Wisconsin High Court: Lifetime GPS Monitoring Not Punishment
The Wisconsin Supreme Court says a judge wasn’t required to tell a man he would face a lifetime of GPS monitoring upon pleading guilty to child sex crimes because such monitoring is a public safety measure, not a form of punishment.
A Wisconsin judge wasn’t required to tell a man he would face a lifetime of GPS monitoring upon pleading guilty to child sex crimes because such monitoring is a public safety measure, not a form of punishment, the state Supreme Court ruled Friday.
The court concluded in a rare 7-0 decision that monitoring is designed to protect the public rather than punish the offender further.
“(Lifetime monitoring) provides a middle ground between releasing dangerous sex offenders into the public wholly unsupervised and civil commitment,” Justice Michael Gableman wrote in the ruling. “In light of the ‘frightening and high’ rate of recidivism for sex offenders, the relatively minimal intrusion of lifetime GPS tracking … is not excessive in relation to protecting the public.”
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
This decision is in direct conflict with the 4th Amendment.
In fact, SCOTUS has already dealt with a case similar to this from South Carolina I believe. That case had gps monitoring on a vehicle or something to that effect. I’ll see if i can find the case #.
Don’t most judges have interns or aids to help the judges with making decisions. by giving wrong info about each case making bias decisions.
we know that this is about money. and we have a good idea who they are. now what do we do about it. Americans have to step-up. I will say I was told by my public defender that he had 50 cases in front of me and don’t expect anything special from him. I did 10 1/2 years probation no
prison time and I had to fight for myself. I had 20 years on paper went on my own to get early termination and got it. i’am registered under
predator status. I have proof of my innocence but I have been told I can’t use it because I took a plea deal. so I keep reading and hoping a day will come this nightmare will end. maybe a day will come justice will prevail for all rso’s. stop the registry!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What it’s going to take is a truth in sexual recividism statistics law. Why? Because, as we all know, there are many rearrests made for various reasons that are not sexual but are counnted as recividism.
I’m gonna play devils advocate here and it probably won’t be appreciated, but I do believe it needs to be said. When I was on probation here in the “lovely” state of Florida, I too was required to wear an ankle monitor and carry around that beeper sized GPS device that they pair with it.
I hated every minute of it. I was ashamed to wear sandals without socks for fear someone would see that bulging black cord wrapped around my ankle.
I resorted to wearing long dark colored socks and sweat pants most of the times, rarely being seen in public with shorts on. I resent the fact that Florida lumps all offenders into the same category regardless of the crime committed, however that’s the way it is and will be until clearer minds prevail.
But I digress. My reason for commenting here is about a lifetime GPS for a violent predator. While I do not agree that anyone should have to endure this horrendous humiliation forever, I do believe that we as a group ought not even get into entertaining an argument over this at the moment. Perhaps our energies would be well spent working on fixing the fixable problems with the registry and the GPS system in place for less serious risk offenders.
I’m a firm believer that we can chip away at this heinous law little by little if we approach it by attacking the least fearful elements of the registry. If we do this we will eventually crack this system open and hopefully at that point it will collapse on itself.
I’m not sure if I’m explaining myself well and forgive me if I’m not.
I, like all of you, wish to see the registry and SORNA go the way of the dodo bird, but like all things in life, I believe change will only happen a little at a time.
I get your point, and am torn between the 2 positions. Registries should not exist for anybody but the public at large assumes everybody on a registry is dangerous and out of control. We know the vast majority do not meet the public’s perception of a sex offender. In order to combat the public’s love affair with registries I do agree that chipping away might be more effective. I think more stories of minor offenses that come with a life sentence can help the public start to question the fear mongering of legislatures. Most of the public will never accept that the “worst of the worst” deserves not to be on public registries, but I think most can agree that far too many minor offenses are on them. If we have a track record of reducing the types of crimes placed on registries it might gain traction. Just my 2cents.
You are strong and I commend you for shat you have fndured and gotten through. That is our cause, the ‘one size fits all’ mentality. If you were going to a doctor for medicine they wouldn’t just throw a medicine at every single person but they would dispense the medicine according to whatever the person needed. The law should function the same way I If you were going to a doctor for medicine they wouldn’t just throw a medicine at every single person but they would dispense the medicine according to whatever the person needed. The law should function the same way. I just don’t know where to start on it it’s such a huge issue but I wish I could make a change don’t know where to start on it it’s such a huge issue but I wish I could make a change.
This is insane. All RSO are treated the same regardless of the crime. Why does one size fit all? Many of these people are NOT harmful, just made a poor decision when they were younger and dated underage girls. This is insane that these people have to have a lifetime GPS!!! Frighting and high? This is a fiction and biased report from 1986 that has since been called out and not true. Look up the facts people on this report.
I can’t belive that judges still rely on false and outdated info…ummmm…yes I can…
“In light of the ‘frightening and high’ rate of recidivism for sex offenders, the relatively minimal intrusion of lifetime GPS tracking … is not excessive in relation to protecting the public.”
What can we do???