The past few decades have seen the rise of two very different alternatives to the traditional criminal justice system: private police and restorative justice programs. These two approaches arise out of very different causes - the first is an effort by private citizens to obtain greater and more responsive crime control, and the second is a movement aimed at addressing the psychological needs of victims and perpetrators of crimes. Each of these approaches represents a revolutionary paradigm shift as to how criminal justice is administered in this country - and yet each of these movements has been limited in its impact on the current criminal justice system. The privatization movement has been restricted to the law enforcement stage of the criminal justice system, while the restorative justice movement has been dependent upon state support. The article's thesis is that it is only a matter of time before these two movements combine, thereby creating a viable private alternative to the public criminal justice system.

Note: This article's coverage may be more limited than the presentation, but two things are of interest. First, all the safety tips have to do with police activity or victim support after a crime. Second, only 12 people came to the session.

Once a month, staff conduct an educational session for families who believe they may have a loved one that is experiencing domestic abuse. Victim advocates provide information and advice on how to intervene in a way that is helpful and supportive to victims. Additionally, staff provides training and consultation for employers on how to recognize and address domestic violence affecting the workplace. All of which are designed to keep people safe and to identify domestic violence cases before another tragedy occurs.

If we think in terms of restorativeness when assessing programmes and practices, we can respond to problems (and even successes) by considering ways in which the intervention might be made more restorative. What might this look like.

If restorative justice is not a programme but rather a philosophy or set of values, then it is not useful to speak in terms of "having it" or "not having it." Instead, we would speak in terms of how restorative our programmes and processes are. How does one measure restorativeness?

Many of us have had the experience of talking about restorative justice with someone who immediately says, "We already have that," and then goes on to describe a restitution or community service programme. It is almost as though people have a checklist of innovations, and they have ticked the box for restorative justice.

The recent shootings at Virginia Tech raised a number of continuing questions about how to inform students (at universities), workers (at businesses) and presumably other members of large groups about crises as they happen.

Victim impact statements serve an important role in allowing victims a voice in the criminal justice system. But it is a limited voice, as several recent news articles remind us.

The son of murdered Tokoroa school teacher Lois Dear is outraged he cannot tell her killer exactly what he thinks of him... . He admits it contains some strong sentiments about Te Hiko and the judicial system, but he says Te Hiko needs to know he thinks of him.

Both common law and continental law systems base civil liability on the compensatory principal: The victim of a wrongful act should be made whole by the restitution of compensatory damages. However, most common law jurisdictions recognize the mechanism of punitive or exemplary damages, which reward the victim over and above the amount of the actual loss.