ERA Forum https://doi.org/10.1007/s12027-018-0528-1 ARTICLE Fail better: sentencing to protect the public or to restore justice? Tim Chapman 1 © ERA 2018 Abstract This article reviews the research into the effectiveness of sentencing in pre- venting crime in England and Wales. It then discusses the impact that a restorative justice perspective could have on sentencing in criminal cases. It argues that such an approach would enhance the quality of justice for both victims and perpetrators and lead to improved outcomes in relation to victims’ recovery from the harm of crime and to perpetrators’ reintegration and desistance from offending. Greater participa- tion in the process of justice would also increase public confidence in the criminal justice process and reduce the pressure to imprison so many people. Keywords Restorative justice · Sentencing · Public confidence 1 Introduction A process as complex and demanding as sentencing will never be completely effec- tive. For those of us who have worked within the criminal justice system, Samuel Beckett’s 1 famous quotation: ‘Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail bet- ter’, will resonate with the lived experience of doing justice. This article argues that the strategy, adopted in many jurisdictions, to strive for sentences which are effective in reducing the risk of further offending should be reviewed. It is based upon the as- sumption that the public is preoccupied with fear of crime and wants the system to address its need for safety. Consequently, the effectiveness of sentencing is assessed 1 Beckett [6]. B T. Chapman tj.chapman@ulster.ac.uk 1 Visiting lecturer, Ulster University, Shore Road, Newtownabbey, Northern Ireland, UK