Criminal Defendants have More Rights Than Doc Review Attorneys

Criminal defendants have more privacy rights than doc review lawyers. Civil rights groups want electronic monitoring abolished from the legal system. They call it “e-carceration” and argue for more freedom than attorneys get in the real remote work contract quoted below.

If electronic monitoring MUST be used in criminal proceedings, defense attorneys don’t allow intrusive terms like these into their clients’ agreements without a fight. I did some research and have included a link, also below, to an ACLU report about the efforts to get rid of electronic monitoring. It provides several well-researched reason that such restrictive measures have no place in the criminal legal system.

Too much restriction opens the door to discrimination based on race, class, and disabilities. It also causes mental health concerns. Furthermore, civil rights groups demand clearly defined terms for defendants that do get monitored, so that, for example, the Courts don’t have indefinite access to daily video recordings of the defendants. Somehow no one has a problem with constant surveillance of lawyers working remotely. Unlike the criminal courts, this doc review company can keep its video recordings of their “e-carcerated” e-discovery attorneys years after their assignments end. The third party security/ surveillance company can retain the recordings too. 

Here are some of the highlights from the contract: 

“The Remote Monitoring captures and stores video recordings of you whenever you are logged in.”

“The recorded video and other Remote Monitoring personal information is subject to both automated and human review for security, employee performance, and any other legitimate purposes related to your remote work.”

“Such review may occur in real time during your remote work session or after the session has ended.”

As civil rights groups argue for reform in the criminal courts, the lawyers’ contracts keep getting worse. None of these quotes were in the contract last year. Even so, I know firsthand that the surveillance already caused a major burden for me back then. The attorneys are treated more like criminals than defendants on parole. I half expected to see something about probation and parole officers next. Maybe ankle monitors. I’m glad we are looking out for criminal defendants. But why doesn’t anyone seem to care about these lawyers?

This is the ACLU report:

www.aclu.org/report/rethinking-electronic-monitoring-harm-reduction-guide