GOP not allowing resolution to protect domestic violence victims with GPS on agenda-- why?...

Hi all...

Yesterday afternoon (before the monthly resolution deadline) I sent in notice to our County Legislature's offices that fellow county legislators Sandy Goldberg, Alison MacAvery, and Steve White had all agreed to co-sponsor a resolution to be discussed and voted on in April-- for our County Legislature's Citizens Advisory Committee on Domestic Violence recommendation last October to finally be made real-- "strongly urges the Legislature to direct implementation of a Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) Monitoring and Alert system for high-risk domestic violence offenders"...

Curiously, I was just informed that, in spite of the GOP majority's routinely presenting to the rest of us resolutions to be voted on with only a day's (often less) advance notice, that our resolution on this wouldn't even be discussed or voted on at the next Committee Day (Apr. 7th-- three weeks away)!...

Ask 'em why they continue to play games and turn into a political football the issue of ensuring the safety of Dutchess County women-- email all 25 of us on this at countylegislators@co.dutchess.ny.us...(bad enough that this recommendation was made last Oct. and Dutchess GOP haven't followed through already; now they won't even allow Dem solution to be discussed!)...

As the worm turns...

[pass it on!]

Joel
444-0599/876-2488
http://www.DutchessDemocracy.blogspot.com

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

[email countylegislators@co.dutchess.ny.us and ask why GOP won't allow us to even TALK about this at Apr. 7th Committee Day!]

WHEREAS, the Poughkeepsie Journal reported March 14th that in the past two years, more than 2,800 orders of protection have been issued by Family Court judges in Dutchess County, an increase of more than 30 percent over the previous two years; last year there were more than 1,000 orders of protection in force against City of Poughkeepsie residents alone, and police arrested more than 100 people for violating them, and

WHEREAS, the Dutchess County Legislature's Citizens Advisory Committee on Domestic Violence last October in its System-wide Review and Recommendations made a statement that it "strongly urges the Legislature to direct implementation of a Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) Monitoring and Alert system for high-risk domestic violence offenders, and

WHEREAS, the Dutchess County Legislature's Citizens Advisory Committee on Domestic Violence also made it clear in its report last October that "in contrast to electronic monitoring, GPS monitoring has strengths that can address actual safety concerns for victims in real time," and

WHEREAS, the Dutchess County Legislature's Citizen Advisory Committee on Domestic Violence also stated that "the Committee has reviewed a number of GPS Monitoring Systems that, if implemented in appropriate cases, could provide for timely and meaningful reactions to identifiable risks," and

WHEREAS, Dutchess County Legislature's Citizen Advisory Committee on Domestic Violence also stated that it "notes with significant interest that such a [GPS] system has been operational in Madrid, Spain since 2006; literature reports that there has not been a single attack on a user of the system since that system's inception there," and

WHEREAS, Dutchess County Legislature's Citizen Advisory Committee on Domestic Violence also stated that "when utilized in conjunction with lethality assessment, and as a judicial supplement to the posting of bail for an offender, GPS can provide meaningful assistance to victims...it is the Committee's belief that had such a system been in place and Anthony Riccardulli subject to its monitoring and alerting capabilities, Linda Riccardulli could have been warned of his impending arrival and officers dispatched to the location; this recommendation could have changed the outcome," and

WHEREAS, such GPS monitoring systems have been set up in various jurisdictions across the country at hardly any cost to taxpayers, as high-risk domestic violence offenders often have funded the cost of these systems themselves; GPS monitoring systems can also often end up protecting domestic violence offenders as well from being falsely accused of being places they aren't, and

WHEREAS, there are now at least eighteen states (including Connecticut, Massachusetts, Washington, Indiana, Colorado, Florida, Louisiana, Minnesota, New Hampshire, and Utah) that have all passed legislation for GPS monitoring of high-risk domestic violence offenders, with at least 5,000 domestic abusers being tracked nationwide; in Massachusetts, at least 100 people accused of domestic abuse are monitored by GPSl; they are charged $8 a day for a cellphone-like device that clips to a belt, an ankle bracelet and a home charger; their movements are monitored by three control centers, and if they break an "exclusion zone" around the victim or her children, the police are notified, and

WHEREAS, according to The New York Times quoting Harvard Law School lecturer Diane Rosenfeld in May 2009, "using GPS monitoring to enforce an order of protection makes the order more than just a piece of paper; it's a way of making the criminal justice system treat domestic violence as potentially serious; by detecting any escalation in the behavior of a batterer, GPS can prevent these unnecessary tragedies; Ms. Rosenfeld's research found that about one quarter of women who were killed by their domestic abusers already had restraining orders," and

WHEREAS, Diane Rosenfeld wrote last year in the Hartford Courant that "approximately 75 percent of intimate partner homicides involve a male partner who will not accept a woman's decision to end their relationship and to be free from his violence; strict monitoring of protective orders is crucial as about a quarter of them are violated; approximately one quarter of women killed by their intimate partners had a protective order at the time of their murder," and therefore be it

RESOLVED, that the Dutchess County Legislature strongly urges our county's District Attorney and criminal and family court judges to work together to implement a GPS monitoring system for high-risk domestic violence offenders as quickly as possible, and be it further

RESOLVED, that a copy of this resolution be sent to our county's County Executive, District Attorney, criminal and family court judges, and Universal Response to Domestic Violence Coordinator.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

[recall below sent out on all this to my email list yesterday]

Help Alison MacAvery get life-saving GPS protection for domestic violence survivors!...

[scroll all the way down for Monday's Pok. Journal: "Offers of Protection Offer Victims No Guarantees"!]

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

"'Using GPS monitoring to enforce an order of protection makes the order more than just a piece of paper,' said Diane Rosenfeld, a lecturer at Harvard Law School and a longtime advocate of using GPS in domestic abuse cases.

'It's a way of making the criminal justice system treat domestic violence as potentially serious. By detecting any escalation in the behavior of a batterer, GPS can prevent these unnecessary tragedies.'

Ms. Rosenfeld's research found that about one quarter of women who were killed by their domestic abusers already had restraining orders."

[from "More States Use GPS to Track Abusers" by Ariana Green (NY Times 5/8/09)
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/09/us/09gps.html ]

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Hi all...

Remember how last fall Beacon's Maria DiBari of http://www.4Survivors.blogspot.com and I were able to generate a ton of letters being emailed to our County Legislature after Linda Riccardulli's death?...

Well finally, after much dilly-dallying, Rolison and GOP county legislators eventually agreed to ask our county's Citizens Advisory Committee on Domestic Violence to look into Maria's good suggestions...

And then their report was released-- and one of their top recommendations (from Citizens Advisory Committee on Domestic Violence) was for life-saving GPS protection for domestic violence survivors-- to make sure their abusers wouldn't be able to come anywhere near them...

[recall-- http://www.poughkeepsiejournal.com/article/20110204/NEWS01/110203042 ; also see http://www.poughkeepsiejournal.com/domestic ]

Update-- Co. Leg. Alison MacAvery has just agreed to co-sponsor the resolution drafted by yours truly calling for life-saving GPS protection for Dutchess women from their batterers!...

[kudos to Alison for forging ahead to co-sponsor this after losing late great former Co. Leg. John Ballo]

[...and again-- update here-- it's not just Alison and myself on board for this-- but also Sandy Goldberg and Steve White as well!...]

Note-- make sure this actually gets on agenda, passed-- email countylegislators@co.dutchess.ny.us!...

Now-- in their presentation to us Asst. DA Marjorie Smith and Leah Feldman told us all that Madrid has very successfully and effectively been using a GPS system to very closely monitor domestic abusers...

But fact is it's not just Madrid, not just Massachusetts-- but also literally also a dozen other states across the U.S. that since May 2009 have been monitoring over 5000domestic abusers with GPS systems!...

['tis true; again-- see "More States Use GPS to Track Abusers" by Ariana Green (NY Times 5/8/09):
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/09/us/09gps.html ]

Harvard's Diane Rosenfeld and many others have written on importance of GPS tracking this way; see:

"GPS Adds Security To Protective Orders" by Diane Rosenfeld [Hartford Courant 7/18/11]
http://www.Articles.Courant.com

"GPS Seen As a Way To Aid Abuse Victims" [Chicago Tribune 4/18/08]
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-domestic-violence-080418,0,3577042.story

Facebook: GPS Life-Saving Protection for Victims of Domestic Violence http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=90741564902&topic=7818

Spain Issues GPS Bracelets to Protect Victims of Domestic Violence [by M.P. 7/8/09]
http://www.typicallyspanish.com/news/publish/article_22226.shtml

"Spain Uses GPS Trackers to Protect Women from Domestic Violence" [Guardian 12/12/10]
http://www.Guardian.co.uk

Almost 500 Spanish Women Protected from Domestic Violence by GPS by Sara Naerum [12/15/10]
http://www.WomensViewonNews.org

And-- for those of you brainwashed by likes of Cuomo and Scott Walker that NYS is "bankrupt"...5 facts:

[point-- there's NO excuse for Dutchess/NYS to not implement life-saving GPS protection for women-- especially as Maria DiBari has educated us on the fact that more often than not, high-risk offenders end up paying themselves for GPS!]

Fact #1: Letting current tiny state income tax surcharge on millionaires sunset at the end of this year, as Cuomo and GOP are bent on doing, would literally give five billion dollars a year to the richest 3% [source: Ron Deutsch/New Yorkers for Fiscal Fairness: http://www.ABetterChoiceforNY.org ].


Fact #2: "Top earners have seen a four percentage point decrease in their federal income taxes, thanks to the Bush Administration tax cuts extended for two years by the Obama Administration."
[see http://www.fiscalpolicy.org/FPI_NewYorkShouldContinueTheIncomeTax.pdf ]


Fact #3: The richest 1% of NYS households increased their share of all income statewide from 10% in 1980 to 35% in 2007; we in the middle-class here in NYS now pay over 11% of our income in state and local taxes-- while millionaires pay only 8% of their income in state and local taxes.
[ http://www.FiscalPolicy.org ; http://www.ITEPnet.org/wp2009/ny_whopays_factsheet.pdf ]


Fact #4: Millionaires used to pay a 15 1/2% state income tax rate in the 1970's under Rockefeller-- but now pay only 8.97% (see: http://www.fiscalpolicy.org/taxhistory2.htm ).
[Pataki-- and before him Andy C.'s daddy Mario-- pushed massive budget cuts-- after tax cuts for rich!]


Fact #5: Recent Marist, Siena, Quinnipiac, Hart polls all show 70% of NY'ers SUPPORT millionaires tax.
[see: http://www.capitaltonight.com/2011/02/groups-band-together-to-push-millionaires-tax/ ;
http://www.hungeractionnys.org/Poeple%20SOS%20release%202011.pdf ;
http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=940073&category=state ;
http://www.newyorker.com/talk/financial/2010/08/16/100816ta_talk_surowiecki
(Quinnipiac poll last summer found even rank-and-file GOP registered voters for millionaire tax!)]


And don't forget-- it's not just me-- but these folks who have endorsed a county income tax to eliminate county property taxes and hold sales taxes down-- join us at http://www.petitiononline.com/cobudget :


Dutchess CSEA's Shaun Chesley, Hyde Park's Doris Kelly, Rhinebeck's Marcia Slatkin, Ruth Boyer, Fred Nagel, Sandra Oldenburg, and Edmond Roberts, Clinton's Pat Zolnik, Carmen Region, Milan's Sheila Buff, Fishkill's Josh and Mara Farrell, Wappinger's Philip Banco, Rich Carlson and Richard Vineski, Beacon's Susan Osberg, Erika Waldron, and Dan Rigney, Poughkeepsie's Barbara Lindsey, Scott Patrick Humphrey, East Fishkill's Joette Kane, Red Hook's Cary Kittner and Doris Soroko, Dover's Nora Edwards, Bangall's Alison Francis, Millerton's Dianne Engleke and Joan Daidone, and Pleasant Valley's Sue MacNish!...(besides 100+ other Dutchess folks at http://www.PetitionOnline.com/Fairness )]


So-- email us all at countylegislators@co.dutchess.ny.us; call Albany at (877) 255-9417 for no delay!...


[pass it on if you truly want to see ACTION on this issue here in Dutchess in April-- and not just rhetoric]


Joel
444-0599/876-2488
joeltyner@earthlink.net


[and again-- re: Pok. Journal coverage of forum that took place in Co. Leg. chambers Feb. 3rd-- why has there been little to no coverage in the paper about one of the most interesting things that happened that afternoon-- that Marist's Rochelle Pyne (of NYS Troopers as well) publicly called out Saland for his idiotic comment early on during the proceedings on Feb. 3rd-- about how, supposedly according to him, all too often orders of protection are issued frivolously re: domestic violence for mere gamesmanship for Family Court divorce battles-- to her credit (recognized by a circle of women as the forum ended 2/3), Rochelle Pyne neatly, politely put Saland in his place, contradicting him on this; incredibly, Miller and Molinaro joined in the fracas with their own pathetic statements of support for Saland-- pitiful]


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


From http://www.Articles.Courant.com ...


GPS Adds Security To Protective Orders
July 18, 2010|By DIANE L. ROSENFELD

Connecticut is at the forefront of a national movement to use global positioning system technology to track high-risk domestic violence offenders and to stop them before they strike. A new state law has established a pilot program to use GPS monitoring to help enforce protective orders.

It might have saved Tiana Notice's life. Tiana was brutally murdered on Valentine's Day in 2009 at her home in Plainville, allegedly at the hands of her ex-boyfriend, James Carter. He has been charged with her murder. She had a protective order against him that he violated several times - sending threatening messages, slashing her tires and leaving a letter under her door. Although her father had installed a security camera in her apartment, she did not know that her assailant was lying in wait the night she was killed. GPS monitoring could have alerted the police and Tiana that he was there.


GPS enables law enforcement to monitor the movements of an offender who must wear an electronic bracelet. Police are alerted if the batterer has entered an "exclusionary zone," such as the victim's home, workplace or a child's school, and can immediately notify and protect the victim. This early warning system has made the difference between life and death for many endangered women in states with similar laws.

Tiana's case, like so many others, showed signs of increasing danger presented by her ex-boyfriend. First, and significantly, she had broken up with him. Approximately 75 percent of intimate partner homicides involve a male partner who will not accept a woman's decision to end their relationship and to be free from his violence. Whenever a woman is abused and files for divorce or otherwise seeks protection from her partner's violence, we as a society, and especially in the criminal justice system, need to take very seriously any signs that he won't let go. One such sign is the violation of a protective order.


Protective orders commonly establish exclusionary zones from which the offender is prohibited. These orders are worthless, however, if not enforced. GPS can give women more confidence that a protective order will actually work. This will help eliminate situations in which abused women fail to seek protective orders because they see them as useless. Strict monitoring of protective orders is crucial as about a quarter of them are violated. Approximately one quarter of women killed by their intimate partners had a protective order at the time of their murder.


When a woman seeks help from the justice system, the people who are supposed to help her must treat her case as potentially lethal, evaluate the red flags indicating her partner's sexual possessiveness and wrap her in a safety net.


Connecticut's new legislation is a step in this direction. If we fail to protect a woman who is in danger, it puts her at greater risk than before she sought help. Batterers become emboldened when law enforcement fails to respond to protective order violations, and the violence predictably escalates into homicide in way too many cases. Three to four women a day in this country are killed at the hands of their intimate partners - people who professed to love them.


GPS monitoring focuses police attention on these danger signs, gives them proof of violations and an opportunity to save lives. It also allows them to be better prepared, with backup and information, when rushing to a potentially volatile situation.

In Massachusetts, where we have been using GPS in domestic violence cases, high-risk management teams evaluate all cases, identify the ones that are potentially lethal and use various methods to contain the batterer's behavior, providing increased safety for the victim. Our pilot program, the Greater Newburyport High-Risk Case Management Team, reports no domestic homicides, 100 percent success using GPS monitoring (meaning neither re-assaults nor violations of protection orders) and a conviction rate of offenders of more than 90 percent.

Connecticut has joined 18 states in what is becoming a national movement to better monitor high-risk domestic offenders. We no longer have to shake our heads in resignation, wondering what might have been done to save an endangered woman's life. Instead, we need to respond to the smoke and extinguish the fire before yet another precious life is lost.


[Diane L. Rosenfeld is a lecturer at Harvard Law School, where she teaches courses on domestic violence and women's advocacy.]


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


From http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/09/us/09gps.html ...


More States Use GPS to Track Abusers

By ARIANA GREEN
Published: May 8, 2009


NEWBURYPORT, Mass. - When Theresa, a 51-year-old mother of two living near this coastal town, filed for a restraining order against her husband, she thought it would help put an end to the beatings, death threats and stalking that had tormented her family for years.


She won the order, but her husband, Joel, a West Point graduate with a master's degree who police reports say hid 17 guns in their home, did not seem to care. He violated the restraining order three times, she said.

"He'd come to our child's school and beat both of us up in front of everyone," Theresa said.
In Massachusetts, where about one-quarter of restraining orders are violated each year, according to the state's probation office, a recent law has expanded the use of global positioning devices to include domestic abusers and stalkers who have violated orders of protection. A judge ordered Joel to wear a Global Positioning System monitor, alerting law enforcement officials if he went near his wife's house, her work or their children's school.
"It was the first time I could turn my house alarm off and feel O.K.," said Theresa, who has since been divorced and who insisted that only her first name be used, to protect her children's privacy.

Twelve other states have passed similar legislation - most recently, Indiana this week - and about 5,000 domestic abusers are being tracked nationwide, said George Drake, who oversees Colorado's Electronic Monitoring Resource Center, which gathers data from equipment vendors.


But the path to the system's widespread use has been bumpy. It is still hard to protect families who live in rural areas or where there are not enough police officers to respond quickly. With the economic downturn, states have cut money for training the police and judges in GPS use, and some places with legislation in place say they cannot afford it.
It is up to a judge, in cases of extreme violence, to decide whether to order its use before trial, as a condition of bail or as a sentence.

"Until they know how GPS can be used and how successful it can be, judges are reluctant to order it because it's unfamiliar," said Judge Peter Doyle of Newburyport District Court. "Without seminars and convincing presentations, I wouldn't have been comfortable ordering it."

The scope of stalking was revealed in a study released by the Justice Department in January, which found that 3.4 million people had been subjected to stalking over a one-year period. As this week's fatal shooting of a Wesleyan University student showed - the victim, Johanna Justin-Jinich, 21, told the authorities two years ago that the suspect, Stephen P. Morgan, had repeatedly sent harassing e-mail messages - stalking often includes sending threats online and lurking outside homes, offices and schools. Often the only way victims can prove that they are being stalked, experts say, is through new technologies like GPS.


Newburyport, a city of 17,000 about 35 miles north of Boston, has been a testing ground for some of the most effective training programs in preventing domestic abuse.

Kelly Dunne, associate director of the Jeanne Geiger Crisis Center here, has helped seven other cities follow the model of the Greater Newburyport High Risk Response Team, which brings together police officers, district attorneys, probation officers and others to decide which domestic violence cases should be recommended for GPS monitoring. Last year, her group trained over 1,000 advocates, prosecutors and officials from other states, alerting them to the danger signs in offenders' behavior.

Experts say the program can help save lives. Domestic-violence-related homicides increased 300 percent in Massachusetts from 2005 to 2007, according to Jane Doe Inc., the Massachusetts Coalition Against Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence, while in Newburyport, where a High Risk Team was in place, there were no such homicides in that period.


"Using GPS monitoring to enforce an order of protection makes the order more than just a piece of paper," said Diane Rosenfeld, a lecturer at Harvard Law School and a longtime advocate of using GPS in domestic abuse cases. "It's a way of making the criminal justice system treat domestic violence as potentially serious. By detecting any escalation in the behavior of a batterer, GPS can prevent these unnecessary tragedies."

Ms. Rosenfeld's research found that about one quarter of women who were killed by their domestic abusers already had restraining orders.


Alexis A. Moore, 34, founder of Survivors in Action, a nonprofit organization for crime victims, said that her former partner had violated a restraining order more than 30 times over four years, but that she had no way of proving it. She said he had slashed her tires, lurked outside her home and harassed her online. She said California lawmakers had told her there was no money to pay for GPS monitoring where she lives, although legislation allowed for it.

"My stalker continues to make a game of getting away with restraining order violations - because he can," Ms. Moore said.


In Massachusetts, about 100 people accused of domestic abuse are monitored by GPS. They are charged $8 a day for a cellphone-like device that clips to a belt, an ankle bracelet and a home charger. Their movements are monitored by three control centers, and if they break an "exclusion zone" around the victim or her children, the police are notified.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


From http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=90741564902&topic=7818 ...


GPS Life-Saving Protections for Victims of Domestic Violence


From Cherry Simpson:


In May 2006 my daughter was handcuffed, raped and beaten by her husband - he confessed and was still allowed to plea out of the sex crime status. He got 3 yrs 9 months and served 19 months. We knew he would do it again upon his release. He stalked my daughter from prison. We were told from day one you'll never get a GPS put on him. Well we did.

I personally credit the GPS monitor for keeping my daughter and grandchildren alive. I found out about it by looking on http://www.prisontalk.com. The convicts hate it because they have no legal recourse to have them removed once they're placed on them by DOC and in fact many speak about it providing evidence used against them. I had read about the death of Cindy Bischof and the law which was passed in IL but it wasn't going into effect until Jan 2009 and the court didn't have the funds or the man power to order them or to monitor them at the time. So I did what was logical and contacted IDOC, the PRB and parole. I sent them copies of Regan's abuser's arrests and criminal record as well as proof of his continued stalking.

I knew DOC had GPS for sex offenders, so I appealed to them on the basis that he was a sex offender. He had also continued to stalk my daughter from prison and we reported that to the prison and PRB and filed charges with the DA.

I had heard that Harvard Law Professor Diane Rosenfeld worked with the Cindy Bischof Foundation and I wrote them asking for their support. Professor Rosenfeld wrote the lethality assessment for my daughter and got her a pro-bono atty. to represent her victim rights in court. I thank God for women like Professor Rosenfeld and Atty Rachel Morse who work in the law, their presence in the justice system is helping to change the Law to reflect reality.

My daughter's case was written about in the Chgo Trib. In the story my daughters abuser talks about cutting it off and being able to get to her in 5 mins. But he didn't. (story links below)

The GPS has a 100% success rate in keeping women alive. We wanted an effective legal guarantee of personal-security for my daughter and her children. I think it's a wonderful tool and will not only help save lives but prevents crime and helps to prosecute crime. We all have GPS on our phones and now we've got a microchip being put on our USPS postage stamps because of anthrax and congress. They already use them on sex offenders DOC has them and have monitored them and used the data to prosecute perpetrators. I believe it is inevitable we will all see them utilized soon. Congress wants to live too.

I also think the GPS is important for women's human rights. Too many women are dying from domestic violence. I personally find it very disingenuous that any domestic violence coalition wouldn't want it. It saves lives. It shouldn't be about money, it should be about saving women's lives. The rate prisoners are being released early we all need this crime deterrent tool.

OP's or PFA's (protection orders) are not honest, they do little to nothing to protect nor is there much done to hold batters accountable. Women are being blamed for getting themselves beat and raped by men they know and then chastised for not liking them afterwards. We need the state to recognize that women are violated because we are women (a form of unequal treatment which needs legal teeth) the GPS helps do exactly that and more.

The problems I hear about have been about state lines but according to the VAWA and the Full Faith and Credit Laws it should not be a problem. I've attached the 2 pdf's on Full Faith and Credit below. We have asked PRB upon my daughter's abuser's new release that he be given a GPS monitor just like the last time (he was just put back into prison for the 3rd and 4th violation of OP). The Attorney General of Illinois has assured me he will have it put on him. We received a letter from IDOC told my daughter she would qualify for the GPS under the new Cindy Bischof Law.

I already have the proof it works to save lives...my daughter and grandchildren live with us now in AL.

Sincerely,

Cherry Simpson (Mother of spousal rape and abuse victim)


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


From http://www.slate.com/id/2165568/ ...

Tracking Device
How about using GPS monitoring to stop batterers?
By Maura Kelly
Updated Friday, May 4, 2007, at 12:38 PM ET


Last month, 26-year-old Rebecca Griego was shot and killed by her ex-boyfriend, Jonathan Rowan, as she sat in her administrative office at the University of Washington. Rowan had previously threatened to harm Griego, her sister, and their dogs, and she had gotten a restraining order. She'd also passed out pictures of him to her co-workers so they could serve Rowan the order if he showed up at the campus. And she'd moved to a new apartment and started working from home for two weeks before her death. None of this, of course, helped her.


What might have? In fact, Washington had a good tool in place: a state law that allows judges to impose electronic monitoring as a condition of a restraining order. When judges so order, the police can keep tabs on abusers with a technology best known to people who are bad with directions: the global positioning system.

Just as GPS can find a lost driver, it can also alert cops and targets whenever a domestic-violence offender enters a restricted zone, like the area surrounding a woman's home or office. Police put an electronic bracelet on the batterer that sends a signal to computer servers at headquarters if he goes anywhere he shouldn't. Then, if he violates a restraining order, they can call the woman to let her know that he is on his uninvited way. The idea is to buy women crucial time, even if it's only minutes, so they can get away. The notification loop also kicks in if the offender tries to remove or deactivate the bracelet.


In addition to their value in emergencies, GPS monitoring also may deter offenders from violating restraining orders in the first place. The Jeanne Geiger Crisis Center in Amesbury, Mass., which has been tracking the local success of GPS monitoring, has found that none of the batterers it is studying have committed any serious infractions (beyond "administrative" no-nos, like letting the batteries on their bracelets run low). Knowing the law is on to them may make batterers less likely to break it.

When you think about it from a battered woman's point of view, GPS surveillance seems like "a no-brainer," in the words of former Massachusetts Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey, who helped to push through a monitoring law in her state. Along with Massachusetts and Washington, six other states-Colorado, Florida, Louisiana, Minnesota, New Hampshire, and Utah-have laws that explicitly establish parameters for the electronic surveillance of batterers. Judges in other states may be able to use GPS monitoring too, under the theory that doing so would help to enforce the kind of protection that a restraining order is supposed to (but often doesn't) provide.

To be sure, GPS monitoring for batterers isn't a cure-all. It raises civil liberties concerns (though I didn't find anyone who was eager to press that argument). It's also possible that the occasional abuser might be so enraged by the cops keeping an electronic eyeball on him that he'd be more rather than less likely to get violent again. This issue comes up with restraining orders, too. The best solution, domestic-violence experts say, is for police to talk to victims, who can predict fairly accurately how batterers will respond to different punitive measures.


In addition, victim advocates point out that GPS monitoring can't protect women from the damage abusers can do long-distance-like leaving threatening voice messages or ruining their credit rating. But the evidence from the Geiger Center argues otherwise, because none of the guys in that study have tried to harass their victims in any way. The research is small-scale and preliminary but matches the thinking of advocates, who believe GPS monitoring will deter a range of transgressions by sending a stronger message than a restraining order that the justice system takes battering seriously.

The real barrier to GPS monitoring is paying for it. Though electronic surveillance has gotten cheaper in recent years, it still costs $10 a day-$300 a month per offender. (In addition to the bracelets themselves, the cost includes the GPS servers and software and the salaries for the people operating the computers.) Some states, like Massachusetts, plan to make offenders pay for the monitoring themselves. That approach could backfire, however, in the case of a guy who's also required to pay child support. While he goes to jail if he refuses to pay for GPS monitoring, all that happens if he doesn't write his child-support check is that his wages may be garnisheed. So, an abuser low on funds might logically skip child support instead of the GPS payments. And if he does go to jail, he can't earn the money to pay the child support.


Victim advocates would prefer that the government cover the cost of monitoring. They hope it will pay for itself with savings in other areas, like a reduced need for family shelters-where one-quarter of occupants are typically fleeing abuse-and fewer pricey murder trials. One potential source of funding is the federal Violence Against Women Act of 2005. VAWA is supposed to fund states to improve the investigation, prosecution, and prevention of violent crimes against women. The question is how much money Congress will put behind it. If fully funded, VAWA could mean $1 billion for the states, some of which could go toward GPS monitoring.


Still, even if well-funded, cool new technology has its limits. Before he murdered Rebecca Griego, Jonathan Rowan went into hiding. The police never found him, so they couldn't slap him with the restraining order Griego got, and they wouldn't haven't been able to track him using GPS, either. For monitoring to work, the police must first get the bracelet on the offender.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


From http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-domestic-violence-080418,0,3577042.story ...


GPS seen as way to aid abuse victims
Massachusetts model may be used in Illinois


By Liam Ford
Tribune reporter
April 18, 2008

The young mother's long nightmare began to subside soon after her abusive ex-husband was outfitted with a satellite monitoring device that would electronically warn authorities if he ever got too close to her.

The woman, who requested anonymity, can now drive her children to the store again without going 45 minutes out of her way to avoid him. She can leave her home in eastern Massachusetts without agonizing about whether it would be better to wear a wig, or whether she could reach a police station if she saw him following her.She says she has a life again, thanks to the small global-positioning device clipped to the belt of a man who she feared would kill her.

"Because he went on GPS, I got to go back to school," said the woman, who lives on the front line of an innovative Massachusetts program that uses GPS monitoring for those who violate orders of protection. "I got to raise two beautiful kids."

The Illinois House on Thursday unanimously passed legislation that would allow judges to order GPS monitoring for those who violate orders of protection. The proposed law is modeled on the statute in Massachusetts, one of only a handful of states with experience using the high-tech system to track those accused of domestic violence.

Approved more than a year ago, the Massachusetts monitoring system has proved most effective in the Newburyport area northeast of Boston, where experts say the results have been excellent. So far, none of the eight people outfitted with GPS there have violated protective orders, authorities say.

The effort in Illinois was prompted by last month's slaying of Cindy Bischof, 43, an Elmhurst real estate broker who was shot to death outside her office by a former boyfriend, who then turned the pistol on himself. Michael Giroux was twice charged with violating Bischof's restraining order.

GPS is not a panacea. But women whose attackers have been fitted with it, and advocates and researchers who have studied electronic monitoring, say the technology can turn the tables on people under orders of protection.

"It's really what the technology does to the mind of the batterer more than anything else, and if they realize that there will be very concrete evidence of their violating the restrictions, they are less likely to do so," said Edna Erez, head of the criminal justice department at the University of Illinois at Chicago.

Massachusetts has been using GPS monitoring for sex offenders since 2005, and in late 2006 started using it for those accused of domestic violence or stalking.

In the Bay State program, a GPS-fitted cell phone checks where someone is once a minute, and transmits that data to three central tracking centers every five minutes, said Paul Lucci, deputy commissioner of the Massachusetts Probation Service.

A companion ankle bracelet connects wirelessly to the phone and ensures the person is always carrying it. If the person wearing the GPS device moves into a restricted area -- such as near a victim's home or workplace, or if the bracelet is cut, or the cell phone left even a few feet away, authorities are alerted. They're also warned if the phone's batteries are low.

In a small office in a government building in Boston -- one of the three state monitoring centers -- several state probation employees watched computer screens and made calls to people on probation or parole fitted with the GPS devices. The operation is staffed 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

When someone enters an area from which they are barred -- they're called "exclusion zones" -- an alert is set off, and a probation employee tries to contact the person being tracked on the GPS cell phone, Lucci said. If that doesn't work, a parole officer is contacted, and an arrest warrant can be issued.

Although the Illinois legislation would require victims to be automatically contacted if a potential attacker moves into a restricted area, a woman in Massachusetts is contacted by authorities only if required by court order. Some critics say that is a flaw.

Despite these and other gaps in the Massachusetts system, it's working in areas like Newburyport, where GPS tracking is recommended by a team of law enforcement and social service workers who review all domestic violence cases in the area. Not everyone is enthusiastic about GPS monitoring. Fathers' rights groups are skeptical of protection orders and even more wary of monitoring.

"These things, the protection orders, they're a license to dehumanize somebody," said Mark Charalambous, a spokesman for the state's Fatherhood Coalition.

But the young mother who went back to school and another woman said GPS tracking protected them and dramatically changed the quality of their lives. Both women were helped by the Newburyport team. "At least I could sleep at night when [my ex-husband] was on" GPS tracking, said the second woman, who also asked not to have her name used.

Some women such as Mary Rieves, 47, of Boston, look forward to taking advantage of the system. Rieves said she has had protection orders against her ex-boyfriend since 1993. If he ever is released from jail, she hopes he is fitted with a GPS device.

"Why should I, the victim, have to alter myself?" Rieves said.

In Springfield on Thursday, the House sent the legislation to the Senate on a 114-0 vote after Rep. Suzanne Bassi (R- Rolling Meadows), the sponsor, reminded lawmakers that Bischof "lived in constant fear of this coward."

As the chamber quieted, Bassi recounted how Bischof wore a panic button around her neck and had security cameras and an alarm system installed but that her effort "still wasn't enough."

Several lawmakers said they hoped Bischof's death would not be in vain, that the legislation soon will become a law that helps others fight what one lawmaker called a "reign of terror."

"Something now has to change to help these people so we do not hear on the radio of another woman who was found dead by someone who has attacked her ..." said Rep. Patricia Bellock (R-Hinsdale).


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


From http://www.Guardian.co.uk ....


Spain uses GPS trackers to protect women from domestic violence
Madrid surveillance center receives 1,200 alerts a month from 450 tags now in use


* Sandrine Morel
* Guardian Weekly, Tuesday 14 December 2010 14.01 GMT


Maria Dolores, 40, has short hair, an expressionless face, dark smudges under her eyes and a wry sense of humor no doubt left over from her recent troubles. She takes a black object from her handbag, a little bigger than a mobile phone but much heavier and without a keypad. "Here it is," she says. In the offices of the Centro Mujer 24 Horas, a centre for battered women in Valencia, Loli, as she asks to be called, displays a mixture of pride and anxiety as she shows the GPS device that has stayed with her at all times since June.


Night and day, when out for a meal or to see a film, Loli is never without the transmitter-receiver that connects her directly to the national surveillance centre in the suburbs of Madrid. There, they know where she is at all times - and where her husband is. "The court decided to give him a chance, but it deprived me of any hope of living in peace," Loli says. She never refers to her husband by name, always as "him". Juan (as we shall call him) was imprisoned in January after nearly killing her and released on 7 June. He will be tried next month.


When the court authorized Juan's release on parole, it stipulated that he should remain at a safe distance (300 meters) from his wife, requiring him to wear an electronic tag. The system, introduced by Spain in July 2009 to protect the victims of domestic violence, keeps permanent track of victim and assailant, alerting the police in the event of danger.


If the battery goes flat, the assailant attempts to remove the tag or tries to enter the victim's safety perimeter, an alarm rings. Loli explains: "The first time it started ringing, I was on my way to the court in Albacete", in Castille-La Mancha province, where she was living with Juan and their two children when the assault occurred. "My whole body started shaking," she says. "Just after that, the phone rang and they told me he was 700 meters away, with the name of the street. I stayed connected until I reached the police station where I was due to meet an officer to accompany me."


It was the only incident of this sort, but nothing in the world would separate Loli from her GPS protector. "I hope the people in Madrid keep watch on me round the clock, in fact I would rather they only watched me," she adds.


Assisted by her counsellor, Loli has decided to tell her story. She wants "him" to read this article, to realize what he did and to understand what she has to endure: the fear of sleeping alone, the visits to the psychiatrist and the pills "to stop the dreams". In a recurrent nightmare she relives the scene that almost ended in her death, waking up drenched in sweat.


On the morning of 5 January, Loli's mother was looking after the couple's two children, aged five and 10, so the parents could clean up their hardware shop in Albacete. The previous summer Loli had told Juan she planned to leave him. Though they slept in different rooms she continued living there, "for the kids' sake". "It was a terrible mistake, but there was no way I could have known. He had never been violent before," she explains.

To begin with, Juan tried using tears to win her over. Then he switched to emotional blackmail: "Without you, I'm nothing ... If you leave me, I'll kill myself."


But that day a new argument broke out. Loli discovered that Juan had opened a bank account in his father's name and transferred part of the family's savings into it. When she told him she wouldn't let him get away with it, he went wild. "He grabbed a chisel and hacked at my neck," she says, showing us the scar on her throat. "He threw me down and started banging my head on the floor."


She thought she was going to die, but neighbors heard her cries and alerted a police officer who happened to be passing. They found her on the ground, her husband on top of her, with his knee on her chest. She was rushed to hospital suffering from multiple injuries to the head and neck, two slipped discs and bruises all over her body. "I looked like a painting by Picasso," she says.


The court decided to take Juan into custody while the case was investigated. Loli nevertheless moved out with the children and went to live with her mother in Valencia. "I kept thinking I'd see him wherever I went in Albacete." She gradually began to recover, but then Juan was released on 7 June. It was such a shock that she barely heard the instructions given by the engineer who came to her with the GPS phone.


She has been under constant surveillance ever since. Loli is adamant: "If I didn't have the machine I'd never set foot outside the door. It gives me a feeling of security because I know if he comes within 700 meters of me, I'll be warned."


The surveillance center receives around 1,200 serious alerts a month (tag removal or safety perimeter intrusion), triggered by the 450 tags currently fitted in Spain, out of a total of 3,000 that the government purchased in 2009. "We need to improve the courts' appraisal of the risk before enlarging the scope of the system," says Miguel Lorente, a ministry specialist on gender-based violence. Since the beginning of the year, 63 women in Spain have been killed by their partners. Fourteen of them had already lodged a complaint with the police, but none of them had received a GPS phone.


Loli has decided to apply for a job on the Valencia underground. "I'd like to sell tickets at the counter," she says. But what she means is she wants a protected position, behind security glass - a dream her psychiatrist finds terribly revealing.

France follows

Taking its cue from Spain, France is about to start trials of orders requiring violent spouses to wear an electronic tag, and to equip victims with a warning device. "In France, around 3,600 eviction orders were issued against violent spouses between 2006 and 2008, but it is difficult to keep track of them," France's former secretary of state for family affairs, Nadine Morano, said. "As a result the women are not safe."
In 2008, 157 women were killed by their partners. "In many cases murder is the culmination of ongoing assault," a parliamentary committee of inquiry reported last year. French homes are more dangerous for women than public spaces, but incidents are often not reported. According to the 2001 National Survey of Violence Inflicted on Women, only 13% of incidents at home are reported, compared with 32% for workplace violence and 43% for assaults in public places.


Anne Chemin


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


From http://www.typicallyspanish.com/news/publish/article_22226.shtml ...


Spain issues GPS bracelets to protect victims of domestic violence
By m.p. - Jul 8, 2009 - 4:43 PM


3,000 will be issued to high risk offenders in a first phase

Courts in Spain are from 24th July this year distributing 3,000 GPS tracking bracelets to those found guilty of domestic abuse, which will alert the authorities if a distancing order is being broken.


A similar program is already in place in the Community of Madrid, and the 3,000 tracking devices issued in the first phase of the national programme will cover 10% of offenders affected by distancing orders - those seen as the highest risk cases. EFE reports this phase is setting the government back 5 million ¤.


Equality Minister, Bibiano Aído, said while presenting the programme this Wednesday that the bracelet is a symbol of what society has to say to the aggressor: '40 million Spaniards are watching you. Don't go near her'. And as her fellow Minister, Alfredo Pérez Rubalcaba from the Interior Ministry, said, 'It means whoever wears it is going to think twice'.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


From http://www.WomensViewonNews.org ...


Almost 500 Spanish women protected from domestic violence by GPS
Posted by Sara Rydland Naerum on December 15, 2010

Since electronic tags were introduced in Spain in July 2009, the Madrid surveillance centre has received around 1200 alerts every month.

Around 450 tags are currently in use.


The GPS devices are carried by women who are victims of domestic violence, and trace the electronic tag worn by the perpetrator. If the tag is removed, or if safety perimeter intrusion is recorded, an alarm goes off in the Madrid surveillance center.


The woman's alarm will further alert her, and shortly after staff from the center will contact her with details of the breach and suggest solutions to keep safe.


This year, 63 Spanish women have been killed by their partners. None of these had a GPS tracking system.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


From http://www.PoughkeepsieJournal.com yesterday...


Orders of protection offer victims no guarantees


Poughkeepsie Journal March 14, 2011


by Larry Hertz


It's often described as "only a piece of paper," and law enforcement officials agree there's no guarantee it will protect you.

But virtually every day, judges throughout Dutchess County issue orders of protection to accused and convicted criminals - most often in cases of domestic violence - as a means of keeping victims out of further harm's way.


Orders of protection are designed to help ensure the batterer and the victim stay apart so further violence doesn't occur.


"Most crimes happen just once. Your house gets burglarized, your car gets broken into, and that's it - it's over," said Sgt. Mel Clauson of the City of Poughkeepsie police.

"Domestic violence is different," Clauson said. "When someone is victimized, it's not over. It's going to happen again."


In most cases, orders of protection are so-called "full" orders, barring any contact or communication - by phone, e-mail, text message or other means - between the victim and the alleged abuser. In some cases, such as when the couple share custody of children, the orders may be more limited, allowing some communication but barring the defendant from using threatening language or committing other abuse. In either case, a violation of the judge's order may result in defendants being charged with an additional crime, criminal contempt, subjecting them to enhanced penalties.

There is no state law requiring judges to issue an order of protection against someone arrested in a domestic violence incident. But according to protocols established by law enforcement agencies in Dutchess County, police will usually request one if they make an arrest, and judges will usually agree to do so, one local magistrate said.


"(State law) does say that if an order of protection is requested and the court doesn't issue one, we have to state on the record why we're not doing so," Hyde Park Town Justice David Steinberg said. "In domestic violence cases, it's one of the most important decisions we have to make at the time of arraignment."

The question defendants and their victims often ask when such an order is issued is: What exactly does this piece of paper mean? In Dutchess County, that question is answered, in detail, in an information sheet that is handed to everyone involved in the case when the order is issued.

Dutchess County Senior Assistant District Attorney Marjorie Smith said the document is commonly called the "hearts and flowers handout" because it explains, in plain language, that the defendant is barred from having any contact with his alleged victim, even if it's only to send flowers or a box of candy.

Conversely, victims are advised not to approach their alleged abusers even if they want to discuss reconciliation over a "Valentine's Day dinner." Defendants are warned that even if they receive a friendly call, they are violating the order simply by responding to such an invitation.

"I tell victims, 'This is not your order of protection, it's mine, and only I can lift it,' " Dutchess County Family Court Judge Joan Posner said.

Posner said she and other judges routinely field five to 10 requests for orders of protection every day, and the frequency of those requests is increasing.
In the past two years, more than 2,800 orders of protection have been issued by Family Court judges here, an increase of more than 30 percent over the previous two years, according to statistics provided by the court.


In every case involving an arrest, advocates are assigned to help victims navigate the judicial system and provide other support. State police crime victim specialist Rochelle McDonough said her job is both rewarding and frustrating.

"The first thing I ask (a victim) is, 'Are you safe right now?' " McDonough said.
Once she determines what immediate services her clients need, McDonough explains what will happen later in court and emphasizes the importance of refraining from having any contact with their alleged abusers.


McDonough said it is often hard for judges to determine how serious any incident may be because most women who are in abusive relationships refrain from calling police until their partner's behavior becomes unbearable.

"If someone calls the police (to report domestic violence), you can almost bet this isn't the first time something like this happened," she said. "But a judge may look at the case and say there's no prior history of such conduct and make a decision accordingly."

Thalia Hallenbeck, domestic violence police liaison to the Dutchess County Sheriff's Office, said law enforcement officers are often frustrated by what they see as a lack of proper sanctions on defendants who violate orders of protection.

"There have to be consequences on these individuals," Hallenbeck said. "These guys have to know that if they violate, they're going to have to pay a price, and that doesn't always happen."

Judy Lombardi, director of outreach and support at Grace Smith House, an agency that provides shelter and other services for victims of domestic violence, agreed.

"Everybody knows the saying that an order of protection is just a piece of paper, and it's true that if someone's hellbent on violating it, there's not much you can do to stop them," Lombardi said. "But if there were quicker sanctions (imposed by judges), I think that would deter more people."

Beacon resident Amy Ritter said she and a Grace Smith House advocate, Nada Montesano, attended every court appearance of her former boyfriend, Roland Daise, after Daise assaulted her in August. On the day Daise was sentenced to three years' probation, Beacon City Court Judge Timothy Pagones issued a five-year order of protection, barring him from having any contact with Ritter.

Ritter said that when Daise left the courtroom holding the order of protection, he looked at her and whispered an obscenity as he folded the paper in half. She said she was outraged when he did not receive any further sanction.

"I have to look over my shoulder every day," Ritter said in an interview with a Journal reporter last week. "I feel I was slapped in the face by the (criminal-justice) system. Where's my justice?"


Senior Assistant District Attorney Angela Lopane, who prosecuted Daise, said she could not file additional charges because she had no corroborating evidence he had violated the order. Absent any additional criminal charges, Pagones said, he could not impose any further sanctions.

Daise's attorney, Senior Assistant Public Defender Nancy Garo, said Ritter's allegations were "thoroughly investigated" by police and prosecutors.

"There was absolutely no evidence my client did anything to violate the order of protection, and that's why there were no further charges filed," Garo said.
Lombardi said she hopes publicity about four recent homicides in Dutchess County that involved domestic violence would raise public awareness about the importance of doing more to prevent it. But she said she's not convinced the climate for victims has improved.

"We have wonderful relations with the police, and most of them respond (to domestic violence incidents) appropriately," she said. "The court system? I think there are a lot of variables there."


Clauson, of the City of Poughkeepsie police, said that while orders of protection can be effective tools in preventing further violence, they don't address the root of the problem, and they are by no means foolproof. Last year, he said, there were more than 1,000 orders of protection in force against city residents, and police arrested more than 100 people for violating them.

Clauson said he believes educational programs on domestic violence should begin earlier in the schools.


"We need something like the DARE program (designed to warn middle school students of the dangers of drugs) for domestic violence," he said. "This is learned behavior. It can be changed."