Case Study 1: Jamie and Alex
The following is an account of two teenage boys involved in the same crime. After reading the cases, discuss them by answering the questions.
A local community hall has been vandalized: windows broken, offensive and racist graffiti painted on the outside walls, fire damage to a door. After an investigation, police arrest Jamie, a 17 year old who lives in the neighborhood, and his friend Alex, also 17.
Jamie's Case
Jamie has no prior criminal record, and no record of any other offenses. He is referred by police to the local Youth Justice Committee. The committee is made up of trained volunteers from the community. They look over Jamie's case and decide that he would be a good candidate for a restorative justice process. The Committee arranges for Jamie to meet with some members of the community, including active community league members. Jamie reluctantly agrees to the meeting.
At the meeting, which is held at the community hall, a mediator asks each person in turn to talk about the hall vandalism, and how it has affected them. Jamie listens as each person tells their story: a woman who is afraid to take her children to the park near the hall; a man who was deeply hurt by the racist graffiti because he is a member of the racial group; volunteers who just finished painting and renovating the hall three months ago, and have no idea where the money will come from to repair the damage. Jamie is then asked to tell his own story, and to answer questions from the others about why he did it. The group then discussed how the harm should be repaired, and after a while it was agreed that Jamie should pay for paint, glass, and any other materials needed to repair the hall, and to work for 4 consecutive weekends repairing the damage with the hall custodian.
After the meeting, some community members felt good about the process, while a few thought Jamie was "getting off lightly". Jamie said that the experience made him see how many people he had harmed by his careless and thoughtless act, and what he thought was just "letting off steam" had real consequences. Each weekend, Jamie and the hall's custodian worked on repairing the hall. After 3 weekends, the work was done, so he offered to help out with some routine maintenance jobs. That fall, Jamie volunteered to help the custodian by doing renovations to the community hall's kitchen, and learned he had a real knack for carpentry. Jamie now does renovation jobs part-time in the neighborhood, and plans to apprentice as a cabinetmaker.
Alex's Case
Alex has had several previous convictions, mainly for property damage, burglary, and two drug-related offenses. He is offered the VORP (Victim-Offender Reconciliation Program) process by the Youth Justice Committee, but he refuses, convinced it is a waste of his time. Based on his refusal, the Committee decides there is no alternative but to send him back to the courts. There is a trial, and Alex is found guilty of the offense. In sentencing, the judge tells Alex that normally she would give a lighter sentence for the crime he's committed, but because this is the latest in a long list of convictions for Alex, stricter measures must be taken. Alex is sentenced to a period of custody and probation. While in custody, Alex begins hanging out with known gang members who are also in custody. He becomes involved in a gang, and two years later, is charged, tried and convicted for a major drug offense. Five years later, he is released, but continues to be involved in drug and gang activity.
Evaluation Questions:
Describe the differences between Jamie's and Alex's stories by answering the following questions.
1) What principles of restorative justice are applied in Jamie's case? Use what you learned in the course to identify the principles.
2) Who were the victims of Jamie's and Alex's crime? Can you think of other victims that may not have been mentioned?
3) How did Jamie benefit from the restorative justice process?
4) How did the community members benefit from the process?
5) How might Alex have benefitted from the process?