Based on Daly's study, known as the Sexual Assault Archival Study (SAAS), which focused on the use of conferencing for juveniles charged with a child sex offense, this article concludes that there is insufficient evidence to support the view that restorative justice provides victims of sexual assault with "a greater degree of justice than court" (Daly et al., 2003). It also concludes that because restorative justice could only be used in a minority of sexual assault cases if introduced as a diversion from court, further reform of the child sexual assault trial should be pursued as the primary means of dealing with child sexual assault cases. This would provide better and more certain protections for child victims than restorative justice conferencing. An examination of the SAAS conferencing model shows that the ideal of empowering victims and prioritizing victims/ needs was not necessarily achieved. Victims had no say about whether a case proceeded to conferencing, meaning they had no choice about how their victimization was addressed. Also, the conferencing model is apparently designed for first-time offenders as a diversion from court and to ensure that no conviction is recorded. Under this model, victims' needs are secondary. In addition, victims may have no input to the terms of the undertaking agreed to by the defendant; even when defendants refused to admit to the offense, conferences still proceeded. Further, there was no evidence that conferencing encouraged admissions rather than denial of guilt. 56 references