by Robert Scott
The unspoken word was that it would be most dangerous to Phil and Nancy Garrido. Several inmates had already made it known that given the chance, they would like to kill both Phil and Nancy.
Many of these issues were not resolved at the next court hearing on December 2, 2010. While the news organizations lawyer Karl Olson said that public scrutiny was vital in the judicial process, Susan Gellman countered, “The media does not care about a fair trial or privacy! They are about selling something.”
Stephen Tapson was even more colorful in his language about releasing the grand jury transcripts to the media. Tapson proclaimed, “The thing oozes prejudice. Every page. It lays out what the victim went through in nitty-gritty detail. The public does not need to know that. I have examined hundreds of transcripts that vividly describe murder, rape, pillage, but nowhere in my experience have I seen a transcript that describes evil, as it is contained in the grand jury transcript in People versus Garrido.” Then in his most flamboyant language, Tapson described the media as “sniffing, snarling, whining hounds.”
In response, Judge Phimister said that he still had to wade through numerous documents on these matters. Then he chastised some of the media members present and called them irresponsible for disobeying his orders and broadcasting audio from an earlier court hearing. Phimister stated, “Just because [material] is true, doesn’t always mean you can utilize it. There are cases in which photographs of pornography have been withheld from the public, for instance.”
At the hearing, Judge Phimister also brought up the issue of Phil Garrido’s mental state. Phimister said that he wanted another psychiatrist to examine Phil to see if he was malingering. In other words, Judge Phimister wanted a second expert opinion as to whether Phil Garrido was just “acting” crazy in court, or whether he really was too incompetent at present to aid in his own defense.
A third issue that Phimister addressed had even a more potentially important prospect for the trial and El Dorado County. Judge Phimister expressed concerns that the seventy thousand people in the jury pool of El Dorado County might not be large enough to seat twelve impartial jurors. The stories about Jaycee and the Garridos had been front and center in the consciousness of the citizens of El Dorado County since the news had broken in August 2009. If there were not enough impartial jurors, the case would eventually have a change of venue and be sent to another California county.
But the big news that week wasn’t the court hearing. Instead, it had to do with a story just breaking on a Sacramento news station. Once again, CBS 13 had scooped the other media outlets. They had obtained jailhouse letters written by Nancy Garrido to a prison pen pal. The prison pen pal was a woman named Kathryn, whom Nancy had befriended while the woman had been in the El Dorado County Jail.
In part of one letter, Nancy wrote, Phillip sends me Bible studies that I truly enjoy and bring me closer to our God. We have a great future in God’s Kingdom. Phil and I don’t have one in this world, but Kathryn, Phil and I keep our eyes fixed in God’s Kingdom, there is where our future will be together.
The tone of the letter suggested Nancy had come to grips with her fate in jail and probably in a future that would never be outside of prison. She seemed almost upbeat and happy with her circumstances. In another letter to Kathryn, Nancy wrote, Thank you for the card you made me. It’s so beautiful. I’m not writing nothing in it. I’ll send it to him. He’ll love it. By the way, my birthday was 7/18. Turned the big 55. Hee Hee! I feel like 30. Honestly. I continue to exercise in my cell. You’ll love Phillip as well. We’re two peas in a pod.
In another letter, Nancy wrote that she knew she was probably going to be convicted and spend the rest of her life at the women’s prison in Chowchilla, California. Nancy wrote, I’m happy to hear I’ll be okay dokey [sic] there in Chowchilla. We adapt to any given situation. It’s difficult at first, Kathryn. Our God gives me so much strength to endure my journey.
When Stephen Tapson was asked if these letters were legitimate, he stated that they were. Tapson said, “My interpretation is that it’s new characteristics that she found Jesus. There’s no secrets on letters coming out of the jail. Correspondence written by jail inmates are copied by authorities.”
Soon there were more letters by Nancy and Phil Garrido surfacing. Nancy wrote to Kathryn, He (Phil) loves God so much. Nancy then included a twelve-page letter she had received from Phil into the letter she sent to Kathryn. Phil began by pledging his “undying love” to Nancy. Then he addressed the situation they were in because of the kidnapping: We understand and do not disagree with people’s reactions or their feelings, as my past is pathetic and shameful to say the least. There is more to all this than meets the public’s eyes as we were standing up to confront these problems and deliver a witness about how the Lord provided a way out for me from these behaviors and provided a powerful freedom that allowed me to love Nancy as God intended. So powerful was the change that it ended 12 years ago. When this becomes public you will understand I am telling the truth.
The reference to twelve years ago tended to indicate that he stopped having sex with Jaycee at that point. Twelve years in the past would have made the date around 1997 when Starlit was born.
Phil went on to write that he could add many more details, but he wouldn’t do so at present. Then in another eleven-page letter, Phil wrote, God knows they all love Him and has long been awaiting the day when he can reveal a powerful and intelligently placed hidden disclosure from within the scriptures. It will delight you and bring great pleasure to your heart. Here, Phil seemed to be referencing the “book” he had written about schizophrenia. Then he added, Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the worst.
Susan Gellman responded to the release of the twelve-page letter from Phil Garrido by telling reporters, “This twelve-page letter written to another inmate and having no connection with this case is yet another example of the rambling thoughts of Mr. Garrido. He focuses on galaxies, powerful persuasions, and voices of angels, showing yet again that he may not be competent to be a defendant and make decisions in his criminal case.”
In yet another letter from Nancy to Kathryn, Nancy wrote, Miss Kathryn, I think I told you once about how God’s spirit is working with my husband, you never comment on it. I’m not crazy, nutty.
Two days before Christmas, 2010, DDA James Clinchard sent a motion to Judge Douglas Phimister declaring that the prosecution needed Dr. Charles Shaffer’s report soon, because of the upcoming competency trial of Phillip Garrido. That trial was scheduled for February 28, 2011. On top of that, Judge Phimister had also appointed Dr. David Glassmire to evaluate Phil to make sure he wasn’t malingering. In other words, acting crazy so that he could not be prosecuted.
Clinchard noted that Dr. Glassmire had interviewed and tested Phil on December 18, 2010, and the interview was audiotaped by jail personnel. Clinchard wrote, Without notice to any parties, Judge Phimister met with defense counsel Gellman and a deputy district attorney not assigned to the Garrido case to discuss the jail audio taping issues. On December 20, 2010, the People requested the El Dorado County Jail turn over the audio recordings so that we could copy and discover the audio to the defense. Jail personnel refused this request.
This was very unusual. Generally, jail personnel, who are part of a county’s sheriff’s office, adhere to what a district attorney’s office tells them to do. But in this case, the jail staff and El Dorado County Sheriff’s Office dug in their heels and refused to do so. Eventually Clinchard found out why. Judge Phimister had instructed the jail personnel to turn the audiotapes over to no one, pending the completion of Dr. Glassmire’s full report.
Clinchard and DA Vern Pierson were very worried about that. If Dr. Glassmire finished his report by February 2, 2011, as he expected to do, then the prosecution team would have only twenty-six days to review the tapes. And during those twenty-six days, they would be tackling a thousand and one other issues, including seating a jury.
Clinchard argued
that Judge Phimister’s decision deprives both the People and the defense their due process rights. The People are diligently preparing for the jury trial and need the opportunity to review the contents of the interview as quickly as possible to evaluate the need for any futher examination of the defendant and the need for additional expert witnesses.
Judge Phimister wasn’t going to be bulldozed by anyone, and on January 6, 2011, he made a ruling that the audiotapes weren’t going to be turned over to anyone until Dr. Glassmire finished his full report. Phimister, however, was going to turn over the report of Dr. Charles Shaffer to the prosecution and defense.
On other issues that day, DDA Ed Knapp told the judge that “our fears have been confirmed” about Phil and Nancy Garrido abusing their phone privileges. Knapp said, “Sometime ago, when this subject came up, the jail was very concerned that contacts between codefendants in the same case are very problematical. They are able to conform their testimony, they are able to create false testimony in general.”
Knapp said that was exactly what Phil and Nancy were doing in their brief phone calls to each other. Phil was giving Nancy instructions, and she seemed to be complying wholeheartedly with whatever Phil said. In essence, they were planning how to get their stories straight.
Judge Phimister looked into this and ruled that phone calls between Phil and Nancy would cease immediately. And Phimister also took up the issue that Susan Gellman was thinking of writing a motion that all trials be held somewhere else other than El Dorado County. The news about Jaycee Lee Dugard had been everywhere in the county since August 2009. Yet, there probably wasn’t a county in California where the story hadn’t been front-page news since those August days.
And then the Sacramento Bee had a short item not picked up by other news sources. The journalist wrote, Susan Gellman noted that the prosecution has yet to turn over a surveillance tape from August 2009 taken at the University of California, Berkeley, where Garrido was spotted with Dugard. If the Sacramento Bee was correct, not only had Angel and Starlit been with Phil on that campus in August 2009—so had Jaycee Lee Dugard. It was just one more glimpse of how much she was under Phil’s power, when she could have simply walked up to anyone on campus and told them exactly who she was.
CHAPTER 37
A SUDDEN RECKONING
A court hearing was held on February 28, 2011, and Judge Phimister ruled that no grand jury transcripts were going to be released to the media. But that wasn’t the big news that day. As often happened, the big news occurred outside the courtroom. In this instance, Stephen Tapson, Nancy’s defense lawyer, started speaking off the cuff to the gathered reporters.
Tapson said, “For your information, Mr. and Mrs. Garrido have given full and complete statements to the Sheriff’s Office in the last month or so. They’ve been honest with them, frankly in the hope of mercy from Mr. Garrido for Mrs. Garrido. Unfortunately, the quality of mercy is strained in El Dorado County.
“As of the moment, the current offer is two hundred forty-one years and eight months to life for Nancy Garrido. Based upon what I know of Nancy Garrido’s relationship with Jaycee and the kids, after all the evil stuff—Jaycee, give me a call. I’d like to talk to you if I could.
“We[he and Jaycee] were in the same building about a month ago, twenty feet apart, and I asked the DA, I asked Mr. Clinchard, to introduce me to her. And he said, no. So, I’m curious to know whether you think if two hundred forty-one years, eight months to life is appropriate for Nancy.”
A reporter spoke up at that point and asked, “That’s the offer for both of them?”
Tapson replied, “Oh, no! His is four hundred forty years to life.”
Another question came in. “What did they tell the Sheriff’s investigators?”
Tapson responded, “Everything they wanted to know. Except they didn’t produce any missing bodies. There’s no other victims.”
Reporter: “So they did admit they did the kidnapping?”
Tapson: “Oh, yes! There’s no question about it. Full confession. Obviously Nancy had nothing to do with—well, legally you can argue she had something to do with all the sex stuff. But she really wasn’t involved in that. She obviously is guilty of kidnapping and a lot of other charges. But based on what happened after all this stuff started, they became the bizarre family that they were. She should at least be able to walk on the beach, probably with a walker, at some point in time before she dies.”
A reporter wanted to know, “What kind of offer are you looking for, for Nancy?”
Tapson said, “Something like twenty to thirty years. Something like that. But a lot of your viewers—they’re going to say, ‘Ah, that lawyer! Look at that! She should be locked up forever. Blah, blah, blah.’ But based upon what I know, in the relationship between Nancy and the kids and Jaycee, I don’t think that length of time is appropriate.”
Another reporter asked, “What was her relationship?”
Tapson replied, “She was their mother. She delivered the kids. She fed them. Took them places. I mean they had that kind of relationship—that was like a mother.”
A reporter queried, “Was Nancy involved in the sexual . . .”
Tapson responded even before the full question was asked. “Nah. Nothing. I know, because of the law, she’s an aider and abettor. That’s another argument. But as far as actually being involved in any of the sexual stuff, she wasn’t.”
Reporter: “Did she grab Jaycee?”
Tapson: “Of course.”
Reporter: “So what has she (Nancy) confessed to?”
Tapson: “Kidnapping. False imprisonment.”
Reporter: “She grabbed Jaycee while Phil was driving?”
Tapson: “Yes, yes, yes. That’s a given. We’re not arguing about that. So now, what’s a fair settlement?”
One reporter said, “What do you predict will happen on March 17 (the next scheduled court date).
Tapson answered, “We’ll set a trial date. Mr. Garrido may or may not plead that day. I don’t know. He has no expectations of getting out.”
“Where were you twenty feet away from Jaycee?”
Tapson said, “The Detectives’ Bureau in Placer ville.”
“Is Nancy prepared to go to trial?”
Tapson smiled and replied, “Her lawyer is. How’s that?”
One reporter asked, “When did all of this happen?”
Tapson said, “The last month or so.”
“What prompted that?”
Tapson answered, “Through their lawyers—they wanted to talk to them (Phil and Nancy). We were there (meaning himself and Susan Gellman).
A reporter asked, “What is your best case for why someday your client should walk free?”
Tapson heaved a big sigh and responded, “She had a normal life, went to Leavenworth, gets enthralled with Mr. Garrido. She never used drugs. Never was in trouble. Gets in his grasp and things go down the tubes from there. And, admittedly, she cooperated with being under his authority. Under his thumb. So, obviously, at trial, we’re going to have to argue Stockholm Syndrome and Patty Hearst stuff. There’s lots of psychiatric evidence to show that she was under his thumb or whatever you want to call it. Even the DA said he’s (Phil’s) a master manipulator. They’ve already conceded that point.”
A reporter wanted to know, “What would there be gained by you talking to Jaycee?”
Tapson said, “I just want her opinion. Let’s ask her and the kids. What do you want to happen to Nancy? And then tell the DA that.”
Reporter: “What was the point of Jaycee being there in the detectives office?”
Tapson: “To see what she had to say. It was only with Nancy. Not with Phillip.”
Reporter: “Did they (Jaycee and Nancy) see each other?”
Tapson: “Yep.”
Reporter: “What happened?”
Tapson: “I can’t talk about that.”
A reporter asked, “Did they just see each other? Or did they talk to each other?”
&nbs
p; Tapson replied, “I don’t have a comment about that.” Another question was, “Does your client want to disengage her fate from that of her husband?”
Tapson answered with a small smile, “She doesn’t want to disengage anything. But hopefully she will, with urging on my part.”
A question came in, “How did your client react after seeing Jaycee?”
Tapson replied, “Tears.”
A reporter wanted to know, “Whose idea was it to get them together?”
Tapson said, “The police and mine.”
“Was it a scenario where Jaycee was listening to their statements?”
Tapson answered, “Yes.”
A reporter asked if Jaycee and Nancy were twenty feet apart during the meeting. Tapson said no. He was the one who was twenty feet away. Tapson then added that Jaycee and Nancy were as far away from each other as he was from the reporter, which was about four feet. In other words, right across a table from each other.
The last question from a reporter was, “Could the two hundred forty-one years already mentioned be because that is what Jaycee wants for Nancy?”
Tapson responded, “It could very well be. But I’d like to know that.”
As usual, attorneys not connected to the case gave their analysis to reporters about this latest information. A number of these attorneys spoke to KTVU television news. Joe Dane, an Orange County, California, defense lawyer, who had been a prosecutor for twelve years, weighed in on Tapson’s statements. Danes said, “Before the El Dorado County DA signs off on it (a plea deal) they want to see if there is some remorse there, and to make sure they are doing their duty to the public in seeing if there are other victims.”
Stephen Munketl, a Nevada City, California, defense attorney stated that the prosecution had a high visibility case with “outrageously harmful behavior” on the part of the Garridos. “One of the few things the defense has to motivate a better settlement by the prosecution is the time, trouble, and expense and stress of everybody having to go through the trial process to get the same result.” One of the individuals who would have to be on the stand during a trial would be Jaycee Dugard. All of the things she had told the grand jurors in secret would now be out in the open.