Citation

Daly K. Br. J. Criminol. 2006; 46(2): 334-356.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2006, Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, Publisher Oxford University Press)

DOI

10.1093/bjc/azi071

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

As restorative justice has grown in popularity worldwide, mainly in response to youth crime, controversy surrounds its use for sexual, partner and family violence cases. With some exceptions, all jurisdictions have put these offences beyond the reach of restorative justice for both youth and adult offenders and, thus, empirical evidence is lacking. This paper presents findings from an archival study of nearly 400 cases of youth sexual assault, which were finalized in court and by conference or formal caution over a six-and-a-half-year period in South Australia, to address these questions: (1) What differentiates a court from a conference case? (2) What happens once a case goes to court, e.g. what share of cases is dismissed and how do penalties vary for court and conference cases? (3) From a victim's point of view, what appears to be the better option--having one's case go to court or conference? Contrary to the concerns raised by critics of conferencing, from a victim's advocacy perspective, the conference process may be less victimizing than the court process and its penalty regime may produce more effective outcomes.