GateHouse Media
October 18, 2019
The criminal justice system is in the midst of a seismic
shift in priorities. Ideas that not so long ago would have been considered
radical are now mainstream.
Change can be positive, but it can also have unintended
consequences. Electronic monitoring is a prime example. Electronic monitoring
was introduced in the 1960s. Ralph Gable, a student at Harvard University
patented a device derived from surplus military tracking equipment to verify
his teacher’s theory of positive reinforcement.
Ironically, Gable’s foray into electronic monitoring was
intended to do the opposite of what it does today. Gable used monitoring to
reward probationers who followed the rules, as opposed to today’s focus of
penalizing noncompliance.
Politicians on both sides of the aisle have joined in the
condemnation of incarceration rates. America incarcerates more people for
longer periods of time than nearly every other country in the world. Lawmakers
have looked to electronic monitoring as a safe and cost-effective alternative
to prison and jail. The use of monitors increased dramatically between 1980 and
2016. According to the Pew Charitable Trusts, probation and parole populations
grew by 239% during that period.
Ralph Gable’s brother Paul Gable wrote, “Monitoring provides
a convenient sentencing alternative because it is a punishment less harsh than
incarceration but more strict than minimally supervised probation.”
The “reform” brought about by electronic monitoring has
brought about new problems.
For instance, using electronic monitoring to supervise
people while awaiting trial. Many criminal justice practitioners malign the
cash bail system as unjust and particularly harmful to the economically
disadvantaged.
A defendant is faced with posting bond in the amount of
$5,000. He may have to choose between paying a surety bond of $350 or pay for
installation and monthly rental of an electronic monitor.
The initial monitoring fee is $100, plus $50 per month to
rent the monitor. After six months, the monitoring cost has exceeded the bond
amount. If a defendant fails to pay one month, she may have her bond revoked
ending up where she started - in jail. She may also have her bond revoked for
drinking, or not working - things that wouldn’t otherwise affect someone on a
straight monetary bond.
When it comes to bail, judges are a little gun-shy. Bail is
not a big deal until a case goes bad. A defendant on bail awaiting trial harms
another person. Electronic monitoring is a convenient fall back for judges. If
a defendant harms an innocent person while awaiting trial, a judge can point
the finger at the probation office or private vendor who is “supervising” the
defendant.
The concern doesn’t stop pretrial. After sentencing, an
offender may be put on electronic monitoring in lieu of incarceration. Those
costs will be added to the court cost and fines, often burying a parolee in
debt. Samantha Malamed of the Philadelphia Inquirer recently wrote about a
Philadelphia woman on her 15th year of probation for a 2003 theft - her only
criminal conviction.
Malamed wrote, ”‘Case to close once restitution is paid in
full,’ the docket noted, ordering payments at a rate of $75 per month toward a
total of $40,939. If she continues paying at that rate, she will remain on
probation for an additional 45 years, until she’s 104 years old.”
The criminal justice system itself creates a cycle of
poverty that is nearly impossible to overcome.
What’s worse is who is monitoring the electric monitor? A
monitor can be used to recreate an offender’s location or even alert someone
when the offender goes to a forbidden location, but it would literally take a
workforce of thousands to monitor offenders in real time, in any meaningful
way.
According to Ava Kofman writing in ProPublica, “Critics of
monitors contend that their public-safety appeal is illusory: If defendants are
intent on harming someone or skipping town, the bracelet, which can be easily
removed with a pair of scissors, would not stop them.”
Matthew T. Mangino is of counsel with Luxenberg, Garbett,
Kelly & George P.C. His book The Executioner’s Toll, 2010 was released by
McFarland Publishing. You can reach him at www.mattmangino.com and follow him
on Twitter @MatthewTMangino.
To visit the column CLICK HERE
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment