Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 3Criminal Justice and PenologyCriminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisPolicing Practices and Perceptions

The DOI matches its Crossref record; its reference list is not available.

Police and Crown Prosecutor Use of Restorative Justice and Diversion for Adults and Youth in a High-Crime Area

Weinrath, Michael, Broschuk, Braeden·2022·Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice

Abstract

This research assesses the use of diversion and restorative justice (RJ) referrals by patrol officers and Crown prosecutors in a high-crime urban community. Of interest was the influence on referral of legal factors such as prior criminal history and offence severity and the potential impact of extra-legal factors such as age, gender, and Indigenous ethnicity. Data on 1,000 eligible offenders during a 6-month study period were analyzed. About 15% of eligible cases were referred. Police and Crown were not as aggressive as desirable, with the police passing on some eligible low-severity cases later referred by prosecutors. As prior criminal history increased referrals declined, with a more pronounced impact at the patrol officer level. In bivariate analysis, age, gender, and marital, student, and unemployment status exerted small effects, but these were non-significant in multivariate analysis. No evidence of ethnic disparity was found. Crime types of less serious violence and lower property, as well as prior convictions, had moderate bivariate effects, and these persisted in multivariate analysis. Although most cases referred had a limited criminal history and involved minor crimes, police and prosecutors did refer a few involving serious violent offences and prior convictions, showing potential for greater use of RJ.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3138/cjccj.2022-0034

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 27 · Cited by 3

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Burczycka Marta, 2015, Trends in offences against the administration of justice
  2. Clairmont Don, 2013, Dalhousie Law Journal, 36, 359
  3. Crocker Diane, 2013, Dalhousie Law Journal, 36, 393
  4. Mahony Tina Hotton, 2017, Women and the Criminal Justice System. Women in Canada: A Gender-Based Statistical Report
  5. Samuels-Wortley Kanika, 2019, Race and Justice, 12, 1
  6. Sapers Howard, 2012, Sprit matters: Aboriginal people and the Corrections and Conditional Release Act
  7. Selbin Jeffrey, 2018, Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 108, 1
  8. Weinrath Michael, 2019, Adult Corrections in Canada, 87
  9. Woolford Andrew, 2019, Adult Corrections in Canada, 265

Metadata

Authors
Weinrath, M., & Broschuk, B.
Affiliations
The University of Winnipeg (CA)
Venue
Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice
Published
2022-10-01
Volume
64
Issue
4
Pages
21-46
ISSN
  • 1707-7753 (ISSN-L)
  • 1911-0219
OpenAlex
W4297983593
Cited by
3
References
27
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2
FWCI
4.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénale (publishedVersion)
  • Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Justice and Penology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Policing Practices and Perceptions
Keywords
restorative justice, diversion, police referrals, Crown prosecutors, patrol officers, prior criminal history, crime severity, juvenile offenders, adult offenders, ethnic disparities, gender disparities, indigenous ethnicity, violent crime, property crime

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Police and Crown Prosecutor Use of Restorative Justice and Diversion for Adults and Youth in a High-Crime Area. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3138/cjccj.2022-0034
The paper
Weinrath, M., & Broschuk, B. (2022). Police and Crown Prosecutor Use of Restorative Justice and Diversion for Adults and Youth in a High-Crime Area. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjccj.2022-0034

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.