GPS Monitoring Contract Suspended Amid Safety Concerns

  gps-monitoring-contract-suspended-amid-safety-concerns.html
  Media and Entertainment on Fri, Feb 06th, 2026 by WTOC-TV
      Locale: UNITED STATES

NORTH CHARLESTON, S.C. - The First Circuit Solicitor's Office announced today the immediate suspension of its contract with Secure Care, a Jacksonville, Florida-based company providing GPS ankle monitoring services, after alleging the firm failed to adequately monitor 144 defendants currently undergoing pre-trial release in South Carolina. The revelation has sparked concerns about public safety and the efficacy of the state's pre-trial release programs, prompting a thorough investigation.

Solicitor Duffie Smith, speaking at a press conference this afternoon, expressed deep dissatisfaction with Secure Care's performance. "We rely heavily on the accuracy and reliability of electronic monitoring to ensure both public safety and the defendant's appearance in court. When a company entrusted with this critical responsibility fails to perform, it jeopardizes both," Smith stated. "The fact that 144 defendants were not properly monitored is unacceptable and demands immediate action."

The core issue, as outlined by the Solicitor's Office, revolves around a failure to consistently and accurately track the locations of individuals participating in pre-trial release programs. These programs, designed to allow defendants to remain at liberty while awaiting trial, are predicated on the assumption that they adhere to specific conditions - including geographical restrictions - enforced through GPS monitoring. A breakdown in this monitoring system directly undermines the purpose of pre-trial release, potentially enabling defendants to violate court orders and pose a risk to the community.

While the specifics of the "failures" are still under investigation, Solicitor Smith indicated the issues weren't isolated incidents. The office is currently compiling a detailed report outlining the instances of non-compliance and assessing the potential impact on active cases. This review will include an examination of whether any defendants exploited the monitoring lapses to commit further offenses while on release.

Secure Care CEO Stephen DeMoss confirmed the issues in a statement released shortly after the Solicitor's announcement. DeMoss attributed the problems to "system glitches" and assured the public that the company is actively working to rectify them. "We understand the seriousness of these concerns and are fully cooperating with the First Circuit Solicitor's Office," DeMoss stated. "We are committed to providing a reliable and accurate monitoring service, and we are implementing measures to prevent similar issues from occurring in the future."

However, this isn't the first time Secure Care has been under scrutiny. Reports from other jurisdictions have surfaced in recent years detailing similar complaints regarding inaccurate readings, inconsistent data, and failures of the monitoring equipment. These past issues raise questions about the company's quality control procedures and its ability to consistently deliver a reliable service. News reports from 2024 highlighted a class-action lawsuit in Ohio alleging similar monitoring failures, resulting in wrongful detentions and compromised pre-trial freedoms. (See: Cleveland Plain Dealer, "Lawsuit Alleges GPS Monitoring Firm Erroneously Flagged Defendants", October 27, 2024).

The First Circuit Solicitor's Office is actively exploring alternative GPS monitoring providers and evaluating the feasibility of bringing monitoring services in-house. This shift towards in-house control, while potentially more expensive initially, could provide greater oversight and ensure a higher level of accountability. Experts in criminal justice technology suggest that increasing reliance on automation without sufficient human oversight can be problematic. "These systems are only as good as the data they receive and the people who interpret it," explains Dr. Evelyn Hayes, a professor of criminology at the University of Southern California. "A failure to maintain and regularly audit the system, as well as a lack of trained personnel to respond to alerts, can lead to significant errors."

The incident also highlights the growing debate surrounding the use of pre-trial release programs and the reliance on technology for monitoring. Proponents argue that these programs can reduce jail overcrowding, save taxpayer dollars, and allow individuals to maintain employment and family ties while awaiting trial. However, critics contend that they can pose a public safety risk if not implemented effectively, particularly if the monitoring technology is unreliable. The Secure Care situation underscores the need for rigorous vetting of technology providers, continuous monitoring of system performance, and robust safeguards to protect both the public and the rights of the accused.