Blogs and Stories
Why Jaycee Dugard Should Sue
Clockwise from top left: AP Photo (2); GettyImages
As bones are found near Phillip Garrido’s property, Wendy Murphy says the pundits are wrong: Jaycee Dugard’s family absolutely must sue the parole officers who could have saved her.
A human bone has been discovered in the ground of a home next door to the house where admitted sex predator Phillip Garrido raped and held captive 11-year-old kidnap victim Jaycee Dugard. The discovery raises new questions about whether Garrido is also a murderer because the bone was found on a property where Garrido not only provided caretaking services for the owner but also sometimes spent the night in a backyard shed that was near where the bone was found.
DNA tests are being done to determine whether the bone belongs to one of many dead or missing prostitutes and children who lived in the area, and if cops find a match, Garrido may be charged with even more serious crimes than the multitude of rape and kidnapping charges he now faces related to the 1991 abduction and repeated sexual abuse of Dugard.
Garrido kidnapped Dugard from her schoolbus stop and kept her like an animal in his Antioch, California, backyard—where a garbage heap of tents and sheds served as the little girl's home for 18 years until she was rescued at age 29 last month.
While law-enforcement officials figure out all the criminal charges, it's even more important that someone on behalf of Dugard and her family consider filing a lawsuit against the parole officers whose job it was to closely monitor Garrido during the time he held Jaycee captive.
A lawsuit will encourage all parole officers to work harder in the future so that a red flag that might have been ignored will instead be treated as a focus of concern.
Parole officers were supervising Garrido in connection with another kidnapping and rape case involving a young woman he'd taken to a shed and brutalized in 1976. Sentenced in 1978 to 50 years behind bars, Garrido got out 40 years early in 1988. Three years later, he kidnapped Jaycee Dugard. In 1999, his case was transferred to California parole authorities for supervision.
"Supervision" means parole officers had a duty to make sure Garrido was abiding by the conditions of his release and committing no crimes. They knew Garrido was a convicted sex offender who had drugged and raped a 14-year-old in 1972 (charges were dropped when the child refused to testify), kidnapped and raped another young woman in 1976 and, in connection with that case, admitted committing many other sexual offenses for which he had never been caught. In fact, Garrido testified that he couldn't stop himself.
Parole officers repeatedly visited Garrido at his home over a 10-year period, during which time they knew his backyard was filled with tents and sheds and that his 1976 victim had been raped and held captive in a shed. They also knew young children were living at Garrido's home and they either knew or should have known that local police had received calls form concerned neighbors about kids living in the backyard.
But parole officers did absolutely nothing to ascertain the true identities of the children, or figure out why they were there and what was going on in the tents and sheds.
Had they simply asked for identification and birth certificates, they would have learned that the two little girls living at the home were the offspring of Garrido and Jaycee Dugard—and that Dugard became pregnant with her older child in 1993 (apparently when she was only 13 years old) during one of the countless times Garrido raped her while holding her captive. There would have been no birth certificates because Dugard was forced her to give birth in a soundproof structure in the backyard.
It bears stating the obvious that had parole officers done their job and simply asked for some form of identification from Jaycee and her children, Jaycee Dugard would have been rescued many years ago. Which is why a lawsuit against the idiot parole officers is necessary and appropriate.
How Rich People Smoke Pot
Paul Schrodt is a writer living in New York City. He has contributed to New York magazine, Radar, and Esquire.com.
Justice Clinton?
As vice chairman of Public Strategies and president of Maverick Media, Mark McKinnon has helped meet strategic challenges for candidates, corporations and causes, including George W. Bush, John McCain, Governor Ann Richards, Charlie Wilson, Lance Armstrong, and Bono. McKinnon is co-chair of Arts & Labs, a collaboration between technology and creative communities that have embraced today's rich Internet environment to deliver innovative and creative digital products to consumers.
Was Tiger a Victim?
Wendy is a former child abuse and sex crimes prosecutor who teaches at New England Law/Boston. Wendy specializes in the representation of crime victims, women and children. She also writes and lectures widely on victims' rights and criminal justice policy. Her expose of the American legal system, And Justice For Some, came out in 2007. A former NFL cheerleader and visiting scholar at Harvard Law School, Wendy lives outside Boston with her husband and five children.
Punish the Onlookers
Wendy is a former child abuse and sex crimes prosecutor who teaches at New England Law/Boston. Wendy specializes in the representation of crime victims, women and children. She also writes and lectures widely on victims' rights and criminal justice policy. Her expose of the American legal system, And Justice For Some, came out in 2007. A former NFL cheerleader and visiting scholar at Harvard Law School, Wendy lives outside Boston with her husband and five children.
Hoaxed America Wants Its Pound of Flesh
Wendy is a former child abuse and sex crimes prosecutor who teaches at New England Law/Boston. Wendy specializes in the representation of crime victims, women and children. She also writes and lectures widely on victims' rights and criminal justice policy. Her expose of the American legal system, And Justice For Some, came out in 2007. A former NFL cheerleader and visiting scholar at Harvard Law School, Wendy lives outside Boston with her husband and five children.
spinozareader
For me, any parole officer attached to this case (outside of the "untouchable" group who basically gave a "Get Out of Jail Free" card to this piece of garbage in 1988) should be sued into the ground to the point that the only accomodations they could afford would be equivalent to those Ms. Dugard's had to inhabit for the past 18 long years.
And even that would be too kind a fate for them--infinitely more than they deserve. Because the judge couldn't also punish them with an equal measure of emotional and physical violation that this young girl was subjected to.
tommarcella1
It is obvious you are not a lawyer first even sex offender have a fourth amendment right to privacy unless the parole officers have probable cause to search his house or a warrant they cannot. Second there is something called soverign immunity which means that you cannot file suit against law enforcement, a prosecutor, or a judge as long as the law was not broken or they did not committed a act of gross negligence. From what I read they did neither so leave the law suits to the lawyers.
vi-lontano
I think reports of "sex sounds" and "screaming" and CHILDREN in a predators back yard constitute "probable cause"
don't you?
PhDiva
There was probably cause based on the fact that the police received reports that a convicted sex offender had children. The officer who visited the home after the call about the children did not even search online to discover that Garrido was in the database of sex offenders. Megan's law means that even people outside of law enforcement have access to this information. These people did not do their jobs.
spinozareader
And it's obvious that you are not a lawyer.(Or at least one that any sane person would retain.)
jpaden
I agree totally. Even more importantly, someone should take a look at all of the cases handled by these parole officers and their supervisors. There may be more predators and victims out there!
djanimaequeen
Ms. Murphy you are absolutely correct.
katiewon
Great idea! I wish I'd thought of it. If nothing else, it would scare the bejeezus out of parole officers everywhere to actually do their jobs. Let's find out who they are and reveal their identities to the public. Although I would never agree to such action in the past, this case is so heinous and preventable that they deserve to be publicly condemned and humiliated. Maybe send their daughters to live with Garrido in his cell!
crngndmhm
Wow, while admittly the officers should lose their jobs which they weren't doing or maybe htey were and standards need to change for what parole officer's duties are. But public outing and humilition affects thier families and is fucked up. And sending their daughters to live with Garrido? You have to be some kind of messed up if you think this a good suggestion. Three ruined lives so let's ruin some more. Let's focus on Garrido who is the actual monster who should be put down like a rabid dog.
pclayton
Indeed. Sending anyone (thing) to live with Garrido is an outrageous thought--not even the innocent daughters of people who did not do their jobs properly. He should be bound and placed in solitary confinement to contemplate his evil in a cold, outdoor tent and never again see the light of day.
PetiteNanan
As the one-time victim of a kidnapping, I agree, completely. This would be a righteous use of the Law.
pricklypear
Editors at The Daily Beast:
Please do not label this young woman, Ms. Dugard as a "Sex Slave".
How revolting, crass and insensitive can you get?!!!
pclayton
Nor should the children be referred to as daughters he "fathered." Garrido raped and impregnated Jaycee. To say "fathered" implies she wanted to be a "mother."
finderj
Does California law allow parole officers to request identification of persons living with or near convicted sex offenders?
If it does,then ideed there is a serious problem with the way this case was handled.
I believe that a third felony sex crimes conviction should mean an automatic death sentence. These people cannot be helped, cannot be stopped from preying on the innocent, and incarcerating them for life means that their victimes, should they recover and become productive citizens, bear the burden of actually paying part of the costs involved in housing, feeding, clothing, and prodiving free medical care for their victimizer.
Execute them.
Proper trial, proper appeals, time for DNA exoneration if possible, and upon the validation of a third felony conviction, execute them.
Garrido ought to be the first case.
PlaidAvenger
Why hasn't anybody "outed" the parole officer in this case? In our 24/7 muckraked blogosphere, can't anybody expose these incompetents? In the meantime, we had to listen to the supervisor say with a straight face that the parole officer shouldn't have been expected to check beyond the fence. Infuriating!
MadameDefarge
Garridos built a tall fence that hid the shacks and tents in the back yard. The lots in that area tends to be quite large. Scapegoating the parole officers in this way is very unfair.
According to CNN:
a search of Garrido's property "revealed a hidden backyard within a backyard," he said. It included several sheds no higher than 6 feet tall, two tents and several outbuildings "where Jaycee and the girls spent most of their lives."
The "secondary" backyard was inside the first and was "screened from view." One of the sheds was soundproof, he said.
"The way the backyard is set up you could walk through the backyard, walk through the house and never know that there was another set of living circumstances in that backyard."
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/08/27/california.missing.girl/
Jessica150
One-fourth to one-quarter of an acre is NOT "quite large". There is no excuse for a parole office who, knowing that he ASSAULTED WOMEN IN SHEDS, failed to look into every structure on his property during every visit over the course of 20 years.
DUH.
pclayton
There are witnesses who conducted business with Garrido as a printer who said they met and spoke to Jaycee, as well as witnesses who saw Garrido come and go with the younger girls. It was not a situation where they were never seen or heard. You are making excuses based on one CNN report. So it was hard to see the "backyard within the backyard," but none of the parole officers took the trouble to do a walk through, apparently, as pictures I have seen on line show these shacks and tents had a lot of personal belongings and signs of life in them. There is no excuse for this oversight...sorry.
memo02
Remember we just comment about this situation just two months ago the reason was to cut expenses on each state instead why you ask to your State Senator or Governor why they just let go many people like Phillip Garrido ? on my State I just learn some of this people been transfer to another State the question is how many of this people are out on the street right now ready to go back to jail, only because each State have no enough money to support this !...
jcadams
I live in Berkeley about 25 miles from the Antioch site where this crime occurred. It will benefit Ms. Dugard and also the general population for her to file a civil suit. When you factor in the base pay, overtime, generous benefits and the basic job security that are enjoyed by our law enforcement employees --- these people are paid extremely well. Moreover I feel that the hiring criteria and overall supervision of this group of public employees is clearly lacking. Aside from the mistakes made in the Dugard matter there have been a number of recent high-profile errors by law enforcement in California. (The recent wrongful death shooting of a rider in Oakland by BART police and the brutal arrest of a lesbian homeowner in San Diego County who was hosting a Democratic fundraiser are two recent examples that stand out.) Getting a monetary judgment against law enforcement for their oversights in the Dugard matter will send a clear message through the system that should force some improvements.
SherLl
Remembering the fritzl case in vienna, in which elizabeth fritzl was held captive in a downstairs basement for 24 years, raped by her father and made to bear 7 or so of his children; remembering that the state government has, as far as i know, taken complete responsibility for the whole fritzl family was protected from media in a wing of a psychiatric hospital for many months, reunited with the family upstairs, given therapy and then moved to a protected house in the country; rembering that model, i have thought the same should happen here.
This american system, in which people are taught the default position of defensiveness, and in which victims of governmental/law authority egregious lapses are made to sue, putting themselves through grueling exposure and put into a demanding supplicant role when one or all of them, for the sake of their healing, may not be in a position to do so, now or ever, is asking possibly too much.
The sheriff of that county laudably stepped out of the defensive position at the start by admitting his agency's errors and apologizing for them. This is a good start. But who will protect and pay for, as the writer asks, all the long-term individual and family therapy needed to get these people back firmly on their feet -- and by family i include all the people intimately involved with the stolen child, whose lives were forever changed and stunted by her disappearance; starting with her stepfather, sister, any aunts and uncles and grandparents.
There were so many many grievous errors, other people besides the parole officers not following through, agencies not documenting garrido contacts in the same database, etc., that the lawsuit should be against the whole county; and jaycee dugard shouldn't have to ask ('ask', the meaning of 'sue'), she should just be given what she and her whole family needs, without equivocation, with no defensiveness.
Presumably the fbi are now guarding them and setting them up in housing as 'witnesses' until the garridos' trial. After that, what then?
From a former berkeley trauma and family psychotherapist.
iconklee
'... The sheriff of that county laudably stepped out of the defensive position at the start by admitting his agency's errors and apologizing for them."
A GOOD START?
Being a relatively new sheriff, he said THAT because he was afraid of a lynching if he DIDN'T say that.
HOW do you apologize for two decades of rape and being forced to bear children in a filthy environment>? Jaycee, her parents (who divorced after the turmoil) too many lives were ruined for an apology to mean anything.
Why not offer a settlement --immediately ... give them something they could use -- LIKE TEN ACRES of public owned land ,.. for a start. Free education for the kids and professional therapy FOR LIFE.
After all, their OTHER screw-ups in this case cost innocent children THEIR LIVES. Who EVER approved releasing this "specimen" should also be forced to contribute to the Dugard family.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.