“This is the most extreme type of monitoring that I’ve seen,” says Pilar Weiss, founder of the National Bail Fund Network, a network of over 90 community bail and bond funds across the United States. “It’s part of a disturbing trend where deep surveillance and social control applications are used pretrial with little oversight.”

  • imbrucy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    The very idea that they can forcibly monitor the entire families devices in order for him to be granted bail is insane. Personally, I think the idea of not being allowed any electronic device shouldn’t be allowed anymore, but using that as a pretext to affect the entire family is absurd.

    • nodester@partizle.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Absolutely.

      In 1950, if you were told as a pretrial release condition, you weren’t allowed to use paper because your alleged crime involved a book, no one would have thought that reasonable. Today, devices are the equivalent of paper.

      • MyFeetOwnMySoul@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I agree that this is cruel and unusual punishment, however, I strongly dislike the paper == computer metaphor. The two are hardly comparable.

        Compared to paper, it is easy to comit serious crimes from the comfort of your own home with a computer. Computers facilitate Lightspeed communication, and can be used for instantaneous financial transaction. They can be used to collect information anonymously, and deseminate information publically.

        Very very different risk levels.

        That said, subjecting an entire family to 24/7 electronic surveillance (and making them pay for it!?!) Is fucked up. I think we need a different paradigm for dealing with “e-criminals” like perhaps the state provides state-administered devices to those charges with electronic crimes? Idrk, but this ain’t it cheif.