Question 1

Effective victim-offender encounters include:&#10;A) Meeting&#10;B) Understanding&#10;C) Agreement.&#10;D) All of the above.

Accepted Answer

Effective victim-offender encounters include meeting, understanding, and reaching an agreement, as these elements help in the process of restorative justice and reconciliation.

Question 2

The primary goal of encounter programs is to:&#10;A) Teach those who harmed others a lesson about responsibility.&#10;B) Avoid the courtroom if at all possible.&#10;C) Provide a process that both the person harmed and the person causing the harm perceive as fair.&#10;D) Make those who are harmed less angry.

Accepted Answer

Encounter programs aim to provide a process that is perceived as fair by both the person harmed and the person causing the harm, focusing on restorative justice principles rather than punitive measures or avoiding legal proceedings.

Question 3

An encounter allows the person harmed and the person harming to:&#10;A) Clarify for the parties what actually occurred in a crime.&#10;B) Clarify the harms that resulted from the crime.&#10;C) Identify steps to help address the harm.&#10;D) All of the above.

Accepted Answer

An encounter in the context of restorative justice allows for all of the mentioned aspects: clarifying the events and harms of a crime and identifying steps to address the harm. This holistic approach is aimed at healing and resolution for both the victim and the perpetrator.

Question 4

The first use of a restorative encounter in America took place in:&#10;A) Boston, Massachusetts.&#10;B) Chicago, Illinois.&#10;C) Elmira, Ontario&#10;D) Tacoma, Washington.

Accepted Answer

The first use of a restorative encounter in America took place in Elmira, Ontario, in 1974.

Question 5

Because those who have been harmed are in a different moral position from those who have caused the harm, encounter process facilitators:&#10;A) Favor the person harmed in the process.&#10;B) Make sure the parties consider the injustice done and how to repair it.&#10;C) Shame the offender to force them to accept responsibility for what they have done.&#10;D) All of the above.

Accepted Answer

Encounter process facilitators focus on ensuring that all parties consider the injustice that has occurred and collaborate on finding ways to repair the harm. This approach is centered on restorative justice principles, which aim to address and mend the harm caused by wrongdoing, rather than shaming or favoring one party over the other.

Question 6

A family group conference could have a dozen or more people in attendance, including the arresting police officer and other criminal justice representatives.

Accepted Answer

A family group conference is a restorative justice process that brings together the family, victim, and representatives from the criminal justice system, which can include the arresting police officer, to discuss the offense, its impact, and how to repair the harm. The aim is to involve a broad support network in the decision-making process, which can indeed result in a dozen or more attendees.

Question 7

After a circle process has produced a plan by consensus of the whole circle, follow-up circles may be organized to monitor progress.

Accepted Answer

Follow-up circles are often organized after a consensus plan is made to monitor progress, ensure accountability, and make necessary adjustments, reflecting the iterative nature of circle processes.

Question 8

The advantages of circle processes over typical criminal justice proceedings include that lay participation is encouraged, the amount and quality of information is greatly increased, and creative new options for sentencing can be explored.

Accepted Answer

Circle processes, often part of restorative justice, encourage broader participation, including from the community, leading to more information being shared and the exploration of innovative sentencing options beyond traditional punitive measures.

Question 9

Research on drunk driving panels has shown a dramatic change in the attitudes of offenders and in the likelihood of recidivism.

Accepted Answer

Research on drunk driving panels, often involving interventions where offenders hear from victims or families affected by drunk driving, has shown positive changes in the attitudes of offenders towards drunk driving and a decrease in the likelihood of recidivism. These programs aim to personalize the consequences of drunk driving, leading to behavioral changes in some participants.

Question 10

According to the text, although victims should only engage in encounter programs voluntarily, it's okay to use coercive incentives to get offenders to participate.

Accepted Answer

Coercive incentives for offenders to participate in encounter programs undermine the principle of voluntary participation, which is essential for the effectiveness and ethical integrity of such programs.

Deck 5: Encounter