Restorative Justice and Police: An Eventful Journey.

The story you are about to read is entirely true. Although the events and opportunities described in this article are the personal experiences of the author, it is intended that the main focus should be that of the journey itself, and its role in enabling the meteoric development of Restorative Justice in , Leicestershire and from the year 2000 to 2009.

As a restorative practitioner, Police Officer and Fulbright Scholar, my Restorative Justice (RJ) story first began back in October 1999 when I was selected to represent Leicestershire Constabulary on a secondment to the newly formed Leicestershire County Youth Offending Service (LYOS). Within weeks of this appointment, I had completed a five day training course facilitated by to learn about restorative conferencing. There were however, no opportunities at this time within the LYOS to put this learning into practice as the concept of RJ was yet to be embraced as a formal intervention tool.

In fact, it was some twelve months later that I was asked to ‘pilot’ the use of RJ within my case load of young people who had received a final warning from the Police. I discovered that there were in fact many opportunities to work restoratively between young people who offend and the victims of those crimes once the principles were explained, and the choices were made available to those involved. In a very short space of time, and having facilitated a number of reasonably challenging face to face meetings, my commitment and passion for this work began.

LYOS management decided that a dedicated team was to be the way forward and following a formal interview process, the post of RJ and Reparation Development Officer became my own. The role evolved into two main areas of responsibility. The first was to manage a team of paid LYOS workers whose main priority was the one to one supervision of young people engaged in reparation work to make amends either direct to the victim of their offending behaviour, or to benefit the wider community. We developed a wide range of creative ‘community pay back’ placements across the county to reflect the diversity of local needs and to engage young people in meaningful unpaid work. For example, a wood workshop where bird and bat boxes etc. made by the young people were sold (often to their parents), and the proceeds benefited local children’s and adult hospices. Gardening and painting work was carried out in public places like schools, youth/ community centres and parks across the county with full support of local councils, as well as a number of individually tailored placements specifically requested by victims of crime. In 2005, the reparation team won two national ‘Green Apple’ awards which were presented to us by a local MP at the House of Commons in London. The awards were judged upon multi agency working with innovative community schemes on environmental projects carried out by young people making amends for offensive behaviour.

The second part of my role was the assessment, preparation and facilitation of face to face restorative conferences between victims and offenders at any stage of their involvement with the youth justice system. Referrals for this service came from victims, offenders, family members and LYOS workers as well as professionals from external agencies, including Police colleagues. During the seven years that I worked in this role, I facilitated approximately two hundred such meetings with offences ranging from minor thefts to very serious assaults which included two cases of a serious sexual nature. In 2003 I was the single largest contributor to a book published by Mediation UK entitled; ‘40 CASES Restorative Justice and Victim- Offender Mediation’. This book is written by RJ practitioners for the benefit of other workers in the field and as a teaching tool. The book features five of my own case studies particularly selected to highlight a variety of scenarios, each demonstrating different learning points and outcomes.

In April 2006, I was awarded a Fulbright Police Fellow Scholarship. The Fulbright Program, established in 1946 by Senator J. William Fulbright, is an international educational exchange programme sponsored by the U.S. government, designed to increase mutual understanding between the people of the U.S. and those of other countries. The title of my research project was ‘An Examination of Restorative Justice in the Neighbourhood Policing Context’. The project application process was supported by LYOS senior management team leader, Mr A young man found smoking Phil Hawkins and cannabis on church premises Leicestershire Constabulary agrees to pick up litter from Chief , Mr Matt the churchyard. Baggott. I spent six months from the end of March to the end of September 2007 living in Rochester, New York, USA learning about, and understanding how Americans, locally and nationally, interpret and practice RJ. Rochester has the highest homicide rate per capita from gun and gang crime in the entire state of New York. I worked alongside a ‘not for profit’ organisation called Finger Lakes Restorative Justice Center, - since re-named Partners in Restorative Initiatives (PiRI). I took part in their peacemaking circle training programme for schools and assisted with their efforts to promote the use of RJ within neighbourhoods, the judicial system and educational establishments.

I also spent time with the Rochester Police Department (RPD) which provided a valuable insight into individual and organisational attitudes towards RJ as well as a fascinating comparative study against various other aspects of Policing in the UK. RPD’s victim department incorporates a Junior Accountability Conference (JAC) programme managed by a non-Police co-ordinator who facilitates RJ conferences referred by local schools. PiRI are called upon to assist at busy times. Statistical data derived from projects commissioned by government agencies in the city to support (or otherwise), a more formalised and generic use of RJ collated by the Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT) informed my research.

I capitalised on many travel opportunities in the US, and had the great fortune to meet with some significant people connected with the international RJ scene, including the author, and so called’ grandfather of RJ’- Mr Howard Zehr, at a Mennonite conference in Harrisonburg, Virginia. His workshop was visionary and exciting; I was honoured to have been invited to share some of my UK experiences with him and his audience. Mark Yantzi, Executive Director of Community Justice Initiatives in Kitchener, Ontario, Canada, a leader in establishing the modern Restorative Justice movement since 1974, was the inspirational keynote speaker at the FLRJC Western New York conference in Genesee County, Batavia, New York, in 2006 where I was invited to lead a work shop to present my work. I had a memorable conversation with Kay Pranis; the renowned author, peacemaking circle practitioner and trainer from Minnesota. Kay shared some of her incredible experiences and her knowledge and passion for the subject and offered her support to my research.

I was fortunate also in having the opportunity to speak to a number of anonymous, ‘unsung RJ heroes’ whom for many years have selflessly pursued their ideological and practical aspirations in the development of RJ projects in a variety of settings within the US receiving little or no recognition for such excellent work. Among these were Police Officers, social workers, probation officers, lawyers, teachers and community volunteers. I believe that it should be recognised and appreciated that a very similar situation continues to exist within the RJ community here in the UK.

I spent two days with the CFS Buxmont Academy at the International institute of Restorative Practice (IIRP) based in Bethlehem Pennsylvania. I was a member of a world wide audience invited to observe students and staff working together in a school whose ideal is to foster social discipline by exercising high levels of control and support through the ‘circle process’ to provide a restorative and ‘communitarian’ environment. Most of the students, we were told, came from seriously dysfunctional backgrounds with some having faced incarceration prior to their referral to the school. The regime allows participants to gain an understanding of the impact of their words or actions on others, and to have a say, whilst also recognising that there are consequences for unacceptable behaviour. Watching those young people engaging in the educational curriculum and behaving calmly and respectfully towards staff and peers was heartening to say the least. Importantly, the young people seemed to be happy and openly talked to us about their individual experiences of the school and the challenges that they face when trying to apply restorative principles in their lives outside of school. I can honestly say that in twenty three years of Police experience, had I not seen the behaviours of the young people within this school with my own eyes, I would not have believed such transformations possible.

On a personal level, the privileged contact that I had with so many like- minded people ( including the Amish and Mennonite communities), throughout the US and Canada, for me, incorporated a global, spiritual, even religious dimension which had been otherwise lacking from my understanding of the true meaning of restorative work.

The benefits of the Fulbright experience and my work with LYOS were to be put to use on my return to the UK in ways that I could never have anticipated and had only ever dreamed about. Initially, the Young man removing sooty plan was to introduce stain left from when he restorative practice into threw a lit aerosol can at the mainstream Policing as a pilot building. project with two neighbourhood beat teams each based on an estate in the Leicester City area. The pilot was to run from 1st April 2008 for three months and if it proved successful then it would be rolled out across the organisation. A policy document setting out guidance for its use (i.e. which offences and offenders were deemed suitable or otherwise), and procedural guidance around its application was produced. After much discussion and deliberation, a training provider (Restorative Solutions) was commissioned for one session on the basis that I would co-train the ‘Restorative Approaches in Neighbourhoods’ (RAiN) session with one of their trainers, and from then onwards, given my experience of the subject, I would train other colleagues using the packs provided. Every neighbourhood beat officer and Police Community Support Officer (PCSO) and some key partner agency representatives based within the identified pilot area were trained in a full day to the ‘street’ or ‘instant’ RJ level one standard. The training was adapted to meet our local needs, with the emphasis placed on meeting the precise needs of the victim, rather than being based on an assumption that a face to face RJ conference in the majority of cases is a ‘one size fits all’ solution.

However, towards the end of March 2008 and before the April 1st pilot start date, significant events came about that would rather spectacularly supersede the scale of this planned localised scheme. In a recently published report outlining a major review of Policing produced by Sir Ronnie Flanagan, Leicestershire Constabulary had been identified as one of four Police Forces in the UK, together with Surrey, Staffordshire and West Midlands, to pilot its recommendations. Before writing his report, Sir Ronnie Flanagan, former Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary, then based within Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) at the Home Office, carried out some extensive research on a national basis.

The findings outlined the following;

‘The current Police approach to dealing with local crime issues such as damage, anti-social behaviour and minor assaults is clumsy, officers are encouraged to criminalise people for behaviour which may have caused offence but would be better dealt with in a different way. Complainants are dissatisfied because they want help rather than a criminal justice outcome’.

Some of the recommendations of the report highlighted the need for;

A) Appropriate reduction in bureaucracy, B) Proportionality in the crime recording process in relation to local crimes. C) Allowing officers to use more discretion, experience, and professional judgement when dealing with local crime, and, D) - significantly for the readers of this article- placing more emphasis on ‘community resolution’ (based on RJ principles) to provide a more citizen focussed service.

The governance structure for the pilot consisted of a programme steering group with representation from the Home Office, the National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA), HMIC, and the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) as well as individual force project teams. The programme explored a departure from the sanction detection performance culture in response to a change in the wishes and needs of the public, enabling them to contribute towards the outcome of crimes and incidents through local community resolutions. All four forces developed a variety of work streams, including surveys, evaluation of training and monitoring of outputs over the course of the intervention, based on a framework of agreed principles.

This was an exciting development, and although the initial Leicester City based pilot did go ahead and was a success in its own right, it would be fair to say that the successful implementation of a review of this scale would fundamentally change the way we Police our communities in the UK for the better. Leicestershire’s pilot manager, Chief Inspector Richard Keenan, invited me to work with him to roll out the initial training to all front line staff across the Force. Deadlines were tight; approximately twelve hundred staff members received the input in sixty two sessions in a matter of thirty days. In order to achieve this target, the sessions were reduced to three hours. This allowed sufficient time for us to deliver;

1) An overview of the Flanagan report (to provide the context) 2) A basic insight into restorative practices using live examples, and 3) An understanding of the simplified process and procedures now in place.

There were mixed reactions from front line staff during the training sessions, but what was seen as ‘common sense Policing’ was generally welcomed. The pilot went live across the entire force in Leicestershire on 1st July 2008. Early signs from surveys across all four pilot sites indicated significant increases in both customer and staff satisfaction. Victims were asked about their experiences and were generally found to be supportive of the process of community resolution and thought it was appropriate to their incident, the offence and the offender. They liked the idea of not criminalising the offender and resolving issues outside of the traditional legal system. Staff welcomed the opportunity to have greater flexibility, particularly highlighted around the requirement to arrest for minor offences due to the need to meet performance targets, when the victim did not want formal Police action. Feedback from operational officers indicated that as a result of this initiative, the proportionate recording of crime and the manner in which it is resolved, has freed up time to allow them to focus on what matters.

Above: Three young people cleaning their graffiti from a Charity building following agreement with the victim (Multiple Sclerosis Charity Centre manager pictured centre). There has been no further incidents of graffiti – in fact the young people concerened took to ‘policing’ the wall to protect their hard work!

For the purpose of the pilot, ‘local crime’ was identified as minor theft, damage and assaults, anti social behaviour and harassment. Examples of creative, effective and innovative use of community resolution by front line staff soon began to emerge and were used to promote best practice to colleagues via the force website, and in the press for information and reassurance purposes to local communities.

Outcomes to date (July 2008 – March 2009);

2,666 offences have been resolved in Leicestershire using the community resolution process based on RJ principles. Over 2,000 offenders were directly involved in the process. 45% of offenders were juveniles. Re-offending rate for juveniles involved in the process is 18% Victim satisfaction rates have risen from 60% (pre-pilot) to 90% Police time saved from 1st July 2008; over 18,500 hrs.

This selection of random results is by no means comprehensive, merely an encouraging indicator of the effectiveness of the process within a very short time span, carried out by officers with minimal basic awareness training. A full evaluation of the four force pilot is currently being undertaken by the NPIA and the results will be published in due course. There is of course much more to be done to embed a more thorough understanding of RJ principles into the organisation. I have recently delivered bespoke coaching sessions to thirty one personally selected officers, each of whom have shown themselves to have a particular aptitude and interest in restorative work. These officers are now recognised as ‘force champions’ in this field and have agreed to support colleagues with RJ and promote its use where appropriate. Partner agencies are also a vital resource and will be included where possible in the next phase of coaching due to be rolled out to the neighbourhood beat teams where more emphasis will be placed on the development of RJ conferencing skills.

I could say that my RJ journey ends here, but that would be far from the truth. On a personal level it feels more like an exciting beginning, on a powerful vehicle that has the potential to take restorative justice to the place where it belongs; in the heart of our communities.

Sandie Hastings. Police Constable Leicestershire Constabulary, UK July 2009