The diversionary conferences consisted of a meeting between the offender and at least some family or friends of the offender; the victim or, in the case of drunk driving, a community representative; and a police officer, who facilitated the meeting. The conferences focused on what the offender did, the harm caused, worse harm it could have caused, ways to repair the harm, and a written agreement between police and offender regarding what the offender will do to repair the harm. This report focuses on whether both offenders and victims found conferences to be fairer than court. The evaluation involved direct observations of conferences and offender and victim interviews. Findings show that most victims believed conferences were fairer than court, and offenders reported the same view. Other findings were that the experimental sample was a highly active group of repeat offenders, and they used alcohol and marijuana at high rates. Also, findings indicate that victims suffered substantial harm, and conferences treated them better than court. Offenders found conferences more stressful than court. Extensive tables