This chapter explores the complex ways in which victimological ideas have driven the nature of victim centred policy interventions over recent decades. These interventions have emerged in three interconnected phases with three different foci: the welfare model, the good practice model, and the therapeutic justice model. The chapter reviews these policy phases charting the shift evidenced within them from a narrative focused on the understanding who the victim might be toa narrative focused on what the experience of trauma might be. In analysing this shift the chapter suggests that the increasingly blurred boundaries between different understandings of victimhood (a victimized individual/group or a traumatised individual/group) both of which are differently embedded in the policy interventions discussed which have resulted in policies which suffer from the problem of implementation failure alongside a failure to understand the nature of the adversarial criminal justice system itself.

Chapter 6 explores the institutional context in which the work of territorialisation is performed, its rationale, and its relational logic of cutting and joining. It first introduces the context in which conditions of release are imposed and how legal actors practically choose and design these conditions, relying on internalized institutional norms and practices as well as information on the interactions between the accused and the spaces where the offence is (allegedly, at first) committed. The chapter then presents the competing State interests pursued by different legal actors during the criminal process, focusing particularly on the shifting rationalities of bail from ensuring the accused’s presence in court and preventing crime, to therapeutic and law enforcement.This chapter illustrates how legal actors mobilize both space and time to achieve their different goals.