By Cristina Corbin
Published June 25, 2014
Nearly 60 years after a neighbor snatched toddler Sharon Duvernay from her family’s backyard and raped her, the now-retired school teacher is getting a new neighbor — the infamous “Pillowcase Rapist,” a serial sex offender responsible for at least 40 attacks in the 1970s and 1980s.
Christopher Hubbart, 63, who confessed to raping at least 40 women in Los Angeles and San Francisco between 1971 and 1982, will be released from a state psychiatric facility and placed in a home in Lake Los Angeles by July 7, Capt. Don Ford of the Palmdale Sheriff’s Station, a subdivision of the Los Angeles County Sheriff, told FoxNews.com Wednesday.
Hubbart will reside in a small, one-story white house in a neighborhood off Avenue R and 203rd Street in Lake Los Angeles, a rural, desert community in the northeast corner of Los Angeles County where Hollywood movies and commercials were once made.
“I don’t think about it everyday but certainly with him coming I do…I’m terrified.”
– Sharon Duvernay
While sheriff’s deputies have pledged to do all they can to ensure safety, residents are daunted by the imminent release of Hubbart, who earned his grim moniker for the method of his crimes: binding victims’ hands before pulling pillowcases over their heads to silence their screams.
For Duvernay, the news of Hubbart’s placement brought back a trauma the former elementary school teacher had worked her entire life to overcome. Duvernay recounted how she was kidnapped and raped in 1955 when she was just three by a neighbor in New Orleans. The attack prompted Duvernay, the youngest of five, and her parents to relocate to California.
“The pain never goes away,” said 62-year-old Duvernay, who lives on five acres and who will become Hubbart’s closest neighbor. “I don’t think about it everyday but certainly with him coming I do…I’m terrified.”
“It’s just so ironic. His patterns are exactly like the guy who attacked me,” she said. “We tried to do everything within the law to keep him from moving here. We collected more than 12,000 letters to the judge.”
Duvernay, who now wants to move, said she plans to buy guard dogs and update her security system as well as install cameras on all sides of her home.
“We’re putting better lighting everywhere and we’re thinking about barb-wired or razor-wired fencing,” she said. “Regular activities, like taking out the trash, and every little noise will put me on high alert.”
“He [Hubbart] was released once and he raped 19 women,” Duvernay said. “The second time he was released, he tried to pull a jogger into the bushes. I think he’s very ill and has no impulse control. He will absolutely try to do this again.”
Hubbart has been confined to a mental health facility since 1996. Los Angeles County District Attorney Jackie Lacey petitioned the state Supreme Court in July 2013 to block Hubbart’s release, but the court denied her request, prompting widespread protests from residents.
“Mr. Hubbart, we believe, is still a very dangerous man,” Ford said. “Although he’s been in prison for a long time and received mental health treatment, we know from experience that people can repeat their offenses.”
“Sexual offenders can do well in a controlled setting,” he told FoxNews.com. “But when given more freedom, the risk for a repeat offense increases.”
“The proof is in the pudding,” said Ford, alluding to repeat assaults by Hubbart after he was released from a state hospital in 1979. He was later convicted for assaults in the San Francisco area and readmitted to a mental health facility. Following his parole in 1990, he attacked a female jogger and was imprisoned again.
Law enforcement declined to release the name of the landlord who is renting the property to Liberty Health Care, the company responsible for monitoring Hubbart for several weeks after his release. Plans for Hubbart to live in another home in the same community were scuttled amid neighborhood opposition, but the unidentified owner of the house where Hubbart will live has a strong incentive to rent it through the state, according to Palmdale Mayor James Ledford. He told The Associated Press the state would pay about $2,400 per month for a home that would normally rent for just $500.
Christine Ward, executive director of the Crime Victims Action Alliance, said Hubbart does not belong outside of prison.
“The fact that he’s been paroled once before and was unable to behave is of grave concern,” Ward said. “I am shocked that he is being released into a residential community. My hope is that he will be very closely supervised.”
Hubbart will not be on probation or parole, law enforcement says, but he will wear a GPS ankle bracelet and register as a sex offender with the Lancaster Sheriff’s Station, one of 23 subdivisions of the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department directly tasked with security matters surrounding Hubbart.
“Clearly this wasn’t our choice for placement either,” said Capt. Patrick Nelson of the Lancaster Sheriff’s Station. “But we’re confident we have a good response plan, at least for the first portion of the reintegration when he [Hubbart] will have 24-hour supervision” by a state contractor who supervises sexually violent predators.
Nelson and Ford, who works from neighboring Palmdale, both said that Hubbart will be “very closely monitored” and that additional patrols of the area will be conducted.
“The ankle bracelet tells us where he is, but not what he’s doing,” Ford said. “He’s free to go anywhere.”
“We’re asking the public to educate themselves on Mr. Hubbart and what he looks like,” he said, while also noting that, “We want to make sure nobody unfairly attacks Mr. Hubbart and takes the law into their own hands.”
Denise Squires, another Lake Los Angeles resident, echoed Duvernay’s concerns.
“I’m afraid for myself, for my daughters and my granddaughters,” she said Wednesday. “After all the protest, I was shocked by the news and very surprised to see them fixing up his house with taxpayer money.”
Squires, an area resident for 28 years, said she has “zero” confidence in law enforcement’s supervision of Hubbart.
“It’s very isolated out here and we don’t have enough patrolling to begin with,” she said. “I’ll be looking over my shoulder every place I go. He [Hubbart] looks like an everyday guy. I would never know if he were standing right next to me.”
Read Full Post
| Make a Comment ( Comments Off on Release of ‘Pillowcase Rapist’ to force new neighbor to relive childhood horror )
California data for October 2011 to Jan. 1, 2013, show a 65% increase in warrants for those who were tracked by GPS units and went missing.
By Paige St. John, Los Angeles Times
11:36 PM PDT, April 10, 2013
The increase in fugitive sex offenders in California since the state changed key prison policies is more than double that previously believed, according to data released Wednesday by corrections officials.
The data show a 65% rise from October 2011 to Jan. 1 of this year in warrants issued for paroled sex offenders who were tracked by GPS units and went missing. Previous state reports showed about a 30% climb for that period.
Almost 5,000 warrants were issued during that time, according to the new figures, far more than the 3,251 the department reported in March. Corrections officials said the earlier number did not count cases in which the same offender escaped repeatedly.
In most cases, the officials said, those individuals were caught relatively quickly. No data was provided to support that assertion.
“Our fugitive apprehension teams then aggressively track and arrest parolees who commit this violation,” corrections spokeswoman Deborah Hoffman said.
A recent investigation by The Times showed that in counties where jails are crowded, parolees who ditch their GPS monitors and are recaptured serve little time — sometimes none — behind bars. Some convicted sex offenders who removed their trackers have been charged with new crimes, including rape and murder.
“This confirms the scope of the problem is large,” said state Sen. Ted Lieu (D-Torrance), who has introduced a bill to make it a felony punishable by prison time for a state parolee to remove an electronic monitor.
Under Gov. Jerry Brown’s prison “realignment” plan, parole violators have been referred to county jails rather than returned to the state’s packed prisons. But, like the state, many jails are under court orders to ease overcrowding.
California runs the largest criminal GPS monitoring program in the nation, tracking more than 7,000 registered sex offenders after they are released on parole, usually for three years.
Lieu said the state’s sex offender program, mandated by voters in 2006, is jeopardized.
“We can’t have a GPS monitoring system if we have such dramatic rates of violation,” he said.
Read Full Post
| Make a Comment ( Comments Off on Jump in fugitive sex offenders higher than initially thought )
Read Full Post
By Paul Elias Associate Press
March 4, 2013 – 9:28 pm EST
AN FRANCISCO — The state’s high court ruled Monday that a 2008 ballot measure increasing the time period between parole hearings for inmates serving life sentences applies to all so-called “lifers,” not just those sentenced after the law passed.
The unanimous seven-member court said Monday that “Marsy’s Law” applies to all because it wasn’t intended to prolong punishment or change any inmate’s sentence.
“Marsy’s Law” expanded the legal rights of crime victims, including notifying them of all court proceedings and parole hearings. The law also intended to spare victims from having to trek to parole hearings as often as every year and imposed minimum lengths of seven, 10 and even 15 years between parole hearings for certain prisoners serving life sentences with the chance of parole.
Before Marsy’s law, the maximum length between parole hearings was five years for murder and two years for all other convictions.
The law was named after Marsy Nicholas, who was stalked and killed by a former boyfriend in 1983. Her brother Henry Nicholas, the co-founder of Broadcom Corp., contributed millions to the Proposition 9 campaign after organizing a group of legal scholars, prosecutors and others including former California Gov. Pete Wilson to draft the proposition. Nicholas is now on a quest to amend the U.S. Constitution to include victims’ rights language.
The ruling Monday was prompted by a lawsuit filed by inmate Michael Vicks, who was sentenced to life in prison in 1983 after being convicted of 16 violent felonies including kidnapping and sexual assault.
Vicks argued that he was unfairly subjected to the new parole hearing schedule in violation of state and federal bars on “ipso facto” laws. Those prohibited laws change punishment for behavior after conviction, and Vicks argued the new parole hearing schedule guaranteed him a longer sentence than before Marsy’s Law passed.
Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye, writing for the court, overturned to decisions of two lower courts agreeing with Vicks. Cantil-Sakauye said Vicks provided no evidence that “Marsy’s Law” has kept him or others locked up longer than he otherwise would have been. She said the longer periods between parole hearings was meant to spare crime victims from having to attend hearings that were almost certainly going to result in a denial. She said the law did nothing to change the qualifications for parole, and that prisoners were free to petition for earlier parole dates.
“Although multiple changes to the parole scheme contribute to longer periods between hearings, the changes have no cumulative effect that would create a significant risk of prolonged incarceration,” she wrote.
| Make a Comment ( None so far )
This past Sunday the Bee ran an editorial on AB 109, claiming that critics of the new law were wrong in claiming AB 109 is a significant contributor to the rising crime rate and the early release from custody of county inmates. The editorial authors claim that AB 109 is being vilified, when in actuality it is a positive change in the criminal justice system. The authors stated that crime was NOT on the rise because of AB 109 and that criminals were not being released early because of this law.
This editorial was insulting and dismissive of the real Facts.
The facts are that after several years of a steady decrease in crime
rates, crime IS on the rise. http://www.sacbee.com/2012/08/09/4708245/sacramento-city-county-see-crime.html. Interestingly, the first significant crime rate increase in nearly two decades occurred at the same time AB 109 was implemented in California.
Criminals ARE being released early from county jails because there
simply isn’t room for them now that criminals who were once housed in
prisons are being forced on county jails. While most counties are not releasing AB 109 offenders early, they are releasing their non-AB 109 offenders after serving a small fraction of their court ordered sentence or they are being placed directly on electronic home monitoring without serving any custody time.
Also, lets not forget that the term non-serious, non-violent, non-sex offender is a misnomer. There are plenty of crimes, like felony domestic violence, that are violent in nature, but are not considered so under AB 109. In addition, the “non” only applies to the criminal’s current offense. There are many sex offenders and other violent criminals that are being classified as “non” under AB 109 who should really be spending time in prison.
The authors of this editorial are biased against AB 109’s critics. One of the authors is Joan Petersilia who has been on contract with the State since the Schwarzenegger administration. She was hired to find ways to reduce the state’s prison population. Her job is to reduce the state’s prison population, not to assist local governments managing of their jail population.
Let’s take a look at the author’s claims.
1) Despite mischaracterizations of realignment as “early release,” the law and its implementation have not resulted in the early release of a single person from state prison.
This is NOT what critics are saying. Critics (law enforcement, District Attorneys, victim advocates) of AB 109 are pointing out the fact that AB 109 has resulted in early release of criminals from County Jails! Counties are under court mandates, just like the State, that cap the number of inmates they can house. Because AB 109 limits the list of crimes that a person can go to prison for and parole violators must now serve their time in county jails rather than prison, our county jails are becoming overcrowded. Because of this shift of inmates from the State to the counties, the jails are releasing inmates and defendants awaiting trial early. It’s in the papers all across the state. The problem is so bad it made national news – here is an article about early release from jails in the New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/06/us/in-california-prison-overhaul-county-jails-face-bigger-load.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0.
2) Counties do receive state funds to carry out additional offender management responsibilities under realignment. State leaders provided $850 million for California’s 58 counties in the 2011(-2012 fiscal year) and an additional $1 billion for the 2012-13 fiscal year.
If the Governor’s tax proposal does not pass this November, it is unclear as to how the State will be able to continue to financially support the Counties. Without a guaranteed source of revenue to fund our local government’s new responsibilities under AB 109, it is quite possible that it will wind up in the hands of each county to figure out how to pay for the State’s dumping of prisoners on the counties.
3) We now know that using data and technology to track crime patterns, combined with risk assessment tools, swift and certain consequences for offenders, and the use of programs proven to reduce recidivism work better than old ways of thinking.
Yes, these systems may work – but it isn’t what is being used in California. All of these programs take money, which the counties and the State don’t have at this time. In addition, the risk assessment tools being used are flawed and computer programs cannot evaluate risks as well as a trained parole agent or sheriff’s deputy. CVAA has been told that parole agents are not allowed to override the decision of the risk assessment tool. So if something comes up as a red flag while looking through a criminals file (criminal history), it must be ignored.
Swift and certain consequences are not happening under AB 109. As stated above, there is no room for criminals in county jails. Some counties have stopped prosecuting certain misdemeanor crimes because they don’t have the resources. And, in many counties the AB 109 programs that have been implemented are not working as expected. Most criminals will not attend treatment programs voluntarily. In the past these programs were mandated and there were consequences for not attending – like going back to prison for up to a year. Now there are no longer any real consequences for not attending treatment programs. Under AB 109 the maximum punishment for violating parole is 90 days (counting good time credits) in the county jail, and the average confinement is only 60 days. In some counties the average confinement is even less because of overcrowded jails. Without real consequences anymore, parole agents have told CVAA that criminals are simply walking away from, or never attending treatment programs.
So, what we have under AB 109 is a perfect storm. Criminals are not being held accountable for their actions. There are fewer resources available to house and monitor criminals throughout the state at both the State and the local level. Crime is on the rise. Innocent people have been killed because of AB 109 flaws. Yet, proponents of AB 109 continue to state that it is working. You cannot disregard the facts. AB 109 is a dangerous law.
Read Full Post
| Make a Comment ( None so far )
Contra Costa Times
Posted: 01/10/2012 11:13:01 AM PST
Read Full Post
Ean Keith Brown, who was freed from prison and on parole for burglary, was living in the vehicle in a driveway in the 8300 block of Danbury Circle, Huntington Beach Capt. Russell Reinhart said. (Google Map)
HUNTINGTON BEACH – A 38-year-old parolee was charged today with strangling a 21-year-old woman in a recreational vehicle parked in his parents’ driveway in Huntington Beach over the weekend.
Ean Keith Brown was charged with murder and faces sentencing enhancement allegations for two “strike” convictions and serious felony convictions for second-degree robbery in 1995 and burglary in 2008, according to the Orange County District Attorney’s Office.
Brown, who was freed from prison and on parole for burglary, was living in the vehicle in a driveway in the 8300 block of Danbury Circle, Huntington Beach Capt. Russell Reinhart said.
The victim, Dolores “Arias” Fagan, 21, was living with relatives in the same block, according to prosecutors. The last time they saw her was when she left home about 5 p.m. Friday.
Brown is suspected of strangling Fagan in the vehicle between Friday and Sunday and leaving the body wrapped in a blanket, according to prosecutors.
Brown’s parents called police just after noon Sunday and asked them to check the vehicle, Reinhart said. Police found the body inside the vehicle, but Brown was not there.
San Bernardino County sheriff’s deputies and the California Highway Patrol began a chase of Brown about 4 p.m. Sunday on the northbound Ontario (15) Freeway, Reinhart said. Police caught up to Brown and arrested him just short of the border with Nevada, Reinhart said.
| Make a Comment ( Comments Off on Parolee charged in strangulation of 21-year-old Huntington Beach woman )
Convicted Killer Antonio Pinto will be transferred to Portugal before he has served his term of life in prison.
The California Board of Parole Hearings, on three separate occasions, found that convicted baby killer, Antonio Pinto, was not safe to release back into society. However, with California’s blessing, the federal government will be sending this killer out of the country because he asked to go.
The maternal family members are adamantly opposed to this transfer – but their cries fell on deaf ears.
Neither the prosecuting attorney’s office nor the victims are required to receive notice of foreign prisoner transfers. In addition, neither have the right to have input in the process.
Last year, Annika Ostberg Deasy, sentenced to life for the murder of a law enforcement officer, was released to her native country of Sweden before she completed her prison sentence in the United States. The district attorney and the victim’s family were taken by surprise by the transfer. They were opposed to Ms. Deasy being moved out of a California prison prior to completing her sentence.
The Crime Victims Action Alliance, in partnership with the Alameda County District Attorney’s office, will be working diligently to change the regulations and laws regarding foreign prisoner transfers to include notification to, and input from, prosecutors and victims or the victims’ families.
The facts of this case are disturbing – please note that the following description is graphic.
In the late evening of December 28, 1992, well after she had been put to sleep, a weary four-year-old Jessica cried out to her father from her bedroom. Her call was answered by her father beating her to death.
Antonio Pinto claimed he only remembered a few isolated moments of that evening. He said he remembered spanking Jessica for calling to him after she had gone to bed and then arguing with him. He claimed he remembered also accidentally dropped her in the bathtub due to his weak arms – the side effect of medication he claimed to be taking. He claimed loss of memory to having beaten his four-year-old daughter Jessica to death.
One can only imagine Jessica’s last few hours, filled with fear and pain as she must have cried and begged her father to stop hitting her, asking what she had done wrong and pleading for forgiveness – promising never to be “bad” again.
Jessica’s father did not call 911 for help, even after realizing the severity of Jessica’s injuries from his beatings. Instead, as Jessica took her final breaths, covered in her own blood and vomit, her father began to take steps to cover up her murder.
At 2:00 a.m. he called in sick to work, saying he was suffering from the flu. At 6:00 a.m., when Jessica’s paternal grandfather came to the home to babysit Jessica for the day, Pinto turned him away, telling his own father to go home. Pinto called a neighbor and asked how to clean blood from carpet, and then prepared a detergent solution he used to clean spots of his daughter’s blood from the hallway and bedroom carpets. He also used this solution to clean his daughter’s hair.
It wasn’t until 10:30 a.m. the day after the murder that Pinto called 911 to report his daughter was “having difficulty breathing.” Firemen and paramedics found Jessica on her father’s bed, as he had left her, still covered in blood and vomit. Her body was riddled with over 70 separate fresh bruises, 42 of which surrounded her face and neck. Pinto had beaten Jessica’s buttocks so severely that they were deep purple. The fact that rigor mortis had set in showed that Jessica had been dead for a while.
The pathologist determined the cause of death to be a result of multiple blunt force trauma. Her brain was swollen from hemorrhages caused by several powerful blows Pinto delivered to her head. The sheer number of Jessica’s injuries showed that Pinto inflicted them over some amount of time that night; it took him quite a while to beat his daughter to death. The pathologist’s finding was that all of Jessica’s injuries were sustained while she was alive. When Pinto was arrested for his daughter’s murder, his fists bore the evidence of the beating – they were red and swollen.
Pinto was convicted of second-degree murder and sentenced to life with the possibility of parole.
Jessica’s murder was not an abnormality in Pinto’s character; he had a history of violent behavior. He suffered one prior conviction for brutally assaulting the innocent victim of a car accident that had been caused by Pinto’s friend. Pinto had also physically abused his wife.
Antonio Pinto has appeared before the parole board on several occasions, all of which ended in a denial of parole because the parole board still continues to consider the man too dangerous to release from prison. His last parole hearing was in May 2009 – at which he received a five-year denial.
Jessica’s family was notified in January 2009 that Pinto had applied to be “transferred” to Portugal. The family members are divided in their positions regarding releasing Pinto to Portugal; his parents are in favor while Jessica’s mother, stepmother, grandparents, and other maternal relatives are adamantly opposed.
The family members opposed to the transfer had mistakenly believed that the five-year denial in May 2009 prevented his “transfer.” They learned the “transfer” had been approved when Pinto recently wrote to his son, who also opposes Pinto’s international “transfer.”
Jessica’s family contacted the prosecutor’s office in late December 2009 to find out what they could do to stop the “transfer.” The prosecutors, who had never been notified of Pinto’s application for transfer or its approval, were shocked to hear of the international development. According to California state law, despite the recent advances in victims’ rights, neither the prosecutor nor the victim or the victim’s family have the right to be notified of the “transfer” of a prisoner from the United States to another country.
Why not transfer Antonio Pinto to Portugal?
No Guarantee of Rehabilitation. California inmates are given an opportunity to transfer to a foreign country when it will benefit their rehabilitation efforts. This is usually reserved for inmates who are foreign country nationals and have strong family ties in a foreign country. Antonio Pinto has lived in the United States, with his parents, since he was three years old.
Possible release from prison. There is no guarantee that an inmate will stay in prison once transferred to another country. Antonio Pinto is a violent criminal who has been deemed inappropriate for release in the United States. Transferring this inmate to another country does not change the fact that he is violent and dangerous. In addition, US authorities will have no way of providing counseling or taking other steps to attempt to rehabilitate the inmate before his release. Currently dangerous prisoners should not be allowed to be transferred out of the US until the Board of Parole Hearings determines that they are no longer a risk to public safety. Unfortunately, it does happen.
The victim’s rights are not transferrable. Victims currently have the right to attend Parole Hearings and voice their concerns or support regarding the release of an inmate. Once transferred to a foreign country the victim’s rights can no longer be protected.
No Justice for Jessica. Jessica died as a result of the brutal beating she received at the hands of her father. He was sentenced to an indeterminate term – his release date to be determined by the Board of Parole Hearings if the Board ever determined him to be appropriate for release into society. Jessica’s murderer should stay in custody until the Board of Parole Hearings finds that he will not pose an unreasonable risk to society if released.
Read Full Post
| Make a Comment ( Comments Off on California Parole Board Approves Release of Baby Killer to Portugal )
The Crime Victims Action Alliance is appalled, but not surprised, at the ruling handed down by the three judge panel. CVAA is relieved that at least it is out of the hands of these anti-public safety judges as the matter now moves on to the Supreme Court.
Published Tuesday, Aug. 04, 2009
In a historic move, a panel of three federal judges today ordered the state of California to reduce its prison population by more than 44,000 inmates in the next two years.
The order, which will not result in the immediate release of any of the state’s 160,000 inmates, almost certainly will be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, the first time the high court will have faced such a case.
California’s prison system is operating at 190 percent of its design capacity of 84,210 inmates, and the judges said the state must devise an inmate reduction plan within 45 days unless a stay is ordered to allow an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
“The convergence of tough-on-crime policies and an unwillingness to expend the necessary funds to support the population growth has brought California’s prisons to the breaking point,” the judges’ 184-page order said.
The judges added that “federal courts do not intervene in state affairs lightly,” but that conditions in California’s prisons have become “horrific” in some cases.
“…(T)he rights of California’s prisoners have repeatedly been ignored,” the judges wrote. “Where the political process has utterly failed to protect the constitutional rights of a minority, the courts can, and must, vindicate those rights.”
The order stems from suits filed against the state by various groups, including the Prison Law Office in Berkeley, alleging overcrowding has led to unconstitutional medical and mental health care.
Donald Specter, chief attorney for the law office, called the order “a landmark ruling and historic day in prison litigation in this state and in the country.”
“The court’s order will now require what virtually every expert and even the state itself has recognized for 15 years,” he said. “It can be done safely, thoughtfully and without any adverse impact on our state.”
The order comes as Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is seeking to reduce the prison population by 27,000 to save $1.2 billion in costs, but the plan is being attacked by crime victims’ groups angry at the prospect of such a reduction.
Corrections officials are planning a 3:30 p.m. press conference to discuss the order.
“We are reading the ruling right now to see what our options are,” department spokesman Oscar Hidalgo said.
Read Full Post
| Make a Comment ( Comments Off on State ordered to shrink prison population by 44,000 inmates )
Read Full Post
Christine Ward, Director of the Crime Victims Action Alliance, comments on inmate websites on the Today Show and on Verdict with Dan Abrams Tuesday July 16, 2008.
Vodpod videos no longer available.
| Make a Comment ( None so far )