1 / 22

Two prison ‘ sort of’ studies

Prof. M. H-Evans, PhD, covers prison law and studies the behavior management of prisoners. Despite challenges faced during research on French prison guards' professional values and job satisfaction, the study was conducted with dedication and perseverance, highlighting critical aspects of the prison system. The effort to contribute to fair trial practices, legal fairness, and judicial reviews in prison law is commendable. This ongoing study sheds light on the complexities within the prison system, aiming to understand and improve the working conditions and values of the dedicated prison guards in France.

julioa
Download Presentation

Two prison ‘ sort of’ studies

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Two prison ‘sort of’ studies Prof. M. H-Evans, PhD Rheims Uni, Law faculty

  2. Who I am: prison work • My major has become release, probation and reentry • But I started out with prisons and release. MyPhD: • La gestion du comportement du détenu. • L’apparence légaliste du droit pénitentiaire, Poitiers, 1994 (published in • 1998, Paris, L’HarmattanManagingprisoners’sbehaviourthrough • Fictitiouslegalregulations) • I didyears of legal lobbying in order to contribute to the development of fair trial, legalfairness in prison law, and judicialreview. (in particularwith French NGO Observatoire international des prisons and colleagueEricPéchillon, Rennes Uni.). Withsomesuccess, inter alia: • -fair and judicialreview of disciplinarydecisions; • - clearlydefined and limited prison sanctions; • - fairand judicialreview of quasi-disciplinarydecisions (solitary confinement, punitive transfers, visitation right removal…); • - limitation of and judicialreview of body searches. (naturallythere are alsootherfactorsthatled to thesesuccesses) • - parallel to thisfair trial and judicialreview of all release and breachdecisions • (this one iscurrentlyunderthreatwithupcominglaw)

  3. Who I am: prison work Latest: Droit pénitentiaire (Prison law), with Paris, Dalloz (1000+ p.), 2012-2013 And otherstudies: - Prisoners and theirfamilies intimacy in comparative law ( L’intimité du détenu Et de ses proches en droit comparé, L’Harmattan, 2000) • Prison escape (L’ évasion, L’Harmattan, 2009) - Prisons and the city (La prison dans la ville, Erès, 2009) And… mothers & babies in prison studies (eg in English: ’Mothers and Babies in French Prisons Book chapter, in G. Eldjupovic and R. Jaremko-Bromwich (eds.), Incarcerated Mothers. Oppression and Resistance, Demeter, 2013 : 70-81 Hereafter: two - sort of - studies. An old ‘Ghost study’ I am only starting to code and a ‘quasi study ‘partly based on my own experience in the field.

  4. Study 1: French prison guards • Goals: • 1) See if the prison services would let me partially • replicate A. Liebling’sresearch (Moral Performance, 2004) • 2) modest: justdeterminewithinLiebling’s • frameworkwhat are French prison guards’ • professional values and satisfaction withtheir job. • 3) keep the appreciativeinquiry stance by focusing • on the positive. The titlethuswas: ‘professional satisfaction • and values of French prison guards’ • Method: • 1) use A. Liebling’smoral performance prison guards’ questionnaire (as a written questionnaire – withher permission to translate and use it) • 2) qualitative interviews using as a framework the moral values shefound in Moral Performance… (dignity, humanity, justice, respect, trust, camaraderie – seeinfra…) and addtwo/three French ones(eg. public service, deontology). • Since I teach in threeUniversities (Reims, Nantes and Agen) I couldchooseseveral sites and workwith a group of sevenstudentswhoinvestigated in a variety of prisons: West coast, Corsica, East of France, Paris, all categories of prisons. (high security, medium security, remand and short sentences)

  5. Study 1: French prison guards • Until the start of thisresearch I neverhad to ask for the national headquarters permission to do prison or probation studies: I asked and easilyobtained permission from local prisons or authorities. This changedwiththisresearch…. • National headquartersdemanded I ranmyresearch • throughthem and immediatelystopped=> leftmy • students & I in limbofromOctober 2011 to April 2012. • April 2012 wegot a firmrefusalfrom the prison services • directorhimself. There wasonly one reasongiven: Ms Liebling’s questionnaire ‘contains « ethnicalprism » questions’ that are not admissible. • The prison directorhadincidentallyrelabelled the research: « satisfaction and dissatisfactionof prison guards »

  6. Study 1: French prison guards I hadtold the prison headquarters I wouldallowmystudents to do theirresearch in anyway possible… if theyremainedsilent past March 2012. Sincetheydid… wecontinued the research. 1) Wewentthrough unions, friends, NGOs, one of mystudents’ Unclewhowas a prison guardhimself, prison guards’ forums. 2) One of mystudent, in Agen, being a prison guard in Corsica, managed to distribute the questionnaire to some of hiscolleague. => a mismatchedsample Stillwegot: 28 interviews of prison guards (ordinaryguards: N25 + 3 officers) and 86 questionnaires (80 ordinaryguards; 6 officers) fromseptember 2011 to June 2013.

  7. Study 1: French prison guards Becauseitismismached and becauseitwasstopped by the national headquarters, I haven’tpublishedanything. I amcurrentlycoding the interviews. Cannot use ‘Liebling questionnaire’ resultsbecausethisiswhat I wastechnicallybannedfromdoing (meanwhile a Canadian researcherwaslaterallowed to use it… http://psychocriminologie.free.fr/wp-content/uploads/Focus-sur-une-Recherche-en-cours.pdf ). But here are the (very) general and (very) cautiousresults: • None of the interviewees chose to be a prison guard as a ‘vocation’ – big surprise! - but becausetheyneeded to paytheirrent and it pays ratherwell + someweresick of workingaway or outside (truck drivers or builders); • Stillthisis a job mostlearnt to like (love); • Most expressedpride in doing a public service job involvinghuman relations skills and helpingothers– somesaidcontributing to reinsertion; • Theyclearlyhadhumanskillsthatwentlargelyunoticed; • And their local management wasoftenrigid and did not notice their good work, did not listen to them; • Theywereparticularlycritical of the national headquarters as beingcompletelyremovedfrom the field &neverlistening to staff’s needs. • It isclearthatfinding the right distance withprisonersis • a particularlycomplextask (Liebling, Price & Shefer, The Prison Officer, 2d ed., 2011, willan) 9) Theypretendthey do not feelemotions but their replies to several questions Contradictthis = there’senoughmaterial to focus specifically on Fr. Guards& emotions 10) Overalltheybelong to the classicoldschoolguardcategory, but most do not oppose the legalistic changes of the past few years (some I amguilty of forcing onto the prison services); quite the contrarytheyseem to have embracedthem as a proof of letigimacy.

  8. Study 1: French prison guards • The values listed in the framework for the interviews: • - dignity; • - humanity; • - attentiveness • - care • - public service • - justice • - ethics and deontology; • - decency; • - competence, professionalism; • - appropriate distance; • - coherence, predictability; • - authority and power; • - good order; • - security, protection • - disciplining and boundaries • - being an example • - education and reinsertion • - knowing inmates and the prison • - respect • - trust • - being appreciated and valued • - well-being • - friendship and camaraderie • - Loyalty and solidarity • - supporting and helping offenders • - empathy • - pride • - emotion

  9. ‘Study ’ 2. French disciplinary hearings • A few important dates; • 1995. Marie case, Conseil d’Etat (highestadmin. Court): judicialreview for prison disciplinary sanctions • 1996 decreeintegratesMarie and • - lists all disciplinaryoffences in the PenalProcedure Code (PPC) based on a threetier system: first degree, second degree, thirddegree; • - Lists all disciplinary sanctions in the PPC + their exact duration and conditions • - confirmsthat a Disciplinary Commission (: the governor + 1 guard & 1 higherrank prison officer) makes the decision • April 12, 2000 Act: a general administration & citizensActallows • attorneys to defendcitizensfacingnegativeadmdecisions. Péchillon • & I argue itapplies to prison disciplinary commissions • = confirmed by the Conseil d’Etat in • October 2000. • November 24, 2009: Prison Law: • - limits duration of disciplinarycell (max 20 days 30 if violence; 14; 7) • - includes a communityassessorinto the disciplinary commission

  10. ‘Study ’ 2. French disciplinary hearings Mid 2011 I become an assessor at my local prison. A remand and short (up to 2 years) prison with between 200 and 300 inmates. I decide to: • Write a feedback paper based on my experience (legal and factual) and a questionnaire filled in some ofmy local peers and other assessors. So far N8. = small publication in a Law journal (Ajpénal, November 2013) • Jan 2014. I joined the new prison assessor network (ANAE); • May and June 2014: I’ll train prison guards and prison chief locally (with their incident reports & investigations) => turned into a regional training session (=>systematic legal study on the typical “blunders” in the files opportunity, which will give more depth to what I am about to describe)

  11. ‘Study ’ 2. Findings • Offences Frequently: inmates are charged for the wrongoffences. Admin. Courts allow the commission to change the charges on the day of the hearing (Admin. Trib.Nantes, 5 oct. 2011, no 0805737, unpublished; Admin. Trib. Grenoble, 24 May 2000, Guégan, no 9703617, D. 2002. chron. 117, E. Péchillon) Most frequentoffencesin a remand and short sentences prison: • inmateon inmateassault; • inmateon guardinsults or threats ; • drugor cell phone smuggling (usuallythrownfrom the outsideinto the courtyard) and climbing up the fences to retrieve packages; • refusalto enter the cell or to remain on a floor or wingfollowinginmates’ disputes. Theseoffences are usuallylinked to debts, trafficking, smuggling, and to poverty

  12. ‘Study ’ 2. Findings • Offences. Antediluvian issue: violation of internal regulations art. R 57-7-3,4° of the penalprocedure code : itis a thirddegree (misdemeanour) offences. When in reality inmates do not have a copy of these regulations (nor assessors & attorneys) …and when the prison is not in a capacity to actually implement them too strictly, thereby creating expectations from inmates(Chauvenet A., Orlic F. et Benguigui G. (1994), Le monde des surveillants de prison, Paris, PUF  ; Herzog-Evans, 1994, 1998)

  13. ‘Study ’ 2. Findings ‘I do know that I am committing an offence by calling from my cell.’ ‘Get me an unlimited voice plus text messages package!’

  14. ‘Study ’ 2. Findings • Sanctions ‘Solitary’ used to represent Roughly 70% of all sanctions. These days? No statistics!

  15. ‘Study ’ 2. Findings • Sanctions In practice solitary confinement may be pronounced depending on: • - how serious the offenceis (= the law); • - its impact on the otherinmatesand on the guards (: not the law); • - the number of solitarycellswhich are available& whoiscurently in them! (definitely not the law!) In ‘my’ local prison • solitary confinement very rare except in assault cases or veryseriousoffences; • mostfrequent sanctions are: warning, suspendeddisciplinarycell or confinement in one’scell.

  16. ‘Study ’ 2. Findings • Offenders. As the literature has shown (Glaser W. & Deane K. (1999), ‘Normalisationin an Abnormal World : A Study of Prisoners with an Intellectual Disability’, International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 1999, n° 43 : 338-356; Felson, R.B., Silver . E. & RemsterB. (2012), ‘Mental Disorder and Offending in Prison ’, Criminal Justice and Behavior, n°39 :125-143; Pare P.-P. & Logan M. W. (2011), ‘ Risks of Minor and Serious Violent Victimization in Prison : The Impact of Mental Disorders, Physical Disabilities, and Physical Size ’, Society and Mental Health, n° 1(2) : 106-123) Intellectual disability, Behavioural problems & mental illness cases are re over-represented… but go unnoticed (Hayes S., Shackell P. &MottramP. (2007), ‘ The prevalence of intellectual disability in a major UK prison’, British Journal of Learning Disability, n° 35(3) : 162-167  ; Brinded P. M. J., Simpson A. I. F., Laidlaw T. M., Fairly N. &Malcolm F. (2001), ‘ Prevalence of Psychiatry Disorders in New Zealand Prisons : A National Study ’, Australia N.Z. Psychiatry, n° 35: 166-173) by members of the commission. • And is a taboosubject (‘This question is very shocking’)

  17. ‘Study ’ 2. Findings • Procedure. Incident reports typicallywithoutadequatedetails: Staff is not sufficientlytrained The investigation Not professionalenough and doesnot look for evidence Verylittle confrontations or witnesses A culture where it is more important to let people express themselves (my prison) or remind inmates of boundaries than to find out what the truth actually is. E.g. video recordings are hardly ever used Against the backdrop of the current MoJ Bill which plans to go back to our Middle Ages where fair trial did not exist for release decisions, disciplinary procedure has become fairer. Still attorneys and assessors have led to much quieter disciplinary trials

  18. ‘Study ’ 2. Findings • Procedure/fair trial Attorneys generally do not see patent causes of nullity. There are huge differences between attorneys in terms of competence. The majority falls in the medium or incompetent (couldn’t care less) categories So in practice: numerous due process violations.

  19. ‘Study ’ 2. Findings Assessors: a democratic progress But assessor recruitment varies considerably from one prison to another; the rule of minimal competence is not always observed. E.g. law students seldom admitted. As a resultsome hearings are held without assessors, which is illegal if no or poor effort was made to recruit them(: Admin. Trib. Nantes, 19 juillet 2013, n° 110337, Ajpénal, obs. E. Péchillon, forthcoming; AdminAppelate Court, Nantes, 18 juillet 2013, n° 12NT03128)

  20. ‘Study ’ 2. Findings • the assessor’s positioning • More often than not he/she has a hard time accessing the file • Is often perceived as being an intruder • ‘There’s a « classified » ambiance here’ (an assessor) • But things are radically different in the prison where I am an assessor: • - warm welcoming of assessors (down to annual lunches); • - we can ask questions during the hearing ; • - we do indeed take part in the deliberation & our opinion counts

  21. Conclusion: the commission as a mediation ritual • Good practice: processinga greatnumberof issues via the disciplinary commission and use it as pacifyingtool, where people can express their feelings and solutions are found. It thus serves as a ritualshowing ‘yourproblemistakenseriously’. • Local prison experience: « Citizen mediation » form of guilty pleawith a zest of restorative justice (another interestingsubjectstudy)

  22. Merci! Thank you! • http://herzog-evans.com • martineevans@ymail.com • @ProfMEvans

More Related