Through the case study of Kyrgyzstan this paper argues that a rapidly increasing availability of drugs in prison is not necessarily deleterious to solidarity and inmate codes. Instead, the fragmentary effect of drugs depends on the forms of prisoner control over drug sale and use. In Kyrgyzstan, prisoners co-opted heroin and reorganized its distribution and consumption through non-market mechanisms. State provision of opioid maintenance therapy incentivized powerful prisoners to move to distributing heroin through a mutual aid fund and according to need. Collectivist prison accommodation, high levels of prisoner mobility and monitoring within and across prisons enabled prisoners to enforce informal bans on drug dealing and on gang formation outside of traditional hierarchies. We argue that in these conditions prisoners organized as consumption-oriented budgetary units rather than profit-driven gangs.
A vast body of research underlies the ascendancy of criminogenic risk assessment, which was developed to predict recidivism. It is unclear, however, whether the empirical evidence supports its expansion across the criminal legal system. This meta-review thus attempts to answer the following questions: 1) How well does criminogenic risk assessment differentiate people who are at high risk of recidivism from those at low risk of recidivism? 2) How well do researchers' conclusions about (1) match the empirical evidence? 3) Does the empirical evidence support the theory, policy, and practice recommendations that researchers make based on their conclusions? A systematic literature search identified 39 meta-analyses and systematic reviews that met inclusion criteria. Findings from these meta-analyses and systematic reviews are summarized and synthesized, and their interpretations are critically assessed. We find that criminogenic risk assessment's predictive performance is based on inappropriate statistics, and that conclusions about the evidence are inconsistent and often overstated. Three thematic areas of inferential overreach are identified: contestable inferences from criminalization to criminality, from prediction to explanation, and from prediction to intervention. We conclude by exploring possible reasons for the mismatch between proponents' conclusions and the evidence, and discuss implications for policy and practice.
Scholarship on the expansion of the U.S. carceral state has primarily focused on imprisonment rates. Yet the majority of adults under formal criminal justice control are on probation, an "alternative" form of supervision. This article develops the concept of mass probation and builds a typology of state control regimes that theorizes both the scale and type of punishment states employ. Drawing on Bureau of Justice Statistics data from 1980 and 2010, I analyze whether mass probation developed in the same places, affecting the same demographic groups and driven by the same criminal justice trends, as mass imprisonment. The results show that mass probation was a unique state development, expanding in unusual places like Minnesota and Washington. The conclusions argue for a reimagining of the causes and consequences of the carceral state to incorporate the expansion of probation.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：