State Representative Jill Schupp (D-Creve Coeur) arranged for the Department of Corrections Director  George Lombardi to speak to a group of about 100 people last week at the Creve Coeur Community Center about what the department is doing by way of restorative justice programs.

I went with a question about the influence of private prison contracts, but I was fascinated with what Mr. Lombardi had to say on many other topics.

The whole idea behind the growing interest in restorative justice projects is to give offenders an opportunity to understand how their actions affect the whole community and to offer them a chance to give something back.  “The giving is in the getting,” as Mr. Lombardi says.  Not all offenders are reachable in terms of learning to feel compassion for others, but those who do go through the curriculum designed for this purpose say it is very powerful.

One of the most emotional classes during the program is a visit from parents of murdered children.  They share what their loss has meant to them and how they have to deal with that loss every day.  Mr. Lombardi said it is not uncommon to see the toughest of tough guys cry during one of these sessions.

Those who are able to complete the curriculum have several choices for giving back to the community.  Some inmates make the materials that are given to public school teachers through the Kids Smart program.  Several prisons have gardens and give huge quantities of produce to local food pantries.

At the Vandalia  prison for women, inmates train dogs to help disabled people as part of the CHANCE program.  The women have trained 50 dogs, mostly golden and Labrador retrievers, that are now out there living with people with disabilities.

A new program is one where dogs who are homeless but adoptable with some training are given basic socializing and time to adjust to people before being put up for adoption by local shelters.  Mr. Lombardi told the story of Sparky, a deaf dachshund at  the maximum security prison near Licking, Mo.  A deaf inmate suggested the dog be trained by stomping on the floor to get his attention, and it worked.  The dog was able to learn to respond to five different hand signals and was eventually given to the Fulton School for the Deaf as a gift.  Lombardi said that story made People Magazine and newspapers as far away as London.

A blind and deaf Australian shepherd was brought to the Southeast Correctional Center at age six and has 17 transition after their release.   This is not something we hear about on TV or read about in the newspapers.  And that’s too bad.  

Lombardi said that the DOC graduates the largest number of GED students in the state and has 17 different vocational certificates that offenders can earn so they are employable when they are released.    

When asked about the best way to keep young people from getting into the criminal culture, Lombardi was emphatic the quality early childhood education is the key.  The state could save a ton of money by providing the education small children need rather than waiting until young people end up in the prison system to start educating them.  This confirms what many social justice advocates have been saying for decades, but the message falls on deaf ears.  I wonder why we are able to train  deaf and blind dogs but not deaf and blind people !!

I knew Mr. Lombardi was the real deal when he said he sets aside time to go to a daycare center for low income families in Jefferson City to read to the 3-4 year olds.  We could all benefit from his example.

I did get to ask my question about the use of inmates for slave labor by private corporations. The federal prison system is notorious for doing that.  Lombardi said he is totally opposed to private prisons and a Missouri law was passed back in the 1970’s that prohibits using prisoners for private company profit.  (I’m surprised the Repugs currently in charge of the legislature haven’t repealed that law so their corporate sponsors can rake in even more profit.)

As much as I was impressed with Mr. Lombardi,  it was also encouraging to hear from the folks in the audience that day.  There are many, many wonderful groups working to help keep people out of the prison system, advocating for inmates with special needs and helping during the transition after their release.   This is not something we hear about on TV or read about in the newspapers.  And that’s too bad.  

Check out the Department of Corrections website for photos of the dogs and other interesting information.  www.doc.mo.gov  

It’s painful to face someone and apologize when you know you really screwed up–so much so that some people can’t, or won’t, do it.  But most of us know that only an apology will give us any peace, especially if it is accepted graciously.  Better to face the person you’ve hurt and fess up than have the memory of your wrongdoing keep stinging you. 

A group in Missouri is working to improve our justice system by applying that bit of common sense. Restorative Justice arranges for criminal offenders to face their victims, apologize, and hear what the victims have to say about what happened.  The offender may also hear what restitution the victim wants from him.

Quite a few jurisdictions use such conferences in juvenile cases.  C.J. Larkin, who teaches mediation at Wash. U. Law School, oversees them regularly.  Typically, she tells an offender before they face the victim that he is expected to admit what he did, say he’s sorry, listen to the victim, and be willing to make restitution.

Larkin described a case where three teenage girls went for a ride in a stolen car.  They didn’t steal it, but they knew it was stolen, and the car was damaged before it was returned to its owner.  Two of the girls eventually faced a restorative justice hearing with the victim. 

Larkin said that the first girl was not particularly articulate, and Larkin had some doubts that the girl would do an adequate job of apologizing, but that turned out not to be a problem.  The girl did fine in the conference.

The second girl was, by this time, in college–quite an articulate young woman–so Larkin was not concerned about her ability to offer a clear apology.  Wrong.  When asked what she had to say to the victim, Girl Two said, “I don’t want to talk about it.  If she wants to ask me questions, she can.”  At which point, Larkin asked to talk to the girl in the hall.

When they were alone, the mediator told the girl that she knew she was to admit what she’d done and say she was sorry.  “Are you giving the impression you’re sorry?” Larkin asked her.  The girl replied that she was so embarrassed about what she’d done that she didn’t want to talk about it.  Larkin told her to simply explain that to the victim–which the girl did.  The rest of the conference was fine.  Both girls were required to help pay for the damages to the car.  And presumably Girl Two learned a lesson about offering apologies–and about not screwing up in the first place.

Don’t misunderstand:  such conferences don’t necessarily take the place of prison time.  In minor cases, particularly with juveniles, the offender restitution, apology, and community service may be sufficient.  If a teenager has torn up someone’s garden, for example, he may be required to work in that garden a certain number of hours to get it back in shape.

However, with more serious crimes, such conferences between victim and offender would not take the place of prison time, though they might help to determine the sentence.  Two advantages issue from such conferences.  

The first is that the victim isn’t left out of the proceedings.  In traditional criminal proceedings (retributive justice), the system hardly notices the harm done to the victim.  Instead, the focus is on what law has been broken, and the crime is considered a crime against the state.  The victim, if he’s included at all, is merely a prosecution witness and may be allowed to speak at sentencing.  Restorative Justice, on the other hand, gives the victim a chance to face the offender and hear a much needed apology.  (That’s if both parties agree to the conference.  Neither side is forced into it.)

The second advantage is that offenders are more likely to face their own culpability.  Too often, the traditional trial is a dance of motions and counter motions, often designed to keep relevant evidence from being presented so that the offender may get off on a technicality.  If he is convicted, he often allows himself to believe that “the system” railroaded him and indulges himself in feeling resentful about that.  But if he has faced his victim, admitted what he did, and apologized, then the prison time is atonement.

The Restorative Justice movement is gaining momentum worldwide.  Nina Balsam, Director of Restorative Justice in Missouri, says that this system of dealing with crimes began among Native Americans and the Maoris in New Zealand.  Now it’s gaining strength on every continent–well, not Antarctica. 

In Missouri, 14 out of 45 juvenile courts use restorative justice conferences.  But Balsam would like to see it adopted statewide.  She says that prosecutors are a tough sell as far as adopting these techniques, and so is the legislature.  Attempts to pass a law mandating the use of restorative justice in the juvenile system failed to get a hearing in the last two legislative sessions.  Her group will try again this year.

Those in authority who resist these programs don’t know what they’re missing.  Studies on them done in other states show that offenders who apologize are more likely to honor restitution agreements (on average 19 out of 20 comply with the terms of the agreements), that recidivism is reduced by 74%, and that PTSD is markedly reduced among victims.

If you’d like to know more:

The St. Louis Area Restorative Justice Collaboration and the Missouri Restorative Justice Coalition are sponsoring a showing of the award-winning film Beyond Conviction at The Ethical Society of St. Louis, 9001 Clayton Road , 7:00 pm.  The showing is tonight, October 13th.

Beyond Conviction tells the moving story of three crime victims on a journey toward healing and resolution. The film follows participants in a pioneering program run by the state of Pennsylvania in which victims of the most violent crimes meet face-to-face with their perpetrators. Free and open to the public.