Who reported suspicious activity and when?

love.child

Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
56
Reaction score
2
Edited to add address of Garrido at top of this thread: 1554 Walnut Ave. in Antioch, Contra Costa County, California 94509

I am doing research on building code violations, hoping to affirm my belief that code enforcers are the first line of defense for these situations. I want code enforcers to be trained to look for this kind of thing. As it is, I am finding out that there is a lot of corruption and downright lazyness in code enforcement that puts these young girls at risk. A person should not be able to build a sound-proof torture shack in their backyard!! :furious: I mean, can we, as a society, all get on the same page about that!?

So, if you could help me, I would like to know if there were any code violation complaints for the Garrido property and what was the result?? Where I live this sort of thing is open to the public for anyone who goes into the county planning office. Is there anyone nearby who could go in to check on this for us?

And also - neighbors complained in 2006. Are there any more details about that? Can we have access to the Sheriff's office computer file on this property? All complaints should be kept in the computer under that address. Is that info open to the public?

This is what we have so far:
Neighbors called CCCSO with concerns on or around November 30, 2006. Deputy speaks to Garrido outside of home; clears call within 30 minutes.
 
Garrido's house was in an unincorporated area of the Contra Costa County where building codes often go ignored. If it had been annexed to the city of Antioch years ago (when it was brought up before the city council) then building codes would have been enforced.
 
Probably why he stayed there so long instead of selling and moving to some area of the country where multiple wives and living out on some compound is accepted.
 
I think it was 2007 when someone called the fire department about a fire in the backyard.
 
Contra Costa County - Code Enforcement FAQ's


http://www.co.contra-costa.ca.us/FAQ.aspx?TID=58

Garrido property was potentially in violation of many, including abandoned cars, overgrown and unkempt property, and in particular, THIS bit:

Do I need a permit to build a storage shed?
Storage sheds, tool sheds and play houses that have a foot print of less than 120 square feet do not require a building permit however do have other restrictions. . In the event you bring a utility such as electricity or water to the structure, or enclose mechanical equipment such as a well or pool pump, permits are required. Electrical, plumbing and mechanical permits are required for a structure that may not require a building permit. Sheds and playhouses are not permitted to be located in the property setbacks. This is a required open space that separates properties around the perimeter of the property. Setback distances vary based on property zoning. The Planning Division (925) 335-1381 will help you determine the set back requirements of your property.
 
From the timeline:
A multiagency task force in Contra Costa County searched his home in July 2008 as part of a sexual offender compliance check. The team looked in the back, but saw only a screened-in porch and a back fence. There were no signs of children living there.

An entire team was there in 2008!?
 
I found this quote on the Backyard thread and wanted to put all the similar notes in one thread:

Originally Posted by Harmony2
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/09/07/...ies/index.html
Quote:
There were at least 16 visits from parole officers and seven by the fire department.


Quote:
As recently as June, two months before Dugard was discovered with the Garridos, Contra Costa County firefighters responded to a fire on the property. They doused a car engine that had exploded into flames at the rear of the property, said department spokeswoman Emily Hopkins. They spent two hours there and then left.

They also visited Garrido's property in fall 2007, after a neighbor reported fire coming from the backyard. In addition, they responded twice in 2008 and three times in 2009 to medical emergencies involving Garrido's elderly mother, Patricia Franzen.

Fire department officials weren't sure whether more visits were made to the home, because computerized records date only to 2006.
 
From the timeline:
A multiagency task force in Contra Costa County searched his home in July 2008 as part of a sexual offender compliance check. The team looked in the back, but saw only a screened-in porch and a back fence. There were no signs of children living there.

An entire team was there in 2008!?

YES! An entire team was there in July 2008. I've posted this in several threads in addition to the TL, with the news link, and you're the first to really notice it.

Again, why didn't this task force expand their search?
 
YES! An entire team was there in July 2008. I've posted this in several threads in addition to the TL, with the news link, and you're the first to really notice it.

Again, why didn't this task force expand their search?

From the statement of the PO office, they said the back yard was fenced in such a way that officers thought the backyard ended at the fence. And that what was on the other side of the fence belonged to someone else.
 
Well, I hope this case prompts parole officers, multi-agency sex offender task forces, law enforcement, even fire departments, etc., to make one little change in their procedural handbooks and that is to make it a requirement to look up the property in question in Google Maps or Earth and County Records.

Yeah, it would be a waste of time for all the apartment calls, for example, but if just one person had done this in the Garrido case they would have seen he was living on over 12,000* square feet of property with a bunch of stuff covered up in the far backyard and that more than a cursory check was needed.



(*link somewhere in the forum, I'll see if I can find it to add here.)
 
I think it was 2007 when someone called the fire department about a fire in the backyard.

Just curious does anyone know if "fire runs", the times that fire departments are dispatched to a call are still printed in a newspaper, or if they are available on line somewhere now? Used to be they were always printed in the paper.
 
The DA said she never left the backyard for three and a half years, so that probably wasn't her. In cases like these LE probably gets a ton of sightings like that.
 
Regarding this article about the tipster who thought he saw Jaycee in Oakley, the sherriffs department is saying the person is annymous and was gone when they got there, but then, how and where did the newspaper get this information?

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/10/06/MNS11A1JEG.DTL

most likely one of the bogus bits of tips that have come over the years.
the 1991 people article talks with terry about how many tips about her location or who was behind the abduction.......most likely 18 years of stuff like that is what made her skeptical when the fbi called her to tell her they found jaycee
 
From the statement of the PO office, they said the back yard was fenced in such a way that officers thought the backyard ended at the fence. And that what was on the other side of the fence belonged to someone else.

Exactly, and I seriously doubt that PG layed claim to the other side of the fence area when the fire departmentss or pd was there! Absolutley unreal that he was able to hide them in that area for soooooo long. It appears that only the neighbors (apparently, not even Garrido's family, brother, mother, father, aunt, etc.) knew ANYTHING about that area of the yard. It may as well have been a secret basement compartment or something. Scary.
 
I am not particularly impressed with Mr Portue.

It seems that he and his wife filed a claim against Contra Costa County.

At a Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors meeting on Tuesday May 10, 2005, their claim was denied.

A G E N D A
TUESDAY MAY 10, 2005
Claims, Collections & Litigation

C.11 DENY claims of ... ; ... ; ... ; claims filed by Thomas Portue and Betty Portue, against Contra Costa County, Animal Services, and Sheriff’s Department;


http://www.cccounty.us/Archive.aspx?ADID=636
 
I am not particularly impressed with Mr Portue.

It seems that he and his wife filed a claim against Contra Costa County.

At a Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors meeting on Tuesday May 10, 2005, their claim was denied.

A G E N D A
TUESDAY MAY 10, 2005
Claims, Collections & Litigation

C.11 DENY claims of ... ; ... ; ... ; claims filed by Thomas Portue and Betty Portue, against Contra Costa County, Animal Services, and Sheriff’s Department;


http://www.cccounty.us/Archive.aspx?ADID=636

He's not the point of the post!
 
That's a good idea, but I don't know how to do it. :redface:
We already have a thread going about LE's screw-up, and I do however think that Sheriff Rupf is a big part of it.
 
Regarding this article about the tipster who thought he saw Jaycee in Oakley, the sherriffs department is saying the person is annymous and was gone when they got there, but then, how and where did the newspaper get this information?

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/10/06/MNS11A1JEG.DTL

A siting less than 2 miles from PG's home, and a description of a van that we now know that PG owned. Sounds pretty credible to me. And it wouldn't be the first time that a real tip got lost on a tip line, because of an overwhelming number of tips coming in.

As far as the DA saying that she never left the property, I don't know about that. It wouldn't be unknown for a kidnapper to take a child out. Part of "breaking her" would be to crush her hope of rescue. How better to crush that hope than to take her out in public, and show her that no one noticed her?

And for the question of where the info came from, according to the article:

The Sheriff's Office searched for Dugard's name in a database after she was found in late August and unearthed the old incident report, Terry said.

I do wonder how quickly they responded to the anonymous report?? They said the girl was gone, the tipster was gone, and the station owner didn't know anything about it. They aren't saying if the station had surveillance cameras. They aren't saying whether or not they asked the tipster if he could get the license number. My fear is that the tipline was probably one of those unmanned, taped things that you call in and talk to a machine. So it may have been hours or days, possibly even weeks before that was investigated.
 
A siting less than 2 miles from PG's home, and a description of a van that we now know that PG owned. Sounds pretty credible to me. And it wouldn't be the first time that a real tip got lost on a tip line, because of an overwhelming number of tips coming in.

As far as the DA saying that she never left the property, I don't know about that. It wouldn't be unknown for a kidnapper to take a child out. Part of "breaking her" would be to crush her hope of rescue. How better to crush that hope than to take her out in public, and show her that no one noticed her?

And for the question of where the info came from, according to the article:



I do wonder how quickly they responded to the anonymous report?? They said the girl was gone, the tipster was gone, and the statiillon owner didn't know anything about it. They aren't saying if the station had surveillance cameras. They aren't saying whether or not they asked the tipster if he could get the license number. My fear is that the tipline was probably one of those unmanned, taped things that you call in and talk to a machine. So it may have been hours or days, possibly even weeks before that was investigated.

ill go you one better.
maybe he was testing how far hed broken her by showing her her own missing poster
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
207
Guests online
4,081
Total visitors
4,288

Forum statistics

Threads
591,816
Messages
17,959,540
Members
228,620
Latest member
ohbeehaave
Back
Top