Pretrial Supervision and Domestic Violence: Factors to Consider

By Daniela Imig, Implementation Specialist, equivant Pretrial

Domestic violence cases can be highly sensitive, complex, and at times, in the media spotlight. When a defendant accused of domestic violence is ordered to pretrial supervision (or  ‘pretrial monitoring’), a range of factors should be considered that inform effective supervision strategies. The National Association of Pretrial Services Agencies (NAPSA) standard 2.9 notes that pretrial supervision should be individualized to a defendant’s assessed risk level and risk factors and based on the least restrictive conditions necessary to reasonably assure the defendant’s future court appearance and arrest-free behavior. In recognition of October as Domestic Violence Awareness Month, we compiled a brief list of factors to consider when supervising defendants accused of abuse in intimate relationships. 

• Assessment tools: These instruments play a vital role in the pretrial phase and are usually the first step in determining effective pretrial supervision conditions. The Ontario Domestic Assault Risk Assessment (ODARA) is an actuarial tool designed to estimate the risk that a domestic violence defendant will assault a partner again. The results from the ODARA assessment can help guide decisions about appropriate interventions and other strategies for the assessed individual.
• Frequency of reporting: This factor can often be informed by the results of an assessment tool – typically, the higher the score on the assessment tool, the more check-ins or supervision requirements may be placed on the defendant (don’t forget to adhere to the NAPSA standard detailed above). These appointments can be crucial in determining compliance with any court-ordered conditions, such as adherence with protective orders or substance use monitoring. Additionally, these sessions can be used to provide referrals to community resources, such as attending educational programs on domestic violence and access to counseling services. 
• Use of GPS electronic monitoring (EM): While this tool can sometimes bring a sense of security to the victim, EM requires more crucial examination as there are several limitations that should be considered: 

1. 1. Defendants may find a way to circumvent the restrictions that EM may provide, such as harassing the victim through phone calls or social media. 
   2. The use of GPS can inform authorities about where a defendant has traveled, but there is often a delay in response time. This delay can be critical in a domestic violence situation where immediate action may be necessary.
   3. There may be inadequate geographical coverage in remote or rural areas, which can compromise connectivity and/or longer response times from law enforcement.

It is important that these limitations are clearly explained to the victim so secondary protective measures can be a part of their safety planning. 

Addressing domestic violence through pretrial supervision requires a nuanced and individualized approach that prioritizes both the safety of victims and the rights of defendants. By leveraging assessment tools like the ODARA, you can tailor supervision strategies to the specific risk factors associated with each case, ensuring that conditions are both effective and least restrictive. The integration of regular check-ins and community resources can foster compliance and provide critical support for defendants, promoting rehabilitation while safeguarding victims.

For more information about pretrial risk assessments, alternative screenings, or effective pretrial process, please contact us.