Actually I used Anthroamys excellent timeline and it just took a min!! I'll be happy to help you find your keys however. Did you check the bathroom? I always leave mine there as I run in there quickly when I get home!!
Early Parole and Missed Opportunities-What happened?
- Thread starter JBean
- Start date
Actually I used Anthroamys excellent timeline and it just took a min!! I'll be happy to help you find your keys however. Did you check the bathroom? I always leave mine there as I run in there quickly when I get home!!
I wasn't really sure what they meant in the report about this:
December 4, 2006 Local law enforcement queries Garrido in law enforcement database
This link explains it pretty well I think, so I thought I'd pass it along.
http://www.slate.com/id/2179180/
Though, the big question still is why did they suddenly start doing this and so many times thereafter?
August 23, 2007 Local law enforcement queries Garrido in law enforcement database.
March 6, 2008 Local law enforcement queries Garrido in law enforcement database.
March 14, 2008 Local law enforcement queries Garrido in law enforcement database.
March 28, 2008 Local law enforcement queries Garrido in law enforcement database.
April 8, 2008 Local law enforcement queries Garrido in law enforcement database.
April 14, 2008 Parole agent places GPS tracking device on Garrido.
June 24, 2008 Local law enforcement queries Garrido in law enforcement database.
June 27, 2008 Local law enforcement queries Garrido in law enforcement database.
July 2, 2008 Local law enforcement queries Garrido in law enforcement database.
August 1, 2008 Local law enforcement queries Garrido in law enforcement database.
November 10, 2008 Local law enforcement queries Garrido in law enforcement database.
April 14, 2009 Local law enforcement queries Garrido in law enforcement database.
December 4, 2006 Local law enforcement queries Garrido in law enforcement database
This link explains it pretty well I think, so I thought I'd pass it along.
http://www.slate.com/id/2179180/
Though, the big question still is why did they suddenly start doing this and so many times thereafter?
August 23, 2007 Local law enforcement queries Garrido in law enforcement database.
March 6, 2008 Local law enforcement queries Garrido in law enforcement database.
March 14, 2008 Local law enforcement queries Garrido in law enforcement database.
March 28, 2008 Local law enforcement queries Garrido in law enforcement database.
April 8, 2008 Local law enforcement queries Garrido in law enforcement database.
April 14, 2008 Parole agent places GPS tracking device on Garrido.
June 24, 2008 Local law enforcement queries Garrido in law enforcement database.
June 27, 2008 Local law enforcement queries Garrido in law enforcement database.
July 2, 2008 Local law enforcement queries Garrido in law enforcement database.
August 1, 2008 Local law enforcement queries Garrido in law enforcement database.
November 10, 2008 Local law enforcement queries Garrido in law enforcement database.
April 14, 2009 Local law enforcement queries Garrido in law enforcement database.
I provided an analysis of that earlier in this thread [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4389573&postcount=103"]here[/ame]:
To recap:
Natal said:
Thanks, Natal. Your theory seems to fit but I would still like a definite as to what these queries were for. You're right that, if the 12/6/06 querie was from the neighbor calling, it contradicts the CCCSD report that they didn't do a background check. But, if in March, the queries were after PF's fall, why weren't queries also ran when they were called to PF's aid other times and also other times he registered? There would be a lot more of these queries.
Remember is Shaws report that out of 136 months that there were only 12 or 13 months that the PO did the correct monitoring? Maybe these dates corespond to the dates on Shaws timeline. I just got finished working 13 hours, so I'm too tired to check it out, but maybe there is a pattern there?
It looks like someone thought that maybe this one wasn't a fall, and looked him up. And it looks like more than one person was checking up on him over that week, so it sorts of suggests that LE regarded that incident as suspicious.
my2sisters
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2009
- Messages
- 671
- Reaction score
- 0
Jun 24, 27, Jul 2; 08 - preparatory work as part of the SO task force sweep
I don't understand this. Does LE prepare RSOs for raids on their homes??? 3 visits/contacts just days prior to the July 5 (?) county sweep on RSO parolees. No wonder they didn't find anything!
not_my_kids
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2008
- Messages
- 12,689
- Reaction score
- 276
If I read that right, those unexplaineds were simply doing the LE equivalent of a name google. If it was a database query, there would likely have been no contact and no visit. it would be common to see an address and name of any person about to be raided, looked up for confirmation several times in the days and weeks preceeding the raid.
MOO.
Although ... I was trying to figure out if "Local Law Enforcement" would even refer to Parole Officer inquiries? Did someone determine it would?
It seems like the report would have stated it was the CDCR that ran the queries and not local LE, since they aren't the same. Parole is not considered local LE even if their office is in the town being referenced. They are a State entity, not local. I don't know how we even could determine what the report was referring to either way, but I'm with you, I don't think the report was referring to the CDCR here.
Thanks ... that's kind of what I had assumed. I guess there's no way to know if it was the APD or CCCSO? Although, I don't see why it would be APD.
That was the special task force that periodically does sweeps through the SOs looking for violations independently of the . The queries on the database would have been research they did on their targets as part of the planning in preparation for the raids. The SOs themselves wouldn't have been aware of what was going on.
It does make you wonder however just how much research they actually did beyond the database though. Surely as part of the planning they would have obtained groundplans of the property/s they were going to hit?
my2sisters
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2009
- Messages
- 671
- Reaction score
- 0
Thanks. I don't know what's wrong with me, I didn't read it that way. :waitasec: But now it makes sense. I think I need a break.
I think I mentioned this before, but all those properties (except for the end ones) are close to the same size - they are all almost identical in depth. It seems the depth of Garrido's yard would have seemed obviously off. But, yeah, they could have gotten property maps or just looked on Google. The other thing is that the 2006 report from the 911 call would have mentioned tents! Of course, that is all not to mentioned those nasty extension cords hanging about.
OR.... they could have just looked in the file, where the fed's had said they've seen the sound proof shed and checked out the sound proof shed.....and just possibly wondered where that was???I think I mentioned this before, but all those properties (except for the end ones) are close to the same size - they are all almost identical in depth. It seems the depth of Garrido's yard would have seemed obviously off. But, yeah, they could have gotten property maps or just looked on Google. The other thing is that the 2006 report from the 911 call would have mentioned tents! Of course, that is all not to mentioned those nasty extension cords hanging about.
Yeah, I'm not buying the whole thing excuse about that they couldn't have known about the back yard. Just the picture in the Parole Report clearly show why any parole office or LE should have seen things that were obvious and questionable.
my2sisters
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2009
- Messages
- 671
- Reaction score
- 0
Natal (or others), you appear to know some about the legal system and there's something that's been bothering me. Jim Molino was on parole for a felony as was PG. How were they able to openly hang out together since they were both felons? Isn't it a parole condition that felons can't have contact with other felons? How was Molino able to hire other felons at JM and none of the parole officers had a problem with it? Especially given the fact a prostitute was found impaled on his fence and it's general knowledge in this area that Jim is a crook.
I personally know that local LE knew that Jim had, allegedly, been involved in criminal activities at the wrecking yards for many years. I heard about him from a California Highway Patrolman back in the mid/late 80s. CHP and CCCSO were well aware of him back then but he seemed to escape most problems.
Has anyone been able to do a check on JM's criminal background?
I personally know that local LE knew that Jim had, allegedly, been involved in criminal activities at the wrecking yards for many years. I heard about him from a California Highway Patrolman back in the mid/late 80s. CHP and CCCSO were well aware of him back then but he seemed to escape most problems.
Has anyone been able to do a check on JM's criminal background?
my2sisters
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2009
- Messages
- 671
- Reaction score
- 0
"What violations would cause the revocation of my parole?
Conditions of parole are set at the time a prisoner is released from state prison. The prisoner has to sign agreement to those conditions. Some conditions are standard:
* regular reporting to the Parole Officer (P.O.);
* keeping him advised of any intention to change residence address;
* providing notice of change in employment within 72 hours;
* reporting any new arrest;
* not associating with other felons;
* restricting travel away from home with either time or distance thresholds; and
* no possessing of weapons.
Other conditions specific to the crime for which the parolee was convicted can include:
* staying a certain distance from schools or playgrounds (for sex criminals);
* random drug testing;
* not associating with gang members;
* psychiatric treatment;
* abstaining from the use of alcohol or drugs;
* no contact with a domestic violence victim;
* sex offender registration; and
* wearing a GPS monitor..." More
This answers some of my questions but creates many more. Not associating with other felons seems to be pretty standard.
Conditions of parole are set at the time a prisoner is released from state prison. The prisoner has to sign agreement to those conditions. Some conditions are standard:
* regular reporting to the Parole Officer (P.O.);
* keeping him advised of any intention to change residence address;
* providing notice of change in employment within 72 hours;
* reporting any new arrest;
* not associating with other felons;
* restricting travel away from home with either time or distance thresholds; and
* no possessing of weapons.
Other conditions specific to the crime for which the parolee was convicted can include:
* staying a certain distance from schools or playgrounds (for sex criminals);
* random drug testing;
* not associating with gang members;
* psychiatric treatment;
* abstaining from the use of alcohol or drugs;
* no contact with a domestic violence victim;
* sex offender registration; and
* wearing a GPS monitor..." More
This answers some of my questions but creates many more. Not associating with other felons seems to be pretty standard.