This thesis has been submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for a postgraduate degree (e.g. PhD, MPhil, DClinPsychol) at the University of Edinburgh. Please note the following terms and conditions of use: This work is protected by copyright and other intellectual property rights, which are retained by the thesis author, unless otherwise stated. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the author. The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the author. When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given. i THE WALL AND THE BRIDGE A SPATIAL HISTORY OF SEGREGATION MEASURES IN SCOTTISH PRISONS Jessica Bird BA (hons), MA, MSc ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would neither have started nor completed this project had it not been for the support - the humour most especially (along with the cash) - of my family and friends. And it would certainly have been a far more confusing and dispiriting process without the guidance, encouragement and care of my primary mentor, Richard Sparks, who has the rare knack of knowing just what to say, how much or how little, and when. I owe you. Thank you to the various SPS gatekeepers - Jim Carnie, Dan Gunn and Andrew Coyle in particular - for assisting me in accessing key archives and people. I am also grateful to all those who agreed to be interviewed. Their insightful contributions, so generously given, made this project possible. The writing process was made significantly more enjoyable by having shared many afternoons in the sunshine with Rich and Elias, who both reminded me that life does not begin and end at a computer screen. Thank you sincerely. Finally, I am especially grateful to my friend Andrew. Our endless conversations found their way into this research in one way or another, making it much more honest than it would otherwise have been. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements……………………………………………………………...ii Table of Contents……………………………………………………………….iii Declaration…………………………………………………………………........iv Abstract…………………………………………………………………………..v INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………….1 CHAPTER ONE………………………………………………………………..18 Methodology CHAPTER TWO……………………………………………………………….71 Segregation as a Penal-Administrative Norm; Routine Segregation Measures CHAPTER THREE…………………………………………………………...107 Segregation as a Special Measure; Small Units in Scotland CHAPTER FOUR……………………………………………………………..150 Segregation and In/Dignity; The Moral Implications of Segregation CHAPTER FIVE……………………………………………………………...183 Segregation and Prisoner Resistance; Dirty Protests in the Peterhead ‘Digger’ and the Inverness ‘Cages’ CHAPTER SIX………………………………………………………………..213 Segregation and Prisoner Transformation; Spatial Autonomy and Desistance in the Barlinnie Special Unit CONCLUSION………………………………………………………………..300 BIBLIOGRAPHY……………………………………………………………..302 APPENDIX…………………………………………………………………….322 iv DECLARATION As per Regulation 25 of the Postgraduate Assessment Regulations for Research Degrees I acknowledge that elements of Chapter Six build on work which was undertaken for a dissertation which formed part of an MSc degree (Criminology and Criminal Justice) and so there are limited portions of text which are identical to that earlier work. In addition, parts of Chapter Four and Six have been significantly abridged to form a chapter that will be published in late 2016 as part of an edited collected (editors: Emily Hart and Esther van Ginneken). As per Regulation 26 of the Postgraduate Assessment Regulations for Research Degrees I confirm: - This thesis was composed by me - It is my own work - It has not been submitted for any other degree or professional qualification (subject to the qualification above) v ABSTRACT This project explores the contemporary history of segregation in Scottish prisons, focusing on measures of ‘special handling’ particularly the network of small units that was operative between the 1950s and the 1990s. Scotland has a complicated, troubling, idiosyncratic and, to a lesser degree, inspiring tradition of special handling measures, involving generic punishment blocks, anachronistic isolation units, highly innovative specialist units, ‘safe’ and ‘silent’ cells, and more collective segregation spaces such as vulnerable prisoners wings. Such sites have provoked considerable attention across public and political arenas; they have been sources of shame, pride, criticism and confusion; in specific penal moments, they have been experienced by prisoners (and officers) as warzones, sanctuaries, coffins and creative spaces; and, in terms of efficacy, they have both exacerbated and ameliorated the behavioural difficulties of the prisoners contained within them. The objectives of this research are (1) to chronologically map the evolution of key segregation sites, attending to the external pressures that have informed the policies, procedures and rules governing their protean use, (2) to explore the impact of particular environmental factors on the initial design, operation and, subsequently, the closure of these sites, and (3) to reflect on the relationship between space and the ways individuals have understood, coped with, and in various ways ‘acted-out’ their segregated confinement. Deciding who, how and why to segregate prisoners raises questions of a conceptual, operational, political, and moral nature. But deciding where to segregate prisoners situates such questions within the physical constraints and potentialities of space. By adopting a spatial-temporal approach, this research straddles disciplines, utilising the methods of penal history, prison sociology, and – though in a more approximate manner – the steadily burgeoning sub-discipline of carceral geography. Additionally, by marshalling a number of personal testimonies, this history vi attempts to capture the emotional resonances of segregation – how it feels to actually live and work in ‘prisons within prisons’. 1 INTRODUCTION To segregate means to control. Segregation is that which is forced on inferiors by superiors. But separation is that which is done voluntarily by two equals – for the good of both. - Malcolm X The link between persons and environments holds a position in the social sciences similar to that of virtue in society. We love to preach and teach it, but we often ignore it in practice - Hans Toch (1977:1) Project Aims and Chapter Summaries I began this project with a single, broad question: what has segregation meant in Scottish prisons throughout the twentieth century and up to the present? Initially my intention was to explore the topic from multiple perspectives, chiefly those of the prisoners against whom segregation has been imposed, but also prison officers who were tasked with implementing it, prison officials who had overseen it, and policy makers who had designed and legislated its parameters. It quickly became clear, however, that this term ‘segregation’ encompasses many more practices, ideas, and physical sites than merely the traditional segregation unit, as is typically assumed. A central divide emerges between routine segregation measures on the one hand, applicable to all prisoners - including classification and allocation mechanisms, spatial zoning, and situational controls – and, on the other, specialist segregation measures. This latter category includes various forms of punitive, administrative and protective custody intended for those prisoners who are considered especially problematic and/or vulnerable. While the means and to some extent the effects may differ, the motives underpinning these two categories of segregation are consistent: security, order, discipline, and to a lesser degree, care. My objectives for this research then shifted; the project’s first aim became understanding the conceptual and practical nuances of both these 2 categories, along with the differences and parallels between them. (Chapter Two addresses this). In the course of that early research, and after having interviewed several prison officials (Chapter One offers a full methodological discussion), the topic that assumed the most significance in the data was Scotland’s particular and peculiar history of specialist measures, namely the network of small units operative between the late 1950s and the early 1990s. Consequently, my second aim for this work was to present a more specific account of how this network evolved, concentrating on this narrower time period: the latter half of the twentieth century. I was concerned to outline the specific spatial and operational arrangements that comprised the small units network, the categories of prisoners it targeted, how individual units were managed, with what effects, and for what purpose each unit served – both in practice and rhetoric (Chapter Three considers these questions). Given the paucity of archival materials relating to certain units, as well as the excess of documentation regarding others, it was apparent that my ambition to offer a comprehensive analysis of this network was unfeasible. Instead I decided to devote the second half of this thesis to examining in more detail the extreme poles of the unit spectrum, i.e. those units that were worryingly anachronistic, adopting authoritarian and often brutal approaches to the management of so- called ‘problem’ prisoners1 (e.g.