Nov 052017
 
 November 5, 2017  Surveillance, U.S.  Add comments

This may be one of those “the-road-to-Hell” stories. Joe Cadillic sent it along and we are both of the opinion that regardless of any good intentions, this is not a good idea.

Meaghan Ybos reported:

Nearly 70 victims of domestic violence and rape in Memphis are wearing GPS devices thanks to the city’s Sexual Assault Kit Taskforce, according to its monthly progress report published in October.

[…]

The GPS devices, which are tracked in real time, “provide an extra measure of safety by alerting victims when alleged perpetrators out on bond come within a certain range of victims who voluntarily wear the device,” taskforce leader Dewanna Smith told me in an October 23 e-mail.

Read more on In Justice Today.

Yeah…. no….. if a victim really wants to wear the device, then I guess that’s their right and decision, assuming that they have been fully informed of how data are collected and stored and what THEIR data may be used for and by whom. But otherwise, this strikes me as a pretty bad idea.

And does the perpetrator get a signal that they have gotten too close to their victim? Does a loud alarm on their monitor start shrieking at them? And if so, could that actually help a perpetrator find their victim if they were looking for them?

There’s too much wrong with this. Joe: jump in with your thoughts, please. I tend to agree with this statement in the story:

“If somebody accused of rape is enough of a risk that a victim would need to wear a safety monitoring device,” said Carrie Goldberg, a New York civil rights attorney and pioneer in the field of sexual privacy, “then perhaps it would make more sense to rethink that [perpetrator’s] being on the streets in the first place.”

  4 Responses to “Mixed Signals: GPS Monitors on Memphis Victims”

  1. My feelings mirror yours, however I disagree with Carrie Goldberg “If somebody accused of rape is enough of a risk that a victim would need to wear a safety monitoring device, then perhaps it would make more sense to rethink that [perpetrator’s] being on the streets in the first place.”

    As we’ve seen, not everyone accused of rape or physical abuse is guilty. So to require anyone to wear a GPS device before they’ve been found guilty is a huge privacy concern.

    A recent article in Pro Publica titled “In Connecticut, Calling for Help Carries Risks for Victims of Domestic Violence” discusses how victims of domestic violence are arrested along with the accused.

    Our justice system cares more about incarceration and less about everyone’s privacy. And that in my opinion is the real issue.

  2. GPS Monitoring: On The Wrong Foot?

    Being “accused” doesn’t make one guilty, or even the accuser a victim, but that’s just how a lawyer should view things. The fear of a complainant of her alleged perpetrator may be real, regardless of whether there is any basis for it, but that would enough to hold a person in jail rather than afford the person reasonable bail? But that too is just lawyer talk.*
    https://blog.simplejustice.us/2017/11/06/gps-monitoring-on-the-wrong-foot/

 Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>