This article reviews Bernard Harcourt's Against Prediction: Profiling, Policing, and Punishing in an Actuarial Age (2007), in which he criticizes the use of actuarial prediction methods in the contexts of policing and sentencing. I focus on the latter context. I argue that Harcourt has identified an important, and not exclusively American, trend and develops a valid critique of it that should be pushed further. From a theory of punishment perspective, I argue that Harcourt's critique is no less applicable to clinical prediction methods than to the use of actuarial ones. Harcourt's arguments, however, beg a more general explanation of the flaws of incapacitation as a justification for punishment. If we base our objection to the use of prediction methods on such larger grounds, questions arise as to the legitimacy of other practices that are not considered punitive but rather “regulatory” or “preventive.”

risk-management techniques within the criminal justice system, and pressures upon the probation service to adopt a more punitive role within the criminal justice system.The third main section of the book focuses on particular parts of the criminal justice system, and covers policing, community safety and crime prevention, prisons, probation and lastly, prosecution and the courts. In each of these chapters, Faulkner provides a useful summary of recent developments, highlighting similar themes throughout: the need for policies that promote social inclusion, rather than the exclusionary trend that has existed over recent years; the need to promote good citizenship (involving emphasis on both rights and responsibilities); and the necessity for clear lines of accountability in the new structures that are emerging.While it is difficult to disagree with many of Faulkner's general arguments, it can be said that the book does have some limitations. The main criticisms relate first, to the breadth of coverage attempted, and second, to overlap within the book's overall structure.Crime, State and Citizen is an ambitious attempt to provide both a detailed review of most aspects of criminal justice policy, and a discussion of the broader issues facing public administration in 21st-century Britain. The breadth of coverage limits the extent to which the author can explore particular issues in any great depth. Thus, the reader is left feeling that some subjects, upon which the author is eminently qualified to comment, are skated over rather too briefly. This particularly applies to the rather descriptive sections on the recent history of criminal justice policy in England and Wales, which could have provided more insights into the hidden processes of criminal justice policy-making.The second main criticism concerns the book's structure. There is much overlap between the substantive sections, all of which include accounts of recent history, descriptions of current issues, and critical assessment of current policy. There are therefore frequent in-text references to sections in other chapters, which confirm the impression of repetition. Without this overlap and with a clearer focus, many of the author's important arguments would have had more bite.Despite these criticisms, this remains an extremely useful text for those interested in the recent history of criminal justice policy-making in England and Wales, and the key tensions within New Labour's policies as we enter the 21st century. It provides a timely reminder for politicians, policy-makers and the wider public of the crucial need for social inclusiveness and accountability in criminal justice and penal policy.

No abstract

No abstract