91172.pdf

188 / Court and the Legal System—Civil Forensics

victimized him a second time. He was depressed and he needed answers. He wanted

to confront his shooter and tell him about the damage he had done, and he wanted an

apology.

Cieiger found answers to many of his questions in mediation. He found that the

offender was a substance abuser, out of work, and on parole. He had planned a simple

robbery. He hadn't intended to shoot Geiger but instead wanted to fire a warning shot.

At: the end of his session, Geiger shook hands with the man who shot him. "I saw the

burden of guilt lifted from him and the anguish from me." Geiger testified on behalf of

the man last February at his parole hearing. He was granted parole after serving 12 years

of a 12- to 25-year term for first-degree robbery. (Reske, 1995, pp. 1—3)

Literature Review

Types of Victim—Offender Mediation Programs
In the Middle Ages, a criminal act was punished by the criminal making repara-
tions directly to the victim; this is the basis upon which victim—offender mediation
programs are utilized today (Severson & Bankston, 1995). Currently, there are var-
ious types of mediation programs, which can differ in several ways. Some programs
offer mediation after conviction of a crime but prior to sentencing, while others
offer mediation upon parole and make restitution a condition of parole. In some
programs the victim and offender meet face-to-face while in other programs they
do not (K. L.Joseph, 1996; Roy, 1993). In addition, programs may differ on the
cases they accept; some programs may only accept juvenile cases while others ac-
cept adults. Some programs only accept cases of violent crimes, while others accept
nonviolent criminal cases (Severson & Bankston, 1995). Finally, programs differ in
who they use to mediate the cases, the model they utilize to run the program, and in
their administration. Most programs use trained volunteers as mediators; however,
other programs may use social work professionals. Although many mediation pro-
grams are supported by religious agencies, some are run and financed by probation
departments and private foundations (K. L.Joseph, 1996; Severson & Bankston,
1995).
The most popular model used to run victim—offender mediation programs is the
Victim/Offender Reconciliation Program (VORP) model. The VORP model was
developed in 1974 by the Mennonite Central Committee in Kitchener, Ontario,
Canada (Roy, 1993; Umbrek & Bradshaw, 1997). In 1978, the United States' first
victim—offender program was put together in Elkhart, Indiana (Reske, 1995). The
Elkhart program, like most victim reconciliation programs nationwide, is based
on the VORP model. Programs based on the VORP model provide face-to-face
meetings between the victim and offender (Roy, 1993). Also, the VORP is usually
a postadjudication program in which the offenders and their victims explore recon-
ciliation and build a plan together for reparation (Roy, 1993; Severson & Blackston,
1995). Most likely, the program Geiger went through utilized the VORP model
because he had a face-to- face meeting with his offender and because the mediation