Rape, Sexual Assault –

Victim-Offender mediation

Probation Service

Rape, Sexual Assault

Victim-Offender Mediation

A female victim of sexual violence was informed by the Irish Prison Service Victim Liaison Officer  that the perpetrator of the offences against her, a close family member, was due for release in the coming months. A conversation ensued regarding the services available to her, including restorative justice. With her consent, her contact details were forwarded to the Probation Service’s Restorative Justice and Victim Services Unit. The Coordinator of the Unit then contacted the victim in response to her request to explore restorative justice, and allocated her case to a Probation Officer to progress.

The offender was convicted of the rape and sexual assault and was sentenced to several years in custody. The harm he had caused to the victim in this case was physical, emotional, psychological and mental. It impacted her daily life, her education and her capacity to live freely as she had before these offences. She found it difficult to engage with other services and suffered from anxiety and fear. The extended family were secondary victims.

In the initial meeting with the Probation Officer, the victim indicated that she wished to meet the offender in person before he was released from custody as she had questions she wished to ask him. She wished to request that he not return to where she lived as the impact of this crime was devastating for her and her family. She wanted to ask him, face-to-face, why he had raped her, and to show him that she had moved on with her life. In keeping with good practice and with consent, contact was made with services providing support to the victim, who expressed the view that this process would be of benefit.

As part of the preparatory work, the Probation Officer met with nominated members of the victim’s extended family and they expressed their concerns for her and indicated their willingness to support her through the process. After further consultation with the Victim Services Coordinator, and based on the victim’s request, it was agreed to proceed to the next stage of preparation for victim-offender mediation.

Several meetings took place with the victim and, separately, the offender to prepare them for the facilitated conversation. The Probation Officer worked jointly with another Probation Officer in facilitating those meetings, on some occasions meeting one of the parties together, on other occasions meeting a party one-to-one. They held discussion with prison staff regarding the logistics of the meeting. All planning was undertaken in line with agreed arrangements that exist between the Irish Prison Service and the Probation Service for the management of restorative justice requests.  The people to be  involved on the day of the meeting were the lead and co-facilitators, the victim, a victim support person, the offender and the Probation Officer who was based in the prison.

The date was set and one facilitator met with the victim and her support person to travel to the prison. The facilitator sought to support the victim through her anticipated feeling of distress as she neared the destination. The co-facilitator was waiting at the prison to ensure that there were no barriers to access and the smooth running of the meeting.

The victim wished to enter the room first and did so, followed by the offender, who took a short time to compose himself. The process was then reiterated and agreed to and, as per the victim’s request, the offender spoke first. The offender spoke respectfully, accepting full responsibility for the rape and sexual assault. He offered his explanation as to why the abuse had occurred. At this point, the victim asked for a short break, and this was facilitated.

The meeting resumed, and the victim asked her prepared questions. She began by asking why he abused her, to which he gave his prepared answer. As the conversation developed, she explained the severe impact the attacks had on her and how he had blamed her throughout the Court case. He acknowledged that he had blamed her and expressed regret for his actions and the harm he had caused. The victim then discussed her personal safety concerns, and he assured her that he would not return to the area. As the meeting ended, the victim said that she would never forgive him. He accepted this statement, apologised and asked her to forget about him and live her life.

The victim initially required time to process the meeting. She said that if she had not engaged in restorative justice, she would still be traumatised and worried about meeting him in public. She said that she felt that ‘she had a voice’ throughout the process which she did not have during the trial. Prison staff supported the offender, and he expressed his hope that the victim would be able to recover and move forward with her life having listened to his explanations and apology – in the room, it seemed that healing had begun as the harm caused was acknowledged and closure commenced.

In relation to cases involving serious crime, such as this case, specific training is required to ensure that facilitators have sufficient knowledge of the criminal justice system and sexual offending, and understand the impact and trauma caused by sexual abuse. It is essential that preparation is sufficiently long and flexible to meet the needs of both victims and offenders. Facilitators must have the ability to manage and respond sensitively to emotions and distressing content. The awareness of cues, agreed codes for breaks and supportive follow-up with both individuals is also a crucial element of the process and essential to the healing journey.

This case clearly illustrated how assessment, preparation, analysis, support, critical reflection and debriefing are key components to facilitate a meeting. Ongoing training and development in this area is required, along with shared learning with others.