By pointing to the immense use of Twitter by citizens during crises, communication experts argue that governments should participate more actively on Twitter during crises. Until now, however, little empirical research has been conducted to validate this claim. This article aims at validating this claim and putting forward building blocks for an evidence-based vision on the use of Twitter by governments during flash crises, i.e. large-scale incidents that occur unexpectedly and immediately. The authors analysed 52.806 tweets sent by citizens and governments during a large-scale industrial fire in Moerdijk (2011). They looked at the content of the tweets and sorted them into fourteen categories. The results show that most of the tweets sent by citizens contained no new or relevant information for governments. In addition, the tweets sent by governments were totally ‘snowed under’ in the huge stream of tweets from citizens. Consequently, the tweets sent by governments were very little re-tweeted by Twitter users. The authors conclude that the Moerdijk case does not show a need for a more proactive role of governments on Twitter.

Factitious disorders are rather rare. Doctors are not inclined to take such a diagnosis into consideration. Basically, the term Münchhausen-syndrome is not correct, because the stories told by the baron were obviously unbelievable. The DSM IV-TR makes a distinction between malingering, factitious disorder and conversion hysteria. Four cases are shortly described, two with factitious disorder in adults, one with Münchhausen by proxy and one of apparent child abuse.Especially in Münchhausen-syndrome by proxy, clinical and juridical approaches come together in the diagnostic and the criminal investigative phase. Professionals from both disciplines have to work together to protect the wellbeing of the child and to find the adequate (forensic psychiatric) treatment for the mother.

The central question of this article is whether biographies can be a source for criminological research on white-collar crime and how they can contribute to the explanation of white-collar crime. To answer this question, 35 Dutch biographies were studied. Following the legal ambiguities of white-collar crime, not all of these biographies are about criminal offences. And following the dominant anthropomorphic approach to corporate crime, some of these are corporate biographies. Many biographies confirm current criminological explanations of the causation of white-collar crime. Yet, biographies also offer additional insights, for instance about the causal relevance of the private life of white-collar offenders.

This article analyses a criminal family. It is not the individual, but the family as a social entity that is central to this approach. The Van D.’s are a family of eleven brothers with a collective history of crime. Raised with anti-authoritarian norms, violence, alcohol and a strong sense of loyalty, they were known as an ‘army of brothers’ dominating the streets of H-town. The criminal family as object of study proves valuable in understanding the influence of contextual factors, subculture, and stigmatization. In the case of the Van D.’s, blood ties create cohesion and conflict at the same time.

Considerable political pressure is currently being brought to impose severe punishments, and it is frequently suggested that these punishments would enhance the wellbeing of victims and achieve ‘closure’. Populist images, such as ‘victims have a right to revenge’ have gained great influence. To what extent would therapeutic professionals have to support victim needs that are shaped within such punitive contexts? In this paper it is first argued that revenge embraces ambivalent meanings. Although avengers are lauded in the popular imagination, feelings of revenge are still viewed as ethically unacceptable. In recent decades, however, a penal populism has been gaining ground as a result of which revenge was stripped of its pejorative associations. In a punitive climate it is believed that victims would demand harsher penalties and that such penalties would promote closure and peace. Research findings show however that revenge may bring temporary relief, but anger rumination precludes healing. Subsequently the question is discussed whether two different forms of victim participation, victim impact statements and restorative justice conferences, might temper revenge feelings. Because VIS-participants (dealing with high levels of anger and fear) believe that their statements will culminate in longer sentences, they are generally frustrated that the imposed sentence is not tough enough. After the procedure they keep on viewing the offender as a malign person. Restorative procedures generally show an opposite picture. Finally this paper is criticizing the tendency of victim-oriented therapeutization within criminal justice and restorative justice. It is argued that the voice of the victim and the process of emotional healing should be separated strictly.

The tendency to revalorise emotions in the response to offending, seems to face a dilemma. On the one hand, experiencing crime and reacting to it inevitably are imbued by emotion. On the other hand, giving way to emotions in responding to crime entails the risks of disproportionate and unequal justice. This article argues that there is a fundamental difference between the emotions promoted to be included in the response to crime and the emotions feared as a risk to overwhelm good and proportionate jurisprudence. The first ones focus on the needs of the immediate stakeholders of the offence and seek their (re-)inclusion. The second type of emotions focuses on the criminal act and seeks to keep the threat it represents under control through punishment and incapacitation. It is a socio-ethical choice to promote the inclusionary approach. Whereas the rehabilitative approach has addressed the needs of the offenders only, the restorative tendency addresses the needs of both the victim and the offenders in a more balanced way. This balance also helps to avoid that respectful responses to crime degrade into norm erosion. The option for revalorising inclusionary emotions in the response to crime through restorative justice is located as a next phase in the civilisation process, described originally by Elias.

In this article attention is paid to the thoughts and feelings which underlie criminal law and restorative justice, as well as the question whether those thoughts and feelings have to be regarded as rational or irrational. For this purpose, the author has firstly examined the relationship between thinking and feeling from the perspective of the so-called cognitive emotion theory as put forth by the American philosopher Martha Nussbaum and the Dutch philosopher Mirjam van Reijen. In addition, this contribution also addresses the ideas of the Stoics, Spinoza and Schopenhauer, since the aforementioned theory goes back on the ideas of these philosophers. These philosophers depart from the view on man and world in which interconnectedness plays an important role – as the opposite of separateness. This view which reflects the mystic-religious perspective on man and world forms an important connecting thread in this article, as this turns out to have direct consequences for the idea about the (ir)rationality of certain thoughts and feelings, as well as for the (ir)rationality of criminal law and restorative justice. Special attention is paid to emotions that are relevant within the context of criminal law and restorative justice – which include anger, resentment, hatred, fear and compassion. After having explained – on the basis of the cognitive emotion theory – how thinking and feeling relate to each other and which thoughts and feelings – on the basis of the perspective of interconnectedness – have to be considered as (ir)rational, the article examines whether punishment is (ir)rational and whether the regular theories which legitimate punishment (i.e. retribution and prevention theories) are ‘rationalities of something irrational’. Furthermore, it is assessed whether the thoughts and feelings behind restorative justice are (ir)rational. The article concludes with a suggestion in which the main findings of this contribution are summarized, in order to stimulate discussion.

In 2011 the Dutch Parliamentarian Geert Wilders was acquitted of group defamation pursuant to article 137c of the Penal Code. The court ruled that the qualification ‘concerning a group of people because of their religion’ had not been fulfilled because Wilders had spoken about the religion of Islam but not about people. This recent juridical shortcut has various foundational problems in semantics and jurisprudence. In view of the impact that defamation of religion can have via the modern media, violent disturbance of public order should be reintroduced as a ground of liability.

In cultural criminology, we talk about crimes as secrets and secrets as crimes. There is a close relationship between criminality and secrecy. The unravelling of secrets can help us discover the meaning criminals attach to their actions and contacts. Secrets have always been a topical issue, as they are strongly embedded in our social world. Secrecy used to be functional in times of war and under dictatorships as a symbol of political and/or religious protest. Today, however, secrecy is most often associated with illegality and criminality. It is not easy to study secrets and secrecy, and for this reason criminological research requires specific, mainly ethnographic, research methods.

The Austrian social historian Christa Pelikan wrote in 2009 an article with the following title: On the efficacy of Victim-Offender-Mediation in cases of partnership violence in Austria, or: Men don’t get better, but women get stronger: Is it still true?
It contains outcomes of an empirical study which reads in short: The efficacy of VOM in cases partnership violence is to a large part due to the empowerment of the women victims, but partly, albeit to a smaller percentage, also due to an inner change, to insight and following from that a change of behaviour on the side of the male perpetrators. These achievements should be understood as part of a comprehensive societal change – a change of expectations regarding the use of violence in intimate partnerships. The research presented is to be perceived against the background of another study carried out 10 years before; its title was: ‘The efficacy of criminal law interventions in cases of partnership violence: Comparing The Criminal Trial and Victim-Offender Mediation (out of court offence compensation – ATA)’. Quantitaive and qualitative research is used, as well as a description of cases. In our journal a Dutch translation of this relevant (2009) article on RJ and domestic violence has been published.

To achieve effective outcomes in youth justice, youth criminal law should help influence youth criminal behavior and support the young persons development to maturity. In New-Zealand, youth criminal behavior is dealt with by Family Group Conferences according to the Children, Young Persons and Their Families Act. This way of dealing with youth criminal behavior supports the development of young persons and requires involvement of the young persons family and the victim. Research shows that conferencing in youth justice leads to less repeat offending. This supports the conclusion that Dutch youth justice should adopt the New-Zealand principles.

In restorative thinking it is often assumed that the involvement of volunteers, almost naturally, flows from its values and aims. But are there really convincing arguments that account for, justify or even necessitate an active policy on volunteering in restorative justice practices?This contribution focuses on the moderate view on restorative justice as developed in the Belgian context. It is argued that this approach offers a variety of reasons for developing a volunteers-programme. Two central issues in a moderate view on restorative justice are essential to understand the value of volunteering in restorative justice practices. Such a view sees 1) crime as a multi-layered phenomenon, and 2) takes participative and communicative justice as its central aim.

This article provides information about the results of the experimental project the Courthouse of Amsterdam undertook in 2010-2011 concerning court-connected penal mediation. In The Netherlands, the majority of the restorative projects that have been undertaken, have not been connected to the penal process. The authors describe the positive results, concerning both victims and offenders, the experiences of the lawyers, public prosecutors and judges involved. Various recommendations are made to improve implementation of a court-connected system of penal mediation in The Netherlands.