skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 44472 Find in a Library
Title: DIFFERENTIATION AMONG ADMINISTRATIONS AND INSTITUTIONS REGARDING DANGEROUS INMATES
Journal: REVUE DE SCIENCE CRIMINELLE ET DE DROIT PENAL COMPARE  Issue:3  Dated:(JULY-SEPTEMBER 1977)  Pages:625-633
Author(s): P AYMARD
Corporate Author: Editions Sirey
France
Date Published: 1977
Page Count: 9
Sponsoring Agency: Editions Sirey
75005 Paris, France
Format: Article
Language: French
Country: France
Annotation: A COMPARATIVE STUDY ON CLASSIFICATION OF AND FACILITIES FOR DANGEROUS INMATES IN EUROPE IS PRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR OF FRENCH PENITENTIARY ADMINISTRATION.
Abstract: DIFFICULTIES IN DETERMINING WHICH INMATES ARE 'DANGEROUS' INCLUDE THE FACT THAT SOME OFFENDERS CONVICTED OF VIOLENT CRIMES WHO HAVE EXHIBITED VIOLENT BEHAVIOR BEFORE INCARCERATION MAY NO LONGER BE DANGEROUS IN THE PRISON SETTING; CONVERSELY, SOME INMATES MAY BECOME DANGEROUS ONLY AFTER CONFINEMENT. SOME EUROPEAN COUNTRIES MAKE USE OF OBJECTIVE CRITERIA, SUCH AS DANGEROUSNESS AT THE TIME OF THE OFFENSE OR INCARCERATION, WHILE OTHERS USE SUBJECTIVE CRITERIA OF SUPPOSED DANGEROUSNESS IN ADDITION. THE NATIONS IN THE FORMER CATEGORY MOST OFTEN INCARCERATE DANGEROUS INMATES IN TRADITIONAL INSTITUTIONS, BUT ISOLATE THEM STRICTLY FROM OTHER INMATES; MOST OF THE COUNTRIES WHICH EMPLOY SUPPOSED DANGEROUSNESS AS A CRITERION HAVE CREATED SPECIAL UNITS WHICH, BY KEEPING DANGEROUS PRISONERS AT A DISTANCE FROM THE REST OF THE INSTITUTIONAL COMMUNITY, REDUCE THE RISK OF DISTURBING THE GENERAL PRISON POPULATION AND ENDANGERING THE SAFETY OF PRISON PERSONNEL. ITALY, BELGIUM, DENMARK, NORWAY, GREECE, AND ICELAND HAVE NOT CREATED SPECIAL SECURITY WARDS, WHILE GERMANY, GREAT BRITAIN, SWEDEN, AUSTRIA, AND FRANCE ASSIGN DANGEROUS INMATES TO PARTICULAR MAXIMUM-SECURITY UNITS. IN ADDITION TO ACTUAL VIOLENT BEHAVIOR AS AN INDICATOR OF DANGEROUSNESS, GREAT BRITAIN AND FRANCE USE MENTAL ABNORMALITY, SWEDEN AND GERMANY USE THE POSSIBILITY OF ESCAPE, AND FRANCE USES PRIOR ESCAPE ATTEMPTS IN WHICH VIOLENCE WAS INVOLVED. REGARDLESS OF THE CRITERIA APPLIED, ALL OF THE COUNTRIES SURVEYED PRACTICE DISPERSION OF DANGEROUS INMATES. CHARACTERISTICS OF SPECIAL FACILITIES IN EUROPE ARE DISCUSSED. IT IS POINTED OUT THAT SECURITY OF THIS SORT IS NOT ADAPTED TO PREPARING THE INMATE FOR REINTEGRATION INTO THE REGULAR PRISON COMMUNITY AND EVENTUALLY INTO SOCIETY, AND THAT ASSIGNMENT TO A SPECIAL UNIT REINFORCES THE CRIMINAL LABEL FOR CERTAIN OFFENDERS. --IN FRENCH.
Index Term(s): Behavior typologies; Corrections internal security; Europe; Maximum security; Offender classification; Problem behavior; Violent inmates
Note: PRESENTED AT THE THIRD CONFERENCE OF DIRECTORS OF PENITENTIARY ADMINISTRATION ORGANIZED BY THE EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR CRIMINAL PROBLEMS
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=44472

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.