TWO VIEWS

WHEN AnneMarie Kay was asked if she would like to sit down face to face with the man who caused the death of her son, she balked.

At the time, Hirini Konia, 33, had pleaded guilty to careless driving causing death after he lost control of his truck on Haywards Hill, between the Hutt Valley and Pauatahanui, in February, smashing into an oncoming vehicle and killing the driver instantly.

That driver was Richard van der Linden, Kay’s son and a father of one, soon to be father of two.

The speed limit on the stretch of road had been reduced to 70kmh at the time, after a washout. Konia claimed he had not seen the sign, and was doing between 81kmh and 96kmh when the truck slid around a bend before slamming into van der Linden.

Kay and her partner, Mike, van der Linden’s stepfather, said that in the first few months the grief was far too raw to consider a meeting with Konia. But nine months after the crash, the couple’s stance had softened.

‘‘I was very anti it . . . I think there should be consequences for criminal actions,’’ said Mike Kay.

‘‘But what changed my mind, I was handed a summary of facts and, once I read it, I wanted to face the guy who caused the accident.’’

Finding out that the poor condition of the road had played a part, as well as learning of Konia’s clean criminal record, all contributed to agreeing to restorative justice, he said.

Restorative justice is a process in which offenders meet victims to talk about the harm caused by crimes, before offenders are sentenced.

In the past, restorative justice referrals were voluntary, but after changes to the Sentencing Act any defendant who pleads guilty will automatically be referred to restorative justice. Victims and offenders can still decline to take part.

Recent research by the Justice Ministry estimated that the 1569 conferences held in the 2011-12 year would lead to 1100 fewer offences being committed and 650 fewer prosecutions required over the following three years.

It found offenders who took part in a conference committed 23 per cent fewer offences compared with comparable offenders during the following year, and had a 12 per cent lower rate of reoffending.

Anne-Marie Kay said the 21⁄ hour meeting provided an opportunity to ask Konia some hard questions. Anne-Marie Kay on the man who killed her son in a car crash

For restorative justice to be successful she believes it is important for it to not be ‘‘too nice’’.

‘‘I think we all gained from it, but overall I think it does give them [offenders] a platform to say, ‘I’m really sorry’. I mean, what can you do, there’s no winner in this.

‘‘He didn’t have as much as a parking ticket against his name, he’s a good hard worker and it’s destroyed him. We fully understand he didn’t wake up in the morning wanting to kill someone.’’

The couple admit that, if it had been a murder, rather than a car crash, they would have found it impossible to attend restorative justice.

Konia was sentenced last week to 250 hours’ community work and was disqualified from driving for a year.

During sentencing, Judge John Walker noted the impact of the restorative justice meeting and the huge level of remorse felt by Konia.

‘‘The level of carelessness was not high, but the consequences were as great as they can be.’’ Rethinking Crime and Punishment – executive director Ced Simpson Restorative justice goes to the heart of what most of us want from our justice system: an opportunity for victims to tell their story, and an opportunity for offenders to recognise the harm they have caused and to try to put things right. It puts victims at the heart of the justice system. Comprehensive research in a range of countries, including New Zealand, has shown victim satisfaction rates at over 80 per cent. The research also shows that, contrary to some assumptions, restorative justice is even more successful in situations involving violent crime, rather than other offences. It is more likely to be successful when available to the victim(s) as an option at any time during the criminal justice process. Restorative justice can be very hard on offenders because it prompts reflection and the taking of responsibility in a way other justice processes often don’t. It is effective and in tune with our best values as a country. Sensible Sentencing Trust – Leigh Woodman and Jayne Walker, mothers of murder victims SST does consider there is a place for restorative justice (RJ) but with certain conditions. We believe it must always be victim driven, not offender driven. Any person with a serious criminal record should not work in RJ. RJ should only ever take place post-sentence and should not be taken into consideration as part of sentencing or later at parole hearings when an offender is being considered for release back into the community. SST has strong concerns in regards to victims of serious violent crime, sexual violence and homicide being told they need to consider a RJ meeting – how can you restore a murder victim? What can the offender say to the victims and their families that can ever justify the murder of the person they loved? As parents of a murdered child, we find it offensive, it has no value at all and, in most cases, it is incredibly intimidating and traumatising. All it does is add to their already overwhelming grief. Where is the ‘‘justice’’ in these meetings?