Week 2

Week 2

Two new faces joined us today: replacing the prisoner who had been at an immigration hearing and who will be sent home and another who, despite the hold which is meant to keep him with us for the course, has been moved.  Both new men are keen to be with us which is encouraging and should mean they will catch up. 

Lots to get through today: our extended introduction last week means that as well as showing the first episode of the course film I need to allow time for a good discussion of the principles of Restorative Justice (RJ) and some the arguments about criminal justice.

We start with a review of the first week and then watch the first film. The film identifies four ways RJ might be played out: victim-offender mediations or conferences, offenders making amends by putting something back through work programmes or mentoring schemes for example and the question of taking responsibility by writing to a victim to say sorry properly.  

I talk about “taking responsibility” and also the way our justice system focuses on offenders rather than victims or community – victims are often left on the side-lines by the wheels of the criminal justice system leaving them revengeful, unsatisfied, ignored, and still hurting.  A restorative approach focuses on harm done, looks at the needs of those harmed and asks who is responsible for meeting those needs.  A restorative approach allows us to look at the full impact of crime, at victims and communities affected by crime but it also allows us to consider the offender and his family - who are all affected by the crime and by the offender’s criminal behaviour. We talk about any experiences the men have had and some comment on community sentences – they don’t think much of them – they have no effect, don’t connect them with their crimes and give them no sense of achievement or satisfaction.  This course has great timing because we have recently given comments on the Government’s Green Paper – “The Rehabilitation Revolution” – suddenly this RJ thing that in the past no one knew about is being talked about.

We follow that exploration of what RJ is all about with a visit back to Jericho 2000 years ago -  back to Zac and with a bit of role play get ourselves into the mind-set of a victim of  Zac’s .  Tony, one of the volunteers ably plays the part by giving us a dramatic presentation as if he were a resident of Jericho 2000 years ago; it gives a bit of colour to the scenario and gets everyone thinking. 

How did Zac’s behaviour affect his victims? With a victim voice the men respond: “it made me poor, stressed, depressed, we suffered family break down, we became angry, revengeful, and desperate….”  The men are adamant that behaviour like Zac’s would have had a big impact.  And they wanted Zac to understand what they had gone through, to have their money back, for him to be sympathetic and understanding. 

There is a bit of banter between two or three individuals in different groups but it is good natured. 

In the break the two newcomers get the course registration paperwork done so I can register them with Open College Network (OCN) (a bonus of the course is that it is accredited with  OCN allowing the men whose work is up to standard to get ad OCN credit at level 2).  I speak to both newcomers – they will have two week’s work to get done this week and one admits that he can read a little but really needs help with this writing – his literacy level is very poor.  However, he has a brother in prison with him and thinks he may be able to help him.  He is an articulate young man and so I don’t doubt his ability to think the issues through but make it clear he has to ensure it is his work – even if his brother is acting as scribe. 

After the break we consider the concept of “making excuses” and, after imagining what Zac might have said we talk about why offenders make excuses: to justify their actions, because they believe there are the reasons for their behaviour and to avoid responsibility. 

I then introduce them to the Woolf Within – a film interview of an offender and his victim with the scenes of the crime acted out – watch it on You Tube .  The film causes a disruption: someone (let’s call him Bob) claims to know Peter Woolf (quite possible as Peter, by his own admission had spent many years in prison).  Then as the film ends I am challenged – two of them say they know that it is all a lie as Peter has been arrested recently on a handling charge!  I am really concerned by their attitude  – but also know they are wrong.  I have met Peter and know he has truly turned life around.  I assure them of that fact but am met with suspicion – a couple of them refuse to believe me – in a kindly way another man tells me that it doesn’t worry him as he thinks the film makes a very clear point.

I know I am slightly rattled by the reaction to The Woolf Within but have to move on into the most nerve wracking (for me) part of the session – a graphic illustration of the impact of crime.  With all the men gathered around me and with a bowl of water on the floor I talk about how we all like to be in control of our lives, how we like to plan, have aspirations, dreams, goals, but that when crime happens – as I throw an orange into the bowl to make a huge splash – life is disrupted “mess” is created and the ripples go on for a long time.  Next week they will meet someone whose life was turned upside down by the impact of crime…….I don’t say who or what.

We end the session with time in the small groups for each of them to think about their offending and who they affected and how – thinking of the orange in the bowl of water - whose lives did they “mess up”?

Bob, who had forcefully asserted that Peter Woolf was back in prison,  sits to one side looking bolshy.  I go and sit next to him and ask what is up? He tells me he doesn’t want to carry on with the course and that next week he won’t be coming.  I say how sorry I will be about that, but that it is a free choice and I can’t make him come.

He tells me I have humiliated him in front of everyone by disagreeing with him.  I apologise – I did not intend to humiliate. However I disagreed with what he had said.  I ask if he would like to hear it from my perspective?  I explain that, as I had told them, I know Peter and that I know for certain that he hasn’t been on a recent charge. Bob had, in front of the whole group, challenged the integrity of what I was saying and the foundation of the course.  He looked surprised and said “So I undermined you?” “Yes!” !  Bob apologised and said in that case he would return to his small group: ten minutes later, as all have gone back to their cells, his group facilitators tell me he rejoined the group transformed - chatty and positive! Prison has a strange effect on the ego making them incredibly vulnerable to anything they consider a put down but how refreshing to be able to deal with a disagreement and move on – how often we allow things to brew and smoulder.