It is well known that being victimized or losing a loved one through victimization can be a traumatizing experience, and so the criminal justice system acknowledges this fact and seeks to make the victims and society "whole again" (Schmalleger, 2015, p. 343). Through retribution and Incapacitation the criminal may be punished, however it 's through restoration that the victim may really begin the mending process. For example, in the case of Teresa, the secondary victims of this case, Jamie 's parents, may be compensated via restitution paid by the criminal, for any funneral expenses, therapy, or to replace any property stolen or broken. As the criminal, Teresa may even write a formal apology to the family owning up to her crime and taking responsibility for her actions. Through restoration the victims and their families might also get to tell their story and be heard, experience empathy from the offender and their community, and get information related to the criminal and criminal proceedings (Susan Herman, 2000 ). So unlike many of the other sentencing goals, restoration comes after a crime has been committed and is concentrated on the well being of the victims more than the punishment of the criminal. Although, restoration can only be effective when a crime has been investigated, the criminal has been caught and tried, and hinges a lot on whether or not a criminal wants to take part in the restoration (Susan Herman, 2000). So if Teresa is not made by the court to pay a restutition fee, and if she does not own up to her crime or make a formal apology, then Jamies parents will not receive many of the benefits of restorative justice. In truth, restoration is less about punishment and more about
It is well known that being victimized or losing a loved one through victimization can be a traumatizing experience, and so the criminal justice system acknowledges this fact and seeks to make the victims and society "whole again" (Schmalleger, 2015, p. 343). Through retribution and Incapacitation the criminal may be punished, however it 's through restoration that the victim may really begin the mending process. For example, in the case of Teresa, the secondary victims of this case, Jamie 's parents, may be compensated via restitution paid by the criminal, for any funneral expenses, therapy, or to replace any property stolen or broken. As the criminal, Teresa may even write a formal apology to the family owning up to her crime and taking responsibility for her actions. Through restoration the victims and their families might also get to tell their story and be heard, experience empathy from the offender and their community, and get information related to the criminal and criminal proceedings (Susan Herman, 2000 ). So unlike many of the other sentencing goals, restoration comes after a crime has been committed and is concentrated on the well being of the victims more than the punishment of the criminal. Although, restoration can only be effective when a crime has been investigated, the criminal has been caught and tried, and hinges a lot on whether or not a criminal wants to take part in the restoration (Susan Herman, 2000). So if Teresa is not made by the court to pay a restutition fee, and if she does not own up to her crime or make a formal apology, then Jamies parents will not receive many of the benefits of restorative justice. In truth, restoration is less about punishment and more about