Lawsuit Alleges Ankle Monitoring Practices Are Akin to Extortion

[TexasTowelie]

James Brooks had to pay a heavy price for his ankle monitor.

James Brooks left his job at the Port of Oakland after his mother was paralyzed by a catastrophic stroke in 2012. The 49-year-old former longshoreman is now her full-time caregiver, earning about minimum wage from the state's In-Home Supportive Services program.

So when Brooks was arrested for DUI last year, he was desperate to avoid going to jail. "I have to take care of her," he said in a recent interview. "There's nobody else. I don't have family support. I have to do this by myself."

Brooks eventually reached a plea deal to serve his 120-day jail sentence through 58 days of home confinement, which included wearing an ankle bracelet to monitor his location and submitting to alcohol testing. He was ordered to go to Leaders in Community Alternatives (LCA), a private company that provides electronic monitoring and other law enforcement services in Alameda County and other jurisdictions throughout California.

He didn't know that he'd end up paying heavily for his decision.

Read more: https://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/lawsuit-alleges-ankle-monitoring-practices-are-akin-to-extortion/Content?oid=18890703

[Fullduplexxx]

1. Gets a dui then bitches about what his dui wrought.

He's lucky he didnt kill anyone

[TeamPooka]

3. so you're fine with the injustices built into the justice system. Okay.

[Jake Stern]

5. This is not someone who shoplifted a CD. His actions had a high likelihood of killing people

As noted in the comments by an attorney, 120 days is the standard for a THIRD offense. The article conveniently leaves out how many more times he's been busted driving drunk.

I am opposed to injustices but I can't bring myself to pity a drunk driver either.

[Fullduplexxx]

7. I dont agree with what you are defining as an injustice

[TeamPooka]

9. people being charged different amounts for the same service, with the brunt of the

big charges being borne by those who can afford it least is injustice.
Did you read the article?
That's what it is about.

[Jake Stern]

2. I agree in principle BUT couldn't they have picked

someone other than a DUI?

Perhaps a non-violent drug offender or someone with a larceny rap?

To me a drunk driver is the equivalent of someone standing in the street firing a gun. May not hit anyone but they may end up killing a person.

[TeamPooka]

4. either you treat everyone the same or it's a rigged system. Funny how it always affects people of

color more, huh?
The rigging and injustice.

[Jake Stern]

6. He had a choice: to drive drunk or not.

He made his choice and is facing the consequences of it. If that white woman in SC faced the same thing I'd feel the exact same way.

[TeamPooka]

8. you can feel anyway you want but the law must be applied equally. Sorry you have a problem with that