process.

Going through the justice system often left me feeling frustrated and pessimistic. Restorative Justice changed this, since I chose the questions and could respond to the answers. Some of my friends thought I was crazy to talk to this woman, but others understood my interest. But the bottom line is that I did this for myself. In some ways it was a movement toward bringing forgiveness into view, though I am still working on it.

In the intervening years, the killer’s wife has declined further contact with the facilitator, with her attorney saying she wanted to put this behind her. It is infuriating but anything coerced will be fruitless. Only time will tell if she will come to a more open place, and then I wonder how much she will choose to recall. Still, I have absolutely no regrets in having entered this process, as it afforded a human connection that would never have happened otherwise. - Rose