Electronic Monitoring Essays - Punishments, Criminal Justice, Crime

Electronic Monitoring Electronic monitoring has emerged as one of the most popular forms of community corrections in the United States today. Electronic monitoring began and/or was first used in approximately 1984. Today, approximately 12,000- 15,000 offenders or participants are being monitored on a daily basis. The electronic monitoring equipment used today allows us to determine if a monitored participant is in his/her required place at the proper time. When I speak of electronic monitoring the first thing that comes to your mind is probably an ankle bracelet. Well, today's technology has called for a few new and interesting not to mention easier forms of monitoring offenders and participants. (It is essential for me to note that not all persons being monitored have been convicted of crimes. Monitoring is also used as a condition of pre-trial release. In my research I will focus on the guidelines of probation monitoring). Today, we have monitors in the form of wristwatches, we also have monitors in the form of voice verification through the offenders telephone, and there is also a system of visual verification that assures that the participant is answering the phone. There are even units that have drive-by options that allow a supervising officer to sit outside of a building and tell whether or not an offender is inside, where he/she is required to be. These forms are in addition to the ankle bracelet. Over the years technology has also been able to "enhance battery life and improve the bands worn by offenders by making them non-stretchable and tamper-resistant. A new mobile unit allows supervising officers to check on offenders and hold two-way conversations with them without ever having to leave their vehicles (Papy 132)." In the wristwatch program the participant is signaled through the device at various random times throughout the day. The participant is then obligated to call a central monitoring station from a nearby phone using a 1-800 number. The central monitoring station picks up the participant's location using caller ID. The participant is then supposed to press and hold the face of the wristwatch to the phone. The device generates a beeping code, which will identify the participant. The telephone call also is able to detect whether or not the device has been tampered with, and if the participant is in their correct, required locations. The officer programs the number of random signals. In the voice verification system, the participant is either called at their home at random or they are scheduled to make a call at certain times. However, the system is computerized to pick up the participant's voice no matter what type of phone, or what type of condition the phone is in. This system is 95% accurate and can easily tell the difference between relatives. It can also make a positive identification when the participant has a cold. In connection with the voice verification system there is a visual verification option that allows the officer to make sure that the participant is the person answering the phone. The supervising officer has three main responsibilities: selecting participants for the program, installing whatever device is necessary for the monitoring program (basically "hooking up the offender"), and supervising the participants. "Officers are contacted each time one of the following ?key events' occurs: unauthorized absences from the residence; failure to return to the residence from a scheduled absence; late arrivals; early departures from a residence; equipment malfunctions; tampering with the monitoring equipment; loss of electrical power or telephone service; location verification failure (where a participant moves the monitoring equipment from the residence without permission); and when the monitoring equipment misses a randomly scheduled call to the monitoring center (Altman, Murray, Wooten 31)". These are all certain violations that set off and can alert the officer of a participant foul up. When the officer is alerted of a violation he/she calls the central monitoring station and finds out who is in violation and does whatever is necessary to handle the problem. While electronic monitoring is a growing trend in community corrections, two of the major questions are is electronic monitoring cost effective? If so, which system is the best and most secures? Unfortunately today in our society we have reached some extremely crime-ridden times. Crime rates are soaring, and the corrections system is running out of places and things to do with offenders. Prisons and jails are being overcrowded. The number of people on probation in early 1998 was well over 3.2 million. All of these functions are costing us money. Next to protecting the community, and rehabilitating offenders we also want to