Convict Criminology and the Struggle for Inclusion

Convict Criminology (CC) began in the early 1990s as a reaction to the then current state of academic criminology that did not adequately reflect the voices of convicted felons. Since its beginnings, CC has attempted to draw attention to a range of problems created by the criminal justice apparatus and defenders of the status quo. Dr. Joanne Belknap’s 2014 ASC presidential address and subsequent article presented an argument that stressed the importance of activism to be considered as part of criminological research. In the process, she reviewed her career and then criticized the field of Critical Criminology, in particular Convict Criminology. The article, however, ignored the numerous efforts that CC has engaged in to build an inclusive group school, movement, organization and network that includes the diverse voices of Ph.D. educated convicts and excons, and overall reflected a superficial understanding of the history and intent of Convict Criminology. This article attempts to explain the shortcomings of Belknap’s article and clarifies misunderstandings.     

In Search of Civic Policing: Recasting the ‘Peelian’ Principles

For over a century the so-called ‘Peelian’ principles have been central to the self-understanding of Anglo-American policing. But these principles are the product of modern state-building and speak only partially to the challenges of urban policing today. In fact, they stand in the way of clear thinking and better practice. In this paper, I argue that these principles ought to be radically recast and put to work in new ways. The argument proceeds as follows. First, I recover and outline the current ‘Peelian’ principles and argue that they lack the specificity, sufficiency and status required in order to do real work in the governance of policing. Second, I make the case for principles both as a regulative ideal guiding our aspirations for what policing can become and as a means of regulating police work in the here-and-now. I then develop a revised set of principles and indicate, in conclusion, how they can guide the formation of trust-producing and democracy-enhancing practices of civic policing.     

The Commons Select Committee System in the 2015–20 Parliament

The House of Commons select committees witnessed some of the most constructive political theatre of the 2010‐2015 Parliament. Recall Rupert Murdoch's public contrition, Margaret Hodge's assault on MNC tax evasion and Keith Vaz's timely interrogations of G4S, etc. The committees also embraced social media and adopted public engagement as a key task. These developments all reflect a newly emboldened system. In recent months, four reports have been published which reflect on these developments. They also look forward to the further substantial development of committee activity. The system thus sets sail with an abundance of specific suggestions, including ideas that could have far wider and more far‐reaching democratic implications.     

Suing "the welfare": the diminishing immunity for child protection authorities

Until recently, child protection authorities enjoyed significant levels of immunity in respect of civil actions arising from their action or inaction. However, the tide has turned in Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. The decision of Redlich J of the Victorian Supreme Court in the complex case of SB v New South Wales (2004) 13 VR 527; [2004] VSC 513 consolidates the trend in Australia with a further repudiation of the assertion that child welfare authorities should be specially advantaged. It appears that henceforth actions will regularly be able to be brought against the state by persons who have been harmed by the negligent discharge of child protection duties. In the future, plaintiffs' biggest impediment will lie in the evidentiary challenge of establishing the extent of the harm flowing from the breach of the state's duty as against the harm wrought by previous and supervening events.     

Heterodoxy, iconoclasm and spuriousness: the limits of novel expert evidence

A difficult issue arises for courts' decision-making at common law and under statutory evidentiary regimes when expert opinions are significantly unorthodox, iconoclastic or methodologically flawed. This editorial analyses the relevant evidentiary principles and the Australian jurisprudence on the subject, giving particular attention to the decisions of the South Australian Supreme Court in R v Parenzee [2007] SASC 143 and R v Parenzee [2007] SASC 316 in which expert opinions about the existence, identifiability and transmissibility of HIV and its relationship to AIDS adduced on behalf of the defence in a criminal trial were found to be seriously wanting. A variety of factors indicative of low probative value in expert opinions are distilled.     

Centralisation versus regionalisation: Designing the Sixth National Mental Health Plan

In response to the recent Productivity Commission report into mental health, the previous Federal Government announced its intention to produce a new national agreement that lays the platform for Australia's sixth national mental health plan. It has been recommended mental health move to a more regional model of governance and planning, away from a centralised, top-down approach, partly in response to broader reforms affecting health care, and partly in direct response to consistent inquiry evidence that the mental health system remains in crisis. The past 30 years of mental health planning have been centralised. Successive national plans set a broad framework, with real decisions about mental health funding and service allocation made in the health departments of our capital cities. Will the next plan sponsor or inhibit regionality in mental health planning? This paper assesses Australia's historical approach to health planning particularly as it affected mental health and the costs arising. In learning these lessons, we propose the necessary ingredients to facilitate a regional, innovative, and effective approach to decentralised planning, for better mental health outcomes. We cannot afford to replicate the failed planning approaches of the past.