Connecticut House Bill HB06712

Connecticut 2019 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/29/19
• Refer: 1/29/19

Caption

An Act Concerning Gps Monitoring Of Convicted Persons Awaiting Sentencing For Aggravated Sexual Assault.

Impact

The implementation of HB 06712 would amend existing statutes, specifically section 54-63f of the general statutes, to include electronic monitoring as a standard requirement for convicted individuals of aggravated sexual assault awaiting sentencing. This could potentially transform the state's approach to monitoring offenders and influence broader discussions about the penalties associated with such serious charges. It raises questions about the efficacy and moral implications of utilizing technology in the monitoring of suspected offenders, particularly concerning their rights during a pending legal process.

Summary

House Bill 06712 introduces a requirement for GPS electronic monitoring of individuals awaiting sentencing for aggravated sexual assault. The bill mandates that any person in this category must be subject to electronic surveillance, ostensibly for public safety and to prevent further potential offenses during the awaiting sentencing period. This legislative measure has been framed as a necessity to ensure that such individuals do not pose a risk to the community before their formal sentencing takes place.

Contention

Opposition to the bill is likely to arise from concerns about civil liberties and the feasibility of imposing costs associated with electronic monitoring. Critics may argue that financial burdens placed on individuals could clash with the principle of presumed innocence as they await sentencing. There are also ethical considerations regarding the impact of continuous surveillance on individuals, particularly for those who may not be financially capable of bearing the costs without proper judicial waivers for indigent defendants.

Discussion

Proponents of the bill argue that electronic monitoring represents a proactive step towards ensuring community safety and accountability for serious offenses. In contrast, detractors may view it as an overreach that assumes guilt before formal sentencing, potentially leading to unnecessary stigmatization and violation of personal freedoms. The ongoing discussions around this bill will likely center around balancing the need for public safety with the rights of individuals in the legal process.