Police as Alert Responders? Lessons Learned about Perceived Roles and Responses from Pretrial GPS Supervision of Domestic Violence Defendants

Abstract

There is a substantial body of literature that examines police practices, behavioral responses, and victim cooperation when the police respond to intimate partner or domestic violence (IPV/DV) incidents. Less scholarly attention is given to the complex justice system response to IPV/DV incidents in which the police are one of many collaborative actors. A critical time in IPV/DV justice system processing is the period of time after arrest and before court disposition. Increasingly, the supervision of defendants in this pretrial period has been facilitated with the use of technology that creates new roles for the police. The present study seeks to explore perceived police roles and responses through an in-depth case study of a city-county municipality employing global positioning system (GPS) pretrial supervision of IPV/DV defendants. Using interview data from pretrial probation officers, victim advocates, and victims of IPV/DV, this research offers lessons learned and police practice recommendations for working as a unified systems front to curtail IPV/DV crimes and improve communication between multiple justice system stakeholders.

Repeated Domestic Violence Police Calls: A Closer Look at Three Case Situations

“…Accurate risk assessment requires information from preceding calls and knowledge of associated risk factors, particularly related to the end of a relationship (Anderson & Saunders, 2003;Romans et al, 2007). Responses to risk assessment questions commonly rely on information provided by victims (Kebbell, 2019), who may appear uncooperative by refusing to respond (Carter & Grommon, 2016;Johnson, 2004), or may be distrustful of officers (Goodman-Delahunty & Crehan, 2016), whom victims experience as unfair or blaming (Stewart et al, 2013). Children are often present, and at risk in domestic disputes (Fallon et al, 2015;Kimball, 2016), yet, children's involvement is not necessarily well-captured on risk assessments or police reports (Swerin et al, 2018).…”

Las órdenes de protección como herramienta para combatir la violencia hacia las mujeres en el marco de la (ex)pareja: fundamentos, marco jurídico y aplicación en Uruguay

“…Asimismo, las víctimas con OP reportan sentirse empoderadas y con mayor confianza de contactar a la policía (Fischer & Rose, 1995;Lewis, Dobash, Dobash & Cavanagh, 2000). Adicionalmente, este efecto disuasorio puede ser potenciado mediante el monitoreo electrónico del movimiento de los ofensores en tiempo real, mediante dispositivos con GPS (Carter & Grommon, 2016), como las tobilleras electrónicas, y la provisión de botones de pánico y sistemas de alerta móvil para un reporte más fácil e inmediato (Lloyd, Farrell & Pease 1994;Natarajan, 2016).…”

Occupational Stress Associated With Technological Diversion Among Pretrial Services Officers: A Qualitative Case Study of GPS Supervision for Intimate Partner and Domestic Violence Cases

“…Maximizing the plausible diversionary benefits of GPS technology requires community corrections officers to navigate unique circumstances. While there is a growing body of literature on the effect of pretrial GPS supervision for IPV/DV cases (see, for example, Carter & Grommon, 2016;Erez et al, 2012Erez et al, , 2013Grommon et al, 2017;Gur et al, 2016;Ibarra & Erez, 2005;Ibarra et al, 2014), the range and nuance of stressors that community corrections professionals experience with pretrial GPS supervision represents an underdeveloped research area. The growth of pretrial service programs coupled with the pace of technological changes in GPS necessitates urgent examination of the experiences and staffing considerations of community corrections agencies using this technology.…”

“…A community corrections officer must discern between these low- and high-priority alerts and events as quickly as possible while continuing to monitor the defendant’s location. The technological challenges and dynamic responses to alert notifications and affiliated events associated with GPS supervision are prevalent (Carter & Grommon, 2016; Erez et al, 2013; Grommon et al, 2017); thus, utilizing this form of monitoring system with certain populations may compound stress that already accompanies community corrections.…”