This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: by some critics of restorative justice about difficulties in achieving
equivalency in sanctioning between similar cases when, for example, the same conduct causes
dramatic differences in actual harm, or differences in financial circumstances between offenders
or victims create disparities in reparative debts, falsely assume that current punishments based on
retributive considerations achieve equivalency in punishment. For research and policy
commentary on current gaps in due process and unintended consequences of the adversarial system
and procedures for ensuring equivalency and procedural protection in restorative alternatives, see
Wright (1991); Hackler (1991); Messmer and Otto (1992); Van Ness, (1993); and Elias (1993).
10. While a new research agenda should be launched to explore the impact of balanced and
restorative interventions on victims and communities as well as offenders, an emerging
theoretical base and body of research is supportive of the view that the experience of making
amends for harm done to victims and the community through restitution and unpaid service may
have positive rehabilitative effects (Eglash, 1975; Schneider, 1986; Butts & Snyder, 1991;
Wright, 1991). One cl...
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 02/01/2011 for the course CRJU 4230 taught by Professor Derekallen during the Spring '10 term at Georgia State University, Atlanta.
- Spring '10