Electronic monitoring: uses, challenges and successes

Footnotes

1 G4S (2016) ‘Electronic Monitoring to the Criminal and Youth Justice Systems in Scotland: Statistical Bulletin’ 1 January 2015 – 31 December 2015, Glasgow: G4S

2 Pepper, M. and Dawson, P. (2016) ‘Alcohol Abstinence Monitoring Requirement A process review of the proof of concept pilot’ MOPAC Evidence and Insight Unit, available at: https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/aamr_final.pdf; non-compliance was based solely on the consumption of alcohol or tampering with monitoring equipment and did not include compliance with the conditions of the community sentence, which were often numerous and complex. 

3 Scottish Government Working Group 2016 'Electronic Monitoring in Scotland Working Group Report' available at: https://www.gov.scot/publications/electronic-monitoring-scotland-working-group-report/, p. 7

4 Gibbs, A. and King, E. D. (2003) ‘Home detention with electronic monitoring: The New Zealand experience’ Criminal Justice 3:2; Vol. 3(2): 199–211; Graham, H. and McIvor, G. (2015) ‘Scottish and International Review of the Uses of Electronic Monitoring’ University of Stirling; Gur, O.M.,  Ibarra, P. R., and  Erez E., (2016) 'Specialization and the Use of GPS for Domestic Violence by Pretrial Programs: Findings from a National Survey of U.S. Practitioners', Journal of Technology in Human Services, 34:1, 32-62, p.37; International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) cf Gies, S. V. (2016) ‘The Use of Electronic Monitoring as a Supervision Tool’ in Jeglic, E. and Calkins, C. (eds.)  Sexual Violence: Evidence based policy and prevention, pp. 95-117 Springer International Publishing, pp. 102-3; Payne, B., DeMichele, M., & Button, D. (2008) ‘Understanding the Electronic Monitoring of Sex Offenders’ Corrections Compendium 33(1): 1-5.

5 Graham and McIvor (2015)

6 Armstrong, S., Malloch, M., Nellis, M and Norris, P. (2011) 'Evaluation of the Use of Home Detention Curfew and the Open Prison Estate in Scotland' Scottish Government Report available at:  http://www.antoniocasella.eu/nume/HDC_armstrong_scotland_2011.pdf

7 Barry, M., Malloch, M., Moodie, K., Nellis, M., Romeo, R., and Dhanasiri, S.,  (2007) 'an Evaluation of the Use Of Electronic Monitoring as a Condition of Bail In Scotland' Scottish Executive available at: https://www.sccjr.ac.uk/publications/an-evaluation-of-the-use-of-electronic-monitoring-as-a-condition-of-bail-in-scotland/

8 Scottish Government Working Group (2016)

9 The publications resulting from this project can be accessed at: http://emeu.leeds.ac.uk/reports/

10 Searches were conducted using terms which included “electronic monitoring”, “home detention”, “home arrest”, “tagging”, “curfew”.

11 Di Tella, R. and Schargrodsky, E. (2013) 'Criminal recidivism after Prison and Electronic monitoring'  Journal of Political Economy 121:1, highlight the range of available literature and provide an overview on p. 29, footnote 2. 

12 Ministry of Justice (2011) 'The effect of early release of prisoners on Home Detention Curfew (HDC) on recidivism' available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/217378/effect-early-release-hdc-recidivism.pdf

13 Graham and McIvor (2015) p. 20; Scottish Government Working Group (2016) p. 3

14 The term ‘unilateral’ is used to describe EM that monitors only the offender; bilateral monitoring is used to describe systems whereby the offender and the victim are involved in the EM process. 

15 McIvor, G. and Graham, H. (2016) ‘Electronic Monitoring in Scotland’ University of Stirling and the European Commission, p. 3

16 Conditions ‘g’ to ‘j’ will be the new uses under the Management of Offenders Bill, and ‘e’ is a change in that Community Payback Order use will be at first disposal, rather than only at breach stage. Some of these will therefore not be possible until the legislation, which at the time of writing was before the Scottish Parliament, is passed and commenced.

17 G4S (2016)

18 Graham and McIvor (2015); Mair and Nee (1990) cf. Nellis, M. (2004) ‘Electronic Monitoring and the Community Supervision of Offenders” in Bottoms, A., Rex, S., and Robinson, G., (eds.) (2004) Alternatives to Prison Devon: Willan Publishing, p. 22; Van Kalmthout, A., Knapen, M., and Morgentern, C., (2009) (eds.) Pre-trial detention in Europe, Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publishers

19 Black M. and Smith R. (2003) ‘Electronic monitoring in the criminal justice system. Trends & issues in crime and criminal justice’ 254. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, available at:  https://aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/tandi254; Cale and Burton (2018) ‘Factors Associated with Breaches of Home Detention and Returns to Custody Post-Home Detention in South Australia’ Current Issues in Criminal Justice 30: 1, pp. 35-56

20 Boone, M. and Herzog-Evans (2013) ‘Decision Making and Offender Supervision’ in McNeill F. and Beyens, K. (eds.) (2013) Offender Supervision in Europe Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 

21 Moss, B. (2018) ‘Electronic monitoring and monitoring probation: The case of Ireland’ European Journal of Probation, Vol. 10(2) 120– 135; p. 125

22 Boone, M., Van der Kooij, M., Rap, S. (2017) ‘The highly reintegrative approach of electronic monitoring in the Netherlands’ European Journal of Probation , Vol. 9:1, 46– 61

23 Barry et al (2007)

24 Barry et al. (2007); Graham and McIvor (2015) p. 22

25 Graham and McIvor (2015) p. 22

26 Haverkamp, R., and Woessner, G., (2016) 'The Emergence and Use of GPS Electronic Monitoring in Germany: Current Trends and Findings' JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY IN HUMAN SERVICES 34: 1, p. 124

27 Cale and Burton (2018) p.38

28 Dünkel, F., Thiele, C. and Treig, J. (2017) '“You’ll never stand-alone”: Electronic monitoring in Germany' European Journal of Probation 9:1 pp. 28–45

29 Gibbs and King (2003) p. 200

30 Graham and McIvor (2015) p.71; Wennerberg, I. (2009) ‘Victims’ Perspectives on Electronic Monitoring’, presented at CEP EM Conference, Egmond aan Zee, The Netherlands; 

31 Beyens K and Roosen M. (2017) 'Electronic monitoring and reintegration in Belgium' European Journal of Probation 9:1, p.14

32 Cale and Burton (2018) p.38

33 Moss (2018) p.125

34 Otero, P. (2009) 'Electronic monitoring, an alternative way of preventing aggression and helping social rehabilitation ' Journal of Organisational Transformation and Social Change 6: 2, p. 137

35 Di Tella, R., and Schargrodsky, E. (2013) p. 36

36 Boone et al. (2017)

37 Martinovic M. (2017) 'Expanding Electronic Monitoring in New Zealand' The Journal of Offender Monitoring,  29: 2, p. 28

38 Kilgore, J. (2012) ‘Would you like an ankle bracelet with that?’ Dissent, Winter, p. 70; Willoughby, A., and Nellis, M. (2016) '“You Cannot Really Hide”: Experiences of Probation Officers and Young Offenders with GPS Tracking in Winnipeg, Canada'  Journal Of Technology In Human Services 34: 1, p. 77

39 Scottish Government (2016) ‘Electronic Monitoring Interim Guidance’ available at: https://www2.gov.scot/Resource/0050/00502012.pdf

40 Armstrong, S., Malloch, M., Nellis, M and Norris, P. (2011) Scottish Government Report 'Evaluation of the Use of Home Detention Curfew and the Open Prison Estate in Scotland', p. 2

41 Willoughby and Nellis (2016)

42 Bales, W., Mann, K., Blomberg, T., Gaes, G., Barrick, K., Dhungana, K., McManus, B. (2010) ‘A Quantitative and Qualitative Assessment of Electronic Monitoring’ Report submitted to the Office of Justice Program, National Institute of Justice, US Department of Justice, Florida: The Florida State University

43 Dünkel et al. (2017) p. 28; Eilzer, S. (2014) ‘Data protection and electronic monitoring in Germany’ Centre for Crime and Justice Studies available at: https://www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/publications/cjm/article/data-protection-and-electronic-monitoring-germany

44 Cale and Burton (2018) p. 36, 38; Graham and McIvor (2015) p. 60

45 Cale and Burton (2018) p. 36. 

46 Ministry of Justice (2019) ‘Process evaluation of the Global Positioning System (GPS) Electronic Monitoring Pilot Qualitative findings’, p. 9 available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/779199/gps-location-monitoring-pilot-process-evaluation.pdf

47 ibid, p. 9

48 Ministry of Justice (2019) p. 16

49 Risk Management Authority (2016) Standards and Guidelines for Risk Management, p. available at: https://www.rma.scot/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Standards_and_Guidelines_for_Risk_Management_2016.pdf

50 Otero, 2009, p. 136

51 ibid. 

52 Colorado Criminal Defense Institute (2015) ‘The Colorado Bail Book’ available at https://www.bja.gov/Publications/Colorado_Bail_Book_Pretrial_Release.pdf

53 ibid.

54 CARAS parole guidelines (2008) available at https://cdpsdocs.state.co.us/ors/docs/Risks/CARAS_BriefDescription_V5.pdf

55 ibid. 

56 Ibid. 

57 Di Tella and Schargrodsky (2013) pp. 37-8

58 ibid, p. 39; there is often a waiting list for equipment in Argentina and defendants must remain in prison until a tag is available. 

59 These are comparable to the DASH RIC tool used in the UK.

60 Ibarra, P. R., and Erez, E., (2005) ‘Victim-centric Diversion? The Electronic Monitoring of Domestic Violence Cases’ (2005) Behavioral Sciences and the Law 23, p. 266

61 ibid., this was based on a lethality assessment similar to those used in the UK.  

62 Haverkamp and Woessner (2016) p. 130; Hucklesby, A. (2009) 'Understanding Offenders’ Compliance: A Case Study of Electronically Monitored Curfew Orders' Journal of Law and Society 36, p. 263; Erez, E., and Ibarra, P. R. (2007) ‘Electronic monitoring and victim-re-entry in domestic violence cases. British Journal of Criminology’ 47: 2, p. 115; 

63 Haverkamp and Woessner (2016) p. 130;

64 Otero (2009) p. 142, footnote 13

65 Martinovic, M. Schluter, P. (2012) 'A Researcher's Experience of Wearing a GPS-EM Device'  Current Issues in Criminal Justice 23:3, p. 419

66 Hucklesby (2009) p. 263

67 ibid.

68 Dünkel et al. (2017) p.40

69 National Audit Office (2006) 'The Electronic Monitoring of Offenders' available at https://www.nao.org.uk/report/the-electronic-monitoring-of-adult-offenders/

70 McIvor and Graham (2016); Ibarra, P., Gur, O., & Erez, E. (2014) ‘Surveillance as Casework: Supervising Domestic Violence Defendants with GPS Technology’ Crime, Law and Social Change 62, p.428

71 Ministry of Justice (2019) p. 28

72 Bulman, P. (2010) 'Electronic Monitoring Reduces Recidivism' Corrections Today 72: 6 pp. 72-73; Graham and McIvor (2015), p. 8

73 Bales et al. (2010)

74 Belur, J. Thornton, A., Tompson, L., Manning, M., Sidebottom, A., and Bowers, K., (2017) What Works Crime Reduction Systematic Review Series no. 13: ‘A Systematic Review of the Effectiveness of the Electronic Monitoring of Offedners’ UCL Department of Security and Crime Science, University College London, UK, p.41

75 Hunkeler, U. (2015) ‘New Generation of EM Technology: Soon Too Many Sensors?’ Journal of Offender Monitoring, p. 6

76 ibid., p. 7

77 ibid.

78 Bock, S. (2003) ‘Michigan DOC runs BETA test of new remote transdermal alcohol monitoring system’ The Journal of Offender Monitoring, Winter/Spring, p. 13

79 Flango, V.E., & Cheesman, F. (2007) ‘When should Judges use Alcohol Monitoring as a Sentencing Option in DWI Cases?’ Drug Court Review 44: 3

80 It was established that judges were more likely to give RAM sentences to more serious offenders, thus the groups were not matched equally on offending history (ibid, p. 104)

81 ibid.

82 Pepper and Dawson (2016)

83 Pepper and Dawson (2016); non-compliance was based solely on the consumption of alcohol or tampering with monitoring equipment and did not include compliance with the conditions of the community sentence, which were often numerous and complex. 

84 ibid. p. 25

85 ibid.

86 Bock (2003)

87 McKelvie. A. R. (2005) ‘An implementation of remote alcohol monitoring in Alaska’ Alaska Justice Statistical Analysis Center. Justice Center, University of Alaska, Anchorage

88 ibid. 

89 Goodall, C.A., Neville, F.G., Williams, D.J. and Donnelly,  P. D. (2016) ‘Preliminary research informing policy on remote alcohol monitoring in criminal justice: the Scottish experience’ International Journal of Public Health, p.865. 

90 ibid, p. 869

91 ibid.

92 Goodall et al. (2016) p. 869; Barnett, N. P., Celio, M. A, Tidey, J. W., Murphy, J. G., Colby, S., M., and Swift, R. M., (2017) 'A preliminary randomized controlled trial of contingency management for alcohol use reduction using a transdermal alcohol sensor' Addiction, 112, pp. 1025-1035  for example uses monetary incentives to encourage abstinence; Dougherty D .M., Karns T. E., Mullen J., Liang Y., Lake S. L., Roache J. D.,and Hill-Kapturczak, N. (2015) ‘Transdermal alcohol concentration data collected during a contingency management program to reduce at-risk drinking’ Drug Alcohol Depend 148, pp.77–84

93 Scottish Government Working Group (2016) p. 7

94 Goodall et al. (2016) p.866

95 Scottish Government Working Group (2016) p. 19

96 ibid.

97 Di Tella and Schargrodsky (2013) p. 32

98 Düenkel et al. (2017) p. 41

99 Graham and McIvor (2015) p.69

100 Scottish Government Working Group (2016) p.8

101 Pepper and Dawson (2016) p. 4

102 Personal communication with Programme Director Deborah Alderson, 11/02/19; Willoughby and Nellis (2016) p. 69

103 Willougby and Nellis (2016) p. 73

104 ibid. p. 76

105 DeMichele, M. (2014) ‘Electronic Monitoring: It’s a Tool, Not a Silver Bullet’ Criminology and Public Policy 13:3, pp. 393-400. 

106 Armstrong et al. (2011) p.6

107 ibid, p. 98

108 Halsey, M., and Deegan, S. (2015) Young Offenders: Crime, Prison and Struggles for Desistance, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, p.3

109 Graham and McIvor (2015) p. 57

110 Beyens and Roosen (2017) p. 24

111 Armstrong et al. (2011)

112 Armstrong et al. (2011) p. 4; Nellis, M. (2015) ‘Standards and Ethics in Electronic Monitoring. Handbook for professionals responsible for the establishment and the use of Electronic Monitoring’ Council of Europe, p.15, available at: https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=09000016806ab9b0

113 Dodgson, K., Goodwin, P., Howard, P., Llewellyn-Thomas, S., Mortimer, E., Russell, N., et al. (2001). Electronic monitoring of released prisoners: An evaluation of the home detention curfew scheme (Home Office Research Study No. 222). London: Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate; p. 1, 5; Haverkamp and Woessner (2016) pp. 131-2

114 Cochran, J. C. (2014) ‘Breaches in the wall: Imprisonment, social support, and recividism’ Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 51, 200–229; Scoones, C. D., Willis, G. M., and Grace, R. C. (2012) 'Beyond static and dynamic risk factors: The incremental validity of release and planning for predicting sex offender recidivism' Journal of Interpersonal Violence 27, pp. 222–238

115 Haverkamp and Woessner (2016) p. 130

116 Martinovic M. (2016) 'GPS-EM Sanctions for Serious Sex Offenders: The Application and Outcomes in the United States and Australia' Journal of Technology in Human Services 34:1, p. 86

117 Boone et al. (2017)

118 Beyens and Roosen (2017)

119 Graham and McIvor (2015) p. 58; Martinovic (2016) pp. 85-6

120 Martinovic (2016) pp. 85-6; Graham and McIvor (2015) p. 61 on the requirements in Norway

121 Graham and McIvor (2015) p. 58

122 Hucklesby A (2008) 'Vehicles of desistance? The impact of electronically monitored curfew orders' Criminology & Criminal Justice 8:1, pp.51–71; (2009) pp. 264-5

123 Williams, J.and Weatherburn, D. (2019) 'Can Electronic Monitoring Reduce Reoffending?' IZA Institute of Labour Economics Discussion Paper Series p. 7, available at http://ftp.iza.org/dp12122.pdf

124 Ibid. p. 7

125 ibid. 

126 Scottish Government Working Group (2016)

127 Gibbs and King (2003) p.205

128 Vanhaelemeesch, D., and Vander Beker, T. (2012) 'Electronic monitoring: Convict’s experiences in Belgium' in Cools, M. (ed.). Social conflicts, citizens and policing . Antwerp: Government of Security Research Paper Series (GofS), Series 6.

129 ibid p.278

130 Gibbs and King (2003) p.203

131 Martinovic and Schluter (2012) pp.423-4; Pearson, A. (2012) ‘An Evaluation of Winnipeg’s Electronic Monitoring Pilot Project for Youth Auto Offenders’ Unpublished Masters Thesis, University of Manitoba, Canada, p. 71; Willoughby and Nellis (2016) p. 75

132 Willoughby and Nellis (2016) p. 75-6

133 Gibbs and King (2003)

134 Vanhaelemeesch and Vander Beker (2012)

135 Bartels and Martinovic (2017) ‘Electronic Monitoring: the Experience in Australia’ European Journal of Probation, 9:1, p.96

136 Henneguelle, A., Monnery, B. and Kensey A. (2016) 'Better at home than in prison? The effects of EM on recidivism in France' The Journal of Law and Economics 59:3, p. 649

137 Ibid.

138 Haverkamp and Woessner (2016) p. 129

139 Hucklesby (2009) p. 256-7

140 ibid. p. 261-2 

141 ibid. p. 264

142 ibid. p. 265

143 Gibbs and King (2003) p. 204

144 ibid. 

145 Kilgore (2012) p. 68

146 Ibid.

147 Bales et al. (2010); Gibbs and King (2003); Scottish Government Working Group (2016)

148 G4S (2017) ‘1^st January – 31^st December 2017 Statistical Bulletin, Electronic Monitoring to the Criminal and Youth Justice systems in Scotland’ available at: https://www2.gov.scot/Resource/0053/00530120.pdf,  p. 4

149 Scottish Government Working Group (2016) p. 57

150 Scottish Government Working Group (2016) p. 57

151 Hucklesby (2009) p. 265

152  Scottish Government (2016) p.20

153 Beyens and Roosen (2017) p. 18; National Audit Office (2006) p. 4

154 Gibbs and King (2003); Graham and McIvor (2015); Gur et al. (2016) p.37; International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) cf. Gies 2016: 102-3; Payne, DeMichele and Button (2008); 

155 Boone et al. (2017)

156 Gibbs and King (2003) p.204

157 Nellis, M. (2013b) ‘Surveillance, Stigma and Spatial Constraint: The Ethical Challenges of Electronic Monitoring’ in Nellis, M., Beyens, K., & Kaminski, D. (eds.) Electronically Monitored Punishment: International and Critical Perspectives, London: Routledge, p. 204

158 Boone et al. (2017)

159 Graham and McIvor (2015), although note that the authors caveat this suggestion with “More research on this is needed.”

160 Barry et al. (2007) p. iii

161 Boone et al. (2017); Durnescu, I., Enengl, C., and Grafl, C., (2013) ‘Experiencing Supervision’ in McNeill F. and Beyens, K. (eds.) (2013) Offender Supervision in Europe Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan; Gibbs and King (2003) p.205; Ibarra and Erez (2005); Ministry of Justice (2019)

162 Nellis M (2011) ‘The Integration of Probation and Electronic Monitoring – A Continuing Challenge, A Reflective Report for CEP’ <http://www.cepprobation.org/uploaded_files/ EM%20Literature%20Research.pdf> , p. 4; Nellis M (2010) ‘Electronic monitoring of offenders’, p. 1 in Herzog-Evans M (ed) Transnational Criminology Manual, vol 3, Wolf Legal Publishers, The Netherlands,; Payne B and Gainey R (2004) ‘The electronic monitoring of offenders released from jail or prison: Safety, control, and comparisons to the incarceration experience’, The Prison Journal 84(4), pp. 426–31

163 Martinovic and Schluter (2012) pp.423-4

164 Martinovic and Schluter (2012) interviewed two UK Home Office investigators who had spent periods wearing an electronic tag for the purposes of research.

165 Ibid. 

166 Pepper and Dawson (2016) p. 26

167 Vanhaelemeesch, D., Vander Beker, T., and Vandevelde, S. (2014). Punishment at home: Offenders’ experiences with electronic monitoring. European Journal of Criminology 11(3): 273–287.

168 Andersen, L. and Andersen, S. (2014) ‘Effect of Electronic Monitoring on Social Welfare Dependence’ Criminology and Public Policy 13: 3, pp. 349-379.

169 Wennerberg (2009)

170 Boone et al. (2017)

171 Henneguelle et al. (2016) p. 649

172 Willoughby and Nellis (2016) p. 72

173 Ibid.

174 Ibid. 

175 Hucklesby (2009) p. 264

176 Ibid.

177 Ibid. 

178 Kilgore (2012) pp.66-71

179 Ibid.

180 Nellis, M. (2016) 'Electronic Monitoring and Probation Practice' in F. McNeill Durnescu, I. and Butter, R. (eds.), Probation Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan, p. 235; Bales et al. (2010); Ibarra and Erez (2005)

181 Kilgore (2012) p. 67

182 Souza, K. A., Lösel, F., Markson, L., and Lanskey, C., (2015) ‘Pre-release expectations and post-release experience of prisoners and their ex-partners’ Legal and Criminological Psychology 20, p. 317

183 Williams and Weatherburn 2019, p. 10; Research from New South Wales attempted to control for this difference by measuring reoffending from the time the EM sentence ended, however, of the 73 individuals studied, 36 were excluded from the sample for reoffending and being re-imprisoned, thus the sample size was reduced to 37 individuals, making it difficult to draw robust conclusions (Ibid, p. 20, footnote 20)

184 Di Tella, and Schargrodsky (2013) p.30; Otero (2009) p. 137; in any case those released on a community sentence are in general deemed at lower risk of offending than those sentenced to prison. A Home Affairs note specifically notes that the HDC scheme in England and Wales “is aimed at low risk prisoners” (House of Commons‘ Library (2013) ‘Early release from prison in England and Wales:  an overview’, p.5 available at: http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN05199/SN05199.pdf

185 Di Tella and Schargrodsky (2013) p. 30

186 Williams and Weatherburn (2019) p. 8

187 Di Tella and Schargrodsky (2013) p. 30

188 Pepper and Dawson (2016) p. 14 note that “direct ‘like-for-like’ comparisons between compliance rates of different orders should be treated with caution due to varying offence types, offender characteristics, processes of dealing with breach, and lengths of orders.”

189 See Avdija, A. S., and Lee, J. (2014) 'Does Electronic Monitoring Home Detention Program Work? Evaluating Program Suitability Based on Offenders’ Post-Program Recidivism Status' Justice Policy Journal, 11:2, pp. 3-4 who provides an overview of the available evidence on recidivism outcomes. Di Tella, and Schargrodsky (2013) p. 32-3 also highlight this. 

190 Ministry of Justice (2011) p. 1

191 Flango and Cheesman (2008) p. 103

192 Belur et al. (2017)

193 Williams and Weatherburn (2019) p. 23

194 ibid. 

195 Ibid, p. 17

196 Marklund, F. and Holmberg, S. (2009), ‘Effects of Early Release from Prison Using Electronic Tagging in Sweden’, Journal of Experimental Criminology vol. 5, pp. 41–61

197 Capdevila, M., Parés, R., Ferrer, M., Luque, E. and Torrecillas, M. (2006), La clasificació inicial en règim obert dels condemnats a presó, Justidata, 43, pp. 2, 12 cf. Otara (2009) p. 137

198 Henneguelle et al. (2016)

199 ibid. p. 649

200 ibid.

201 Bales et al. (2010)

202 ibid.

203 Hucklesby (2009) p. 12

204 Ibid. 

205 Avdija and Lee (2014)

206 ibid pp. 11-12

207 ibid, p. 12

208 Bales et al. (2010); Brown T., McCabe S., and Wellford C. (2007) 'Global Positioning System (GPS) Technology for Community Supervision: Lessons Learned' National Institute of Justice, US Department of Justice, Noblis Technical Report, US; Losel and Schmucker 2005; New Jersey State Parole Board (2007) ‘Report on New Jersey’s GPS Monitoring of Sex Offenders’ p. 4; Padgett K., Bales W., and Blomberg T., (2006) ‘Under Surveillance: An Empirical Test of the Effectiveness and Consequences of Electronic Monitoring’, Criminology and Public Policy 5:1, p. 84

209 Williams and Weatherburn (2019)

210 Williams and Weatherburn (2019) p. 25

211 Ibid.

212 New Jersey State Parole Board (2007) 

213 Gies et al. (2012)

214 Ibid. 

215 New Jersey State Parole Board (2007) 

216 Henneguelle et al. (2016) p. 649;

217 ibid.

218 Henneguelle et al. (2016) p. 649;  Hucklesby (2009)

219 Hucklesby (2009) p. 256-7

220 ibid, p. 262

221 Hunkeler, (2015) p. 6

222 Ibid. 

223 Belur et al. (2017); National Audit Office (2006); House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts (2006) 'The EM of Adult Offenders: 62nd Report of Session 2005-2006, House of Commons' The Stationary Office Limited: London; Hucklesby 2013; Shute, S. (2007) Satellite Tracking of Offenders. A study of the Pilots in England and Wales, Ministry of Justice Research Summary 4.

224 See for example Armstrong et al. (2011) (on HDC); Bartels and Martinovic (2017) pp.95-6; Dodgson, K.,  Mortimer, E. and Sugg, D.(2000) Assessing Prisoners for Home Detention Curfew: A Guide for Practitioners. UK: Home Office available at: http://library.college.police.uk/docs/homisc/pg1homedetention.pdf; Dodgson et al. (2001); Heggie, K. (1999) Review of the NSW Home Detention Scheme. NSW: Department of Corrective Services; Esdorf, A., and Sandlie, J. (2014) ‘Executing Prison Sentences at Home with Electronic Monitoring – Advantages and Disadvantages of the Scandinavian Model’ Presentation at Confederation of European Probation (CEP) 9th Electronic Monitoring Conference: Frankfurt, Germany; Gies (2016) p.113; Graham and McIvor (2015); Ministry of Justice (2011) on HDC only; Moss 2018; National Audit Office (2006) for 90 day curfew period; Padgett et al. (2006) p. 84; Wagner (2008) p.8; Yeh’s (2010) research from the US concludes that EM reduces reoffending, which reduces cost.

225 Armstrong et al. (2011) p. 5

226 Graham and McIvor (2015) p. 37

227 Armstrong et al. (2011) p. 93

228 Nellis (2015) p. 15

229 Nellis (2016) p. 224

230 National Audit Office (2016)

231 “the electronic wristlet costs €4.20 per inmate per day, compared to the €52.51 that it costs the State for each inmate each day…Dinner alone in the penitentiary centre of the inmate is more expensive.” Otero (2009) p. 138; On this, The BBC recently published an article reporting that the daily cost of the recently introduced GPS tags was £9 per day (BBC 16^th February 2019 ‘Electronic GPS tags to track thousands of criminals in England and Wales)

232 Williams and Weatherburn (2019) p. 24

233 Brown et al. (2017) 

234 State of California Legislative Analyst’s Office (2007) ‘Analysis of the 2007–08 Budget Bill (Judicial and Criminal Justice)’ Sacramento, Available at: http://www.lao.ca.gov/analysis_2007/crim_justice/cj_05_anl07.aspx; It is important to note that in the USA, a number of federal authorities charge the offender for their use of EM and thus comparison to the Scottish context can be difficult.

235 Bacigalupi, J. (2012) 'Seminole County Florida fights domestic violence with EMPACT' Journal of Offender Monitoring, 24: 1,  p. 17-8

236 Ibid, p. 18

237 Belur et al. (2017) p.41

238 Hunkeler (2015) p. 7

239 Smith, D. (2001) 'Electronic Monitoring of Offenders: the Scottish Experience'  Criminal Justice 1:2, p. 201

240 Barry et al. (2007) p.2

241 Barry et al. (2007)

242 Osmori, M., and Turner, S. (2012) ‘Assessing the Cost of Electronically Monitoring High-Risk Sex Offenders’ Crime & Delinquency XX, p. 12

243 Tennessee Board of Probation and Parole. (2007). Monitoring Tennessee’s sex offenders using global positioning systems: A project evaluation. Tennessee Board of Probation and Parole.

244 Fransson, A. (2005) ‘Reinforcing Restraining Orders Using Electronic Monitoring’ Sweden: Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention; Martinovic (2016) p. 93

245 Martinovic (2016) p. 93

246 Otero (2009) p. 143

247 Ministry of Justice (2019) p. 1

248 Ministry of Justice (2019) p. 26; this may only be a perceived cost: there has not yet been a longitudinal study to evaluate whether the use of GPS EM might reduce court time on a long-term basis. 

249 Ibid.

250 Gibbs and King (2003); Belur et al. (2017)

251 Smith (2001)

252 Beyens and Roosen (2017)

253 Dünkel et al. (2017) p. 40

254 Gur et al. (2016) p. 37; Ibarra and Erez (2005)

255 Dünkel et al. (2017) p. 41

256 Belur et al. (2017) p. 9

257 Willoughby and Nellis (2016) p. 74

258 Ibid.

259 Ibid, p. 76-7

260 Ibid¸p. 77

261 Michael K., McNamee A., and Michael M. (2006) ‘The emerging ethics of humancentric GPS tracking and monitoring’, University of Wollongong — Research Online, Australia, p. 7; The Reconviction rates in Scotland for the 2015-2016 offender cohort shows that the percentage of sex offenders reconvicted in one year for any crime was lower than that of any other crime group, and this has held constant over a number of years.

262 Hudson K. and Jones, T. (2016) ‘Satellite Tracking of Offenders and Integrated Offender Management: A Local Case Study’ The Howard Journal of Crime and Justice 55: 1-2, p. 188

263 Martinovic and Schluter (2012) p. 415

264 Nellis (2016) p. 235; Pepper and Dawson (2016) p. 30; Willoughby and Nellis (2016) p. 77

265 Martin, J. S., Hanrahan, K., and Bowers Jr. J. H. (2009) 'Offenders’ Perceptions of House Arrest and Electronic Monitoring', Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 48, p.556

266 ibid. p.562; Willougby and Nellis (2016) p. 77

267 Kilgore (2012) p. 68

268 Holdsworth, E. and Hucklesby, A. (2014) ’Designed for Men but also worn by women’ Criminal Justice Matters 14:1, p. 15; Richardson F. (2002) ‘A Personal Experience of Tagging’ Prison Service Journal, 142, p. 41

269 Vanhaelemeesch et al. (2014) p. 278

270 Gibbs and King (2003); Robert, L. and Stassart, E. (2009) ‘Onder elektronisch toezicht gestelden aan het woord: Krachtlijnen uit het eerste Belgische onderzoek [Experiences of electronically monitored offenders: main findings from the first Belgian research]’,in:T.Daems,S.DeDecker, L. Robert and F. Verbruggen (eds.) Elektronisch toezicht: De virtuele gevangenis als reële oplossing? Onderzoek en beleid 1998–2008 [Electronic Monitoring: The Virtual Prison as a Real Solution? Research and Policy 1998–2008] (reeks Samenleving, Criminaliteit & Strafrechtspleging [Society, Criminality & Criminal Justice Series], no. 33), Leuven, Belgium: Universitaire Pers Leuven; Staples, W. G. (2005) 'The everyday world of house arrest: Collateral consequences for families and others' in C. Mele & T. Miller (eds.) Civil penalties, social consequences New York: Routledge; Vanhaelemeesch et al. (2014)

271 Vanhaelemeesch et al. (2014)

272 Respondent 10 cf. Vanhaelemeesch et al. (2014) p. 278

273 Martin et al. (2009) p. 566

274 Martin et al. (2009) p. 563; Nellis (2016) p. 235

275 Boone et al. (2017) p.56

276 Ministry of Justice (2019) p. 16

277 Rokkan, T. (2012) Straffegjennomføring med elektronisk kontroll: Evalueringsrapport 2: Hva er innhold i straffegjennomføring med elektronisk kontroll? [Serving Sentence with Electronic Monitoring. Evaluation Report 2: What Is the Content in the Serving of Sentences with Electronic Monitoring?] Oslo: Kriminalomsorgens Utdanningssenter [KRUS]. Available at: http://brage.bibsys.no/xmlui/bitstream/handle/11250/160608/KRUS-rapport-3-2012.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y, p.17

278 Boone et al. (2016) executive summary section

279 Ministry of Justice (2019) p. 27

280 Buchanan, A. (2008) 'A Racial Justice Perspective on Monitoring Domestic Violence Offenders Using GPS Systems'  Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review 43; Kilgore (2012) pp. 69-70; in Williams and Weatherburn’s (2019, p. 11) research, conducted in Australia, aboriginal offenders are purposefully excluded from their sample because Aboriginals “have a distinctly different relationship with the criminal justice system.”

281 Buchanan (2008); Kilgore (2012)

282 Conway, no date, cf. Kilgore (2012) pp. 70-1

283 Vanhaelemeesch et al. (2014) p. 277

284 ibid.

285 Willoughby and Nellis (2016) p. 74

286 Barry et al. (2007) p. 4

287 Barry et al. (2007) p. 5

288 Graham and McIvor (2015) p. 29

289 McIvor and Graham (2016) p. 1

290 Di Tella and Schargrodsky (2013) p. 31; Williams and Weatherburn (2019) p. 2 respectively. 

291 Di Tella and Schargrodsky (2013); Williams and Weatherburn (2019)

292 Barry et al. (2007) p. 5; Dünkel et al. (2017) p. 41; Graham and McIvor (2015); Levenson J., Brannon Y., Fortney T., and Baker, J. (2007) ‘Public Perceptions about Sex Offenders and Community Protection Policies’ Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy 7:1 pp.137-161; Martinovic and Schlutter (2012) p. 415 describe the “moral panic” within the media after it was announced serious sex offenders were to be released and demands were made for this group to be more robustly monitored. 

293 See for example; Nellis, M. (2007) ‘Press Coverage of Electronic Monitoring and Bail in Scotland’, in M. Barry, M. Malloch, K. Moodie, M. Nellis, M. Knapp, R. Romeo, & S. Dhanasiri (2007) An Evaluation of the Use of Electronic Monitoring as a Condition of Bail in Scotland, Edinburgh: Scottish Executive Social Research; Nellis, M. (2003) ‘News Media, Popular Culture and the Electronic Monitoring of Offenders in England and Wales’ The Howard Journal 42(1): 1-31; and Willoughby and Nellis (2016). 

294 Finn, R., and McCahill, M. (2010) ‘Representing the Surveilled: Media Representation and Political Discourse in Three UK Newspapers’, Paper presented at 60th Political Studies Association Annual Conference, 29 March – 1 April 2010, Edinburgh.

295 cf. Graham and McIvor (2015) p. 83

296 Willougby and Nellis (2016) p. 71

297 Ibarra and Erez (2005)

298 Gur et al. (2016) p. 42

299 ibid.

300 Erez, E., Ibarra, P., Bales, W., and Gur, O. (2012) GPS Monitoring Technologies and Domestic Violence: An Evaluation Study [A report submitted to the National Institute of Justice], Chicago: University of Illinois, p. 94; Gur et al. (2016) p. 42

301 Offenders are deemed ineligible for EM, regardless of offence, if they are convicted of violent and/or sexual offences or are deemed at high risk of reoffending following a process of risk assessment conducted by the SPS. 

302 Scottish Government (2013a) ‘Development of Electronic Monitoring in Scotland: A Consultation on the Future Direction of the Electronic Monitoring Service’, Edinburgh: Scottish Government, p.30, available at: https://www2.gov.scot/Publications/2013/09/7937

303 The term ‘unilateral’ is used to describe EM that monitors only the offender; bilateral monitoring is used to describe systems whereby the offender and the victim are involved in the EM process. 

304 Erez, E. and Ibarra, P. R. and Lurie, N. A. (2004) ‘Electronic Monitoring of Domestic Violence Cases: A Study of Two Bilateral Programmes’ Federal probation Journal 68: 1; Ibarra and Erez (2005) p. 260

305 Graham and McIvor (2015) p. 10

306 Erez et al. (2004)

307 Graham and McIvor (2015) p. 81

308 Ibid. 

309 Scottish Government (2018) ‘Domestic abuse in Scotland: 2017 - 2018 statistics’ available at: https://www.gov.scot/publications/domestic-abuse-recorded-police-scotland-2017-18/

310 Erez et al. (2004) p. 6; Erez et al., (2012)

311 Gur et al. (2016) p. 46

312 Erez et al. (2012) p. 95

313 Bacigalupi, J. (2012) 'Seminole County Florida fights domestic violence with EMPACT' Journal of Perpetrator Monitoring, 24: 1,  p. 18

314 ibid.

315 Erez and Ibarra (2007)

316 Erez, E., Ibarra, P., Bales, W., & Gur, O. (2012) GPS Monitoring Technologies and Domestic Violence: An Evaluation Study [A report submitted to the National Institute of Justice], Chicago: University of Illinois. Available online at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/238910.pdf p. 65.

317 Ibarra and Erez (2005)

318 Erez and Ibarra (2007) p. 112

319 ibid. 

320 Gur et al. (2016) pp. 45-6

321 Ibarra and Erez (2007) p. 106

322 ibid.

323 Erez et al. (2012) p. 101

324 Erez et al. (2004)

 325 Otero (2009) p. 144

326 ibid.

327 Erez et al. (2014) p. 440

328 Ibarra, et al. (2014)

329 ibid, p. 433

330 ibid, p. 428

331 ibid, p. 439

332 ibid.

333 Ibarra and Erez (2005) p. 271

334 Erez et al. (2012) p. iii

335 Erez et al. (2012) p. 141, Erez et al. (2014) p. 437

336 Ortano (2009) p. 142

337 Barry et al. (2007) p. 67

338 Ministry of Justice (2019) p. 24

339 ibid.

340 Rates varied from 7.7% in the South to 59.3% in the MidWest in the one year follow up period. 

341 See Erez et al. (2012), p. 70

342 ibid., p. ii

343 ibid. p. 212, footnote 14

344 Gur et al. (2016)  

345 Barry et al. (2007) p. 40

346 ibid. pp. 45-6

347 Graham and McIvor (2015) pp. 43-4

348 Vera Baird Police and Crime Commissioner Northumbria (2015) http://www.northumbria-pcc.gov.uk/gps-proximity-device-launch/; there has recently been a new pilot implemented in London for violent offenders but due to the small time elapsed there is no evaluation of this pilot.

349 Personal communication with Programme Director Deborah Alderson, 11/02/19

350 ibid.

351 ibid.

352 Criminal proceedings statistics 2017/18

353 Lockhart-Mirams, G., Pickles, C.,  and Crowhurst, E. (2015) 'Cutting Crime: the role of tagging in offender management' Reform available at: https://reform.uk/sites/default/files/2018-10/Tagging%20report_AW_8.pdf

354 Henneguelle et al. (2016)

355 Williams and Weatherburn (2019) p. 23

356 Bales et al. (2010)

357 Ministry of Justice (2011) p.1

358 Flango and Cheesman (2007) p. 103, for example, state “(e)lectronic monitoring is as effective as incarceration, and less expensive”.