By: Independent Monitoring Boards

Property – having your own possessions that are important to you – is vital to those who are living in the constraints of a prison environment, deprived of their liberty, with little connection to the outside world.

The national scale of loss and damage to prisoners’ property shown by IMBs monitoring in adult prisons and YOIs, and the detrimental impact this has on these men, women and children’s quality of life, is unacceptable.

Property loss and damages severely harmed prisoners’ mental health and wellbeing, causing huge amounts of distress. It also undermined their safety, dignity and humanity, physical health, and prospects for progression and release.

Many of these losses have been unforgivable: a disabled prisoner living without his prosthetic limb for over a year; critical evidence for a prisoner’s sentencing missing; the irreplaceable letters from prisoners’ loved ones who have died while they’ve been inside misplaced.

The causes of lost property have been well-documented. Over many, many years almost all IMBs in adult prisons and YOIs have repeatedly told ministers and the Prison Service that they need to get a grip and have made recommendations about how to do so. In the latest tranche of annual reports alone, nearly 60 IMBs asked 75 property related questions to governors and directors, the service and ministers.

In September 2022, the Prison Service implemented a new policy framework with the aim of addressing the main problems continually identified by IMBs nationally in recent years and improving prisoner outcomes. During its development, and even now, IMBs receive assurances that the framework is doing just that. Two years later, however, the wider findings of the IMB suggest there is little to no evidence the framework has made any difference.

As the causes of property loss have been so well evidenced by local IMBs over the years, this thematic monitoring report focuses much less on the process and system failures (although there are many) and far more on the poor outcomes for prisoners. It also highlights good practice in prisons and YOIs that has helped to prevent or resolve property loss. Although these effective local initiatives aren’t a substitute for national solutions, these examples show that it can be done, and this is not an inevitable, intractable problem.

It is my hope as National Chair that this is the last time IMBs will have to set out these recurring issues and the scale of this problem, and that the new government will finally overhaul property processes and systems and invest in much-needed immediate and long-term resolutions, including a national digital tracking system. This will also be a significant investment in staff time, prison safety, improving prisoners’ lives, their mental health and wellbeing, and their perceptions of staff, fair treatment and the system overall.

Independent Monitoring Boards (IMBs) monitor and report on the conditions and treatment of those detained in every prison in England and Wales, as well as every immigration detention facility across the UK.

This report provides an overview of outcomes for men and women in adult prisons and children and young people in young offender institutions (YOIs), whose property has been lost or damaged.

It is based on analysis of:

• 71 survey responses from 64 IMBs monitoring in adult prisons and YOIs completed in early 2024 (see Annex 1).

• 106 Boards’ latest published annual reports, published until 31 July 2024.

• Property applications (a written or verbal representation to Boards)

• consisting of:

  • Data on the number of property applications received in the above annual reports.

  • 1732 property-related applications received via the 0800 free phone line between April 2020 and July 2023.

London: The Independent Monitoring Boards, 2024. 21p

By: Dr. Mike Lauder

On 17 July 2002, David Blunkett announced a White Paper, Justice for All (Home Office, 2002). He stated: “In protecting the public, we are placing emphasis on dealing with dangerous, violent and sexual offenders. Those not sentenced to lie imprisonment but who are nevertheless a danger to society will remiain custody until they are considered safe for release. An indeterminate sentence will ensure that they will only be released under strict supervision when they are no longer assessed to be a threat to the public”. (HC Deb, 17 July 2002, c287).

The Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence was introduced under the Criminal Justice Act 2003. The IPP sentence was abolished in 2012 but this action was not retrospective. By June 2024, there were still 2,734 IPP prisoners (1,132 unreleased and 1,602 recalled) and, of those unreleased, 99 percent had served time beyond their tariff (Ministry of Justice, 2024).

There are now some who believe that keeping this cohort of people in prison is uniquely cruel as there is evidence that to do so might create unwarranted psychological harm (Grimshaw, 2022). Members of Parliament now recognise that the IPP system is fundamentally flawed. What was devised to be a social good has, some would argue, become one that creates harm (Justice Committee, 2022).

The aim of this working paper is to describe the role that may have been played by the flaws inherent within the ‘Perfect World Paradigm’ when it is used to make public policy.

Centre for Crime and Justice Studies’ working paper series; London: Center for Crime and Justice Studies, 2024

By Zarek Khan

The literature on probation supervision has paid significant attention to prisoner reintegration into society. Many of these studies are based on retrospective samples of ex-prisoners as their primary analytical focus. Research studies on the early transitions from prison to the community have predominantly examined men’s experiences. This article explores the experiences of a small group of men and women serving their sentences in the community while under probation supervision. Drawing on interview extracts, it is argued that probation practices hinder, rather than support, post-release necessities for men and women seeking to reintegrate into society. The article highlights the implications for future research on probation supervision and re-entry.

Probation Journal 2023, Vol. 70(4) 350–366

MAY CONTAIN MARKUP

By Daniel Arasse, translated by Christopher Miller

"The Guillotine and the Terror" delves deep into the chilling history of the French Revolution, exploring the gruesome reign of terror that engulfed France. Unveiling the sinister purpose behind the invention of the guillotine, this book sheds light on the dark events that shaped a nation's destiny. From the blood-soaked streets of Paris to the political machinations of revolutionaries, this gripping narrative unveils the horror and brutality that defined an era. A must-read for history enthusiasts and those seeking to understand the complex interplay of power, fear, and revolution.

Penguin, 1991, 192 pages

MAY CONTAIN MARKUP

BY Marek M. KAMINSKI

On March 11, 1985, a van was pulled over in Warsaw for a routine traffic check that turned out to be anything but routine. Inside was Marek Kaminski, a Warsaw University student who also ran an underground press for Solidarity. The police discovered illegal books in the vehicle, and in a matter of hours five secret police escorted Kaminski to jail. A sociology and mathematics major one day, Kaminski was the next a political prisoner trying to adjust to a bizarre and dangerous new world. This remarkable book represents his attempts to understand that world.

As a coping strategy until he won his freedom half a year later by faking serious illness, Kaminski took clandestine notes on prison subculture. Much later, he discovered the key to unlocking that culture--game theory. Prison first appeared an irrational world of unpredictable violence and arbitrary codes of conduct. But as Kaminski shows in riveting detail, prisoners, to survive and prosper, have to master strategic decision-making. A clever move can shorten a sentence; a bad decision can lead to rape, beating, or social isolation. Much of the confusion in interpreting prison behavior, he argues, arises from a failure to understand that inmates are driven not by pathological emotion but by predictable and rational calculations.

Kaminski presents unsparing accounts of initiation rituals, secret codes, caste structures, prison sex, self-injuries, and of the humor that makes this brutal world more bearable. This is a work of unusual power, originality, and eloquence, with implications for understanding human behavior far beyond the walls of one Polish prison.

Princeton University Press, 2004, 215 pages

Edited By Ugljesa Zvekic and Anna Alvazzi del Frate

Explore a comprehensive bibliography delving into the realm of alternatives to imprisonment from a comparative perspective. This curated collection of resources offers a diverse range of scholarly works, research papers, and case studies focusing on innovative practices and policies aimed at reducing reliance on incarceration. Dive into this bibliography to gain insights into the evolving landscape of criminal justice systems worldwide, as experts examine the effectiveness, challenges, and ethical considerations surrounding alternative approaches to traditional imprisonment. Whether you are a student, academic, policymaker, or practitioner, this bibliography serves as a valuable resource for understanding the multifaceted dimensions of modern penal systems and the quest for more humane and effective ways of addressing crime and social justice.

Nelson-Hall Publishers, 1994, 537 pages

By   E. Ann Carson, Lauren Beatty and Stephanie Mueller

This is the fifth report as required under the First Step Act of 2018 (FSA; P.L. 115-391). It includes data on federal prisoners for calendar year 2022 provided to BJS by the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP). As required by the FSA, this report details select characteristics of persons in prison, including marital, veteran, citizenship, and English-speaking status; education levels; medical conditions; and participation in treatment programs. It also includes statistics BJS is required to report at the facility level, such as the number of assaults on staff by prisoners, prisoners’ violations of rules that resulted in time credit reductions, and selected facility characteristics related to accreditation, on-site health care, remote learning, video conferencing, and costs of prisoners’ phone calls.

Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2023. 26p

By Marta Nelson, Samuel Feineh and Maris Mapolski

One hundred years from now, we may look back at the United States’s overreliance on punishment and its progeny—mass incarceration—with the kind of abhorrence that we now hold for internment camps for Japanese Americans and Jim Crow laws. Or, if we never curb our reliance on jails and prisons for public safety, we may be in the same place then as we are today….This report posits that maintaining our system of mass incarceration will not bring people in the United States the safety and justice they deserve, while dismantling it in favor of a narrowly tailored sentencing response to unlawful behavior can produce more safety, repair harm, and reduce incarceration by close to 80 percent, according to modeling on the federal system. In this report, the Vera Institute of Justice (Vera) addresses a main driver of mass incarceration: our sentencing system, or what happens to people after they have gone through the criminal legal system and are convicted of a crime

New York: Vera Institute of Justice, 2023. 81p.

By Lauren G. Beatty and; Tracy L. Snell

This report provides statistics on whether prisoners were required to have a work assignment, the types of work they performed while incarcerated, and reasons they chose to have a work assignment if one was not required. Findings are based on data collected in the most recent Survey of Prison Inmates, which was conducted in 2016 through face-to-face interviews with a national sample of federal and state prisoners.

Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2023. 7p.

By Matthew R. Durose and Leonardo Antenangeli

For the first time, BJS used prison records from the National Corrections Reporting Program and criminal history data to analyze various characteristics and the arrest history of persons admitted to state prison in the United States. The report presents findings on the age at first arrest, number of prior arrests, and length of criminal history of persons admitted to state prison in 2009 and 2014. It also examines the post-prison arrests during the 2 years following their release from prison.

Highlights

• More than 1 in 4 persons admitted to state prison in 34 states in 2014 had been sentenced for a violent offense.

• The 369,200 persons admitted to state prison in 34 states in 2014 had an estimated 4.2 million prior arrests in their criminal histories, including the arrest that resulted in their prison sentence.

• In both 2009 and 2014, persons admitted to prison had a median of nine prior arrests in their criminal histories.

• About 1 in 10 persons admitted in 2014 at age 24 or younger had at least one prior out-of-state arrest, and about 4 in 10 persons admitted at age 40 or older had at least one such arrest.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, 2023. 36p.

By Justice Policy Institute

The Maryland Parole Commission (MPC) suffers from a series of systemic problems that result in the parole system’s inability to conduct its duties effectively. Safe at Home assesses how well parole practices in Maryland are aligned with other states, identifies inefficiencies in release decision-making, and provides options for changes to policy and practice informed by best practices in the field.

JPI conducted a comprehensive analysis of national parole practices and identified several policy options grounded in best practices in parole decision-making and supervision. JPI identified these policies by conducting interviews with system and field experts, attorneys, community members, and those with lived experience. These policy options are a mere blueprint that can help guide legislative and administrative actions better align the MPC with best practices across the country. Maryland decision-makers must now solicit input from a broad range of stakeholders, including community members, to operationalize these options into policy.

1. The MPC should adopt a structured decision-making tool that incorporates a validated needs assessment tool.

2. The MPC should operate under the presumption that the goals of punishment have been met at the time of initial parole eligibility. Parole release decision-making should be based solely on objective factors related to an individual’s future risk to public safety.

3. Supervision should be imposed selectively, with the length and conditions of supervision linked to risk. Conditions should be the least restrictive necessary to meet the goals of reentry and public safety. Resources should be frontloaded, and people should have the opportunity to shorten their parole term through good behavior.

4. The MPC should work closely with other criminal justice agencies and support agencies to develop a parole release plan that supports a successful reentry.

5. The MPC should employ transparency in parole release decision-making protocol and practices. The applicant and victim should be fully informed of the process and be allowed to participate actively.

6. Reasons for denial of parole must be made public, documented in writing, and appealable.

7. An applicant should have access to counsel and be provided all materials that the MPC will use to make its decision in advance of a hearing.

8. Establish standards for parole board member eligibility, including education and work/life experience.

9. The parole board must have transparent rules and procedures that reflect the input of all interested parties.

10. The parole board should adopt a robust set of performance measures that are publicly reported regularly.

JPI works with state leaders and community stakeholders to advance comprehensive policy options for consideration by the Maryland General Assembly, the Maryland Parole Commission, and other state decision-makers. Our work in Maryland is part of our broader efforts, in places like the District of Columbia, to draw attention to the harms of mass incarceration and long prison terms and support evidence-based reforms that provide options to earn release and safely return home.

Washington, DC: Justice Policy Institute, 2023. 59p.

By Ulla V. Bondeson

From the cover: “Prisoners in Prison Societies is a study of criminal career patternsover time, demonstrating specifically how and in what ways imprisonment has a positive correlation with later recidivism. The book combines original research and a ten-year follow-up study of Swedish inmates, surveying their attitudes o neverything from political ide- ology to prison reform. The work is m u c h more than a survey of prisoner attitudes, however; it includes official statements and administrative staff assessments at the in- stitutions examined. As a result, it is many sided and avoidsthe usual specialpleading of criminological writings. Among its unique features, Prisoners in Prison Societies analyzes thirteen correctional institutions, ranging from training schools to youth and adult prisons as well as a preventive detention facility.”

New Brunswick. Transaction Publishers . 1989. 364p. CONTAINS MARK-UP

By Torsten Eriksson

Translated from the original Swedish text by Catherine Djurklou. From the cover: Torsten Eriksson traces the history of reform experiments in criminal treatment in Europe and the United States from the sixteenth century to the present day. Experiments with separate and solitary confinements, self-government in institutions, and modern methods of treatment in psychiatric and psychological institutions are among the topics covered in Eriksson's d scription of the achievements and failures of pioneer reformers. The Reformers recounts ideas conceived, expressed, and executed throughout history which parallel our thoughts today, lending perspective to present-day attempts at prison reform. It is the first book of its kind that concentrates entirely on the develop- ment of treatment methods for criminals. This unique and scholarly volume should be essential reading for al those who take a serious interest in the treatment of offenders.

NY. Elsevier. 1976. 320p.

By Leticia Fernandez, Sharon Ennis, Sonya R. Porter and Elizabeth Carson

This report was produced by the U.S. Census Bureau, Center for Economic Studies (CES), under award number DJO-BJS-21-RO-0005. It explores the role that race/Hispanic origin, other demographic characteristics, and custodial/criminal history factors have on post-release mortality, including on the timing of deaths. It also assesses whether conditional release to community supervision or reimprisonment may explain the higher post-release mortality found among non-Hispanic whites. In the second part of the analysis, the report estimates standardized mortality ratios by sex, age group, and race/Hispanic origin using the U.S. general population as a reference. The data come from state prison releases from the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ National Corrections Reporting Program (NCRP). The NCRP records were linked to the Census Numident to identify deaths occurring within five years from prison release. NCRP records were linked to previous decennial censuses and survey responses to obtain self-reported race and Hispanic origin if available.

Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2022. 44p.

By Denis Gough and Megan Coghlan  

This rapid evidence review (RER) presents an analysis of literature and research to understand factors linked to reoffending and desistance, while also analysing multi-2022. 943p.agency working in relation to reducing reoffending. This is important given the 2021- 2023 Department of Justice Statement of Strategy that includes a focus on reducing reoffending and understanding multi-agency working to inform policy and ensure a shared purpose in the criminal justice sector in Ireland. To identify relevant literature for this RER peer reviewed academic literature only is analysed to understand reoffending and desistance, while a mixture of academic and governmental literature was selected to analyse multi-agency working. To be eligible for analysis, the relevant literature and research was required to be European and published in English from 1990-present.

Dublin: Ireland Department of Justice,  2022. 94p.

By Jake Phillips and Rebecca Roberts

In 2018/19, ten people died each week following release from prison. Every two days, someone took their own life. In the same year, one woman died every week, and half of these deaths were self-inflicted. 

This report, co-authored by Dr Jake Phillips of Sheffield Hallam University and Rebecca Roberts of INQUEST provides an overview of what is known about the deaths of people on post custody supervision following release from prison. It highlights the lack of visibility and policy attention given to this growing problem and calls for immediate action to ensure greater scrutiny, learning and prevention.

London: INQUEST, 2019. 17p.

By Rebecca Roberts, Claire Campbell and Deborah Coles

Every four days a person takes their life in prison, and rising numbers of ‘natural’ and unclassified deaths are too often found to relate to serious failures in healthcare. The lack of government action on official recommendations is leading to preventable deaths.

Deaths in prison: a national scandal exposes dangerous, longstanding failures across the prison estate and historically high levels of deaths in custody and offers unique insight and analysis into findings from 61 prison inquests in England and Wales in 2018 and 2019.

The report details repeated safety failures including mental and physical healthcare, communication systems, emergency responses, and drugs and medication. It also looks at the wider statistics and historic context, showing the repetitive and persistent nature of such failings.

With case studies of deaths and inquest findings, it tells the harrowing human stories behind the statistics (see page 9). INQUEST also details the experiences of bereaved families who struggle to access minimal legal aid for inquests, while prisons automatically receive millions in public funding.

London: INQUEST, 2020. 20p.

By Caitlyn Norman

Prisoners have significantly greater levels of drug use than the general population, which is related to many adverse outcomes both during and post-imprisonment. Reducing the availability of drugs in prison can lead to a reduction in the drug use of prisoners but requires knowledge of the different drug smuggling routes and the implementation of effective security measures. The main smuggling routes identified in the literature are through visitors; mail; prisoners on reception, remand, or work release; staff; and perimeter throwovers, but they differ between prisons depending on various contextual factors and security measures in place. Based on a total of 81 studies from 22 different countries, the average prevalence of drug use during incarceration is 32.0% with a range from 3.4% to 90%. The types of drugs used in prisons vary among geographical regions, countries, and even regions within countries. The most common drug reported to be used by prisoners in most studies was cannabis, except in South Asia and Scotland, where heroin was more prevalent. The drugs used in prison tend to reflect the prevalence of drugs in the local community, except where a drug has advantages unique to use in prison. It is vital to examine the prevalence of drug use and different types of drugs used during incarceration to help inform drug treatment services, assist prison staff in identifying potential drug use or intoxicated prisoners, and advise prisons about the most prevalent drug smuggling routes so new security measures can be considered.

WIREs Forensic Science, e1473. 

By Gresham M. Sykes

The Society of Captives, first published in 1958, is a classic of modern criminology and one of the most important books ever written about prison.

Gresham Sykes wrote the book at the height of the Cold War, motivated by the world’s experience of fascism and communism to study the closest thing to a totalitarian system in American life: a maximum security prison. His analysis calls into question the extent to which prisons can succeed in their attempts to control every facet of life — or whether the strong bonds between prisoners make it impossible to run a prison without finding ways of “accommodating” the prisoners.

Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1958. 168p.