Tuesday, May 20, 2008

Parole Board Agreed To Release Serial Rapist

From the Statesman Journal:

Childhood rape victim Tiffany Edens has no confidence in the Oregon parole board.

To her dismay, Edens had to sue the board to block the planned release of Richard Troy Gillmore — the notorious "jogger rapist" who committed at least nine sexual assaults in the Portland area in the 1970s and '80s.

"It's been a frustrating battle," she said in a recent interview. "It's been very wearing on me and my family. I think it's very unfair and very unfortunate that victims have to be revictimized years later by the institution that is supposed to protect them."

Gillmore's case has become a rallying cry for parole board critics, who say it demonstrated poor judgment about a sexual predator and shabby treatment of a rape victim.

I wish this situation were shocking, but it isn't. Unfortunately, the parole board may still release this serial rapist soon. One of the problems is that many of his admitted rapes couldn't be prosecuted because at the time of those rapes the statute of limitation was 3 years.

He was convicted in 1987 and given a 60 year prison sentence on 2 charges with a 30 year minimum before he would be eligible for parole, but the parole board cut the minimum in half.

When the parole board approved Gillmore's release his victim in that case was not notified and only found out about his scheduled release because her mother checked on his status. She shouldn't have had to plead with the parole board in order to testify about why the parole board should reconsider their decision to release this man.

Not surprisingly, Gillmore portrayed himself as a changed man.

The board approved his release after the testimony of the victim and a report from a veteran forensic psychologist which contradicted Gillmore's testimony -- even though the parole board admitted that Gillmore was still a danger to others.

This parole board decision falls into a familiar trap of letting sympathy for a convicted criminal trump the evidence.

After the judge's rebuke, parole officials defended the decision to release Gillmore in a written statement: "In deciding that Mr. Gillmore could be adequately supervised in the community, the board considered Mr. Gillmore's long record of positive prison conduct and responsible work history, the many classes and treatment programs he has successfully completed, as well as his understanding of his past criminal behavior."

The problem with the basis for this decision is that people who are highly dangerous when released can be model prisoners. The underlying flaw is the view that the sexually violent are people who cannot control themselves.

However, Gillmore's rapes were examples of extreme control not lack of control. He stalked his victims while jogging which indicates thoughtfulness and self-control. That means seeing control in other areas such as taking classes or expressing understanding of his past criminal behavior is meaningless.

This new behavior mirrors the old behavior. Control in order to get what he wants. Before his arrest that was rape. After his sentencing that was being paroled.

His methodology -- both old and new -- indicate that he understood what he was doing from day 1 and was able to control himself.

This parole board overlooks this at the peril of every girl and woman who would be unlucky enough to cross paths with Gillmore when he is released.

Since his old pattern was to rape strangers, he is likely to return to that pattern and may decide that the safest option for his own self-interests is to kill any future victims.

Wayne DuMond was championed by Gov. Mike Huckabee over the predictions of a past victim who predicted that the next rape victim would be murdered. But the Arkansas parole board choose sympathy for the rapist over evidence and 2 innocent women paid for that decision with their lives.

The Oregon parole board ignores that history at the peril of the lives of innocent girls and women.

Hat tip: Chaze77

Technorati tags:


Bookmark and Share
posted by Marcella Chester @ 12:42 PM   1 comments links to this post


At January 01, 2010 9:08 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have long advocated that those who release these dangerous criminals back out to feed on our most vulnerable should be held accountable for thier actions. I applaud this women for taking a stand against the very people "parole board" who let these animals back out when every fiber of mankind says its not prudent to do so. We need to dispose of "gain time" "early release" and "over-crowding" weasel clauses for those who commit violent sexual assaults. When victims start suing the "chain of command" who release these poor excuses for DNA back out onto the streets, I'll bet the "powers that be" will find it cheaper to keep them locked up..


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home