Rethinking Criminal Justice

By David E. Risley

Years of professional experience and observation have led me to rethink criminal justice, social justice, restorative justice—justice in all its forms.

The pursuit of justice is what motivates me.

As long as I can remember I have had a strong sense of fairness and a strong protective instinct. Those two things combined have shaped the course of my professional life. They drive me now.

Below:

• What is Justice?
• Something is Terribly Wrong
• So Why Don’t We Fix It?
• Political Will Follows Public Demand
• Harnessing the Power of Stories
• Examples of Cost-Effective, Problem-Solving Solutions

WHAT IS JUSTICE?

I spent a career as a federal prosecutor working for the U.S. Department of Justice. Justice was literally my business.

Later, after retiring from federal service I served in the Illinois Governor’s Office as Director of Public Safety Policy. Again, justice was my business.

As you can imagine, over those years I thought a lot about justice and doing justice, striving to do the right things, the right way, in the name of justice.

But I don’t think I really started to understand what justice is—and isn’t—until life brought me back into contact with some people I had prosecuted after they were released from prison. I listened to their stories of life before, during, and after prison. And I listened to the stories of others whom I met while serving in the Governor’s office, people who had gone to prison for serious crimes and emerged to face the injustice of what some call permanent punishments—legal and social barriers to leading a productive law-abiding life after being marked for life as a convicted felon.

As I listened, I found myself often thinking, this isn’t right, this isn’t just, this is justice gone awry in the name of justice.

My instincts for fairness and to protect the vulnerable were on high alert.

SOMETHING IS TERRIBLY WRONG

Something is terribly wrong with our approach to criminal justice when we incarcerate people for years in the concentrated company of criminals—an experience one of my former defendants called “crime college”—and expect them to emerge less criminal than when they went in. And yet, it is upon that irrational assumption that our current criminal justice system is built.

Something is terribly wrong with our approach to criminal justice when people emerge from prison with fewer viable alternatives to crime than when they went in. (Listen to Marlon Chamberlain in episode 8)

Something is terribly wrong—irrationally wrong—with our approach to criminal justice when we respond to trauma-driven criminal behavior as if the cure were to add trauma to trauma in prison.

Something is terribly wrong with our approach to criminal justice when we send young people to prison who live in a community in which the only thriving business is the crime business and then after release from prison we send them right back into that same environment after graduating from “crime college”.

Something is terribly wrong with our approach to criminal justice when between one-third to half of those who are released from prison are sent back within three years at an actual total cost estimated by the Illinois Sentencing Policy Advisory Council (SPAC) to be over $150,000 per inmate per year. (Read the report)

Something is terribly wrong with our approach to criminal justice when we perpetuate a system in which we focus more on punishing those who do harm to victims than we do on making things right for the victims—doing real justice—by seeking to heal the harm they suffer and continue to suffer. (Listen to Lenore Anderson, Author of “In Their Names” and founder of Alliance for Safety and Justice in episode 17)

Something is terribly wrong with our approach to criminal justice when we keep doing the same things and expect different results—or worse, when we uncritically fail to challenge the election-year mantra of politicians that we should double down on our criminal justice and public safety failures in the name of getting “tough on crime.”

SO WHY DON’T WE FIX IT?

All of that seems pretty obvious. In fact, public opinion surveys show most people think our current criminal justice system is broken.

But here is where things get sideways.

Surveys also show most people—probably many of the same people—support so-called “get tough on crime” measures that amount to doubling down on the very criminal justice policies and practices that have failed to deliver the safer communities and justice outcomes people want.

Why do most people support doing more of the same failed things and at least hope for better results? Because they don’t see any better alternatives on the horizon of realistic possibility.

Do better and more realistic alternatives exist? Yes.

Then why don’t we hear more about those alternatives and why aren’t they being implemented?

Good question. In fact, that’s the key question.

During my time in the Illinois Governor’s Office working on criminal justice policy, I came to the conclusion there are five main obstacles to making the improvements necessary to achieve the criminal justice outcomes the vast majority of citizens want.

1. The big one: lack of public awareness of root causes of crime problems and better alternatives for solving them;
2. powerful entrenched interests in maintaining the current system;
3. the huge complexity of effectively making major changes in long-standing public institutions with intertwined operational and funding dependencies while at the same time avoiding unintended and undesired consequences;
4. the vexing problem of what I call the resource riddle (increased funding for one thing usually means reduced funding for something else); and
5. lack of political will to tackle and solve those problems.

Ultimately, the two key obstacles to meaningful change are problems 1 and 5—lack of public awareness and lack of political will.

In the Governor’s Office I came to the conclusion that in a political system it is almost impossible to implement major change in something like our criminal justice system from the top down because that is not how most politicians think or operate. Most politicians are not public opinion leaders, they are public opinion followers.

POLITICAL WILL FOLLOWS PUBLIC DEMAND

So, the solution to lack of political will to make major improvements in our criminal justice system is to generate a critical mass of public demand for change.

How do we do that? We increase public awareness of root causes of crime problems and better alternatives for solving them.

That’s why I launched the Justice Voices podcast and why the wonderful volunteers who serve on the Justice Voices board of directors devote their time and energy to supporting the program.

It started with asking myself what changed my perspective on criminal justice and what motivates me to seek major improvements in how we think about and administer justice.

HARNESSING THE POWER OF STORIES

The answer was in large measure the stories of the many people with whom I came in contact on both sides of the law over my years as a prosecutor and the stories of remarkable people whom I met during my time working in the Governor’s Office.

I am a naturally analytical thinker—or so I like to think. But in truth I think more like most people think, in terms of stories.

As a prosecutor, I listened to crime stories and through witnesses I shared those stories in court. Analysis followed and was shaped by those stories.

Stories shape perceptions and attitudes. Stories make it real. Stories motivate.

Stories illuminate the human elements of the justice equation, including the stories of

• people who have perpetrated past acts of harm,
• victims of harm,
• judges,
• prosecutors,
• police,
• people who live in high crime communities, and
• people who search out and deliver community-based solutions to community crime problems.

That is why half of the mission of Justice voices is to share “eye opening stories.”

Some episodes feature stories that open our eyes to what leads people to commit crimes (even murder), what they experience in prison, what they experience and the challenges and temptations they face when they are released from prison, what changed the trajectory of their lives, and what wonderful things they are doing now.

We share and will be sharing more stories of victims of criminal acts to better understand the harms they experience and what it takes or would take to heal, to be made whole, for things to be set right in their lives (the truest sense of the word justice).

We share and will be sharing more of the stories of people who live and work in high crime communities and work together to develop and scale up community-based solutions, including solutions to the individual and community trauma that breeds and feeds crime and victimization.

There are so many more of these and other stories that need to be told of people with lived experience with crime and so many more voices that need to be heard.

But what about the other half of the equation: practical solutions?

During my career as a prosecutor in the criminal justice trenches I had little time to invest in getting above the daily battles to see a bigger picture (although I did my best to be proactive rather than only reactive), but seeing the big picture became my job when I was recruited to work in the Illinois Governor’s Office as Director of Public Safety Policy.

In that policy role, not only did I meet people with stories that needed to be told, I also met people who were devoting their professional and often personal lives to finding and implementing practical solutions. Their voices also need to be heard.

EXAMPLES OF COST-EFFECTIVE, PROBLEM-SOLVING SOLUTIONS

Here are some examples of serious criminal justice problem-solving.

Council on Criminal Justice 10-Point Plan to Help Cities Reduce Violence

The Council on Criminal Justice (CCJ) is an independent, nonpartisan think tank devoted to deep study of crime problems and coming up with practical solutions. I know several of their staff scholars and highly recommend an exploration of their website, linked above.

Included in the information and resources available on that website is a 2022 report—“Saving Lives: Ten Essential Actions Cities Can Take to Reduce Violence Now”—resulting from an extended deep-dive study by their Violent Crime Working Group of what works and what doesn’t in addressing urban violence.

Four principles guided the group’s work:

• Solution-focused
• Evidence-informed
• Community-engaged
• Humanity-centered

The “Ten Essential Actions” identified by the group:

1. Set a clear goal: commit to saving lives by setting impactful yet realistic goals to reduce homicides and shootings.

The report suggests a 10% annual reduction as an impactful yet realistic goal.

2. Identify the key people and places driving the violence.

Most chronic violence in a city is driven by a small number of people in small areas of the city. (Research has shown that in some cities 50-70% of homicides and shootings are committed by as few as 0.5% or less of a city’s population.)

Those people and the areas in which they operate should be targeted for concentrated intervention.

3. Create a citywide plan for engaging those key people and places.

4. Engage the key people with both empathy and accountability.

“High-risk individuals and groups must be placed on notice that they are in danger of being injured, killed, arrested, and/or incarcerated. Supports and services must be offered while law enforcement makes clear that further violence will not be tolerated.”

5. Engage key locations using place-based policing and investment.

“Police are needed to disrupt cycles of violence, but must be supplemented and replaced by cleaning-and-greening and other targeted enhancements to change the nature of violent micro-locations.”

6. Place responsibility for violence reduction at the top.

“Every city suffering from high rates of violent crime should have a permanent unit dedicated to violence reduction housed in the mayor’s office, with senior leadership reporting directly to the mayor.”

7. Emphasize healing with trauma-informed approaches.

“Agencies working with victims and survivors of violent crime should use a trauma-informed approach. The same holds true for law enforcement officers, who also experience trauma.”

8. Invest in anti-violence workforce development.

9. Set aside funding for new stakeholders and strategies.

“While most funding should be reserved for strategies with demonstrated track records of success, some portion of anti-violence dollars should be set aside to promote innovation.”

10. Commit to continuous improvement based on data, evidence, and peer-to-peer learning.

“Leaders should embrace a learning culture that can recognize when strategies are not working and shift course. Research partners should be engaged early to assess performance.”

Serious State Reviews and Recommendations for Reforms: Illinois and Pennsylvania

Illinois and Pennsylvania are examples of states that have undertaken serious performance and outcome reviews of their criminal justice systems, resulting in multi-pronged recommendations for major reforms, only some of which have actually been implemented.

The principle findings and recommendations of the December 2016 Final Report of the Illinois State Commission on Criminal Justice and Sentencing Reform (Parts I & II), is the subject of Justice Voices episode 5.

In that episode, I summarized and commented on the most important take-aways from that Illinois commission report:

• Overuse of prison as a solution to crime problems is not only ineffective and hugely expensive, but also counterproductive, resulting in more crime, not less.
• We can’t punish our way out of our crime problems, especially in high crime communities.
• Therefore, rather than persisting in our currently dominant punishment approach to criminal justice, we need to pivot to a problem-solving approach.
• A problem-solving approach leads naturally to replacing overuse of prison with more effective and ultimately less costly solutions best delivered at the local level.
• But, increasing the capacity of local communities to scale up and effectively implement those local solutions requires funding on a scale that meets the need.
• To think those additional funds can come from savings from sending fewer people to prison not only gets the cart before the horse, it is also mathematically unrealistic, given the deep reductions in our prison population that must precede any substantial reduction in the costs of running the prison system.
• That is what I call the resource riddle, and solving it is essential to public safety and community health.

More recently, in December 2022 a governor-mandated Pennsylvania action team released a 200-page report with over 150 evidence-based recommendations to transform the Pennsylvania criminal justice system into a trauma-informed, healing system. Their approach recognized that trauma is both an effect and a major driving force behind most violent crime, especially in high crime communities,

To work to implement those recommendations, the Pennsylvania Governor’s Office developed and sponsors HEAL PA, a multisectoral and multidisciplinary coalition of volunteers from a wide variety of fields, geographies, ethnicities and life experiences, including trauma survivors. As stated on the HEAL PA Website “this mix of state agency representatives and community stakeholders from all across the Commonwealth is responsible for prioritizing the [report] recommendations, setting short and long term goals, and assigning accountabilities to make the plan recommendations a reality.

When there is the political will, it can be done.

Group Violence Intervention (Such as Operation Ceasefire)

Group Violence Intervention (GVI), such as implemented in Operation Ceasefire in Boston, is a highly effective strategy for reducing serious violence in disadvantaged communities by focusing on the small number of street groups that drive the majority of violent crime. Quoting from the GVI webpage linked above, “Group members typically make up around half a percent of a city’s population but are involved in as much as 70 percent of its homicide and gun violence.”

GVI works through a structured partnership between law enforcement, community leaders, and social service providers with distinct but complementary roles. The strategy employs direct communication with high-risk group members through “call-ins” and personalized “custom notifications,” delivering a three-part message: (1) a moral appeal from community voices against violence, (2) an offer of immediate support and services, and (3) clear advance notice of legal consequences for continued violence. Rather than using broad enforcement tactics that harm entire communities, GVI uses focused deterrence that targets enforcement actions specifically on groups that commit violence.

The approach has demonstrated remarkable effectiveness across multiple cities, with reductions in group-related homicides ranging from 32% to 73%. A systematic review by the Campbell Collaboration found “strong empirical evidence” supporting GVI, while a USAID study concluded it “has the largest direct impact on crime and violence, by far, of any intervention.”

Beyond reducing violence, GVI rebuilds community trust in law enforcement, recognizes the trauma experienced by group members (who face homicide rates approximately 100 times the national average), and demonstrates commitment to keeping vulnerable young people alive, safe, and out of prison.

READI Chicago

READI Chicago (Rapid Employment and Development Initiative) is an innovative violence reduction program that targets individuals at the highest risk of gun violence involvement through a comprehensive approach combining cognitive behavioral interventions (cognitive behavioral therapy or CBT), paid transitional employment, and supportive services.

The program identifies participants through three pathways: outreach by community partners, referrals from reentry systems, and a predictive algorithm using administrative data from various sources to identify individuals at elevated risk. Once engaged, participants receive up to 18 months of paid employment, CBT sessions, and wraparound support services. (Listen to Eddie Bocanegra in episode 12)

While statistical measures of program success were mixed (“the results provide reason for both caution and optimism”), research by the University of Chicago Crime Lab found that READI Chicago significantly reduced arrests and gun violence involvement among participants. Their randomized controlled trial showed that READI participants had 65% fewer shooting and homicide arrests than those in a control group.

The evaluation also revealed that READI’s approach is cost-effective, with estimated reductions in social harms of at least $182,000 and perhaps as much as $916,000 per participant, which far exceeded program costs. (Unfortunately, due to lack of funding READI Chicago is reportedly scheduled to sunset in June 2025.)

What distinguishes READI from other violence prevention strategies is its intensive, multi-faceted approach focused exclusively on the highest-risk individuals. Rather than addressing group dynamics or using deterrence messaging like Group Violence Intervention, READI directly targets the underlying factors that contribute to violence through economic opportunity, cognitive-behavioral programming, and trauma support. This approach recognizes that those at highest risk of gun violence perpetration are often themselves victims of violence and trauma, requiring comprehensive intervention beyond enforcement or basic services.

Chicago CRED

Chicago CRED (Creating Real Economic Destiny) is a multifaceted violence intervention organization founded by former U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan that focuses on reducing gun violence in Chicago’s most affected neighborhoods. CRED employs a holistic strategy centered on direct engagement with individuals at highest risk for gun violence, combining street outreach, life coaching, trauma counseling, education, and employment support. The program specifically targets young men ages 18-32 in neighborhoods with the highest rates of shootings, engaging them through credible messengers who often have lived experience with violence and incarceration.

CRED’s model operates through four interconnected pillars:

• street outreach to identify and recruit high-risk individuals;
• individualized life coaching and support services;
• educational opportunities ranging from high school diploma completion to college preparation; and
• workforce development including job training, paid transitional employment, and permanent job placement.

The organization also invests in community-level violence prevention through peace treaties, community events, and advocacy for broader policy changes that address systemic contributors to violence.

What distinguishes Chicago CRED is its comprehensive approach combining direct intervention with systemic change efforts and its emphasis on long-term engagement with participants. Rather than short-term fixes, CRED commits to supporting participants for multiple years as they make sustainable life changes.

The organization reports significant impact in its target communities, with reductions in shootings in program areas and high rates of educational advancement and job placement among participants.

CRED’s work represents a community-based, trauma-informed approach to violence reduction that addresses both immediate risk factors and underlying economic and social conditions.

Peacekeepers Program

The Peacekeepers Program is a community violence intervention initiative spearheaded by Chicago CRED in partnership with local street outreach organizations. The program is designed to address gun violence in high-risk hotspots across Chicago and Cook County.

The program serves a dual purpose—reducing violence through targeted intervention while creating workforce development opportunities for participants who face barriers to employment.

Originally launched in 2018 as the Flatlining Violence Inspires Peace (FLIP) Strategy, the program recruits individuals with lived experience and community connections to mediate conflicts and prevent violence.

With support from the Illinois Office of Firearm Violence Prevention, the program transitioned from a summer-only initiative to a year-round effort in 2023, significantly expanding from 14 to 35 communities.

The program has shown promising results, with a 41% reduction in shooting victimizations in hotspots and a 31% decrease across program community areas between 2023-2024 compared to 2021-2022. Beyond reducing immediate violence, the program has extended “peace intervals” in 13 of 14 established communities.

Since its inception, 171 Peacekeepers have transitioned into full-time community violence intervention careers, and participants conducted 2,172 conflict mediations with a 68% success rate. The program represents a data-driven approach to violence reduction that leverages community expertise while creating pathways to sustainable employment for those most affected by gun violence.

Problem-solving Courts

Problem-solving courts are what the name implies: specialized courts that move beyond traditional punitive measures to address the underlying issues driving criminal behavior. Unlike conventional courts that focus primarily on determining guilt and administering punishment, problem-solving courts employ a therapeutic jurisprudence framework to target specific problems such as substance abuse, mental illness, veterans’ issues, domestic violence, or human trafficking.

These specialized courts integrate treatment services, intensive supervision, regular judicial monitoring, and a collaborative team approach including judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, probation officers, and treatment providers working together toward rehabilitation rather than incarceration.

The problem-solving court model is characterized by several key elements: voluntary participation, non-adversarial proceedings, regular status hearings before the same judge, graduated sanctions and incentives, and phased programming leading to graduation. Participants typically enter these courts through diversion or post-adjudication referrals and must comply with rigorous requirements including frequent drug testing, treatment attendance, and court appearances. The judge plays a central role not just as an arbiter but as an active participant in the recovery process, directly engaging with individuals and using both sanctions and positive reinforcement to motivate behavioral change.

Research from the Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority (ICJIA) and other sources indicates that problem-solving courts can significantly reduce recidivism rates and yield substantial cost savings compared to traditional incarceration.

Adult Redeploy Illinois

Adult Redeploy Illinois (ARI) is a state grant program that incentivizes local jurisdictions to divert people with eligible offenses and underlying behavioral health issues from state prisons to more effective and less expensive community-based supervision and services. The program provides financial support to counties to develop evidence-based programming tailored to their communities’ needs, while requiring sites to reduce prison commitments from their target populations by 25% compared to previous years.

ARI funds various diversion models including problem-solving courts and Intensive Supervision Probation with Services (ISP-S). The ISP-S model has proven particularly effective, combining enhanced supervision with treatment services and evidence-based practices rather than just surveillance. Research shows this integrated approach reduces recidivism rates by addressing underlying criminogenic needs through cognitive behavioral therapy, substance abuse treatment, and supportive services.

Since its inception with five pilot sites, ARI has expanded to 28 sites covering 45 counties across Illinois. The program demonstrates significant cost savings—community-based supervision costs substantially less than incarceration—while improving public safety through reduced recidivism.

Evaluations show participants experience positive outcomes in employment, housing stability, substance use reduction, and development of prosocial attitudes, making ARI a cornerstone of Illinois’ efforts to reform its criminal justice system. (Read a 2021 ARI evaluation report)

Restorative Justice

Restorative justice is a victim-centered approach to addressing crime and accountability for harm. The focus is on repairing damage rather than simply punishing offenders.

At its core, restorative justice views crime primarily as harm done to people and relationships rather than merely a violation of law. This perspective shifts the focus from law-breaking to harm caused to victims, communities, and even offenders themselves and seeking to repair those harms.

The process can take many forms, but generally involves bringing together those most affected by an incident—victims, offenders, and community members—in facilitated dialogues where all parties can express how they’ve been affected and collaborate on determining appropriate accountability measures.

These encounters, which include practices like victim-offender conferences, peace circles, and community panels, create space for victims to have their questions answered, express the full impact of the harm, and participate actively in resolution.

For offenders, restorative justice offers an opportunity to take genuine responsibility, understand the human consequences of their actions, and make meaningful amends—rather than being let off the accountability hook by simply serving a sentence of incarceration that may in reality help no one.

Research demonstrates that well-implemented restorative justice programs consistently produce higher victim satisfaction, reduced post-traumatic stress symptoms among victims, lower recidivism rates for offenders, and cost savings compared to traditional criminal justice approaches.

(Listen to Lisa Daniels, a mother who found healing in forgiving the man who murdered her son and sought leniency at his sentencing, in episode 16.)

CONCLUSION

Stories of people with lived experience with crime and the criminal justice system can be eye-opening and motivate listeners to care and act to support needed improvements.

My own journey from prosecutor to a reform-minded podcaster has shown me that the other half of that action equation is knowing enough about practical solutions to get behind them and push them forward, even if only by voting for political candidates who know (or care about) the difference between failed “tough on crime” policies and “smart on crime” solutions that work.

The Justice Voices podcasts and blog posts address both sides of that justice reform equation: “Eye Opening Stories. Practical Solutions.”

COMING UP

In the next blog post we’ll take a close look at the best way to overcome the negative inertia of institutional resistance to change and how to solve the resource riddle: align incentives with desired outcomes.

As part of that we will learn how the Adult Redeploy Illinois program (introduced above) reduces criminal justice system costs while improving results.

How? By incentivizing better results—aligning incentives with achievement of desired target outcomes.

That episode will dive into the next fundamental law of human nature that must be harnessed to make change happen: outcomes follow incentives.

RESOURCES

Below are some additional or expanded resources for information and perspective regarding crime and criminal justice.

Disclaimer: This is not even remotely an exhaustive list and inclusion below is for information purposes only and not intended as an endorsement of any content or positions taken by these organizations.

Suggestions for additions to this list are welcome.

Websites:

• National Institute of Justice
• Council on Criminal Justice
• Vera Institute
• University of Chicago Crime Lab
• Loyola Chicago Center for Criminal Justice
• Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority
• Illinois Sentencing Policy Advisory Council
• Brennan Center for Justice
• Heal PA
• Restorative Justice Council
• Alliance for Safety and Justice
• Darren B. Easterling Center for Restorative Practices

Books and Articles:

• Anderson, Lenore. In Their Names: The Untold Story of Victims’ Rights, Mass Incarceration, and the Future of Public Safety. New York: The New Press, 2022.
• Athens, Lonnie H. “Violentization: A Relatively Singular Theory of Violent Crime.” Deviant Behavior 36, no. 8 (2015): 585–95.
• Athens, Lonnie H. “Applying Violentization: From Theory to Praxis.” Victims & Offenders 12, no. 6 (2017): 787–98.
• Ludwig, Jens. Unforgiving Places: The Unexpected Origins of American Gun Violence. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2025.