Indiana Bill Going to Senate to Criminalize Shameful Advances in GPS Tracking – Indianapolis Business Journal

It would be a crime to use a GPS device to track someone without their knowledge, according to a bill passed Tuesday in the Senate Corrections Committee.

But Republican senators are at odds over who gets to use the increasingly common technology. Much of the dispute concerns possible exceptions for private investigators and certain family members.

Though the proposal advanced 8-0, lawmakers warned the bill still needs more work. Further amendments are expected in plenary.

Senate Bill 161, authored by Senator Michael Crider, R-Greenfield, would create the felony of remote criminal pursuit of prosecuting a person without their knowledge, a Class C misdemeanor. The penalty would be increased to a Class A misdemeanor if the prosecution was under a protective order was issued.

The sentence could get tougher for someone convicted of using a tracking device in the commission of a crime.

“What I’m trying to accomplish with Senate Bill 161 is to thread a needle between legitimate uses of electronics,” Crider said Tuesday. “I’m trying to figure that out, and this is our first attempt, so I’ll tell you the math probably isn’t perfect.”

Crackdown on GPS trackers

Crider said the impetus for the bill stems from “increasing concerns” by Indiana attorneys about the use of electronic devices, such as Apple AirTags or cell phone apps, to track and “stalk” individuals who are in “custody” and ” domestic violence”. situations.

These included an incident in Hancock County where a man tracked down his former girlfriend Millie Parke and “vigorously assaulted her and almost took her life,” Crider said.

Parke told lawmakers Tuesday her abusive ex-boyfriend had repeatedly violated a protective order — and “always” knew where she was by using GPS tracking technology.

As she attempted to escape, she was eventually attacked by her ex at a local gas station, leaving her with lasting injuries as well as lingering mental and emotional trauma.

“You think you’re running from someone, you think you’re escaping, you think you’re doing something — but you’re not. You’ve come to the right place,” Park said on Tuesday. “He had access every time I started my car. Every time I started, I stopped – everything.”

Laura Berry of the Indiana Coalition Against Domestic Violence noted that stalking through the use of technology is a “significant problem” in Indiana. She said that 60% of coalition survivors report being tracked daily by GPS surveillance.

“Our concern is their safety,” Berry said. “As we know, tracking has long-term health consequences and can lead to death.”

Courtney Curtis of the Indiana Prosecuting Attorneys Council said Crider’s bill would help prosecutors intervene earlier in such stalking situations and potentially increase charges for violators.

“We don’t have to wait for her to be repeatedly stalked, which requires ongoing harassing behavior. We don’t have to wait until she’s abused to the point of grievous bodily harm,” Curtis said. “The importance of this bill is being able to intervene earlier to disrupt that behavior.”

Exceptions in the latest version of the bill allow parents to track a minor child, track personal and business property, and conduct court-ordered surveillance — such as using ankle cuffs — and lawful policing.

However, legal prosecution would not include what violates a protective order.

Curtis said IPAC supports exceptions for family members, including finding an older adult. But who qualifies should be better defined, she said, noting that “some family members have contentious relationships.”

Who should be freed?

However, lawmakers on the committee squabbled over other acceptable uses of tracking devices.

The committee amended the bill on Tuesday to exempt vehicle manufacturers who put GPS tracking and navigation devices in new cars.

Another amendment, authored by Sen. Liz Brown, R-Fort Wayne, aimed to create a narrower exemption that applies only to family members pursuing minor children, relatives with intellectual disabilities, or those under guardianship.

But the proposed change didn’t go to a vote after the committee’s chairman, Sen. Aaron Freeman, R-Indianapolis, threatened to kill the bill if it were changed with Brown’s language.

“There’s probably a consensus here that we shouldn’t be doing this to our fellow citizens,” Freeman said. “That is a challenge. If you write something in the law and put something on paper, it is the law. And we all want to protect the ladies in our lives and the ladies of Indiana – everyone, but especially the ladies. And the challenge is, how do you do that without shutting out the world?”

Brown and other lawmakers also maintained that private investigators should remain subject to the criminal law provisions of the bill.

A separate amendment to exempt licensed investigators failed by a vote of 2 to 6.

“I don’t think we should give an intermediary a pass, so to speak, to pursue business and do things that he wouldn’t otherwise be allowed to do, which is disconcerting to think about,” Brown said. “I respect the profession of private investigator, but the profession predates these types of incredibly invasive devices.”

David Shelton, a licensed private investigator and vice president of the Indiana Society of Professional Investigators, said GPS tracking can be “a very valuable tool” for private investigators.

“Private investigators are professional, very personable and understand all of the concerns that have been raised here today,” he said. “There is not a single investigator of any integrity who would not first conduct a background investigation into a prospective client to ensure that there are no protective orders in place or pending in the court systems.”

Still, Shelton said he doesn’t use the technology himself, and acknowledged that GPS devices have “always been a bit of a gray area” for private investigators.

Sen. Jack Sandlin, R-Indianapolis, also said that a person who feels “harmed” by a tracking device already has an opportunity to file a complaint with the Indiana Attorney General or the state’s licensing authority.

Brown pushed back, arguing that a person would not know they were being followed by a “really good” private investigator.

“The way this bill reads — we’re not talking about just putting a GPS, putting it on someone’s car, which is worrying because police need a search warrant for that,” Brown said. “If a private investigator figured out how to throw an AirTag in my personal belongings – like leaving my shopping bags outside – that would be a tracking device that would be allowed. I find that incredibly disturbing.”

The Indiana Capital Chronicle is an independent, nonprofit news organization covering state government, politics and elections.