Content area
Abstract
This mixed-method study analyzes the questions that parole board members ask candidates during parole hearings in Louisiana, the only state that has made parole hearings publicly available through YouTube due to the COVID-19 outbreak in 2020. In particular, I examine the tension between retributive and restorative rhetoric during this questioning, exploring whether candidate demographics influence certain rhetoric types and whether they correlate with parole outcomes. Using a sample of 96 hearings, I identified the types and proportions of rhetoric in each hearing and analyzed their relationships with candidate and hearing descriptive characteristics using one-way ANOVA, chi-square, and t-test analyses. I then interviewed eight formerly incarcerated people who underwent parole hearings in Louisiana during the same time frame and used grounded coding to understand their phenomenological experiences of the parole board's questioning. I conclude by triangulating the quantitative and qualitative results to identify why current parole practices are more closely tied to performances of state power and control than to repair or public safety. I also identify potential opportunities for restorative justice interventions during the parole process.
