Surely the first thing you do while trying to hide is ditch the GPS enable microphone and camera you carry everywhere?
What if you substitute "bounty hunter" for "the private investigator your ex-wife hired". "The stalker who's willing to put a couple of hundred dollars into an internet grudge", etc. At some point you have to realistic that perfectly innocent people can care about their privacy too.
A male with a violent ex wife should be just as afraid.
Or indeed anyone of any gender with a violent ex of any gender.
I used to work for a company in the mobile phone space, we had access to triangulation APIs and my ex-boss, often requested we track people who owed him money, just because we could.
Most probably haven't, yet we treat them as though they have when we apply a punishment..
In some cases they already are, e.g., killing someone by accident or in a fit of passion vs a premeditated murder are usually charged differently.
Beyond that, it seems not unreasonable to apply the maxim that "maybe you should stay in jail here as if you'd thought it through, so you might actually think it through next time...".
I don't have a solution or a better alternative, just saying that punishment only really makes sense if agents in the system are rational.
Assume that the criminals are 100% irrational, random, and not influenced by external inputs; even then, inprisonment has a value to society of containing the possibility of bad actions by those bad actors during the prison term.
The fact that the recidivism rate is far less than 100% also tells us that criminals are not 100% random, irrational, and unresponsive to external inputs. A significant number do actually rehabilitate, whether by taking advantage of counseling, rethinking their choices, or simple fear of re-inprisonment.
So yes, it seems that until we come up with something better, making the system more accurate is the way to go.