Slashdot Mirror
Chicago Is Tracking Kids Awaiting Trial With GPS Monitors That Can Call, Record Them Without Consent (theappeal.org)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Appeal: On March 29, court officials in Chicago strapped an ankle monitor onto Shawn, a 15-year-old awaiting trial on charges of armed robbery. They explained that the device would need to be charged for two hours a day and that it would track his movements using GPS technology. He was told he would have to be given permission to leave his house, even to go to school. But he found out that through his monitor, officers wouldn't just be able to track his location, as most electronic monitors do. They would also be able to speak -- and listen -- to him. Shawn, whose name has been changed to protect his identity, is one of hundreds of children in Chicago whose ankle monitors are now equipped with microphones and speakers. The stated purpose of these devices is to communicate with the children, but they are raising concerns among civil liberties watchers that they are actually a mechanism for surveilling the conversations of these kids and those around them -- and potentially for using the recordings in criminal cases.
In January, Cook County, home of Chicago, awarded a contract to the electronic monitoring company Track Group, which will lease 275 ankle monitors to keep tabs on children awaiting trial. The devices, known as ReliAlert XC3, have two-way communication capabilities that allow both electronic monitoring officers at the criminal court and employees at Track Group's monitoring center to call an individual wearing a monitor at any time. The wearer can press a button on the device to reach the monitoring center, but there is no way to decline an incoming call. Cook County officials said juvenile probation began using the new devices in February because of their extended battery life and more secure band. The devices were also selected because of their built-in communication, as some children on probation are difficult to reach by phone. But Pat Milhizer, the director of communications for the office of the chief judge in the Circuit Court of Cook County, said the county would now review concerns about privacy. "I can't quite even start down the parade of horribles in terms of all the ways this could be a problem," said Sarah Staudt, senior policy analyst and staff attorney for Chicago Appleseed Fund for Justice and a former juvenile defense attorney in Cook County. "The idea that an adult can turn on a listening device while a child is, say, in the bathroom or in their bedroom is not good."
In January, Cook County, home of Chicago, awarded a contract to the electronic monitoring company Track Group, which will lease 275 ankle monitors to keep tabs on children awaiting trial. The devices, known as ReliAlert XC3, have two-way communication capabilities that allow both electronic monitoring officers at the criminal court and employees at Track Group's monitoring center to call an individual wearing a monitor at any time. The wearer can press a button on the device to reach the monitoring center, but there is no way to decline an incoming call. Cook County officials said juvenile probation began using the new devices in February because of their extended battery life and more secure band. The devices were also selected because of their built-in communication, as some children on probation are difficult to reach by phone. But Pat Milhizer, the director of communications for the office of the chief judge in the Circuit Court of Cook County, said the county would now review concerns about privacy. "I can't quite even start down the parade of horribles in terms of all the ways this could be a problem," said Sarah Staudt, senior policy analyst and staff attorney for Chicago Appleseed Fund for Justice and a former juvenile defense attorney in Cook County. "The idea that an adult can turn on a listening device while a child is, say, in the bathroom or in their bedroom is not good."
All these Orwellian police state tactics instituted by (R) dominated cities....
Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
Than I don't care.
In 2014, a technician for Track Group, which was then called SecureAlert, testified during a hearing in Puerto Rico that although the device is supposed to vibrate and make a noise when itâ(TM)s activated, the listening and speaking capabilities can be turned on without warning.
and now I care.
The kid is accused of armed robbery. The kid gets to stay out of jail while awaiting trial. I understand the "if you have nothing to hide then why worry" argument, but this isn't just some random person. Truly, if he has nothing to hide then no problem. But he's probably a gang banger who is going to brag about his crimes to his homies.
IMHO, the only time this kid gets to be un-monitored is when he's talking to his lawyer. Bragging to his homies? Gotcha.
Don't like it? Cool your jets in jail until your trial date comes up. You aren't some random dude minding his own business. You're probably an asshole who needs to be locked away for decades, and this is your last chance to prove the prosecutor wrong.
They wear the monitor and consent to it's use. Or they can stay at the Big House. Where's the lack of consent exactly?
So you're OK with guilty until proven innocent? You also think most people understand their "actual" rights? And a minor? If he had money and bailed out they would have to get a warrant just to listen to phone etc. But you have decided, based solely on the fact that he was charged, he's "probably an asshole who needs to be locked away for decades" so why bother with due process? And a minor? Mind boggling.
You get that this means listening to people around them as well? People to whom they may not disclose that they're a police listening device. Do you think it's reasonable, for example, if they're having sex with their minor girlfriend/boyfriend that someone should be secretly listening in? Don't even try to pretend that it wouldn't be abused for this sort of thing. It's been shown time and time again that, for example, TSA agents abuse their access for prurient reasons. We've just gotten more callous about it since there's nothing we can do and the organization has gotten better at covering it up. Same goes for police access to all kinds of our personal information. It gets used for stalking constantly. The police _will_ be abusing this, there's no question about it.
They gave consent when they accepted this as a condition for release
Before armchair lawyering, did you work for Microsoft writing EULAs?
All politicians are crooked shysters.
Trump is included. We've put him in the swamp to kill as many of the other critters as he can before his term is up.
We don't have to invite Trump over for a dinner party. We just have to let him do his job.
Lots of states require two-party consent for audio recordings. This is a reason why so few surveillance cameras have microphones. The audio portion is often inadmissible.
"The idea that an adult can turn on a listening device while a child is, say, in the bathroom or in their bedroom is not good."
Seriously, what is the big deal about listening to a kid poop? If a pedophile has some weird fetish for that, they can already go to any public restroom and site quietly in a stall listening to kids poop in the other stalls. Or if the kid is masturbating, well, same thing. If pedo fetishist really wants to volunteer to work for law enforcement in order to have the chance to listen to kids in bathrooms, so be it. Society has more important things to worry about, like keeping tabs on violent criminal teens before their trials.
This space intentionally left blank
So instead of being in jail because of no bail, the can wear these.
Let's be clear about something, most of these are animals needing a leash.
The "child" is accused of armed robbery. ARMED ROBBERY. He should be thankful that another gang member or the cops didn't shoot him while he was attempting to escape. I agree that wearing an ankle monitor is inappropriate; he ought to be in jail.
He's awaiting trial for ARMED ROBBERY. He OUGHT to be in JAIL.
that's up to and including anything you say to your attorney, because attorney-client privilege is for white collar crimes, the whiter the better.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
A debt doesn't compel someone to show up for court dates - the threat of being arrested does. All bail does is give lazy and corrupt prosecutors a way to pressure poor people into pleading guilty to charges instead of contesting them in court.
Needs to be charged for two hours a day? They cheaped out on equipment. Using non-local GPS computation* and Lithium batteries would power it orders of magnitude longer.
*A non-local GPS system like Skybitz GLS relays the dozen or so GPS signal data to servers in the cloud, thus saving battery usage.
Kriston
The kids who wind up in these shitty circumstances are not all bad kids. The cops are corrupt as hell and I've seen a lot of liars (ie cops) testify against innocent individuals in court. The police will plant evidence because someone looked at them wrong or manipulate circumstances to put innocent people away. There is zero chance I'd convict a guilty party if I were on a jury. The system is so bad that you can't trust any evidence that is presented in court. Those who thing otherwise are naive. I'm a media corespondent and have seen all sorts of abuse. I was even arrested once for crossing a street (legally might I add) and disorderly conduct (for doing my job-filming illegal police conduct). If I hadn't had multiple backup cameramen I would be sitting in jail. If not for the backup cameramen I would have no legal recourse and it wasn't the direct abuse (that I didn't do those things the cop claimed) but other violations of clearly established constitional protections that has put me in a situation to seek compensation. I've also seen other media corespondents forced back from filming other illegal police conduct, surrounded, gang style, and then only arrested after a complaint was filed against an officer. The officer claimed he was making a false complaint despite it all being on video. Prosecutor dropped the case, two officers were fired after an investigation got started because the cops had lied about where they were, even though no investigation occurred or punishment resulted from the abuse of the media corespondent. Basically two of the officers were raping women and we didn't know that until after the charges were dropped. There is also a lawsuit here as well. There have also been a few other lawsuits in regard to filming police. Ultimately when they can't arrest you for filming they just make something else up in order to violate your rights and intimidate you. Thousands of dollars if not more get thrown at lawyers as well as theft occurs via bail charges. Even if your innocent you don't get that $40 fee to the bail bondsmen back, nor your time, nor other expenses that are incurred when they kidnap you on the street many miles from your home and then transfer you to another cit- or steal your car for that matter possibly in the process.
Seriously, if this is a huge civil nightmare, then throw these kids in jail. Issue solved.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Where's your head exactly?
Option A: Get lojacked with a device that records everyone around you
Option B: Go to jail. Where you can be beaten, raped and tortured. And if you stay there long at all you'll lose your house/job/kids. Even if you are completely innocent.
There's no more "consent" here than a bank "consents" to part with some cash when someone slips a threatening note to a teller.
Well if that's what the cops said he did... shit why even have a trial. They said he's an armed robber!
These court officials need to be prosecuted as the pedos they are!
Exactly what also flew my mind.
If these teens are not idiots (did they all get busted for stupid things like robery, or are there more-brain-than-brawl criminals in the lot), they would have some loud sex (they're horny teens after all) and try to counter sue for child-pornography.
Also, they are kids, they are probably more tech-savvy than most of the other people involved (well, save probably for the summary's burglar. Are there kids awaiting trial for hacking in this surveillance program ?), they will probably find ways to hack-around the system (put a speaker next to the mike, some padding to block out-side real-world noise and play something with an MP3 player)
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Most people are strapped to them too.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
Apologies for the grammar error in the header.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
I'm sorry but in my mind a kid about to be convicted for armed robbery should NOT have any expectation of privacy. He should feel lucky to avoid prison because that's where he belongs. A kid that age shouldn't be involved in more than a bit of shoplifting, vandalism and similar, not armed robbery. If you do that you both have the wrong friends and a really bad moral spine.
"For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
All of these comments are petty arguments over politics and race, when the real issue here is that technology has been getting developed specifically for intrusive use by the government. Where do we draw the line? Obviously, the crime this kid did brings little sympathy... but what if surveillance technology becomes the norm for DUIs or minor drug offenses?
"The cause of fear is ignorance."
They can always sit in jail.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
All politicians are crooked shysters.
Trump is included. We've put him in the swamp to kill as many of the other critters as he can before his term is up.
We don't have to invite Trump over for a dinner party. We just have to let him do his job.
But instead hes's decided being a critter is actually pretty good and is trying to set himself up as head critter.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
"The idea that an adult can turn on a listening device while a child is, say, in the bathroom or in their bedroom is not good."
This could also be used to listen to privileged conversations. While they couldn't use them in court directly there would be no way to determine if the prosecution otherwise took advantage of that knowledge.
It's one thing to require a GPS tracking bracelet on a person for pre-trial supervision or even as a term of probation for a limited term but to enable communication through that device... that is too far in the name of "justice".
I could easily see such technology being used without prior notice of the monitored to listen in on private communications, even privileged communications such as with a lawyer or counselor; this is of course not to mention the fact that such monitoring could be used to build a greater case against an individual based upon recordings. It's not unheard of for this here on Slashdot for company provided monitoring to be abused and misused, it's also not unheard of for such systems to be compromised by third-parties for malicious purposes such as covert surveillance or harassment so, is it a stretch to believe that such could likely happen with this particular practice?
Why is GPS/location monitoring not enough? What sound justification could be made for more than that for legal reasons? These are children, not spies, not enemies of the state and even if such features could lead to greater security for society, is that a society that you could reasonably say you'd prefer if it was your child or yourself?
You're the one making the ad-hominem attacks. ie: Crying.
These kids behaved like animals and subsequently have less rights than animals. I don't care if they get recorded masturbating. Kid is in trial for *armed Robbery* Fuck him, and his parents.
~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
Assuming most of the commentators here are in the US of A, the number of people not just willing but enthusiastically willing to give up on what remains of our constitutional rights is sad.
you have to right. .That was the crazy thing. Basically, it was GOP wanting to rob peter to pay themselves. It is actually cheaper to society to pay for mental health than to pay prison costs (as well as the crimes including murder that will occur otherwise).
I was being sarcastic about throwing him in jail. That is exactly what we used to do. America's real problem is that we used to spend money on mental health, but then the GOP esp under reagan, cut it way back. Said that we were pampering ppl
As to the GPS, I have no issue with listening in. He signed up for it in place of jail. unless things have changed, in Illinois, you are allowed to record conversations as long as 1 party knows about it (i.e. no spying). The kid knows that he can be recorded so, 1 party does know.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
If that worked prisons could not have any surveillance either.
I would presume that by default some small private part in a normal prison (e.g.: toilet booth) aren't on continuously cam (and an escort would be required if strong suspiction requires to monitor those moments).
From what I've heard, here around in Europe, when inmates are having conjugal visits their activities aren't on cam either for the same obvious reasons.
(Where's BankRoberMBA when you need him to share his experience as an inmate ?)
I would strongly presume that nothing forbids the teenage person to engage in sex.
And given they WTF-ness levels of laws on your side of the Antlantic Pond, where even teens consensually sexting each other could be charged for child pornography, I would suspect that suing for child pornography isn't as far fetched as it sounds.
A suspect for armed robbery disabled his monitor and is on the run?
First, as I've mentionned, if the guy is stupid enough to *actually* get into something like armed robbery, he's probably not smart enough to successfully mess with the monitor.
Second, someone smarter would probably not try to disable it (that would immediately attract attention), but instead try to artificially report the noises they want to the monitor (random background noises) to mask their activity to get some privacy.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]