DEXTER, Maine — The tragic deaths of Amy Bagley and her two children in 2011 has sparked a movement to equip those accused of domestic violence crimes with an electronic monitoring device.
Those who knew and loved Bagley and her two children, Coty and Monica — who were slain by Bagley’s estranged husband, who then killed himself — believe the tragedy could have been averted if the state had an electronic monitoring system to track the movements of those charged with a domestic violence crime as part of their bail conditions.
The Dexter community held a Race/Walk to End Domestic Violence in June that raised $18,000 for starting an electronic monitoring system. The state supplemented the fund with a $500 donation for the purpose of attracting private donations. The community-led effort hopes the fund will be used to support tougher domestic violence laws in the state. Such laws could include requiring ankle monitoring devices to be worn by domestic violence defendants on bail and by those who have been served with a protection from abuse order.
The fund reached $36,500 in July when Gov. Paul LePage donated $18,000 from his office’s contingency fund. LePage later commissioned a task force to consider ways of implementing the technology into the judicial system.
He named seven members to his Task Force to Reduce Domestic Violence Through Technology.
The task force members include Department of Public Safety Commissioner John Morris and Corrections Commissioner Joseph Ponte. There are also state prosecutors, as well as representatives of the attorney general’s and information technology offices, statewide organizations dedicated to ending domestic violence, and police chiefs associations.
Now that a pot of money and the task force are in place, the challenge that remains is how Maine will become the 41st state to implement an electronic monitoring system. The task force has held several meetings since March discussing how to implement the system.
The task force met with several representatives from domestic victims’ advocates groups last month in Augusta at the request of Rep. Ken Fredette, R-Newport. He invited Womancare Community Relations Coordinator Art Jette, who is also a member of the Department of Corrections Victims Advisory Group, to monitor the task force’s progress.
The discussion was focused on the type of monitoring system the state should implement using the donated funds. The group discussed methods used by other states in an effort to determine which system was the best fit for Maine. Some members also considered using the devices for paroling low-level criminals.
As the discussion moved toward using the devices for nondomestic violence purposes, both Jette and Fredette expressed concerns. Jette believes the funds raised by the Dexter community and donated by LePage were made for the specific purpose of protecting domestic violence victims.
“I think the community made it perfectly clear how they wanted the funds to be used,” Jette said. “I don’t think there was any desire from the task force not to use the money for domestic violence safety purposes. But I hope future meetings will emphasize using the funds for what they were raised for.”
The task force is due to issue a final report by Dec. 15 about how the funds will be spent. The recommendation may include a series of pilot programs operated throughout the state to monitor its effectiveness. The task force may also use a small portion of the proceeds to hire a consultant to oversee the program’s implementation.
The task force will make a recommendation to Ponte, who will oversee how the $36,000 will be spent. Department of Corrections officials indicated that the task force is still considering several options for implementing the system.
“The task force will be ready to make a recommendation to the governor by Dec. 15. It will be one recommendation with a string of all the components on the best way to get this instituted,” said Gregory Couture, special assistant to Ponte. “Nothing has been finalized. We are still working on completing our report to the governor.”
Neither Fredette nor Jette are task force members. The two men don’t plan on attending the task force’s next meeting on Oct. 4.
I don’t see how monitoring would work in this situation. I do see how it works to keep track of a person who is restricted to their residence but to try and track people where ever they go could not be done in real time. I guess it would be possible to put an algorithem into computer software that would alert if the individual went near the other persons residence. If you were to try and monitor people real time you would have to have an operations center and track each individual as they mover throughout the country side. That would be difficult. Plus how would you know if the monitored individual doesn’t encounter the other person somewhere within town. Like a store.
I have serious reservations about anything that involves the phrase, “equip those accused of… crimes with an electronic monitoring device” (emphasis mine). I know the counterarguments; they boil down to “but Domestic Violence is different,” which, I’m sorry, doesn’t wash. Innocent until proven guilty is innocent until proven guilty – what of doesn’t and shouldn’t enter into it. The potential for abuse of such a questionably legal practice should be both obvious and disturbing; besides which, start making special-case rules for certain crimes and you’ve set an appallingly dangerous precedent.
Excellent. Couldn’t have said it better myself. It jumped out at me as soon as I started reading the article, keyword being “accused”.
This is better than nothing, BUT these idiots need to be incarcerated PERIOD. No second chances. There is no reason to beat on a spouse or girlfriend or vice-versa. We are supposed to be a civilized society. Sadly, we are far from that.
This is better than nothing, BUT these idiots need to be incarcerated PERIOD.
What, without even a trial? They’re talking about putting tracking devices on people who’ve been accused, not convicted.
One of the problems that I see is that even people convicted of domestic violence seem to have most of their sentence suspended in Maine. Read the Court Reports in any Maine paper for verification of this statement on any given day. For all the alleged leniency of Massachusetts court system that people write about on these boards, Maine seems to have a much more lenient legal system.
Another thing I would point out is that when an individual is arrested for domestic violence, there is usually a pattern of such arrests, even convictions, in the history of that person. How do I know that? I have had positions that have allowed me access to the criminal records of individuals, and perpetrators of domestic violence tend to have a track record of it, often with more than one partner.
So then it comes down to whether bail conditions can include the tracking devices or whether judges should hold them in jail till trial. From what I have seen, bail conditions can include whatever the judge deems necessary. Or the accused can stay in jail till trial. It seems to me that the one that would benefit from the devices is the individual accused of domestic violence because at least that individual would not have to sit in the jail cell until trial.
Time to stop talking about doing this and do it. There are 40 other states modeling how to go about a program so what is the problem?
Well, one potential problem is that tracking people (let me just emphasize this one more time, since I’m starting to suspect people are skimming this article and missing this rather important detail) who have not been convicted of a crime as though they were farm animals is probably unconstitutional.
Maybe as a condition of bail? In the instance of the Lake case – his guns were ordered collected, which I am sure some would claim to be unconstitutional as well.
There are a few States in the Mid-Atlantic area that have gone with the idea of, when a TRO is issued by a Court Commissioner, to issue the abused victim a cell phone that is programmed with 9-1-1 ONLY as a means of providing the victim with some protection’s. The cellphone’s are the older one’s that have been turned in or are seized under court order a part of a criminal case’s evidence that’s been finalized and had their ‘card’s’ modified to the 9-1-1 standard. Realizing that cell service in Maine is sketchy at best, especially up in The County, this might not work in all of Maine. But given the problem, and with winter coming on, it’s something to try. Either that or we all wait for the next ‘call’ and start digging graves again. No one wants that so why can’t we get that simple idea across ?