Making Prisons Safe

Making Prisons Safe Dr Kimmett Edgar May, 2014 There were nearly 11,000 recorded assaults by prisoners on other prisoners in 2013; between 2010 and 2013, serious assaults increased by 14% (Prison Reform Trust, 2014). Prison managers have a serious commitment to ensuring that prisons are safe. I firmly believe that prisons can be safer, and I hope this paper provides some ideas about how to achieve that. Most prisoners feel safe most of the time. No one is violent all of the time. And every day, prison officers prevent dozens, perhaps hundreds of fights and assaults. They observe signs of trouble and know when and how to intervene. However, violence reduction strategies and staff interventions are hampered by a lack of information about the circumstances that lead to violence. Much of what is known about prison violence is gleaned from officers who respond after violence has erupted. I will say more about how we did our research in a moment, but our interviews with officers demonstrated that in two- thirds of the incidents they responded to, they did not have 1 a good grasp of what led to the fight or assault. Less than one in five said that they had any security intelligence that could have helped them to predict that it would happen. Only three per cent felt that there had been anything they could have done to prevent it. The premise for a conflict-based strategy to reduce violence is that violent incidents can be studied as the culmination of conflicts between prisoners. Knowing how and why conflicts escalate into violence is an essential foundation for preventing fights and assaults. Central questions explored by conflict-centred strategies are: How do prisoners handle it when trouble arises with another prisoner? What factors determine whether a dispute is resolved or results in a fight? What skills do prisoners use when in disputes; and how likely are those tactics to resolve the situation or drive it towards a fight or assault? Why do prisoners decide to use force? Research Research conducted by Edgar, O’Donnell and Martin at the University of Oxford Centre for Criminology gathered data on violent incidents in prisons in England and Wales (Edgar, et al. 2003). 2 Prisoners who were directly involved in a fight or assault clearly have a privileged perspective. They were personally involved in the problem that led up to the violence. The knowledge they had about the incident is indispensable to an explanation of why it occurred – and, hence how it might have been prevented. The Escalator: a diagram of conflict We began by asking the prisoner to describe the problem with the other person from the first sign of trouble, in a sequence of steps. She went Susan in, all They were happy. I intimidating I then heard punched on her in the them talking association, face, just They asked, about so I said to once. ‘Are you assaulting me, the leader, so I prepared frightened ‘Come into I came in the to show you for a the toilets prison and have drugs?’ confrontation. with me’. was I said, confronted ‘Nothing by three frightens me.’ Q What did you hope to achieve? women who demanded It wasn’t pre-meditated, but I knew I drugs. had to take action. No way you can run to the officers. Through questions about the options available at points along the way, the escalator presented the possibility that the violence could have been averted. Indeed, some of the disputes presented behaviour that opened up possibilities for a peaceful resolution. 3 Conflict Resulting in Violence Conflicts are Situations in which there are competing interests which the parties pursue in uncompromising ways. Analysing the incident as a conflict means looking at the parties involved, the clash of interests between them, the tactics they used to achieve their goals, the relationship between them – before, during and after the conflict – and the social environment in which the conflict developed. How people handle disputes can aggravate the situation and make it more likely that one or both would resort to physical force. Such tactics include verbal abuse, threats, and hostile gestures. Interests are what the person wants out of the situation, which might relate to an object, such as a newspaper, or values, such as loyalty. The social context refers to policies and conditions that generate conflicts. For example, a wing might tolerate one of the phones being out of action. But combine that with two or three nights of association being cancelled, and the atmosphere will be very tense: violent conflicts are far more likely to arise. 4 The conflict pyramid tactics interests relationships interpretations purposes of force social context These diverse elements - relationships, interests, tactics, and the social context - can be illustrated by following the course of one dispute. I laugh and Ballard's account walk away. When I come Jenkins hits me out for in the back of breakfast, go to the head. I turn the servery. Jenkins shouts round and we Jenkins is in ‘No!’ still start rucking. front of the I ask the staring at me. I servery, looking servery lad, say, ‘I ain’t no for trouble. ‘Could you dickhead.’ I change this for walk away. me please, bro?’ He just I'm in the Q. Why did you think he was staring stares. I look food queue. I at you? for a reply. get a smashed ice A. He was trying to intimidate or cream. frighten me.’ 5 Jenkins’ account I start to walk away, I say, “Why but then I In the are you turned and morning, I running off hit him. am on the your Officers I say no; the hot plate. mouth?” He come in and officer says no. Ballard is mouthy break it up. The new guy comes in and back. says to the gives me a I'm on the other servery dirty look. Q. Why did Ballard say this to the servery. A worker, “Tell other worker? new guy that boy to do demands a as I tell him.” A. He was trying to put me down, different ice like he was higher than me. lolly. The stares, accusations and challenges show how poor conflict resolution skills escalated this dispute. Banter is commonplace, but in disputes, verbal abuse is used to belittle an opponent and win a war of words. Another narrative shows how people with learning disabilities can be at a disadvantage in disputes. Shawn scalded Phil with boiled water. When I interviewed them, an officer said Shawn had a learning disability. Shawn explained that he loaned Phil some tobacco. The first time, it was a gift. The fourth time, Shawn said he wanted to be repaid and Phil agreed. When Phil got paid, Shawn asked for a smoke, but Phil offered him a chocolate bar. Shawn persisted about their agreement, but when Phil turned his back and walked away Shawn threw the water. Although Phil’s interview does not suggest any wrongdoing towards Shawn, it is likely that Phil was taking advantage and exploiting Shawn. I am not suggesting that people with learning disabilities are inherently poor at resolving conflict. They might have a good understanding of how to resolve a dispute, but be unable to 6 explain the solution. However they might find it difficult to process information or believe they have very few options, and this can have an effect on how they respond to conflict. No One Knows, a study by Jenny Talbot at the Prison Reform Trust, defined learning disability as: A significantly reduced ability to understand complex information or learn new skills (impaired intelligence) A reduced ability to cope independently (impaired social functioning) A condition which started before adulthood . and has a lasting effect Learning disabilities Limited language ability, comprehension and communication skills: – Difficulty understanding certain words – Difficulty understanding and responding to questions – Difficulty reading body language and following social cues Limited memory capacity: – Difficulty recalling information – Take longer to process information – Difficulty ordering and sequencing Can be acquiescent and suggestible; under pressure, might try to appease others Frequently unable to read and write very well, or at all. If undetected, they are often left to manage conflicts alone. Even when they are involved in an incident, their disability may not come to light. No One Knows found that people 7 with learning disabilities and difficulties were five times more likely to say they had been subject to control and restraint. Prisoners with learning disabilities who are not helped when they complain about being victimised find other ways of coping, which include staying in their cells – at greater risk of self harm – or lashing out. Shawn’s story illustrates the complexity of the links to violent incidents as he filled both victim and perpetrator roles. Lessons from conflict What lessons can we gain from conflict to help prisons prevent violence? Three important themes arise. The high risk of being victimised exacerbates prison conflicts Tactics used in prison disputes tend to escalate rather than resolve conflicts Anti-social behaviour, such as threats or accusations, was often reciprocal The first theme is that the high risk of being victimised - for example through theft or exploitation - exacerbates conflicts in prison, creating conditions in which prisoners might be led to use force. 8 Cycle One – an eye for an eye The risk of assault is increased by the belief that being wronged or exploited requires physical retaliation. Actual risks of being cheated, exploited, or Material defrauded deprivations increase the Prisoners react to urgency to perceived wrongs defend property with violence Theft, fraud, Norm: wrong- bad debts are doing merits seen as signs physical of disrespect punishment When officers ensure the safety of all prisoners from victimisation, they are preventing conflicts which might otherwise result in assaults or fights.

Load more