pad747 tab ppt
TRANSCRIPT
- 1. Electronic Monitoring of OffendersVasilikiAntzoulis
- 2. Electronic Monitoring Used for offenderswho need asupervised structuredenvironment Alternative to jail andprison sentencing Communityplacement
- 3. Electronic Monitoring Radio Frequency Global Positioning System Satellite Tracking
- 4. Benefits Cuts offenders fees Reduce overcrowdingof jails and prisons Opportunity for theoffender to sustainemployment, appearin treatment, andkeep family ties
- 5. Complications Standards needed in selection Durability and reliability of devices Adequate Training
- 6. Ethical Concerns Surveillance can beconsidered against apersons liberty Too invasive Misuse and Abuse Violation of privacyrights Affecting the familyinvolved Legislative concern
- 7. Crime and Electronic Monitoring Deters criminalbehavior Reduces crime Leads to long-termbehavioral change
- 8. Selection Criteria Background checks Mental Stability Participation Support Following convictions taken intoconsideration
- 9. Ways to Measure Success 1. Whether or notoffenders violatedtheir conditions Failed to finishtheir sanction Whether or not theoffender committedany new offenses
- 10. Advantages & DisadvantagesAdvantages Help save taxpayers $ Reduce overcrowdedjails/prisons Right tools and trainingcan produce efficientresultsDisdavantages False positives Faulty devices Lack of training Stigma
- 11. Public Safety Number one concern for electronicmonitoring is the publics safety Protecting the public Keeping a track on offenders
- 12. Conclusion Curfew Drug testing Visits by supervisors Self-help groups Guidelines andregulations Easily reportedviolations
- 13. ReferencesArmstrong, G., & Freeman, B. C. (2011). Examining GPS monitoring alerts triggered by sex offenders: The divergence oflegislative goals and practical application in community corrections. Journal of Criminal Justice , 29 (2), 175-182.Button, D. M., Tewksbury, R., Mustaine, E., & K.Payne, B. (2013). Factors Contributing to Perceptions About PoliciesRegarding the Electronic Monitoring of Sex Offenders: The Role of Demographic Characteristics, Victimization Experiences,and Social Disorganization. . International Journal of Offender therapy & Comparative Criminology , 57 (1), 25-54.Button, D., DeMichele, M., & Payne, B. (2009). Using Electronic Monitoring to Supervise Sex Offenders: Legislative Patternsand Implications for Community Corrections Officers. Criminal Justice Policy Review , 20 (4), 414-436.Brown, T., & McCabe, S. (2008). GPS use in community supervision: A practitioners primer. Journal of the AmericanProbation and Parole Association , 32 (1), 25-32.DeMichele, M., Payne, B. K., & Button, D. M. (2008). Electronic Monitoring of Sex Offenders: Identifying UnanticipatedConsequences and Implications. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation , (3/4) (46), 119-135.Nellis, M. (2011). Quakers, penal reform and the challenge of electronically monitoring offenders. International Review ofLaw, Computer & Technology , 25 (1/2), 95-105.Martin, J., Hanrahan, K., & Bowers, J. (2009). Offenders Perceptions of House Arrest and Electronic Monitoring. Journal ofOffender Rehabilitation , 48 (6), 547-570.Payne, B., & Gainey, R. (2000). Understanding the Experience of House Arrest with Electronic Monitoring: An Analysis ofQuantitative and Qualitative Data. International Journal of Offender Therapy & Comparative Criminology , 44 (1), p.81; p.13.Payne, B., & Gainey, R. (2004). THE ELECTRONIC MONITORING OF OFFENDERS RELEASED FROM JAIL ORPRISON: SAFETY, CONTROL, AND COMPARISONS TO THE INCARCERATION EXPERIENCE. Prison Journal , 84 (4),413-435.