By Niko Leiva, Osvaldo Avila

As an alternative to incarceration, in 2018 Los Angeles County launched the Reentry Intensive Case Management Services (RICMS) program. The RICMS program coordinates the services of multiple community-based service providers throughout LA County. It links people who have been involved with the criminal legal system to commu­nity health workers, many of whom have personal experience with incarceration, sub­stance use disorders and addiction, and other issues RICMS clients face. These commu­nity health workers provide case management services and mentorship, and help clients navigate the many services and other forms of support available to them.

MDRC evaluated the implementation of the RICMS program and found that the program is a promising approach to improving the lives of its clients, particu­larly by reducing their future contact with the criminal legal system. As part of the evaluation, in 2021 and 2022 an MDRC research team conducted semistructured interviews with RICMS community health workers and clients to learn more about how services are delivered and about the experiences of RICMS clients. This brief presents the stories and experiences they shared.

New York: MDRC, 2023. 10p.

By David S. Rubenstein & Pratheepan Gulasekaram

The vast majority of detained immigrants are held in facilities operated by private corporations. Over the past decade, academics and dedicated advocates have shed critical light on the structural causes and effects of privatized immigration detention, offering a range of policy prescriptions along the way. Until now, however, federalism has been a virtual blind spot in that reformist agenda. Intervening, this Essay draws federalism into the spotlight.

Stanford Law Review Online Volume 71 (2018-2019), 13p.

By Marco Castillo, Sera Linardi, Ragan Petrie

Many previously incarcerated individuals are rearrested following release from prison. We investigate whether encouragement to use reentry support services reduces rearrest. Field experiment participants are offered a monetary incentive to complete different dosages of visits, either three or five, to a support service provider. The incentive groups increased visits, and one extra visit reduces rearrests three years after study enrollment by six percentage points. The results are driven by Black participants who are more likely to take up treatment and benefit the most from visits. The study speaks to the importance of considering first-stage heterogeneity and heterogeneous treatment effects.

Munich : Munich Society for the Promotion of Economic Research - CESifo GmbH

Munich Society for the Promotion of Economic Research - CESifo, 2024. 46p.

By Emily J. Salisbury & Allison Crawford

Over 20 years has passed since the principles of gender-responsive correctional strategies were published in a foundational report in the U.S. These practices acknowledge the unique characteristics and life experiences of justice-involved women, have undergone rigorous empirical testing, and are shown to effectively reduce women’s recidivism. In part, they supported the United Nation’s adoption of minimum human rights afforded to women serving custodial and non-custodial criminal sentences. This paper presents updated research evidence that continues to amplify the need for gender-responsive principles and practices, including the role of victimization in girls’ and women’s offending trajectories and the intersection of relationships, relational identity, and trauma as key drivers for justice involvement. Further, because the perinatal needs of justice-involved women are a frequently overlooked area of inquiry among the gender-responsive literature, this scholarship is also summarized using a reproductive justice framework. Finally, we illustrate the impact of gender-responsive scholarship by sharing some of the practice and technology innovations that have emerged, while acknowledging there is much yet to accomplish.

Health & Justice, Vol. 13 (1) , 1-15,

By Cassia Rowland | Thomas Pope 

The prison system in England and Wales is in an extremely poor state. Levels of violence, self-harm and drug use are shockingly high, prisoners’ work and education opportunities severely limited. Buildings are crumbling or in severe disrepair, many dangerously so, and physical conditions often unsanitary.1,2 Inexperienced staff are struggling to cope with these increasingly fraught circumstances. The failure of successive governments since at least the early 2000s to expand the number of places to meet the growing number of prisoners has put severe pressure on capacity and exacerbated this decline.3 Deep funding cuts implemented in the early 2010s have still not been fully reversed, even as the prison population has hit new highs.4 And while capital investment has risen sharply in recent years, this is focused on building new prisons and is insufficient to address the growing maintenance backlog.5 In just the last two years, eight prisons have been issued with ‘urgent notifications’ by the prisons inspectorate, escalating serious concerns directly to the secretary of state.6 Cuts to prison officer numbers as part of the coalition government’s austerity programme began to bite from 2012/13, with officer numbers in 2013/14 down 26% from 2009/10 and then staying flat until 2016/17, even as the prison population rose.7 Recruitment since 2017/18 has partially reversed this, but many of these new officers have been to staff new prisons, leaving the number of prison officers per 1,000 prisoners in March 2024 still 8% below 2009/10 levels. Crucially, even as workforce numbers have recovered, the average officer is now much less experienced than before staff cuts. This combination of reduced staff numbers and experience is likely to have contributed substantially to prisons’ overall declining performance. That is the national picture. But what is the situation within individual prisons? Which are doing better or worse, and what might be driving that? This report – the first in a new series of analyses of public services at the local level across England and Wales from the Institute for Government and funded by the Nuffield Foundation – digs into the detail of prison performance to answer some of these questions. We find widespread decline across most prisons on a range of measures. Violence, self-harm and ‘protesting behaviours’ have risen sharply across almost all prisons. However, some buck the trend – particularly open prisons (category D sites). Clearly this is at least in part to do with the types of prisoner these prisons hold. But that is not the whole story, with open prisons continuing to outperform other categories even as the prisoner mix has changed in the last year. What is clear is that overcrowding and a lack of purposeful activity for prisoners are significantly associated with poor performance, especially violence. Reception prisons, with the highest levels of overcrowding and lowest purposeful activity, are over-represented among the worst performers 

London: Institute for Government, 2025. 45p.

By Ayumi Takano, Kunihiko Takahashi, Tatsuhiko Anzai, Takashi Usami, Shiori Tsutsumi, Yuka Kanazawa, Yousuke Kumakura, Toshihiko Matsumoto

Background: Methamphetamine use is related to severe health, social, and criminal challenges. However, there is limited evidence regarding the factors associated with the recurrence of drug use among individuals who have used methamphetamine, particularly within populations involved in the criminal justice system. This study aimed to identify predictors of illicit drug use at a one-year follow-up among males in Japan who have used methamphetamine and are involved in the criminal justice system.

Methods: The study participants were adult males on probation due to methamphetamine use or possession and were involved in a community-based program. The participants were recruited early in their probation period and participated in telephone-based surveys conducted by mental health center staff. We analyzed one-year follow-up data to investigate the recurrence rate of illicit drug use and associated risk factors using multiple logistic regression.

Results: Out of 234 participants, 27 (11.5 %) used illicit drugs during the one-year follow-up period. After adjusting for demographic characteristics, severity of drug use, type of probation, and use of treatment for substance use disorders, the use of social welfare services (OR = 2.78) and a lack of trustworthy relationships (OR = 3.17) were significantly associated with recurrence of illicit drug use.

Conclusions: This study suggested that individuals facing challenges in maintaining stable living conditions and building trustworthy relationships were more likely to return to drug use early in their probation period. Comprehensive and tailored support focused on social stabilization and relationship-building is recommended to aid recovery in males who have experienced methamphetamine use.

Drug and Alcohol Dependence Reports, Volume 14, March 2025, 100316

By Gabriel Weinberger, Raul Armenta, and Elisa Nicolett

In the United States there are approximately 3.7 million people under community supervision—also known as probation or parole. People under community supervision often need supportive services, such as behavioral health (to deal with mental health and substance use disorders), education, employment, housing, and transportation services. Such services are usually provided by local governments or community-based organizations, which play a pivotal role in helping people under supervision to avoid contact with the criminal legal system. Probation officers typically provide referrals for services, though research suggests that a low percentage of people under community supervision end up receiving services. Studies have also shown that those affected by the criminal legal system, including those under community supervision, live in marginalized and under-funded communities, and lack adequate access to services. As a result, researchers, practitioners, and advocates have worked to develop programs that increase the supply of available services and lead to greater cooperation with social services providers in the community to connect people to services. Recent innovations within probation departments (about 80 percent of people under community supervision are on probation and they are the focus of this brief) have incorporated a “community hub” model where multiple service providers are located in the same places as probation offices to facilitate access to services for clients and to raise officers’ awareness of those services. This brief describes an MDRC study of a community hub model in Los Angeles (LA) County, the Developing Opportunities and Offering Reentry Solutions Community Reentry Center (better known as “DOORS”). DOORS was established inside a building where probation officers also work. The DOORS model is intended to provide probation officers with the opportunity to connect adults on probation to service providers located within the same building with the goal of reducing future involvement in the criminal legal system. However, within eight months of opening, the COVID-19 pandemic forced DOORS to shift to a hybrid model where services were provided both in person and virtually. Since study data collection ended, DOORS has expanded in LA County as a hybrid model that is not always co-located in a probation building.

New York: MDRC.2025. 20p.

By Charlie Taylor

The rate of self-harm among women in prison has rocketed in the last 10 years and is now 8.5 times higher than in men’s jails.

Rather than specific health care interventions, this thematic focuses on what practical support officers and leaders can offer women to reduce the likelihood that they will resort to self-harm.

We found that the paucity of regimes, the difficulties in enabling visits, and the lack of training or support for officers all contributed to a failure to help women cope. Staff spent a lot of their time helping women suffering acute crises, leaving little time to provide less intensive yet vital support for other women, which was taking a toll on the mental health of both staff and the women in their care.

London: HM Inspector of Prisons, 2025. 47p.

By Brady P. Horn, Aakrit Joshi and Paul Guerin

Substance use disorders (SUD) are very prevalent and costly in the United States and New Mexico. Over 20 million individuals in the US meet diagnostic criteria for SUD and over 65 thousand US residents died from drug opioid overdose in 2020. It is well known that there is a strong correlation between SUD and incarceration. National studies have found that on average two thirds of prisoners have SUD and approximately 30% of inmates report having an opioid use disorder (OUD). There is growing momentum nationally to incorporate SUD, particularly OUD treatment, into incarceration systems and numerous studies have found that providing medication for opioids use disorder (MOUD) in incarceration systems is clinically effective. Since 2005, there has been a Methadone Maintenance Treatment (MMT) continuation program within the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) where individuals who were already receiving community-based treatment could continue their treatment within the jail. Prior work has found that this program was associated with reduced crime. In 2017 this program was expanded and started providing treatment to individuals who had not been receiving methadone in the community prior to incarceration. In this study we evaluate the impact of this treatment program. Data was collected from numerous different sources, linked, thoroughly cleaned, and a difference-in-difference empirical strategy is used. Robust evidence is found that MMT initiation reduced reincarceration. Our main results find that MMT initiation is associated with a per-person reduction in 19 incarceration days in the one-year period after jail-based MMT was received. We also find evidence confirming prior studies that found MMT continuation reduces recidivism. We find that jail-based MMT continuation is associated with a per-person reduction in 31 incarceration days in the one-year period post release. Also, a heterogenous treatment effect is found where individuals that received jail-based MMT for longer periods of time had larger reductions in reincarceration. Individuals who received MMT initiation for 70 days or more were associated with 22 fewer reincarceration days and individuals that received MMT continuation were associated with 60 fewer reincarceration days.

Albuquerque: University of New Mexico, Institute for Social Research, 2023. 43p

By Breanna Boyett, Camella Rosenberg,  Paul Guerin,

As an alternative to incarceration program, the Bernalillo County Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) Community Custody Program (CCP) aims to reduce recidivism rates among non- violent offenders while decreasing alcohol and substance use for a higher possibility of successful community reintegration. The program provides community-based supervision and treatment reporting for offenders who meet eligibility criteria. This review is designed as a process evaluation and a preliminary outcome evaluation. The evaluation comprises a CCP staff survey and a review of CCP inmate records. The study found that clients who participated in CCP experienced reductions in criminal justice system contacts following CCP. Approximately 70% of CCP participants did not have a court case following their exposure to CCP during the post-period, and 70% were not booked into the MDC following their exposure period. Inmates enrolled in CCP had a statistically significant reduction in both bookings and court cases after involvement in the program. When comparing pre- and post-period bookings and court cases, both felony and misdemeanor level bookings illustrated a statistically significant reduction in the follow up cases in the post-period. Clients who recidivated had the highest number of court cases and bookings in the first year after their time in the program, with recidivism decreasing in the second and third years following their release from CCP. The average client who recidivated did so in the first year post-CCP.

Albuquerque: University of New Mexico, Institute for Social Research , 2023. 37p.

By Samuel A. Torres

This report investigates the alignment of scores on the Criminogenic Risk and Behavioral Health Needs Framework (“risk-needs framework”) with recidivism likelihood as part of a broader evaluation of the Resource Reentry Center (RRC) and Justice and Mental Health Collaboration Program (JMHCP) in Bernalillo County. Recidivism is operationalized as a subsequent arrest beyond an initial booking into the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC). The capacity of the risk-needs framework to predict new bookings is compared with that of the Proxy Risk to Recidivate Screener (“Proxy”), one of the screening tools used to construct risk-needs framework scores. Retrospective analysis of jail data over an eight-month period for over 6,000 inmates originally released between July and October 2019 indicates that risk-needs framework scores do not correspond to jail readmission rates or length of stay in a consistent manner. The Proxy scores align much more closely with subsequent bookings and length of stay. If the goal of the risk-needs framework is at least partly to predict recidivism risk, this report recommends the Proxy be used in lieu of the full framework to screen arrestees’ risk to reoffend.

Albuquerque: University of New Mexico, Institute for Social Research, Center for Applied Research and Analysis, 2021. 13p.  

By Elise M. Ferguson, Alise O’Connell 

 This report follows a cohort of more than 28,000 inmates released from the Metropolitan Detention Center in 2010 over a nine-year follow-up time period. Overall recidivism is described as well as recidivism by sex, race/ethnicity, and age at release. Also presented are cumulative recidivism rates and rates by year of first return to custody. 

 Albuquerque: University of New Mexico, Institute for Social Research, Center for Applied Research and Analysis, 2020. 80p

By E. Ferguson, H. De La Cerda, and P. Guerin 

This report reviews the impact of preventive detention motions on the Failure to Appear (FTA) and New Criminal Activity (NCA) rate for individuals in Bernalillo County charged with felony crimes and for which the Public Safety Assessment (PSA) was administered and used in the pretrial release decision making process from the Bernalillo County Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC). This report contains several sections. Following this introduction, we include a brief description of the sample of court cases used in this review. Next, we discuss PSA recommendations and crime types, the PSA and pretrial detention motions, pretrial detention motions and FTA and NCA rates, and NCA and charge levels. 

Highlights: • A Pre-Trial Detention motion was more likely to be granted for cases with more restrictive PSA recommendations. • Preventive Detention Motions were not associated with failure to appear to court or new criminal activity. • As PSA recommendation categories became more restrictive FTA rates and NCA rates increased. • The most serious charge for BCMC cases were violent (35%), property (30%), and drug (27%). • ROR release recommendations accounted for 32.7% of violent charges recommendations. RORs had an FTA rate of 8.5% and an NCA rate of 8.3%. • PSA recommendation categories were not evenly distributed between violent and non-violent charges. • Preventive detention motions have been filed for all PSA recommendation categories, including 18.7% with a ROR. • Higher FTA and NCA rates were associated with drug offenses, property offenses and public order offenses. • Overall, the new criminal activity rate was less than 20% and was primarily for charges of a lower or equivalent level as the assessed case. 

Albuquerque: University of New Mexico, Institute for Social Research , 2020. 16p.

By Robin Joy

Vermont’s alternatives to the criminal justice system are available pre-charge, postcharge, and post-sentence. However, there has been some question about the extent to which access to alternative programs might be influencing racial disparities in the criminal justice system. To explore this notion, Crime Research Group (CRG) secured funding to examine whether there are disparities in who is served by alternative programs. By triangulating several data sources, researchers were able to describe who was served by Adult Court Diversion from 2015 through 2019, and who was served by the Treatment Courts from 2013-2018. However, several data quality issues impacted researchers’ ability to perform advanced statistical analyses capable of identifying factors that significantly contribute to whether an individual is served by an alternative program. On Measuring Disparities with Administrative Data Using administrative data to model human decision-making presents several challenges. First, because Vermont is a small state, researchers usually run into the issue of low numbers. This is especially true when trying to examine the experiences of marginalized populations within the state. Oftentimes, data on Asian, Indigenous, and Hispanic Vermonters must be excluded from analyses because there are so few people represented in the data that disclosing numbers has the potential to identify specific individuals. As a result, administrative data is not able to describe the experiences of these individuals. Qualitative research, which captures the themes of people’s experiences while masking their identities, is needed to bridge this gap. Second, issues arise when attempting to match data from one dataset to information stored within another dataset. Researchers were unable to match Treatment Court data with Vermont criminal histories because the data was inconsistent or non-existent. Successful diversion participants have their records expunged two years after the case is dismissed by the prosecutor so if no other record is found, an assumption is made that these are first time offenders. Researchers cannot be sure if an individual is a first-time offender, a consideration that is certainly used by prosecutors when determining whether to refer to Court Diversion.

Court Diversion Adult Court Diversion is governed by statute, administered by the Attorney General, and delivered by a network of non-profit organizations. CRG used Adjudication Data and Vermont Criminal Histories to test for disparities in who was referred to diversion; both data sets originate from Court records. Analysis of the data revealed that: x From 2015-2019, there were 6,127 defendants referred to Diversion. Most defendants referred were White (84.9% / 5,204). There were 259 Black defendants, 59 Asian defendants, and 45 Latinx defendants. The race of 530 (8.7%) defendants was either missing, unknown, or not reported. Race is as recorded by law enforcement. x The most common offense committed by those served in Court Diversion was Motor Vehicle offenses that were not DUI or Gross Negligent related (e.g., Driving on a Suspended License). Public order offenses were the second most common. The offenses include Disorderly Conduct, Trespassing, and Violations of Conditions of Release. For these offenses, 7% of all charges for Black and White offenders were referred to Court Diversion. x Statistical tests indicate that the race of the Public Order and Motor Vehicle offenders was associated with whether they entered Court Diversion. However, because of the administrative data issues discussed above (page 2), it was not possible to build a statistical model capable of determining exactly how race is related to the Court Diversion participation. Treatment Courts In Vermont, Treatment Courts operate as special dockets within the criminal court system. The Judiciary operates a Mental Health Docket and a Drug Treatment Docket in Chittenden County, a Drug Treatment Docket in Rutland and Washington Counties and a Regional DUI Docket serving residents in Windsor, Windham and Orange Counites. The dockets function in a team atmosphere to help the participant access treatment and hold them accountable for the underlying criminal offense. Treatment Courts are evidence-based, and several studies have found them to be effective for reducing recidivism (Gennette & Joy, 2019; Joy & Bellas, 2017; NPC Research Team, 2009; Wicklund & Halvorsen, 2014). Analysis of the Docket databases and the Court Adjudication data-based showed that: Between 2013 and 2018, 1,076 people entered Phase 1 of the Treatment Dockets. Chittenden’s combined dockets served 52% of the people, while the newest docket, the DUI Regional Docket, served the fewest with 57 people served. x During the five-year study period, all Treatment Dockets served only 30 black people, and even fewer Asian or Native American persons. x The Rutland docket served 12 (3.8%) people of color and 296 (95%) White people. The most common charge served by the docket was Violations of Conditions of Release (201). The next two most common charges were Retail Theft (196) and Petit Larceny (129), Burglary was the fourth most common charge (104). Black offenders were less likely than white offenders to be referred for property offenses. This indicates there may be some structural reasons or gatekeeping that are keeping Black offenders from being referred. x On the Washington County Treatment Docket, burglary offenses were the most common charge (59 charges, not people a person can have more than one burglary charge on the docket). During the study period there were 25 Black people charged with burglary offenses in Washington county, but none appeared in the Treatment Docket database. This indicates that there may be gatekeeping or structural reasons that result in Black burglary defendants not being referred. x The Southeast Regional DUI Docket served fewer than five people of color between 2013 and 2018. There were 476 White defendants with potentially eligible charges during the study period, there were 8 Black people. One of the program benefits is a shorter incarcerative sentence. Because DUI is not a common crime Black people commit or get sentenced to a correctional facility for, the program will not have the same impact on Black incarceration rates as it does for White incarceration rates. Recommendations:  Vermont policymakers should incorporate racial impact statements when creating criminal justice policies. Racial impact statements are an analysis of the impact the proposed policy would have on marginalized groups. These statements serve as a tool for policy makers to evaluate potential disparities or other collateral consequences that would result from enactment of a particular policy. Typically, racial impact statements are considered prior to the policy’s adoption and implementation. Several states have implemented the use of racial impact statements. Also, additional information should be recorded so that future efforts to analyze disparities using administrative data might be successful. CRG recommends including the following fields in Court Diversion and Treatment Court data collection by the entity best able to capture the information : whether the defendant was offered Diversion, whether the defendant refused Diversion, and any socio-economic or behavioral risk factors that may affect participation in Diversion or Treatment Court These additional fields will provide a clearer picture of why certain offenders are served by Court Diversion and Treatment Court and why others are not.    

Montpelier, VT: Crime Research Group, 2022. 23p.

By Megan A. Novak

In 2013, the Vermont Department of Corrections (DOC) began planning for significant changes in the way it delivered programs. The DOC adopted the National Institute of Corrections (NIC) Eight Evidence-Based Principles and developed the Risk Intervention Services (RIS) model with these principles as the foundation, specifically focusing on Principles 1 through 6— assess risk, enhance intrinsic motivation, target interventions, use cognitive behavioral approach, provide positive reinforcement, and provide ongoing support. All services and curricula administered in the DOC are now placed under the Program Services Director. New initiatives were put in place, staff were trained, the priority target population was identified, and implementation began in 2018. Now is the time to address Principle 7 (measure the relevant processes and practices) and Principle 8 (provide measurement feedback/using data to guide actions). To our knowledge, Vermont’s RIS model is the only one of its kind operating nationally that integrates clinical programming, education, and vocational training. As with any innovation, many changes have been made throughout implementation. The following process evaluation will first document how the new integrated programming model was conceptualized and planned. Then, the remainder of the report will describe the roles and responsibilities of RIS staff, services and curricula provided, the implementation process, and issues that have arisen throughout RIS implementation.   

Montpelier, VT: Crime Research Group, 2023. 56p.

By Robin Joy

In 2016, four of the Department of Corrections facilities began offering Risk Intervention Services-- an innovative suite of services including behavioral programming curricula, educational courses, and workforce development. Risk and other assessments at prison intake determine who is eligible to participate in RIS and identify which services should be administered. Methods and Objective: This study explores the impact of RIS participation for individuals who received behavioral programming services between 2016 and 2019. RIS participation data for 731 individuals was matched into Vermont Crime Information Center data to examine RIS participation’s impact on recidivism. Researchers considered RIS’s impact using the statutory definition of recidivism, as well as academic conceptualizations of recidivism. Key Findings: Using three different definitions/measures of recidivism, the study found RIS participants to have a recidivism rate of 14% (modified statutory definition), 27% (running recidivism rate), and 23% (three-year recidivism rate. These recidivism rates are lower than the 89.96% recidivism rate for high risk/high need Diversion participants found in a 2019 study. Using the three-year recidivism rate for any new conviction, analysis found no statistical correlation between an individual’s risk score and subsequent conviction. This suggests RIS is having a positive impact on participants' recidivism rate. Notably, RIS participants with a domestic violence conviction (90) had a three-year conviction rate of 21%. This was lower than the rate of recidivism in a 2011 study which found a recidivism rate of 37% for those with prior history of domestic violence conviction. Limitations During the study period (2016-2019), the DOC was not consistently or uniformly collecting data on all Risk Intervention Services. As such, this study was limited to exploring the impact of behavioral programming services on recidivism and did not investigate the impact of corrections education or workforce development services. Further, data on those who were eligible but declined and those whose sentences were too short to participate was not available. Therefore, the study was not able to investigate if the program was serving marginalized people equitably. Recommendations: The DOC Risk Intervention Services model appears promising. The DOC should consider creating an administrative control group of people who did not receive services when the assessment tools were validated. Because these individuals did not receive the service, they can provide a benchmark recidivism rate for comparing RIS recidivism rates. Future studies should use a three-year recidivism rate and focus only on new convictions rather than furlough violations and readmissions. This will make it easier to compare rates across years and programs and give a more holistic understanding of a person's behavior after programming is complete.  

 Montpelier, VT: Crime Research Group, 2023. 22p

By Robin Joy

This research brief contains a preliminary analysis on the use of Conditions of Release in Vermont Criminal Division and charges of Violations of Conditions of Release if a violation of 13 V.S.A. 7559(e). The purpose of this brief is to inform stakeholders on the following questions: • Who gets conditions of release? • What are the conditions? • Who violates conditions of release? CRG invites inquiries and discussions as we move forward with our research. Several data sources were used in this analysis. The Adjudication Database maintained by CRG was used to answer questions about county use of conditions versus released on own recognizance. The Judiciary created a data set for CRG that gave information on what conditions were imposed on people from March 2021- March 2022. CRG acquired the criminal histories (rap sheets) of people in the data set the judiciary provided to understand more about violations, criminal pasts, and current cases of the people on conditions.

Montpelier VT: Crime Research Group, 2024. 7p.

By  Jisha Menon  

This article explores the relationship between the law and personhood, dispossession and dignity. It asks: How might we move beyond a conception of dignity as the bounded property of the liberal, autonomous agent, toward a more capacious understanding of dignity, as the affective relationality between persons? How does the negative force of the death penalty radiate beyond the condemned and exert its power over their loved ones, family, and even the staff of the prison? What might it mean lose one’s autonomy, a word that derives from the law (nomos) over the self (autos), in the face of the state’s management of life and death? Exploring the moral and legal staging of the death penalty in Chinonye Chukwu’s Clemency (2019) and Boo Junfeng’s Apprentice (2016) this article examines conceptions of personhood when “civility” meets capital punishment.

Law, Culture and the HumanitiesOnlineFirst, © The Author(s) 2025, 17p.

By Rachel López and Geoff Dancy

Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court grappled with an issue of first impression in this country, but one familiar to other jurisdictions around the world—that is, whether a former head of state should be immune from prosecution for his criminal acts while in office. Those who argue in favor of criminal accountability, at home and abroad, often trumpet the democratic benefits of punishing state officials. Such justifications have also been consecrated in law, finding their way into judicial decisions as a basis for overturning amnesty laws. But is there any evidence to support these claims? Can a government really punish its way to a more democratic future?

Using empirical evidence from other countries that have prosecuted state officials for their crimes over the last three decades, this study sheds light on the possible effects of these prosecutions on democratic institutions and behaviors. First, it examines an in-depth case study of Guatemala, a country where this issue recently came to the fore, to develop a set of hypotheses about the democratic effects of punishing state officials. To determine whether the lessons gleaned from Guatemala are more generalizable, it tests these hypotheses using the most extensive global data set of prosecutions of government officials in domestic courts, which specifically focuses on human rights prosecutions.

Interestingly, the findings reveal a paradox. While criminal prosecutions of state officials for human rights violations are associated with some pro-democracy outcomes, like increased civil society activism and pro-democratic mobilization, they are also associated with greater political polarization and anti-system backlash. By contrast, they appear to have little effect on democratic institutions. Considering this data, a central takeaway is that the democratic effect of prosecuting political leaders tends to rest with the people. Whether punishing them helps to ensure a more democratic future depends more on how the populace responds—negatively or positively—than on the limited institutional effects resulting from punishment.

2025, 68p.

By Simon D. Venema https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2623-2964 s.d.venema@rug.nl, Petrick Glasbergen, […], and René Veenstra

Various programmes have been implemented in prisons to strengthen parental involvement and parent–child relationships during imprisonment. In-depth insights into such programmes are limited. This qualitative study compared the experiences of two groups of imprisoned fathers in the Netherlands: fathers who participated in a family approach programme (N = 10) and fathers in a comparison group (N = 29). Based on a thematic analysis, four key differences were identified between the family approach group and the comparison group. Fathers in the family approach group: (1) described more positive engagement activities in direct father–child interactions, (2) reflected more positively on their fathering role during imprisonment, (3) structurally included participation in the family approach programme in their narratives of how imprisonment affected father–child relationship quality, and (4) more often expressed feelings of uncertainty and caution when discussing family life after imprisonment. The findings of this study are informative for the mechanisms behind prison-based parenting and family relationship programmes and illustrate the potential of these programmes to alleviate the unintended negative impact of imprisonment on parental involvement and family relationships. Based on these findings, recommendations for further research and practice are provided.

European Journal of Criminology 2024, Vol. 21(4) 533–555 pages