Criminological research has emphasized the importance of procedural justice of authorities during encounters with citizens. Theory and prior research propose that the procedurally just treatment by the police influences, possibly via legitimacy, citizens’ willingness to cooperate with authorities in the criminal justice chain. This article tests the hypotheses of procedural justice theory using Dutch data of the European Social Survey (N=1,616). The results show an association between the procedurally just treatment of citizens by the police and cooperation with criminal justice authorities. However, this association has not been explained by the legitimacy of the police.

The current study investigates the relationship between the Dark Triad personality traits (consisting of narcissism, psychopathy and Machiavellianism) and three different forms of aggression: online aggression, overt aggression and relational aggression. The sample consisted of 1,051 adolescents between 12 and 16 years old. Results show that psychopathy and Machiavellianism are positive predictors of the three forms of aggression, while narcissism is a positive predictor of online aggression only.

Why and how mediated contact between victims and offenders (and members from their networks) leads to positive outcomes, remains a difficult question to answer. Not surprisingly therefore, this topic has been the focus of attention of multiple articles in the past twenty years of this journal. In this contribution, the inspiring article of Borbala Fellegi (2008), titled ‘Explaining the impact of restorative justice. The “4-way interaction” of morality, neutralisation, shame and bonds’ is celebrated. Fellegi presents a theoretical framework in which the added value of restorative, mediated victim-offender meetings for the re-integration of offenders is outlined compared to other judicial responses to crime. Central to her argument is that the mediation process affects in particular the four criminogenic factors mentioned in the title. In this contribution two innovative, working mechanisms of the mediation process that she proposes, are highlighted. First, the preparation phase in which the neutral mediator initiates and facilitates discussion of the crime and its consequences for the victim(s) with the offender. Fellegi proposes that this mechanism can (start to) lift the criminogenic factor moral reasoning of the offender. Second, the restorative focus of the encounter itself between the victim and offender, in which both parties can express how they were affected, express their emotions (such as shame feelings of the offender) and discuss jointly how restoration and reparation might be achieved. This should reduce the criminogenic factor neutralisation, increase moral reasoning, and might contribute to integrative social bonds between the parties and their networks. Thus, Fellegi’s work has made innovative suggestions about the working mechanisms of victim-offender mediation – these suggestions offer useful hypotheses that can be tested empirically.

The aim of this study was to provide more insight in prevalence and aetiology of juvenile frequent offending, employing police registered data as well as self-report information. We combined data about 519 youths that participated in a self-report study in the region of The Hague with police register data (the HKS system) from the police unit of The Hague. The results indicate that a substantial part of youths that report a large amount of offenses themselves are not formally known as ‘juvenile frequent offender’. Causal factors derived from four major criminological theories can be found in a more pronounced way among juvenile frequent offenders than among youths that incidentally commit offenses. In general, there are similarities between the characteristics of juvenile frequent offenders defined by police register data and those defined by self-reports, but, on average, frequent offenders that are known by the police spend more time unstructured socializing with friends. We conclude that research using the method of self-report is well capable to find juvenile frequent offenders, and that this method also leads to useful information about the causes of their delinquent behaviour.

This article considers Christopher D. Marshall’s proposal to draw a connection between the ethics of care and restorative justice. The ethics of care tradition is critical of the modern liberal interpretation of morality as a rational endeavor based on universal principles. The article attempts to spell out the ethical and political implications of adopting this fundamental viewpoint in the context of restorative justice. On the ethical level, the ethics of care may remind the tradition of restorative justice of its essential reliance on the concrete moral practices and competences of people that precede any conceptualized normative ethics. On the political level, an ethics of care approach to restorative justice seems to lead to a certain deadlock in that it fails (and refuses) to offer a rational justification of restorative justice practices. On a closer look, the ethics of care can provide such a justification, be it a ‘communitarian’ one.

This contribution reflects on the criminological meaning of the still ongoing trend of digitalisation. What does this mean for crime as a phenomenon and for the explanation of criminal behaviour? Not only did we see the emergence of new types of offending, also the context of crime has changed. In principle, the underlying explanatory processes can remain the same, but their application in the online world is complex and deserves further attention. Online social interactions are not only important for online crime, but also for traditional offenses. However, systematic research on how this actually takes place is scarce.

A narrative review was conducted to develop more coherent awareness and knowledge regarding emotional experiences of qualitative researchers studying sensitive topics or vulnerable groups, as discussions about this topic are currently fragmented and scattered. Qualitative researchers experience many painful as well as enjoyable emotions, which can influence their personal, social and professional lives. These emotions are recurrently reported in relation to the unpredictability of qualitative research and the different roles of qualitative researchers. More structural and individual attention for emotional experiences of qualitative researchers is necessary, for instance, in academic (doctoral) training and general handbooks on qualitative research.

Within the group of Dutch foundlings, 28% are migratory foundlings: children coming from abroad to the Netherlands (inbound foundlings), and children going abroad from the Netherlands (outbound foundlings). According to the rational choice theory, there is at some point a rational decision behind human action, based on consideration of costs and benefits – terminology reminiscent of the origins within economic science. When viewed from that perspective, cross-border abandonment may be regarded to be a conscious effort to hinder detection. After all, abandonment of foundlings has been a criminal offence in the Netherlands since at least the Middle Ages. There is therefore also a vested interest in not attracting attention. Anyone abandoning a child and wishing to protect their identity will be attracted to locations that lack effective supervision, defined as guardianship within the criminological routine activities theory. However, the less familiar a location, the trickier it is to avoid visibility. Does the rational consideration of costs and benefits result in migratory foundlings being abandoned just over the border (in order that the perpetrators attract the least possible attention) or actually further inland (in order to detract from the cross-border activity, for example)? Is there a comparable choice in terms of distance when people abandon native foundlings – children found in their country of birth? Relevant questions indeed, as greater insight into such variables can support the direction taken by detection activities. This study is an exploratory analysis of the distance between the domicile or birth location and the abandonment location of cross-border foundlings. The results will then be compared with the distances in the case of domestic foundlings.

Between 2013-2017 there were many ISIS videos circulating. It was generally assumed that these videos would encourage young Muslims to radicalize and join ISIS. But what do we actually know about the imaginary world of young people? Do sociological aspects such as the economic, cultural and religious background play a decisive role in this? Can we use the films and TV series that young people see as an entry into their imaginary world? To what extent can image analysis provide knowledge that contributes to safety issues? Commissioned by the Department of Counterterrorism, Radicalization and Extremism (CTER) of the Dutch National Police, the IVMV Foundation invited, in a comparative pilot study, twenty Dutch youngsters (10 with a Muslim background and 10 police students) to share their viewing experiences with five trailers (3 Hollywood, 1 Netflix, 1 not explicit violent ISIS video) that touched on the ISIS issue. This resulted in a research report and a film (in Dutch as well as in English) that was presented in November 2017 (De Mare et al. 2017a; De Mare 2017b). A remarkable result was that their viewing experiences and feelings showed a lot of similarity.

In this article Tom Daems and Bas van Stokkom discuss work and life of the Dutch social psychologist Hans Boutellier. The article is based on an interview the authors conducted with Boutellier in December 2018 as well as his published work. The article discusses in particular themes such as the morality of crime, the emancipation of victims, and processes of secularisation.

For quite some years now, crimes of ‘the powerful’ have been studied by criminologists. While researching crimes of ‘the powerful’, researchers aim to maintain and safeguard their integrity and ethics. However, there seems to be a friction between, on the one hand, ethics of the researchers themselves and on the other hand, ethics (policies) of universities. Obviously, not only do they have to justify their actions and decisions to themselves and ‘science’ as a whole, they must justify their research to ethics committees (EC’s) of universities. It could result in complex and difficult situations when researchers suspect that EC’s themselves may be instruments and products of the powerful groups they are studying. In that case, EC’s might undermine ethics and research integrity themselves. What do certain EC- ‘conditions’ look like for research ethics and to which extent do they have to be adjusted or reconsidered when criminologists are researching ‘the powerful’? The key question that will be answered in this contribution is as follows: how can criminologist (re)act ethically responsibly when confronted with (un)ethical committees? To answer this and other relevant questions, after reviewing literature, we reflect on a biographical study of a legal arms trader. We then elaborate on the ‘ethics creep’ (Haggerty, 2004) that seems to haunt social sciences nowadays.

Illegal (IUU) fishing is a relatively understudied area within criminology. In this article the authors briefly describe what IUU fishing entails, what is known about the consequences of such fishing, and will list law enforcement issues. They illustrate how illegal fishing can be organized in different ways, and will give some examples of fish fraud. The authors also discuss the (massive) measurement issues. The ecological impact of IUU fishing constitutes an important reason for more research into this phenomenon.

Penal mediation is currently gaining ground within the Dutch criminal law system. The practice of penal mediation is still young, however, and therefore vulnerable. Common criminal practice as well as legislation are not yet thoroughly compatible with practicing penal mediation. The authors of this contribution explore some of the dangers mediators in penal cases face while drafting party-agreements that are to be taken into consideration by the judicial authorities.
The article identifies the responsibilities of penal mediators who at the same time serve the interests of victims and offenders as well as take into account expectations judicial authorities might have. The responsibility of penal mediators is especially delicate whenever mediation parties seek to influence the outcome of the criminal lawsuit through mediation. Criminal law is a highly-regulated field, which – albeit unconsciously – seduces the mediator his- or herself to lose track of the main restorative goals of the mediation process. The authors point out some of the traps penal mediators can and should avoid. The article for instance elaborates the inadequacy of current Dutch regulations to arrange financial compensations and damages through penal mediation. Also, the article enumerates examples of over-juridification as well as the lacking of it. Furthermore, avoidable pitfalls such as McDonald-icing of penal mediation, the uselessness of so-called sunny-weather-vouchers, the dangers of copy-paste-agreements and – the worst – putting the height of their own – currently fixed – fees above party interests, are being addressed.

The Halt-intervention is an extra-judicial intervention for young people who have committed a minor offense. This article zooms in on the results of a literature review concerning the efficacy of offering an apology, one of the core elements of the Halt-intervention. Offering an apology leads to more insight into the consequences of their behavior and it increases the sense of moral norms. Shame and guilt play a crucial role in this process. The effect of the excuse can be increased by good mediation between perpetrator and victim, good preparation of the conversation, and the drafting of a contract. These instructions can also be applied when offering an apology in other interventions.

Empirical research on restorative justice shows that offenders can apologise to victims. Because of the ritual component of restorative justice and the possible influence on the justice system, certain questions arise: how do victims perceive these apologies? Is it important for victims that these apologies are sincere? The aim of the article is to discuss these questions through three topics, namely the physical aspect of the ritual, the symbolic meaning for victims and the relation between the offender’s apologies and the victim’s reaction.

Over the last twenty years, research on desistance from crime and on restorative justice has grown rapidly and both have emerged as exciting, vibrant, and dynamic areas of contemporary criminological interest. While the implementation of restorative justice practices in Europe has been essentially victim-oriented, there has always also been an emphasis on including the moral and social rehabilitation of the offender. This more offender-centred approach to restorative justice and its practices is not limited to the evaluation of its ability to reduce crime, but is to be seen within the connection between reparation, resettlement (reintegration into the community after sentence), and desistance from crime. This article examines, from a broad perspective, but including some data from research on victim-offender mediation in prison, the capacity of restorative justice interventions to impact positively on offenders’ likelihood of stopping committing criminal offences.

In 2015, South-Korea and Japan came to a ‘final’ agreement concerning the ‘comfort women’ issue. This contribution reveals that this deal signals the next stage in a process of denial through which Japanese authorities have structurally denied the women’s’ victimhood. Taking a discourse analytical approach, the contribution investigates this historical process of denial and its implications. The analysis shows that denial takes several forms and performs different functions throughout the process. It demonstrates that denial is an interactional phenomenon, has different psychologies underlying it, and that it operates on different levels. Denial ultimately contributes to a state of continued victimization.

In this article the authors reflect upon Judith Shklar’s classic book The Faces of Injustice. They maintain that injustice is wrongly confined to the absence or counterpart of justice. The authors discuss the relationship between and the difference between injustice and justice. According to the authors, injustice has more intensity than justice. Legal rules have only limited power to fight extreme forms of injustice. They argue that there is an asymmetry between justice and injustice, also because the law introduces values as predictability and regularity that, in concrete situations, are badly equipped to eliminate injustice. They claim that injustice is rooted in the idiosyncratic perspectives of those who suffered harm and argue that injustice has a ‘playful’ character, while the law has the character of a game. Finally, they argue that injustice is at the core an intimate experience, whereas justice is primarily about relationships between people. The authors outline the implications of these points for thinking about restoration and the relationship between restoration processes and the law.

This article scrutinizes the forces that are at play during the work of police officers in the Netherlands in order to unravel how they shape and give meaning to police officers’ workaday practice. By doing so, we contribute to scholarly debates in the fields of criminology and public administration and give a new impulse to the Dutch debate on policy culture. Using insights from the literatures on police culture, policing, police morality and police styles as theoretical background, an empirical study was conducted using fifteen focus groups with a total of 83 police officers working at street-level as main method of data collection. After analyzing the transcripts through an iterative coding process, four main forces that influence police officers’ workaday practice emerged from the data, partly confirming and partly expanding existing research: 1) environment and public; 2) group culture; 3) organization and its supervisors; and 4) personal factors. However, by acquiring a deeper understanding of these forces in relation to each other and to their workaday practice, police officers’ ‘moral resilience’ will increase: it will help them to act well-considered, strengthening their ability to explain the logic of their actions.

The mediator in criminal cases operates in special setting which requires specific competences: knowledge of the field of criminal law, knowledge of psychiatric/psychological problems and – if necessary – be able to consult a network of experts in that field, being prepared to operate in complex offender-victim relations and also to deal with high-escalated conflicts. These requirements raise a number of questions regarding the rules of the Dutch mediation federation, which are not designed to be used in the context of criminal law. Mediators in criminal cases are in need of other rules and pre-conditions to fulfil their work adequately.