In her recent book The Limits of Blame, Erin Kelly argues that we should rethink the nature of punishment because delivering blame is, contrary to the widely held view, not among the justifiable aims of a criminal justice system. In this paper, firstly, I discuss her case against criminal blame. Kelly argues that the emphasis on blame in the criminal justice system and in public discourse is one of the main causes of the stigma and exclusion faced by those convicted for a crime. This claim might appear puzzling and, while she provides other convincing arguments against criminal blame, Kelly does not extensively defend this particular argument. To offer support for this view, I reflect on the often overlooked distinction between moral blame and criminal blame to show how the latter, unlike the former, is exclusionary and stigmatising. Secondly, I address the claim put forth by Kelly that blame should play no role in the criminal justice system at all. In light of her argument about the optional nature of moral blame, I explore the possibility that the state should leave open to victims the option to blame criminal wrongdoers in restorative justice conferences. I argue that in such contexts blame would not have the same exclusionary features of criminal blame in traditional settings and that it could serve some valuable aims articulated by communicative theories of punishment, such as the restoration of moral relationships.

在她最近的著作《责任的极限》中埃琳·凯利（Erin Kelly）认为，我们应该重新考虑惩罚的性质，因为与普遍持有的观点相反，责备不属于刑事司法系统的正当目的。在本文中，首先，我讨论了她反对刑事责任的案件。凯利（Kelly）认为，在刑事司法系统和公共话语中强调责备是被定罪的人面临的耻辱和排斥的主要原因之一。这种说法似乎令人费解，尽管她提出了其他令人信服的论点来反对犯罪责任，但凯利并没有广泛地捍卫这一特殊论点。为了支持这种观点，我反思了道德责任和刑事责任之间经常被忽视的区别，以显示犯罪责任与前者不一样，是排他性的和污名化的。其次，我要解决凯利提出的指责，指责在刑事司法系统中根本不扮演任何角色。根据她关于道德责任的选择性性质的论点，我探讨了国家应该让受害者接受在恢复性司法会议上责怪犯罪不法者的选择的可能性。我认为，在这种情况下，怪罪不会具有传统背景下刑事怪罪的排他性特征，并且它可以服务于交际惩罚理论所阐明的一些有价值的目标，例如恢复道德关系。我探讨了国家应该向受害者开放在恢复性司法会议上指责犯罪不法者的选择的可能性。我认为，在这种情况下，怪罪不会具有传统背景下刑事怪罪的排他性特征，并且它可以服务于交际惩罚理论所阐明的一些有价值的目标，例如恢复道德关系。我探讨了国家应该向受害者开放在恢复性司法会议上指责犯罪不法者的选择的可能性。我认为，在这种情况下，怪罪不会具有传统背景下刑事怪罪的排他性特征，并且它可以服务于交际惩罚理论所阐明的一些有价值的目标，例如恢复道德关系。