A turning point, not a turnstile

These opportunities cultivated my interest in criminal justice policy and got me thinking about gaps in the system as a whole. After all, what does successful criminal justice look like? Does it exist?

A perfect system?

First and foremost, the perfect criminal justice system simply does not, and cannot, exist. Definitions of crime and justice vary across time, place and context. Even measurements of crime – such as incarceration rate – are difficult to compare due to the way data is collected and presented.

In fact, fields of study like criminology and sociology would be unlikely to exist if perfection was attainable. That is not to say all justice system practices are strictly bad or good. However, the best we can do is strive to balance the needs of all parties involved in the pursuit of justice.

Justice for whom?

This brings me to my first point: After reading through my past three articles, I realised I promoted the rehabilitation of offenders without giving equal attention to supporting victims.

Victims are, in fact, profoundly important to consider in justice system processes. From victim impact statements to resources post-trial, victims deserve a chance to be heard and supported. While the needs of every victim and offender are different, helping victims recover is just as important as helping offenders reform.

Innocent until proven guilty?

With that said, and having never worked with victims, I feel I can only comment on matters relating to offenders.

One aspect of my work in the courthouse that I have reflected on a lot is the importance of the presumption of innocence principle. All too often, defendants are treated as guilty until proven innocent, rather than innocent until proven guilty.

While we provided judges with the least restrictive remand recommendations possible, almost every outcome involved supervision of some sort.

Of course, it is difficult to strike a balance between protecting the public from (potential) harm while also protecting the rights of defendants. However, pretrial practices are not the only place where assumptions of guilt may be made. These assumptions also take the form of implicit biases about what crime is, who criminals are and what justice looks like, which are extremely difficult to overcome.

Support behind and beyond bars?

If and when an individual is found guilty of a crime, support inside and outside the prison can help reduce reoffending. In order to reduce recidivism, support – such as mental health treatment – needs to be offered on a consistent basis.

For instance, receiving treatment pretrial is unlikely to be effective if it not continued within, and beyond, the prison environment. Additionally, connecting offenders to resources upon release can help them re-establish their lives by pointing them towards employment, housing and educational opportunities.

This is important, because – as I mentioned in my first article – the justice system is often criticised for being a revolving door of criminalisation. Of course, there are many other factors which contribute to recidivism rates. Yet, support throughout all stages of the justice system can make a difference.

Alternatives to Incarceration

Finally, it is worth thinking about alternatives to incarceration. Overcrowded prisons are not beneficial to inmates or taxpayers, and should be used as a last resort. Restorative justice offers one alternative, as does wider policy reform.

For example, a significant number of individuals I worked with behind bars held drug possession charges. Because the nature of many drug crimes does not harm anyone other than the user, reforming drug policy could save resources while helping drug-users get the support they need through the healthcare system, rather than the justice system.

While there are many other lessons that can be taken from working in justice system settings, these were some of my key takeaways to help make the justice system a turning point, rather than a turnstile.

Katelyn Owens is a PhD student in sociology at the University of Kent, studying the impact of gentrification on the sexual geographies of King’s Cross in London and Pigalle in Paris.