Introduction
Zahid Mubarek was a British Pakistani serving a prison sentence at Feltham Young Offenders’ Institution situated at the southwest area of London. He was killed by a cellmate just five hours to his release. The murder occurred on March 21, 2000. Reports of investigations of the murder showed that Zahid’s death had been racially motivated. The current essay identifies and discusses various circumstances, processes, and working practices of the criminal justice agencies that have contributed to avoidable deaths or failure to bring offenders to justice. The paper examines the failings of the agencies, and provides a reflection on students’ career aspirations. It also looks at the violation of the law which informs murders that take place in prisons. The essay as well highlights discrimination as well as discriminatory practices within the criminal justice system.
Failures of the Criminal Justice System Agencies and Implications on Career Aspirations
The circumstances that surrounded the preventable death of Zahid revealed serious failures of the various agencies of the British criminal justice system. In most cases, first-time inmates who have committed minor felonies do not receive harsher sentences compared to repeat offenders (Hucklesby & Wahidin, 2013; Waldron et al., 2017). Zahid was such an inmate. He was serving his first prison sentence for committing petty crimes. However, he was given ninety days of imprisonment (Commission for Racial Equality, 2003b). The police erred in arresting Zahid for crimes that were not serious. On its part, the court made a mistake of giving a long prison sentence to a first-time offender. Even after the occurrence of the murder, the court did not explore cell allocation procedures at the correctional facility based at Feltham, and the series of events that led to the killing.
The Keith Report established that there was an overpopulation of inmates at Feltham. The facility lacked enough cells to accommodate the prisoners (Keith, 2006a). This made it necessary for some prisoners to share cell. That is how Zahid ended up sharing a room with his killer Stewart. The authorities at Feltham prison got it all wrong in continuing to admit inmates even when they were aware of the facility’s limited capacity. The problem of large number of prisoners was further aggravated by lack of enough prison officers at the facility (Keith, 2006a; Akhtar, 2020). It was difficult for the few officers available to effectively manage many inmates.
Further evidence suggests that the prison officers who were based at Feltham lacked appropriate training (Commission for Racial Equality, 2003b; Akhtar, 2020). As a result, they failed to do their work properly. For instance, they did nothing to curb the strange behavior of Stewart. They just chose to ignore most of the complaints made by other prisoners about him. It also needs to be pointed out that due to lack of training, the prison officers lacked basic cell search skills. The cells at Feltham had to be searched after every three months (Keith, 2006a). However, what happened in Zahid’s murder shows that this did not happen. The officers should have discovered the broken table leg that Stewart used in killing his fellow inmate.
Zahid’s death demonstrated lack of communication between different institutions within the criminal justice system (Commission for Racial Equality, 2003b). For instance, the courts failed to share Stewart’s criminal files with the prison department. Perhaps these files could have prevented the murder of Zahid by way of letting the prison officers understand the danger posed by Stewart. The operations at Feltham prison also portrayed lack of supervision in the prison system (Akhtar, 2020). They showed that the authorities of the prison did not do their work correctly. They left everything in the hands of junior officers. It is clear that they were never concerned with whatever was going on inside the cells.
It is evident that Zahid had the potential for rehabilitation. However, he was not given this chance. The criminal justice system failed to protect him against his assailant. The prison officers at Feltham demonstrated elements of laxity and lack of morale in the way they carried out their duties (Commission for Racial Equality, 2003b; Keith, 2006a). Yet the criminal justice system has a role in protecting not only free members of the public, but also inmates who are undergoing rehabilitation. The officers at the prison showed little concern for Zahid. Even after discovering that he had been seriously injured, it took four hours for him to be taken to hospital (Keith, 2006a). This shows irresponsibility of the highest order.
For students with future career aspirations within the field of criminal justice, the case of Zahid impacts them in some significant ways. It gives them an opportunity to identity how the different agencies of the system have failed in the past in their role of enhancing justice. The failures enable them to learn the importance of doing things in the right way. The case also helps the learners to understand how the violation of the law leads to miscarriage of justice. It shows them the importance of adhering to the law in making any decision pertaining to criminal justice. The case as well enables the students to comprehend various discriminatory practices that have plagued the criminal justice system. It demonstrates to them why it is necessary not to deny people justice on the grounds of their racial and ethnic backgrounds.
Zahid’s Case versus the Law
The incidents in Zahid’s murder demonstrated instances of the violation of the law by the criminal justice system. To begin with, the laws of England and Whales require a coroner to conduct investigations into the death of an inmate who dies while in prison (UK Public General Acts, 2009). This is expressed in Section 48 of the Prisons Act 1865, Section 3 of the Coroners Act of 1887, and Section 13 (2) (b) of the 1926 Coroners (Amendment) Act. Despite this, the Coroner for West London decided not to carry out an inquest in order to unravel the circumstances surrounding the killing of Zahid (Commission for Racial Equality, 2003b; Gadd, 2011). The coroner chose to stick to her decision despite being severally asked to reconsider it. She argued that coroners were constrained from conducting public investigations of the issue that the case had raised.
According to Article 2 (1) of the European Convention on Human Rights, “Everyone’s right to life shall be protected by law. No one shall be deprived of his life intentionally save in the execution of a sentence of a court following his conviction of a crime for which this penalty is provided by law” (European Court of Human Rights, & Council of Europe, n.d.). Although the United Kingdom left the European Union in early 2020, it was bound by the laws of the union at the time when Zahid’s murder occurred. The criminal justice system did nothing significant to prevent the killing. It allowed somebody to lose his life while he was in the process of serving a court sentence (Keith, 2006a).
The Race Relations Act 1976 states that it is unlawful for an individual to be discriminated against based on race, color, ethnic origin or nationality, (The National Archives, 2021). This particular act requires the criminal justice system to ensure racial equality among the people held in custody. The Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000 further requires the agencies of the system to implement various race equality schemes in its operations (Keith, 2006a ; The National Archives, 2021). This did not happen in Zahid’s case. The police, courts, and prison officers did not do enough to prevent a murder that was racially motivated. They allowed a prisoner from a racial minority to be murdered by a white racist (Gadd, 2011; JRCT, 2019).
Zahid’s killing could also be regarded as a case of deliberate or alleged murder by state agents (Commission for Racial Equality, 2003b). A case that bears strong similarity to this one was that of Edwards v United Kingdom (2002) 35 EHRR 487. In this case, a prisoner with marked signs of mental illness identified as Christopher Edwards was placed in the same cell with another inmate called Richard Linford who had an acute mental illness. Christopher was killed by Richard. The court accepted Richard’s plea of being guilty of manslaughter as a result of diminished responsibility (Lauterpacht & Greenwood, 2011). In both this case and that of Zahid, the state could be held responsible of doing nothing to protect the victims against mentally ill and violent inmates with whom they shared cells.
Discrimination and Discriminatory Practices within the Criminal Justice System
The death of Zahid also portrayed the discriminative nature of the criminal justice system. Zahid was incarcerated for just stealing razors (Keith, 2006b; Edgar & Tsintsadze, 2017). This is just one of the petty crimes that lead to lighter jail sentences. However, the young man ended up being imprisoned for 90 days. He was not even spared for being a first- time offender. Although Zahid had been previously involved in minor run-ins with the police, he did not have an imprisonment record. His imprisonment demonstrates how the criminal justice discriminates against non-whites and minority groups. These groups are usually given harsher sentences than their counterparts of the white origin ((Edgar & Tsintsadze, 2017). Such is the case even if they commit crimes that are less serious.
Stewart was a racist. He did not hide his discriminative feelings towards non-whites. He often wrote letters that depicted racial violence, and had a tattoo bearing the word ‘RIP.’ Prior to killing, he had openly said that he was going to commit what he described as his first murder of this millennium (Commission for Racial Equality, 2003a). The prison officers stationed at Feltham were fully aware of this. Yet they did nothing about it. One wonders how they arrived at the conclusion of allowing any prisoner to share a cell with Stewart. In this case, a racial minority was put in the same cell with a known racist for six weeks (Gadd, 2011; Edgar & Tsintsadze, 2017). This shows the negative attitude that prison officer have towards inmates who are not white.
It is reported that Stewart was suffering from a serious personality disorder. He lacked a sense of conscience. His previous imprisonment history showed that he often displayed bizarre behaviors, including having a conversation with walls, and swallowing batteries (Commission for Racial Equality, 2003a; Keith, 2006b). These actions show that Stewart was a serious threat to other prisoners. He was not the kind of person who had to be allowed to stay in a cell with another prisoner. Apart from this, nothing had been done about his mental health state. The prison system did not bother to seek mental healthcare services for him (Gadd, 2011). This is a clear demonstration of how people mental health problems are often disregarded and discriminated against by the criminal, justice system.
After killing Zahid, Stewart claimed that his cellmate died of an accident. The prison officers believed his story and quickly moved him to another cell where he was allowed to wash his hands as well as clothes that had been stained by blood (Keith, 2006b). By doing so, the officers interfered with the forensic investigations associated with the murder. They made it difficult for the forensic team to correct meaningful evidence from the crime scene. This incident demonstrates the laxity with which law enforcement agencies and the criminal justice system handle investigations pertaining to racially motivated violence. Such investigations are not given the serious attention they deserve (Keith, 2006b; Akhtar, 2020).
It is also important to note that in looking for justice for their loved one, the members of Zahid’s family encountered some discrimination. The Home Secretary David Blunkett was reluctant to order a public inquiry into the murder. He was only forced to do so by the House of Lords (Keith, 2006b). Even after allowing the inquiry, the family had to wait for more than four years before justice could be served. This reluctance depicts the discriminatory practices of the criminal justice system. Even if this system is depended upon for justice, it is less helpful to racial minorities (Commission for Racial Equality, 2003a; JRCT, 2019). Cases involving such groups are not subjected to serious investigations.
Conclusion
The death of Zahid indeed demonstrated the criminal justice system’s failures. The police, prison officers, and court judges all failed in their roles of ensuring justice for all. There was enough evidence to show that Stewart was a menace to his fellow prisoners. However, he was just ignored. Zahid’s murder also depicted the violation of various laws pertaining to cases of deaths that occur inside prisons. These included the Prisons Act of 1865, the Coroners Act 1887, the Race Relations Act of 1976, and the European Convention on Human Rights. Additionally, Zahid’s case portrayed discriminatory practices and discrimination in the system of criminal justice. The system tended to discriminate against the offenders who belong to racial minority groups.
References:
Akhtar, S. (2020). The Murder of Zahid Mubarek: A Result of Unjust Practices in Policing and the Prison Service. NPMP Magazine. Retrieved from http://npolicemonitor.co.uk/uncategorized/the-murder-of-zahid-mubarek-a-result-of-unjust-practices-in-policing-and-the-prison-service/
Commission for Racial Equality. (2003a). Racial Equality in Prisons: A formal investigation by the Commission for Racial Equality into HM Prison Service of England and Wales Part 2. Retrieved from https://www.statewatch.org/media/documents/news/2003/oct/crePrisons.pdf
Commission for Racial Equality. (2003b). The Murder of Zahid Mubarek: A formal investigation by the Commission for Racial Equality into HM Prison Service of England and Wales Part 1. Retrieved from https://www.librarysearch.manchester.ac.uk/discovery/fulldisplay/alma992983003328101631/44MAN_INST:MU_NUI
Edgar, K., & Tsintsadze, K. (2017). Tackling Discrimination in Prison: Still Not a Fair Response. Prison Reform Trust.
European Court of Human Rights, & Council of Europe. (n.d.). European Convention on Human Rights. Retrieved from https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/convention_eng.pdf
Gadd, D. (2011). Murderer, Mad Man, Misfit? Making Sense of the Murder of Zahid Mubarek. Journal of Psycho-Social Studies, 5 (1): 139-162. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282704249_Murderer_Mad_Man_Misfit_Making_Sense_Of_The_Murder_Of_Zahid_Mubarek
Hucklesby, A., & Wahidin, A. (2013). Criminal Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Keith, B. (2006a). The Zahid Mubarek Inquiry Report, Vol 1. London: Stationery Office.
Keith, B. (2006b). The Zahid Mubarek Inquiry Report, Vol 2. London: Stationery Office.
Lauterpacht, E., & Greenwood, C. J. (2011). International Law Reports: Vol. 140. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
The Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust (JRCT). (2019). Case Study: The Zahid Mubarek Trust. Retrieved from https://www.jrct.org.uk/zahid-mubarek-trust
The National Archives. (2021). Discrimination and Race Relations Policy. Retrieved from https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/cabinetpapers/themes/discrimination-race-relations-policy.htm.
UK Public General Acts (2009). Coroners and Justice Act 2009. Retrieved from https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2009/25/part/1
Waldron, R. J., Quarles, C. L., McElreath, D. H., Waldron, M. E., & Milstein, D. E. (2017). The Criminal Justice System: An Introduction. London. CRC Press.
Why You Should Choose Us
Affordable Prices
Since we know that we are dealing with students, either part time or full time, many might be having financial constraints, but still want to pursue academic life. This has made us ensure we have very affordable prices, and wonderful discounts, yet give high quality products.
Professional Writers
Our reputation has been built because of the dedicated and highly qualified writers in our team. The writers give clients high quality products which guarantees return clients and referrals.
Quality
Our team is dedicated to giving clients the best quality products. However, if a paper does not meet the requirements stated by the client, our team will provide free revisions to the satisfaction of the client.
Moneyback guarantee policy
We believe that clients should get value for their money. If the client finds that the product has not met the requirements stated, we will refund the amount paid.
Original papers
We understand how plagiarism can ruin clients’ careers and reputation. We thus strive to provide original papers to our clients. We use several tools to check plagiarism. This ensures that clients get products that meet their institutions’ standards.
24/7 Customer Support
You can reach our support team via, live chat, email or phone. All your issues will be dealt with asap as the team works round the clock.
Try it now!
How it works?
Follow these simple steps to get your paper done
Place your order
Fill in the order form and provide all details of your assignment.
Proceed with the payment
Choose the payment system that suits you most.
Receive the final file
Once your paper is ready, we will email it to you.
Our Services
You have other errands to run? No need to worry. Place your order with us, carry out your errands while we do your paper and deliver on time.
Give us a topic you want your blog based on, and let our team handle the rest. You will get the best article to be published in any forum you want. We have able team to do all the work for you.
Assignments
Many students are given assignments by their tutors. However, students find it challenging to just even come up with a topic. This should no longer be a problem to you. Just visit our site, contact the support team that will help you place your order, and find the best writer to handle the assignment.
Dissertation Services
Dissertation has proven to be challenging to most students. For this reason, we have specialized writers who handles only these kind of papers. You will be in constant touch with the writer and the support team once you place a dissertation order to make sure nothing goes wrong.
Editing and Proofreading
Some students have good points and writing prowess. However, they make minor mistakes that deny them good grades. To avoid such cases, you can give us your already written paper so that our team can edit it to the correct formatting style, language, proper flow and the correct academic language. This gives you an upper hand to get the best grade than a person whose job has not been edited.