Though the 2011 ‘riots’ attracted a huge amount of political, media and academic attention, the state’s punitive reaction to the unrest received far less analysis, despite being characterised by exceptionally harsh practices at every stage from arrest to sentencing. Drawing on interviews with criminal justice professionals who were at the heart of this response, and focusing in particular on the Crown Prosecution Service’s unusually punitive approach, this article examines the imaginations, assumptions and claims that allowed professionals to variously justify and problematise this vindictive backlash. The article shows how an imagination of the disturbances as an apolitical and unprecedented outbreak of violence was central to many professionals’ accounts. Yet this imagination, I contend, requires significant erasure and elision. Forgetting England’s long history of unrest, and ignoring or dismissing the police killing of Mark Duggan that immediately precipitated the disturbances, were vitally important in allowing professionals to ignore the vital connections between the unrest and entrenched structural racism that has consistently underpinned post-war urban unrest – and to position the harsh law and order response as reasonable, proportionate, necessary and adequate. In doing so, the article makes a significant contribution to scholarship on the unrest, and on the importance of amnesia and ignorance - conceived as active, collective and inherently political processes - in normalising punitive and discriminatory state practices, both in the wake of the riots and in their longer aftermath.
Prisons are in a moment of crisis, with a number of recent high-profile scandals receiving substantial media attention and threatening to undermine the hegemony of the institution. At the same time, the work of the current Conservative Government on criminal justice policy as a whole, and on prisons in particular, has been seen by many as a marked departure from their previous penal policy agenda, heralding a new, progressive and broadly liberal direction. Focusing on Michael Gove's rhetoric on prison reform during his term as Justice Secretary (May 2015 to July 2016), this article uses critical discourse analysis (CDA) to examine how Gove employed a variety of discursive strategies to create an impression of a liberal, progressive reform agenda, while simultaneously reinforcing the need for an expansive and punitive prison system. Building on recent work on agnotology, it shows that Gove strategically selected, deflected, distorted and ignored the available evidence on prisons. In doing so, he effectively legitimized and reinforced the central role of the prison in the criminal justice system despite increasing evidence of its inefficacy, foreclosing discussion of genuinely radical alternatives.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.