ShareThis Page
Nation

Parole officials in California rapped in kidnap case

| Thursday, Nov. 5, 2009

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — State parole officials missed many chances to capture convicted sex offender Phillip Garrido and find Jaycee Lee Dugard, whom Garrido is accused of kidnapping 18 years ago and harboring in his Antioch backyard, a prison watchdog concluded in a critical report released Wednesday.

Inspector General David R. Shaw said a two-month probe found that the state parole division supervising Garrido for a decade could have discovered Dugard, and her two children fathered by him, much earlier than August.

Garrido and his wife are accused of kidnapping Dugard outside her South Lake Tahoe home when she was 11.

Shaw says parole agents didn't revoke Garrido's parole and send him to prison when the device used to monitor him showed that he had gone beyond a permitted radius from his home; didn't classify him as a high-risk sex offender who would have received more intensive supervision; didn't explore clues to the hidden backyard compound where Dugard and her daughters were allegedly kept; and didn't talk to neighbors who might have revealed their presence.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me