During my recent experience, I once again assumed the role of a simulated offender to test the Ministry of Justice’s innovative technology. Previously, I had experimented with an alcohol monitoring tag by attempting to breach its restrictions at a local pub. This time, I engaged as a community-based offender to trial a new surveillance system.
This new initiative involves post-release offenders and individuals serving non-custodial sentences responding to behavior-related queries through a mobile questionnaire. Upon completing the questionnaire, participants are prompted to submit a brief video for identity verification using artificial intelligence.
Minister of Prisons, James Timpson, emphasized the aim of integrating state supervision through mobile devices to maintain a sense of accountability even outside confinement. Timpson, a proponent of technological solutions for prison management, unveiled this latest strategy.
Following my registration at the Ministry of Justice, I received my first survey notification unexpectedly on my work phone. The prompt, appearing as “GOV.UK,” interrupted my routine, requiring me to provide feedback on my well-being and support needs.
During the survey, I disclosed struggles with mental health, financial difficulties, and excessive alcohol consumption. Such responses, if mirrored by actual offenders, would raise concerns flagged for probation intervention.
Post-questionnaire, I underwent a brief identity verification process through a five-second video recording. Testing the system with various individuals, including colleagues and friends, confirmed the system’s accuracy in verifying identities.
This technological advancement forms part of an £8 million initiative aimed at bolstering criminal monitoring efforts, fostering a “prison-like” environment within the community. A trial phase commenced across four Probation regions in England, supplementing existing offender obligations like GPS tracking and curfews.
Timpson stressed the necessity of effective community-based punishment supervision, hinting at potential expansions like wearable reminder devices and geolocation services for enhanced monitoring.
While the efficiency of this technology seems promising, its real impact remains to be seen. The potential for offenders to deceive in survey responses, coupled with the three-day response window, raises questions about its effectiveness. Timpson reaffirmed the irreplaceable role of in-person probation meetings in the supervisory process.
Despite the benefits of tech-enabled emotional check-ins, concerns linger about over-reliance on technology over human-centric offender monitoring. The evolving landscape of offender surveillance warrants cautious exploration to prevent potential drawbacks.
Sophie, a Political Correspondent at Mirror since December 2022, specializes in UK politics, particularly focusing on prisons, justice systems, education, and online safety.