Attica and Lewis Prison: How Two Crises Transformed Negotiation
This paper examines how two landmark prison incidents — the 1971 Attica riot and the 2004 Lewis State Prison hostage standoff — fundamentally reshaped the practice of crisis negotiation. Beginning with the failures at Attica, where disorganized negotiators and political refusal to engage led to deadly outcomes, the paper traces how lessons learned drove institutional reforms. It then analyzes the Lewis incident, where a coordinated multi-agency team applied psychological insight, rapport-building, and flexible command structures to achieve a peaceful resolution. The paper concludes by applying crisis negotiation principles to broader contexts, including school violence, domestic disputes, and international diplomacy.
- Introduction: Two Crises That Changed Everything: Overview of Attica and Lewis as turning points
- The Attica Prison Riot and the Failure of Early Negotiation: Attica's deadly outcome exposed fatal negotiation failures
- The Lewis State Prison Standoff: A New Model in Practice: Lewis demonstrated coordinated, psychology-informed negotiation
- Lessons Learned from Lewis and Their Lasting Impact: Seven operational lessons that reshaped crisis negotiation
- Applying Crisis Negotiation Beyond Prison Walls: Principles extended to schools, families, and diplomacy
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Uses two concrete historical case studies in sequence to build a clear before-and-after argument about the evolution of crisis negotiation.
- Grounds analytical claims in specific textual evidence, citing Strentz, McMains and Mullins, and Brown and Campbell throughout.
- Moves logically from descriptive narrative (what happened) to analytical reflection (what was learned and why it matters), maintaining forward momentum.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates comparative case study analysis: two incidents are placed side by side not merely to recount events, but to isolate contrasting variables — command structure, negotiator psychology, political will — and show how one failure produced the institutional knowledge that enabled a later success. This technique is particularly effective for tracing policy evolution across time.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a framing introduction establishing the significance of both events, then devotes one section each to Attica and Lewis, moving chronologically and analytically. A dedicated section enumerates the seven specific lessons drawn from Lewis. A closing section broadens the scope to non-prison scenarios — school violence, domestic conflict, and international diplomacy — demonstrating the transferability of crisis negotiation principles. The references section cites three academic sources in APA format.
Introduction: Two Crises That Changed Everything
The historical events of the riot at Attica prison on September 9, 1971, and the hostage situation in 2004 at Lewis State Prison in Arizona led to a significant transformation in the practice of crisis negotiation. The lessons learned from each event changed the art of crisis negotiation profoundly. To understand how this transformation came about, it is essential to examine the events that transpired in each case.
The Attica Prison Riot and the Failure of Early Negotiation
The Attica prison revolt served as a "wake-up call" to administrators of crisis negotiation (Strentz, 2012, p. 176). Lacking on that day were the necessary "experience" and "intelligence" of crisis negotiators, as well as the correct "command decisions," tactics, and techniques (Strentz, 2012, p. 176). The "art" of negotiation was unrefined, crude, "forceful," and disorganized (Brown & Campbell, 2010, p. 362). Among the prisoners, however, there was the opposite: organization, rhetorical skill, and leadership (Christopher, 2013).
The prisoners seized control of the central control room of the prison following an incident in which inmates in 5 Company rebelled after not being led to their usual outdoor routine following breakfast. The prisoners took 42 hostages but kept them safe while producing a list of demands, including improvements in medical treatment and sanitation (Christopher, 2013). Governor Rockefeller, however, refused to take part in the negotiations, viewing the inmates as rebels who deserved nothing but a show of force — which is precisely what they received. As the inmates grew dispirited and tensions mounted, violence became a real threat. The prison was then set upon by the National Guard, and several hostages were killed by police fire. It was a deadly retaking of the prison brought about by failed negotiations.
One of the most important lessons learned from Attica was the necessity of fairness and of preventing officers from taking revenge on prisoners during a siege. What had started out as "hostage negotiation" was now being termed "crisis negotiation" as a result of the disastrous response at Attica. The art of negotiation now began to focus on understanding the needs of those in revolt and working toward a peaceful, non-violent outcome.
The Lewis State Prison Standoff: A New Model in Practice
These lessons, however, were not learned overnight. The Lewis State Prison example illustrates as much. In 2004, two prisoners took hostages — a situation far less motivated by a sense of injustice and far more by a desperate desire to escape their circumstances by any means necessary. The negotiation process over the next two weeks differed markedly from Attica. More than 30 negotiators were utilized, producing a team drawn from several FBI units as well as the local police department (McMains & Mullins, 2014, p. 33). Several coordinators and team leaders were also deployed. This was a coordinated, collaborative effort rather than a single-person-calling-the-shots arrangement.
Negotiations were difficult because the two men were described as "psychopaths" — a scenario quite different from Attica, where inmates had been viewed as victims of police brutality (McMains & Mullins, 2014, p. 33). Negotiators were aware of the psychology of the hostage takers and used this knowledge as leverage within the negotiation process. This reflected a key lesson drawn from Attica: understand the other side.
By day ten, negotiators were working to build "rapport" with the inmates by sending them "small items" for "comfort" (McMains & Mullins, 2014, p. 34). They also engaged relatives of the hostage takers as third-party intermediaries to help talk sense into the men. This approach proved effective: before long, one of the inmates was speaking of turning on the other, and their resolve and solidarity were visibly crumbling. Authorities agreed to meet certain demands, such as the transfer of one inmate to a different prison. When the inmates finally agreed to surrender on day fifteen, authorities honored their promise. This outcome demonstrated the importance of mutual respect, even in highly provocative circumstances. The negotiators did not allow the hostage takers to drive the situation; instead, they used steady guidance to bring the inmates to a level of reality at which a peaceful surrender became possible. At Attica, by contrast, the entire process had been driven by those exhibiting psychopathic behavior — on the outside of the prison walls.
References
Brown, J., & Campbell, E. (2010). The Cambridge Handbook of Forensic Psychology. Cambridge University Press.
McMains, M., & Mullins, W. (2014). Crisis Negotiations. Routledge.
Strentz, T. (2012). Psychological Aspects of Crisis Negotiation. CRC Press.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.