Something smells and it’s not the cheese! Can someone please pull the public records and state how much ICS is being paid on a contract to monitor criminals on parole. Due to another serious breach earlier this week, we’ve been made aware once again how ineffectual (in my opinion) this company has been in providing an essential service. It has come to light that criminals continue to evade monitoring due to a defective and inept system. As the public is aware, I would assume that ICS is also aware that such infractions of their system has been occurring often. In offering a solution to the problem, a manager of ICS was quoted in the Tribune as saying, “the Courts should establish” a zone to restrict the movement of criminals. What nonsensical gibberish! If the company is going to issue a public statement; it should not insult the public intelligence. I’m I to understand that the courts are to be held to a correctional standard when it is contracted hardware (which this company presented to the government after due diligence) that is rubbish? How would a created zone make any difference when your hardware is not capable of detecting whether persons who are being monitored have evaded your system? What should occur is a public inquiry into how in this age of technology, a company succeeds in gaining a contract (where national security is concerned) after presenting inferior and defective equipment. This is a breach of professional competence.
Posted on: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 22:33:13 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015