(Renée Daamen PWC Consulting & Marianne Heuvelmans, Slachtofferhulp Nederland) Making sense of (judicial) interventions, from the perspectives of the victim, the offender, society and the professional, is an innovative way of working in the Dutch network of judicial organizations, including victim support, police, public prosecutor, probation officers, and child protection. In this way of working, professionals explore opportunities to intervene or to penalize, while taking the interests of the victim, of the offender and of society seriously into account. The central question professionals are evaluating each case is: which intervention is meaningful here? Meaningful to the victim, to the offender and to society. In order answer this question, professionals reach out to victims in order to take their interests into account in deciding which intervention is meaningful (to the victim) in a specific case. This way of working requires professionals to connect and to commit. To show commitment and build trust in cooperation with partners; be committed to reach out to victims and let their voice be heard in the judicial process. Professionals connect with victims by reaching out to them, and they connect with judicial partners in order to select an intervention that makes sense. This workshop will introduce the way of working by means of an example, and give participants an experience of making sense of intervention in an inspiring interactive and cooperative setting.

1. 1
Workshop VSE 2016 Cases
1. Start Case study: a small whale on the beach
Three young men aged 18 and 19 years found a dead small whale, washed up on
the shore. They thought it would be fun to hang the small whale behind the car and
drive around. A hiker on the beach called the police and the men were arrested.
A case with a victim but without a victims report of the crime. The suspects had never
been in contact with the police. The public prosecutor, the police, probation and
victim support asked themselves: what to do in this case?
One of them knew the foundation SOS Dolphin. This is a center of knowledge and
sanctuary for whales and dolphins in the North Sea. The probation officer called SOS
Dolphin and asked if they could think of a meaningful intervention to present to the
suspects.
The public prosecutor decides on a conditional discharge with the condition that the
three men had to spend one afternoon within one week at SOS Dolphin to be
educated and to help with cleaning activity’s.
The probation officer called SOS Dolphin to find out how the agreement had expired:
well, completely as planned and the men voluntary donated money to the foundation.
2. Case study: abuse of a taxi driver
The police finds a very drunk man at Schiphol Airport who wants to go home. He is in
no condition to find his home on his own. The police provides for a taxi. The man falls
asleep in the taxi. At the moment he awakes, while driving on the highway, he
abuses the driver. He bites the taxi driver and hits him on the head. The driver stops
his car on the emergency lane of the highway and calls the police. The police arrests
the man. He does not remember anything. He was very drunk and he regrets what he
had done. He wants to compensate the damages to the victim.
The taxi driver wasn’t able to work for two weeks; implying a loss of income of
€ 2,000. He is scared and afraid to go working at night.
The victims wish: We taxi drivers are often the victim of aggressive and abusive
behavior, especially at night. It is my profession, the way I earn my living and I
shouldn’t be afraid at work. I would like the suspect to work a night shift so that he
experiences with what behavior we have to deal at work. And I hope he will realize
what the impact is of his behavior so that he will not do this again.
The public prosecutor decided on a conditional discharge with the condition that the
suspect works a night shift with a colleague of the victim within twee weeks and the
reimbursement of the damages of the victim.

2. 2
3. Case study: two flags on the facade of a youth hostel
At night two flags attached on the facade of a youth hostel were taken away and
there was some damage on the facade. The manager of the hostel reported the
crime to the police. The suspects, two students, have been arrested with the flags in
their hands. They confess and feel guilty.
Victim Support spoke with the manager the next morning to investigate the cost of
the repair and the purchasing of two flags. She told that she received the two flags
from the police and that the repair would cost € 60. She also told that this crime
happened over and over again on Thursday night, the students night out. She wasn’t
amused anymore.
Her wish: let the defendants repair the damages themselves. The public prosecutor
did not consider this a good idea, since it is questionable whether they will deliver
quality. The public prosecutor decided on a conditional discharge with the condition
that the students immediately after release offer their apologies to the manager with a
bucket of flowers and €60 to pay for the damages. Moreover, they had to help with a
cleaning activity for four hours within the next week.
Victim Support called the manager one week later to find out how the agreement had
turned out and was experienced by the youth hostel: very well and completely as
planned.

3. 3
4. Slot Case study: birthday girl
There was a birthday party in a dorm.
Around midnight, the group went into town.
The birthday girl stood outside with two friends.
A man arrived who wants to sell them a bike.
They are not interested.
The man continues to try to sell his bike and he became aggressive.
The boy leads the man away so the girls can step in the car to drive away.
The man sees this and runs to the car.
He slams the car on the roof and he pulled at the door.
The driver starts the car.
She cannot drive forward because the road is blocked.
She has to drive in reverse in a street with many curves.
Meanwhile, the man runs after the car and tries to get something out of his coat.
Both girls think that he's going to get a gun and became really scared.
Then the police arrives at the scene.
The girls hear at the police station that the suspect lives three houses down the
street.
I call both girls the next morning.
It is clear that the incident had quite some impact and that they were afraid because
the suspect lives in the same street.
The girlfriend will not visit her friend for some time
The birthday girl will not leave her house alone.
The public prosecutor told me that the suspect had no documentation and that he
didn’t give any inconvenience in the neighbourhood.
The public prosecutor decides to speak with the suspect: What happened and why?
The suspect stated that he had too much to drink.
That he had acted stupid and he regrets what he had done.
He did not know the victims and did not know where they lived.
I called the girls a second time and told them this information.
I heard a sigh of relief through the telephone when they heard that the incident
was not directed against them and that the suspect did not know who
they were and where they lived.
They started their weekend with a lightened heart and with
less fear and they were very happy that I could give them this
information in a short time: Only 14 hours later.