A Killer In Our Midst: The John Albert Gardner Story

by Cathy Scott

Crime writers choose the stories we write. Some stories, however, find us. In many cases, it’s the locality of the crime that catches our interest. In other cases, it’s the circumstances. I’m a native San Diegan, so when a high-profile crime happens there, my interest is piqued.

Such was the case with the separate -- but related – grisly tales of the kidnaps, rapes and murders of California teenagers Chelsea King in 2010 and Amber DuBois in 2009. The crimes against these girls were more than disturbing, not to mention particularly sad: two bright, happy teenage girls, with their promising futures in front of them, killed in cold blood under senseless, frightening circumstances.

Their assailant was a disturbed young man -- a sexual predator -- named John Albert Gardner III, who had previously been charged with sexual assault. But Gardner slipped through the cracks, evading notice by authorities, including his probation officer, and left to his own devices to attack again. But, this time, the results were deadly, breaking the hearts of the girls’ families and friends.

California law requires sex offenders to register where they live, not where they go, and, in Gardner’s case, he moved between a couple of counties in San Diego County, dodging registration requirements and evading authorities.

Then, Amber disappeared first, nine months before Chelsea. DNA evidence left at the scene of Chelsea's murder led police to Gardner, who lived with his mother not far from the wooded park where he stalked at least two girls, including Chelsea as she went for an afternoon jog.

It was Chelsea King’s murder that prompted police to dig deeper, at the urgency of Amber’s parents. But it was Gardner, in a successful attempt to save himself, in exchange for prosecutors to not seek the death penalty against him, who led police to Amber’s body.

I began reporting on the Gardner investigation soon after Chelsea's disappearance. Now, I’ve turned the cases into a “true crime short,” which I’ve just released on Kindle, via Amazon.com, and on NOOK, on barnesandnoble.com. The advent of eBooks allows authors to tell victims’ stories without a lot of pomp and circumstance, no book release parties, no book signings, and with a shorter turn-around time to get them in print, albeit electronically.

Thus, I am announcing, on Women in Crime Ink, the eBook release of this true crime short, which I've titled A Killer In Our Midst. It tells the story of John Albert Gardner III, his troubled early years, how he evaded arrest, and the girls he preyed upon.

A Killer In Our Midst is available online at Kindle Book Store and NOOK Books .

Tweet

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

The Impact of the Victim's Statement

by Diane Dimond

Imagine being in a room with the person who murdered your child. How would you react? What would you want to say to the killer?

Every day,  grieving families congregate in courtrooms to watch justice meted out to those who’ve robbed them of their loved ones. Before sentence is passed upon the convicted, judges offer family members a chance to give a “victim’s impact statement.” It’s the most dramatic, heart wrenching moment of the entire judicial process.

Such a day played out recently in a San Diego courtroom with a registered sex offender named John Albert Gardner III (above left). He’d been out on parole less than five months after serving six years for sexually attacking a 13-year-old girl. Gardner was 31, living with his mother, when he began preying on other young girls.

Gardner ultimately confessed to abducting, raping and murdering 17-year-old Chelsea King and 14-year-old Amber Dubois (both right) and to the brutal attack on another young woman who testified about how she lived through the ordeal.

“Look at me!” Chelsea King’s mother demanded of Gardner as she began her victim’s impact statement to the court. There was a long pause as Gardner, wearing his prison greens and slumped at the defendant’s table, kept his chin lowered but sheepishly glanced up for a split second.

And then in a soft, eloquent voice, Kelly King compared the “wretched piece of evil” that is John Gardner to her beautiful dead daughter.

“She was a funny, a fun loving girl, a gifted musician, a fiercely competitive athlete with a thirst for life. She couldn’t wait to start college! I can never adequately articulate what you plundered from us and our community. You should burn in hell.”

Brent King told the killer what it was like to be Chelsea’s father.

“I loved feeding her, playing with her, changing her diapers, just being her dad,” he said. He called Gardner a coward for knowing he had a problem and ignoring it.

King said he hoped Gardner lived every day of the rest of his life in prison in fear of fellow inmates, “who are going to torment you. You do not deserve a peaceful moment on this earth or the next life.”

Both Kings blamed a judicial system which allowed a dangerous predator to be freed. They also blamed Gardner’s mother, a psychiatric nurse who, they said, knew what her son was capable of but did nothing to monitor or stop him.

As I watched this play out, I wondered if I would have the strength to be so articulate in that circumstance – or would I dissolve into a puddle of tears, unable to speak a word?

The statements given by the parents (left) of Amber Dubois really tore my heart. They waited 13 months for any news about what had happened to their precious daughter. Only after Gardener was arraigned on charges of murdering Chelsea did he finally lead police to Amber’s body, revealing that awful truth. 

Maurice Dubois compared Gardner to a mountain lion whose predilection to kill came naturally, saying it was no surprise the murders began so soon after he was released from parole.

“(You) … heartlessly discarded our beautiful 14-year-old girl, Amber,” he said. “You will burn in hell for the acts you have committed. I just hope that day is an agonizingly long way away, and that you have to suffer as much as we all have.”

And then Amber’s mother stepped forward to address the court. Her attorney had told me privately that she had been so consumed with knowing about her daughter’s last moments on earth that she’d requested and gotten a face-to-face prison meeting with John Gardner.

No details were released, but can you imagine sitting down to talk with your child’s killer?

“After 15 months of the most agonizing pain, worry and grief, I’m supposed to address the court,” Carrie McGonigle began. “On February 13, 2009" Amber "innocently walked to school. I kissed her goodbye and said I loved her, not knowing it would be the last time. You took my best friend.”

Amazingly, tears rolled down John Gardner’s cheeks (right). Perhaps it was because he’d already met with Amber’s mother; perhaps she'd somehow gotten through his perverted, criminal sense of right and wrong.

Yes, in courtrooms around the U.S., the “victim impact statement” scene plays out in varying degrees every day. Victims hope that somehow confronting the guilty will bring them some sort of vindication or peace. For some it does.

At the end of her message to the court that day, Amber Dubois’ mother said the most remarkable thing to John Gardner. “I forgive you, but I will never forget what you stole from me.”

I know I’d never have the courage to say that. By the way, Gardner got consecutive life sentences.

Tweet