A Dysfunctional, Broken System: California Department of Corrections Parole Operation

by Robin Sax

Co-authored by Caroline Aguirre, retired parole agent

In late August 2009, the arrest of parolee Phillip Garrido exposed just how broken and dysfunctional the California Department of Corrections (CDCR) has become. Investigative findings, as published by California State Inspector General David Shaw and the State Attorney's General' office, concluded that a number of parole agents over a period of nine years had failed to do their jobs properly surrounding the parole supervision of Phillip Garrido. A registered sex offender, Garrido has been charged with the kidnapping and rape of Jaycee Dugard. To date, the state of California has paid out a sum of $20 million dollars to Jaycee Dugard. Numerous other law suits are pending in which CDCR is named as defendants.

Then there was John Albert Gardner, also a registered sex offender, who admitted earlier this year to the horrific rape and murder of both Chelsea King and Amber Dubois.

As noted in the Investigative report findings by State Inspector General David Shaw:

"This report concludes that during the department's parole supervision of Gardner, it did not identify Gardner's aberrant behavior, including unlawfully entering the grounds of a state prison, a felony as well as numerous parole violations. Had the department identified Gardner criminal act and parole violations, it could have referred them to the District Attorney's or the Board Of Prison Hearings for appropriate actions. Successful prosecution of Gardner could have sent Gardner back to prison , making it impossible for him to have murdered Amber Dubois and Chelsea King."

Right after the arrest of Phillip Garrido, Matthew Cate, Scot Kernan and Robert Ambroselli, top administrators for the CDCR, openly stated to numerous news media outlets that parole agents had done a good job.

After the arrest of John Albert Gardner, these same administrators told the elected state officials and the news media that all of the parole records on John Albert Gardner (who was a discharged parolee at the time of his arrest for the murders and rapes in San Diego) had been destroyed. After the San Diego Union-Tribune confronted these same administrators about Gardner's prison central file (central files are never destroyed), then they all made public apologies, and the central file records were released to the news media. Multiple civil lawsuits have been filed naming the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation as the defendants.

On July 24, 2009, 17-year-old Lily Burk was murdered by parolee Charles Samuel in the Skid Row area of Los Angeles. Samuel admitted to the murder of Ms. Burk and received a life sentence without the possibility of parole. CDCR has failed to address the issue of how parolee Charles Samuel, who on the date and time of the murder of Ms. Burk resided in a residential drug treatment program, was able to be out and about in the community?

A CDCR spokesperson told a news media reporter that Samuel had been given a written pass to go to the Department of Motor Vehicles on the date in question and that the assigned parole agent of the residential drug treatment program had verified all of the information on the request form for the pass. Only after the murder of Lily Burk was it discovered that the DMV was closed on the date in question (Friday) for state mandated work furlough days. Where is the internal affairs investigation on the parole agent?

On July 24, 2010, bride-to-be Chere Osmanhodzic was murdered in her home in the Valley Village area of Los Angeles. Parolee Omar Armando Loera was subsequently identified as the murder suspect as a result of DNA and was arrested in Mexico. Loera has been charged with the murder of Ms. Osmanhodzic. This is yet another case of a dysfunctional parole agency. Region 3 Parole Headquarters failed to verify if Loera had been deported to Mexico, in a timely fashion, upon his release from state prison.

As a result of his documented criminal history, Loera was classified as a high-control supervision case, and this verification should have been done immediately after his release from prison. Instead, individuals assigned to the Region 3 USINS unit waited three months before doing their job. These individuals also failed to update Loera's parole facesheet. The face sheet in question did not even have a photograph of Loera. If the parole administrators assigned to Region 3 had performed their assigned duties correctly, would Ms. Osmanhodzic be alive today?

CDCR failed to make up wanted parolee-at-large notices to distribute to local law enforcement agencies. As mandated by law, per the California Penal Code, parole agents must submit a request for an arrest warrant when a parolee classified as high-control supervision fails to report to the parole unit office within 24 hours of their release dates. This was not the case with Loera. Parole administrators have said that outside law enforcement can check the parole database and find out which parolees have outstanding warrants.

Now, I ask you, with over 120,000 parolees on active parole status within the state of California, do these parole administrators truly believe that police officers have the time to check each parolee's status? Or, do the administrators somehow erroneously believe police officers have a magic crystal ball?

On October 30 , 2010, parolee Christopher Orlando Pinn, armed with a TEC-9, attempted to kill a Los Angeles County sheriff's deputy. Pinn was subsequently arrested and faces criminal charges of attempted murder of a peace officer and possession of an assault weapon. A documented hard-core gang member, Pinn had as a special condition of his parole a ban on associating with gang members. Pinn was on parole for possession of controlled substance, a low-level, non-violent criminal offense, and was being supervised at one of the lowest levels of parole supervision.

On October 31, 2010, Halloween day, 5-year-old Aaron Shannon Jr. was proudly wearing his new Spider Man costume, dashing about in the backyard of his home located on East 84th Street, when he was gunned down by one or two suspected gang members. On November 5, the Los Angeles Police Department held a press conference where they announced the arrests of two suspects, 18-year-old Marcus Denson and 21-year-old Leonard Hall, both documented Kitchen Crip gang members. Each is to be charged with the murder of little Aaron Shannon Jr.

Let's take a good look at Leonard Hall. On the date and time of the horrific murder of this innocent small child, Hall was on active parole supervision for possession of a controlled substance and disregard for safety. As a result, he was on the next to the lowest level of parole supervision: control service out of the Huntington Park 2 parole unit. Also, as a special condition of parole, Hall could not associate with known Kitchen Crips gang members. That is what is so troubling surrounding his parole supervision level. On October 15, 2010, Hall was arrested for robbery as per parole documentation. No formal criminal charges were filed, and Hall was released from local custody on October 22.

Now, the question is did the assigned parole agent do a case review with the parole unit supervisor after Hall's release date of October 22? Review of Hall's parole face sheet notes that he is a documented hard-core Kitchen Crip gang member. Also noted in the problem area is a history of battery on a police officer. In the past, if someone was arrested on a serious or violent charge, even if no criminal charges were filed, once the parolee was released back into the community, then his supervision level would have been increased to a higher supervision level for at least a three-month period and then reduced once the parolee had remained free of any parole violations or arrests.

Is public safety no longer a concern and a priority for the CDCR? Reading through the complete court transcripts and depositions associated with the trial in the civil case of Hernandez vs. California Department of Corrections and Maria Franco (Maria Franco is the current acting head of Region 3 parole), you might be able to determine the CDCR/DAPO's mindset. It seems that the parolee classification ratings have a correlation to expenditures, namely that overtime costs are an issue, and lower classifications require less supervision.

One parole administrator has gone as far to state that less parole supervision can be a form of positive reinforcement in the long run and only enhance and encourage the parolee to remain free of involvement in new criminal behavior. Really!? As you can see with Parolee Hall, this lax parole supervision idea/policy can only lead to disaster. It allowed Hall to continue to associate with his homeboys, have possession of a loaded firearm, and then take the life of an innocent 5-year-old child.

Where is the public outcry on this parole supervision crisis? Where is the accountability? Why are these parolees not being properly supervised and monitored by parole agents? Where is the governor of the State of California on this? Why do these parole administrators continue to have their jobs? Shouldn't they be held accountable for these resulting disasters? How many more innocent people have to be murdered for the department to make changes? How many more innocent victims have to suffer at the hands of roaming parolees?

Tweet

My Take on the Jaycee Dugard Case

by Cassie Nelson

I’m turning 18 in November, and Jaycee Dugard has been held captive for longer than I’ve been alive. I spent my 18 years enjoying a happy childhood and the typical turmoil of teenage years. Jaycee has spent her 18 years as a victim of sexual abuse. At the age of 14, when most girls are looking forward to starting high school, Jaycee became a mother and went on to raise two children sired by her abuser.

The incredible good fortune of Jaycee’s rescue is matched by the horror of her long ordeal. There are so many questions and issues raised by her experience: how could the neighbors and the authorities have failed to see what was going on; could the abuser’s wife be complicit; and most confusing of all, how could Jaycee have made no apparent effort over the years to escape? The neighbors have explained why they were not aware; the authorities have admitted they failed in their responsibility. The wife was apparently just as much a monster as her husband, but what about Jaycee?

Psychiatrists have explained that anyone under the complete control of an abuser will come to feel a connection with their abuser, based on fear but also dependence. Jaycee was only 11 when she was taken and, although the backyard she was hidden in was only 35 miles from her home, it must have seemed like a world away. The experts say that no individual can maintain the level of fear or anger that being abducted and abused would cause for a prolonged time. Eventually hopelessness sets in, followed by a growing sense of identification and bonding with the abductor.

Young children are capable of finding joy even in the most difficult circumstances. Children living in dire poverty can enjoy playing street games while their parents sink into despair. It is this very innocence and resilience that saved Jaycee at the same time it imprisoned her.

Jaycee made the best of a horrifying situation. Although escape may have seemed ridiculously easy to an adult, to a child even crossing the street alone is a frightening experience. In fact, Jaycee was doing just that, on the way to the bus stop, when she was abducted less than 100 yards away from her stepfather.

My parents warn me constantly to be aware of my surroundings and never, ever text while walking through a parking lot. I know that if the unthinkable occurs, if I do the wrong thing and am taken, my parents will not be angry at me and will never give up looking for me. A child does not have the same ability to reason as an older teen or adult. Like Shawn Hornbeck, who was abducted at age 11 and held for four years, Jaycee couldn't believe that there were still people out there looking for her -- an abstract concept -- when her abductor told her she was his forever.

Psychology calls this the pre-operational stage of development. In a recent interview, Shawn described his situation this way: “It’s like you are on autopilot, only someone else is controlling all the switches. They control every little, minute detail in your life. Everything.” Like Shawn, Jaycee deserves our understanding and support, so that perhaps the next 18 years of her life will finally be happy.

Tweet

Sorry I Raped You; I'm a Sex Addict!

by Pat Brown

I made a comment on The Today Show last week that there was no such thing as sex addiction, and my commentary immediately netted me this email:

"Just saw you on the Today Show. There's no such thing as a 'sex addict?' Open your eyes, grasshopper. With whoppers like that, it won't be long before people question and doubt EVERYTHING that comes out of your mouth."

Yeah, well, he signed his real name, but he could have just written "Sex Addict." I bet his wife caught him viewing on-line pornography again or found the motel receipts.

I didn't back down. Later that evening on Issues with Jane Velez-Mitchell:

PAT BROWN, CRIMINAL PROFILER: "Absolutely. First of all, his father, Jane, saying he's a sex addict, is garbage. Sex addict simply means "I don't want to have sex in a moral, ethical, or legal manner, so I'm going to blame my choices on that."

Then, I got a nasty phone call pointing out my stupidity.

It was that kind of day until I got an email from Dr. Stanton Samenow, author of Inside the Criminal Mind and numerous other books, renowned psychologist, and my hero. He wrote:

"As a forensic psychologist, I was delighted to hear you say that there is no such thing as 'sexual addiction.' I have testified to this in civil (child custody) and criminal cases. This was a breath of fresh air."

Thank God. Someone with sense. Someone who doesn't buy into excuses for poor and illegal behavior. Dr. Samenow, like myself, believes in free will and individual choice.

But aren't we also affected by our upbringing? Of course we are. But if we blame our upbringing for everything we do, we might as well abolish the penal system and simply offer therapy. It's not that you can't keep it in your pants or that your pants are approaching little girls and unwilling women; no, it's that you are a sex addict. Yes, let's roll out the latest excuse for committing heinous crimes: sex addiction!

Who knew that wanting lots of sex meant one has to rape and murder to get enough? I guess since paying for it is breaking the law, one wouldn't want to do that; rape is the only answer. I have some "addictions" myself. I have a thing for Diet Pepsi, but I can't remember having shoplifted the sodas from convenience stores in recent months.

Manuel Garrido, father of Phillip Garrido (pictured left), the vile creature who kidnapped then 11-year-old Jaycee Lee Dugard and imprisoned her for eighteen years in his backyard, says this of his son:
"He was a sex addict, that was his problem. I believe my son killed the prostitutes."

Dad is referring to prostitutes who oddly disappeared near one of the locations Phillip Garrido worked. Dad thinks his son liked having sex with prostitutes. Dad also says he thinks Phillip and his wife, Nancy (pictured in court below), chose to kidnap a girl to "give them babies after discovering they could not have children together."

Clearly, since Jaycee Dugard had children by Garrido when she was 14 and 17, she was raped. But was this so that Garrido could have children or sex-on-demand? He liked the idea of sex slaves, so I'm guessing the sex angle is more believable than the need to procreate. Garrido raped little girls and had sex with prostitutes. How does this logically connect to some supposed label like sex addict?

First, let's look at the definition for this supposed "disease" or "syndrome" from Medicinenet.com:

"The term 'sexual addiction' is used to describe the behavior of a person who has an unusually intense sex drive or an obsession with sex. Sex, and the thought of sex, tend to dominate the sex addict's thinking, making it difficult to work or engage in healthy personal relationships. Sex addicts engage in distorted thinking, often rationalizing and justifying their behavior and blaming others for their behavior. They generally deny they have a problem and make excuses for their actions.

"Sexual addiction also is associated with risk-taking. A person with a sex addiction engages in various forms of sexual activity, despite the potential for negative and/or dangerous consequences. In addition to damaging the addict's relationships and interfering with his or her work and social life, a sexual addiction also puts the person at risk for emotional and physical injury. For some people, the sex addiction progresses to involve illegal activities, such as exhibitionism (exposing oneself in public), making obscene phone calls, or molestation. However, it should be noted that sex addicts do not necessarily become sex offenders."

Behaviors associated with sexual addiction include:
Compulsive masturbation
Multiple extra-marital affairs
Multiple or anonymous sexual partners and/or one-night stands
Consistent use of pornography
Unsafe sex
Phone or computer sex (cyber sex)
Prostitution or use of prostitutes
Exhibitionism
Obsessive dating through personal ads
Voyeurism (watching others) and/or stalking
Sexual harassment
Molestation/rape

Phillip Hodson, fellow of the British Association for Counseling and Psychotherapy, thinks the concept of sexual addiction is rot. He calls supposed sex addition a behavior better described as obsessive, compulsive or greedy. He further comments that successful men - say, someone like Roman Polanski (little girls), Michael Jackson (little boys), or Michael Douglas (young beautiful women he hoped his wife didn't find out about) - because "some very successful men have a habit of thinking they can get away with anything, especially behavior they view as exciting," he says.

Michael Douglas' first wife divorced him because he was a womanizer. She must have been right because he was likely already bedding Catherine Zeta-Jones, an actress young enough to be his daughter (young thing pictured left with old thing). Apparently sexual addiction for Douglas is so target-specific, he never hit on women his own age.

But Douglas was merely a cad. He wasn't breaking a law, and he wasn't using the label "sex addict" as anything more than a way to excuse his greed for hot women and bad behavior.

Phillip Garrido's defense lawyer will likely try to toss this label into court. Ryan Jenkins, the millionaire reality-TV star who stuck his murdered wife in a suitcase, had already used "sex addiction" to avoid a jail sentence -- for beating up another woman before beating up Jasmine Fiori, his wife. Apparently, he suffered from alleged sex addiction just as much as his victim suffered from its result. When girls wouldn't give it up, he got ticked off.

Using this logic, all crimes would fall under the same category: "entitlement," as in "I should get what I want or else."

Jenkins had no trouble getting sex, but because he couldn't get it from everyone he wanted whenever he wanted, he thought he was deprived. What a greedy little bastard! He had zero empathy for the women; apparently, their needs and desires didn't matter. Jenkins was found hanging in a hotel room in British Columbia in August, choosing suicide over life in prison. I guess he wouldn't be able to feed his kind of sex addiction behind bars, poor baby.

Phillip Garrido could get sex. He could get a lot of sex from prostitutes if he weren't such a cheap schmuck. What does killing these women have to do with getting sex, unless you don't want to pay or you like murdering women? He also could get sex from his wife, who clearly made a fine doormat. But that wasn't good enough for him. So what was his real problem? He gave us a clue when he told one of his rape victims that the Romans were lucky to have sex slaves.

Garrido wanted a sex slave. Not because he can't control himself, but because he likes control over others. Sex is not the problem. Mr. Hudson puts it correctly when he talks about the adrenaline rush being the real issue. Sex provides an adrenaline rush. So does sex with women 20 years younger than you, sex with your next-door neighbor's wife, raping little girls. Ditto for knocking over a convenience store, robbing people, and killing the innocent. Even that chocolate I love causes an adrenaline spike.

Everything we like to do and feels good to us comes with an adrenaline boost. But the difference between Garrido's adrenaline rush and mine is legality. This is why we make laws. It's true that the adrenaline rush I get whenever I chomp down a Toblerone dark chocolate bar could encourage me to eat my way into diabetes and heart failure, hurting myself, hurting others. But this self-destructive behavior is not illegal. I overeat, cause myself pain, cause others pain, they run away, and I pay the price.

Garrido has broken the law, and no phony addiction label should be used to house him in a mental facility until he gets his supposed addiction under control.

Sexual addiction seems to be the rage for explaining away kidnapping, rape, and murder. Even if one decides to follow a path that might lead to destructive behavior (excessive masturbation, sex with strangers, sadism, etc.), the choice to step over the legal line and force violent perversions on others is not a psychiatric matter. It's a legal one. Let's keep it that way.

Tweet