Tools in Network: an E-Net Approach to Sharing Mediation Competences.

First Case

The State's attorney with the Juvenile Court refers to CMA mediation the case of Tom (who had been indicted under sections 81 Criminal Procedure Code, 612 and 594 Penal Code at the prejudice of Dick) as an experiment under article 9 of Pres. Decree no. 448/88, and submits the relevant file to the competent Centre. CMA invites in writing the victim and the offender to a meeting where the team seeks their consent and determines whether it is convenient to carry on the mediation. In order to work out an action plan, the Centre has to preliminarily assess the personal and familiar conditions of the parties, and first of all of the offender.

In the instant case Tom (who is 17) lives in a small village near Cosenza, attends his fourth year at the surveyors technical school, lives with his family and is the elder child. Both parents work, his mother as a teacher, his father as an entrepreneur. No criminal record.

Dick (the victim) is 49, lives in a village near Cosenza, too and works in town in a school where he is in permanent touch with juveniles. He is separated, has two children and lives alone.

In their first meeting with Tom (parents had been invited due to the minor age of the offender) mediators explain the meaning and terms of mediation and ask the parents' permission to have a first interview alone with the indicted juvenile. The parents assented to the request.

The juvenile is invited to tell what had happened in minute detail to unveil particulars of facts underlying mediation as well as fears deriving from the offence's consequences and any further expectations.

The mediation carries on with the reconstruction of the event, which turns out to be a mere "phone joke" against a totally unknown person who had been picked up by chance.

Upon the victim's strong emotional reaction, Tom decides to continue in his attitude and dresses up his call with insults and threats to the victim. As the juvenile reports, that was a fully thoughtless act while unaware of the consequences of his gesture and its serious effect.

Tom declares he is ready to meet Dick to reaffirm what he told the mediators. Therefore, the latter separately meet Dick to inform him of the meaning and terms of the mediation and to ask his permission to go on. The interview follows the same pattern as with the offender: Dick has all narrative opportunities in reporting the event, its consequences and the terms of conflict and is totally free to express fears and expectations connected to the impact of his behaviour as well as the offender's conduct.

Dick confirms the facts as were reconstructed by Tom and reports an anonymous phone call, threatening and minatory, which was first undervalued, yet repeated many times in more and more worrying terms. Dick looks exhausted and still quite afraid; he had come to identify the culprit, a hardly 17-year old boy, few months before thanks to the investigations made by police forces. Through the phone service ("Who's who") he had tried to contact the number from which the anonymous calls were coming and to ask, in vain, to drop this persecution, which was achieved only by the intervention of police forces.

The interview gave away the feeling of a psychological damage which had grown in time, as turns out of the victim's words "the damage I suffered is immense, none can ever make restitution for 3 years' nightmare I lived and my lost peace...". This foreshadowed the victim's initial will to seek damages through his defence counsel who had supported him throughout the fact and whose participation in mediation is regarded as appropriate by the team.

It must be pointed out that involving Dick in the mediation process was extremely hard because of the lingering fears, he often repeated, caused by the reiterated threats, which urged him to change his lifestyle and intensify his distrust in the others.

To remove Dick's fear the mediators emphasized the importance for him to meet the offender and try to understand the reasons for this act on the one side, but also, and above all, to try and explain to Tom the repercussions of his gesture.

By doing so Dick could contribute to integrating mediation with educational functions and help the offender become aware of the most traumatic aspects of his conduct. It was thanks to this very explanation that Dick, especially mindful of youth's problems and educational aspects, resolved to meet Tom at a fixed date and time in CMA office.

During the joint mediation session Tom looks anxious and somehow inhibited in his narration, whereas Dick continues to be defensive and fearful, avoiding direct eye-contact with Tom even when he tells things which concerned the youngster.

Nevertheless, it is Dick who, talking in an increasingly quiet voice and mood about the various stages of the story and the deriving concerns, helps ease the state of tension and create a calm and relaxed atmosphere, which the team stresses as it emphasizes the striking passages and shifts emotions towards Tom.

Even Tom's attitude markedly changes: he deeply perceives Dick's suffering and finds the right words to express it and apologize for it. Tom and Dick now talk directly and look at each other. The conversation changes direction; Dick is interested in Tom's school course and future projects. Thanks to his job he is ready to support Tom in college orientation.

Both parties, joined by the juvenile's father, take their leave of the team, quiet and satisfied, and thank especially for freely expressing their innermost emotions on the event and maintain they will go to the police station to have Dick's complaint against Tom withdrawn.

The team duly submits a report to the State's Attorney with the Juvenile Court and fills in the anamnestic case file.