The practitioner has now met both sides separately, has heard their stories and explored their needs and wishes. They are in the extraordinary position of being the only person to have the whole picture, to have heard people's different perspectives on the same event. They may know information about one side that could be of enormous import and benefit to the other.

If insights and needs have been expressed that would be helpful for the other person to know, the practitioner may ask permission to share snippets of information between people. In this stage of the restorative process, the practitioner moves between the parties, drip-feeding information to each side. They may share a little about the other person's perspective, paint a picture of what they are like, describe their attitude. They may share information about the impact of the crime, how the other person is now faring, what the person is telling them about their needs and what would help the person to move forward.

Some practitioners write down the information and agree it with the person who is sharing it, to make sure that they have not introduced their own thoughts or feelings, and to be clear that they have permission to pass it on. It is not uncommon for people to start the restorative process off with written correspondence, perhaps expressing why they would like to meet the other, establishing some basic information in advance of a face-to face-encounter. Stephen, one of the young men who met with Ray and Vi Donovan, describes this stage of the process:

Care with the ownership of information

Knowledge is power, and the practitioner must take great care with the ownership of information. Once disclosed, it can't be retracted, and personal information must only be shared between parties with explicit permission.

This preparation stage of indirect communication can help to close the gap. However, there is still a gap with indirect restorative work.