skip navigation


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: 72066 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: Examination of Repeated Custodial Remands to Brixton (England) Prison for Medical Reports
Author(s): J Marshall
Date Published: 1976
Page Count: 22
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice/
Rockville, MD 20849
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
NCJRS paper reproduction
Box 6000, Dept F
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America
Language: English
Country: United Kingdom
Annotation: A pilot study was conducted at England's Brixton Prison regarding remand prisoners, the preparation of their medical reports, and the identification of medical remand 'repeaters,' defendants remanded for medical reports more than once a year.
Abstract: A search of Brixton reception records between July 1973 and June 1974 turned up 259 individuals (or 594 reports) remanded for medical reports during those 12 months who had been received on remand for medical reports at least once more within 12 months of their initial receptions. These 259 are 11 percent of the individuals annually remanded to Brixton for medical reports, and represent 24 percent of the approximately 2,750 medical reports requested each year by the courts. In view of findings that only 20 percent of all the reports recommended that the courts dispose of a case by medical order and that 7 out of every 10 repeaters never received such a recommendation on any occasion, a majority of the repeaters' custodial medical remands may have been unnecessary. Courts might be encouraged to rely on medical reports prepared within the 12 months proceding the current remand by the fact that the probability of a medical recommendation appears to be associated in most cases with the outcome of the previous report. A medical recommendation is likely in only 10 percent of the cases where the previous report made no recommendation, but in 50 percent of the cases where the previous report did offer medical recommendation. Unfortunately in only 18 cases of the entire sample had the remanding court expressly indicated awareness of previous reports. The findings thus suggest that a service should be provided to courts wishing to know of the existence and contents of any previous medical report, so that these courts can refrain from custodial remands to obtain new reports, and so that diagnoses can be made with more consistency. An appendix discusses the diagnoses and dispositions of the cases, seven footnotes are provided, and tables illustrate the findings.
Index Term(s): Court delays; England; Medical evaluation; Records management; Remand procedures
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*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.