USED BOOK. MAY CONTAIN MARK-UP

By Cairine Petrie

FROM THE FOREWORD: “During the last two decades in the United Kingdom, we have increasingly locked up children who are difficult or delinquent. This study explores the uses and consequences of custody for young people. Cairine Petrie compares a number of boys held in a unit of maximum security with a similar number of delinquents resident in an open training school. The book also provides interesting insights into the workings of the Scottish List D schools which, unlike institutions for young offenders in England and Wales, still remain the responsibility of the central authorities. South of the border since 1969, persistent delinquents have been sheltered in community homes and are in the care of the local authorities. Those who cling to the myth that effective reformatory schools have been swept away by permissive legislation will gain little comfort from this book.”

London. Saxon House. 1980.

USED BOOK. MAY CONTAIN MARK-UP

By Debra Smith

FROM THE INTRODUCTION: “After being anti-privatisation (and I am still very concerned about how much of all this is real and will last) I am coming to a positive view of this private prison. In the short term it is certainly better for the prisoners in the long term I don't know what safeguards are there that it is maintained. But it is a 20-year business plan and contract so if I'm still here in 2017 I guess I' be able to make a judgement.' Ididn't make it to 2017 - in September 2004 I received a letter terminating my contract: services no longer required…..”

Adelaide, Aus. Ginninderra Press. 2008. 129p.

USED BOOK. MAY CONTAIN MARK-UP.

Edited by Beverly R. Fletcher, Lynda Dixon Shaver, and Dreama G. Moon. Foreword by George Henderson. Illustrations By Lisa J. Billy

FROM THE FOREWORD: “Perhaps nothing captures the debilitating effects of sexism more vividly than an in-depth study of women incarcerated in our correctional institutions. Beneath the statistics lie a human tragedy of a magnitude most people cannot fully comprehend: a disproportionate number of women are wasting away in nonrehabilitative institutions that perpetuate rather than correct criminal behaviors. The editors and contributors to this book capture cogent slices of life of some of the role players in the prison drama. And they do so with the sensitive touch of social surgeons who carefully lift and examine one layer of human behavior and then another. But they do not stop there. They also examine some of the attitudes, beliefs, and values of incarcerated women and their keepers (prison staff). The total work is an insightful glimpse of a neglected subculture.”

Westport, CT. Praeger. 1993. 202p.

By S. Rebecca Neusteter, Ram Subramanian, Jennifer Trone, Mawia Khogali, and Cindy Reed

Police in America arrest millions of people each year, and the likelihood that arrest will lead to jail incarceration has increased steadily. Ending mass incarceration and repairing its extensive collateral consequences thus must begin by focusing on the front end of the system: police work. Recognizing the roughly 18,000 police agencies around the country as gatekeepers of the system, this report explores the factors driving mass enforcement, particularly of low-level offenses; what police agencies could do instead with the right community investment, national and local leadership, and officer training, incentives, and support; and policies that could shift the policing paradigm away from the reflexive use of enforcement, which unnecessarily criminalizes people and leads directly to the jailhouse door.

New York: Vera Institute of Justice, 2019. 76p.

by Solitary Watch and the Unlock the Box Campaign

The watchdog group Solitary Watch and the advocacy coalition Unlock the Box released a groundbreaking joint report showing that at least 122,840 people are locked daily in solitary confinement in U.S. prisons and jails for 22 or more hours a day. Calculating Torture is the first report to combine the use of solitary in local and federal jails in addition to state and federal prisons. It is based on analysis of data recently released by the federal Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) as well as by state prison systems that did not report to BJS, and data from a survey of local jails conducted by the Vera Institute of Justice.

These report numbers come closer than have any previously published figures in accounting for the total number of people in solitary confinement in U.S. prisons and jails. Previous counts have largely focused on prisons, failing to include jails. In some cases, earlier data also omitted some states, and/or counted only those individuals held in solitary confinement for more than two weeks. For these reasons, previous reports have offered an incomplete picture of how extensively the discredited practice is used and the number of people it affects.

Solitary Watch and the Unlock the Box Campaign, 2023. 16p.

By the Unlock the Box Campaign

There is a growing movement across the United States to end or restrict solitary confinement and to employ alternative interventions that improve safety and well-being. Fueling this surge in efforts at ending solitary is a recognition that solitary confinement is a form of torture. It inflicts terrible suffering and injury—physical, psychological, emotional, and social—on individuals who have experienced it or are currently subjected to it and has severe effects on their loved ones and on the wider community. This horrific practice is in extensive use across the country, damaging or destroying untold lives. Deeply disturbed by this reality, an increasing number of campaigns led by people who have survived solitary confinement and those with loved ones in solitary now or in the past have helped spur legislative and administrative policy changes to curb the use of solitary and to promote alternatives. Between 2009 and 2022, in 45 states, 886 bills were introduced to restrict or end solitary confinement in some form; 40 states have passed at least one of these bills. In 2021 alone, 153 pieces of legislation were filed across 37 states to regulate some aspect of solitary confinement, the vast majority seeking to end at least some aspect of the practice in state prisons and jails, youth facilities, and other carceral settings. An additional 74 bills were introduced in 2022, and 16 bills were passed in 2022, namely, in New York, Kentucky, Illinois, Connecticut, Louisiana, Virginia, Hawaii, Colorado, and Maryland, with additional bills to be acted on, as of the writing of this report. Anti-solitary efforts have also contributed to the closure of entire prisons, buildings, and units used to inflict solitary, most recently with the closure of supermax prisons in New York and Connecticut

Unlock the Box Campaign, 2023. 64p.

By Damon M. Petrich, Travis C. Pratt, Cheryl Lero Jonson, and Francis T. Cullen

Beginning in the 1970s, the United States began an experiment in mass imprisonment. Supporters argued that harsh punishments such as imprisonment reduce crime by deterring inmates from reoffending. Skeptics argued that imprisonment may have a criminogenic effect. The skeptics were right. Previous narrative reviews and meta-analyses concluded that the overall effect of imprisonment is null. Based on a much larger meta-analysis of 116 studies, the current analysis shows that custodial sanctions have no effect on reoffending or slightly increase it when compared with the effects of noncustodial sanctions such as probation. This finding is robust regardless of variations in methodological rigor, types of sanctions examined, and sociodemographic characteristics of samples. All sophisticated assessments of the research have independently reached the same conclusion. The null effect of custodial compared with noncustodial sanctions is considered a “criminological fact.” Incarceration cannot be justified on the grounds it affords public safety by decreasing recidivism. Prisons are unlikely to reduce reoffending unless they can be transformed into people-changing institutions on the basis of available evidence on what works organizationally to reform offenders.

Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, Volume 50. 2021

By Human Rights Watch

“A Nightmare for Everyone: The Health Care Crisis in Pakistan’s Prisons,” documents widespread deficiencies in prison health care in Pakistan and the consequences for a total prison population of more than 88,000 people. Pakistan has one of the world’s most overcrowded prison systems, with cells designed for a maximum of 3 people holding up to 15. Severe overcrowding has compounded existing health care deficiencies, leaving inmates vulnerable to communicable diseases and unable to get medicines and treatment for even basic health needs, as well as emergencies.

Washington, DC: HRW, 2023. 63p.

By Evelyn F. McCoy, Paige Thompson, Travis Reginal, and Natalie Lima

Jail incarceration continues to be a main driver of the mass incarceration crisis in the United States and to negatively affect individuals, families, and communities. Racial disparities in local jail populations are significant, particularly to the detriment of Black communities. Involvement in the criminal legal system, even when brief, can have severe consequences, including barriers to sustaining employment and securing stable housing, poor physical and mental health stemming from chronic stress and limited access to adequate health care, and disruptions to family relationships and social support networks.

To address these issues, Philadelphia implemented a multipronged reform plan supported by the Safety and Justice Challenge (SJC) to reduce its jail population and associated racial and ethnic disparities. Since 2015, Philadelphia has significantly reduced its jail population through these SJC efforts, which included closing a jail facility, launching a strategy across decision points in the criminal legal system, strengthening collaboration and cross-agency partnerships, launching a formal committee to represent community members’ perspectives, and analyzing data to identify racial and ethnic disparities across decision points. This report describes Philadelphia’s major SJC strategies, documents how it navigated challenges and advanced tangible reform efforts, and explores the perceived impacts of these strategies on its efforts to engage community members, reduce local jail use, and implement system reforms that advance equity. Lessons learned include that it is possible to significantly reduce jail populations in large cities with comprehensive, cross-agency collaboration; that such jail population reductions do not necessarily mean racial and ethnic disparities will also decrease; that reform fatigue is a reality for long-term initiatives like the SJC and can make it difficult for stakeholders to sustain efforts; and that meaningful community engagement is challenging and requires educating stakeholders and community members.

Urban Institute. 2023. 36p.

By Kristen M. Budd, Ph.D. and Niki Monazzam

Twenty-seven states and the federal government incarcerated 96,370 people in private prisons in 2021, representing 8% of the total state and federal prison population. Private for-profit prisons incarcerated 96,370 American residents in 2021, representing 8% of the total state and federal prison population. Since 2000, the number of people housed in private prisons has increased 10%. Harmful crime policies of the 1980s and beyond fueled a rapid expansion in the nation’s prison population. The resulting burden on the public sector led to the modern emergence of for-profit prisons in many states and the federal system. Of the 1.2 million people in federal and state prisons, 8%, or 96,370 people, were in private prisons as of year end 2021.

Washington, DC: The Sentencing Project, 2023. 3p.

By Ashley Nellis

Extreme punishments, including the death penalty and life imprisonment, are a hallmark of the United States’ harsh criminal legal system. Nationwide one of every 15 women in prison — over 6,600 women — are serving a sentence of life with parole, life without parole, or a virtual life sentence of 50 years or more. The nearly 2,000 women serving life-without-parole (LWOP) sentences can expect to die in prison. Death sentences are permitted by 27 states and the federal government, and currently 52 women sit on death row. This report presents new data on the prevalence of both of these extreme sentences imposed on women. Across the U.S. there are nearly 2,000 women serving life-without-parole (LWOP) sentences and another 52 women who have been sentenced to death. The majority have been convicted of homicide. Regarding capital punishment, women are sitting on death row in 15 states. Women are serving LWOP sentences in all but six states. Three quarters of life sentences are concentrated in 12 states and the federal system. It is notable that in all states with a high count of women serving LWOP, there is at least one woman on death row as well. Two exceptions to the overlap are Colorado and Michigan which do not have anyone serving a death sentence because it is not statutorily allowed.

Brooklyn: National Black Women's Justice Initiative, 2021,

By Marion Vannier and Ashley Nellis

This paper considers the pains of life-sentence imprisonment through the novel vantage point of old age understood as a process. Our prison populations are getting older and the use of life sentences is dramatically increasing. Yet, research, campaigning, law and policy have not addressed the long-term consequences of imposing life sentences on prisoners who will age. Whilst far from exhaustive, our study draws on studies in gerontology, health policy and penology. We rely on shared analysis of collected official data from the US and the UK to highlight how the expansion and growth of life sentences on the one hand, and the dramatic aging of the prison population, on the other, are intertwined and need to be considered together. This article emphasizes the urgency of taking a holistic approach to penal severity, one that includes analyses of scale, lived experiences, as well as of law and politics, to uncover the multiple forms of marginalization elderly prisoners are exposed to. Aging is a phenomenon we will all experience, yet, in the context of imprisonment, we argue that old age is a ‘prison problem’ rather than a ‘prisoner problem,’, urging research and policy to depart from the conventional and reductive view of the older prisoner as one in need of transformation and treatment or as being inherently criminal

Punishment & Society 1–22 © The Author(s) 2023

By Ashley Nellis

Before America’s era of mass incarceration took hold in the early 1970s, the number of individuals in prison was less than 200,000. Today, it’s 1.4 million; and more than 200,000 people are serving life sentences – one out of every seven in prison. More people are sentenced to life in prison in America than there were people in prison serving any sentence in 1970. Nearly five times the number of people are now serving life sentences in the United States as were in 1984, a rate of growth that has outpaced even the sharp expansion of the overall prison population during this period. The now commonplace use of life imprisonment contradicts research on effective public safety strategies, exacerbates already extreme racial injustices in the criminal justice system, and exemplifies the egregious consequences of mass incarceration. In 2020, The Sentencing Project obtained official corrections data from all states and the Federal Bureau of Prisons to produce our 5th national census on life imprisonment.

Washington, DC: The Sentencing Project, 2021. 46p.

By Justin Helepololei

This dissertation draws on ethnographic research conducted with prison abolitionists and criminal justice reform activists in Western Massachusetts - a context in which the sheriffs who operate county jails see themselves as reformers. I use the concept of a “progressive jail assemblage” to analyze the varied actors and logics that sustain incarceration locally, focusing especially on the use of care discourses and practices. I consider how progressive jailing puts prison abolitionists in the position of being against some forms of care. At the same time, abolitionists have put forth competing notions of care, ones they see as building a world in which prisons and jails would not exist. Informed by interviews with formerly incarcerated organizers who navigate this assemblage, I argue that both tendencies have the potential to reinforce the hierarchies that sustain incarceration, but they also have the potential to create openings for undoing the world as it exists.

Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts, 2023. 265p.

y Léon Digard and Elizabeth Swavola

Approximately two-thirds of the more than 740,000 people held in locally run jails across the United States have not been convicted of a crime—they are presumed innocent and simply waiting for their day in court.a This “pretrial population” has grown significantly over time—increasing 433 percent between 1970 and 2015, from 82,922 people to 441,790.b People held in pretrial detention accounted for an increasing proportion of the total jail population over the same time period: 53 percent in 1970 and 64 percent in 2015.c This growth is in large part due to the increased use of monetary bail. Historically, the purpose of bail was to facilitate the release of people from jail pending trial, with conditions set to ensure their appearance in court. Over time, however, those conditions have shifted away from no requirement that money be paid—or a requirement that money be paid only when people failed to appear in court—to upfront payment of cash bail and bail bonds issued by for-profit companies. Pretrial detention has far-reaching negative consequences. This brief presents information on the way that pretrial detention is currently used and summarizes research on its impacts.

New York: Vera Institute of Justice, 2019. 17p.

The Monitoring Team is issuing this Special Report to advise the Court and the Parties of the continued imminent risk of harm to incarcerated individuals and staff in the New York City jails. The first few months of 2022 have revealed the jails remain unstable and unsafe for both inmates and staff. The volatility and instability in the jails is due, in no small part, to unacceptable levels of fear of harm by detainees and staff alike. Despite initial hopes that the Second Remedial Order (dkt. 398), entered in September 2021, would help the Department gain traction toward initiating reform on the most immediate issues, the Department’s attempts to implement the required remedial steps have faltered and, in some instances, regressed. These failures suggest an even more discouraging picture about the prospect for material improvements to the jails’ conditions. Furthermore, the Department’s staffing crisis continues and the New York City Mayor’s Emergency Executive Order, first issued on September 15, 2021, and still in effect (through multiple extensions) as of the filing of this report, acknowledges that, among other things, “excessive staff absenteeism among correction officers and supervising officers has contributed to a rise in unrest and disorder.” The Monitoring Team’s staffing analysis, discussed in detail below, reveals that the Department’s staff management and deployment practices are so dysfunctional that if left unaddressed, sustainable and material advancement of systemic reform will remain elusive, if not impossible, to attain. …

New York: The Independent Monitoring Team, 2022. 78p.

By James Bonta

The search for ‘what works’ in the assessment and rehabilitation of justice-involved persons dates back at least to the 1960s and an argument can be made that it is even earlier than that. However, it was probably Lipton, Martinson, and Wilks’ (1975) review of the treatment literature that catapulted ‘what works’ to the forefront of correctional research and practice. The story of their review and Robert Martinson’s popularisation of the review is well known. The conclusion from the review was that ‘these data…give us little reason to hope that we have in fact found a sure way of reducing recidivism through rehabilitation’ (Martinson, 1974, p.49). This proclamation was quickly translated into ‘nothing works’ and opened the gates to the ‘get tough’ movement. After all, it was argued, if treatment does not work then our only alternative is to punish law-breakers justly and fairly in the hope that it will deter them from further crime. The view that ‘nothing works’ did not go unchallenged. Ted Palmer (1975) was almost alone in supporting rehabilitation efforts at the time. …

Manchester: HM Inspectorate of Probation, 2023. 13p.

By The Trachtenberg School of Public Policy and Public Administration Columbian College of Arts & Sciences George Washington University

JPI partnered with graduate students from George Washington University’s Trachtenberg School of Public Policy & Public Administration to explore the landscape of transitional housing for individuals returning home after long prison terms. Returning Citizens: Promising practices and recommendations for the District of Columbia presents the research and findings of the team, who explored challenges with reentry, best practices in transitional housing, and recommendations for a holistic community approach to support the transition from prison to the community. Washington, DC leaders need to take action to improve reentry services, and this report provides several actionable recommendations to make the journey home more accessible and sustainable.

Washington DC: Justice Policy Institute, 2022. 89p.

By Justice Policy Institute

Virginia is at a crossroads entering the 2022 legislative session. Progressive reforms, including abolishing the death penalty and broadening appeal rights, were a focal point of the last several years, but were primarily partisan with the support of only three Republicans. In 2022, control of Virginia will split, with the House of Delegates and Executive Branch controlled by Republicans, and the Senate of Virginia slightly leaning Democrat. While this poses a challenge for legislative activity, it provides an opportunity to step back and explore the critical issues faced by Virginia’s adult criminal justice system. The number of people in Virginia’s prison system, which declined for the first time in 2009 after four decades of growth, has plateaued in recent years. Virginia’s system remains plagued with dysfunction that disproportionately impacts communities of color and keeps people locked up for extremely long sentences. These practices have resulted in a costly system. In 2014, the Justice Policy Institute reported that Virginia spent $1.064 billion to run itsprison system, and even with a population decrease, the 2020 budget increased 25 percent to $1.34 billion. However, this is only part of the story. The toll of mass incarceration in Virginia has fallen disproportionately on the shoulders of its Black and Brown citizens, with devastating consequences. This is particularly pronounced among those persons serving extreme prison sentences.

Washington, DC: Justice Policy Institute, 2022. 16p.

By Jacqueline Beard

Sentences of Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP sentences) were available for courts to impose from 2005 to 2012. They were designed to detain offenders who posed a significant risk of causing serious harm to the public through further serious offences in prison until they no longer posed such a risk. IPP sentences are indeterminate as opposed to fixed-term sentences. They have a minimum term that must be served in custody, sometimes called a ‘tariff’ that must be served before a prisoner can be considered for release by the Parole Board. The prisoner can then only be released once the Parole Board is satisfied the prisoner no longer needs to be confined for the safety of the public. Release is never automatic, and prisoners can be detained indefinitely if the Parole Board decides it is not safe to release them. When released, a person serving an IPP sentence will be on licence, subject to conditions. Breaching the conditions of the licence may result in the person being recalled to prison. If recalled, a person must remain in prison until the Parole Board is satisfied that custody is no longer necessary for public protection. The licence will be in force indefinitely until its termination. People serving an IPP sentence are eligible to have termination of their licence considered by the Parole Board ten years after their first release.

London: House of Commons Library, 2023. 22p.