GPS tracking devices prove effective for Newington PD, but civil rights and legal groups push back

Police departments in Connecticut are using GPS devices launched from their cruisers to track suspect vehicles that flee without having to chase them, but not everyone is in favor of the new technology.

“When activated it does emit a small laser so you can get it in sight,” explained Sgt. Matthew D’Esposito with the Newington Police Department.

The police technology is designed to prevent pursuits.

“Allows us to disengage from a pursuit but still keep an eye on that vehicle to pick it up again when it comes to a stop,” said D’Esposito.

The tracking devices from the company Starchase eliminate the need to pursue a vehicle, without sacrificing a potential arrest.

“Thinking outside the box and looking into ways to address those concerns,” he said.

Newington has been using the devices for a few years and will point out they have been used in a number of arrests, including the arrest of two people believed to have been involved in thefts in towns around Connecticut just last month.

Other departments like New Haven have shown off the technology in action in the past.

From shoplifters to stolen vehicles, they said the devices are working for their department, allowing them to strike a balance.

“The difficulty of balancing the liability of pursuing a vehicle vs the benefit to the community of actually apprehending the suspect that you are looking for,” D’Esposito said.

The darts themselves launch using compressed air and have an adhesive on one side allowing it to attach to the back of a vehicle. It pings every few seconds, allowing dispatchers or the officer to track.

The idea of tracking a vehicle without a warrant or without the driver knowing has raised strong opposition from some legal groups and civil rights organizations.

The Chief Public Defender’s Office testified on a bill that would have created a pilot program for three departments in Connecticut. The office is against the use of the technology, saying in part, “there is simply no question that permitting an officer to launch or place a GPS system onto another vehicle without a warrant is unconstitutional.”

The ACLU of Connecticut has also been opposed.

 “Expanding police powers in this way not only invites abuse, but also deepens the mistrust that many communities — especially Black, Brown, immigrant, LGBTQIA+, and low-income communities — already feel toward law enforcement. Giving police the authority to place GPS trackers on people’s cars without a warrant raises serious civil liberties and privacy concerns. People have a right to move through their lives without being secretly monitored by the government. We should be focused on protecting people’s rights and privacy, not creating new avenues for unchecked government surveillance,” Chelsea-Infinity Gonzalez, public policy and advocacy director for Connecticut ACLU said in a statement.

But some experts disagree.

“I think it’s no question the way it’s used in Connecticut is constitutional, but I can understand why some people feel uncomfortable about being tracked,” said Michael Lawlor with the University of New Haven.

Lawlor points to a Supreme Court case from 2012 that ruled against the use of the trackers. In that case, the device was attached a day after a warrant expired and was on for 28 days.

He said he believes in Connecticut, police are using the devices only when they have probable cause under exigent circumstances. He said it's no different than cases where an officer could search a vehicle without a warrant.

“These are officers that have a definitive reason to stop that vehicle,” said Sgt. D’Esposito.