This innovative collection presents original theoretical analyses and previously unpublished empirical research on criminal victimisation. Following an overview of the development and deficiencies of victimology,subsequent chapters present more detailed challenges to stereotypical conceptions of victimisation through their focus on: male victims of domestic violence; victims of male-on-male rape; corporate victims; and the 'victim-offenders' who are the recipients of IRA punishment beatings. The second half of the book considers criminal justice responses to victimisation, focusing in particular on the potential of, and limits to, restorative justice, the social (and gendered) construction of the victim within contested trials and the exclusionary nature of current 'victim-centred' initiatives. This important book will further the debate on how we conceptualise victims as well as their appropriate role within the criminal justice system. New Visions of Crime Victims will be of interest to academics, students, criminal justice practitioners and policy-makers. It has particular implications for scholarship in the fields of victimology, restorative justice and feminist approaches to criminology and criminal justice. The integration of work by established criminologists, such as Carolyn Hoyle, Paul Rock, Andrew Sanders and Richard Young with that of young, previously unpublished scholars, makes for an interesting and stimulating book. As well as being a valuable addition to the literature, it can be used to support undergraduate and postgraduate courses in criminal justice and criminology.

This book reveals what happens to applications for post-conviction review when those in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland who believe they are wrongfully convicted apply to the Criminal Cases Review Commission, the only body that can refer a case back to the Court of Appeal once appellants opportunities for direct appeal are exhausted. While the Court is obliged to hear all such referrals, the Commission can only refer a case where it believes there is a real possibility that the Court will quash the conviction. The first empirical study of all stages of decision-making within the Commission, this book starts from the premise that the test applied by the Commission (the real possibility test) is not inflexible. Though created by statute and refined through case law, it must be determined on a case-by-case basis, drawing too on cultural and structural variables, alongside fresh evidence gathered by the Commission. Through in-depth analysis of case files and interviews, Hoyle and Sato scrutinize the Commissions operational practices, its working rules and assumptions, considering how these influence its understanding of the real possibility test. Situating their rich empirical data within a framework of the Commissions social, organizational, and legal contexts, this book demonstrates that in its open-ended investigations there is considerable scope for discretion; for thorough exploration of all possible avenues or for choosing a more superficial consideration of a case. It emerges that while structured internal guidance, drawing heavily on Court jurisprudence, shapes decision-making, creating consistency in approach, there remains some variability across cases, over time, that can be accounted for by the different professional backgrounds and personalities of Commission staff.

Criminology is a booming discipline, yet one which can appear divided and fractious. In this rich and diverse collection of essays, some of the world's leading criminologists respond to a series of questions designed to investigate the state, impact, and future challenges of the discipline: What is criminology for? What is the impact of criminology? How should criminology be done? What are the key issues and debates in criminology today? What challenges does the discipline of criminology face? How has criminology as a discipline changed over the last few decades?
The resulting essays identify a series of intellectual, methodological, and ideological borders. Borders, in criminology as elsewhere, are policed, yet they are also frequently transgressed; criminologists can and do move across them to plunder, admire, or learn from other regions. While some boundaries may be more difficult or dangerous to cross than others it is rare to find an entirely secluded locale or community.
In traversing ideological, political, geographical, and disciplinary borders, criminologists bring training, tools, and concepts, as well as key texts to share with foreigners. From such exchanges, over time, borders may break down, shift, or spring up, enriching those who take the journey and those who are visited. It is, in other words, in criminology's capacity for and commitment to reflexivity, on which the strength of the field depends.

Debating Law is a new, exciting series that gives scholarly experts the opportunity to offer contrasting perspectives on significant topics of contemporary, general interest. In this first volume of the series Carolyn Hoyle argues that communities and the state should be more restorative in responding to harms caused by crimes, antisocial behaviour and other incivilities. She supports the exclusive use of restorative justice for many non-serious offences, and favours approaches that, by integrating restorative and retributive philosophies, take restorative practices into the 'deep end' of criminal justice. While acknowledging that restorative justice appears to have much to offer in terms of criminal justice reform, Chris Cunneen offers a different account, contending that the theoretical cogency of restorative ideas is limited by their lack of a coherent analysis of social and political power. He goes on to argue that after several decades of experimentation, restorative justice has not produced significant change in the criminal justice system and that the attempt to establish it as a feasible alternative to dominant practices of criminal justice has failed. This lively and valuable debate will be of great interest to everyone interested in the criminal justice system.

This innovative collection presents original theoretical analyses and previously unpublished empirical research on criminal victimisation. Following an overview of the development and deficiencies of victimology, subsequent chapters present more detailed challenges to stereotypical conceptions of victimisation through their focus on: male victims of domestic violence; victims of male-on-male rape; corporate victims; and the 'victim-offenders' who are the recipients of IRA punishment beatings. The second half of the book considers criminal justice responses to victimisation, focusing in particular on the potential of, and limits to, restorative justice, the social (and gendered) construction of the victim within contested trials and the exclusionary nature of current 'victim-centred' initiatives. This important book will further the debate on how we conceptualise victims as well as their appropriate role within the criminal justice system. New Visions of Crime Victims will be of interest to academics, students, criminal justice practitioners and policy-makers. It has particular implications for scholarship in the fields of victimology, restorative justice and feminist approaches to criminology and criminal justice. The integration of work by established criminologists, such as Carolyn Hoyle, Paul Rock, Andrew Sanders and Richard Young with that of young, previously unpublished scholars, makes for an interesting and stimulating book. As well as being a valuable addition to the literature, it can be used to support undergraduate and postgraduate courses in criminal justice and criminology. From the reviews of the hardback edition: "This is a stimulating and well-presented book." Martin Wright, Restorative Justice Online, November 2003 "The book succeeds in its goal of introducing 'new voices', both in terms of the topics as well as the authors." Roxanne Lieb, Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, July 2003 "...it will be a valuable asset to victimologists and academic libraries because it includes so many challenges to conventional wisdom." Brian Williams, British Society of Criminology Newsletter, March 2003