Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: November 22, 2024 Fri
Time: 11:59 am
Time: 11:59 am
Results for global positioning systems
7 results foundAuthor: Tewey, John F., Chair Title: Final Report to the Governor and the General Assembly. By the Maryland Task Force to Study Criminal Offender Monitoring by Global Positioning Systems Summary: The Task Force was asked to study how the state can utilize global positioning technology to monitor individuals who have committed criminal offenses, how law enforcement can benefit from the linkage to global positioning technology to solve crimes adn streamline workload, the admissibility of evidence issues, as well as other issues that the Task Force considers relevant. Details: Towson, MD: Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services, 2005 Source: Year: 2005 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 114640 Keywords: Global Positioning SystemsOffender Monitoring |
Author: Goodison, Sean Title: Digital Evidence and the U.S. Criminal Justice System: Identifying Technology and Other Needs to More Effectively Acquire and Utilize Digital Evidence Summary: The field of digital evidence is new and rapidly expanding. Potentially, digital evidence offers an important new source of information that will help prosecutors win more convictions. Using GPS data to place suspects at or near the scene of a crime, analyzing text messages and email to corroborate charges, capturing incriminating photos from social media sites, and gathering information on criminal associates from cell phone address books or social media metadata are just a few of the ways in which electronic data provides police and prosecutors with a source of information that was previously unavailable. As the types and sophistication of electronic media from which digital evidence can be gleaned increase, this type of evidence will become an essential part of investigating and prosecuting most crimes. However, while the potential is great, there are significant challenges in exploiting digital evidence including: - Educating prosecutors to make more-focused use of digital evidence. - Educating judges to better understand the issues surrounding use of digital evidence in the courtroom. - Enabling first-responding patrol officers and detectives to be better prepared for incident scenes where digital evidence might be present. - Providing better prioritization and triage analysis of digital evidence given scarce resources. - Developing regional models to make digital evidence analysis capability available to small departments. - Addressing concerns about maintaining the currency of training and technology available to digital forensic examiners. These top-tier needs highlight a path for innovation, through funding and training at all levels of the criminal justice system that can allow digital evidence to reach its full potential for law enforcement and courts. Details: Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2015. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 5, 2015 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/248770.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/248770.pdf Shelf Number: 136334 Keywords: Digital EvidenceEvidenceGlobal Positioning SystemsLaw Enforcement Technology |
Author: Graham, Hannah Title: Scottish and International Review of the Uses of Electronic Monitoring Summary: This Review provides a bounded overview of Scottish and international evidence and experience of the uses, purposes and impact of electronic monitoring (EM). Electronic monitoring, using radio frequency (RF) technology, currently operates at a number of points in the adult criminal justice system in Scotland, which are reviewed in Section 2. EM is most often used with adults as a stand-alone measure without additional criminal justice social work supervision and support from others. Restriction of Liberty Orders (RLOs) and Home Detention Curfews (HDCs) are the two most commonly used electronic monitoring modalities, making up 53% and 45% respectively of all electronically monitored orders in Scotland (G4S, 2015). In terms of children and young people (aged under 16 years), electronically monitored movement restriction conditions are used in a relatively small proportion of cases of those supervised through Intensive Support and Monitoring Service (ISMS) orders in Scotland. Electronic monitoring is significantly cheaper than the cost of incarceration. The average unit cost for electronic monitoring in Scotland in 2013-2014 was L743 (L1,043.73) (a significant reduction from L1,940 (L2,725.21) in 2011-2012) (Scottish Government, 2015; Scottish Government, 2013b). This figure is based on total expenditure across all forms of electronic monitoring, including as part of a Drug Treatment and Testing Order (DTTO) as well as part of Movement Restriction Conditions (MRCs) imposed with children and young people by the Children's Hearings System. In 2013, the average cost per EM order per day in Scotland was estimated at L10.17 (L14.29) (Scottish Government, 2013a: 7). In terms of order completion, approximately 4 out of 5 of those made subject to EM in Scotland complete their period of monitoring (G4S, 2015). There is some evidence that breach rates are higher for those under longer periods of monitoring, among younger people and among those with more extensive criminal histories. Section 3 of this Review provides a circumscribed overview of a range of purposes and uses of electronic monitoring in different international jurisdictions, including: violent crimes; domestic abuse; sexual crimes; alcohol and drug-related crimes; vehicle theft; with people with prolific offence histories and with people suspected or convicted of terrorism. Two types of offenders are highlighted here, in discussions of the international evidence and experience regarding the uses and impact of global positioning system (GPS) tagging and tracking. In relation to sex offenders, this Review establishes the following: - Despite some emergent positive research findings of the impact of this technology during the period of monitoring, there remains a significant lack of empirical evidence to support the positive impact of GPS-based monitoring of sex offenders in terms of increasing compliance, reducing re-offending and enabling desistance and reintegration; - Where research has shown that GPS-based monitoring of sex offenders has been associated with benefits and positive impact, EM is usually integrated with other surveillance, supervision and risk management, and supports; - Where it is used on a mid- to long-term basis, GPS-based monitoring of sex offenders may be less cost-effective and less easily ethically defensible, in that it can cost more than other electronic monitoring technologies such as RF and 'standard' probation supervision, although it remains cheaper than prison, yet it may not realise significant reductions in re-offending and may have unintended consequences in the lives of monitored people. However, findings on the grounds of fiscal efficiency are mixed; some US studies state that GPS monitoring of sex offenders is cost effective. Additionally, Sections 3 and 4 of this Review of the uses, effectiveness and impact of GPS tagging and tracking with domestic abuse defendants and offenders show that: - There has been growth in the use of GPS tagging and tracking in places like the United States, Spain and Portugal, with both criminal justice and civil - in the form of EM restraining orders - pilots and initiatives specifically designed for perpetrators of domestic abuse. A considerable number of these initiatives use GPS EM at the pre-trial stage, to reduce the use of remand (imprisonment) while ensuring surveillance forms a part of tailored risk management within the granting of bail; - Limited available research from the US suggests that pre-trial GPS monitoring of domestic abuse defendants is more effective, in comparison to RF EM, in reducing violations and promoting compliance; - Professional ideology and institutional orientations affect the use and impact of GPS monitoring technology, with motivational and collaborative approaches yielding different results to punitive approaches; - Bilateral EM is becoming a feature of discussions about victim participation in the EM of domestic abuse offenders, and while victims hold a diversity of positions on this, it seems to attract mostly positive responses. The empirical evidence and criminological literature on GPS-based bilateral EM is limited and relatively new, and it is too early to make strong claims about its impact, and comparisons to RF EM, on compliance, reducing re-offending and enabling desistance after their EM order has concluded. Section 4 of this Review highlights a number of other significant findings regarding impact and effectiveness based on international evidence and experience: - Overall, the electronic monitoring programmes and approaches which are shown to reduce reoffending during and/or after the monitored period are mostly those which include other supervision and supportive factors (e.g., employment and education, social capital) associated with desistance. The effective approaches discussed here have developed on the basis of high levels of integration with supervision and support from Probation Officers and other staff and services. In other words, the more effective programmes and approaches, in Europe in particular, are those where EM is not a stand-alone measure. - The effective approaches discussed here use tailored, and in some cases quite restrictive, eligibility criteria to determine who can participate in EM programmes. This affects how the impact of EM on recidivism, desistance and reintegration should be interpreted. - A significant number of the major empirical studies conducted - mostly in North America and the United Kingdom - in the last fifteen years conclude that the efficacy of EM in reducing re-offending after it has concluded is modest or minimal. Whereas research from other countries - especially Scandinavian countries and some European countries - indicates more extensive effectiveness and positive impact. - There is currently only limited empirical literature available which focuses on the perspectives and lived experiences of monitored people regarding issues of compliance (or non-compliance), legitimacy, and desistance from crime. More research is needed. - Flexibility in the use of EM orders and conditions may foster motivation for monitored people to comply. The capacity to incentivise and reduce curfew hours and days (e.g., curfews from 7 days a week down to 5 days a week) as a form of recognition and reward for a monitored person's formal compliance in the initial stages of an order may positively affect their perceptions of the legitimacy of that order. More research on this is needed. Details: Glasgow: Scottish Centre for Crime and Justice Research, 2015. 137p. Source: Internet Resource: SCCJR REPORT No.8/2015: Accessed August 28, 2015 at: http://www.sccjr.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Scottish-and-International-Review-of-the-Uses-of-Electronic-Monitoring-Graham-and-McIvor-2015.pdf Year: 2015 Country: International URL: http://www.sccjr.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Scottish-and-International-Review-of-the-Uses-of-Electronic-Monitoring-Graham-and-McIvor-2015.pdf Shelf Number: 136612 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationDesistanceElectronic MonitoringGlobal Positioning SystemsOffender SupervisioinTagging |
Author: Heaton, Harold I. Title: GPS Monitoring Practices in Community Supervision and the Potential Impact of Advanced Analytics, Version 1.0 Summary: The first electronic monitoring (EM) devices were developed in the 1960s with the intent of providing feedback to young-adult-offender volunteers to facilitate their rehabilitation, but that approach was not widely accepted. Following their reemergence in the 1980s in support of a more punitive model of offender treatment, such devices were used principally for home detention applications. By 1990 radio-frequency (RF)2 technologies were in-use in all 50 states. ( The utility of EM increased considerably in 2000 when the military began permitting civilian Global Positioning System (GPS) receivers to attain much greater accuracy , and the offender tracking market expanded quickly. At least 44,000 tracking devices were estimated to be in-use in the United States by 2009 , and the more compact and affordable devices available today can be better tailored to specific needs. Modern features include voice communication, and audible and vibratory alerts to warn participants of schedule violations. These devices also include improved case management software and better mapping technology, with playback capabilities and mobile restriction zones that can be used to keep tracked participants from congregating and separated from former victims. Much of the exigency for enhanced usage of offender monitoring systems has resulted from legislative mandates to track sex offenders, but other applications have emerged such as intensively supervising high-risk parolees, developing confinement alternatives for low-risk criminals to facilitate their re-entry into society and alleviate jail overcrowding, or monitoring pre-trial defendants. "By 2010, 33 states had enacted legislation requiring that this technology be used on sex offenders," although many had not yet implemented those programs. Some states and jurisdictions had also begun using EM to track gang members and domestic abusers, monitor habitual burglars, or alert former victims when offenders were released from custody. Nevertheless, GPS-based systems generate a plethora of data. Without analytical aids to interpret those data, supervising agents can quickly become overwhelmed and unable to take advantage of these tools as they manage their daily caseloads. The temporal sequences of locations gathered by GPS monitoring systems provide unprecedented opportunities to explore patterns of activity through the application of space-time analytics to individual movements and stops. Automated processing and alerting algorithms developed to more fully exploit gathered data could focus an agent's attention on only those events requiring investigation, and provide the basis for conducting social network analyses to gain intelligence on offender habits. While analytical capabilities do not appear to have strongly influenced correctional agency selection of their EM vendors and products to date, tools comprising various combinations of statistical analysis procedures, data and text mining, and predictive modeling can be mission enabling through the discovery of hidden behavioral patterns and the prediction of future outcomes. This paper briefly reviews research on the usage of location-based tracking to motivate an assessment of the potential role of advanced analytics in more strongly leveraging the capabilities of such systems. Relying in part on the results from a recent market survey of commercially-available analytics products suitable for use in correctional applications, it presents several recommendations for deriving actionable information from GPS tracking data as an aid to managing community-released offender populations. Nevertheless, "there has been little rigorous research evaluating the impacts of electronic monitoring," and questions remain about the efficacy of this approach in community supervision. "Policy-relevant research" is needed that is "focused toward understanding the potential for supervision with electronic monitoring to improve long-term outcomes". Details: Laurel, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, 2016. 42p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 28, 2016 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/249888.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/249888.pdf Shelf Number: 139510 Keywords: Electronic MonitoringGlobal Positioning SystemsOffender MonitoringOffender Supervision |
Author: Pew Charitable Trusts Title: Use of Electronic Offender-Tracking Devices Expands Sharply Summary: The number of accused and convicted criminal offenders in the United States who are monitored with ankle bracelets and other electronic tracking devices rose nearly 140 percent over 10 years, according to a survey conducted in December 2015 by The Pew Charitable Trusts. More than 125,000 people were supervised with the devices in 2015, up from 53,000 in 2005. All 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the federal government use electronic devices to monitor the movements and activities of pretrial defendants or convicted offenders on probation or parole. The survey counted the number of active GPS and radio-frequency (RF) units reported by the companies that manufacture and operate them, providing the most complete picture to date of the prevalence of these technologies in the nation's criminal justice system. Details: Philadelphia: Pew Charitable Trusts, 2016. 6p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 24, 2016 at: http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/assets/2016/10/use_of_electronic_offender_tracking_devices_expands_sharply.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/assets/2016/10/use_of_electronic_offender_tracking_devices_expands_sharply.pdf Shelf Number: 145997 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationElectronic Monitoring Electronic TaggingGlobal Positioning SystemsOffender Supervision |
Author: Great Britain. National Offender Management Service Title: Electronic Monitoring Global Position System: Toolkit for partner agencies Summary: Electronic Monitoring with a Global Positioning System (GPS) tag is a versatile offender management tool offering a choice of capabilities that can support decision makers to manage risk more effectively, and get the right balance between punishment, crime prevention and rehabilitation. It allows for a more bespoke approach to be tailored to an individual. It can be punitive, but also help to support rehabilitative interventions or programmes, improve compliance, help prevent reoffending, and improve enforcement and crime detection as well as providing improved outcomes for victims. A GPS tag can be used with offenders or defendants who may otherwise be in custody, and can mitigate some of the risks these offenders might pose if given an opportunity to remain in the community. A GPS tag can be used by decision makers to monitor a range of conditions or requirements, through providing flexibility to set a range of restrictions including keeping a given distance from a particular place or address or mapping out areas on a map that cannot be entered. Up to 50 different zones can be created if required, and can be can be limited to certain days, dates or times of day. Buffer zones can also be included around restricted zones to alert a subject they are approaching an area they are not to enter. GPS tagging can also be used to monitor a subject's whereabouts and to monitor attendance to support rehabilitate interventions. Through initial feedback from our presentations to stakeholders, 96% of the 260 feedback responses received, agreed that GPS monitoring will be a useful tool for managing offenders in the community. Wearing a GPS tag can potentially support a subject in a number of ways, for example by: - restricting their ability to fall into bad habits, or mix with the wrong crowd; - incentivising them to not reoffend through the knowledge that their movements are being monitored; - eliminating them from a police enquiry by showing they were not present when a crime was committed; - helping them to demonstrate their commitment to change to justice services as well as to family, friends and employees. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, Her Majesty's Prison and Probation Service, 2017. 35p., app. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 31, 2017 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/591822/EM-GPS-toolkit-V2.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/591822/EM-GPS-toolkit-V2.pdf Shelf Number: 146959 Keywords: Electronic MonitoringElectronic TaggingGlobal Positioning SystemsOffender MonitoringOffender Supervision |
Author: Big Brother Watch Title: Police Access to Digital Evidence: The powers of the Police to examine digital devices and how forces are training staff Summary: Police Access to Digital Evidence reveals that 93% of UK police forces are extracting data from digital devices including mobile phones, laptops, tablets and computers which are seized as evidence from suspects, victims and witnesses. As mobile phones and other connected devices are now ubiquitous, it should come as no surprise that such technologies can play a significant role in committing or assisting a crime. The data held on digital devices can give a detailed insight into people's lives, communications, contacts, friends, family and acquaintances. Extracting and interrogating evidence such as location data, photos, messages or internet searches can therefore be beneficial in assisting the police with criminal investigations. Nevertheless, whilst the investigation of crime is important, ensuring that the law is comprehensive and up to date is equally important. Based on Freedom of Information requests and research we have conducted, we are concerned that the seizure of devices and extraction of digital evidence is being undertaken using laws that were established in a pre-digital age. Rather than updating the existing laws to adequately address the complexities of new technology and data, the Government have merely amended them, creating a patchy and far from technically detailed framework. But it is not just the laws which are complex and unclear. The details about how the police acquire, interrogate and retain data is also opaque. The majority of UK police forces failed to respond to our FOI request asking for detail on how many devices have been seized, how many have been interrogated and how many officers have been trained. 32 police forces cited that the data was not held centrally or was not easy to retrieve. Such responses are simply not acceptable and undermine the key principle of transparency which the Police's own 'Good Practice' guidance recommends. Rethinking how our data can be used in all aspects of life, including law enforcement, is necessary if we are all to live in a just and fair connected society. If law enforcement is to continue to police in line with the Peelian principle of consent then up-to-date laws, training practices and actively working towards establishing systems for transparency are essential. In light of this Big Brother Watch make three recommendations: 1. Review of legislation. The legislative process for extraction and interrogation of data from seized devices, in relation to a criminal act, needs urgent re-examination to ensure it is clear, concise and fit for modern policing. 2. Police must be transparent regarding digital evidence gathering. Police forces must adhere to good practice guidance on transparency. Records of the number of seized devices, the number of devices subject to data extraction and details regarding how long data is held for must be kept and made available for audit. 3. Training in digital evidence gathering for all officers. Improvements need to be made to the training of police officers in the handling, interrogation and retention of data extracted from devices. Any front-line officer whose role may involve the handling of digital evidence should be able to prove a high level of competence and understanding of the technical process and data protection. Details: London: Big Brother Watch, 2017. 33p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 3, 2018 at: https://bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Police-Access-to-Digital-Evidence-1.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Police-Access-to-Digital-Evidence-1.pdf Shelf Number: 150031 Keywords: Digital EvidenceEvidenceGlobal Positioning SystemsLaw Enforcement TechnologyPolice Training |