Search results

Drawing on multi-method research conducted in 2013-2014, the purpose of this paper is to consider the extent and nature of disadvantage experienced by individuals with psychosocial and intellectual disabilities (PID) who come into contact with the criminal justice system in Zambia. The research was conducted as part of a wider project aiming to bring about improvements in how people with PID are dealt with by the criminal justice services.

The research activities included interviews with 29 individuals with PID who had experienced the criminal justice system as suspects, defendants or prisoners (“self-advocates”). A focus group and interviews were also conducted with the family members of people with PID who had criminal justice experience.

People with PID in contact with the criminal justice services in Zambia are disadvantaged and discriminated against routinely and systematically. Like all detainees, they experience harsh and at times brutal conditions of detention. However, because of their disabilities, such experiences can be more keenly felt: their disabilities may be exacerbated by detention or by limited or non-existent health care; and they are likely to be less resourceful than other detainees and, therefore, less able to cope with the privations of detention.

In drawing on the self-advocate interviews, this paper presents direct, vivid accounts of what it means to be a suspect, defendant or prisoner with disabilities in Zambia. These are extremely marginalised and multiply disadvantaged individuals whose voices are rarely heard.

Whilst the criminal justice system has evolved over the last seven years, it can be argued that the ability of the current criminal justice system in England and Wales to deal with the investigation, prosecution and trial of serious and complex fraud can still be challenged. Using material gathered whilst undertaking research for the Diploma in Compliance Studies at Exeter University, this paper makes a number of recommendations in this context. The existence of civil remedies and the regulatory structure created under the Financial Services Act 1986 may offer a limited opportunity to deal with some categories of commercial malpractice in an expedient and cost‐effective manner, outside the scope of the criminal justice system. This paper derives from research carried out with the purpose of reviewing the investigation, prosecution and trial of serious fraud in England and Wales in order to assess whether commercial malpractice is in fact a proper subject for ‘public law’, or whether it could be more effectively and expediently dealt with through civil law remedies, or by the self‐regulatory agencies created under the Financial Services Act 1986. This paper represents a summary of the main findings and interpretations of that research, which included interviews with three experts in the field. In considering this issue, one is bound in two ways. If one concludes that the criminal justice system can offer an effective and efficient method of the disposal of commercial fraud, the arguments for and against the use of the regulatory system become commensurably less significant. If, however, the conclusions suggest that major legislative and procedural changes are required to facilitate the effective and efficient prosecution of commercial fraud, the scope for use of regulatory sanctions where appropriate takes on a greater significance. Thus there are two elements in the writer's conclusion. First, there was concern to assess the veracity of the conclusions drawn by the Fraud Trials Committee in 1986 to the present, and other problems faced by the criminal justice system in the investigation, prosecution and trial of commercial fraud. Secondly, it was important to consider arguments for and against the use of regulatory sanctions for the disposal of commercial crime. The conclusions drawn from a review of the problems faced by the criminal justice system are, it is suggested, fundamental to the question of whether the increased use of regulatory sanctions is necessary, or desirable.

The purpose of this study was to describe programs that aim at programs to divert people with a mental condition from the criminal justice system to mental health services are being initiated, but reporting is limited and fragmented. This study described programs that aim at diverting persons with mental health conditions out of criminal justice systems to community mental health services, with the intention to inform research and practice.

A scoping review was used to map and synthesise diversion programs. Ten online data bases were searched. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews was used to direct the selection of sources. Research and evaluation publications and grey literature published from 2010 to 2021 in English language were included.

Eight distinct diversion programs were identified across 24 countries or territories covering five phases of the criminal justice process. Diversion programs included crisis intervention teams, the electronic linkage system, mobile crisis units, the criminal justice liaison program, problem-solving courts, the abstinence-based program, the community equivalence program and the forensic assertive community treatment program. Although distinct programs have the potential to form a system of diversion across the continuum of the criminal justice process, only two territories moved in that direction. Diversion programs reported overwhelmingly originated from high-income countries.

Stigma that labels people with mental health conditions as violent and dangerous need to be addressed. It is important to place diversion systems on national policy agendas and advocate for evidence-based interventions.

The study provides a blueprint on diversion systems to set a research agenda and develop a road map, tailored towards local contexts.

The purpose of this paper is to review the evidence of alcohol use disorders within the different stages of the criminal justice system in the UK. Furthermore it reviewed the worldwide evidence of alcohol brief interventions in the various stages of the criminal justice system.

A rapid systematic review of publications was conducted from the year 2000 to 2014 regarding the prevalence of alcohol use disorders in the various stages of the criminal justice system. The second part of the work was a rapid review of effectiveness studies of interventions for alcohol brief interventions. Studies were included if they had a comparison group. Worldwide evidence was included that consisted of up to three hours of face-to-face brief intervention either in one session or numerous sessions.

This review found that 64-88 per cent of adults in the police custody setting; 95 per cent in the magistrate court setting; 53-69 per cent in the probation setting and 5,913-863 per cent in the prison system and 64 per cent of young people in the criminal justice system in the UK scored positive for an alcohol use disorder. There is very little evidence of effectiveness of brief interventions in the various stages of the criminal justice system mainly due to the lack of follow-up data.

Brief alcohol interventions have a large and robust evidence base for reducing alcohol use in risky drinkers, particularly in primary care settings. However, there is little evidence of effect upon drinking levels in criminal justice settings. Whilst the approach shows promise with some effects being shown on alcohol-related harm as well as with young people in the USA, more robust research is needed to ascertain effectiveness of alcohol brief interventions in this setting.

This paper provides evidence of alcohol use disorders in the different stages of the criminal justice system in the UK using a validated tool as well as reviewing the worldwide evidence for short ( < three hours) alcohol brief intervention in this setting.

This chapter provides a genealogy of the Gladue–Ipeelee principle of special consideration of Indigenous circumstances at sentencing. The principle is codified in the 1996 statutory requirement that “all available sanctions other than imprisonment … should be considered for all offenders, with particular attention to the circumstances of Aboriginal offenders” (s. 718.2e of the Criminal Code of Canada). Using the Foucaultian genealogy method to produce a “history of the present,” this chapter eschews normative questions of how s. 718.2e has “failed” to reduce Indigenous over-incarceration to instead focus on how practices of “special consideration” reproduce settler-state paternalism. This chapter addresses three key components of the Gladue–Ipeelee principle: the collection of circumstances information, the characterization of those circumstances, and finally their consideration at sentencing. Part one focuses on questions of legitimacy and authority and explicates how authority and responsibility to produce Indigenous circumstances knowledge was transferred from the Department of Indian Affairs (DIA) to Indigenous Courtworker organizations in the late 1960s/early 1970s. Part two identifies how authority shapes problematization by examining the characterization of Indigenous circumstances in the two eras, finding that present-day Gladue reports articulate an Indigenous history and critique of colonialism as the root cause of Indigenous criminalization, whereas DIA reports prior to 1970 generally characterized this criminalization as a “failure to assimilate.” Part three focuses on the structural reproduction of power relations by exploring historical continuities in judicial and executive-branch consideration of Indigenous circumstances, suggesting that the Gladue–Ipeelee principle reinscribes a colonial “mercy” framework of diminished responsibility. The author discusses how the principle operates in the shadow of Indigenous over-incarceration as a form of state “recognition” and a technique of governance to encourage Indigenous participation in the settler justice system and suggests that the Gladue–Ipeelee principle produces a governing effect that reinforces settler-state authority by recirculating colonial practices and discourses of settler superiority.

For contemporary American young adults (aged 18–29), coresidence with parents is now the most common living arrangement. Recent research on residential transitions out of and back into the parental home shows that residential independence is still common, meaning that many young adults coreside with parents after first leaving the nest. The timing of residential independence and subsequent coresidence is often tied to other life-course outcomes, such as relationships and employment, as well as characteristics of the family context, such as family structure and financial resources. A small body of research also demonstrates that residential transitions are common following criminal justice contact experiences such as arrests and periods of incarceration. While this association does not appear to be explained by the family context, the current study argues there are several reasons to anticipate heterogeneity in coresidence patterns based on the childhood family context. Drawing on data from the 1997 cohort of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, I find that criminal justice contact is associated with coresidence with parents during young adulthood in a fairly consistent manner across different dimensions of family context (although parental education may play a role). These findings demonstrate the power of the criminal justice system in directing or redirecting residential trajectories and have implications for both individuals with contact and their families.

Issues of crime, justice, and incarceration play a crucial role in electoral politics. Recent Gallup polls reveal that nearly half of Americans view crime as an extremely serious or very serious problem. Such polls also reveal that Americans have little confidence in the criminal justice system. These issues have been exacerbated recently by the deaths of several young Black men including Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, Eric Garner in Staten Island, New York, and Laquan McDonald in Chicago, Illinois, which brought national attention to the strained relationships between local law enforcement agencies and the communities that they are sworn to serve and protect. Ironically, this concern coincides with a U.S. crime rate that has dropped steadily for more than a decade. Why is the American public increasingly concerned with crime if crime rates are steadily dropping? This chapter explores the role of crime, politics, and media imagery in the making of criminal justice policy. We argue that crime is one of the most enduring political issues of this century and that, in turn, politicians have played a fundamental role in constructing criminal justice policies. The implications for public governance and policymaking are many, as criminal justice policies rely on the public perception of officials as legitimate and just. Scandal and corruption reduce the legitimacy of public officials and lead to public questions about the discretionary decision-making of criminal justice actors as well as the disproportionate consequences in the criminal justice system for poor and minority communities.

Recent political commentary in the USA has suggested that there is great potential for current criminal justice practices designed for drug-involved offenders to be significantly overhauled in the near future. It is imperative to plan for these changes by assessing how well current programs serve drug-involved criminal justice populations. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

This critical assessment begins with an overview of the most recent research on the prevalence and impact that substance use disorders have within the criminal justice system. Although the evidence demonstrates that relying on incarceration as a crime control method for drug-involved offenders has many shortcomings, there are innovative new programs being adopted across the country. Two of these promising programs are discussed, as well as the potential results that could be realized from integrating medication assisted treatment into appropriate criminal justice programs designed for drug-involved offenders.

Incarceration is a failed practice for attending to the underlying reasons why many drug-involved offenders become involved in criminal activities. There are encouraging new programs emerging in different parts of the USA, but the inclusion of supplemental treatment options could further promote positive outcomes.

The impending expansion of criminal justice programs for drug-involved offenders must consider how innovative new programs can be fused with supplemental treatment options to achieve the best results.