skip navigation
National Criminal Justice Reference Service
Login | Subscribe/Register | Manage Account | Shopping Cartshopping cart icon | Help | Contact Us | Home     
National Criminal Justice Reference Service
  Advanced Search
Search Help
     
| | | | |
place holder
Administered by the Office of Justice Programs U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Seal National Criminal Justice Reference Service National Criminal Justice Reference Service Office of Justice Programs Seal National Criminal Justice Reference Service
Topics
A-Z Topics
Corrections
Courts
Crime
Crime Prevention
Drugs
Justice System
Juvenile Justice
Law Enforcement
Victims
Left Nav Bottom Line
Home / NCJRS Abstract

Publications
 

NCJRS Abstract


The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Library collection.
To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the NCJRS Abstracts Database.

How to Obtain Documents
 
NCJ Number: NCJ 106447  
Title: Prison Disciplinary System: Perceptions of Its Fairness and Adequacy by Inmates Staff and Members of Boards of Visitors
Journal: Howard Journal of Criminal Justice  Volume:26  Issue:2  Dated:(May 1987)  Pages:122-138
Author(s): J Ditchfield ; D Duncan
Publication Date: 1987
Pages: 17
Type: Surveys
Origin: United Kingdom
Language: English
Annotation: In 1984, the Prior Committee, the Departmental Committee on the Prison System in Great Britain, investigated the ways in which the prison disciplinary system was perceived by inmates, officers, governors, and members of the Board of Governors.
Abstract: The principal subjects of investigation in the interviews were whether the system was perceived to be fair in dealing with disciplinary offenses, suggestions from various protagonists on ways to treat serious disciplinary offenses, the role of informal measures for maintaining discipline, and the adequacy of existing punishments. All parties agreed that the most important factor determining fairness of the Board of Visitors' and Governors' adjudications was the opportunity they afforded for inmates to present their side of the case. There was disagreement on how much this goal was achieved in practice. Fairness was not necessarily the same in this case as impartiality because the system would always be biased against the inmate. It was not unexpected that inmates preferred serious charges to be dealt with by outside courts that provide automatic legal representation and all the other benefits of a public hearing. Officers and governors surprisingly agreed with this option, though they may have failed to distinguish between especially grave offenses, now dealt with by courts, and serious offenses, now dealt with by Boards of Visitors. Lack of adequate facilities and privileges in prisons has resulted in the disciplinary system becoming too reliant on the use of forfeiture of remission as a punishment. To approach the problem of control by simply removing existing privileges was recognized as unrealistic. 7 tables, 1 note, and 7 references. (Author abstract modified)
Main Term(s): Inmate discipline
Index Term(s): Inmate grievances ; Inmate staff relations ; Punishment ; Forfeiture ; Inmate attitudes ; Prison management ; Foreign criminal justice systems ; Inmate treatment ; Great Britain
 
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=106447

* A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's web site is provided.


Contact Us | Feedback | Site Map
Freedom of Information Act | Privacy Statement | Legal Policies and Disclaimers | USA.gov

U.S. Department of Justice | Office of Justice Programs | Office of National Drug Control Policy

place holder