Introduction
The Washington County Court Services have been vested in an overall criminals Justice response to crime and policies have change gradually with time. The main focus have been on the competing issues such as safety of the public, preclusion, sentence, rehabilitation of the victims, response to offender’s need and prevention (Schmalleger, F.,2007). Remaining open to new ideas Washington Country Court Service have been continuing looking at the restorative justice principles. Some of the main issues at hand that are being dealt with and are projected for the next 50 years are; developing and maintaining a Continuum of Community based options, Integration of Restorative Justice Principles across the Department, and Leadership Transition.
Main body
There has been a continuum at this Court that expands the resources for dealing with the victims and the offenders. Thinking outside the box is the main theme. This assumption implies that people should view the restoration justice as a philosophy and principles other than looking at it as a packed program. The former held notion about unaccepted restorative justice and the victim offender mediation has been reviewed and now the aim of this Court is to restore the relationship between the offenders and the victims and at the same time offer rehabilitation programs for the victims. According to Court director, this process is evolving and they cannot afford to be locked into one way.
The integration for the restorative justice principles across the various departments for the response to offenders and victims has been ongoing process. This policy aimed at altering the administrative threatening and vitational behavior towards the offenders. The implementation of the policies has been in progress and more reforms in this policy are expected in the future. Progress is made within some probation departments as the administrators intend to put up three components of victims, offenders and the community into a concrete manner. This policy also will focuses on the career advancement and look into salaries of the members (Clear, T.R. & Corbett, R.P.1999).
Lastly, another main focus of the Court service is the Leadership Transition. This policies look at the life of the leaders especially after retirement. There is no anyone who is indispensable in this reform. According to the Court director the community participation and collaboration with those who are working in the system and the continuous efforts at training would definitely transform the transition in the future.
Community Members/Groups: The department continues to work with the community members and the family agencies to develop services, to establish recommendation guidelines and to assess the extent to which the services were restorative. On the other hand the representatives of the groups are often included in ad hoc committees in the department that were concerns with the similar issues. According Schmalleger, F. (2007) the representatives reported that they have considered department as a technical support resource center.
The ongoing partnership can be seen in the community justice department which have worked withy the representatives from the communities in Washington country. Their main objective is to establish a community council circle and seeks for fund to support this program. The participant from the community assumed the importance of the restorative justice collaboration by taking time to set up a successful process.
Normally, the members of the community are invited to attend seminars and training by the department. The community representatives organize the training programs and may even serve as a trainer. This program is highly regarded and those who have trained normally recommend it to other offenders-victims in the community. During the training session, the trainees exchange information and this is a significant way of creating good relationships among various interest groups in the community, departmental staff, and criminal justice personnel.
Criminal Justice Decision makers: Collaboration efforts with the criminal justice decision makers in Washington country takes place formally and informally. For example in 1990s the discussion concerning the relationship between the offender and the victims were done within the community advisory board context. Presenting options of the program before the board is one way in which the board generates new ideas. Supports for the board over the last years up to date have been in frontline with restitution, and active in offender-victim mediation. The administrator views the board as a place where players could come to survey new information as well as view their concerns.
It allows or restorative justice to take place and promote movement towards the main concerns for the victims and seek ways to reintegrate the offenders back into the community. Judges in the Washington Court are supportive to the restorative programs and in most cases the use victims-offenders intervention and they service the board by using sentence (Camp, C., & Camp, G. 1997).
Conclusion
Washington Country Court Service has shown the ability to institute long-term change without a precipitating crisis or without the typical charismatic leadership. This has been achieved through an established commitment to community based services and working mutually with the community groups and decision makers in the criminal justice.
Reference
Schmalleger, F. (2007). Criminal justice today (9th Ed.), Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. ISBN 0-13-171950-5.
Clear, T.R. & Corbett, R.P.(1999). Community Corrections of Place. Perspectives Winter (23)1: 24-31.
Camp, C., & Camp, G. (1997). The corrections yearbook. South Salem, NY: Criminal Justice Institute.