Meet ... David
Like others who have written before me I too feel privileged to be
part of the Mannheim community, all the more so as being based
mainly in Italy means that I am something of a ’corresponding
member’. Nonetheless I do manage to come to the UK reasonably
regularly for workshops and other reasons. I also contributed a
class or two each year as a visiting Law Professor on my friend
Robert Reiner’s LLM on crime policy- and no doubt new chances for
collaboration will present themselves.
After my PHD -on crimes by landlords -at the Cambridge institute of
Criminology I taught philosophy of law, sociology of law and
criminology, first in Edinburgh (where I was also a juvenile court
judge) and then in UCL.Whilst still in England in the 80's I wrote
about subjects such as white collar crime, community crime
prevention and crime and globalisation. After moving to Bologna in
Italy (for love of a judge!) in 1989 I worked in a small town
university (four hours from where I live) and my main concern has
been not to lose touch with the larger academic community that I had
been part of before. Fortunately I was able to turn my culture shock
concerning crime and the response to it in Italy into a
contribution to comparative criminology (see my recent primer on
comparative criminal justice for Sage).
I have written for example about the cultural significance of low
prison rates or the ‘tolerance’ of offending by juveniles. (This
photo of the workshop at the Juvenile Prison in Bologna below shows
that the legend over the door in Italian says ‘Working wears you
More recently, I have broadened my interests from comparative
criminology to transnational criminal law and regulation. I am
interested for example in discovering how far campaigns against
human trafficking really create more global solidarity or rather
help States pursue their own interests, control sex work and limit
immigration. More in general I am interested in the process of
creating and monitoring global social indicators for example
concerning pollution, corruption, business friendliness, human
rights or whatever, which are then used to define, measure, monitor,
incentivise and punish States in terms of their performance as shown
by such indicators. The effort to implement the protocol against
Human trafficking also represents an example of this.
I am just back from a works outing to the culturally fascinating and
sophisticated island of Penang in Malaysia as a member of the SCOPUS
board responsible for assessing which law (and criminology) journals
are of a sufficient quality to be included in its data base.This too
can be seen as another exercise in making such purportedly
universal 'indicators'. Such foreign trips or teaching engagements
also provide the opportunity to sample other criminal justice
discourses and practices. Interestingly, the local (English
language) newspaper in Penang described community crime prevention
schemes in terms which were immediately recognizable. The two photos
below are of the police station in Georgetown. The text on the
notice board at the front gate (and on its Facebook site) provides
this moving ode to 'community' policing :
Dear all. We would not be around if not for the people. We would
not be in existence if the people didn't 'create' us. We would not
be able to achieve what we have achieved if the people didn't
support us. We would not be relevant if the people didn't recognize
our service. Be with us because we are part of you. Love us as we
are also members of the big family. Be kind to us, because we are
also human. Forgive us because we are not perfect. Support us
because you are our strength (YDH Dato 'Wira Ayub Hj Yaakob).
Could England learn something here from its former colony?
But the study of the comparative and the transnational are always in
tension. The local newspaper's daily discussions of the need to
abolish the death penalty canvassed the standard criminological
arguments on both sides of the debate. But one of the most important
arguments in favour of abolition it offered was the need to come
into line with global standards.
Institute of Criminal Justice Research at the University of
Southampton by Professor Jenny Fleming
The Institute was established in the Law School at Southampton in
1986 under the direction of Andrew Rutherford (now Emeritus
Professor of Law and Criminal Policy in the Law School). As well as
an academic, Andrew was an active penal reformer (he was for many
years the Chair of the Howard League for Penal Reform), and so the
Institute has always maintained an interest in exploring and
developing the relationship between criminal justice research and
scholarship and policy and practice. Fostering these connections
will remain a central aim of the re-launched Institute. In recent
months, the Institute has been revived and was re-launched on 14
October 2012 as the Institute of Criminal Justice Research (ICJR).
While the Institute still ‘sits’ in the Faculty of Law, it is now
co-managed by Law and Social Sciences. The Directors of the
Institute are Professor Jenny Fleming, (Criminology, Social
Sciences) and Phil Palmer (Law). Jenny Fleming has recently moved
from the University of Tasmania where she was Research Professor and
the Director of the Institute of Law Enforcement Studies. Phil
Palmer (LLB) lectures in the Faculty of Law and in a previous life
was a police officer! Immediate plans for the Institute include a
new and updated website (currently in production); a regular seminar
series; postgraduate activities; symposiums; an annual lecture and
The Institute is envisaged as a genuinely inter-disciplinary
research hub that seeks to reach out to colleagues of all
disciplines (and indeed across all institutions) who feel that their
research interests might include or complement criminal justice
studies. An expression of interest letter has begun to be
distributed whereby we ask potential members of the Institute to
indicate how they might like to be involved in the Institute’s
activities. So for example, we have asked whether recipients are
interested in receiving news on funding calls and being invited to
contribute to interdisciplinary grant application and/or whether
they would be interested in being placed on the membership directory
and receiving notifications about seminars/events and other
Institute activities. Where individuals or groups have indicated an
interest in interdisciplinary research activities they have advised
what they believe would be their strongest contribution to such
activity. To date we have had strong expressions of interest from
lawyers, psychologists, social geographers, policy people and a
significant number of practitioners from policing; probation;
security, lawyers and psychology.
The 2012/2013 seminar programme has begun and speakers have
included: Chief Inspector, Andrew Brown, Deputy Head of Leadership
and Professional Development, Scottish Police College speaking about
Maritime Negotiation – A critical perspective on the role of the
negotiator within the complex maritime environment; Harry Annison
from Oxford exploring the creation and subsequent amendment of the
Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence and Mark Telford
(Law, Southampton) discussing Minimalism and the Criminalization
Future speakers include –Chris Greer (City) and Eugene McLaughlin
(Southampton), Scandal without End? Sir Jimmy Savile, Child Sexual
Abuse and the BBC Crisis (28 November 2012) and Simon Harding
(Middlesex), Street Capital and Street Government: the role of the
violent street gang in the London riots of 2011 (5 December 2012).
Any research centre is only as good as its administration and we
have been very fortunate to have been secured the valuable services
of Caroline Andow in this respect. Caroline is a Ph.d student at the
University of Southampton and her research (funded by the Economic
and Social Research Council) explores the relationship between
empathy and aggression in young people.
If you are interested in hearing more about the Institute’s
activities and/or be placed on our mailing list please email
Fleming, J. and McLaughlin, E. (2012) Through a different lens:
researching the rise and fall of New Labour's ‘public confidence
agenda’. Policing and Society, 22, (3), 280-294.
Greer, C. and McLaughlin, E. (2012) 'Media Justice: Madeleine
McCann, Intermediatisation and 'Trial by Media' in the British
Press', Theoretical Criminology, 17, 1.
Palmer, P (2012) Dealing with the exceptional: pre-crime
anti-terrorism policy and practice, Policing and Society, Vol. 22
Sindall, K. Sturgis, P.and Jennings, W. (2012)
Public confidence in the police: a
time-series analysis. British Journal of Criminology,
Telford, MJ (2012) ‘It was about trust’–Practitioners as policy
makers and the improvement of inter‐professional
communication within the 1980s youth justice process. Legal Studies,
32 (1), 58-77 (with Sotirios Santatzoglou).
Yip, M, Shadbolt, N and Webber, C (2012)
Structural analysis of online criminal
social networks. In, IEEE International Conference on
Intelligence and Security Informatics (ISI) Washington, US, 11 - 14
Jun 2012. (doi:10.1109/ISI.2012.6284092)
Professor Tim Newburn
The Director, Professor Craig Calhoun congratulated Professor Tim
Newburn and his team who recently won ‘Innovation of the Year’ at
the Press Gazette British Journalism Awards for their Reading the
Riots research project, in collaboration with the Guardian. The
project, which aimed to better understand the causes of the riots
and disturbances in the summer of 2011, was also nominated for the
‘Research Project of the Year’ by the Times Higher Education. The
Press Gazette award is open to any journalistic innovation and the
The Times – Cities Fit for Cycling Project
Channel 4 News – No Go Britain (multimedia campaign highlighting the
problems faced by disabled transport users)
John Dale – 24 Hours in Journalism book and investigative project
Guardian News and Media – Reading the Riots project
The Bureau of Investigative Journalism
Channel 4 Dispatches App
The Judges described the Reading the Riots project as a “massive
piece of work and beautifully presented”.
Professor Jennifer Brown
Jennifer attended a seminar of Nordic Police research presenting a
paper on the evidence base for interventions into occupational
health, stress , and operational behavioural investigative advice.
Several presenters explained the moves to reform Nordic policing and all
are moving towards regionalisation or establishing national police
forces, so England and Wales are bucking the European Trend (unlike
Scotland). And yes Danish detectives do wear the jumper.
Dr Coretta Philips
has completed her book which is now published and is entitled The Multicultural
Prison: Ethnicity, Masculinity, and Social Relations among
Prisoners. This presents a unique sociological analysis of
the daily negotiation of ethnic difference within the closed world
of the male prison.
How a colonel became a killer by Carl Millar and Ian Robertson which
is an account of Russell Williams who was fast tracked to lead the
Canadian military but who became a sexual predator and killer.
Tropic of chaos; climate change and the new geography of violence by
Christian Parenti. Formerly a student of David Downes, this book
discusses the implications of social unrest and violence
consequential on global warming.
Policing in an age of austerity; a post colonial perspective by Mike
Brogden and Graham Ellison which is a fierce critique of the
disproportional ties in policing with a concentration of controlling
the 'lower orders'
Janet Foster has launched the next
'meet the crims project. She is looking for some keen and
enthusiastic Ph.D. students to participate in this second
round. This involves directing a small project group of
undergraduate students who will video interview an eminent
Criminologist. This year the list includes Tony Bottoms, Mike Levi,
Elaine Player and Ben Bowling. Unlike last year when the project
was compulsory for undergraduate Crime and Deviance students this
year it is optional and approximately 15 student have signed up to
The Ph.D. adviser’s role is to
manage the undergraduate group, help them to select the texts to
read, prepare for the interview, finalise an interview schedule and
work through the analytical processes with them. This involves
approximately four meetings. The good news is that you also get
Please could you send an e mail to
Janet if you are interested and let her know why you would like to
be involved in the project.
Oxford Post graduate seminar
Bear and Johannes Reiken organised a meeting of LSE
criminology PhDs and Oxford PhD students to discuss the research
policy practice interface 19th October. Robert Reiner
began with an exposition of different points of entry for
researchers using the inside outsider typology i.e. whether the
researcher has insider knowledge and is working from within or
outside the organisation. Paul Quinton gave an inside perspective
from the National Policing Improvement Agency, shortly to become the
College of Policing. Ben Linton and Paul Dawson from the Met gave a
practitioner point of view. Jennifer Brown drew together some of the
issues discussed which included: data harvesting, advocacy,
implementation, commissioning, learning from mistakes, the educated
customer, practical difficulties.
The LSE hosted workshop was followed up with a further discussion at
Oxford on 26th October.
MSc Research Workshop
Coretta Phillips and Jennifer Brown organised a seminar for the MSc
students in Social Policy on 28 November
Welcome and introductions were given by Coretta.
First up was
Anita Dockley from the Howard League for Penal Reform who talked
about the political challenges of harnessing research to influence
policy. Jennifer then gave a paper about utilising research data
from secondary sources and thinking about more imaginative primary
data such as children's drawings. Tim Newburn talk through the
methodological challenges of his work on 'Reading the Riots'. Ubaid
Rehman (Metropolitan Police Service) talked about the evaluative
research done in the Met whilst the topic of volunteering and
internships was discussed by Kimmett Edgar (Prison Reform Trust)
and Jacqui Karn (Police Foundation).
October 4th, 2012
: Professor Andrew Ashworth gave the third in this series of seminars
organised in collaboration with the Howard League for Penal Reform.
Professor Ashworth presented the case for the non incarceration of
property offenders. His main argument was that to take away a person’s
liberty for an offence that involved a deprivation of property is
disproportionate and unfair. Removing property offenders from the
prisons would take away 8 per cent of adult male sentenced prisoners
(some 5,000) and 21 per cent of female sentenced prisoners (over 700).
There were criteria to be taken into consideration; seriousness i.e.
that the offences were not overly violent or frightening and were non
sexual. Professor Ashworth also argued that the number of pervious
convictions for similar offences should not be material. He discussed in
particular cases of fraud, tax evasion and money laundering. His
proposed alternatives included: better preventative measures;
Restorative Justice, fines and community sentences.
Kier Starmer QC the Director of Public Prosecutions and Lord
Charles Falconer, Baron Falconer of Thoroton, P.C, Q.C., formerly the
Lord Chancellor were the discussant who mostly took issue with the
seriousness criteria in that a person might be deprived of a personal
memento of no intrinsic value but the harm done at the loss may be
considerable. The example was given of the thief inadvertently stealing a bag
containing insulin for the diabetic victim which may be life threatening. The
practicalities of the exceptions were felt to be a considerable challenge
to the proposition. The seminar was chaired by Professor Jill Paey.
29th November 2012:
What if university probation schools become the research and education
foundations of probation services? was the fourth "what if.." presented
by Jonathan Shepherd Director, Violence Research Group Professor of Oral
and Maxillofacial Surgery. The discussant was Heather Munro, Chief
Executive of the London Probation Trust.
Professor Shepherd argued for an evidence based approach to Probation.
He suggested that at present there is a dearth of studies, poor
implementation, a lack of high quality UK research and such studies as
there are, are not sound. He concluded that there was a lack of
engagement with research intensive universities, either for evidence
production or for practitioner training and compared with other public
services, the probation service has an over-reliance on government to
produce evidence of effectiveness. He presented his model of an evidence
chain that would link research, policy and practice.
His proposition would result, he said, in innovative products that
would attract wide public attention; offender management would be
transformed; the profession's standing, credibility and recruitment
standards of probation would increase and the benefits would become
apparent within four years. The discussant did agree that the move
towards professionalizing probation was to be welcomed but that
practitioner research was very much hampered by lack of funds. Professor
Robert Reiner chaired the evening.
Hermann Mannheim quote of the month
The need for further research into juvenile delinquency,
particularly in its local setting, has been stressed above in our
introductory remarks. So far, such research has been carried out
mainly by outsiders, i.e. by persons not simultaneously engaged in
the actual treatment of young offenders. Whilst regular contribution
of this kind by outsiders will remain indispensable to keep the
right balance, they should be supplemented, much more than has
hitherto been done, by practical workers in the field, notably
Probation Officers, members of staffs of Institutions for juvenile
delinquency and of Child Guidance Clinics. This is needed not only
as the best method of securing a constant stream of first-hand
information but also in the interest of those social workers. For
them, an opportunity of combining research with their practical
duties will provide a valuable antidote to that feeling of deadly
monotony and staleness which almost inevitably becomes prevalent
after a number of years."
Mannheim. H. (1948) Juvenile Delinquency in an English Town
London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co. p118.
From The Archives
Why some countries seem to be able to cope with fewer prisoners: what
could be done to do the same?
Dr Tapio Lappi-Seppälä
National Research Institute of Legal Policy, Finland
The paper will discuss the following issues in the light of Nordic
experiences and cross-comparative evidence from a large sample of
1. What characterises low imprisonment countries and high imprisonment
countries in terms of political cultures, welfare and social policy,
public sentiments and trust? How do these basic “drivers of penal
policy” interact and relate to each other, how and why are they
conductive to different forms of penal practices.
2. Is tough penal policy necessary and/or workable in order to maintain
confidence and the credibility of the criminal justice system; does
punitivity produce confidence, or does trust enable to conduct less
punitive penal/social practices, and if so, why?
3. Which dimensions are essential when discussing “punitivity”? What is
the role and relevance of imprisonment compared to other dimensions of
systemic punitivity; how systemic and attitudinal punitivity relate and
interact; do both dimensions of punitivity originate from the same
sources; do high imprisonment countries display also other type of
4. The role of crime: To what extent does crime explain differences in
the extent of imprisonment; to what extent do differences in prison
policies explain differences in crime?
5. The role of penal reform: How and through which practical means
Nordic countries have been able to reduce or moderate the scale
Some issues will be discussed in more detail, some are just posed for
Mannheim/BSC Wednesday Seminar
Ros Burnett University of Oxford “False allegations of abuse in
positions of trust"
To Do in London