
Crime without punishment: can a different kind of justice offer something more to sexual assault survivors?
Jülich revealed to her father that she had been a victim of sexual assault by a man known to the family. Decades before. Her brother revealed the same. Their father, a police officer, did not waste any time.
'My father just said, 'OK we'll have a meeting tomorrow morning,'' she recalls. He called on people in the family network to gather the next day. He called the man who had allegedly hurt his children. He said, Jülich remembers, ''I will ring him up and I will tell him to be here at 10.15.''
'And I thought, he won't come, he won't come,' she says.
But he did.
The next morning the man, his wife, Jülich and other family members sat in her parents' lounge room. Her mother and father sat together. Jülich sat opposite them, next to her husband, feeling nervous. Not knowing what to expect. Her father chaired the meeting. He called it a 'confrontation meeting'.
Jülich, now 75, remembers her father turned to the man. 'He said, 'I'm going to allow you to speak and then I'm going to ask your victims to speak,'' Jülich recalls. 'And so we all had a turn of saying what had happened and how it had affected us.'
She says the man admitted to assaulting Jülich and her brother, and that he apologised to Jülich's parents.
'It was so validating to hear him say yes he did that,' she says.
When her father wrapped up the meeting, he asked if everyone had their say. 'Do you want to say anything more to the offender?' he asked.
'And I said [to the man], 'I'm going to ask you to leave the house now,'' Jülich recalls. ''Your wife can stay and have a cup of tea.''
Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email
She and her brother would go on to seek legal redress, but it was that morning in her parents' lounge room, the confrontation that she had not expected, the meeting where her alleged abuser owned up to what he had done to her and her brother, 'that was the process that gave me a real sense of justice', she says.
For Jülich, that morning also represented the start of something that would shape the course of her life and work for the next three decades.
As she began researching ways to transmute the type of meeting her father had held in their living room into something with structure and safety for sexual assault survivors, she says: 'I just kept thinking, this has got to be way better than anything else we've got.'
More than 30 years after that morning, Jülich speaks to Guardian Australia from her office in Auckland. Since that 'confrontation meeting' in her parents' lounge room, Jülich has gone on to become an associate professor, specialising in restorative justice. She also became a founding member of what many say is the gold standard in restorative justice for sexual assault in the world: New Zealand's Project Restore. And in the years between that lounge room morning and today, conversations about sexual assault, and whether restorative justice might be a safe, effective and just response to it, have shifted.
Restorative justice can be a difficult concept to define. It takes different shapes the world over. But, in essence, it is a flexible, victim-survivor-led process which brings two parties together – one, the person harmed, the other, the person who caused the harm – facilitated by professionals, in which the act of harm, its causes and consequences are explored. It is a process, in short, in which the person who caused harm is asked to face the person they hurt, and answer to them.
Australia is having a reckoning with sexual violence, and the failure of the criminal courts system to adequately hold offenders to account or not re-traumatise victim-survivors. Fewer than one in 10 women who experience sexual assault in Australia contact police. In May last year, the New South Wales justice department revealed that just 7% of sexual assaults reported to police resulted in criminal conviction in that state. This chasm between crime and consequence is known as the 'justice gap'. Even when complainants receive a guilty verdict in their case, a 2023 report found that those working in the system in NSW questioned the value of a trial, given the often traumatising impact of the process on the complainant. Which leaves many with a question: what kind of justice is that?
For many, improving the experience and the quality of criminal trials for sexual assault complainants is the best way to improve justice outcomes. But for others, alongside improving the criminal courts is an emphasis on providing a suite of options for victim-survivors. That includes the criminal system, but also improving avenues for civil courts and access to restorative justice.
It is being considered within the current Australian Law Reform Commission inquiry into sexual assault justice responses, the 2021 Victorian Law Reform Commission recommended restorative justice be made available as one of various options to victim-survivors, the Greens have pledged to fund a pilot program and in 2022 the Queensland government committed to exploring options for adult restorative justice in cases of sexual violence in its response to the Women's Safety and Justice Taskforce report, noting that 'restorative justice places victims at the centre of the criminal justice process'.
The idea that the shape of justice could be malleable, that it might look like different things for different people is what is at play in restorative justice. It asks the question: what is the purpose of justice? And who is it for?
'It's really been in direct response to victim-survivors themselves and what they need,' says Meredith Rossner, professor of criminology at the Australian National University. 'A real recognition of, well, who gets to decide what someone's justice path is?'
Over recent decades, more attention has been paid to the needs of people who have experienced sexual assault, and the paths – or justice – that are important to them. Griffith University's Prof Kathleen Daly has identified five justice needs of victim-survivors of sexual assault: participation, voice, validation, vindication, and the offender taking responsibility and accepting accountability. Other research has identified information, validation, voice and control as needs.
And this is where, some argue, restorative justice may have something to offer.
Researchers and practitioners speaking to Guardian Australia are insistent that restorative justice is not for everybody. Not for every victim, not for every perpetrator. But what it does offer is another way of thinking about justice.
The meeting in Shirley Jülich's parents' lounge room was not a restorative justice process. It did, however, have the blurry outline of the restorative justice processes that Jülich would go on to develop over her career.
Project Restore, which began in 2005, is one of a small number of restorative justice programs which now address sexual assault as a crime. Whereas Jülich's father called their meeting at less than a day's notice, at Project Restore the process takes months. During that time, a survivor specialist works with the person hurt by sexual violence, and an accountability specialist works with the person who caused harm; each trained in the dynamics of sexual violence and each supporting the individual to understand the harm, the consequences and what they want to achieve through a restorative justice process. A third person facilitates any coming together. The form the process and its culmination takes is led by the victim-survivor; it may end with a face-to-face meeting, an exchange of letters, or a meeting by proxy.
In Melbourne, Open Circle – part of the Centre for Innovative Justice at RMIT – has been running since 2019. In 2018 the ACT government's Restorative Justice Unit began accepting cases of family and sexual violence. Their own models differ slightly from Project Restore, but share similar principles and processes. Case numbers through all remain very low in comparison to criminal courts, and in the case of the RJU and Project Restore often come after or in an adjournment from a criminal trial.
What these processes do not involve, and what we as a society have come to expect and value as a consequence of a serious crime, is the ability to sentence a criminal to prison.
What survivors of sexual assault want from a justice process can vary between individuals and over time. Jülich, however, says that her research of victim-survivors of sexual assault found that imprisonment was not necessarily a priority. They did not want insincere apology. They wanted to tell their story in a safe forum, and they wanted the offender – who is in most cases known to them – to take responsibility, accept accountability and be censured by their community, though not necessarily by the courts.
An evaluation of the ACT scheme released in January 2025 found that 90% of people harmed felt they were supported and treated respectfully in the conference. Eight in 10 said they felt they were heard, and were able to say what they wanted to say. It also found the scheme had a positive impact on those responsible for harm, and that adults in the program had a lower rate of reoffending than those outside the scheme. The report, believed to be the first evaluation of a restorative justice program for domestic and sexual violence in Australia, found the scheme broadly successful.
Prof Julia Quilter of the University of Wollongong notes that in a recent NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research report, 'a number of complainants did say that their primary reason for reporting to police was that they didn't want this to happen to somebody else'. She asks: 'Is that going to be solved only through restorative justice or is that going to be solved through the criminal trial process?
'I don't think restorative justice is an option for every complainant,' she says. 'But it may be for some and I think that it's important to ensure that all complainants have all of the relevant available options.'
Proponents for restorative justice like Jülich say that – while the number of sexual assault cases going through restorative justice is too small to be able to produce strong data on recidivism – in being required to engage deeply with the harm they have caused, with the misogyny at the core of the actions, 'it makes sense to me that that would be a strong deterrent to reoffend'. In the criminal courts, defendants are afforded the right to silence and may progress through a trial without answering any questions at all about their alleged actions. At Open Circle, the person responsible for harm will meet with an accountability specialist about 15 to 20 times over a period that can last up to 12 months.
'It's excruciating,' says Renee Handsaker, Open Circle's principal restorative justice convener. 'It's huge for a person responsible for sexual violence to actually engage deeply.'
The take-up of restorative justice processes in Australia is tiny compared to criminal complaints – in the ACT, the RJU may only deal with cases once there has been a criminal guilty plea or finding, while at Open Circle, referrals come more from the community than criminal justice. An Australian Institute of Criminology review of the ACT restorative justice program published last year found low numbers through the process were in part due to the perception among those who had the power to refer cases that restorative justice presented a 'soft option'.
Handsaker rejects the critique.
'The criminal justice system can require certain things of [alleged offenders], but it also requires them to kind of position themselves pretty fiercely as, 'no, this didn't happen,'' she says. 'To me, that's a kind of a soft option, as opposed to actually requiring someone to deeply engage in the harm that they've caused.'
Another criticism of restorative justice is that it undoes the decades of work by advocates making sexual assault understood as a serious and public crime. If a society agrees that this is one of the worst categories of crime, it should warrant the treatment we give to serious crimes: courts and imprisonment.
Rossner, who has been working in restorative justice for two decades, says there are good reasons to argue for consistent due process across all crimes. That means that we treat crimes as infractions against the state – against all of us. A crime against one woman is serious enough that as a society we decide it is a crime against the sum of us. 'But [that approach] leaves a big gap,' Rossner says. 'And that gap seems to be even worse when it comes to sexual harm than to other crimes, in terms of victims.'
Now, she says, there is more enthusiasm for change, with survivors at the centre. 'It's pretty uncontroversial to say that what we're doing now is not working, is not helping.'
She is glad, she says, but 'I mean, it's tragic what it's taken to get to that point, right?'
Information and support for anyone affected by rape or sexual abuse issues is available from the following organisations. In Australia, support is available at 1800Respect (1800 737 732). In the UK, Rape Crisis offers support on 0808 500 2222. In the US, Rainn offers support on 800-656-4673. Other international helplines can be found at ibiblio.org/rcip/internl.html

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Guardian
2 days ago
- The Guardian
Alleged childcare paedophile Joshua Dale Brown likely to face more charges, court told
Alleged childcare paedophile Joshua Dale Brown is likely to face extra charges with a court today granting police more time to investigate him. Brown's next court appearance of has now been pushed into 2026, with police requesting the magistrates court allow more time to compile evidence against him. Magistrate Donna Bakos on Tuesday granted an application by police to extend the deadline to provide the hand up brief of evidence to Brown's lawyers to 4 December. The matter will then return to court for a committal mention on 10 February. An extension was also provided in the matter of Brown's co-accused, Michael Simon Wilson, who will next appear in court for a committal mention on 15 November. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email The accused men, who are both remanded in custody, were not required to appear in court for the brief administrative hearing. The court heard an affidavit in support of the extension argued the investigation into the duo was ongoing. Brown's lawyer, Rishi Nathwani KC, said the affidavit also flagged the potential for 'additional charges'. Nathwani said charges against his client 'are in flux', with police now following a 'vast number of other avenues that have now become apparent'. He asked Bakos not to release the full list of charges to media in light of this, saying it would be 'premature' and 'hinder the realisation of natural justice'. However, Bakos disagreed and said she would release the charges later today to ensure fair and accurate reporting of the matter. Brown, 26, was charged in May with more than 70 offences relating to eight alleged victims aged between five months and two years old. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion They include sexual penetration of a child under 12, attempted sexual penetration of a child under 12, sexual assault of a child under 16 and producing child abuse material for use through a carriage service. His case was only made public on 1 July after a suppression order was lifted. Wilson, 46, meanwhile, faces 45 charges including possessing child abuse material and rape and bestiality. It is understood Wilson's alleged offending is not connected to childcare facilities or any of the children alleged to be victims in the Brown case. Both cases are in their early stages and neither Brown nor Wilson are yet to enter a plea.


The Guardian
6 days ago
- The Guardian
Shoddy work and rogue tradies: the home repair practices targeting vulnerable Australians
When Jane was quoted about $20,000 to get the power put back on at her mother's property, she balked. 'He said the whole house needs to be rewired,' Jane said. 'He had the iPad out and said 'I'll need you to sign here'. I know my mum doesn't have that kind of money. I asked why it would cost so much. 'They said something like 'this quote will expire, you need to sign now or we can't get started and you won't have electricity'.' Jane – who didn't want her real name used – didn't cave to the urgency. Instead, she got someone else to do the job for about $3,500. But Jane is furious that had she not been there, her 78-year-old mother would have faced the pressure. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email Consumer groups and state government authorities around the country have warned of a variety of concerning practices and tactics by tradespeople, including: Targeting vulnerable, often older people, or those affected by natural disasters. Fearmongering by pretending a problem is urgent and potentially disastrous. Using threatening behaviour to coerce people. Overcharging and upselling unnecessary work. Operating under dozens, even hundreds of names to influence internet search results, hiding from bad reviews and providing multiple quotes that appear to be from different companies. The company Jane asked to quote trades under almost 200 names across all states and territories and offers a range of services including hot water repair and electrical work. The Council on the Ageing Australia says it has had 'troubling reports' about tradies targeting older people. 'Unfortunately, older people are targeted as they're more likely to be home during the day, and these scammers are quick to take advantage of this,' the council's acting chief executive, Corey Irlam, said. 'If someone shows up unannounced, uses high-pressure tactics, or demands upfront payment for a job, that's a red flag.' The New South Wales government has warned about 'unlicensed trades and scams' after floods. Building Commission NSW has received 157 reports of unlicensed or unregistered trade work since the beginning of 2025. This month, Consumer Protection Western Australia said 'dodgy door knockers' were targeting homes to carry out 'shoddy roof repairs'. 'These con men move from town to town using high-pressure tactics to push overpriced roof restoration jobs – often delivering little to no actual work,' the agency said. One elderly couple was approached by two men who said their roof needed repairs. The men began the job without a formal quote and the couple were told to deposit an $18,645 cheque. Another couple was 'coerced' into paying $2,145 'while the man stood over them during the bank transfer', the agency said. The agency also warned about 'rogue elements' in plumbing and electrical trades who 'exaggerate necessity for extra work and costs'. The South Australian consumer and business affairs minister, Andrea Michaels, said the department had fielded numerous complaints where 'customers feel they have been quoted excessive amounts, feel they have been told they need work done that they do not, or feel they have been pressured into agreeing to high-priced work'. Examples provided included $1,000 to fix a leaking tap; $1,000 for a valve that another plumber said should have cost $90; an elderly customer charged $2,500 for an air conditioning part worth less than $100; and more than $2,000 to replace a shower head. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion In another case, according to Michaels, a customer was charged $10,000 to unblock a drain and install replacement concrete, but was then advised by another plumber that the concrete work was not needed and the drain could be unblocked for a few hundred dollars. Earlier this month Queensland's Office of Fair Trading warned some tradies with a 'blatant disregard for the law' were taking large sums of money without providing the promised goods and services. Consumer Affairs Victoria said 'fake tradies' or 'travelling con men' might offer to do work then 'disappear with your money, leaving unfinished or substandard work, if they start work at all'. The Master Plumbers Association (SA) chief executive officer, Andrew Clarke, said people looking for a tradie should ask family or friends for recommendations. Searching on an industry association website instead of trusting search engines was also a good idea, he said. 'If you're using a member of an association, you then have the right to complain to the association,' he said. Experts say people should seek multiple quotes – ensuring they're from genuinely different companies – check licensing and accreditation of tradies and resist pressure to sign contracts even in emergency situations. Jane said she had dealt with hundreds of maintenance people in her life, but the experience with her mother's house was different. 'They were basically in my face trying to get me to sign,' she said. 'What if my mum, not understanding, signed on the iPad? She would have been up for a massive bill. 'They're taking advantage of vulnerable people.' Do you know more? Contact


The Guardian
6 days ago
- The Guardian
Victorian regulator weighs unprecedented intervention in AFL's fight with bookmakers over gambling revenue
The Victorian gambling regulator is considering whether to make an unprecedented intervention in a dispute between the AFL and bookmakers, which could set a limit on the league's revenue from wagering. Earlier this year, the AFL proposed a significant increase to the amount of money it receives from each bet placed on its game. The league also proposed a minimum $20,000 annual fee for all bookmakers, including small operators who focus on racing. Leaked documents seen by Guardian Australia revealed the cash grab was justified as a way to address what AFL executives termed an 'unprecedented' increase in 'integrity risks' posed by the wagering industry, which has exploded in popularity in recent years. The documents outlined concerns the AFL's integrity system was seriously deficient and struggled to identify whether players, coaches and staff were using inside information to manipulate betting markets, in breach of their contracts. Bookmakers opposed to the increase were told they needed accept it before the season began, or be banned from taking bets on the sport. By law, all bookmakers must have an agreement with a sport's governing body. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email When the increase was first proposed, several gambling companies described it as 'unsustainable' and said it could cripple smaller operators willing to pay their 'fair share' to support integrity measures. Some bookmakers have told Guardian Australia they increased financial inducements – such as bonus bets or bet-matching – to encourage people to spend more money, despite knowing this could increase harm. In June 2023, a parliamentary inquiry into online gambling called for financial inducementsto be banned. The Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission (VGCCC) has confirmed it is assessing an application to intervene in the dispute and make a determination about the AFL's conduct and the reasonableness of its fees. The application was made by an unnamed bookmaker. Before making a decision to intervene, the regulator must assess whether both parties have engaged in genuine negotiations. It must also assess whether a resolution is possible without the regulator's involvement. It has been assessing the application for more than two months. The regulator has the power to ask for information from the AFL, recover costs for any investigation, and make compulsory determinations to settle the dispute. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion 'Previous applications received by the VGCCC did not meet the criteria for a determination as outlined in legislation,' a spokesperson for the regulator said. Two sources at established bookmakers who were not authorised to comment publicly said a determination could set a limit on how much money the AFL could make from gambling. They said a determination could also impact future negotiations. Lachlan Gepp, an expert gambling and sports rights lawyer at Addisons, which has represented bookmakers, said product fees had become 'uncommercial and unreasonable' in recent years. The fees were introduced in the early 2000s. 'It should be remembered that the laws requiring betting integrity agreements were introduced in Victorian and New South Wales betting legislation to coincide with the blow-up of corporate online bookmaking and to provide funds to the AFL to administer an integrity concern that otherwise did not exist,' Gepp said. 'Make no mistake: in 2025, product fees have been morphed into a tax strategy designed to play catchup to the NRL and positioned by AFL spin doctors to solve an invisible growth in betting integrity issues.' The AFL has argued the integrity challenges are real and serious. Its correspondence outlining the increase to bookmakers did not mention commercial objectives. 'If the VGCCC determines that the product fee rate sought by the AFL is unreasonable or an overreach in terms of what the law is designed to do, then that outcome has been a long time coming for the online wagering industry,' Gepp said. The AFL declined to comment. One relatively small bookmaker, who declined to be named because of the commercial sensitivity of the issue, and so that they could speak freely, said they had increased inducements in response to the AFL's proposal. 'We will need to introduce additional incentives, not because we want to, but because the market demands it. Without them, we may not be able to keep the business running,' the bookmaker said. In Australia, Gambling Help Online is available on 1800 858 858. The National Debt Helpline is at 1800 007 007