ive read the charges.
i also read the comment that the forcible rape started again after 12/01/94. so maybe im confused as to what the rest of the post meant? 'resumed" aka started again.
Nancy Garrido - thread #2
- Thread starter arielilane
- Start date
ive read the charges.
i also read the comment that the forcible rape started again after 12/01/94. so maybe im confused as to what the rest of the post meant? 'resumed" aka started again.
Go back a bit in the thread and read. We're talking about how it odd it is that the forcible rape charges seem to be dropped during the time the daughter would have been "conceived" not "born".
thanks.
a simple answer could be that it stopped after they found out she was pregnant.
but given garrido i doubt that's true!
The charges are two counts of Rape in the month after the abduction. Then Forcible Lewd Acts, specifying sexual intercourse, through Jaycee's 14th birthday in 1994. I'm saying that since they are essentially saying forced sex occurred it makes no sense not to charge the Garridos with rape in addition to or in lieu of forcible lewd acts.
i think this was discussed i the 'question and answer" thread a few weeks ago. i think it's going for an enhanced charge, and sentence.
Hellllooooo? How could Jaycee have conceived by PG if she was not raped???? That's the point. Why did they drop the forcible rape charges and then resume them? Especially when it would have been during the time they could "prove" she was raped, due to a pregnancy?
Except that if you read the charges it does not appear that way at all.
If it was going for an enhanced charge then there would be concurrent forcible rape charges all the way through, not just for June 1991.
well since you put it that way.......this goes to my fears they are gonna flub this up somehow. not dotting i's, crossing ts, or filing proper charges.
BBM.
288. (a) Any person who willfully and lewdly commits any lewd or
lascivious act, including any of the acts constituting other crimes
provided for in Part 1, upon or with the body, or any part or member
thereof, of a child who is under the age of 14 years, with the intent
of arousing, appealing to, or gratifying the lust, passions, or
sexual desires of that person or the child, is guilty of a felony and
shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for three,
six, or eight years.
(b) (1) Any person who commits an act described in subdivision (a)
by use of force, violence, duress, menace, or fear of immediate and
unlawful bodily injury on the victim or another person, is guilty of
a felony and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison
for three, six, or eight years.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=281-289.6
288. (a) Any person who willfully and lewdly commits any lewd or
lascivious act, including any of the acts constituting other crimes
provided for in Part 1, upon or with the body, or any part or member
thereof, of a child who is under the age of 14 years, with the intent
of arousing, appealing to, or gratifying the lust, passions, or
sexual desires of that person or the child, is guilty of a felony and
shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for three,
six, or eight years.
(b) (1) Any person who commits an act described in subdivision (a)
by use of force, violence, duress, menace, or fear of immediate and
unlawful bodily injury on the victim or another person, is guilty of
a felony and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison
for three, six, or eight years.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=281-289.6
and we know there were many other occurnces then the ones they are charged with. so why not charge them more?
I can guarantee Garrido is never getting out of prison unless he escapes or it is in a coffin. I sincerely doubt Nancy will ever get out of prison either. This cannot be flubbed up, there is too much evidence. My greatest worry at this point is that they are not going to charge Patricia with anything and that Garrido could h ave had other partners in crime that will never be caught. I don't care how old Patricia is either, she knew and she could be dangerous. I wouldn't put my mother in the same nursing home with her.
garrido's never getting out. im sure some bleeding heart will make sure nancy at lest gets the chance at parole.
and patricia is gonna stone cold get away with it.
well i probably just insulted myself cause i have a bit of bleeding heart in me.
and i didnt say nancy was getting away with anything, i said patricia was
I meant Patricia is not going to be free and you did say some bleeding heart in relation to Nancy. If Nancy ever gets a chance at parole it will be 30-50 years from now and will be turned down. Patricia may not get any prison sentence, but she will be in a nursing home till she dies.
is it in accurate for me to say she's getting away with it though?
as far as i've seen i've seen no action to prosecute or even bring a grand jury against her.
i want to clarify the bleeding heart comment.....
i have a bleeding heart for victims and the down trodden. i dont partiucarly care what happens to criminals, murderer, pedophiles ect.
sadly there are judges and lawyers and shrinks that do not think the same way. that's why i made the comment about nancy getting a shot at getting out.
i have a bleeding heart for victims and the down trodden. i dont partiucarly care what happens to criminals, murderer, pedophiles ect.
sadly there are judges and lawyers and shrinks that do not think the same way. that's why i made the comment about nancy getting a shot at getting out.
We don't know yet. It would be more difficult because she is once removed, is claiming she has dementia, and has obviously had health problems. More speculation is not going to help because if they were going to prosecute her, they have to do a lot more investigating and observation/testing of her. She's old and although I wouldn't want my own mother in the same place as her, I would imagine they are finding it difficult to know what to do with her. She's essentially disabled due to not having anywhere to go back to and no one that can or will be her caretaker.
Since this is the thread for Nancy, I think this is getting off-topic also.
i absolutely agree with you even if it doesnt look that way.
i have a permanent case of hoof in mouth.
but as far as nancy goes, any parole even if she's 95 would be wrong......she's just as guilty as he is
LinasK
Verified insider- Mark Dribin case
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2004
- Messages
- 26,747
- Reaction score
- 23,434
See my comments on Patricia's thread as to where I think she is being cared for and I don't think she's getting out any time soon if ever...
P.S. They do have skilled nursing facilities for prisons- Susan Atkins- Manson follower died in one!
Amen, Time. And since when is stupidity the sole property of either political party?