Civilising the Scaffold: a renewed carceral space in videoconferencing trials

Titolo Rivista RIVISTA GEOGRAFICA ITALIANA
Autori/Curatori Marco Nocente
Anno di pubblicazione 2024 Fascicolo 2024/1
Lingua Inglese Numero pagine 19 P. 72-90 Dimensione file 0 KB
DOI 10.3280/rgioa1-2024oa17377
Il DOI è il codice a barre della proprietà intellettuale: per saperne di più clicca qui

Vedi l'articolo Scarica l'articolo open access

FrancoAngeli è membro della Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA)associazione indipendente e non profit per facilitare (attraverso i servizi tecnologici implementati da CrossRef.org) l’accesso degli studiosi ai contenuti digitali nelle pubblicazioni professionali e scientifiche

In this article, I analyse the implication of the spread of videoconferencing for prisoners under pre-trial detention as a technology embedded in a process of civilising punishment by bureaucratising criminal procedure. This is specifically examined through a series of letters from Italian prisoners ‘engaged in struggles’, held in maximum security from 2006 to 2020. From a situated perspective, the letters describe videoconferencing as a way of disembodying and recoding the space-time of the prisoners, reducing them to a simulacrum: a series of images, sounds and glances caught by cameras and microphones. This technology ensures, through a both material and virtual geographical solution, efficiency, and security but at the cost of increasing the distance between the judge, society and the accused.

In questo articolo analizzo le implicazioni della diffusione della videoconferenza in carcere, una tecnologia che burocratizza il processo penale all’interno del processo di civilizzazione della pena. Questo aspetto viene esaminato attraverso una serie di lettere di detenuti ‘in lotta’ in regime di massima sicurezza in Italia dal 2006 al 2020. Da una prospettiva situata le lettere descrivono la videoconferenza come un modo per disincarnare e ricodificare lo spazio-tempo dei detenuti, riducendoli a un simulacro: una serie di immagini, suoni e sguardi catturati da telecamere e microfoni. Questa tecnologia garantisce, attraverso una soluzione geografica materiale e virtuale, efficienza e sicurezza, ma al contempo aumenta la distanza tra il giudice, la società e l’imputato.

Keywords:geografia carceraria, videoconferenza, punizione, simulacro

  1. Asoni E. (2022). Reassessing the camp/prison dichotomy: New directions in geographic research on confinement. Progress in Human Geography, 46(6): 1349-1368. DOI: 10.1177/03091325221118578
  2. Baudrillard J. (1983). Simulations, Semiotext(e). New York: Columbia University.
  3. Bellone E.T. (2013). Private Attorney-Client Communications and the Effect of Videoconferencing in the Courtroom. Journal of International Commercial Law and Technology, 8: 24-48. http://lexiconlimited.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Videolink/magistrates.pdf
  4. Beniger J. (1986). The control revolution: Technological and economic origins of the information society. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
  5. Castel R. (1981). La gestion des risques: de l’anti-psychiatrie à l’après-psychanalyse. Paris: Minuit.
  6. Christie N. (1978). Prisons in Society, or Society as a Prison: a Conceptual Analysis. Prisons Past and Future, edited by Freeman J.C. London: Heinemann.
  7. Clarke R. (1993). The Digital Persona and its Application to Dataveillance. The Information Society, 10(2): 77-92. DOI: 10.1080/01972243.1994.9960160
  8. Davis M. (1995). Hell Factories in the Field: A Prison Industrial Complex. The Nation, 260(7): 229-234.
  9. De Mably G.B. (1789). De la législation. In: Oeuvres complètes, tomo nono. Brookline: Adamant Media Corporation.
  10. Elias N. (1939/1984). The civilizing Process. London: Blackwells.
  11. Feeley M.M., Simon J. (1992) The new penology: Notes on the emerging strategy of corrections and its implications. Criminology, 30(4): 449-474. DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-9125.1992.tb01112.x
  12. Ferri E. (1906). The positive school of criminology. London: Charles Kerr and Co.
  13. Foucault M. (1977). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Vintage Books.
  14. Gallagher M. (2010). Are schools panoptic? Surveillance and Society, 7(3/4): 262-272. DOI: 10.24908/ss.v7i3/4.4155
  15. Garland D.W. (1990). Governmentality and the problem of crime: Foucault, criminology, sociology. Theoretical criminology, 1(2): 173-214. DOI: 10.1177/1362480697001002002
  16. Gill N., Conlon D., Moran D., Burridge A. (2018). Carceral circuitry: New directions in Carceral Geography. Progress in Human Geography, 42(2): 183-204. DOI: 10.1177/0309132516671823
  17. Gilmore R.W. (2007). Golden gulag: Prisons, surplus, crisis, and opposition in globalizing California. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  18. Guagliardo V. (1997). Dei dolori e delle pene: saggio abolizionista e sull’obiezione di coscienza. Roma: Sensibili alle foglie.
  19. Hamlin M., Speer J. (2018). The politics of conceptualizing the carceral: A commentary on Moran et al. (2017). Progress in Human Geography, 42(5): 799-802. DOI: 10.1177/0309132517716997
  20. Haraway D. (1988): Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14(3): 575-599. DOI: 10.4324/9780203427415-40
  21. Hulsman L., De Celis J.B. (2001). Pene perdute: il sistema penale messo in discussione. Milano: Colibrì.
  22. Iuliano E. (2020). L’aberrante espansione delle videoconferenze: tra vecchie questioni e attuali problematiche. Archivio Penale, 4: 197-217. DOI: 10.12871/978883318073115
  23. Kluss S. (2008). Virtual Justice: The Problems with Audiovisual Appearances in Criminal Courts. Law Society Journal, 46(4). DOI: 10.3316/ielapa.200805884
  24. Lorusso S. (2017). Dibattimento a distanza vs. “autodifesa”. Diritto Penale Conteporaneo, (4): 217-223. https://dpc-rivista-trimestrale.criminaljusticenetwork.eu/pdf/DPC_Riv_Trim_4_17_Lorusso.pdf
  25. Lyon D. (2001) Surveillance Society: Monitoring Everyday Life. Buckingham: Open University Press.
  26. Mason P. (2013). Captured by the Media. London: Willan Publishing.
  27. McAtackney L. (2013). Dealing with Difficult Pasts: The Dark Heritage of Political Prisons in Transitional Northern Ireland and South Africa. Prison Service Journal, 210: 17-23. www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/sites/crimeandjustice.org.uk/files/PSJ%20210%2C%20Dealing%20with%20difficult%20pasts.pdf
  28. McKay C. (2016). Video Links from Prison: Permeability and the Carceral World. International Journal for Crime, Justice & Social Democracy, 5(1): 21-37. DOI: 10.5204/ijcjsd.v5i1.283
  29. McKay C. (2018). Video links from prison: court “appearance” within carceral space. Law, Culture and the Humanities, 14(2): 242-262. DOI: 10.1177/1743872115608350
  30. Moran D. (2013). Between outside and inside? Prison visiting rooms as liminal carceral spaces. GeoJournal, 78(2): 339-351. DOI: 10.1007/s10708-011-9442-6
  31. Moran D. (2015). Carceral Cultural Landscapes, Post-Prisons and the Spectacle of Punishment. In: Carceral Geography: Spaces and Practices of Incarceration. Abingdon on Thames: Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/9781315570853-18
  32. Moran D., Piacentini L., Pallot J. (2012). Disciplined mobility and carceral geography: Prisoner transport in Russia. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 37(3): 446-460. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2240897
  33. Moran D., Turner J., Schliehe A.K. (2018), Conceptualizing the carceral in carceral geography. Progress in Human Geography, 42(5): 666-686. DOI: 10.1177/0309132517710352
  34. Myrick A. (2004). Escape from the Carceral: Writing by American Prisoners, 1895-1916, Surveillance and Society, 2(1): 93-109. DOI: 10.24908/ss.v2i1.3329
  35. Nocente M. (2024). Narratives on Prison Governmentality: No Longer the Prison of the Past. Abingdon on Thames: Routledge.
  36. Pelot-Hobbs L. (2018). Scaling up or scaling back? The pitfalls and possibilities of leveraging federal interventions for abolition. Critical Criminology, 26(3): 423-441. DOI: 10.1007/s10612-018-9401-3
  37. Pratt J. (2000). Civilization and punishment. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 33(2): 183-201. DOI: 10.1177/000486580003300206
  38. Pratt J. (2011). Norbert Elias, the civilizing process and penal development in modern society. The Sociological Review, 59: 220-240. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-954x.2011.01986.x
  39. Rey P.J. (2012). The myth of cyberspace. The New Inquiry. Available at: http://thenewinquiry.com/essays/the-myth-of-cyberspace.
  40. Rose G. (2016). Rethinking the geographies of cultural ‘objects’ through digital technologies interface, network and friction. Progress in Human Geography, 40(3): 334-351. DOI: 10.1177/0309132515580493
  41. Rosen L. (1966). The dock – Should it be abolished? The Modern Law Review, 29(3): 289-300. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2230.1966.tb00737.x
  42. Ross J.I. (2015). Varieties of Prison Voyeurism: An Analytic/Interpretive Framework. The Prison Journal, 95(3): 397-417. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2685252
  43. Rowden E. (2011). Remote Participation and the Distributed Court: an approach to court architecture in the age of video-mediated communications. PhD Thesis, Architecture, Building and Planning, The University of Melbourne.
  44. Russell E.K., Carlton B. (2020). Counter-carceral acoustemologies: Sound, permeability and feminist protest at the prison boundary. Theoretical Criminology, 24(2): 296-313. DOI: 10.1177/1362480618769862
  45. Simon B. (2005). The Return of Panopticism: Supervision, Subjection and the New Surveillance. Surveillance & Society, 3(1): 1-20. DOI: 10.24908/ss.v3i1.3317
  46. Story B. (2019). Prison land: Mapping carceral power across neoliberal America. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
  47. Turner J. (2013). The Politics of Carceral Space: Televising Prison Life. In: Moran D., Gill N., Conlon D., eds., Carceral Spaces: Mobility and Agency in Imprisonment and Migrant Detention. Ashgate: Farnham. DOI: 10.4324/9781315570853-17
  48. Webster C.W.R. (2009). CCTV policy in the UK: Reconsidering the evidence base. Surveillance and society, 6(1): 10-22. DOI: 10.24908/ss.v6i1.3400

Marco Nocente, Civilising the Scaffold: a renewed carceral space in videoconferencing trials in "RIVISTA GEOGRAFICA ITALIANA" 1/2024, pp 72-90, DOI: 10.3280/rgioa1-2024oa17377