Parole release decisions revisited: An analysis of parole release decisions for violent inmates in a southeastern state

In an attempt to discover the major predictors of parole decision-making in one southeastern state, this study examined the cases of 762 inmates under the supervision of the Alabama Department of Corrections who were eligible for parole from June 1, 1993 through May 31, 1994. Of the 762 eligible inmates, only 138 (18 percent) were granted parole. Using parole disposition (granted or denied) as the dependent variable, this study investigated the offense, offender, and general parole variables and their impact on parole decisions. Logistic regression findings indicated that the strongest predictors of parole release decisions were the length of the original sentence assessed for the offense, the total number of felonies for which the inmate was serving time, and the warden and senior officers' recommendations. These variables, which were also significant at the bivariate level of analysis, explained approximately 47 percent of the variation in the dependent variable. A major concern of the study was the generalizability of the findings.     

Coronial Inquests,Indigenous Suicide and the Colonial Narrative

Critical Criminology - This article explores the over-representation of Indigenous people in suicide statistics internationally as indicative of the broader impacts of colonialism. The purpose of...     

The European Union in Sudan: A Missed Opportunity?

Abstract

International organisations active in Africa are often criticised for their ineffectiveness. So too is the European Union (EU), which is also accused of failing to assume a more prominent conflict management role in war-torn countries. This article examines the EU’s capacity and readiness to take on such a role in one such country, the former Republic of Sudan, home to Africa’s longest-running civil wars and the first ‘genocide’ of the 21st century. It begins by outlining the EU’s record in Darfur and the North–South Peace Process. Drawing upon 25 interviews and Hill’s ‘capabilities–expectations model’, it then questions whether the EU’s ‘capabilities’ (resources, instruments, unity) were ‘fit for purpose’ in Sudan’s hostile target setting. It concludes by identifying settings that have been more propitious for a conflict-related management function and by suggesting that the EU should better manage expectations about future security roles.