The present invention is related to monitoring movement, and in particular to systems and methods for monitoring contact between identified criminal elements.
Various approaches have been used to monitor the location and activity of individuals that for one reason or another require additional supervision. As an example, a tracking device may be attached to an individual and used to report the location of the individual at any given time. This information has traditionally been used by, for example, a parole officer assigned to monitor the individual to assure that the individual is staying within the parameters of their parole. Such a monitoring agency system gathers location information associated with a number of individuals being monitored and stores it to a database. This database may then be accessed by an authorized entity to monitor the activity of a given individual. Merely providing location information to a monitoring agent may not allow for effective interruption of criminal activity.
Hence, for at least the aforementioned reasons, there exists a need in the art for advanced systems and methods for monitoring entities.
The present invention is related to monitoring movement, and in particular to systems and methods for monitoring contact between identified criminal elements.
Various embodiments of the present invention provide behavior determination systems. Such systems include a first monitoring device, a second monitoring device, and a monitoring system. The monitoring system is operable to: receive information from the first monitoring device; receive information from the second monitoring device; identify at least a first zone around the first monitoring device; identify at least a second zone around the second monitoring device; and characterize an intersection of the first zone and the second zone.
In some instances of the aforementioned embodiments, the monitoring system includes a processor and a computer readable medium. The computer readable medium has instructions executable by the processor to: receive the information from the first monitoring device; receive the information from the second monitoring device; identify at least the first zone around the first monitoring device; identify at least the second zone around the second monitoring device; and characterize the intersection of the first zone and the second zone.
In various instances of the aforementioned embodiments, characterizing the intersection of the first zone and the second zone includes: determining that a first individual associated with the first monitoring device is friendly with a second individual associated with the second monitoring device; and characterizing the intersection as a friendly interaction. In some cases, the monitoring system is further operable to provide an alert indicating the friendly interaction. In various cases, the friendly interaction corresponds to a common gang affiliation of the first individual and the second individual.
In particular instances of the aforementioned embodiments, the monitoring system is further operable to define a common zone around both the first monitoring device and the second monitoring device. In such instances, the interaction is a first interaction, and the monitoring system is further operable to: receive information from a third monitoring device; identify at least a third zone around the third monitoring device; and characterize a second intersection of the third zone and the common zone. In some cases, characterizing the second intersection includes: determining that a first individual associated with the first monitoring device is unfriendly with a third individual associated with the third monitoring device; and characterizing the intersection as an unfriendly interaction.
In one or more instances of the aforementioned embodiments, characterizing the intersection of the first zone and the second zone includes: determining that a first individual associated with the first monitoring device is unfriendly with a second individual associated with the second monitoring device; and characterizing the intersection as an unfriendly interaction. In some cases, the monitoring system is further operable to providing an alert indicating the unfriendly interaction. In some such cases, the friendly interaction corresponds to an adverse gang affiliation of the first individual and the second individual.
Other embodiments of the present invention provide methods for behavior determination. Such methods include: monitoring a first location of a first monitoring device; monitoring a second location of a second monitoring device; receiving the first location from the first monitoring device; receiving the second location from the second monitoring device; identifying at least a first zone around the first monitoring device; identifying at least a second zone around the second monitoring device; and characterizing an intersection of the first zone and the second zone.
In some cases, characterizing the intersection of the first zone and the second zone includes: determining that a first individual associated with the first monitoring device is friendly with a second individual associated with the second monitoring device; and characterizing the intersection as a friendly interaction. In particular cases, the methods further include providing an alert indicating the friendly interaction. In other cases, the methods further include defining a common zone around both the first monitoring device and the second monitoring device. In some such cases, the interaction is a first interaction, and the methods further include: receiving information from a third monitoring device; identifying at least a third zone around the third monitoring device; and characterizing a second intersection of the third zone and the common zone. In one or more cases, characterizing the second intersection includes: determining that a first individual associated with the first monitoring device is unfriendly with a third individual associated with the third monitoring device; and characterizing the intersection as an unfriendly interaction. Characterizing the intersection of the first zone and the second zone may include: determining that a first individual associated with the first monitoring device is unfriendly with a second individual associated with the second monitoring device; and characterizing the intersection as an unfriendly interaction.
Yet other embodiments of the present invention provide computer readable media having instructions executable by a processor to: receive information from the first monitoring device; receive information from the second monitoring device; identify at least a first zone around the first monitoring device; identify at least a second zone around the second monitoring device; and characterize an intersection of the first zone and the second zone.
This summary provides only a general outline of some embodiments according to the present invention. Many other objects, features, advantages and other embodiments of the present invention will become more fully apparent from the following detailed description, the appended claims and the accompanying drawings and figures.
A further understanding of the various embodiments of the present invention may be realized by reference to the figures which are described in remaining portions of the specification. In the figures, similar reference numerals are used throughout several drawings to refer to similar components. In some instances, a sub-label consisting of a lower case letter is associated with a reference numeral to denote one of multiple similar components. When reference is made to a reference numeral without specification to an existing sub-label, it is intended to refer to all such multiple similar components.
a-6e depict a number of co-location scenarios in accordance with one or more embodiments of the present invention.
The present invention is related to monitoring movement, and in particular to systems and methods for monitoring contact between identified criminal elements.
Various approaches and systems have been developed for monitoring the location of individuals. As an example, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/041,746 entitled “Beacon Based Tracking Device and Methods for Using Such” and filed Mar. 4, 2008 by Buck et al. discloses a monitoring system. As another example, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/608,109 entitled “Systems and Methods for Adaptive Monitoring of Physical Movement” and filed Oct. 29, 2009 by Buck discloses another monitoring system. Each of the aforementioned patent applications is assigned to an entity common hereto and share a common inventor. In addition, each of the aforementioned patent applications is incorporated herein by reference for all purposes. Among other things, such monitoring systems monitor the location of a number of individuals and report that location to a central database. In some cases, the monitoring of the individuals is forced by a judicial system due to a conviction of the individual for prior criminal activity. In other cases, the monitoring is consensual.
Those who have a history of criminal behavior often become involved in additional criminal behavior after being released from incarceration even though they are being monitored. One of the factors in their return to criminal behavior is involvement with a gang. Various embodiments of the present invention leverage the location information about individuals with prior criminal records to intervene and/or disrupt gang related activities by learning gang relationships and patterns of activities through use of information related to monitored individuals.
Various embodiments of the present invention provide systems and methods for monitoring individuals to identify a probability of impending or ongoing criminal activity, and/or locations with a high probability of criminal behavior. In some cases, the monitored entities are humans. In such cases, the systems and methods may further include a warning of a potential impending or ongoing criminal activity, and/or locations with a high probability of criminal behavior.
Turning to
Central monitoring station 80 includes an individual monitoring control 54 that is responsible for monitoring the location of a number of individuals 10 that are transmitting location information to a server 52 via communication network 30. In addition, central monitoring station 80 is operable to determine interactions between various of individuals 10, and to use the determined interactions to identify groups of potential co-conspirators, locations frequented by the groups, and/or impending or ongoing criminal behavior. Server 52 may be any device or system known in the art that is capable of receiving information via communication network 30 and for performing operations as directed by individual monitoring control 54 and/or disruption control 56. In some embodiments of the present invention, server 52 is a microprocessor based device. In such embodiments, disruption control 56 may be a computer readable medium including instructions executable by a microprocessor to implement the operations related to disruption control 56. Similarly, individual monitoring control 54 may be a computer readable medium including instructions executable by a microprocessor to implement the operations related to individual monitoring control 54.
In some embodiments of the present invention the location is time stamped, and the time stamp information is provided to central monitoring station 80. Disruption control 56 of central monitoring station 80 uses the location information from monitoring devices 15 along with particular geographic information to determine probabilities of criminal behavior involving individuals 10a, 10b. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize other information that may be utilized to determine probabilities of criminal behavior involving individuals 10a, 10b.
Communication network 30 may be, for example, a cellular telephone network or other communication networks. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of communications networks and combinations of communications networks that may be used in relation to different embodiments of the present invention to transfer information between monitoring devices 15 and central monitoring station 80.
In operation, central monitoring station 80 receives location information from monitoring devices 15 each associated with respective individuals 10. Individual monitoring control 54 maintains the received information and compares the information against rules intended to limit movement of the respective individuals 10. The rules may be programmed or otherwise updated using any approach known in the art. The rules may be specific to a given individual 10 indicating locations that the given individual is not allowed to be. For example, in the case where a restraining order is entered disallowing contact by individual 10a to individual 10b, the a perimeter around the residence and/or work place of individual 10b may be indicated as areas where individual 10a is not allowed to enter. Where individual 10a violates one of these regions, individual monitoring control 54 causes central monitoring station 80 to issue a violation update to monitoring recipient (not shown) charged with monitoring individual 10a.
Disruption control 56 utilizes location information from monitoring devices 15 to determine a potential or probability of criminal activity involving two individuals 10. For example, where individual 10a is a known gang member that is frequently co-located with individual 10b, it may be determined that individual 10b belongs to the same gang as individual 10a. Further, surveillance of the location where individual 10a and individual 10b interact may identify other unmonitored individuals which may be involved in the same gang. Where a location is identified where individual 10a and individual 10b interact, disruption control 56 may cause central monitoring station 80 to issue a warning to law enforcement identifying the location. The warning may be issued in any number of ways including, but not limited to, via email, text message, voice call, and/or physical mail. As another example, where a large number of individuals known to be affiliated with the same gang meet at a common location that was not previously frequented, disruption control 56 may cause central monitoring station 80 to issue a warning to law enforcement identifying the location as a location of a possible impending or ongoing criminal behavior. As yet another example, where a large number of individuals known to be affiliated with two different gangs are moving toward a common location, disruption control 56 may cause central monitoring station 80 to issue a warning to law enforcement identifying the location as a location of a possible impending or ongoing criminal behavior. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of other detectable interactions that may form the basis of warnings or alerts sent to a law enforcement agency. In some cases, in addition to the warning may cause central monitoring station 80 issue instructions for how to proceed to reduce the determined potential for contact. The aforementioned warnings may be communicated to the respective individuals 10 from central monitoring station 80 via communication network 30. The message(s) may be received via monitoring device(s) 15 or via other communication devices associated with the respective monitored individuals 10 such as, for example, cell phones.
The probability of criminal interaction may be based on various factors that can be discerned from the location of individuals and/or the rate of movement of one of more of individuals 10. For example, a probability of criminal interaction may be determined to be low where one or more of individuals 10 are traveling at a high rate of speed suggesting more of an incidental passing rather than an intent to contact. As another example, a probability of criminal interaction may be determined to be greater when a direction of travel of an individual 10 is toward a restricted or otherwise identified area. As yet another example, a probability of contact may be heightened when individuals that are expected to avoid contact are located in an area known to be frequented by one of the individuals 10 as compared with a similarly proximity in an area that is not known to be frequented by one of the individuals 10. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of information that may be used in determining probability of criminal interaction.
Turning to
Where updated information is available (block 280), any received location information is received (block 205), and the received location information is used to update the record of a monitored individual (block 210). In addition, any Individual group affiliation information is received (block 215), and the records of one or more individual's indicated by the group affiliation are updated to indicate the affiliation (block 220). For example, an individual Y may be identified as part of or friendly with group Z. In this case, the record associated with individual Y is updated to indicate the affiliation with other monitored individuals within group Z. Alternatively, the individual Y may be identified as unfriendly with a group W. In this case, the record associated with individual Y is updated to indicate the unfriendly affiliation with other monitored individuals within group Z. As yet another example, a group A may be identified as unfriendly with a group B. In such a case, all members of group A may be identified as unfriendly with all members of group B. As yet another example, a group C may be identified as friendly with a group D. In such a case, all members of group C may be identified as friendly with all members of group D. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one or ordinary skill in the art will recognize other affiliations that may be used in relation to different embodiments of the present invention.
Using the updated information the collision zones around the individuals are defined (block 225). These collisions zones may be programmed to be any defined size. In some cases, the collision zones are the same size around each individual. In contrast, in other cases, the collision zones may be a different size for one individual than for another.
Where either the aforementioned update has been completed (blocks 205, 210, 215, 220, 225) or an update was not called for (block 280), it is determined whether a monitored individual is within a defined proximity of another monitored individual (block 230). This may include determining whether a collision zone associated with one monitored individual overlaps that of another monitored individual. Where it is determined that one monitored individual is within proximity of another monitored individual (block 230), it is determined whether the monitored individuals identified as being within proximity of each other are known to be friendly with each other (block 235). This determination is made based upon the affiliation information updated in blocks 215, 220.
Where it is not known whether the individuals are friendly (block 235), it is determined whether the monitored individuals are known to be unfriendly with each other (block 240). Again, this determination is made based upon the affiliation information updated in blocks 215, 220. Where it is not known whether the monitored individuals are unfriendly with each other (block 240), the monitored individuals are identified for further research to discover the relationship between the individuals (block 245). This may include alerting law enforcement of the interaction. Where it is determined that the individuals are friendly (e.g., part of the same gang), this affiliation may be updated.
Alternatively, where it is determined that the monitored individuals are unfriendly with each other (block 240), law enforcement may be alerted of a potential incident at the location where the co-location of the monitored individuals was detected (block 250). Such an alert may be provided via, for example, an email, a text message, a voice mail, or the like.
Alternatively, where it is known that the monitored individuals are friendly (block 235), a common collision zone is defined around the monitored individuals (block 260). As an example, the common collision zone may encompass the collision zones around each of the monitored individuals, and in some cases an area beyond the individual collision zones. In addition, an alert of a possible meeting is provided to law enforcement (block 265). Again, such an alert may be provided via, for example, an email, a text message, a voice mail, or the like.
It is determined whether an unfriendly, monitored individual has come within range of the common collision zone (block 270). This may be determined by determining whether there is an overlap between the aforementioned common collision zone and an individual collision zone around the unfriendly, monitored individual. Where it is determined that there is an overlap with the common collision zone (block 270), an alert of a possible incident is provided to law enforcement (block 275). Again, such an alert may be provided via, for example, an email, a text message, a voice mail, or the like.
Turning to
Where it becomes known that such surveillance is being directed to meeting locations where monitored individuals (e.g., gang members 310a, 310c, 310d, 310e, 310f) are co-locating, there will be pressure within the gang to exclude monitored individuals from gang activities. Such a result is desirable as it may operate to break the influence that a gang may have over a particular member allowing them a greater likelihood of being able to turn away from criminal activity.
Turning to
Again, where it becomes known that such surveillance is being directed to meeting locations where monitored individuals (e.g., members 320a, 320b, 320c, 320d, 320e) are co-locating, there will be pressure within the gang to exclude monitored individuals from gang activities. Such a result is desirable as it may operate to break the influence that a gang may have over a particular member allowing them a greater likelihood of being able to turn away from criminal activity.
a-6e depict a number of co-location scenarios in accordance with one or more embodiments of the present invention. Turning to
Referring to
Turning to
It should be noted that the scenarios described in relation to
In conclusion, the present invention provides for novel systems, devices, and methods for disrupting, predicting and/or monitoring criminal behavior. While detailed descriptions of one or more embodiments of the invention have been given above, various alternatives, modifications, and equivalents will be apparent to those skilled in the art without varying from the spirit of the invention. Therefore, the above description should not be taken as limiting the scope of the invention, which is defined by the appended claims.
The present application claims priority to (i.e., is a non-provisional of) U.S. Pat. App. No. 61/266,203 entitled “Systems and Methods for Disrupting Criminal Activity”, and filed Dec. 3, 2009 by Buck. The entirety of the aforementioned application is incorporated herein by reference for all purposes.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4475481 | Carroll | Oct 1984 | A |
4549264 | Carroll | Oct 1985 | A |
4658357 | Carroll | Apr 1987 | A |
4724427 | Carroll | Feb 1988 | A |
4777477 | Watson | Oct 1988 | A |
4821823 | Skibinski | Apr 1989 | A |
4843377 | Fuller | Jun 1989 | A |
4857893 | Carroll | Aug 1989 | A |
4885571 | Pauley | Dec 1989 | A |
4916435 | Fuller | Apr 1990 | A |
4918432 | Pauley | Apr 1990 | A |
4996161 | Conners | Feb 1991 | A |
4999613 | Williamson | Mar 1991 | A |
5043736 | Darnell | Aug 1991 | A |
5146207 | Henry | Sep 1992 | A |
5220919 | Phillips | Jun 1993 | A |
5627520 | Grubbs | May 1997 | A |
5731757 | Layson, Jr. | Mar 1998 | A |
5828306 | Curran | Oct 1998 | A |
5867103 | Taylor, Jr. | Feb 1999 | A |
5889474 | Ladue | Mar 1999 | A |
5923300 | Meija | Jul 1999 | A |
5936529 | Reisman et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5959533 | Layson, Jr. | Sep 1999 | A |
5982281 | Layson, Jr. | Nov 1999 | A |
6014080 | Layson, Jr. | Jan 2000 | A |
6072396 | Gaukel | Jun 2000 | A |
6130620 | Pinnow et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6160481 | Taylor | Dec 2000 | A |
6218945 | Taylor | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6512456 | Taylor | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6606304 | Grinter | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6674368 | Hawkins et al. | Jan 2004 | B2 |
6700547 | Mieja et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6703936 | Hill et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6774797 | Freathy | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6774799 | Defant | Aug 2004 | B2 |
RE38838 | Taylor | Oct 2005 | E |
6992582 | Hill et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
7038590 | Hoffman et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7102510 | Boling et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7119695 | Defant et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7123141 | Contestabile | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7205890 | Defant et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
RE39909 | Taylor | Nov 2007 | E |
7330122 | Derrick | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7386152 | Rowe et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7518500 | Aninye | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7545318 | Derrick | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7619513 | Hill et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7701171 | Defant | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7737841 | Derrick et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7804412 | Derrick | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7930927 | Cooper et al. | Apr 2011 | B2 |
7936262 | Derrick | May 2011 | B2 |
7961092 | Freathy et al. | Jun 2011 | B2 |
RE42671 | Taylor | Sep 2011 | E |
20020140559 | Zhou et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20030109988 | Geissler et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030210149 | Reisman et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040174264 | Reisman et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040236199 | Hawthorne et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20050250440 | Zhou et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20060202836 | Hawthorne et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060202837 | Hawthorne et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20080012760 | Derrick | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080108370 | Aninye | May 2008 | A1 |
20080316022 | Buck et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20100123589 | Buck et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100240969 | Rompa et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20110133928 | Buck et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110154887 | Cooper et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
WO9808204 | Feb 1998 | WO |
WO0077688 | Dec 2000 | WO |
WO2005019977 | Mar 2005 | WO |
WO2005038590 | Apr 2005 | WO |
WO2006108077 | Oct 2006 | WO |
WO2006121930 | Nov 2006 | WO |
WO2006122004 | Nov 2006 | WO |
WO2007027943 | Mar 2007 | WO |
WO2007037794 | Apr 2007 | WO |
WO2008008666 | Jan 2008 | WO |
WO2008008667 | Jan 2008 | WO |
WO2008008669 | Jan 2008 | WO |
WO2008008670 | Jan 2008 | WO |
WO2008027948 | Mar 2008 | WO |
WO2008027985 | Mar 2008 | WO |
Entry |
---|
U.S. Appl. No. 12/041,746, Mar. 4, 2008, Buck, et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/714,581, Mar. 1, 2010, Buck et al. |
Marques, et al., “Evaluating Transdermal Alcohol Measuring Devices” Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, NHTSA, Nov. 2007 pp. 1-96. |
Pollard, et al. “Review of Technology to Prevent Alcohol-Impaired Crashes” U>S> Department of Transportation NHTSA, DOT HS 810 833, Sep. 2007, pp. 1-108. |
Pollard, et al “Vehicle Technologies to Prevent Crashes Involving Alcohol-Impaired Drivers” The Volpe Center, Aug. 11, 2006, pp. 1-28. |
Ratcliffe, “www.stltoday.com,” Dec. 26, 2007, pp. 1-2. Retrieved from internet http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/emaf.nsf/Popup retrieved on Jan. 18, 2008. |
Roberston, et al. “Continuous Transdermal Alcohol Monitoring : A primer for Criminal Justice Professionals” Traffic Injury Research Foundation, Oct. 2006, pp. 1-34. |
Shellem, “SCRAM Can Alert Probation Officers if Someone's Been Drinking”, The Patriot-News, Nov. 25, 2007, pp. 1-3. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20110133937 A1 | Jun 2011 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61266203 | Dec 2009 | US |