3100 CJ MOD 2 HW KH

The Paintball Case

A Restorative Justice Case Study

Tom Cavanagh

Copyrighted materials enclosed. May not be reproduced.

2

The Paintball Case: A Restorative Justice Case Study

Tom Cavanagh, MS

Affiliate Professor School for Professional Studies

Regis University Denver, Colorado

Copyright © 1998. Tom Cavanagh-Restorative Justice, Inc. All rights reserved. This publication is protected by copyright law and may not be reproduced in whole or in part by Photostat. Microfilm, retrieval system, or any other means, without prior written permission of the publisher.

Tom Cavanagh-Restorative Justice, Inc., Publisher PO Box 214 Fort Collins, CO 80522 www.restorativejustice.com

3

About the Author

Tom Cavanagh is a scholar, writer, and facilitator of restorative justice. He

facilitated a private forum called, “A conversation about restorative justice in

Colorado,” as part of the Institute on the Common Good at Regis University in Denver.

He is currently a Ph.D. candidate at Colorado State University in Educational

Leadership and an Affiliate Professor of Management for the School for Professional

Studies at Regis University. He worked as a court reporter for the District Court in Fort

Collins.

He is an honors graduate of Regis University in Denver, with a MS in

management. His undergraduate work was completed at Carroll College, Helena,

Montana, where he received a BA in English, and Lamar (Colorado) Community

College, graduating with an AA in Liberal Arts.

4

Abstract

“The Paintball Case” is a case study, similar to those used to teach people about

the law or management. The intent of this case study is to teach people about

restorative justice based on a real life application.

District Court Judge Fred McElrea, of Auckland, New Zealand, a pioneer in the

application of restorative justice processes in the courts, made these comments about

“The Paintball Case”:

“I think this a great case study - informative, educative and insightful. What was

most impressive was the boy’s offer to donate part of his eye if that would bring back

her sight. The second reaction I have is to marvel at the way in which restorative justice

helps build community bonds that were not there before - for example, the common

interest and empathy of the two families. Lastly, it brings home how simple it really is

to get these things going! That is because this sort of process is second nature to most

people, whereas the court process is an artificial, ritualized procedure that obscures

people’s real feelings and desire for reconciliation.”

5

The Paintball Case: A Restorative Justice Case Study

The Offender

Fort Collins lies in Northern Colorado and is known as the “Choice City,”

because it is one of the popular places to live in the United States. As a result this

conservative city of over 10,000 people, known for its university and agriculture

heritage, is growing rapidly and experiencing the joys and pains of rapid growth.

One evening in April of 1998, 15 year old Justin Barton and two of his cousins

were together for the evening in Fort Collins, Colorado. Early in the evening the

teenagers were at the Foothills Fashion Mall. They ate dinner at Taco Bell and went to a

coffee shop. While driving around, the boys passed Swenson's Ice Cream Parlor. After

Justin's cousins told him he could not go paintballing with them, Justin reached into the

trunk, though the back seat, pulled out a paintball gun, and fired into a group of girls at

the store.

As he fired the gun, Justin noticed a young girl quickly turn her head. His

cousins said, "Justin, what are you doing?" Justin replied, "I think I shot a girl in the

face."

The Victim

The same evening, 15 year old Jorel Travis went bowling with her friends and

then on to Swenson's Ice Cream Parlor. While Jorel and her friends were eating their ice

6

cream in front of the store, shots came out of the window of a Volkswagen Jetta. A

paintball struck Jorel, resulting in permanent blindness in one eye.

The Court Proceedings

On June 8th, Justin appeared in juvenile court to answer to the charge resulting

from the paintball incident. The charge was second degree assault with a deadly

weapon. At the time of the incident, Justin was on probation for a charge of attempted

theft.

Justin pled guilty to the charges before Juvenile Magistrate Joseph Coyte, as part

of a plea agreement. The plea agreement called for a sentence to probation, with the

terms and conditions to be set by Magistrate Coyte. The maximum possible sentence

for Justin was two years probation and 45 days in jail. If he were charged as an adult,

the possible incarceration was two to eight years in the state penitentiary.

The Motivation

The motivation affecting the outcome of the paintball case was based on a desire

of both the offender and victim to meet face to face. Justin wanted to talk to Jorel.

When he entered his guilty plea, Justin explained, "I never wanted to hurt anybody, but

I was being very thoughtless at the time. I understand if you never forgive me. If you

don't get your vision back, I would be happy to donate the part of my eye you need."

Soon after the incident, Jorel expressed her desire to meet with Justin. "I'd like to

talk to him to see how he really feels about it." Both Jorel and her mother, Rene Bone,

were described as being motivated to resolve the case by educating people about the

dangers and harm of paintball guns and preventing such an incident from happening

again. Jorel and her mother were neither malicious nor vindictive.

The Conference

7

Because of the willingness and desire of Justin and his family and Jorel and her

family to meet, probation officer Mort Gallagher suggested this case was ideal to use a

family group conference, a restorative justice process for healing the harm of crime.

Although Justin and his family expressed apprehension, they agreed to attend the

conference.

The family group conference was held at the United Way office, a neutral

location. The conference was held the day before the sentencing to accommodate the

presence of everyone who wanted to attend. Flexibility was the key to bringing people

together who were concerned about the incident. Justin was living with aunt and uncle.

His mother lived in Texas, and his father resided in Pennsylvania. Both wanted to

attend.

Bernadette Felix was the probation officer for Justin at the time the incident

occurred. Justin came to her soon after the incident and admitted his involvement.

Bernadette talked with Magistrate Coyte about the planned family group conference

and obtained his support.

Leslie Young, a trained mediator for family group conferences and a Loveland

police office, coordinated the process and made the necessary contacts and

arrangements. Fifteen people attended the conference. One person was designated to

record the main points during the dialogue.

At the conference people were seated in a circle, with no tables or other barriers.

Jorel, her family, and one of the girls present at the incident sat to the right of Leslie. To

the left of Leslie sat Justin, his family, and other people present at the scene of the

offense. Bernadette sat in between the two groups.

The four-hour conference began with Leslie giving an overview of the conference

process and reminding the participants that participation in the process was voluntary.

Justin began by talking about the incident. The harm resulting from the crime was

expressed by Jorel explaining what happened, how she felt, and what she hoped to get

out of the conference. Jorel's mother Rene was expressive. She talked about the

outcomes and harms resulting from the offense and particularly that she lost her job.

8

Then the discussion went around the circle. The victim's friends and family members

talked about the effects of the incident on their lives. Justin's family and friends next

told of the effects of the offense on them, including an aunt who was blind in one eye

since birth and an older cousin who was a poor role model for Justin regarding

paintball gun shooting.

During this sharing Justin was visibly moved and cried. A key theme during the

discussion was concern for the safety of others involved with paintball guns and of the

need to inform others of the dangers of paintballing.

Leslie turned the discussion to answering "what" questions concerning the harm

resulting from the incident: What needs to happen? What do we want to accomplish?

What do we need to do? In line with the key theme of the conference and in place of

community service, the group decided they wanted Justin to talk to school children and

write a letter to the local newspaper and teen magazines about the risks and dangers of

paintballing.

Justin's family assumed financial responsibility for the out-of-pocket expenses

incurred by Jorel and her family. An uncle to Justin offered to provide a computer for

Jorel. Justin's grandmother offered to give rides to Jorel when her mother was busy. In

order to pay the financial obligations, Justin needed a job. One of the people present

thought her husband could provide Justin a job in carpentry. All present agreed to

initiate a write-in campaign to legislators requesting the public be warned of the

dangers of paintball guns.

Justin read a letter of apology to Jorel, in which he again offered to donate his eye

to the victim. The letter was prepared prior to Justin’s first meeting with Bernadette,

who was his probation officer at the time.

Leslie prepared a copy of each point of the conference that was reached by

consensus. This paper formed the agreement of those present. During a break, the final

agreement was prepared, and each person responsible for performing a certain part of

the agreement was asked to sign the document.

9

In speaking about the conference, Bernadette said, "Initially it was very tense, but

as it went on, people were able to come together as a team. It was a real powerful

experience."

The conference was concluded by Leslie thanking those present for working

through this difficult process to help heal and repair the harm resulting from the

incident. The formal meeting was closed, and an informal discussion continued,

including the exchange of telephone numbers among those present and the two

mothers hugging.

The Sentencing Hearing

The day after the conference was the sentencing hearing in front of Magistrate

Coyte. The friends and family of Justin and Jorel mingled in the hall before court and

sat together in the courtroom. Several people talked about the conference. Bernadette

described the conference and gave a copy of the final agreement to the court and the

attorneys.

Magistrate Coyte expressed support for the agreement. He sentenced Justin to

two years of probation and 45 days in jail. The jail term was suspended, except for six

days in jail on weekends. The victim's family was opposed to any jail time. After the

sentencing hearing, Jorel and Rene expressed to Justin they were upset with the jail

time.

Two days after the sentencing hearing, Bernadette and Justin met to review the

terms and conditions of his probationary sentence. Further discussions were held about

the ongoing needs of Jorel, focusing on healing the relationship of Justin with his

family, friends, and the community and building a relationship with Jorel and her

family and friends.

On September 10, 1998 a letter to the editor from Justin appeared in the Fort

Collins "Coloradoan" entitled "Teen learned the hard way about paintball-gun dangers."

In the letter Justin described the dangers of paintball guns in general and the specifics of

the incident resulting in the injury to Jorel. He expressed to the community how sorry

10

he was for hurting Jorel and how such a result should have crossed his mind before he

shot the paintball gun.

Questions

1. Read this case history through the court proceedings. What would most likely be

the outcome of this case in your community? What values would prevail in your

community for handling this case?

2. What restorative justice core values are exemplified in this case history?

3. How were these questions answered in the case history: What harm resulted from

the paintball incident? How can we heal the harm? Who is responsible for healing

the harm?

4. What would your community need to do to create a restorative justice approach to

incidents such as presented in the case history?