The offenders were sentenced to home detention as a condition of probation and were randomly assigned to either electronic monitoring or manual monitoring. Manual monitoring included frequent personal and telephone contacts, while electronic monitoring used less frequent personal contacts, together with computer-generated telephone calls, the placement of a "wristlet" in a unit attached to the home telephone line, and the recording of answers. Findings showed that both types of monitoring required considerable effort and organization. In addition, electronic monitoring permitted closer supervision of offenders, although the electronically monitored offenders tended to have more negative views about their monitoring than did the manually monitored offenders. However, the method of monitoring did not affect the probability of an arrest or other contact with the criminal justice system within 1 year of release. Nevertheless, the timing of the post-release arrests suggests the desirability of graduated release or immediate aftercare. Figures and 26 references. For the full report, see NCJ-125653.
Executive Summary: The Electronic Monitoring of Non-violent Convicted Felons: An Experiment in Home Detention
NCJ Number
123614
Date Published
1990
Length
47 pages
Annotation
Information from 154 nonviolent offenders sentenced to home detention in Marion County (Ind.) formed the basis of a comparison of electronic monitoring and manual monitoring.
Abstract
Date Published: January 1, 1990