Rocky Mountain Tracking

By Harriette Halepis

Over 3 million people are subject to stalking during a one year period (NY Times). Many of these people have filed restraining orders against their stalkers. Many more have discovered that restraining orders are relatively useless when a stalker is persistent.

In fact, “…about one quarter of women who were killed by their domestic abusers already had restraining orders (NY Times).” The vast majority of stalkers have had some kind of personal relationship with their victim in the past. Stalking frequently turns into domestic abuse with women and children becoming moving targets.

GPS tracking technology might be on the brink of changing the constant fear that victims of domestic abuse face on a daily basis. Thirteen states have implemented GPS tracking usage when it comes to domestic violence.

Still, in order to have a violent offender tracked, a judge must decide whether the trackers are to be used before a trial, as a permanent sentence, as part of bail, or at all. While some judges have seen the compelling arguments for GPS tracking, others are not quick to put the technology into action.

Since most judges are not entirely familiar with GPS tracking, they tend to resort to older domestic violence sentences – in short, restraining orders.

Those areas that can afford to track domestic violence offenders have found a clever way to pay for GPS tracking technology. In the state of Massachusetts, domestic violence offenders are charged $8 per day for the tracking bracelets that they are forced to wear – these criminals literally pay for their crimes.

If GPS trackers can save lives – when restraining orders clearly cannot – why is this technology largely disregarded? Aside from the fact that some police forces simply don’t have enough manpower to monitor trackers, those that sit upon the judicial bench must be educated as to the usefulness of GPS tracking.

Commenting on those judges that are still using futile sentencing methods, one Massachusetts judge has made the reluctance to use GPS tracking devices quite clear: “…until they know how GPS can be used and how successful it can be, judges are reluctant to order it because it’s unfamiliar (NY Times).” For the sake of those that are killed by domestic offenders every year – isn’t it about time to familiarize judges with GPS tracking systems?

By Greg Bartlett

Every day, three women are killed and thousands more are injured in domestic violence incidents. In Maine, domestic violence accounts for 60% of homicides. Unfortunately, domestic violence has only increased in recent years, and merely issuing a restraining order is not enough to stop the violence and protect the victims. Many people ignore restraining orders and come back to injure and possibly kill the victim.

In Wisconsin, two restraining orders were not able to stop an ex-boyfriend from murdering a woman. A few years ago in South Carolina, a man attacked his former girlfriend, was arrested, and then released on bail. Later he came back and held his former girlfriend hostage for a few hours in a grocery store before he finally killed her.

Unfortunately, these instances are not unusual. Authorities are looking for new ways to protect domestic violence victims so that they will not become homicide victims. One effective way is with GPS monitoring. The offender wears a monitor and can be tracked at all times. If he goes outside of permitted areas or comes within restricted areas, for instance the victim’s neighborhood or workplace, both the police and the victim can be alerted. The victim would then be able to avoid the offender and law enforcement, following the information from the GPS tracking unit, could intercept the offender before he reaches the victim.

Some programs use GPS monitoring only when offenders are deemed to be dangerous, and others use it only when the offenders have already violated restraining orders. In an effort to decrease domestic violence incidents and homicides, many states are pushing for legislation to require GPS monitoring for any domestic violence offenders.

For some domestic violence victims, getting away from the abuser is the spark which makes the abuser turn to lethal violence. For instance, the relationship may not be very violent until the woman leaves, and then the ex-boyfriend erupts in anger and violence. In one situation, when a woman moved out, her ex-boyfriend came after her with a gun and killed her, their child, and her parents.

Protecting the victim is more important than ever if the victim leaves the abusive situation, and GPS monitoring is one of the best solutions. Although by itself it cannot protect the victim, it can do more than restraining orders and can alert the police and the victim if the victim is in danger, thus protecting the victim from further injuries and preventing domestic violence homicides.