THE phrase “I am sorry” is one of the most powerful in the English language but all of that power is lost if the person speaking the words does not mean them.

This very simple concept, which we are all taught at a young age, forms the basis of the process known as restorative justice (RJ).

The idea behind RJ is that committing a crime doesn’t just break the laws laid down by the Government but it can also cause harm to people, property, relationships and the wider community.

The restorative process personalises the crime by putting the victims and the offenders in contact with one another – often face-to-face – as a means of trying to repair the harm caused by criminal behaviour. Crime hurts, so in theory justice should heal.

Saying “sorry” and meaning it can lead offenders to take greater responsibility for their crime than if they receive a punitive sentence, such as a fine or time behind bars. Advocates say that when it is successful RJ can give a victim of crime a feeling that the system has worked on their behalf and lead to a sense of closure which helps them to recover from the incident.

When it fails, however, as in the case we have highlighted in today’s Echo, then it serves only to compound the original offence.

Cleveland Police has now admitted that RJ should not have been used in the case of Amy Tombs, who was glassed in the face during a night out in Yarm. The letter she received from her attacker shows little or no remorse.

The police force have blamed the investigating officer for using RJ when more traditional forms of justice might have been more appropriate.

We hope that this is the real reason and we will be monitoring future cases involving RJ to ensure the process is not being used by police forces as a means of clearing up casework on the cheap.