The Philosophy and History of Corrections

© Jones &Placeand Bartlett Learning, History in LLC the ofCriminal © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION JusticeCorrections System 122 © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION

OBJECTIVES FEATURES © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC

OO OO NOTUnderstand FOR criminalnatural SALE law sentencing ORand the DISTRIBUTION philosophical and the factors CorrectionsNOT Research:Focus: FOR Newgate The SALE Effect of ConnecticutOR of Tougher DISTRIBUTION thatreasons inform why it. societies develop criminal justice and Prison Conditions on Recidivism: Fact or Fantasy? correctional systems. Corrections Controversy: Holt v. Hobbs: OO Identify the presentence investigation (PSI) report OO CorrectionsA Unanimous Brief: Supreme Incarceration: Court Decision Is It Just Time andCompare its uses deterrence, by the criminal retribution, justice incapacitation, system. © Jones & Bartlettrehabilitation, Learning, and restoration LLC as punishment © JonesAway from& Bartlett Crime? Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALEOO Followphilosophies OR changing DISTRIBUTION and philosophies sentencing rationales. of sentencing, trends NOTCorrections FOR SALE History: OR DISTRIBUTIONPrinciples from the in sentencing, and the role of the United States OO Trace the history of corrections to ancient societies Corrections1870 National in the Congress News: Inmate on Penitentiary Mental Health and Sentencingand throughout Commission various religious in sentencing traditions. policy. Reformatory Discipline OO OO LearnFollow the the functions development of specialized/problem-solving of corrections in colonial courts,America. such as drug© courts, Jones DWI & courts, Bartlett family Learning, LLCCorrections Research: Prison© PolicyJones as &an Bartlett Agent Learning, LLC OO courts,Understand mental the health penitentiaryNOT courts, FOR andand reformatorycommunitySALE OR DISTRIBUTIONof Social Change NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION courts.movements and their relationship to social conditions and crime rates. OO Recognize the factors that are used to classify OO inmateRecognize populations. key figures in correctional history, such as ©John Jones Howard, & Alexander Bartlett Maconochie, Learning, Walter LLC Crofton, © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC OO NOTAssessZebulon FOR the Brockway, risk SALE factors John that ORAugustus, contribute DISTRIBUTION and others.to inmate NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION misconduct and violence. OO Identify the eras of correctional and prison history in the 20th and 21st centuries. OO Understand the current state of correctional © Jones & Bartlettphilosophy Learning, and practice. LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR“Specialty DISTRIBUTION courts are an innovative and NOTtherapeutic FOR waySALE to handle OR DISTRIBUTION people who do not fit into The respect for the law is thethe obverse traditional side and inflexibleof our hatred forcriminal the criminal justice transgressor.model.”1, p. 348 (Mead, 1918, pp. 585–586)

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 33 13/12/17 1:16 pm Natural law is authoritative or binding over © Jones & BartlettPenitentiaries Learning, were little LLC more than holding bins for the© Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC human conduct, and the good of the order (referred NOT FOR SALEdregs OR of society. DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION to generally as “the good”) takes primacy over indi- (Meskell, 1999, p. 862) vidual rights and concerns. In short, natural law is obvious and unequivocal that certain behaviors are wrong and intolerable and therefore must be pun- © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLCished. Evidence for natural© law Jones can be & found Bartlett in the Learning, LLC The PhilosophyNOT of FOR Corrections SALE OR DISTRIBUTIONuniversal human revulsionNOT against FOR specific SALE negative OR DISTRIBUTION behaviors or crimes. You would be hard pressed to Throughout history, people and cultures have varied find a society or group of people that did not morally greatly in their beliefs about what is an appropriate response to violations of law. Of course, responding to condemn behaviors such as murder, incest, or even violations© Jones of the& Bartlett law depends Learning, on what law LLC is violated theft. These© Jones behaviors & appearBartlett to be Learning, intrinsically LLC (presumablyNOT FOR murder SALE and OR shoplifting DISTRIBUTION will elicit different wrong, orNOT mala FORin se. BecauseSALE ofOR their DISTRIBUTION severity, mala responses) and the circumstances surrounding the in se offenses have historically been punished in the offense, such as the age of the offender, whether the most severe way—by a sentence of death. As human person acted purposely or negligently, and whether the organizations became more complex and societies © Jones & Bartlettperson acted Learning, aggressively LLC or in self-defense; however,© Jonesbecame & Bartlett more modern, Learning, the mode LLC of punishment

NOT FOR SALEdifferent OR value DISTRIBUTION systems result in different responses toNOT FORevolved SALE (DeLisi, OR 2011). DISTRIBUTIONThe range of behaviors that crime. Some people and cultures are bleeding hearts were defined as crimes broadened and included and lenient; others are cold-hearted and harsh. Some many acts that were deemed illegal. Mala prohibita are seemingly unable and unwilling to punish; others offenses are crimes made illegal by legislation, not by punish with zeal. Throughout this chapter, you will rec- natural law, and are punished in a variety of ways, ognize that the history© Jones of corrections & Bartlett reflects Learning, ongoing LLCsuch as fines or detention.© Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC changes in beliefs NOTand practices FOR SALEabout the OR best DISTRIBUTION way to Along with evolving modesNOT FORof punishment, SALE OR dif- DISTRIBUTION punish criminal offenders. ferent punishment philosophies have also ebbed and If corrections, or punishment, has vacillated flowed throughout history and to the present. For between these poles of harshness and leniency, a more instance, consider the following quotation: basic© Jones question & isBartlett what do societiesLearning, do to LLCpunish crimi- © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC nal offenders in the first place? Why do we punish? NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION We concludeNOT that FOR the present SALE prison OR system DISTRIBUTION is antiquated and When do societies develop correctional systems to inefficient. It does not reform the criminal. It fails to protect respond to law violators? A good place to start is natu- society. There is reason to believe that it contributes to the ral law. Natural law is the belief that the human world increase of crime by hardening the prisoner. We are conis organized by a positive or good natural order that vinced that a new type of penal institution must be developed, © Jones & Bartlettshould be Learning, obeyed by all LLC humans. First described by the© Jonesone & that Bartlett is new in spirit,Learning, in method, LLC and in objective. NOT FOR SALEGreek OR writer DISTRIBUTION Sophocles, natural law is most famouslyNOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION (Bates, 1932, p. 562) attributed to Aristotle and its revival in the 13th century by philosopher St. Thomas Aquinas. Unlike the codified laws that we follow today, natural law is unwritten. While this seems like an editorial from a newspaper in the 21st century, it comes from an article by Instead, it is tacitly© understood Jones & and Bartlett appreciated Learning, by LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC human reason. As Aristotle indicated in Politics, “Just Sanford Bates, the first director of the federal Bureau NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION punishments and chastisements do indeed spring from of Prisons. Bates was echoing the conclusions of the a good principle, but they are good only because we Wickersham Commission, which convened in 1931 cannot do without them—it would be better that to assess the state of criminal justice in the United neither individuals nor states should need anything of States. Then, as now, there was dissatisfaction with the© Jonessort” (1998, & Bartlett p. 13). Learning, LLC correctional© Jones policies & and Bartlett the inability Learning, of the correc LLC- NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION tional systemNOT to FOR reduce SALE crime ORand reformDISTRIBUTION offenders. Of all the justifications of criminal punishment, the desire Because of this, different punishment philosophies to incapacitate is the least complicated, the least studied, have appeared in correctional history. The main and often the most important. punishment philosophies are deterrence, retribution, © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC(Zimring & Hawkins, 1995, p. ©v) Jonesincapacitation, & Bartlett rehabilitation, Learning, andLLC the newest one, NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FORrestoration. SALE OR DISTRIBUTION

34 CHAPTER 2 The Philosophy and History of Corrections

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 34 13/12/17 1:16 pm ■■ © Jones & BartlettDeterrence Learning, is the act ofLLC frightening the potential © Jonespercentages & Bartlett of violent Learning, crimes. TheLLC policy designed actor with the use of the threats of punishment. It to specifically target this group of habitual offend- NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION is the discouragement of crime because of fear of ers for imprisonment is known as selective inca- its consequences. The two general types of deter- pacitation (Zimring & Hawkins, 1995). rence are specific and general. Specific deterrence ■■ Rehabilitation means to restore an offender to a pertains to the individual offender being sen- law-abiding lifestyle. In corrections, the purpose tenced and punished.© Jones General & Bartlett deterrence Learning, per- LLCof sentencing is to help the© offenderJones &live Bartlett a crime- Learning, LLC tains to the largeNOT number FOR of potentialSALE OR criminals DISTRIBUTION free life in the communityNOT via mandatedFOR SALE partici OR- DISTRIBUTION who might be discouraged from committing pation in programs, such as drug and alcohol crime because of the punishments received by treatment, psychiatric counseling, anger manage- others. In short, deterrence is the use of punishment training, life skills training, and other treatment© Jones to send & a Bartlett message andLearning, speaks to LLC the ratio- ment modalities.© Jones Toward & Bartlett that end, Learning, correctional LLC nalityNOT of FOR crime. SALE If the correctionalOR DISTRIBUTION system is tough officials, NOTsuch as FOR a probation SALE officer OR DISTRIBUTION or parole offi- enough, people will decide that crime is too risky cer, supervise clients to improve the offender’s to commit for fear of the punishment. The spirit chances of being a productive and law-abiding and logic of general deterrence is captured by the citizen.

Chinese proverb: it is better to hang the wrong ■■ © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © JonesRestoration & Bartlett is a theoryLearning, of justice LLC that emphasizes fellow than no fellow. repairing the harm caused by crime. Restorative NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION ■■ Retribution is the payment of a debt to society justice is accomplished through cooperative and the expiation of one’s criminal offense. processes that include offenders, victims, and Expiation is based upon the belief that crime community residents. Restoration transforms the arouses the anger of the gods against the entire traditional relationship between communities community, and the© Jones only way & to Bartlett reduce the Learning, anger LLCand government in responding© Jones to& Bartlettcrime by Learning, LLC is to destroy the offender.NOT FOR Retribution SALE ORis inherent DISTRIBUTION including all parties in anNOT interactive, FOR mediation-SALE OR DISTRIBUTION in the biblical message of “an eye for an eye, a style process as opposed to the punitive, bureau- tooth for a tooth” and is utilized when offenders cratic approaches of the courts. Examples of are punished harshly, such as with death or life restorative justice are victim–offender mediation, offender reintegration, restitution, community imprisonment© Jones & Bartlett sentences. Learning, Those punished LLC for © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC retributive reasons are commonly described as service, and offender–victim–family conferenc- NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION getting their just deserts, meaning they get what ing (Restorative Justice, 2011). Restorative justice they deserved because of their criminal violation. is ideologically similar to rehabilitation and dis- To the general public, the sense of vengeance or similar to retribution and incapacitation. revenge directed at a criminal offender is consis- © Jones & Bartletttent with Learning, the theory of LLC retribution. However, ret- © JonesSquandering & Bartlett our scarce Learning, correctional LLCtreatment program NOT FOR SALEribution OR does DISTRIBUTION seek to match severe punishment to NOTresources FOR SALEon low-risk OR offenders DISTRIBUTION that do not need them is a the severity of the original offense. Revenge is waste of those resources. simply bloodlust to punish a hated criminal. (Latessa & Lowenkamp, 2006, p. 522) Walter Berns’s statement that “anger is the passion that recognizes and© Jonescares about & Bartlett justice” conveysLearning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC the sentiment of retribution (1979, p. 152). The next section provides a brief historical over- NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION ■■ Incapacitation is the inability to act. In correc- view that showcases early approaches to corrections tions, incapacitation refers to the use of imprison- as a means to respond to criminals and crime. ment to preclude the ability of an offender to victimize members of society. Without question, © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC American prisons are in the business of incapaci- Historical Approaches to Corrections tation,NOT FOR simply SALE removing OR DISTRIBUTION offenders from NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION circulation so they cannot victimize members of Throughout history, corrections and criminal justice mainstream society, a general process known as generally were largely one and the same. To be sus- collective incapacitation. It is well known that pected or accused of a crime was to be considered © Jones & Bartlettless than Learning, 10 percent ofLLC criminals commit more © Jonesguilty of & a crime,Bartlett and Learning,summary punishment LLC was NOT FOR SALEthan OR50 percentDISTRIBUTION of crimes and even higher NOToften FOR the outcome.SALE OR Punishment DISTRIBUTION has historically been

Historical Approaches to Corrections 35

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 35 13/12/17 1:16 pm © Jones & Bartlettswift and Learning,brutal, and victims LLC of crime were encour©- Jones &employs Bartlett capital Learning, punishment, LLC the ultimate sanc- aged and even expected to exact personal retaliation tion is rarely imposed and is administered in NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALEagainst OR criminals. DISTRIBUTION Even families or kin groups what is supposed to be a humane, medical pro- engaged in this type of retributive justice in blood cedure. By comparison, historical approaches to feuds with other families. criminal justice were draconian and used the Fortunately, corrections and criminal justice have penalty of death for scores of crimes, even mi- evolved in the following© Jones three & important Bartlett ways: Learning, LLC nor ones. In short, a hallmark© Jones of & civilization Bartlett hasLearning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTIONbeen the transformationNOT of FORjustice SALE from some OR- DISTRIBUTION 1. The ways that justice and punishment are admin- thing that was retributive and repressive to istered have evolved from informal to formal or something that is more rehabilitative and resti- bureaucratic means. In earlier epochs, the crimi- tutive. By and large, the personal vengeance nal justice system did not exist. Instead, family inherent in justice was replaced by an imper- © Jonesand community & Bartlett members Learning, responded LLC to, sanc- © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC sonal bureaucracy. NOTtioned, FOR and SALE judged OR crimes DISTRIBUTION and other behaviors NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION that were deemed inappropriate. This is called informal social control. Informal social control Code of Hammurabi still exists today. The ways that parents, friends, Arguably the earliest important date in correctional © Jones & Bartlettand coworkersLearning, correct LLC one’s behavior are infor-© Joneshistory & Bartlett was the establishment Learning, ofLLC the Code of mal means of social control. Being grounded NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FORHammurabi SALE bORy the DISTRIBUTION Babylonian King Hammurabi in for 2 weeks by one’s parents, lectured to by one’s 1780 BCE. The Code of Hammurabi was fairly boss, or given a stern gaze by one’s friends are just sophisticated and contained 282 clauses or case laws some methods that we use to police, judge, and pertaining to a variety of social and legal issues. The punish others in everyday life. Code of Hammurabi was guided by the doctrine of 2. Criminal justice© Jones and punishment & Bartlett have Learning, also LLClex talionis, meaning an eye© forJones an eye, & a Bartlett tooth for aLearning, LLC evolved fromNOT a personal FOR to SALE an impersonal OR DISTRIBUTION pro- tooth. The lex talionis embodiedNOT FOR three SALEprinciples OR that DISTRIBUTION cess, which is related to the first way corrections are applicable to the present day. First, law and crimi- has evolved. Although informal social control nal punishment should be punitive and in part driven can be effective, it is also susceptible to biases by vengeance. Second, crime and its punishment © Jonesand abuses & Bartlett because of Learning, the emotional LLC connections should be© proportionate Jones & Bartlett (i.e., a person Learning, convicted LLC of NOTbetween FOR offenderSALE ORand victim.DISTRIBUTION If the judge and the murder shouldNOT FORbe executed SALE because OR DISTRIBUTION the punishment judged are members of the same family, then it is equals the severity of the underlying criminal con- likely that evaluations of criminal conduct will be duct). Unfortunately, because many nonlethal subjective. Subjectivity can compromise the law- behaviors were punishable by death, the Code of ful, equitable, and proportional goals of justice. It Hammurabi often was excessive and not proportion- © Jones & Bartlettis thought Learning, that objectivity LLC better serves the pur©- Jonesate. &Third, Bartlett punishment Learning, is inflicted LLC in the name of the NOT FOR SALEsuit OR of DISTRIBUTIONjustice since it is based on fact, evidence,NOT FORcommunity SALE or OR city-state, DISTRIBUTION not the specific victim. The and procedure instead of raw emotion. This is idea that all societal members suffer from crime, thus an exceedingly important point. A dispassionate, making it a social problem, is certainly salient to us formal, professional system of criminal justice today and is a basis of the restorative justice has evolved from© Jones the visceral, & Bartlett informal, Learning, and per- LLCmovement. © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC sonal methods of the past. This raises important NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION questions about the ability of the modern, formal Judeo-Christian Traditions criminal justice system to harness and address Between the 16th and 13th centuries BCE, the Judeo- the emotions elicited by criminal wrongdoing. Christian traditions weighed in on criminal justice. Can formal criminal justice be as personally According to religious tradition, Moses received the © Jonessatisfying & asBartlett former informal Learning, methods? LLC Ten Commandments© Jones & from Bartlett God. ContainingLearning, most LLC NOT3. A dramaticFOR SALE shift fromOR DISTRIBUTIONbrutal, barbaric forms of famouslyNOT the proscription FOR SALE against OR murder,DISTRIBUTION the Ten punishment to what are thought to be civilized Commandments have heavily influenced cultures measures of reasoned punishment has occurred. and legal systems within the Judeo-Christian tradi- A hallmark of the progression of civilization has tion, such as the United States. A noteworthy © Jones & Bartlettbeen Learning, the diminution LLC of violence as punishment.© Jones contribution & Bartlett during Learning, this era was LLC the book of NOT FOR SALEFor OR example, DISTRIBUTION although the United States still NOT FORDeut eronomySALE OR attributed DISTRIBUTION to Moses. Deuteronomy is

36 CHAPTER 2 The Philosophy and History of Corrections

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 36 13/12/17 1:16 pm © Jones essentially& Bartlett a legal Learning, book containing LLC the rights, laws, © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC penalties, and protocriminal justice system of Israel. NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION

When Sodom and Gomorrah flouted God’s will, his anger laid them waste. © Jones(Friedman, & Bartlett 1993, Learning, p. 34) LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION

To establish a prison environment which will not be a wel- come asylum to the man who has lived in squalor and degradation and yet not be a place of continual torture and ©deprivation Jones to& a Bartlett man of finer Learning, sensibilities isLLC consider- © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC ableNOT of a task FOR in itself. SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION (Bates, 1932, p. 570)

© Jones & BartlettLike the Babylonians,Learning, theLLC Judaic and Christian © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC traditions of criminal justice were punitive and viewed NOT FORdeath SALE as an OR appropriate DISTRIBUTION penalty for many transgres- NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION sions. Consider two verses from Deuteronomy 17:6–7 (from Carroll & Prickett, 2008):

At the mouth of two witnesses,© Jones or three & Bartlett witnesses, shallLearning, he LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC that is worthy of deathNOT be put FORto death; SALE but at ORthe mouth DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION The Code of Hammurabi from 1780 BCE contains some of the of one witness he shall not be put to death. The hands of earliest tenets of the punitive philosophy that underlies criminal the witnesses shall be first upon him to put him to death, punishment. In what ways do American correctional systems and afterward the hands of all the people. So thou shalt continue to embody the spirit of the Code of Hammurabi? put the evil away from among you. © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © National Library of© Medicine. Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION An interesting side note is the reference to the notion of evil, and by extension, evil people. From the was plagued by dissent, the harsh criminal justice law of Moses to our modern concern about serial code of Draco was softened by reformists such as killers and other infamous criminals, people have Solon and Cleisthenes. These progressive Greeks struggled with the proper conceptualization and han- © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jonesmade only & Bartletthomicide aLearning, capital crime LLC and instituted dling of criminals. NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOTthe FOR widespread SALE use OR of finesDISTRIBUTION as a form of punishment. Fines served two purposes or constituencies. They Greek and Roman Traditions were a form of restitution to the victim and served as The Greek and Roman societies also made significant a tax for the public good. By paying both victim and early contributions to ©criminal Jones justice. & Bartlett In 621 BCE,Learning, community, LLC Solon’s use of fines© helpedJones bridge & Bartlett the Learning, LLC the Athenian politicianNOT and magistrateFOR SALE Draco OR com DISTRIBUTION- private and public interests of NOTcriminal FOR justice. SALE OR DISTRIBUTION piled the first comprehensive set of laws in Greece. From the founding of Rome in 750 BCE to 450 Prior to this time, criminal matters were viewed as BCE, criminal justice was administered according to private matters and were resolved by the injured tradition of Roman patricians. Unfortunately, this party or victim’s family. Draco’s laws were noteworthy informal, top-down form of justice was unfairly for their© Jones severity, & as Bartlett the penalty Learning, for many offenses LLC administered© to Jones nonelites. & InBartlett 450 BCE, Learning, Roman mag LLC- was death.NOT Poisoning,FOR SALE starvation, OR DISTRIBUTION death by exposure, istrates createdNOT the LawFOR of SALE the Twelve OR TablesDISTRIBUTION, a and banishment were just some of the sanctions comprehensive and codified legal code to replace employed during Draco’s time. Indeed, the contem- the oral, informal, and largely unfair prior tradition. porary term draconian, often used to describe tough The Twelve Tables remained in effect for nearly © Jones &criminal Bartlett justice Learning, policies, is LLC derived from Draco and © Jones1,000 years & Bartlett until the fallLearning, of Constantinople LLC and the NOT FORhis SALE legacy. OR Over DISTRIBUTION the next century, as Greek society NOTEastern FOR Roman SALE Empire. OR DISTRIBUTION An interesting facet of the

Historical Approaches to Corrections 37

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 37 13/12/17 1:16 pm © Jones & BartlettTwelve Tables Learning, was the LLCestablishment of two sets of © Jones &On Bartlett Crimes and Learning, Punishments LLC contained a variety laws, one exclusively for Roman citizens and the of ideas that seem obvious today but were revolution- NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALEother ORfor noncitizens. DISTRIBUTION The idea that law and criminal ary for their time. Some of these ideas were that laws justice are applied differently based on individual should be rational, punishments should be in degree characteristics exists to the present day. to the severity of the crime (thus capital punishment should not be widely applied), the presumption of Magna Carta © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLCinnocence, that the law should© Jones apply &equally Bartlett to all Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTIONpeople regardless of socialNOT class orFOR other SALE status, OR and DISTRIBUTION A centerpiece historical contribution to criminal jus- that long imprisonment is a more powerful deterrent tice and the rights of criminal defendants is the than condemnation (DeLisi, 2011). Magna Carta, or Great Charter. Signed by King John of England on June 15, 1215, the Magna Carta was a codified© Jones set of& lawsBartlett that both Learning, delineated LLC the set of © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC behaviorsNOT FOR that SALE citizens OR could DISTRIBUTION not engage in and lim- CorrectionsNOT FOR in Colonial SALE OR America DISTRIBUTION ited the powers of the throne. In many respects, the In many respects, the colonial United States continued Magna Carta was the forerunner of the U.S. Constitu- the historical approach to criminal justice by relying tion with its dual goals of cautiously empowering the heavily on punishment. However, other forms of cor- state and granting rights and protections to the © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jonesrection & Bartlett and punishment Learning, emerged, LLC some of which are public. NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FORused inSALE today’s OR criminal DISTRIBUTION justice system. For instance, In fact, the United States owes its entire criminal the American colonies relied extensively on informal justice system and common law tradition to England. social controls, including public shaming and ridicule. Common law is based on customs, traditions, Because communities were small and close-knit, the unwritten norms, and general principles that ulti- proclivity for gossip actually helped serve the purposes mately find their way© Jones into codified & Bartlett or statutory Learning, law. LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC of keeping people in line and publicly humiliating Common law wouldNOT characterize FOR SALE the burgeoning OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION them when they transgressed social norms. American colonies from the arrival of Columbus in The colonists also used fines for minor offenses, 1492 to the Declaration of Independence in 1776 and such as flirting or engaging in sexual contact that was the drafting of the U.S. Constitution from 1787 to considered improper, such as premarital kissing. For 1789 to the ratification of the Bill of Rights in 1791. © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC slightly more© Jones serious &violations, Bartlett corporal Learning, punish LLCment, Colonial justice is described in greater detail later in NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION or the inflictionNOT FOR of pain SALE to correct OR and DISTRIBUTION punish deviant this chapter. behavior was used. Pillories were wooden frames with holes for an offender’s head and hands. Offenders On Crimes and Punishment would stand attached to the pillory for hours as vil- American justice also owes a tremendous debt to lagers ridiculed and at times threw rocks and garbage © Jones & BartlettCesare Beccaria Learning,’s masterpiece LLC Dei delitti e Delle Pene© ,Jones at them. & Bartlett Stocks were Learning, wooden frames LLC with holes for NOT FOR SALEor On OR Crimes DISTRIBUTION and Punishments, published in 1764.NOT FORthe person’s SALE hands OR DISTRIBUTIONand feet and were basically a An Italian nobleman and jurist, Beccaria was dis- seated version of the pillory. Other accused persons gusted with the arbitrary, discriminatory, and largely were publicly whipped, receiving various numbers of barbaric system of justice that typified 18th-century lashes or whippings depending on the severity of the Italy. Beccaria believed© Jones in the & Enlightenment Bartlett Learning, idea LLCoffense. Those who swore,© engaged Jones in & questionable Bartlett Learning, LLC that people were rationalNOT FOR and thus SALE their OR behavior DISTRIBUTION sexual conduct, were intemperate,NOT FOR associated SALE with OR DISTRIBUTION followed an almost economic weighing of the costs servants or slaves, or disrespected parents or village and benefits or pains and pleasures of action. Com- leaders received mutilation (cutting ears off was a mensurately, punishment should be swift, certain, common practice), water torture, whippings, beating, and severe (but proportionate) to hopefully deter or or even brandings. In addition to the extreme physi- dissuade© Jones people & Bartlett from choosing Learning, to engage LLC in crime. cal pain inflicted© Jones by &branding, Bartlett the Learning, brands also servedLLC AccordingNOT FOR to Beccaria,SALE OR “in DISTRIBUTIONorder for punishment not the purposeNOT of notifyingFOR SALE the community OR DISTRIBUTION what the to be, in every instance, an act of violence of one or of criminal had done. Thieves were branded with T on many against a private citizen, it must be essentially their forehead; burglars and persons accused of blas- public, prompt, necessary, the least possible in the phemy received a B; and, as immortalized in © Jones & Bartlettgiven circumstances, Learning, proportionateLLC to the crimes, © JonesNathaniel & Bartlett Hawthorne’s Learning, classic LLCThe Scarlet Letter, NOT FOR SALEdictated OR by DISTRIBUTION the laws” (1994, p. 284). NOT FORadulterers SALE were OR branded DISTRIBUTION or forced to wear an A.

38 CHAPTER 2 The Philosophy and History of Corrections

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 38 13/12/17 1:16 pm © Jones Noted& Bartlett legal historian Learning, and scholarLLC Lawrence Friedman © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC (1993) suggests: NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION

It was a paternal society—a society built on the model of a patriarchal house. Like a stern father, the authorities did not believe in sparing the rod. The courts enforced discipline. In a way, it was a© crime Jones just to & be Bartlett a bad citizen: Learning, not LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC to conform to standardsNOT of good FOR virtue SALE and respectability. OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION (p. 38)

An early form of incapacitation practiced by the colonists© Jones was banishment & Bartlett, in whichLearning, wrongdoers LLC were © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC excommunicatedNOT FOR orSALE excluded OR from DISTRIBUTION the community NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION entirely. Repeat criminal offenders were a group commonly subjected to banishment (the same logic is used today). The colonial use of banishment is somewhat Torture has historically been used to punish persons accused of crimes and was common on transportation ships. © Jones &ironic Bartlett because Learning, the bourgeoning LLC United States received © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FORthousands SALE OR of English DISTRIBUTION criminals who had been ban- NOTEastern FOR Kentucky SALE University ORArchives, DISTRIBUTION Richmond, KY. ished or transported from England. Transportation was used by England to export criminals since at least 1615, when James I ordered that clemency could be granted to lesser criminals, such as thieves, swindlers, It is revolting to have no better reason for a rule of law and prostitutes, as long© as Jones they were & banishedBartlett to Learning, what thanLLC that so it was laid down in© the Jones time of Henry & Bartlett IV. Learning, LLC is today the United StatesNOT and FOR Australia. SALE The OR English DISTRIBUTION NOT(Wendell FOR Holmes, SALE 1897) OR DISTRIBUTION Transportation Act of 1718 instituted banishment as the usual punishment for property offenders (violent It wasn’t all physical punishment in the American offenders were simply executed), and it is estimated colonies, however. As early as the 17th century, the that between 50,000 and 100,000 criminals were ban- © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC beginnings of© what Jones would & todayBartlett be called Learning, pretrial LLC ished to colonial America (Wadman & Allison, 2004). NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION supervision appear.NOT FOR(Bail wasSALE used OR in Roman DISTRIBUTION law as The ships used for transportation, which were little early as 700 BCE.) Lawbreakers and other suspects more than floating jails, were known as hulks. had to post money or some other form of collateral as an enticement to obey the law while on “bond.” This early type of bail release was known as the fee system. © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © JonesEarly local & Bartlettjails were basedLearning, on the commonLLC law NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOTtradit FORion—the SALE customary OR DISTRIBUTION criminal justice and legal traditions or doctrines that the United States inher- ited from England. These early jails, known as gaols, held persons awaiting execution, whipping, or some © Jones & Bartlett Learning,other LLC punishment. Gaols had ©been Jones in place & inBartlett English Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTIONcommon law since the reign ofNOT King FORHenry SALE II in OR DISTRIBUTION 1166. It is interesting to note that the function, varied population, and overall squalor of jails has changed little since the 12th century. For nearly 1,000 years, jails have housed persons accused of crimes and © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC awaiting trial,© prisoners, Jones &the Bartlett poor, displaced Learning, persons, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION the mentally NOTill, and FOR others SALE who could OR notDISTRIBUTION be accom- modated by some other party of social service agency Transportation is a form of banishment in which criminals were (Goldfarb, 1976). sent away, such as the British practice of placing criminals on The colonial approach to corrections was effective ships and sending them to colonial America and colonial Australia. © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jonesfor its time & Bartlettand worked Learning, because the LLC colonies were rela- NOT FOREastern SALE Kentucky OR University DISTRIBUTION Archives, Richmond, KY. NOTtively FOR small SALE and homogenous. OR DISTRIBUTION Matthew Meskell (1999)

Corrections in Colonial America 39

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 39 13/12/17 1:16 pm © Jones & Bartletthas suggested Learning, that three LLC social forces created an inevi©- Jones &Third, Bartlett there wasLearning, an intellectual LLC movement away table decline in colonial corrections and necessitated from corporal and capital punishments (recall the NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALEreforms. OR First, DISTRIBUTION as the 18th century progressed, popula- contributions of Beccaria described earlier in this tions increased dramatically in places such as New chapter). A major figure in this intellectual ferment York, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania. Punishments was John Howard, who was appointed sheriff of Bed- that worked well in small villages were almost totally fordshire, England, in 1773. Howard had once been ineffective in large,© expansive Jones &settings Bartlett where Learning, residents LLCimprisoned in a French facility© Jones and was & Bartletthorrified atLearning, LLC were more mobile.NOT Second, FOR Americans SALE wereOR repulsedDISTRIBUTION the conditions of confinementNOT that FOR characterized SALE OR DISTRIBUTION by the violent harshness of English common law and European jails. In 1777, Howard published The State in turn disliked the use of corporal and capital punish- of Prisons in England and Wales, a work that publi- ments in their own society. The following description cized the appalling conditions of English jails, the of© Pennsylvania Jones & Bartlett jails in 1776 Learning, captures the LLC colonial dis- unfair use© of Jones the bail/fee & Bartlett system, and Learning, generally, LLCan satisfaction with too tough a correctional system: uncivilized correctional system. His work resulted in NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION the passage of the Penitentiary Act in 1779, which required English prisons and jails to provide safe, In one corrupt and corrupting assemblage were to be sanitary facilities; conduct systematic inspections to found the disgusting objects of popular contempt, ensure compliance with appropriate procedures; © Jones & Bartlettbesmeared Learning, with filth from LLC the pillory—the unhappy vic©- Jonesabolish & Bartlett charging feesLearning, to inmates; LLC and oversee a NOT FOR SALEtims ORof the DISTRIBUTION lash . . . the half-naked vagrant—the loathsomeNOT FORhealthy SALE lifestyle OR regimen DISTRIBUTION for prisoners. Howard is drunkard—the sick suffering from various bodily pains, credited with coining the term penitentiary, and his and too often the unaneled malefactor. work heavily influenced colonial intellectuals, includ- (Vaux, cited in Meskell, 1999, p. 839) ing Benjamin Rush and Benjamin Franklin, and © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLCwould lay the groundwork© for Jones the American & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION

Various forms of corporal punishment, such as the shower bath and flogging, were common in early American prisons, such as Sing Sing. Over time, sheer confinement replaced the physical infliction of pain on prisoners. © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALEPhoto courtesy OR ofDISTRIBUTION Ron Arons, Author of The Jews of Sing Sing. Wood engraving fromNOT Cornelia FOR Cotton Gallery.SALE OR DISTRIBUTION

40 CHAPTER 2 The Philosophy and History of Corrections

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 40 13/12/17 1:16 pm © Jones penitentiary& Bartlett (forLearning, an overview LLC of correctional history, © JonesMiseries & of BartlettPublic Prisons, Learning, which mobilized LLC the Com- see Blomberg & Lucken, 2000; Johnston, 2009). monwealth of Pennsylvania to set the international NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION standard in prison design. In 1790, the Philadelphia Society established what is often credited as the first The Invention of the Penitentiary penitentiary or prison in the United States at the Wal- nut Street Jail (see the Corrections Focus for a profile of Although confinement© hasJones existed & inBartlett Western Learning,societ- the LLC first American prison). It took© Jones decades &to Bartlettconvince Learning, LLC ies for centuries, prisonsNOT as theyFOR are SALE understood OR DISTRIBUTION today state leaders of the superiority ofNOT the penitentiaryFOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION are considered an American invention. At their approach, but would culminate in the Western State inception, prisons, then symbolically known as Penitentiary in Pittsburgh in 1826 and the more famous penitentiaries, were hailed as an outgrowth of the Eastern State Penitentiary in Cherry Hill just outside Enlightenment in which criminal offenders were © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC Philadelphia in© 1829.Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC confined and expected to contemplate their criminal Eastern State Penitentiary was the most expensive NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION behavior and work toward their rehabilitation and American building of its day (it had running water ultimate redemption. Indeed, inmates were expected and central heat before the White House had such to be penitent, defined as feeling or expressing amenities), one of the most famous buildings in the remorse for one’s misdeeds or sins. world, and a major tourist attraction. As described © Jones & BartlettThroughout Learning, American LLChistory, prisons have © Jonesearlier, the& Bartlettfunction of Learning, the penitentiary LLC was not to NOT FORreflected SALE the OR social DISTRIBUTION conditions of the day, and early pen- NOTsimply FOR punish SALE but OR to move DISTRIBUTION the criminal toward spiri- itentiaries reflected the intense religiosity of the colonial tual reflection and change. The Quaker-inspired era. The Pennsylvania Quakers led by William Penn Pennsylvania system involved the following (Eastern initiated reforms of the colonial approach to correction State Penitentiary, n.d.; The History Channel, 1996): in which physical punishment would be replaced by © Jones & Bartlett Learning, ■LLC■ Total isolation from other© prisoners Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC isolation. In 1787, Benjamin Franklin and Dr. Benja- min Rush (among otherNOT distinguished FOR SALE citizens) OR DISTRIBUTION■■ Labor in solitary confinementNOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION organized the Philadelphia Society for Alleviating the ■■ Strictly enforced silence

Newgate of Connecticut © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALEThe Walnut OR Street DISTRIBUTION Jail in Philadelphia is often referred to asNOT and FOR prison SALE systems OR in DISTRIBUTION Pennsylvania and New York. For being the first prison in American history when it opened in instance, Newgate was not administered by a progres- 1790. However, the Connecticut General Assembly autho- sive penologist who sought to rehabilitate prisoners into rized the creation of Newgate in Connecticut in 1773, law-abiding citizens. Instead, Newgate was simply a con- nearly 20 years before the founding of the Walnut Street finement facility—one that was characterized by ineffi- Jail. Newgate was a ©colonial Jones prison & Bartlettthat was built Learning, in an LLCciency and by what would today© Jonesbe considered & Bartlett barbaric Learning, LLC abandoned copper mineNOT and FOR used toSALE confine OR five specificDISTRIBUTION conditions and treatment by correctionalNOT FOR officials. SALE Never OR- DISTRIBUTION types of offenders: robbers, burglars, forgers, counterfeit- theless, Newgate deserves its place in the history of the ers, and horse thieves. The use of a prison for confinement American prison. purposes was a departure from the use of corporal punishment.© Jones Newgate & Bartlett received its Learning, first prisoner LLCin December SOURCES: A.© M. Jones Durham, III.& (1989).Bartlett Newgate Learning, of Connecticut: LLC 1773 and housed political prisoners during the Revolution- Origins and early days of an early American prison. aryNOT War. BeginningFOR SALE in 1824, OR Newgate DISTRIBUTION also housed female Justice Quarterly, NOT 6 ,FOR 89–116. SALE Retrieved OR July DISTRIBUTION 1, 2011, from inmates. Newgate was noteworthy for inmate escapes and http://www.cultureandtourism.org/cct/cwp/view.asp?a generally inhumane conditions and was closed in 1827. =2127&q=302258; N. Johnston. (2009). Evolving function: Several factors have been cited for the general ano- Early use of imprisonment as punishment. The Prison © Jones & Bartlettnymity of NewgateLearning, compared LLC to more famous prisons© JonesJournal, 89 & Bartlett, 10S–34S. Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION

The Invention of the Penitentiary 41

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 41 13/12/17 1:16 pm ■■ © Jones & BartlettExtraordinarily Learning, strict LLC social control in which© Jones Auburn & Bartlett system wasLearning, viewed as LLC more humanistic in inmates were hooded whenever they were outside the sense that it replaced the systemic use of soli- NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION their cells tary confinement. But the Auburn system also ■■ Extreme isolation that would cause criminals to employed the lockstep (inmates marching in single think about the wrongfulness of their crimes and file, placing the right hand on the shoulder of the become genuinely penitent. man ahead, and facing toward the guard), the © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLCstriped suit, 2-foot extensions© Jones of the & walls Bartlett between Learning, LLC Although the Pennsylvania system has enjoyed a NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTIONcells, and special seating NOTarrangements FOR SALE at meals OR to DISTRIBUTION staid reputation, particularly compared to more con- ensure strict silence. Auburn also introduced the temporary images of American prisons, incidents of tier system with several floors or wings that have disorder did occur. Norman Johnston’s (2010) recent stacked cells over another and classified (and pun- historical assessment found some evidence of alcohol use© Jonesand sexual & misconductBartlett Learning, occurring among LLC staff at ished) inmates© Jones by their & Bartlett level of compliance. Learning, By LLC the theNOT Walnut FOR Street SALE Jail and OR Eastern DISTRIBUTION State Penitentiary. 1830s, theNOT Auburn FOR system SALE generally OR DISTRIBUTION replaced the These isolated incidents caused significant embarrass- Pennsylvania system, which was discontinued as a ment to the correctional system and were rare, but prison approach by 1913. demonstrate that scandal is a timeless part of correc- The goal of the Pennsylvania and Auburn sys- © Jones & Bartletttional lore. Learning, LLC © Jonestems & was Bartlett to reform Learning, inmates, butLLC they used different methods. It is difficult to say which model was NOT FOR SALEAs OR a punishment DISTRIBUTION philosophy, the PennsylvaniaNOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION system was developed in the 18th century; however, more effective. In fact, neither rehabilitated inmates the Auburn system began in 1816 with the opening very well. The reasons for their respective failures of the Auburn Prison in New York. Although heav- are many. Critics of the Pennsylvania system held ily influenced by and similar to the Pennsylvania that its prisons were too expensive to build and system, the Auburn© Jones system was& Bartlett a congregate Learning, system LLCoperate and that separate© confinement Jones & Bartlett led to wide Learning,- LLC in which inmatesNOT ate and FOR worked SALE together OR DISTRIBUTIONduring spread insanity within theNOT prison FOR population. SALE OR DISTRIBUTION the day and were kept in solitary confinement at Opponents of the Auburn system argued that the night with enforced silence at all times. The system was too cruel and inhumane to affect

In early American prisons, inmates walked in lock step, as shown in this historical photo from Sing Sing Prison in New York. Are inmate movements within facilities today similar or different from lock step approaches? © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALECourtesy OR of New DISTRIBUTIONYork State Archives; Criminal Justice, B0095. NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION

42 CHAPTER 2 The Philosophy and History of Corrections

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 42 13/12/17 1:16 pm © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION CORRECTIONS CONTROVERSY

Holt v. Hobbs:© A JonesUnanimous & Bartlett Supreme Learning, Court LLC Decision © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION The public generally believes that political and legal In the majority opinion authored by Justice Samuel Alito, opinions in the United States are deeply divided, and the Court held that the Religious Land Use and Institution- that that division also pertains to the Supreme Court. alized Persons Act of 2000 allows prison official to test the However, it should be noted that even if some correc- sincerity of religious beliefs to prevent them from being tional© Jones issues appear & Bartlett to be controversial, Learning, they LLC are actu- used for illicit© conduct.Jones Holt & Bartlettmet the standard Learning, for accom LLC- allyNOT straightforward FOR SALE in legal OR terms. DISTRIBUTION An example of this modation becauseNOT heFOR was SALEneither slight OR norDISTRIBUTION idiosyncratic is the unanimous Supreme Court decision in Holt v. with the tenets of Islam. Justice Alito also concluded that Hobbs (2015). The case involved a white inmate named the correctional concerns about security risks posed by Gregory Holt, a practicing Salafi Muslim who also went the beards were hard to take seriously when the hair on © Jones & Bartlettby the name Learning, Abdul Maalik LLC Muhammad. Petitioner Holt,© Jonesinmates’ & Bartlettheads was Learning,longer, and thus LLC could more easily who was serving a life sentence for burglary and assault, obscure a weapon or contraband. Moreover, correctional NOT FOR SALEwanted ORto grow DISTRIBUTION a beard as a necessary practice of hisNOT officers FOR SALEcould merely OR searchDISTRIBUTION the inmate’s beard if they religion. However, the Arkansas Department of Correc- have a genuine security concern. In addition, correctional tions did not allow men to have facial hair other than officials also expressed concern that allowing beards narrowly trimmed mustaches and quarter-inch beards in would make it easier for inmates to alter their appearance the case that an inmate© Jones had a diagnosed& Bartlett dermatologi Learning,- LLCwhich could contribute to identification© Jones problems & Bartlett where Learning, LLC cal problem. Holt arguedNOT that FOR the groomingSALE ORpolicy DISTRIBUTION was a inmates live in congregate housing.NOT Justice FOR Alito SALE reasoned OR DISTRIBUTION violation of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized that correctional officials should simply take pictures of Persons Act of 2000, which provides that “no govern- inmates with and without beards to strengthen their iden- ment shall impose a substantial burden on the religious tification of inmates. exercise of an institutionalized person unless the govern- Interestingly, although the decision was unanimous, ment© Jonesdemonstrates & Bartlett that the Learning,burden is the LLCleast means Justice Sonia© Sotomayor Jones wrote& Bartlett a concurring Learning, opinion where LLC of NOTfurthering FOR a SALE compelling OR DISTRIBUTIONgovernmental interest.” she disagreedNOT with FOR the Court’s SALE dismissal OR DISTRIBUTION of the security The respondent in the case, Ray Hobbs, director of the explanation of the correctional officials. Department of Corrections, argued that the hair policy was necessary as a security measure to prevent inmates SOURCES: Holt v. Hobbs, 574 U.S. __ (2015); Liptak, A. (2015, from hiding weapons in their beards. Most states allow January 21). Ban on prison beards violates Muslim rights, © Jones & Bartlettbeards, but Learning, several states, LLC including Alabama, Florida,© JonesSupreme & CourtBartlett says. The Learning, New York Times LLC. Retrieved May 15, NOT FOR SALEGeorgia, OR South DISTRIBUTION Carolina, Texas, and Virginia, had similarNOT 2017, FOR from SALE https://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/21/us/prison OR DISTRIBUTION proscriptive policies as Arkansas. -beard-ban-gregory-holt-ruling.html

people’s lives positively.© JonesAccording & Bartlettto de Beaumont Learning, LLCAlthough the Pennsylvania© Jonessystem lost& Bartlett favor Learning, LLC and de Tocqueville (1994):NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTIONin the United States, it becameNOT widely FOR imi SALE- OR DISTRIBUTION tated throughout the rest of the world. For The Philadelphia [sic] system being also that which produces the instance, correctional systems in Belgium, China, deepest impressions on the soul of the convict, must effect more England, France, Germany, Holland, Italy, Japan, reformation© Jones than that& Bartlettof Auburn. The Learning, latter, however, LLC is perhaps and Spain adopted© Jones various & Bartlett methods Learning,of both the LLC more conformable to the habits of men in society, and on this Pennsylvania and Auburn systems. Ultimately, NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION account effects a greater number of reformations, which might be the Auburn system was more widely adopted in called “legal,” inasmuch as they produce the external fulfillment the United States for one principal reason: it rein- of social obligations. . . . the Philadelphia system produces more forced the emerging industrial philosophy that honest men, and that of New York more obedient citizens. allowed states to use convict labor to defray © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC (p. 374) © Jonesprison costs. & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION

The Invention of the Penitentiary 43

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 43 13/12/17 1:16 pm © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION

© Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION Eastern State Penitentiary was once among the most famous structures in the world and is a symbol of the American prison.

The Library Company of Philadelphia.

© Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION consequenceNOT of FOR the Revolutionary SALE OR DISTRIBUTIONWar, England The Invention of the Reformatory stopped transporting criminals to the American colonies and instead shipped them to what is now During the Jacksonian era spanning the first several Australia. Between 1840 and 1844, Captain Alexander decades of the 19th century, dissatisfaction with Maconochie was placed in charge of one of the American prisons was widespread. In their 1833 mas- worst British penal colonies, located about © Jones & Bartlettterwork, Learning,Gustave de Beaumont LLC and Alexis de © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC 1,000 miles off Australia’s coast on Norfolk Island. NOT FOR SALETocqueville OR DISTRIBUTION opined that “while society in the UnitedNOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION This was where twice-condemned criminals— States gives the example of the most extended liberty, offenders who had committed felonies in England, the prisons of the same country offer the spectacle of been transported to Australia, and committed addi- the most complete despotism” (1994, p. 381). Upon tional crimes there—were sent. visiting Eastern State© Jones Penitentiary & Bartlett in 1842, Learning, Charles LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC Like John Howard, Maconochie had previously Dickens wrote, “I hold this slow and daily tampering NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTIONbeen a prisoner—he was capturedNOT FOR by the SALE French OR DISTRIBUTION with the mysteries of the brain to be immeasurably while serving as a British naval officer, and was thus worse than any torture of the body” (The History sensitive to the often deplorable conditions of con- Channel, 1996). In other words, the methods of cor- finement. Upon seeing the conditions under which rection inherent in the Pennsylvania and Auburn most inmates lived, Maconochie introduced humane systems© Jones were & viewed Bartlett as cruel, Learning, counterproductive, LLC and © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC reforms that would give prisoners some degree of flagrantlyNOT FOR in violation SALE ORof basic DISTRIBUTION tenets of human, civil, NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION hope for their future. He proposed the following and due process rights (Skidmore, 1948). changes (Barry, 1956): Over time, American penologists were also influenced by the innovations of foreign correc- ■■ Criminal sentences should not be for a specific © Jones & Bartletttional administrators, Learning, LLC most notably Alexander © Jones &period Bartlett of time; Learning, rather release LLC should be based on NOT FOR SALEMaconochie OR DISTRIBUTION and Sir Walter Crofton. As a NOT FORthe SALE performance OR DISTRIBUTION of a specified quantity of labor.

44 CHAPTER 2 The Philosophy and History of Corrections

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 44 13/12/17 1:16 pm ■■ © Jones & BartlettIn brief, fixed-timeLearning, sentences LLC should be abolished © JonesIndividuality, & Bartlett in whichLearning, prisons LLC were not permit- in favor of task sentences. ted to house more than 300 inmates, thus avoid- NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION ■■ The quantity of labor prisoners must perform ing the problems associated with overcrowding. should be expressed in a number of marks (see the ■■ Gradual approximation to freedom, in which discussion of the mark system that follows this list) every successive stage of discipline (like the mark that must be earned before release was possible. system) was characterized by less restraint. © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC ■■ While in prison, inmates should earn everything ■■ NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTIONStrict supervision after dischargeNOT FOR and certain SALE revo OR- DISTRIBUTION they receive; all sustenance and indulgences cation of ticket to leave on any appearance of a should be added to their debts of mark. relapse. ■■ Prisoners should be required to work in groups of Despite these innovations, there was still the wide- six or seven people, and the entire group should spread public belief that crime threatened the stability be© heldJones accountable & Bartlett for the Learning, behavior of LLC each of its © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC and order of society, and prisons appeared to be doing members.NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION little to reduce the crime rate. Even in the middle 19th ■■ Prisoners, while still obliged to earn their daily century, the general public considered prisons as mere tally of marks, should be given proprietary inter- holding stations, regardless of how innovative their est in their own labor and be subject to a less rig- design, until criminals were released to offend again. © Jones & Bartlettorous discipline Learning, in order LLC to prepare them for © JonesEdgardo & Bartlett Rotman Learning, (1998) described LLC the state of NOT FOR SALErelease OR into DISTRIBUTION society. NOTAmerican FOR SALE prisons OR as follows: DISTRIBUTION Maconochie developed a mark system, where marks were credits against a sentence that allowed The elements of the original penitentiary designed, based inmates to be released once they earned the required on regimentation, isolation, religious conversion, and number through good© behavior. Jones The & Bartlett mark system Learning, steadLLC labor, had been subverted by© aJones pervasive & overcrowd Bartlett- Learning, LLC consisted of four stages.NOT First, FOR the penal SALE stage OR was DISTRIBUTIONthe ing, corruption, and cruelty. PrisonersNOT FOR were oftenSALE living OR DISTRIBUTION harshest form of punishment and was typified by soli- three and four to a cell designed for one, and prison disci- tary confinement and meager living conditions. pline was medieval-like in character, with bizarre and Second, the associated stage permitted inmates to asso- brutal punishments commonplace in state institutions. Wardens did not so much deny this awful reality as ciate ©with Jones others &and Bartlett begin to earnLearning, marks by LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC participating in programs, working, and abstaining explain it away, attributing most of the blame not to those who administered the system but to those who experi- fromNOT continued FOR criminal SALE behavior. OR DISTRIBUTION The worse the NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION enced it. Because the prisons were filled with immigrants inmate’s behavior during this initial adjustment, the who were ostensibly hardened to a life of crime and imper- more marks that were required for release. Third, the vious to American traditions, those in charge had no social stage approximated community living so inmates choice but to rule over inmates with an iron hand. © Jones &could Bartlett better function Learning, upon LLC release. Fourth, the final © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC (p. 152) NOT FORstage SALE of ticket OR of DISTRIBUTION leave was achieved when all marks NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION were earned and the offender was conditionally

released to the community (Barry, 1958; Morris, 2002). These concerns did not go unnoticed. The New York Today, the use of good time toward an inmate’s sen- Prison Association commissioned Enoch Cobb tence and parole are familiar concepts; however, they Wines and Theodore Dwight to conduct a national were revolutionary in Maconochie’s© Jones & era.Bartlett His progres Learning,- LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTIONsurvey of prisons and correctionalNOT methods. FOR SALE Their OR DISTRIBUTION sive ideas were denigrated as coddling of criminals, findings were grim. Wines and Dwight suggested an and Maconochie was relieved of duty in 1844. almost complete reconstruction of American prisons, A disciple of Maconochie, Sir Walter Crofton was including barring prison administration appoint- the chairman of the board of directors of the Irish ments based on politics, granting wardens the power prisons.© Jones Crofton & instituted Bartlett very Learning, similar protocols LLC in to remove guards© Jones at will, & abolishing Bartlett prison Learning, labor for LLC Ireland,NOT which FOR were SALE based OR on Maconochie’s DISTRIBUTION mark profit, increasingNOT religious FOR SALE and academic OR DISTRIBUTION training, system. Under Crofton’s direction, Irish prisons were and even redesigning the basic prison buildings characterized by: (Meskell, 1999). Inspired by their report, the ■■ Reward, in which all advantages, including ulti- National Congress on Penitentiary and Reformatory © Jones & Bartlettmate release, Learning, were dependent LLC on industry and © JonesDiscipline & Bartlett(a forerunner Learning, of the contemporary LLC Ameri- NOT FOR SALEgood ORconduct, DISTRIBUTION as shown by daily records. NOTcan FOR Correctional SALE Association)OR DISTRIBUTION met in October 1870

The Invention of the Reformatory 45

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 45 13/12/17 1:16 pm © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION CORRECTIONS HISTORYNOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION

Principles from the 1870 National Congress on Penitentiary © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC and ReformatoryNOT DisciplineFOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION

■■ Punishment is inflicted on the criminal in expiation ■■ The interest of society and the interest of the con- of the wrong done, and especially with a view to victed criminal are really identical. Society is best prevent his relapse by reformation. served by saving its criminal members. © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC ■■ Treatment is directed at the criminal and his new ■■ The prisoner’s self-respect should be cultivated. NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION birth to respect for the laws. ■■ In prison administration moral forces should be ■■ Practice shall conform to theory and the process of relied upon with as little mixture of physical force public punishment be made in fact, as well as pre- as possible. tense, a process of reformation. ■■ Steady honorable labor is the basis of all refor- © Jones & Bartlett■■ A progressive Learning, classification LLC should be established© Jones &matory Bartlett discipline. Learning, It not only LLC aids information, it is NOT FOR SALE ORand includeDISTRIBUTION at least three stages: a penal stage, NOTa FOR essentialSALE toOR it. DISTRIBUTION reformatory stage, and a probationary stage worked ■■ It is important that criminals be trained while in on some mark system where they earn promotion, prison to the practice and love of labor. gaining at each successive step, increased comfort ■■ We regard the contract system of prison labor as prej- and privilege. © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC udicial—alike to discipline,© Jones finance, and& Bartlettreformation. Learning, LLC ■■ Since hope is a more potent agent than fear, rewards NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION■■ The stage of conditionalNOT leave FOR is problematic SALE OR to DISTRIBUTION more than punishments are essential to every good administer but we believe Yankee ingenuity is com- prison system. petent to devise some method of practical applica- ■■ The prisoner’s destiny during his incarceration tion among separate jurisdictions and the vast reach should be put in his own hands. of our territory. © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC ■■ The two master forces opposed to the reform of ■■ Prisons, as well as prisoners, should be classified NOTthe FOR prison SALE systems OR are DISTRIBUTIONpolitical appointments and or graded.NOT ThereFOR shallSALE be prisonsOR DISTRIBUTION for the untried; instability of administration. prisons for young criminals; prisons for women; for ■■ Prison officers need a special education for their misdemeanants; male felons; and the incorrigible. work; special training schools should be instituted ■■ It is believed that repeated short sentences are © Jones & Bartlettfor themLearning, and prison LLC administration should be raised© Jones &worse Bartlett than useless. Learning, LLC to the dignity of a profession. NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR■■ GreaterSALE use OR should DISTRIBUTION be made of the social principal in ■■ Sentences limited only by satisfactory proof of ref- prison discipline than is now. The criminal must be ormation should be substituted for those measured prepared for society in society. by mere lapse of time. ■■ Public preventative institutions for the treatment of ■■ Of all the reformatory© Jones agencies & Bartlett religion Learning,is the first LLC children constitute a true© Jonesfield of promise & Bartlett in which Learning, LLC in importance. NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTIONto labor for the repressionNOT of crime. FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION ■■ Education is a matter of primary importance in ■■ More systematic and comprehensive methods prisons. should be adopted to serve discharged prisoners. ■■ No prison can be made a school of reform until there Having raised him up, it has the further duty to aid is, on the part of officers, a hearty desire and inten- in holding him up. © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC tion to accomplish this effect. ■■ The successful prosecution of crime requires the NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION ■■ There must be a serious conviction in the minds combined action of capital and labor. of prison officers that the imprisoned criminals are ■■ It is plainly the duty of society to indemnify the citi- capable of being reformed. zen who has been unjustly imprisoned. ■■ A system of prison reform must gain the will of the ■■ Our laws regarding insanity and its relationship to © Jones & Bartlettconvict. Learning, LLC © Jones &crime Bartlett need revision. Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION

46 CHAPTER 2 The Philosophy and History of Corrections

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 46 13/12/17 1:16 pm © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC ■■ Does society take all the steps it easily might to ■■ As a general rule, the maintenance of all penal institu- NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALEchange, OR DISTRIBUTION or at least improve, the circumstances in tions, above the county jail, should be from the earn- our social state that thus lead to crime? ings of their inmates, and without cost to the state. ■■ The exercise of executive clemency is one of grave ■■ A right application of the principles of sanitary importance, and at the same time of great delicacy science in the construction and arrangements of and difficulty. © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC prisons is another point of© vitalJones importance. & Bartlett Learning, LLC ■■ The proper durationNOT for FOR imprisonment SALE forOR a violationDISTRIBUTION ■■ The principle of the pecuniaryNOT responsibilityFOR SALE of parOR- DISTRIBUTION of the laws of society is one of the most perplexing ents for the full or partial support of their criminal chil- questions in criminal jurisprudence. dren in reformatory institutions, extensively applied in ■■ The establishment of a National Prison Bureau or a Europe, has been found to work well in practice. © JonesNational Prison& Bartlett Discipline Learning, Society is recommended. LLC ■■ It is our© Jonesintimate convictions& Bartlett that Learning, one of the most LLC NOT■■ We FORdeclare SALE our belief OR that DISTRIBUTION the education and self- effectiveNOT agencies FOR in theSALE repression OR of DISTRIBUTION crime would be respect of the convict would be served by the estab- the enactment of laws, by which the education of all lishment of a weekly newspaper to enable him to the children of the state should be made obligatory. keep pace with passing events. ■■ It is our conviction that no prison system can be

■■ perfect or successful to the most desirable extent, © Jones & BartlettPrison Learning, architecture isLLC a matter of grave importance.© Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC The proper size of prisons is a point of much interest. without some central and supreme authority to sit NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION In our judgment 300 inmates are enough to form the at the helm, guiding, controlling, unifying, and vital- population of a single prison; and, in no case, would izing the whole. we have the number exceed five or six hundred. SOURCE: American Correctional Association. (1970). National ■■ The organization and construction of prisons should congress on penitentiary and reformatory discipline, 1970 pro- be by the state.© Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLCceedings. Alexandria, VA: American© CorrectionalJones & Association. Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION

in Cincinnati, Ohio, and established principles of the second grade. After 6 months of good conduct, modern,© Jones humanistic & Bartlett correctional Learning, theory and LLC practice they were promoted© Jones to the & firstBartlett grade, Learning, and 6 months LLC (WinesNOT & Dwight, FOR SALE 1867). OR DISTRIBUTION of continued NOTgood conductFOR SALE entitled OR them DISTRIBUTION to parole. One of the most famous practitioners who Prisoners who misbehaved were demoted to the third placed the reformatory theory into practice was level, where a month’s good conduct was required to Zebulon Brockway. As warden of the Elmira (New restore them to the second grade. Inmates who regu- York) Reformatory, Brockway infused educational larly misbehaved were obliged to serve their © Jones &programs, Bartlett vocational Learning, training, LLC an administrative © Jonesmaximum & Bartlettsentence. Learning, LLC NOT FORand SALE operating OR DISTRIBUTIONsystem based on military discipline, NOT FORBrockway SALE believed OR DISTRIBUTION that prisoners could be and a humanistic orientation into American correc- reformed only in an atmosphere conducive to reha- tions. In 1876, the Elmira Reformatory began bilitation. It was in that spirit that Brockway receiving inmates. Elmira was built like Auburn developed what became known as the Elmira model: with inside cell blocks© for Jones solitary & confinement Bartlett Learning, at ■LLC■ Clothing that was not degradingly© Jones distinctive & Bartlett but Learning, LLC night and communal NOTworkshops. FOR TenSALE percent OR ofDISTRIBUTION uniform, and represented NOTthe respective FOR SALE grades OR or DISTRIBUTION Elmira’s cells were built with outside courtyards, standing of the inmates similar to those at Cherry Hill. This modified ■■ design allowed natural light to penetrate the build- A liberal prison diet designed to promote vigor ing. Elmira also used more artificial light than the ■■ A gymnasium completely equipped with baths Auburn© Jones or Cherry & BartlettHill prisons Learning, and had more LLC mod- and exercise© Jones equipment & Bartlett and facilities Learning, for field LLC ern sanitaryNOT FOR facilities. SALE OR DISTRIBUTION athleticsNOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION Elmira also differed from the typical prison of ■■ Facilities for training about one-third of the pop- this period in one other respect. Indeterminate sen- ulation in mechanical and freehand drawing, tencing meant that prisoners received a maximum wood- and metalworking, cardboard constructive © Jones &sentence Bartlett with Learning, early release LLC on parole if they exhibited © Jonesform & work,Bartlett clay Learning,modeling, cabinetmaking, LLC and NOT FORgood SALE behavior. OR DISTRIBUTION At entry, all prisoners were placed in NOT FORiron moldingSALE OR DISTRIBUTION

The Invention of the Reformatory 47

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 47 13/12/17 1:16 pm © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION

© Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION The Elmira Reformatory was the quintessential reformatory under the guidance of Warden Zebulon Brockway. In many respects, Brockway advanced the rehabilitative capacity of American corrections.

Eastern Kentucky University Archives, Richmond, KY. © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC ■■ Trade or vocationalNOT FOR instruction SALE ORbased DISTRIBUTION on the reform programs availableNOT only toFOR a few. SALE At Elmira OR DISTRIBUTION needs and capacities of individual prisoners and elsewhere, simple custody reemerged as the ■■ A school with a curriculum from an adaptation of primary goal and punishment as the method for the kindergarten to the usual high school course, controlling prisoners (Brockway, 1994). © Jonesand special & Bartlett classes in Learning,college subjects LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT■■ A libraryFOR SALEfor circulation, OR DISTRIBUTION consultation, and occa- NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION sional social use Probation and Parole ■■ A weekly institutional newspaper, in lieu of all While confinement tends to dominate the discussion outside newspapers, edited by prisoners (and budget) of corrections, interesting developments ■■ © Jones & BartlettRecreation Learning, and entertainment LLC for the inmates© Jonesalso &were Bartlett occurring Learning, in community LLC corrections. Like the NOT FOR SALE■■ Nondenominational OR DISTRIBUTION religious opportunities NOT FORvarious SALE eras of OR prison DISTRIBUTION history, the historical develop- Between 1876 and 1901, the Elmira model was ment of sanctions, such as probation and parole, adopted in correctional systems in 12 states across responded to social conditions, crime rates, and the the United States. However, by the time Brockway philosophical movement of the era. For instance, proba- retired, the enthusiasm© Jones that had & Bartlett inspired the Learning, refor- LLCtion, which is Latin for a period© Jones of proving & Bartlett or trial, Learning, LLC matory movementNOT began FOR to decline SALE mainly OR becauseDISTRIBUTION began in 1841 and is creditedNOT as the FOR invention SALE of ORJohn DISTRIBUTION crime continued to be widespread. The reformatory Augustus. Augustus was a Bostonian shoemaker of did not appear to work. As a result, the enlightened financial means who secured the release of a confirmed concepts of the reformers gave way once more to a alcoholic arrested for being a common drunk by acting more control-oriented approach to corrections. as surety for him. At sentencing, Augustus asked the © JonesAn inherent & Bartlett limitation Learning, of the Elmira LLC system was judge to defer© Jones sentencing & Bartlett for 3 weeks Learning, and release LLC the thatNOT guards FOR were SALE unwilling OR DISTRIBUTIONto adjust to a correctional defendantNOT to his FOR custody. SALE After OR3 weeks, DISTRIBUTION the offender philosophy that provided inmates with autonomy. convinced the judge of his rehabilitation and received a Emphasis on security remained their first priority, fine. The period of community correction alleviated the especially with the increasing populations of the need for jail, and probation was born. Until his death in © Jones & Bartlettinstitutions. Learning, Administrators LLC were forced to create © Jones1859, & Augustus Bartlett bailed Learning, out 1,800 LLC persons and was liable NOT FOR SALEholding OR areas DISTRIBUTION for more violent offenders, thus makingNOT FORfor nearly SALE $250,000 OR DISTRIBUTIONin secured bonds.

48 CHAPTER 2 The Philosophy and History of Corrections

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 48 13/12/17 1:16 pm © Jones & BartlettAugustus Learning, was selective LLC as to who could be on his © Jonesfluctuations & Bartlett in public Learning,opinion regarding LLC crime control. probationary caseload. The ideal candidate was a From its inception, parole was hailed as a mechanism NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION first-time offender for a nonserious charge who had to both permit criminal offenders an opportunity for moral character and demonstrated potential for reform and cost-effectively reduce the prison popula- reforming his or her criminal behavior. Augustus also tion. Over time, however, the general public grew tired developed the basic operating procedure of the mod- of parole because the sanction was neither providing ern probation system,© which Jones is: & Bartlett Learning,the LLC necessary treatment or correction© Jones to reform & Bartlett crimi- Learning, LLC ■■ Conducting a presentenceNOT FOR investigation SALE OR DISTRIBUTIONnals, nor were criminals servingNOT meaningful FOR SALE terms OR DISTRIBUTION behind bars. Due to indeterminate sentencing and ■■ Mandating probation conditions parole, there was little truth in sentencing. Indeed, the ■■ Developing a caseload changes in how parole is administered demonstrate

■■ Reporting© Jones to & the Bartlett court Learning, LLC how susceptible© Jonesit is to political & Bartlett pressure. Learning, For instance, LLC ■■ between 1980 and 2000, the discretionary parole RevokingNOT FOR the sentence,SALE OR if necessary DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION release rate remained relatively constant. During the In 1878, Massachusetts became the first state to same period, mandatory parole releases increased five- formally adopt probation for juveniles. All states fold (Travis & Lawrence, 2002). In other words, the followed between 1878 and 1938. By 1956, all states discretionary freedom of parole boards has been © Jones &and Bartlett the federal Learning, system had LLC adult probation © Jonesseverely &curtailed, Bartlett and Learning, these tensions LLC continue to sur- NOT FOR(Petersilia, SALE OR 1997). DISTRIBUTION NOTround FOR parole SALE to the OR present DISTRIBUTION day. The 19th century also saw the development of parole (in addition to the work of Maconochie and Every modern Western society witnesses the conflict Crofton). The history of parole in the United States between a perceived necessity of punishment and uneasi- can be understood by following the penal history of ness at its practice. New York State. In the© early Jones 19th ¢ury, Bartlett judges Learning, sen- LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC tenced inmates to flat,NOT determinate FOR SALE sentences, OR such DISTRIBUTION as (Spierenburg,NOT FOR 1984, SALE p. 207) OR DISTRIBUTION 30 years. Due to the inflexibility of these sentences, governors were forced to grant mass pardons to alle- viate prison crowding. In 1817, New York introduced Recent Developments the nation’s© Jones first &good Bartlett time law, Learning, which rewarded LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC prisonNOT inmates FOR with SALE time offOR their DISTRIBUTION period of impris- The first decadesNOT of FORthe 20th SALE century OR lacked DISTRIBUTION the philo- onment for good behavior. In 1876, Zebulon sophical and intellectual power of the reformatory Brockway, mentioned earlier in this chapter, created movement. Instead, the correctional system was prag- parole and the indeterminate sentence whereby matic and not particularly designed, or perhaps even judges set a minimum and maximum term and interested, in the rehabilitation of the offender. While © Jones &permi Bartlettt parole Learning, release for those LLC who have served the © Jonesthe imprisonment & Bartlett rate Learning, remained steady LLC for several NOT FORminimum. SALE OR Both DISTRIBUTION of Brockway’s innovations were NOTdecades, FOR the SALE absolute OR number DISTRIBUTION of inmates increased predicated on the belief that criminals could be substantially during this era, prompting the need for reformed and that their punishment and correction additional prison facilities. For instance, beginning should be individualized to fit the heterogeneity of with the enactment of the Three Penitentiary Act in the criminal population.© Jones & Bartlett Learning,1891, LLC which authorized the building© Jones of the & first Bartlett three Learning, LLC In 1930, the DivisionNOT of FORParole SALEwas established. OR DISTRIBUTION In federal prisons at Leavenworth;NOT Atlanta; FOR and SALE McNeil OR DISTRIBUTION addition, a board of parole was created within the Island, Washington, the federal government devel- division and given the responsibility, formerly held by oped a formalized federal prison system. In 1930, the the New York Department of Corrections, for deci- Bureau of Prisons (BOP) was established within the sions on parole releases from prisons (Petersilia, Department of Justice and charged with the manage- 1998).© From Jones the &late Bartlett 19th century Learning, through LLCthe first ment and regulation© Jones of all & federal Bartlett penal Learning, and LLC decadesNOT of theFOR 20th SALE century, OR other DISTRIBUTION states followed correctional institutions.NOT FOR This SALE responsibility OR DISTRIBUTION covered New York’s lead and revamped their own sentencing the administration of the 11 federal prisons contain- structure and correctional approach to include inde- ing more than 13,000 inmates in operation at the terminate sentencing and parole. time. By 1940, the BOP had grown to 24 facilities with © Jones & BartlettPerhaps moreLearning, than any LLC other form of criminal © Jones24,360 inmates. & Bartlett Except Learning, for a few fluctuations, LLC the NOT FORpunishment, SALE OR parole DISTRIBUTION has been the most susceptible to NOTnumber FOR of SALE inmates OR did DISTRIBUTIONnot change significantly

Recent Developments 49

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 49 13/12/17 1:16 pm © Jones & Bartlettbetween 1940Learning, and 1980, LLC when the population was © Jonesmore & than Bartlett doubled, Learning, from just overLLC 24,000 to almost 24,252. However, the number of facilities almost dou- 58,000. During the 1990s, the population more than NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALEbled (from OR DISTRIBUTION24 to 44) as the BOP gradually moved doubled again. The explosive growth in the BOP is from operating large facilities confining inmates of discussed in greater detail later in this chapter. many security levels to operating smaller facilities that During the first decades of the 20th century, the each confined inmates with similar security needs. correctional system was swifter, tougher, and unques- As a result of ©federal Jones law &enforcement Bartlett Learning,efforts and LLCtionably interested more in© crime Jones control & Bartlett than the Learning, LLC new legislation thatNOT dramatically FOR SALE altered OR sentencing DISTRIBUTION treatment of inmates. A wayNOT to evaluate FOR SALE this era OR of DISTRIBUTION in the federal criminal justice system, the 1980s correctional toughness is the speed with which con- brought a significant increase in the number of fed- demned offenders were not only executed but also eral inmates (Federal Bureau of Prisons, 2006). The processed on death rows across the United States. As Sentencing© Jones Reform& Bartlett Act of Learning, 1984 established LLC determi- shown in© FIGURES Jones 2-1 and & Bartlett2-2, it was onceLearning, routine proceLLC- nate sentencing, abolished parole, and reduced good dure for the states to execute between 100 and 200 NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION time; additionally, several mandatory minimum sen- inmates each year. Moreover, once sentenced to death, tencing provisions were enacted in 1986, 1988, and offenders were executed with considerable dispatch, 1990. From 1980 to 1989, the inmate population unlike the prolonged appeal process that exists today.

NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION200 NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION

150

NOT FORNumber SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION

0 © Jones & Bartlett Learning,1930 1940LLC 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990© Jones 2000 20&10 Bartlett2015 Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION

FIGURE 2-1 Trends in executions.

Reproduced from: Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2017). Executions, 1930–2015. Retrieved May 22, 2017, from https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cp1415sb.pdf. © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION 4,000

3,000 © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION 2,000 Number

1,000 © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION 0 1953 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

FIGURE 2-2 Trends in the death row population. © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALEReproduced OR from DISTRIBUTION Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2017). Prisoners on death row, 1953–2015.NOT Retrieved FOR May SALE 22, 2017, fromOR https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cp1415sb.pdf. DISTRIBUTION

50 CHAPTER 2 The Philosophy and History of Corrections

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 50 13/12/17 1:16 pm

© Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jonesfederal criminal& Bartlett offense. Learning,The Walsh–Healey LLC Act Industrial Prison Era passed by Congress in 1936 prohibited the use of NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FORIn SALE addition OR to beingDISTRIBUTION crowded, prisons of this era were inmate labor to fulfill certain federal contracts in characterized as harsh, and inmates were utilized as excess of $10,000. free labor. The industrial prison era, spanning from approximately 1900 to 1935, placed an emphasis on inmate labor and commerce© Jones to such & Bartlett a degree thatLearning, The LLC Hands-off Doctrine, Deprivation,© Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC prisons were self-sustainingNOT FORand even SALE profitable. OR DISTRIBUTION Five and Importation NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION types of inmate labor systems were used (Regoli & One result of all of the previously mentioned legisla- Hewitt, 2008): tion that addressed correctional labor was the swift end to inmate labor, which meant that formerly ■■ Contract labor system. Private contractors pro- industrious inmates were mostly idle. Prisons were vided© Jones prisons & withBartlett machinery Learning, and raw LLC materials © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC overcrowded, and most lacked any semblance of edu- in exchange for the inmate labor to produce fin- NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION cational, trade,NOT or therapeutic FOR SALE programs OR DISTRIBUTION that would ished products. assist in the offender’s reintegration to society. It was ■■ Piece-price system. Contractors gave raw materi- not uncommon for correctional facilities to experi- als to prisons, which used convict labor to pro- ence violent and costly riots as inmates protested © Jones & Bartlettduce finished Learning, products. LLC Once the goods were © Jonestheir conditions & Bartlett of confinement. Learning, From LLC the Great NOT FOR SALEmanufactured, OR DISTRIBUTION they were sold by the piece to the NOTDepression FOR SALE until theOR late DISTRIBUTION 1960s, a hands-off doctrine contractor, who then resold them on the open characterized American corrections. The practices market. and operations of prisons and other sanctions ■■ Lease system. Contractors would bid against each received little judicial oversight, and they were largely other to own the rights to inmate labor. Inmates © Jones & Bartlett Learning,shut LLC off from the press and academia.© Jones In short,& Bartlett what Learning, LLC worked outside the prison facility, under the went on in American prisons stayed in American supervision of aNOT private FOR contractor, SALE OR who DISTRIBUTION was prisons. Gradually, the SupremeNOT Court FOR recognized SALE OR DISTRIBUTION responsible for the inmates’ food, shelter, and inmate grievances pertaining to the application of the clothing. Eighth Amendment to state prisoners in Robinson v. ■■ Public account system. The state retained control State of California (1962); whether an inmate could of© inmateJones labor & Bartlett and provided Learning, convicts LLC with the bring action under© Jones the Civil & Bartlett Rights Act Learning, in Cooper v. LLC machineryNOT FOR and SALE raw materials OR DISTRIBUTION to produce finished Pate (1964), theNOT case FOR that effectivelySALE OR ended DISTRIBUTION the hands- products. The state sold the products on the open off era; and others. market and used the profits to defray the cost of Another result of this doctrine was the entrench- prison operations. ment of antisocial attitudes, values, and behaviors by prisoners. By approximately 1940, academic criminol- ■■ State-use system. Prison labor was used to pro- © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jonesogists began & Bartlett to gain entrée Learning, into American LLC prisons, duce goods for state-supported institutions, such NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOTand FOR what theySALE described OR DISTRIBUTION was unsettling. Donald as schools and hospitals. Clemmer’s The Prison Community, published in 1940, During the Great Depression, prison labor and showed that prisons were wholly separate microso- commerce came under scrutiny from organized cieties that contained their own language or argot, labor. On January 29,© 1929, Jones the Hawes–Cooper& Bartlett Learning, Act values, LLC beliefs, and norms and ©expectations Jones & of Bartlett behav- Learning, LLC enabled states to implementNOT FOR laws SALEregarding OR the DISTRIBUTION ior. Clemmer developed the ideaNOT of prisonization FOR SALE, OR DISTRIBUTION acceptance or prohibition of prison-made goods defined as the socialization process whereby inmates coming within its borders. It did not prohibit inter- embrace the oppositional and antisocial culture of the state transportation of prison-made goods, but prisoner population. According to Clemmer (1940, made prison-made goods subject to the laws of any 1950), a variety of circumstances made prisonization state© just Jones like other & Bartlett commercial Learning, goods. In LLC 1935, the more likely, such© Jones as: & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION Ashurst–Sumners Act authorized federal prosecu- ■■ Serving a lengthy sentence tion of violations of state laws enacted pursuant to ■■ Having an unstable personality the Hawes–Cooper Act, and subsequent amendments to this law in 1940 strengthened federal ■■ Associating with similarly disturbed inmates © Jones &enforcement Bartlett Learning, authority by LLC making any transport of © Jones■■ Having & Bartlett few positive Learning, relations LLC with those on the NOT FORprison-made SALE OR goodsDISTRIBUTION in interstate commerce a NOT FORoutside SALE OR DISTRIBUTION

Recent Developments 51

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 51 13/12/17 1:16 pm ■■ © Jones & BartlettReadily Learning, integrating LLC into prison culture © Jones &Early Bartlett critiques Learning, of prison centered LLC on the deplor- ■■ able conditions of confinement and the unjust and Blindly accepting prison dogma NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION unconstitutional treatment of inmates and criminal ■■ Associating with hardened offenders or career offenders generally. Academic penologists usually criminals attributed blame for the appalling state of American ■■ Continuing to engage in antisocial behavior while prisons toward the criminal justice system, such as imprisoned © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLCwardens, prison administrators,© Jones and correctional& Bartlett Learning, LLC Norman HaynerNOT and FOR Ellis Ash SALE (1980), OR two DISTRIBUTION contem- officers, not the inmates. Ironically,NOT FOR it wasSALE a former OR DISTRIBUTION poraries of Clemmer, depicted prison conditions in the prisoner turned academic named John Irwin, who, following way: “a clear realization of the degenerating along with Donald Cressey, advanced a new explana-

influence of our present prison system should encour- tion of prisoner behavior in 1962.The importation age© Jonesmore experiments & Bartlett aiming Learning, to devise aLLC community model argued© Jones that prisoner & Bartlett behavior Learning, and the condi LLC- tions of prisons were mostly a function of the forNOT offenders FOR that SALE will actually OR DISTRIBUTION rehabilitate”(p. 583). NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION In 1958, Gresham Sykes’s The Society of Captives characteristics, values, beliefs, and behaviors that portrayed the prison as a despotic, punitive, inhu- criminals employed on the outside of prison. In other words, inmates of varying degrees of criminality mane social organization designed purely for imported their behavioral repertoire and behaved punishment, retribution, and retaliation, and not © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jonesaccordingly. & Bartlett To connect Learning, to the LLCearlier point, prison rehabilitation. This became known as the NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FORconditions SALE were OR often DISTRIBUTION horrendous because of the deprivation model of inmate behavior in which commensurate behavior that offenders brought to the guards created a regime or social order that forced facility. The importation model has received substan- inmates to conform. The regime was totalitarian, tial empirical support evidenced by the continuity in not because guards felt this was the best way to pro- criminal behavior among the most hardened offend- ceed, but rather because© Jones of society’s & Bartlett desire Learning, to LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC ers (Cao, Zhao, & Van Dine, 1997; DeLisi, 2003; NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION prevent escape and disorder. Sykes highlighted the DeLisi, Berg, & Hochstetler, 2004; Gaes, Wallace, deficiencies of this approach, including the lack of a Klein-Saffran, & Suppa, 2002; Gendreau, Goggin, & sense of duty among those who were held captive, Law, 1997; Schrag, 1954). the obvious fallacies of coercion, the pathetic During the late 1960s, the link between prisons colle© Jonesction of & rewards Bartlett and Learning, punishments LLC to induce and conventional© Jones society & Bartlett achieved Learning, its greatest synergyLLC compliance,NOT FOR and SALE the strongOR DISTRIBUTION pressures toward the since theNOT initial FORdesign SALE of the penitentiary. OR DISTRIBUTION The 1960s corruption of the guard in the form of friendship, and 1970s were decades of great turmoil, malaise, and reciprocity, and the transfer of duties into the hands revolution that centered on civil rights, minority of trusted inmates. rights, women’s rights, worker’s rights, and overall a According to Sykes (1958), the deprivation broadening liberalization of society. This social © Jones & Bartlettresulted inLearning, five pains of LLC imprisonment, which were © Jonesturm &oil Bartlett produced Learning, a different type LLC of correctional NOT FOR SALE(1) deprivation OR DISTRIBUTION of liberty, (2) deprivation of goods NOT FORclient. SALE The loosely OR DISTRIBUTIONbounded offender and inmate and services, (3) deprivation of heterosexual subcultures of the deprivation era were replaced by relationships, (4) deprivation of autonomy, and young, politicized, often gang-affiliated offenders (5) deprivation of security. To adjust to this new envi- (Jacobs, 1977). ronment, Sykes identified© Jones archetypal & Bartlett inmate Learning, roles, LLC Also occurring between© Jones1965 and & 1993 Bartlett was an Learning, LLC such as rats, centerNOT men FOR(those SALE who aligned OR DISTRIBUTIONwith unprecedented increase inNOT the crime FOR rate SALE (Wilson, OR DISTRIBUTION guards), gorillas, merchants, wolves, punks, real men, 1983). Rising crime rates, particularly for violent toughs, etc. Over time, criminologists have found crimes such as murder, rape, and robbery, became a that the deprivation model of inmate behavior is still primary concern of the general public and an increas- relevant to the present day and that correctional facil- ingly important political item. As the nation’s ities© Jones characterized & Bartlett by regimes Learning, of rigid socialLLC control criminal ©justice Jones philosophy & Bartlett shifted Learning, to the right, LLC so, tendedNOT FORto experience SALE moreOR DISTRIBUTION inmate-related problems too, did itsNOT thoughts FOR on SALE how to OR best DISTRIBUTION supervise crimi- than facilities with a treatment or less repressive nal offenders. Lawrence Sherman (2005) noted that form of administrative control (Akers, Hayner, & during this era, “[conservatism] helped fuel a sea Gruninger, 1977; Huebner, 2003; Jiang & Fisher- change from treating criminals as victims of society © Jones & BartlettGiorlando, Learning, 2002; Poole LLC & Regoli, 1983; Reisig & Lee,© Jonesto treating & Bartlett society Learning, as the victim LLC of criminals” (p. 126). NOT FOR SALE2000; ORWalters, DISTRIBUTION 2003; Wheeler, 1961). NOT FORTo appear SALE soft OR on crimeDISTRIBUTION was to virtually guarantee a

52 CHAPTER 2 The Philosophy and History of Corrections

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 52 13/12/17 1:16 pm © Jones loss& Bartlett at election Learning, polls. American LLC society generally © Jonesentering & prison Bartlett and reduced Learning, the number LLC of inmates shifted to the political right during the 1980s and leaving prison. However, these were not the only fac- NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR1990s, SALE and OR correctional DISTRIBUTION policy followed suit. As the tors responsible for the rapid growth of the federal 1980s arrived, the American correctional system was prison population between 1984 and 2011. America poised to explode in unprecedented ways. has been engaged in a war on drugs since the early The explosive growth of corrections in American 1900s, but the war gained new momentum in the late society during the latter© Jonespart of the & 20thBartlett century Learning, can 1980s LLC and early 1990s with the© advent Jones of several& Bartlett pres- Learning, LLC be understood in a numberNOT ofFOR ways. SALE Glenn OR Walters DISTRIBUTION idential initiatives. The drug warNOT not FOR only increasedSALE OR DISTRIBUTION (2012), a prominent criminologist and forensic psy- the BOP inmate population but also changed the chologist, worked at the BOP for over 25 years and population’s composition. In 1984, 29 percent of the has offered the following insights. In 1984, the BOP BOP inmate population was serving time for drug consisted© Jones of 32,000 & Bartlettinmates, 12,000 Learning, staff, and LLC 44 dif- law violations;© by Jones 2011, the & Bartlettpercentage Learning, had risen to LLC ferent institutions. By 2011, the BOP had grown to 55 percent. NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION nearly 215,000 inmates, 35,000 staff, and 113 institu- Federal statutes on gun control, immigration, tions. During this time span, the inmate population child pornography, and carjacking as well as the of the BOP increased nearly 575 percent, with only a Revitalization Act of 1997, in which the BOP took 213 percent increase in staffing and a 157 percent custody of all District of Columbia code felony © Jones &increase Bartlett in institutions. Learning, The LLC density of institutions © Jonesoffenders, & notBartlett only increased Learning, the overall LLC prison popu- NOT FORand SALE the inmate–staff OR DISTRIBUTION ratio more than doubled. NOTlation FOR but SALEalso introduced OR DISTRIBUTION a new class of violent What might account for the dramatic increase in offender to the BOP. In 1984, the only violent crime the BOP inmate population over this span? The the U.S. Attorneys office was prosecuting to any Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, which established extent was bank robbery; by 2011, murderers, rapists, determinate sentencing,© Jonesabolished & parole, Bartlett and Learning,assaulters, LLC burglars, and child ©molesters Jones were & Bartlett enter- Learning, LLC reduced the amount of good time inmates could earn, ing the system in record numbers. Changes in both NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION and mandatory sentencing charters enacted in 1986, the size and composition of the federal prison popu- 1988, and 1990 both raised the number of inmates lation may have contributed to a rise in violence

© Jones & BartlettPrison PolicyLearning, as an LLC Agent of Social Change© Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION Few people would cite a prison system in the southern race. On the other hand, the majority of correctional staff United States as an agent of social change in terms of and inmates—white, black, and Hispanic—feared that race relations. As noted in their landmark book First Avail- desegregation of cells in the Texas prisons would result able Cell: Desegregation of the Texas Prison System, Chad in a firestorm of racially motivated violence. To everyone’s Trulson and James ©Marquart Jones documented & Bartlett the Learning, historic LLCsurprise, it did not. Although racially© Jones motivated & Bartlett violence Learning, LLC Lamar decision thatNOT led to FOR the desegregationSALE OR DISTRIBUTIONof the does occur in prisons, the overwhelmingNOT FOR amount SALE of vioOR- DISTRIBUTION Texas prison system. The case centered on the cor- lence is of an intraracial nature (just as crime in the gen- rectional odyssey of Allan Lamar, an African American eral population is mostly intraracial). Today, more than 60 career criminal who committed an array of crimes and percent of double cells are desegregated in Texas prisons, was© imprisonedJones & in Bartlett multiple states Learning, and the federal LLC system and some units© Jones have over & 80Bartlett percent interracialLearning, cells. LLC In from the 1950s until his death in 1998. During this era, this way, the Texas prison system was a trailblazer in race NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION the Texas prison system was segregated by race so that relations in this context. white, black, and Hispanic inmates would only be celled with same-race roommates. This created an interesting SOURCE: Trulson, C. R., & Marquart, J. W. (2009). First avail- constitutional challenge. On the one hand, it is illegal able cell: Desegregation of the Texas prison system. Austin, TX: © Jones & Bartlettto engage Learning,in unequal treatment LLC and discrimination by© JonesUniversity & Bartlettof Texas Press.. Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION

Recent Developments 53

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 53 13/12/17 1:16 pm © Jones & Bartlettwithin the Learning, BOP, as exemplified LLC by a nearly 200 per-© Jonesoffenders, & Bartlett considers Learning, rehabilitation LLC to be largely ideal- cent increase in the number of inmate assaults on istic, and deemphasizes the likelihood of offender NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALEstaff and OR the DISTRIBUTION more than 206 percent increase in the reintegration. In this sense, the new penology is por- rate of inmate assaults on other inmates between trayed negatively. Among academics and some elites, 1984 and 2011 (Walters, 2012). the increased reliance on imprisonment is seen as unjust and discriminatory. Nevertheless, it is the The New Penology© Jones and Beyond & Bartlett Learning, LLCapproach to corrections. © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTIONWhile it is true that inNOT the public FOR eye SALE American OR DISTRIBUTION As shown in FIGURE 2-3, the imprisonment rate has corrections is today more than ever dominated by increased approximately fivefold since 1980, making confinement and control, progressive advancements it clear that imprisonment had become the standard have been made at supervising offenders in the com- method of punishing criminal offenders, with inca- munity. Evaluation researchers Edward Latessa and pacitation© Jones the & assumed Bartlett rationale Learning, for confinement. LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC Christopher Lowenkamp (2006) have suggested that MalcolmNOT FOR Feeley SALE and Jonathan OR DISTRIBUTION Simon (1992) dubbed NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION evidence-based practices demonstrate empirically this approach the new penology, defined as the that recidivism rates can be significantly reduced management of groups or subpopulations of offend- through theoretically sound, well-designed programs ers based on their actuarial risk to society. The new that appropriately apply the principles of effective penology involves shifts in the following three dis- © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jonesintervention. & Bartlett The Learning, principles of LLC effective intervention tinct areas: NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FORare risk, SALE need, OR treatment, DISTRIBUTION and fidelity: 1. The emergence of new discourses. In particular, ■■ The risk principle is who to target. The most the language of probability and risk increasingly intensive correctional treatment and intervention replaces earlier discourses of clinical diagnosis sentence or program should be reserved for high- and retributive judgment. © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC risk offenders, such as© chronicJones or& violentBartlett crimi Learning,- LLC 2. The formationNOT of new FOR objectives SALE for OR the DISTRIBUTION system as nals. For low-risk offenders,NOT FOR simply SALE holding OR them DISTRIBUTION increasing primacy is given to the efficient con- accountable for their actions and imposing mini- trol of internal system processes in place of the mal sanctions is usually sufficient to prevent traditional objectives of rehabilitation and crime recidivism. control. © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC ■■ The ©need Jones principle & Bartlett is what toLearning, target. Programs LLC 3. The deployment of new techniques. These tech- NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION shouldNOT target FOR crime-producing SALE OR DISTRIBUTION needs, such as niques target offenders as an aggregate in place of antisocial peer association, antisocial personality, traditional techniques for individualizing or drug use, alcoholism, self-control skills, and other creating equity. factors that are highly correlated with crime. According to Feeley and Simon (1992), the new ■■ The treatment principle addresses how to target © Jones & Bartlettpenology Learning, emphasizes controlLLC and surveillance of © Jones &offenders’ Bartlett needs. Learning, The most LLC effective programs are NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION

1,200 Rate per 100,000 U.S. residents age 18 or older © Jones &1,000 Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE800 OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION

600

Rate Rate per 100,000 U.S. residents of all ages 400

FIGURE 2-3 Trends in the incarceration rate. © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALEBureau of OR Justice DISTRIBUTION Statistics. (2017). Incarceration rate, 1980–2015. Retrieved MayNOT 22, 2017, FORfrom https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=kfdetail&iid=493 SALE OR DISTRIBUTION

54 CHAPTER 2 The Philosophy and History of Corrections

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 54 13/12/17 1:16 pm © Jones & Bartlettbehavioral Learning, and center LLC on present circumstances © Jonescorrections & Bartlett uses scientifically Learning, influenced LLC actuarial and risk factors that are responsible for the methods to appropriately classify, supervise, treat, NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION offender’s behavior. Behavioral interventions are and manage prisoners based on their level of risk. action rather than talk oriented and teach offend- For instance, many states use the Client Manage- ers new, prosocial skills to replace antisocial ones. ment Classification (CMC) System to supervise ■■ The fidelity principle pertains to the integrity and correctional clients. The CMC addresses treatment quality of the program,© Jones intervention, & Bartlett or sentence. Learning, and LLC supervision needs in five ©ways. Jones In ascending & Bartlett Learning, LLC This includes makingNOT sure FOR that SALE the program OR DISTRIBUTION has order of seriousness, these areNOT (1) selective FOR SALEinterven OR- DISTRIBUTION well-trained staff and that it closely monitors tion-situational, (2) selective intervention-treatment, offenders, assists with other needs of the offender, (3) casework/control, (4) environmental structure, ensures the program is delivered as designed and (5) limit-setting classifications (Harris, Ging- through© Jones quality-assurance & Bartlett Learning, processes, LLC and has erich, & Whittaker,© Jones 2004). & More Bartlett than ever,Learning, the LLC structuredNOT FOR aftercare. SALE OR DISTRIBUTION correctional systemNOT FORknows SALE what it ORis doing DISTRIBUTION when dealing with correctional clients. When the principles of effective intervention And there is continued good news. Distinguished are met, correctional clients of varying criminality penologists Anne Morrison Piehl and Bert Useem serving various sentences respond better to the inter- (2011) summarized the overall effects of the broad vention. Recidivism is reduced and their antisocial © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jonesexpansion & ofBartlett the use ofLearning, incarceration LLC and correc- behavior is more likely to be corrected. It is also NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOTtional FOR systems SALE generally OR DISTRIBUTION in recent decades: important to note that correctional clients should be supervised according to their assorted risks and needs. Just as it is foolish to supervise a violent, The theory behind the prison buildup was that higher rates dangerous, and recidivistic offender in the commu- of incarceration would strengthen the predisposition to nity, it is also foolish to© overpunishJones & anBartlett offender Learning, who obeyLLC law and incapacitate those ©for Jones whom this & predisposi Bartlett- Learning, LLC tion is especially weak. The theory was right. Crime rates is relatively low risk. NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION did fall, due in part to the expanded use of prison. Critics After centuries of innovation and practice, what of the buildup were certain that the country had embarked do contemporary American prisons generally look on a self-destructive course, arguing that the prison system like? They can be described as follows (Tonry & would collapse under its own weight because of the flaws Petersilia,© Jones 1999): & Bartlett Learning, LLC inherent to prisons.© Jones With & the Bartlett advantage Learning, of hindsight— LLC ■■ ComparedNOT FOR with SALE earlier OR eras, DISTRIBUTION prisons are larger in buttressed byNOT reasonably FOR good SALE data—we OR nowDISTRIBUTION know they terms of the number of inmates they house. were wrong. The prison buildup has been associated with a sharp decline in chaos behind bars. Prison riots have ■■ Inmate populations and staffs are more diverse and become rare, the homicide and suicide rates have declined disproportionately African American and Hispanic. dramatically, and a smaller proportion of inmates are held © Jones &■ ■ BartlettMany more Learning, line and management LLC staff are women. © Jonesin segregation & Bartlett and protective Learning, custody. EscapesLLC are less common. If Americans want to have mass-scale imprisonment, NOT FOR ■SALE■ Gangs OR are DISTRIBUTION larger and their influence more NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION we can have it without out-of-control behind bars pervasive. (p. 551) ■■ More prison staff are unionized. ■■ A large and growing fraction of prisons (and sanctions generally) are© underJones private & Bartlett management. Learning, LLCThe current chapter’s historical© Jones look at & corrections Bartlett Learning, LLC shows how public opinion and changing ideological ■■ The possibility of NOTjudicial FOR oversight SALE and OR intrusion DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION and political views have resulted in interesting changes is greater. to various forms of punishment. For instance, some ■■ Inmates serve increasingly lengthy sentences, leading criminologists view the American prison which brings increased demands for medical care system as very small compared to the magnitude of

and© Jones other services & Bartlett for the Learning, aging and elderly. LLC offending that© occurs Jones in the& Bartlett United States Learning, each year. LLC Overall,NOT FOR compared SALE to ORpenitentiaries, DISTRIBUTION reformato- For instance, NOTJohn Wright FOR andSALE Matt OR DeLisi DISTRIBUTION have shown ries, and prisons from any other era in American that despite the rhetoric of criminologists who bemoan history, the correctional system in the 21st century is the mass incarceration movement, only about 0.51 the most scientifically informed, safe, humane, treat- percent of the U.S. population is in prison (Delisi, © Jones &ment Bartlett and program Learning, oriented, LLC and transparent in terms © Jones2015; Wright & Bartlett & DeLisi, Learning, 2016). To put LLC that into per- NOT FORof SALE its openness OR DISTRIBUTION to outside scrutiny. Contemporary NOTspective, FOR research SALE onOR criminal DISTRIBUTION careers and Moffitt’s

Recent Developments 55

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 55 13/12/17 1:16 pm © Jones & Bartlettdevelopmental Learning, taxonomy LLC show that about 10 percent© Jonesinmates & Bartlett simply do Learning, not comply withLLC the rules of correc- of the population comprises life-course-persistent or tional facilities. Moreover, inmates’ misconduct NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALEcareer OR criminals, DISTRIBUTION many of whom are psychopaths. accounted for nearly 40 percent of the variance in deci- Given their disproportionate involvement in crime, it sions to place offenders in supermax housing (Mears & would seem prudent, at minimum, to incarcerate as Bales, 2010). many career criminals as possible. Even if state and In a study of nearly 4,000 inmates from 70 differ- federal correctional© systemsJones were & Bartlett only able toLearning, incarcer- LLCent prison units from a large© Jones state in the& Bartlett southern Learning, LLC ate half of the worstNOT 10 percent, FOR that SALE would OR still DISTRIBUTION be United States, Robert MorrisNOT (2016) FOR found SALE that OR short- DISTRIBUTION 10 times the current incarceration rate! Thus from a term exposure to solitary confinement had no effect pure data standpoint on the most severe offenders, the on the probability, timing, or development of future United States actually underuses prison. misconduct, suggesting that claims about the delete- © JonesStill, vestiges & Bartlett of previous Learning, punishments LLC remain and rious effects© Jones of the sanction & Bartlett were overblown.Learning, LLC old motivations to punish ebb and flow. For instance, a Unfortunately, the continual use of solitary confine- NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION cadre of criminal offenders exist who are thoroughly ment carries with it collateral costs in terms of opposed to quitting crime and for whom there is no psychologically damaging inmates. In this sense, the realistic chance of effective supervision, let alone reha- American prison has harkened to the methods of the bilitation (DeLisi, 2005). Many of the most serious Pennsylvania system to, if not force penitence, at least © Jones & Bartlettcriminals Learning, are intractably LLC antisocial and are increasingly© Jones punish & Bartlett noncompliant Learning, prisoners. LLC (For more on the NOT FOR SALEpunished OR via DISTRIBUTION solitary confinement. For instance, a NOT FORdeleterious SALE effects OR ofDISTRIBUTION solitary confinement, see study found that 55 percent of supermax inmates Anderson, Sestoft, Lillebaek, Gabrielsen, & experience three or more episodes of placement in Hemmingsen, 2003; Ahalt & Williams, 2017). supermax isolation housing, suggesting that some © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION

56 CHAPTER 2 The Philosophy and History of Corrections

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 56 13/12/17 1:16 pm © Jones &WRAP Bartlett UP Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION Chapter Summary

■■ Throughout history, correctional systems have ■■ The deprivation model suggests that the struc- struggled with balancing© Jones the needs & Bartlett of punishment Learning, LLCtures of the prison mold inmate© Jones behavior. & Bartlett Learning, LLC and correction. NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION■■ The importation model suggestsNOT FORthat offender SALE OR DISTRIBUTION ■■ Depending on the severity of the offense and the characteristics determine inmate behavior. seriousness of the offender, different punishment ■■ The imprisonment rate has increased by approxi- philosophies are utilized. mately 500 percent since 1980 due to sentencing ■■ The© penitentiaryJones & Bartlett of the Pennsylvania Learning, system LLC was changes and© Jonesreflects a& punitive Bartlett correctional Learning, LLC designedNOT FOR to force SALE offenders OR toDISTRIBUTION reflect in complete paradigmNOT called FORthe new SALE penology OR. DISTRIBUTION silence and isolation for their crimes. ■■ Although the American correctional system is ■■ The reformatory of the Auburn system was a con- considered tough, it also uses scientific principles gregate system that entailed many progressive to provide the best supervision and treatment of © Jones & Bartlettfeatures to Learning, rehabilitate offenders.LLC © Jonescriminal & Bartlett offenders. Learning, LLC NOT FOR■■ SALECorrectional OR DISTRIBUTION approaches, especially prisons, are NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION susceptible to social conditions and perceptions about whether they correct behavior.

© Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC Key Terms NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION Ashurst–Sumners Act Law that authorized federal corporal punishment Sanctions that inflict physical prosecution of violations of state laws enacted pain on the offender. pursuant to the Hawes–Cooper Act. Subsequent Crofton, Sir Walter Disciple of Maconochie who amendments© Jones to& thisBartlett law in 1940Learning, strengthened LLC employed ©similar Jones reforms & Bartlett in Irish prisons.Learning, LLC federaNOTl enforcement FOR SALE authority OR DISTRIBUTION by making any deprivation modelNOT InmateFOR SALE behavior OR model DISTRIBUTION that pro- transport of prison-made goods in interstate poses that inmate behavior is primarily a function commerce a federal criminal offense. of the oppressive structural features posed by the Auburn system Response to the Pennsylvania sys- prison facility itself. tem; used congregate inmate organization. © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jonesdeterrence & BartlettThe punishment Learning, philosophy LLC that rests Augustus, John Founder of probation in the United NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT onFOR the SALEidea that OR people DISTRIBUTION are rational thinkers States. endowed with free will who weigh the costs and banishment Penalty in which wrongdoers were benefits of each course of action in their lives and excommunicated or excluded from the commu- then choose to act. nity entirely. draconian Tough criminal justice policies. Beccaria, Cesare Philosopher© Jones who & wroteBartlett On Crimes Learning, expiation LLC Based upon the belief© Jones that crime & Bartlett arouses Learning, LLC and Punishments, whichNOT liberalized FOR SALE criminal OR DISTRIBUTIONthe anger of the gods againstNOT the entireFOR commu-SALE OR DISTRIBUTION justice. nity and that the only way to reduce the anger is to Code of Hammurabi Ancient body of laws during the destroy the offender. reign of the Babylonian King Hammurabi in 1780 general deterrence The large number of poten- BCE.© Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC tial criminals© Jones who might & Bartlett be discouraged Learning, from LLC collectiveNOT incapacitation FOR SALE Criminals OR DISTRIBUTION are prevented committingNOT crime FOR because SALE of the OR punishments DISTRIBUTION from committing crime because they are incarcer- received by others. ated. hands-off doctrine Little judicial oversight of the common law The customary criminal justice and practices and operations of prisons and other © Jones & legalBartlett traditions Learning, or doctrines LLC that the United States © Jonessanctions, & Bartlett which were Learning, largely shut LLC off from the NOT FOR SALEinherited OR from DISTRIBUTION England. NOT pressFOR and SALE academia. OR DISTRIBUTION

Wrap Up 57

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 57 13/12/17 1:16 pm © Jones & BartlettHawes–Cooper Learning, Act Enabled LLC states to implement laws© Jonesnatural & Bartlett law The Learning,belief that the LLC human world is NOT FOR SALEregarding OR DISTRIBUTION the acceptance or prohibition of prison-NOT FORorganized SALE byOR a positiveDISTRIBUTION or good natural order that made goods coming within its borders. should be obeyed by all humans. Howard, John English sheriff who caused reforms of new penology The management of groups or sub- English jails and prisons. populations of offenders based on their actuarial importation model ©Argued Jones that & prisonerBartlett behav- Learning, LLCrisk to society. © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC ior and the conditionsNOT FOR of prisons SALE were OR mostly DISTRIBUTION a penitent Feeling or expressingNOT FORremorse SALE for one’s OR DISTRIBUTION function of the characteristics, values, beliefs, and misdeeds or sins. behaviors that criminals employed on the outside penitentiaries Early prison that used silence and of prison. isolation to force inmates to be penitent. incapacitation The inability to act; refers to the use © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC Pennsylvania© Jones system &Quaker-inspired Bartlett Learning, system thatLLC of imprisonment to preclude the ability of an created the penitentiary. NOToffender FOR to victimizeSALE OR members DISTRIBUTION of society. NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION prisonization The socialization process whereby industrial prison era Time that spanned from approx- inmates embrace the oppositional and antisocial imately 1900 to 1935, during which an emphasis culture of the prisoner population. was placed on inmate labor and commerce. reformatory Response to penitentiary movement, © Jones & Bartlettinformal social Learning, control LLCUnofficial sanctions that arise© Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC popularized by the reforms of Zebulon Brockway. NOT FOR SALEfrom OR informal DISTRIBUTION family and friendship networks. NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION rehabilitation Restoration of an offender to a Law of the Twelve Tables A comprehensive and codi- law-abiding lifestyle. fied legal code to replace the oral, informal, and largely unfair prior tradition. restoration A theory of justice that emphasizes repairing the harm caused by crime. lex talionis The law© Jonesof retaliation & Bartlett such that Learning, punish- LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC retribution The philosophical rationale that implies ment must be inflictedNOT FOR with SALEan eye for OR an DISTRIBUTIONeye and NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION a tooth for a tooth. the payment of a debt to society and the criminal offender’s expiation and atonement for his or her Maconochie, Alexander Administrator of Norfolk Island (Australia) penal colony who devised the crime. mark system and other innovations that influ- selective incapacitation The use of prison to selec- © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC enced American penology. tively target high-rate, career criminals. NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION Magna Carta Codified set of laws from England in Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 Legislation that estab- 1215 that was the forerunner of the U.S. Constitu- lished determinate sentencing, abolished parole, tion with its dual goals of cautiously empowering and reduced the amount of good time inmates the state and granting rights and protections to the could earn. © Jones & Bartlettpublic. Learning, LLC © Jonesspecific & Bartlett deterrence Learning, The individual LLC offender being NOT FOR SALEmala in OR se DISTRIBUTIONActs that are intrinsically wrong and NOT FORsentenced SALE andOR punished. DISTRIBUTION violations of natural law. Three Penitentiary Act Legislation in 1891 that autho- mala prohibita Offenses are crimes made illegal by rized the building of the first three federal prisons legislation, not by natural law. at Leavenworth, Kansas; Atlanta, Georgia; and mark system System© Jones devised & by Bartlett Maconochie Learning, in LLCMcNeil Island, Washington.© Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC which credits (marks)NOT FOR against SALE a sentence OR allowedDISTRIBUTION Walsh–Healey Act LegislationNOT passed FOR by SALE Congress OR in DISTRIBUTION inmates to be released once they earned the 1936; prohibited the use of inmate labor to fulfill required number of marks through good behavior. certain federal contracts in excess of $10,000.

© Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOTCritical FOR Thinking SALE OR Questions DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION 1. Arguments for capital punishment usually cen- 2. How has religion shaped prisons since their ter on deterrence. Is there an effective argument inception and through today? What constitu- against retribution? Why is retribution not used tional issues are raised by having religious or © Jones & Bartlettas the Learning, philosophical LLC basis for the death penalty?© Jones &faith-based Bartlett Learning,programs in prison?LLC If the programs NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION

58 CHAPTER 2 The Philosophy and History of Corrections

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 58 13/12/17 1:16 pm © Jones & Bartlettare effective, Learning, should LLCconcerns about church and © Joneselements & Bartlett of the Learning, current correctional LLC system state be ignored? seem to represent retributive intentions? NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR 3.SALE Is th eOR new DISTRIBUTION penology a positive or negative devel- 5. In terms of inmate classification, correctional opment in corrections? administration is fairly scientific. Does the field 4. Have people really evolved beyond the barbaric of corrections have a reputation for being scien- methods of early correctional systems? What tifically rigorous? © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION References

Ahalt, C., & Williams, B. (2017). Reforming solitary confinement DeLisi, M. (2005). Career criminals in society. Thousand Oaks, policy—Heeding a presidential call to action. New England CA: Sage. Journal© Jones of Medicine & Bartlett, 374(18), 1704–1706.Learning, LLC DeLisi, M. (2011).© Jones Criminal justice:& Bartlett Balancing Learning, crime control andLLC Akers,NOT R., Hayner, FOR N., SALE & Gruninger, OR W.DISTRIBUTION (1977). Prisonization in due processNOT. (3rd ed.).FOR Dubuque, SALE IA: OR Kendall/Hunt. DISTRIBUTION five countries: Type of prison and inmate characteristics. DeLisi, M. (2015). Mass incarceration is the style, mass offending Criminology, 14, 527–554. is the substance. Journal of Criminal Justice, 43, 404–405. Andersen, H. S., Sestoft, D., Lillebaek, T., Gabrielsen, G., & DeLisi, M., Berg, M. T., & Hochstetler, A. (2004). Gang members, Hemmingsen, R. (2003). A longitudinal study of prisoners career criminals, and prison violence: Further specification © Jones & Bartletton remand: Learning, Repeated measures LLC of psychopathology in the © Jonesof the& Bartlettimportation Learning, model of inmate LLC behavior. Criminal initial phase of solitary versus nonsolitary confinement. Justice Studies, 17, 369–383. NOT FOR SALEInternational OR DISTRIBUTION Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 26, 165–177. NOTEastern FOR State SALE Penitentiary. OR DISTRIBUTION (n.d.). Six page history. Retrieved Aristotle. (1998). Politics VII. In Politics: Books VII and VII. New July 1, 2011, from http://www.easternstate.org/history York: Oxford University Press. /sixpage.html Ashurst–Sumners Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1761 (1935). Federal Bureau of Prisons. (2006). A brief history of the Bureau of Barry, J. V. (1956). Alexander Maconochie. Journal of Criminal Prisons. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice. Law, Criminology, and© PoliceJones Science &, Bartlett47, 84–106. Learning, LLCRetrieved May 16, 2011, from© http://www.bop.gov/aboutJones & Bartlett Learning, LLC Barry, J. V. (1958). AlexanderNOT Maconochie FOR SALE of Norfolk OR Island: DISTRIBUTION A /history.jsp NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION study of a pioneer in penal reform. London: Oxford Feeley, M. M., & Simon, J. (1992). The new penology: Notes on University Press. the emerging strategy of corrections and its implications. Bates, S. (1932). Have our prisons failed? Journal of Criminal Law Criminology, 30, 449–474. and Criminology, 23, 562–574. Friedman, L. M. (1993). Crime and punishment in American Beccaria,© JonesC. (1994). &On Bartlett crimes and Learning,punishments. In LLC J. E. Jacoby history. New© JonesYork: Basic & Books. Bartlett Learning, LLC (Ed.), Classics of criminology (pp. 277–286). Prospect Gaes, G. G., Wallace, S., Gilman, E., Klein–Saffran, J., & Suppa, S. NOTHeights, FOR IL: Waveland SALE Press. OR DISTRIBUTION (2002). TheNOT influence FOR of SALE prison gang OR affiliationDISTRIBUTION on violence Berns, W. (1979). For capital punishment: Crime and the morality and other prison misconduct. Prison Journal, 82, 359–385. of the death penalty. New York: Basic Books. Gendreau, P., Goggin, C. E., & Law, M. A. (1997). Predicting Blomberg, T. G., & Lucken, K. (2000). American penology: A prison misconducts. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 24, history of control. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter. 414–431. © Jones &Brockway, Bartlett Z. R. (1994).Learning, The American LLC reformatory prison system. © JonesGoldfarb, & R. Bartlett(1976). Jails: Learning,The ultimate ghetto LLC of the criminal justice NOT FOR SALEIn J. E. OR Jacoby DISTRIBUTION (Ed.), Classics of criminology (pp. 387–396). NOT FORsystem. SALE New York: OR Doubleday. DISTRIBUTION Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press. Harris, P. M., Gingerich, R., & Whittaker, T. A. (2004). The ‘effec- Cao, L., Zhao, J., & Van Dine, S. (1997). Prison disciplinary tick- tiveness’ of differential supervision. Crime & Delinquency, ets: A test of the deprivation and importation models. 50, 235–271. Journal of Criminal Justice, 25, 103–113. Hawes–Cooper Act, 49 U.S.C. § 11507 (1929). Carroll, R., & Prickett, S. (Eds.). (2008). The Bible: Authorized Hayner, N. S., & Ash, E. (1940). The prison as a community. King James Version ©(Oxford Jones World’s & Classics).Bartlett New Learning, York: LLCAmerican Sociological Review,© 5, 577–583.Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC Oxford University Press.NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTIONHuebner, B. M. (2003). AdministrativeNOT determinants FOR SALE of inmate OR DISTRIBUTION Clemmer, D. (1940). The prison community. New York: Holt, violence: A multilevel analysis. Journal of Criminal Justice, Rinehart, and Winston. 31, 107–117. Clemmer, D. (1950). Observations on imprisonment as a source Irwin, J., & Cressey, D. (1962). Thieves, convicts, and the inmate of criminality. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 41, culture. Social Problems, 10, 142–155. ©311–319. Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC Jacobs, J. B. (1977).© Jones Stateville: & TheBartlett penitentiary Learning, in mass society. LLC CooperNOT v. Pate FOR, 378 U.S. SALE 546 (1964). OR DISTRIBUTION Chicago:NOT University FOR of Chicago SALE Press. OR DISTRIBUTION de Beaumont, G., & de Tocqueville, A.(1994). On the penitentiary Jiang, S., & Fisher–Giorlando, M. (2002). Inmate misconduct: A system in the United States and its application in France. In test of the deprivation, importation, and situational models. J. E. Jacoby (Ed.), Classics of criminology (pp. 372–386). The Prison Journal, 82, 335–358. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press. Johnston, N. (2009). Evolving function: Early use of imprison- DeLisi, M. (2003). Criminal careers behind bars. Behavioral ment as punishment. The Prison Journal, 89, 10S–34S. © Jones & BartlettSciences and Learning, the Law, 21, 653–669.LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION

Wrap Up 59

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 59 13/12/17 1:16 pm Johnston, N. (2010). Early Philadelphia prisons: Amour, alcohol, American Academy of Political and Social Science, 600, © Jones & Bartlettand other Learning, forbidden pleasures. LLC The Prison Journal, 90, 12–23.© Jones &115–135. Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALELatessa, OR E. J., DISTRIBUTION& Lowenkamp, C. (2006). What works in reducingNOT FORSkidmore, SALE R. A. OR (1948). DISTRIBUTION Penological pioneering in the Walnut recidivism? University of St. Thomas Law Journal, 3, Street Jail, 1789–1799. Journal of Criminal Law and 521–525. Criminology, 39, 167–180. Mead, G. H. (1918). The psychology of punitive justice. American Spierenburg, P. (1984). The spectacle of suffering and the evolution Journal of Sociology, 23, 577–602. of repression: From preindustrial metropolis to the European Mears, D. P., & Bales,© W. Jones D. (2010). & SupermaxBartlett housing: Learning, Place- LLC experience. New York: Cambridge© Jones University & Bartlett Press. Learning, LLC ment, duration,NOT and time FOR to reentry. SALE Journal OR ofDISTRIBUTION Criminal Sykes, G. M. (1958). The societyNOT of captives: FOR A study SALE of a maximum-OR DISTRIBUTION Justice, 38, 545–554. security prison. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Meskell, M. W. (1999). An American resolution: The history of The History Channel. (1996). The big house: Eastern State Peniten- prisons in the United States from 1777 to 1877. Stanford tiary. New York: A&E Television Networks. Law Review, 51, 839–865. Tonry, M., & Petersilia, J. (1999). American prisons at the begin- Morris, N. (2002). Maconochie’s gentlemen: The story of Norfolk ning of the 21st century. Crime and Justice, 26, 1–16. © JonesIsland and & theBartlett roots of modern Learning, prison reform. LLC New York: Travis, J., &© Lawrence, Jones S. & (2002). Bartlett Beyond theLearning, prison gates: TheLLC state NOTOxford FOR University SALE Press. OR DISTRIBUTION of paroleNOT in America.FOR SALE Washington, OR DC: DISTRIBUTION The Urban Institute, Morris, R. D. (2016). Exploring the effect of exposure to short- Justice Policy Center. term solitary confinement among violent prison inmates. Wadman, R. C., & Allison, W. T. (2004). To protect and to serve: A Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 32(1), 1–22. history of police in America. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Petersilia, J. (1997). Probation in the United States. Crime and Pearson/Prentice–Hall. © Jones & BartlettJustice Learning,, 22, 149–200. LLC © JonesWalsh–Healey & Bartlett Act, 41Learning, U.S.C. §§ 34–35 LLC (1936). NOT FOR SALEPetersilia, OR J. (1998).DISTRIBUTION Probation and parole. In M. Tonry (Ed.), TheNOT FORWalters, SALE G. D. (2003). OR DISTRIBUTIONChanges in criminal thinking and identity handbook of crime and punishment (pp. 563–588). New in novice and experienced inmates: Prisonization revisited. York: Oxford University Press. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 30, 399–421. Piehl, A. M., & Useem, B. (2011). Prisons. In J. Q. Wilson & Walters, G. D. (2012). Criminal predatory behavior in the Federal J. Petersilia (Eds.), Crime and public policy (pp. 532–558). Bureau of Prisons. In M. DeLisi & P. J. Conis (Eds.), Violent New York: Oxford University Press. offenders: Theory, research, policy, and practice (2nd ed.). Poole, E. D., & Regoli,© R. Jones M. (1983). & Violence Bartlett in juvenile Learning, institu- LLC Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett.© Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC tions: A comparativeNOT study. FOR Criminology SALE, OR21, 213–232. DISTRIBUTIONWendell Holmes Jr., O. (1897).NOT Address FOR delivered SALE at the OR dedica DISTRIBUTION- Regoli, R. M., & Hewitt, J. D. (2008). Exploring criminal justice. tion of the new hall at the Boston University School of Law, Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett. Boston, Massachusetts, on January 8, 1897. Reisig, M. D., & Lee, Y. (2000). Prisonization in the Republic of Wheeler, S. (1961). Socialization in correctional communities. Korea. Journal of Criminal Justice, 28, 23–31. American Sociological Review, 26, 697–712. Restorative© Jones Justice. & Bartlett (2011). Introduction. Learning, Retrieved LLC July 1, 2011, Wilson, J. ©Q. Jones(1983). Thinking & Bartlett about crime Learning, (Rev. ed.). New LLC York: from http://restorativejustice.org/intro Vintage Books. RobinsonNOT FOR v. State SALEof California OR, 370 DISTRIBUTION U.S. 660 (1962). Wines, E. NOTC., & Dwight, FOR T.SALE W. (1867). OR Report DISTRIBUTION on the prisons and Rotman, E. (1998). The failure of reform: United States, 1865– reformatories of the United States and Canada. Provided to 1965. In N. Morris & D. J. Rothman (Eds.). The Oxford the New York legislature, January 1867. history of the prison: The practice of punishment in Western Wright, J. P., & DeLisi, M. (2016). Conservative criminology: A call society (pp. 151–177). New York: Oxford University Press. to restore balance to the social sciences. New York: © Jones & BartlettSchrag, C. Learning,(1954). Leadership LLC among prison inmates. American© Jones &Routledge. Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE SociologicalOR DISTRIBUTION Review, 19, 37–42. NOT FORZimring, SALE F. E., OR & Hawkins, DISTRIBUTION G. (1995). Incapacitation: Penal Sherman, L. W. (2005). The use and usefulness of criminology, confinement and the restraint of crime. New York: Oxford 1751–2005: Enlightened justice and its failures. Annals of the University Press.

60 CHAPTER 2 The Philosophy and History of Corrections

9781284153071_CH02_DeLis.indd 60 13/12/17 1:16 pm