The incumbent has mentioned a number of times the need and desire to have his ankle monitoring program as an option for persons to be released from jail. The incumbent mentioned in a Yukon Review article on 07/13/2011 that only two people have been assigned to the program. The incumbent also claimed up to twenty inmates could possibly be utilized with the program instead of having them released on an OR (Own Recognizance) bond. As a side note, an OR bond is occasionally provided for lesser crimes with a promise from the person that they will re-appear for court as required. If they do not return an arrest warrant is issued for the person.
When the program was first proposed, the reported cost was $3.00 to $10.00 per day depending on the unit. Considering the average cost is $6.50, then considering 20 inmates released that is $130.00 a day x 1 year=$47,450.00. In the Yukon Review article, he placed the daily amount at approximately five dollars a day, in a year’s time that is $36,500.00 that is received from these inmates. All of this money goes to a private company with the county receiving nothing. In early April of 2011, I recommended to the incumbent that if he wanted an ankle monitoring program so bad that we should do it ourselves. I have significant experience in this area and can guarantee you could buy a very significant number of units for that kind of money.
My question is why would we have people who cannot afford to bond out of jail be released on an ankle monitor. If these people could afford the cost of the monitor they would either bond from jail or they would be paying the costs and fines which landed many in jail. The system we utilize for people to bond out of jail has worked for a significant number of years and the bondsman is responsible for ensuring these people return for court.
We have received questions about the possibility of using the units once a person’s criminal case has been concluded and sentenced by the court. The thought was instead of serving time in jail, these units would serve as a form of house arrest. Historically, although supervision is good on post-conviction persons, swift and sure punishment for violations has not always been the case. We have seen multiple violations go for significant lengths of time before these people are held accountable and often they continue to commit additional criminal acts. In addition to this, if these people are not compliant and not accountable, how would we expect these people would pay for the units which do nothing but increase money these people already owe?
The ankle monitor does not prevent any crime and depending on the unit, it may not even tell us where they were at merely where they were not at. From my perspective, the only person benefiting from this program is the private company who owns these units and it does nothing to realistically help the citizens of this county.
The Drug Court has been instituted in a number of counties in Oklahoma, many through grant funding. Generally, an advantage of the program is there is usually significant monitoring of the offender, accountability for behaviors, substance abuse counseling, and expectations of gainful employment. These programs are usually open to first-time, non-violent simple drug possession cases which if the offender is successful then the criminal case is dismissed. During the period of supervision, if an offender fails to comply with the rules various sanctions are provided up to incarceration in the county jail.
It is my understanding for people to attend the Canadian County Drug Court, it cost them $550.00 a month for the program along with ankle monitoring. Although I support realistic and effective programs, I would like to see the effectiveness of our particular program. In the course of my law enforcement career in this county, I have dealt with a significant number of drug offenders and found few that had any money to be provided to another expense. In addition, without adequate jail space Drug Court sanctions are significantly impacted.
Ultimately, the Sheriff has little interaction or responsibility for the Drug Court. Although this has been offered as an alternative to incarceration, I wonder if the Drug Court program would even have enough offenders to significantly impact our housing problems in the jail.
No comments:
Post a Comment