Psychological Effects of

Wrongful Imprisonment &

Incarceration
AN EXPOSITION

Ibifubara Desmond Lord-Banigo ©2020

 Lord-Banigo

ABSTRACT

Wrongful imprisonment as the name suggests best describes a legal situation

where a person is convicted and incarcerated in connection with a crime that he
or she has not committed. While statistics and surveys have shown a significant
rise in the trend in the past two decades, not much has been discussed on the
adverse psychological impact the victims face after they are exonerated.

This paper reviews existing literatures and examines content of surveys conducted
on exonerees by the Innocence project and other researchers, and draws a
substantive background with available information on their life and mental
experiences, post-prison. The research also identifies other notable factors that
contribute to the challenge of wrongful convictions and imprisonment in the criminal
Justice System.

Accessing contents of various interviews and personal accounts, the research

draws to the conclusion that psychological challenges are a significant problem for
exonerees; and the outcomes are highly devastating. Proper Legislation is also
proposed to create guidelines and establish clear policies on the issues that have
been identified to mar the accuracy of the judicial system in delivering just
judgments and reduce the risk of wrongful imprisonment.

i|Page
 Psychological Effects of Wrongful Imprisonment

Dedication

This work is dedicated to my good friend Ekene Deborah Jideani. Thank you for
being to me; an amazing woman, friend and confidant. Despite my short-comings.
You continue to be the best friend I have got and still, is. The words may be
lacking today, maybe, some other day I would thank you better for all the
motivation and inspiration I draw from you. Thank you.

ii | P a g e
 Lord-Banigo

Acknowledgements

It is with great duty and pleasure that I record my gratitude, firstly to my mother,
whose innumerable dispositions as my parent did not only lay for me the trajectory
of excellence in my endeavors but have also inspired greatness and awesomeness
to which I have endeared myself to many. To my subtle friends and prodigies,
your relentlessness and commitments without doubts have pushed me this far and
I want to specifically thank you. Your efforts that have in one way or another
guaranteed my continuous success, whether directly or indirectly is more than
enough motivation to have kept me going.

This piece of academic work is never complete without the thorough contributions
of all your efforts put together. Members of my immediate family, dearest friends
and confidants, partners and all of you who consistently showed your unwavering
concern to my pursuits and how diligently you had taken out time from your
precious schedules to ensure its thorough success. There is so much gratitude in
me left to go round.

My dearest Architect C.S. Enekwa, Chimbo O.E., the Oderes’, Mrs. Chika Duran-
Aghe and family and to all others herein not mentioned, you have my highest
regards.

Thank you.

iii | P a g e
 Psychological Effects of Wrongful Imprisonment

Table of Contents

Title Page

Abstract

Dedication

Acknowledgements

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction
1.1 Background of Study
1.2 Statement of the Problem
1.3 Significance of Study
1.4 Objectives
1.5 Research Questions
1.6 Limitations
1.7 Definition of Terms

2.0 Literature Review

2.1 The Criminal Justice System
2.2 Conviction [An Overview]
2.3 Understanding Sentencing and Imprisonment
2.4 An Overview of Wrongful Imprisonment
2.5 Accessing the Psychological Impact
2.6 Possible Support Mechanisms [What can be Done?]
2.7 Conclusion

iv | P a g e
 Lord-Banigo

3.0 Methodology
3.1 Research Design
3.2 Data Collection
3.3 Ethical Considerations
4.0 Research Findings
4.1 Summary and Recommendations
References

v|Page
 Lord-Banigo

1.0 Introduction
Wrongful Imprisonment has been a topic that has dominated the Criminal Justice
scene for decades; and in recent times statistics suggest a rise in this trend; in
what can be otherwise called a miscarriage of Justice.

The term imprisonment; is derived originally from Latin, “prensio” which means
“to seize”. Evidence is also suggestive of a French origin for the word itself. The
Pennsylvania Supreme court defines imprisonment as a ‘specific state” of being
physically incarcerated in a constitutional holding facility such as a prison.

In the past decades, with a significant rise in the amount of wrongful imprisonments,
essential steps have been taken to enable wrong prisoners regain their freedom;
but little have also been known about the experiences they face as they transition
to a new phase of life after they are exonerated and released.

1.1 Background of Study

(Irazola et al, 2013), in a report submitted to the United States Department of
Justice describe wrongful imprisonment as a “case” where the government
determines that the “prisoner’ did not commit the crime and subsequently suggests
the release and (or) exoneration. Wrongful imprisonment and convictions are
estimated to occur in every 1 to 5 convictions in the United States alone (Morgan,
2014) and there are public opinions to even suggest that this trend has become
an accepted reality in most common law jurisdictions according to (Campbell,
2003).

Several Literatures contain worrisome statistics at the spate of wrongful

imprisonments; and Christine Kregg assumes that the effects are “devastating” for
the families and the prisoner inclusive (Kregg, 2016). Kregg also identifies
deficient mental support for the exonerated prisoner; because of the devastating

1|Page
 Psychological Effects of Wrongful Imprisonment

effects of being imprisoned, the freed prisoner carries deep psychological wounds
of their unjust imprisonment that can take even a lifetime to heal. The exonerated
person may also face problems ranging from “unemployment, financial troubles,
poor physical and mental health, and strained family ties” (Roberts & Stanton,
2007) as quoted in (Kregg, 2016).

Some factors have been fingered as causes that may result in a person being
wrongfully imprisoned and they include fallibility of hard evidence, police ineptitude,
lawyer behaviors and even discrimination (Bell, 2008)

In south Africa, the National Prosecuting Authority holds the view that wrongful
imprisonment is “extremely rare” because the onus to prove guilt beyond
reasonable doubts lies on the government but in other countries, wrongful
imprisonment still suggests a significant lacuna in the criminal justice system;
peculiar to the nation itself.

Apart from the damaging impact that may affect the wrongfully imprisoned, the
victim of the crime is not left out as well. (Irazola et al, 2013) hold the opinion
that when a prisoner is exonerated from a crime, the victim may also experience
traumatic psychological changes that may range from fear, helplessness, guilt and
even depression. According to them, the psychological impact of the wrongful
imprisonment may even be worse on the original crime victim than the exonerated.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

Mark Godsey writes about Convicted murderer, Fusi Mofokeng in a 2013 journal
for a blog. The writer details the story and travails of Fusi who was wrongly
convicted for murder in 1993 and was imprisoned for 19 years. Today, Fusi
struggles for his personal freedom and fight to clear his name and reintegrate into
society (Godsey, 2013).

2|Page
 Lord-Banigo

There are many more cases like that of Fusi Mofokeng and the increasing trend
of wrong convictions and imprisonments that question the credibility of the criminal
justice system to deliver accurate judgements. Many incidences of eye witness
errors and other procedural deficiencies have all contributed and compounded the
problem of wrong imprisonment (Shermer et al, 2011; Wise et al, 2007) but
certainly; it does not end there.

The aftermath of the process of wrong imprisonment is where this study is focused
and the study investigates the psychological impact on the released or the
exonerated. (Smith & Hattery, 2011) emphasizes that re-integration into society
has been one of the biggest challenges of the wrongfully convicted. Most times,
the exonerated or released person is denied freedom of participation in most social
activities and might even be subject to a racist or social discriminatory undertone.
Difficulties in getting a job, raising a Family, or even starting a career are some
of the psychosocial effects associated with wrongful imprisonment (Morgan, 2014)
and the impact is mentally “devastating.”

1.3 Significance of the Study

This research investigates the psychological effects of wrongful imprisonment and
appraises the procedural efficiency of the criminal justice system in the
administration of justice that is accurate and deserving. Sufficient literature and
statistics exist for wrongful convictions and imprisonment but are also lacking; in
evaluating the adverse psychological impact such judgements have on its victims.
(Campbell 2003) holds the view that whilst there is literature to support the
trend in wrongful imprisonment; no research to date has thoroughly examined how
persons live and cope with the aftermath of wrongful imprisonment. The study
adds to the existing body of knowledge in this regard and provide material for
researchers who wish to investigate further on the topic. The study also provides

3|Page
 Psychological Effects of Wrongful Imprisonment

a material basis for investigation into the efficient administration of criminal justice
for researchers and also for continuous research into other problems that may
arise as a result of miscarriage of justice.

1.4 Objectives of the Study

This research will be useful to determine the following.

i. An insight into the life of wrongfully imprisoned people

ii. Arrest, conviction and life in prison
iii. The criminal justice processes
iv. The overall consequence of going to prison

1.5 Research Questions

This research seeks to answer the following questions

i. How efficient is the criminal justice system in delivering Error free

convictions?
ii. What are the consequences of wrongful imprisonment?
iii. What are the psychological experiences of persons wrongfully convicted and
imprisoned?
iv. To what extent does the criminal justice system address the problem of
wrongful imprisonment

1.6 Limitations of the Study

Getting sufficient accounts to enrich the content of this research became quite a
challenge as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic that had whelmed the world and
brought governments to lockdown and restrict movements. At the time of writing
research, there was little or no access to the national registry to obtain necessary
4|Page
 Lord-Banigo

information on the number of wrongful convictions and exonerations; therefore,

information gathered from the review of cases was limited to those cases identified
in the review and does not represent an exhaustive list of all wrongful convictions
during the designated time period.

Also due to the exploratory nature of this research, the research findings cannot
be generalized or inferred beyond the specific cases identified herewith. Other
factors that limited the study were time and financial constraints.

1.7 Definition of Terms

putting someone in prison or in jail as lawful

Imprisonment
punishment
a final judgment of guilty in a criminal case and
Conviction
the punishment that is imposed
The condition of being relieved from blame or
Exoneration
obligation
the determination of a person's innocence or guilt
trial
by due process of law
Accused A defendant in a criminal proceeding
A correctional institution where persons are
Prison
confined while on trial or for punishment
A person declared innocent of a crime and
Exoneree
released from prison
Incarcerate Confine a person to a prison

5|Page
 Psychological Effects of Wrongful Imprisonment

2.0 Theoretical Framework and Review of Literatures

“No matter what happens to you, you are constantly put under this eye of distrust
that you can never shake… ‘Don’t go near him.’ I just left my stuff and walked
out. It never, ever ends. It never ends. It never ends. It never will be ended.” –
Kirk Noble Bloodsworth, (Scott, 2010).

Kirk Bloodsworth just like others, suffer the same ordeal after they have been
exonerated from crimes they were previously and wrongfully convicted for. Scott
writes that Kirk Bloodsworth was imprisoned for nine years, and had spent two
on death row for the murder and rape of an underaged child; and even though
he had been exonerated, he continues to suffer. Just like him, other persons who
have also been wrongfully convicted and imprisoned suffer varying degrees of
mental illnesses and social rejection as a consequence, and that is very certain,
says Scott (Scott, 2010).

Recent studies have revealed that the emotional trauma exonerated people suffer
can be devastating and they are left to live with the experience for the rest of
their lives; and while some grapple with it lightly, others can even resort to crime
(Armour, 2004).

2.1 The Criminal Justice System

A journal published by the Kent State University reveals that the way criminal
behaviour is defined by a society is largely fundamental to its response to crime.

While crime can be defined as an “unlawful act” that is punishable under the
authority of the state or the law, (Lindsay, 2008) notes that there is no
universally accepted definition in modern criminal law. Lindsay holds that crime is
simply categorized by the law that institutes it; which means something is only a
crime if the law says so (Ibid.) (Martin, 2003) also define crime as an act or
6|Page
 Lord-Banigo

offence that cause harm to an individual, the community, society or state and
therefore is forbidden and punishable by law.

Criminal justice deals with the way and mannerism a society or state responds
and manages crime. The administration of justice still remains a fundamental
function of any society since crime and criminal behaviour is almost inevitable. A
KSU Journal writes that criminal behavior is derived from a theory of rational
choice that assumes that the choice to commit crime is a consequence of logical
judgement of “cost versus reward” (KSU, 2018). “Punishment” is also
propounded by the same theory to “deter” the act of crime by sufficiently rationing
cost to outweigh the reward.

The dictionary defines “Punishment” as the infliction of pain or fine, or the

administration of penalty or chastisement by the judicial arm of the state but
scholars believe that the fundamental purpose of punishment is not just to inflict
pain but to also make the offender realize the gravity of the offence committed
and to repent and atone for it.

(Olutola, 2017) observes that the precise need to provide justice for victims of
crime and create deterrence within the ambit of the law has birthed the criminal
justice system that is and still remains one of the oldest institutions of the world.
Olutola notes that the system has been saddled with the responsibility of
apprehending, punishing and rehabilitating individuals who threaten the peace and
safety of other citizens as well as the state. For the common good, convention
holds the infliction of punishment as the most effective method of teaching criminals
to be more cooperative and law abiding (ibid.)

7|Page
 Psychological Effects of Wrongful Imprisonment

2.2 Conviction
Conviction is defined in law as the judgment or resolution that finds a defendant
guilty of a criminal offence (Bryan, 2000). According to Wikipedia encyclopedia,
there are cases where the application of the word may not be outrightly validated,
but that is peculiar to the jurisdiction it is being used.

When a crime has been committed, A defendant may be acquitted or discharged

under the law even when proven guilty of the offence. This can occur in very
peculiar cases and most times are consequent of the procedural inefficiencies that
continuously plague the criminal justice system. In very adverse situations, the
guilty will be acquitted of a crime and an innocent – people innocent of crimes
committed by others or for crimes that never occurred – (Zalman, 2017) will
be convicted.

In the event of such occurrence, the errors that result to the conviction of an
innocent person can be referred as a miscarriage of justice (Garner, 2000).

Understanding the purpose of conviction under these terms is necessary, so as

to create a direct perspective on the consequence of wrong conviction and
imprisonment.

2.3 Sentencing and Imprisonment

In the US and in some other nations, an accused person can only be found “not
guilty” only if found not to be culpable of the crime alleged. Through the adversarial
system of criminal justice as practiced by most countries, the determination of
guilt is carried out in the presence of the law court and competent attorneys who
serve for the prosecution and defense as they struggle to prove their cases until
a verdict is reached and a sentence is passed.

8|Page
 Lord-Banigo

After a sentence is passed, the guilty offender may be incarcerated in a correctional

holding facility such as “prison.” According to the Britannica encyclopedia, the
prison is described as an institution for the confinement of persons remanded in
custody by a judicial authority or people who have been deprived of liberty
following conviction for a crime (BEp). There are varying degrees of crime that
may require a prison sentence. Imprisonment may also be referred as the process
of being held in a prison. According to the Wikipedia encyclopedia citing the
applicable law in the US, imprisonment or sentence refers only the incarceration
or confinement of an individual after it has been ordered in the court of law and
regardless of any other imposition or suspension of the execution of the law,
either in whole or in part.

The 21st century has seen a multi-dimensional change in the way prisons are
managed, and Olutola notes that gross human rights abuse and poor welfare
among others are among the chief factors that project the calls for alternatives to
prisons (Olutola, 2017)

(Ahire, 1990) also observes that infrastructures required for necessary correction
of criminal offenders and skill acquisition programs are lacking and therefore
prisons have now become places were inmates are merely confined and allowed
to waste away. (Olonisakin et al, 2017) reveal that prisons were made to be
corrective and reformative centers and the holding of prisoners was to serve
retribution and repentance, at least at inception but such is not the case as
prisons have become ultimate centers for varying degrees of atrocities. Even the
prison officials have become accomplices to illegality. Extortion, intimidation,
stealing, denial of medical needs, rape, extrajudicial killings, mismanagement of
funds and extreme violence are some of the identified activities that go on in
prisons (Hembe, 2016; Onyegbula, 2016).

9|Page
 Psychological Effects of Wrongful Imprisonment

2.4 Wrongful Imprisonment – [A case Study]

(Marshall, 1994) holds the opinion that the increasing spate of crime and
criminal behaviour has resulted in society being more severe in how it convicts
offenders and even those it suspects. In the past 50 years there have been an
upward trend for crime rate and so has the level of punishment relatively meted
out to sanction offenders. That being the case, while the criminal justice system
also tries to justify the process of crime management and the administration of
justice, there has been numerous criticisms into the reliability and accuracy of the
entire process to convict and punish actual offenders instead of the innocent.

There have been significant media attention given to wrongful imprisonment since
the rise in the trend in the last two decades. (Bryan, 2009) refers wrongful
conviction and imprisonment as a miscarriage of justice and describes it as a
situation where a person is wrongly punished for a committed crime. in other
words, wrongful imprisonment can occur when a person is detained, interrogated
and isolated for a crime they did not commit (Weigand, 2009) and (Wilson,
2002) says it amounts to torture by human design.

While the term can apply to other errors that mar the judicial process in
administering justice; this study will focus mainly on wrongful imprisonment being
a direct consequence of the criminal justice system. The Wikipedia encyclopedia
reveal that most criminal justice systems have means to quash or overturn wrong
convictions but the processes are painstaking and may take lengths of years for
a victim to achieve exoneration. Sometimes the victim is not exonerated from the
crime until the innocent may have been executed, or served the sentence or even
died.
10 | P a g e
 Lord-Banigo

The Innocence project estimates that in the United States alone, between 3 to
5% of prison inmates are innocent for the crimes they were convicted and
sentenced for (TIP, 2014). Other empirical studies support this claim with several
statistical demonstrations to suggest error rates in sentences handed out for
homicides, felony and varying degrees of sexual misconduct. (Gross et al, 2005)
believe that there are more than 10,000 wrong convictions and that about 4000-
5000 eventually go to prison. The Criminal Justice system of South Africa is
reported to have no official record for exoneration as the legal system does not
essentially permit so and even though an inmate is able to contend his case or
prove innocence, there is no guarantee for freedom (Godsey, 2013).

While exonerations officially relieve and vindicate a person of a crime, the statistics
often misrepresent the figures between wrongful imprisonments and total
exonerations since the steps to achieve legal exonerations and even the lack of
official record keeping have all been identified as encumbrances of the entire
process (Zalman, 2017). Steven Witsosky also holds the opinion that since trials
are products of human judgments then infallibility is almost inevitable. The analogy
that scientific findings are virtually infallible but any mistakes in the process can
alter the final conclusions may be used in this case to understand the logical
inaccuracy of criminal trials. (Witsosky, 1997).

Witsosky emphasizes that ‘human error” has been a major flaw to the process
and (Furman, 2003; Campbell, 2003) supports this claim. According to Furman,
mistaken identity has been blamed for so many wrong convictions. In furtherance
of the above, Witsosky adds that “eyewitnesses may make mistakes, snitches
may tell lies, confessions can be fabricated” racism can trump the truth, Lab tests
can be rigged, defense lawyers can sleep and even the prosecutors can also lie.
These so-called errors reinforce the other, and flaw the entire justice system in
many ways.

11 | P a g e
 Psychological Effects of Wrongful Imprisonment

In the United States and England, eyewitness misidentification has been blamed
as the most single factor that has led to wrongful imprisonments (Huff, 1996).
Huff gives a detailed psychological perspective of the situation and apprises the
workability of the human mind. There is also the opinion that eyewitness
misidentification is exacerbated by the persuasive desire that is inspired by witness
testimony given with confidence but while the verity of this can also be debated,
Huff believes that misidentifications are fraught with genuine mistakes and not
deliberate intents to nail or frame the innocent (Huff, 1996).

Ismail also blames the trend of wrongful imprisonments on Human lethargy

(Ismail,2005) or in other words, procedural inefficiency (Doyle, 2010). Doyle
believes that wrongful convictions are not just products of human fallibility but a
result of other failures of the criminal justice system (ibid.)

(Witsosky, 1997) maintains that most imprisonments and executions are products
of negligence, inadequate assistance and malicious exploitation of the criminal
justice system by the authority. Supporting this claim is (Furman, 1997) who
suggests that despite the fact that due diligence and professionalism is expected
from primary players in the criminal justice system, pressure to prosecute cases
can eventually lead them to slightly “bend the rules”. Prosecutorial Misconduct
often results in critical exculpatory evidence being withheld from the defense in
clear violation of the extant laws of most jurisdictions; and this in turn will clearly
affect proof and weaken the submission of the defense in most cases (Zalman,
2017). (Gershman, 2001) also suggests that prosecutorial misconduct is linked
to a culture of “extreme adversity” approach to law; to win at all cost thereby
creating inherent overzealousness that subsequently results in an uneven playing
field for the defendants whether guilty or innocent if represented by an unprepared
or incompetent counsel.

Griffin explains that lack of a proper defense may increase the risk of wrongful
imprisonment (Griffin, 2001) and according to her, when the defense does not
12 | P a g e
 Lord-Banigo

properly and adequately carry out the job of safeguarding the rights of the accused,
it may come with very unfortunate consequences (ibid). She reveals that lack of
skill, experience and preparation on the part of the lawyer may result in bad
decisions and failure to prove the innocence of the accused. She also pointed
out that negative attitude of outrightly believing that the accused is guilty of the
crime ab initio can lead to a failure in proper investigation and adequate
engagement of all valuable mechanisms that is aimed at determining proof in the
case.

While situational conditions may vary from country to country, Griffin further reveals
that several researches evidently support that lack of preparation on the part of
the defense counsel positively correlates the rising trend of wrong convictions and
imprisonments. In the US, there are cases that suggest that the counsel had no
prior knowledge of the defendants’ background but relied on the data and facts
provided by the prosecution; without conducting an independent investigation into
the leads of the case. Other authors hold that due to a significant lack in
preparation and skill, the defense counsel is almost unable to respond to the
prosecutor’s contest and prove cases beyond the doubt; let alone even contend
the judges’ sentence recommendation. In an amendment to the Florida Rules of
Judicial Administration, quoted in (Ismail, 2005), it is noted that incompetence
on the part of the defense has led to many disastrous consequences for cases
under trial.

(Ismail, 2005) also quotes (Griffin, 2001) to identify police misconduct as a

notable factor that could consequently lead to a miscarriage of justice; cum
wrongful imprisonment. According to Ismail, Griffin holds the opinion that the police
usually believe they can or have resolved a suspect’s culpability basically by arrest
and subsequent detention and will sometimes ignore significant evidence that may
prove otherwise. (Belloni & Hodgson, 2000) recall that there have been many
cases of wrongful imprisonments that had involved the police fabricating substantial
13 | P a g e
 Psychological Effects of Wrongful Imprisonment

evidence or coercing confessions; and this style of police investigation is largely

designed to confirm the suspect as a criminal. Prosecutorial Misconduct involving
the police has also been linked to the concealment or suppression of exculpatory
evidence that would have been significant in the determination of a criminal case.
In the UK and US, prosecutorial misconduct holds some of the most tally for
incidences of wrongful imprisonments (Griffin, 2001).

The law also empowers the police or law enforcement to “haul” out information
from those who do not voluntarily provide it (McConville, 1991). McConville also
holds the view that same method that is used to extract information from
uncooperative criminals can also be used to coerce the innocent to confess to a
crime falsely and implicate themselves. From (Parlof, 1993), the police can use
several tactics which include pressure and sometimes torture to break and extract
information from suspects; and the impact can also coerce vulnerable and innocent
suspects to tender false testimonies. There are also other scholarly explanations
that adduce to the claim on the use of varying degrees of force including Mental
coercion and inducement. All these tactics as have been earlier said, can be
counter-productive and the result is often the rendering of false confessions that
subsequently lead to wrong convictions. (Witsosky, 1997).

(Ismail, 2005) cites “jurors or judges’ mindset” as another typical factor that
can affect the determination of a criminal case; and goes further to demonstrate
the assertion. According to him, a 1992 poll had suggested that over 28% of
jurors believe that a defendant is guilty or probably guilty before the commencement
of the trial and such pre-judgements can often hamper an extreme or careful
scrutiny of the submissions of the prosecution, thus increasing the risk of wrongfully
convicting the innocent (ibid).

Several survey research conducted by criminologists may have not addressed the
prime issue of wrongful imprisonment but (Zalman, 2014) also believes that
statistical and empirical studies conducted in recent years have equally assessed
14 | P a g e
 Lord-Banigo

the opinions of the fundamental participants of the criminal justice system and the
results therefore have also created a deepened perspective on the problem of
wrong convictions and imprisonment.

2.5 Accessing the Psychological Impact

While sufficient empirical contributions on wrongful convictions an imprisonment
exist, (Irazola, 2013) correlate the fact that little work or none has been done
to access the psychological impact on the wrongly convicted suspect or the
exonerated. Konvisser explains that the consequence of prolong adaptation to the
deprivations and frustrations of prison will be greater psychological distress and
long-term dysfunction (Konvisser, 2012).

The National Registry of Exonerations report that about 1700 prisoners in the
United States were exonerated after serving an average term of 10 years. While
forensic evidence helped to exonerate about 25% of the total number, 7% were
on death row for crimes they had not committed (Kregg, 2016). Kregg also
points that wrongful imprisonments carry a disproportionate toll on people of color,
particularly African Americans who make up almost 60% of the total exonerations.
(Roberts & Stanton, 2007) indicate that when the inmates are released, they
are free; but carry psychic wounds and stigma of their long term and unjust
imprisonment.

Prisoners develop reactionary strategies to cope with the experience of

imprisonment, and these strategies are equally influenced by individual backgrounds
and experiences (Iannozzi, 2017). She holds that whatever ways or mechanisms
prisoners develop to adapt to the prison environment are most likely how they
would become upon release and further studies have revealed the difficulties they
face trying to reintegrate into society.
15 | P a g e
 Psychological Effects of Wrongful Imprisonment

Iannozzi also highlighted the “reactionary strategies” or “coping mechanisms”

adopted by prisoners; [Violence, rebellion, cooperation, resistance] and many others
mentioned by Roger Matthews in his book “An introduction to the Sociology of
Imprisonment” (Matthews, 1999) and cited in (Iannozzi, 2017)

According to (Weigand & Anderson, 2007), a wide range of support services,

including material and immaterial; are basically needed for a wrongfully imprisoned
person to effectively reintegrate and function well in the society. Basic needs such
as employment, housing, transport, education, physical and mental care are
immediately needed to assist the prisoner upon release (TIP, 2009). Weigand
also suggests that even though compensation exists for a few, remunerations do
very little to cushion the outcome of wrongful imprisonment (Weigand, 2009).

Kregg further reveals that wrongful imprisonment is traumatizing and disorienting

(Kregg, 2016). Exonerees face severe mental health outcomes unique to their
conviction but the damage is almost uniform among prisoners. (Grounds, 2005)
also suggest that fear and violence are the major problems associated with prisons,
and prisoners can develop severe or negative psychological adaptations to the
prison life that can lead to adverse social outcomes (Haney, 2001). Haney also
mentions that diminished self-efficacy and self-esteem, hypervigilance, emotional
suppression, social withdrawal, aggressive behavior, and post-traumatic stress
disorders are some of the reactions and behaviors that are most likely among
exonerees (ibid).

Iannozzi describes violence as a survival technique in prisons and the fear of

violence becomes a norm and part of everyday prison life (Iannozzi, 2015). In
a study conducted by (Grounds, 2004) respondents mentioned they had to live
in fear of their safety for several years as a result of the humiliations and threats
they experienced during their time in prison. Those who struggle to maintain
innocence while incarcerated even become more vulnerable as targets to many
forms of physical abuse from other prisoners and even prison officials. Grounds
16 | P a g e
 Lord-Banigo

also report that most exonerees will become aggressive and intimidating so they
can cope with the hostility of the prison environment (Grounds, 2004).

According to (Kregg, 2016), the unjust arrest and detention and the forced
confessions or even torture amid innocence equally increase the adverse effect of
long-term imprisonment. In a descriptive study on 18 exonerees, (Grounds,
2005) provides a rare insight to the scope of the problem. The findings of that
study indicate that the long-term psychological effects of wrongful imprisonment
manifests after release and exoneration according to Kregg’s observation on
Ground’s Study (Kregg, 2016). Iannozzi says the adverse outcomes can even
lead to suicide as a result of depression (Iannozzi, 2015) and (Kregg, 2016;
Konvisser, 2012) discovered that these exonerees suffer from severe mental
health problems and personality disorders that resemble the experiences of war
veterans and torture survivors who underwent extreme trauma. (Iannozzi, 2015)
also reveal an “obsessive preoccupation” of the details and evidences surrounding
the case as a unique experience of a wrongfully convicted inmate. They have to
wait painstakingly and will have to adjust to the prison system; cope with the
disappointments of delay and probable denial in the justice system and may even
have difficulties gaining privileges or parole as a consequence of maintaining
innocence.

A wrongfully convicted person will also have to deal with the stigma of conviction;
and most times struggle with intense hatred (Sc0tt, 2010). Neil Miller was
wrongly convicted and had spent 10 years in prison before his exoneration.
According to him, he had a very profound respect and love for women since he
had sisters and a daughter, aunts and female cousins whom he so cherished but
upon conviction, he grappled between emotional stability and vengeful empathy
occasioned by the proceedings of the trial. Neil recounts his feeling of frustration
and hatred on the judge and prosecutor, the witness who pointed her fingers at
him, the police and everyone who engineered his conviction and incarceration. He
17 | P a g e
 Psychological Effects of Wrongful Imprisonment

was imprisoned for 10 years and recall that his daughter was aged; three, at the
time of his incarceration. By the time of his release, his daughter was thirteen;
and according to him, his wife never brought her to see him and even believes
that he was guilty of the crime. His wrongful imprisonment destroyed his marriage
and family, he said and even though he is happy for regaining his freedom, he
still remains “unhappy” at the loss of his family and his home (Scott, 2010).

The anxiety of reuniting with family has also been identified to be one big
challenge among exonerees. The mechanisms to cope with the prison life ensures
survival in the prison but can equally wreak havoc on their “home lives” upon
release (Wilson, 2002). They may even experience shock and “unreality”
according to Kregg as a consequence of their abrupt release and may find it very
hard to make decisions for themselves and adapt to the normalcy of everyday
living (Kregg, 2016). Kregg uses the word “loss” to describe the difficulty
achieved in shifting from incarceration to exoneration. The realm of loss, cited in
(Westervelt & Cook, 2010) according to Kregg describes the loss of security,
feelings, loved ones and self that follows life after incarceration and this is due
to the fact that exonerees face drastic cutoffs from family to prison and prison
back to reality (Kregg, 2016). This abruptness can result in feelings of loss
and estrangement that may be impossible to reconcile (ibid).

Self-loss and loss of self-esteem is another major psychological problem

encountered by the wrongly imprisoned. According to (Wilson, 2002), the free
familiar “self” dies and a new incarcerated self is born in its place, accompanied
by a constant battle of “self” in the mind. The result, is an obscured personality
“isolated on the inside” in the “prison” of the mind. In reality, it creates a
damaging assault to the sense of self-worth and personal dignity. (ibid). While
shame and guilt also torment the prisoner, the feelings of victimization by the
legal system never cease.

18 | P a g e
 Lord-Banigo

(Scott, 2010) further adds that, rebuilding and reconnecting family relationships
can be emotionally draining for exonerees; and sometimes most will return
hardened, unemotional (Wilson, 2002), broken, withdrawn and without the
capacity for intimate feelings anymore (Kregg, 2016). Several respondents from
Grounds study describe the horror of being unable to love back their families as
they did before and even find it difficult to resettle back into their communities
(Grounds, 2005).

Most exonerees often develop a heightened distrust in people and their environment
and may resort to self-isolation to survive even after imprisonment. Another factor;
Fear, also leaves the exoneree mentally unsettled, says Kregg. (Kregg, 2016).
The palpable fear of being rearrested leads to extreme paranoia and hyper-
vigilance in some exonerees and most would prefer not to even leave their homes
unaccompanied.

(Iannozzi, 2015) agrees that the impact of wrongful imprisonment is palpable

and permanent. Relying on statistics, there is a prevalent mental health crisis
mostly among the exonerated than the entire prison population (ibid). Anxiety,
depression, hopelessness, frustration, grief and even suicide have all been identified
as common consequences of wrongful imprisonment (Clow, 2015) and (Iannozzi,
2015) clarifies that these outcomes are specific to the wrongfully imprisoned and
are best discussed under the literature of trauma. Westervelt explains that extreme
feeling of anger and distrust, coupled with grief over losses indicate trauma at
the core of wrongful imprisonment (Westervelt, 2012).

Weigand also emphasizes that the mental health disorders experienced by

exonerees are very similar to victims of brain accidents and veterans of war and
(Ehlers et al, 2000) even observe a perceived mental defeat and loss of
autonomy as a “hallmark” associated with wrong conviction and imprisonment.
According to Scott’s observation of (Grounds, 2004) study, many of the
respondents described a “struggle” in fitting in the new reality, post-prison. Some
19 | P a g e
 Psychological Effects of Wrongful Imprisonment

had to learn skills anew, including use of domestic appliances they were once
familiar with. Some also mentioned difficulties in crossing the road and they had
to do most things accompanied. Feelings of intense anxiety and embarrassment
also made them unsettled and fearful (Scott, 2010) and their inability to adjust
efficiently threatened their sense of hope in the future.

Studies also show that, personality changes are most common among exonerees
(Iannozzi, 2015). This personality change, manifests with characters that were
not previously seen such as hostility and distrust, social withdrawal, etc. Grounds
says that personality changes are common outcomes of PTSD – (Post Traumatic
Stress Disorder) or psychological Traumas and exonerees have reported constant
feeling of threat and estrangement (Grounds, 2005).

There are other indications that the consequence of wrongful imprisonment can
lead to substance abuse and other severe psychosomatic disorders ranging from
chronic insomnia, hallucinations, restlessness and even amnesia.

2.6 Possible Support Mechanisms [What can be Done?]

According to (Campbell, 2013), the long-term effects of the prison effect on
prisoners is deleterious, and is even worse when compared on those that have
been wrongly imprisoned. She opines that exonerees are “victims” of a miscarriage
of justice and the adverse effects of their confinement is even exacerbated by the
unjust nature of their imprisonment (ibid). Infact, some victims suffer from
irreversible and disabling psychological damage (Iannozzi, 2015).

In dealing with the problem, (Iannozzi, 2015) emphasizes that societal perceptions
about convictions and imprisonment must be examined in order to understand how
exonerees must cope. Konvisser holds the opinion that there is much to be done
and strategies for support can be derived from the accounts of exonerees, who

20 | P a g e
 Lord-Banigo

have discovered creative and resourceful strategies that have enabled them cope,
post-prison (Konvisser, 2012).

Iannozzi further highlighted that majority of most exonerees require a publicized

formal apology from the justice system to assume responsibility, deny their
culpability and alleviate the societal stigma. Westervelt notes how such
acknowledgments were meaningful to the life of the exonerees and also described
their gratitude, for being offered (Westervelt, 2012).

Another strategy, Konvisser discovered; is that the exonerees reject to be labelled

as ex-convicts and usually withdraw from their former inmates to re-align back
to their former lives. The need to consciously withdraw from other inmates is
occasioned by the fact that the exonerees feel inherently different from the others.
(Clow, 2011). Some even resort to religion and faith as their last hope
(Konvisser, 2012; Campbell, 2013) to promote emotional healing and recovery.
(Scott, 2010) holds accounts of exonerees who, according to them, “turn to
God for strength and the Bible to find Peace”.

Others tend to pre-occupy themselves with details and facts of the case. Campbell
reveals that this behavior post-prison was focused on achieving full legal
exoneration, post-release (Campbell, 2013). More so, many others turn to
activism, to help them make peace with their predicament (Scott, 2010). The
exonerees go forward to tell their story and use that as a rallying point to help
other prisoners and mentor them.

The criminal Justice system also offers financial compensation to most exonerees
to assist them with rebuilding back their lives but (Scott, 2010) notes that
statutory compensation is not enough even though they are not universally paid
and that the payment neither addresses their immediate needs. Scott understands
that statutory compensations take years to be paid in full while exonerees struggle
with adjustment problems and psychological and emotional pain that needs to be

21 | P a g e
 Psychological Effects of Wrongful Imprisonment

tended as quickly as possible to enable them experience life better. For Westervelt,
there is often no help at all and exonerees are forced to depend on assistance
from family, friends, local and even legal advocates to survive but on the other
hand, no amount of compensation and assistance can equally confront the adverse
mental challenges (Westervelt, 2012)

According to (Grounds, 2004), most exonerees who were compensated usually

return in greater debts because of reckless spending due to their inexperience in
handling finance. Grounds advocates the adoption of a social policy that oversee
that the compensation is effectively allocated to cover their needs and obligations.

Reasonable employment and healthcare have also been advocated under the
compensation system to advance psycho-social healing for the exonerees. Internal
struggles are worsened by public perception and stigma and (Clow et al, 2009)
suggest that government and media campaigns can positively affect perception and
promote better community reception of exonerees. Even Counselling for family
members have been equally advocated so that a better understanding of the
problem can be achieved; and better opportunities for adjustment and coping can
also be provided.

2.7 Conclusion
(Ismail, 2005) emphasizes that the criminal justice system is prone to errors
since it is heavily reliant on human deductions and analysis in its determination
of judgement, but however a thorough and diligent process is equally expected to
ensure that the rate of wrongful convictions and incarcerations are reduced to the
barest minimum.

Substantive and interdisciplinary literature is further required to understand the

psychological impact of wrongful incarceration as Campbell explains that some
judicial systems have few available methods to rectify the situation (Campbell,
22 | P a g e
 Lord-Banigo

2013). Several Recommendations and policies have been initiated in recent

times; aimed at preventing the occurrences of wrongful imprisonments and more
research and action into managing life and psychological health after prison have
equally been advocated. Campbell holds that these policies and recommendations
are an important step into ensuring that factors or practices that can lead to
wrongful imprisonment are quickly identified and mitigated.

23 | P a g e
 Psychological Effects of Wrongful Imprisonment

3.0 Design and Methodology

This section will discuss the methodological choice and the research design
adopted in the study. In addition, the processes required to analyze the findings
of the research were also outlined and discussed.

3.1 Research Design

The descriptive design method is adopted in this study; though (Clow, 2011)
suggests there are no unique methods or paradigm to investigate the problem.
Other studies related to the topic have been descriptive or through surveys and
personal interviews (ibid).

3.2 Data collection

The research relied on information gotten from the personal accounts of exonerees
captured in interviews by the Innocence project and a review of other cases,
captured by the American Criminal Law Briefing on Wrongful conviction. Other
academic sources also contributed reasonable information and statistics that were
used to enrich the content of this research and offer more insight. Other secondary
information was obtained from a systematic review of existing literatures.

A review of exonerated cases between a six-year period submitted to the United

States Department of Justice was concluded by the ICF in 2011 and findings
provided important insights into the scope and impact of the problem. 265 cases
were included in the scope of that study (Irazola et al, 2011)

Zievva Konvisser also provides an extensive literature and theoretical consideration

on the psychological impacts of wrongful conviction on female exonerees
(Konvisser, 2012). Konvisser admits that most research on the topic had focused
primarily on male prisoners and studies seem to be lacking in addressing the
24 | P a g e
 Lord-Banigo

mental impact on the female population. Konvisser was able to analyze several
databases tracking wrong convictions in the United States; data from the Centre
for Wrong Convictions (CWC) at the Northwestern University School of Law
revealed that 41 cases out of 908 wrong convictions involved women (ibid.)

Mark Godsey was also able to identify two cases in his 2010 Journal, exploring
the wrongful imprisonment of Fusi Mofokeng and Tshokolo Mokoena; jailed for
murder for nearly two decades until DNA evidence proved their innocence. Godsey
writes that even though they have been exonerated, there is no clear policy from
the Justice system in South Africa to document exoneration (Godsey, 2011)

Statistics from the National Registry of exonerations in the United States reveal
that 893 of the 1900 exonerations listed in 2016 were cases including African
Americans (Gross et al, 2017) suggesting a racial undertone to the number of
wrongful imprisonments. Gross suggests that most murder exonerees captured
under the statistics were affected by a range of discriminatory practices that
included unconscious bias to explicit acts of racism. The survey also revealed that
African-Americans are five times more likely to go to prison for drug related
offences than white counterparts (ibid).

A Survey on 23 respondents who provided direct services to victims of violent

crimes or wrongfully imprisoned individuals after exoneration was also accessed.
The survey was structured to enable the respondents answer various questions
that examined their working relationships with the victims. Data was accessed from
(Irazola et al, 2011). A case study was also conducted in 2012 with the
personal accounts of victims to inform various findings of previous surveys with a
contrast to their needs and experiences post-exoneration.

In the American Criminal Law Brief Journal, Leslie Scott documents personal
accounts of several exonerated prisoners and examines the psychological outcomes

25 | P a g e
 Psychological Effects of Wrongful Imprisonment

of their prison experience (Scott, 2010). This journal provided useful details that
have hitherto informed the findings of this study as well.

3.3 Ethical Considerations

The existence of the Covid-19 Pandemic hampered movement and made the
collection of primary data quite impossible. Social distancing was a contributing
factor to the collection of primary data hence the primary reliance on existing
surveys.

However, intellectual resources were properly cited to avoid plagiarism and statistical
evidence properly reviewed to prevent misrepresentation. On the basis of
confidentiality, only information deducted from open source documents and surveys
were considered for use in this research.

4.1 Research Findings

The ICF survey and statistics from the National Registry on Exonerations revealed
a significant racial undertone in the trend of wrongful conviction cases and
imprisonments. Cases involving blacks in the number of exoneration cases reviewed
in the study was a staggering 49%. The observation suggests a positive correlation
between race and the likelihood to be wrongly imprisoned.

Based on personal accounts of 200 exonerees captured by the Innocence project,

an average term of 12 years had been served in prison. With staggering statistics,
the Innocence project notes that 60% of the exonerees had spent over one -
third of their lives in prison. The Innocence project also observed that majority of
them spent longer times in prison as a result of maintaining their innocence (TIP,
2016)

26 | P a g e
 Lord-Banigo

Accounts from 154 out of 200 exonerees reveal convictions were based on eye-
witness misidentification. Eye witness misidentification has also been identified as
the leading cause of wrongful imprisonments, followed by invalidated / improper
forensics (Irazola, 2011). 130 cases based on forensic errors or fraud were
also reported bringing the analyzed statistic to 77% and 65% respectively. (TIP,
2016). Another 25% of the imprisonments were based on false confessions and
admissions.

The Innocence project also revealed that out of the 200 cases examined only,
45% (90) were compensated.

Examining the accounts recorded in Leslie Scott’s journal reveal that Depression,
Anxiety and PTSD [Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder] were common psychological
problems wrongfully imprisoned people face.

Other forms of psychiatric distresses including personality disorders and insomnia.

According to Scott, who also observed Grounds study noted that Grounds inferred
his study on three categories of psychological problems (Scott, 2010); the first
category covered symptoms of PTSD and is consequent to specific instances of
people who experienced violence in prison or following arrest. The symptoms of
PTSD included [Nightmares of assault, panic attacks, extreme shyness, palpable
fear, and inferiority complex]. 12 of the respondents covered under Grounds study,
fell under this category (ibid).

On the second category, grounds covered 14 cases of personality disorders.

Personality disorders included hostility and mistrust, social withdrawal, hopelessness,
aggression and feelings of estrangement. According to Scott, only three respondents
had symptoms that could not be readily classified. Under the third category,
additional psychiatric issues were diagnosed including substance use and abuse,
violent paranoia, and Grounds also noted that 10 men covered in the study
suffered depression since after their release (Scott, 2010). Campbell also noted

27 | P a g e
 Psychological Effects of Wrongful Imprisonment

that respondents from her study revealed that their experiences have further fueled
anger and hatred towards the justice system.

4.2 Summary and Recommendations

From the findings and an overview of literatures that exist on the topic, one can
agree that there is a significant psychological impact associated with wrong
imprisonment and its prevalence suggests a tactical issue in the administration of
criminal justice.

Respondents drawn across all the observed surveys included exonerees, attorneys
and other participants in the justice system and service providers; some of whom
provided services ranging from legal to medical and even spiritual.

The respondents agree that significant mental support and service can support
those who have been wrongly convicted and (Irazola, 2011) understands that a
review of the Justice system has equally been advised.

(Campbell, 2013) hints that the Canadian Department of Justice had earlier
presented a report in 2005 that held specific and comprehensive guidelines that
address the factors that can lead to wrongful conviction and imprisonment while
appraising other factors contributing to the miscarriage of justice. Even so, more
research is needed into this topic to further understand how such guidelines and
policies can be safely implemented in the justice system, regardless of jurisdictional
practice.

Exonerees and stakeholders also propose that these policies and guidelines should
be reviewed accordingly and that legislation should also be enacted to provide a
specific framework for engaging and supporting exonerees.

28 | P a g e
 Lord-Banigo

Lastly, the profound psychological impact of wrongful imprisonment on the

exonerees and their families are very distressing; and the need for further studies
into the sociological and economic impact of the problem is also advised.

29 | P a g e
 Psychological Effects of Wrongful Imprisonment

REFERENCES
Acker, J. R. & Bellandi, R. (2014). Deadly errors and salutary reforms: The
kill that cures? In M. Zalman & J. Carrano (Eds.). Wrongful conviction and
criminal justice reform: Making justice (pp. 269- 285). New York: Routledge.
Ahire PT (1990). The Nigeria Prison System: A Social History. (Paper presented at the
National Seminar on Prison Reform in Nigeria, Abuja FCT).
Angus Reid Group. (1995). Public perspectives on wrongful conviction. Justice
and Public Safety Issues. The Angus Reid Report, 10(4), 75-77.
Campbell, K., & Denov, M. (2004). The burden of innocence: Coping with a
wrongful imprisonment. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice,
46(2), 139-163
Campbell, K., & M. Denov. (2013.) Miscarriages of Justice: The Impact of
Wrongful Imprisonment. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice
46(2): 139-163
Clow, K. A., Blandisi, I. M., Ricciardelli, R., & Schuller, R. A. (2012). Public
perception of wrongful conviction: Support for compensation and apologies. Albany Law
Review, 75(3), 1415-1438.
Doyle, J. M. (2010). Learning from error in the American criminal justice system. Journal
of Criminal Law & Criminology, 100,109-47.
Forst, B. (2004). Errors of justice: Nature, sources, and remedies. Cambridge
University Press.
Furman, P. H (2003). Wrongful Convictions and the Accuracy of the Criminal Justice
System Colorado Lawyer, WESTLAW UK
Gershman, B. (2001). Prosecutorial misconduct. Deerfield, IL: Clark Boardman
Callaghan.
Godsey M. (2013). Wrongful Convictions and South Africa
Griffin L. (2001) 'The Correction of Wrongful Convictions: A Comparative Perspective'
16 American University International Law Review 1241.
Gross, S. R., Jacoby, K., Matheson, D. J., Montgomery, N. & Patil, S. (2005).
Exonerations in the United States, 1989 through 2003. Journal of Criminal Law &
Criminology, 95(2), 523-60.
Gross S., Maurice P., Klara S. (2017). Race and Wrongful Convictions in the United
States: A Report.
Grounds, A. (2004). Psychological consequences of wrongful conviction and
imprisonment. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 46, 165-
82.
30 | P a g e
 Lord-Banigo

Grounds, A. (2005) ‘Understanding the effects of wrongful

imprisonment’, Crime and Justice,32, 1-58.
Haney, C. (2001). The psychological impact of incarceration: Implications for
post-release adjustment. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office
of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. Retrieved
from http://aspe.hhs.gov/basic-report/psychological-impact-incarceration
Huff, C.R, Rather A., and Sagarin E. (1996) Convicted but Innocent: Wrongful
Conviction and Public Policy, Sage
Huff, C. R. (2002). Wrongful conviction and public policy. Criminology, 40 (1), 1-18.
Iannozzi, C. (2015). A Day in the Life: The Long term effects and Psychological
Aftermath of Wrongful conviction.
Innocence Project. (2009). Making up for lost time: What the wrongfully convicted endure
and how to provide fair compensation. Report for the Innocence Project. Benjamin N.
Cardozo School of Law, Yeshiva University
Innocence Project. (2016). http://www.innocenceproject.org/exonerate/.
Irazola S., Erin W., Stricker J., Niedzwiecki E., (2014). Addressing the Impact of
Wrongful Convictions on Crime Victims. Submitted to: National Institute of Justice.
Irazola S., Erin W., Stricker J., Niedzwiecki E., (2013). Study of Victim
Experiences of Wrongful conviction. Submitted to: National Institute of
Justice.
Ismail, S.M (2005). Miscarriages of Justice: Causes and Cures. Research.
University of Kebangssan, Malaysia.
Kent State University (2018). Criminology and Criminal Justice: Major Criminology
Theories and how they affect Policy. Retrieved from:
Konvisser, Z. D. (2012). Psychological consequences of wrongful conviction in women
and the possibility of positive change. DePaul Journal for Social Justice, 5, 221-294.
Kraska, P.B (2004). Theorizing Criminal Justice: Eight Essential orientations. Long
Grove, IL: Waveland Press
Kregg, C. (2016). Right To Counsel: Mental Health Approaches to Support the
Exonerated. Retrieved from: https://www.ssa.uchicago.edu/
Mackenzie D.L (2001). Sentencing and Corrections in the 21st Century: Setting the
Stage for the Future. Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice. University of
Maryland College Park, MD
National Registry of Exonerations (n.d.) Retrieved from
http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/about.aspx

31 | P a g e
 Psychological Effects of Wrongful Imprisonment

Olutola, F. (2017). Alternatives to Prison in Nigeria: A Sociological Reflection. (A

Review)
Ramsey, R. J. & Frank, J. (2007). Wrongful conviction: Perception of criminal
justice professionals regarding the frequency of wrongful conviction and the extent of
system errors. Crime & Delinquency, 53(3), 436-70.
Raphaely, C. (2019). The wasted years: When justice isn’t just. (A journal)
Ricciardelli, R. & Clow, K. A. (2012). The impact of an exoneree’s guest lecture on
students’ attitudes toward wrongly convicted persons. Journal of Criminal Justice
Education, 23(2), 127-147.
Roberts, J. & Stanton, E. (2007). A long road back after exoneration, and justice
is slow to make amends. New York Times.
Scott, L. (2010) ‘“It never, ever ends”: The Psychological Impact of
Wrongful Conviction’, American University Criminal Law Brief, 5,
2: 10-22.
Shermer, L., Rose, K. C., & Hoffman, A. (2011). Perceptions and credibility:
Understanding the nuances of eyewitness testimony. Journal of Contemporary
Criminal Justice, 27(2), 183-203.
Smith, E. & Hattery, A. J. (2011). Race, wrongful conviction & exoneration. Journal
of African American Studies, 15, 74-94.
Olonisakin, T., Ogunleye A. & Adebayo S.O. (2017). The Nigeria Criminal Justice System
and Its Effectiveness in Criminal Behaviour Control: A Social-Psychological
Analysis. IOSR Journal Of Humanities And Social Science (IOSR-JHSS) Volume
22, Issue 2, Ver. IV.
Weigand, H. (2009). Rebuilding a Life: The Wrongfully convicted and Exonerated. Public
Interest Law Journal. 18:2, 427 -437.
Weigand, H. & Anderson, T. (2007). Abstract to life after exoneration stages.
Westervelt, S. D. and Humphrey, J. A. (Eds.). 2001. Wrongly convicted: Perspectives
on failed justice. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
Westervelt, S. D. & Cook, K, J. (2008 ). Coping with innocence after death
row. Contexts, 7(4), 32-37.
Westervelt, S. D. & Cook, K. J. (2012). Life after death row: Exonerees’ search for
community and identity. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Weathered, L. (2014). Huff Ronald C and Killias Martin (eds) (2013) Wrongful
Convictions & Miscarriages of Justice: Causes and Remedies in North
American and European Criminal Justice Systems. [Book Review]. New
York and London: Routledge.

32 | P a g e
 Lord-Banigo

Wisotsky, S. (1997). Miscarriages of Justice: Their Causes and Cures, Saint

Thomas Law Review, WESTLAW UK
Wise, R. A., Dauphinais, K. A., & Safer, M. A. (2007). A tripartite solution to
eyewitness error. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 97(3), 807-871.
Zalman, M. (2006). Criminal justice system reform and wrongful conviction: A
research agenda. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 17(4), 468-92.
Zalman, M. (2014) Theorizing wrongful conviction. Examining wrongful convictions:
Stepping back, moving forward (pp. 283-300). Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.
Zalman, M. (2017). Introduction: Special Issue, The innocence movement and
wrongful convictions. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 33(1): 4- 7.
Zalman, M. (2017). Wrongful Convictions and Criminal Justice: A Challenge and
Invitation. Newsletter of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences. Volume XLII,
Issue 1

33 | P a g e