NCJ Number
190284
Date Published
2001
Length
4 pages
Annotation
Curfew orders with electronic monitoring as a sentence were introduced across England and Wales on December 1, 1999 following trials of the curfew order in seven areas; this report presents key findings from interviews conducted with criminal justice practitioners and electronic monitoring staff for an evaluation of the first year of using the new sentence nationally.
Abstract
Five jurisdictions participated in the evaluation. In these jurisdictions interviews and focus groups were conducted with practitioners from probation services, youth offending teams, and representatives from magistrates' courts. In addition, staff from the three electronic monitoring companies that operated in the five areas were interviewed. The interviews focused on respondents' experiences with and views on the new sentence. The findings showed that most criminal justice practitioners viewed curfew orders as a "top end" community penalty, but some recognized their flexibility in terms of use and tariff. Respondents believed curfews were particularly suitable for offending that occurred at specific times and places, where custody was likely but inadvisable, and when other community penalties had been breached or were unsuitable. Most respondents viewed curfew orders as inappropriate for sex offenders, very violent offenders, and offenders involved in domestic violence or child abuse. Practitioners favored the use of curfew orders alongside other community penalties that could support and build on the consequences of being "tagged." Some respondents also saw value in stand-alone curfews as a means of punishing offenders and reducing offending opportunities. Lack of knowledge about and confidence in the order had inhibited its use in some jurisdictions, particularly where practitioners felt inundated by new initiatives. Bringing breaches of curfew orders has raised both legal and practical difficulties. Also, respondents were concerned about perceived inconsistency in courts' approach to breaches of curfew. Practitioners liked the fact that curfew orders provided clear evidence of compliance and offered a cost-effective alternative to prison; however, they were concerned that tagging might stigmatize offenders. Generally, respondents viewed curfew orders as an underused sentence with considerable potential. They recommended more interagency cooperation and sharing of information to improve practice. 4 references