Is Phillip Garrido a Serial Killer?

"The government is currently looking at this problem and we know they are taking it seriously. However, urgent action is needed to ensure men whose sole desire seems to be to abuse and hurt children are kept off the streets.

"We have to do everything in our power to protect children from these dangerous predators."

Norman Brennan, Director of the Victims of Crime Trust and a serving police officer with 21 years' experience, said the law concerning the release of paedophiles needed to be amended.

"We are being told by doctors and experts that paedophiles cannot be cured, so why are we allowing them back into the community?" he said.

"Why are we allowing these ticking time bombs out on the streets putting whole communities in fear?"

and

Part of a paedophile gang

At his Old Bailey trial in 1992, the judge, Mr Justice Mantell, said Smith's abuse of the youngster was "wicked" and had done him "lasting damage" from which he might never recover.

His abuse of the boy had come to light during Operation Orchid, a two-year police inquiry set up to investigate the abuse and deaths of a number of boys.

At the trial, Smith was named as being a member of a paedophile gang based in Hackney, east London, which is thought to be responsible for the deaths of at least three boys.

Another member of the gang, Leslie Bailey, was already serving life for the murder of six-year-old Barry Lewis and 15 years for the manslaughter of 14-year-old Jason Swift.

And a third member, Robert Oliver, who changed his name in jail, was released last year after serving a sentence for his part in Jason's killing.

an old article .. saying then what a concerned public still says today

news.bbc.co.uk...


Despite all the waffle spouted by 'experts' and others who for some strange reason choose to sympathise and support paedophiles rather than the child victims

the fact remains that paedophiles cannot be 'cured' .. sex with children is what they crave and they have unlimited appetite, life long

Therefore, the majority-public has to make a choice ---- paedophiles or children. It cannot be both. We know it can't be both. Paedophiles have proven it can't be both. Even 'cured' paedophiles, like alcoholics, are only 'cured' on minute at a time, one day at a time. They REMAIN potential paedophiles until they're dead.

So, the choice has to be made. And then judges (who are PAID by the public) must obey.

If the only cure for paedophiles is their death -- then in order to protect children, paedophiles must be put to early death. Death must become the 'sentence' imposed upon paedophiles.

And it's not as if we can't spare them in a world population comprising 6-plus billion

And not as if the god of this planet gives a damn, obviously ... or 'it' would step in and save children from paedophiles. Yet the god of this planet does NOT do so. So any 'religious' pleading on behalf of paedophiles must be seen as the joke it is and dismissed as such.

Paeophiles have to be executed. And the 'law' must bend to the will of the people, or step down and be replaced with a legal system which has some balls

reply to post by St Vaast


Holy crap that's revolting.

I would like to point out something in this thread. It has turned to pedophilia.

This guy isn't a pedophile. He is an opportunist - he is unconcerned about the AGE of the person, than about his opportunity to use and control any victim.

reply to post by Aeons


Wish I could give you applause.

Yeah, pedophiles are sick, I agree, and can even have a level of sympathy for them. I figure they must hate themselves to the core. The thing is, that doesn't change my attitude that once such a predator has been identified, that predator should never be free to roam the community again.

reply to post by Aeons


good point! though i'm not sure we know enough about this guy yet. he was certainly about power, about using sex to dominate and control. i remember reading that pedophelia is about power far more than sex. using sex to overpower.

there is currently outrage about molesting children, and sentences are getting stiffer. there is still very little outrage about rape of adult women. seems to be some difficulty in believing the woman didn't ask for it or consent, and if she doesn't die the sentence tends to be light. so hard to know if the serial predators we do know about act against children because they like having sex with children or because they want power and control over another human being, and children are easier to control--opportunist choices.

Originally posted by Aeons
I would like to point out something in this thread. It has turned to pedophilia.

This guy isn't a pedophile. He is an opportunist - he is unconcerned about the AGE of the person, than about his opportunity to use and control any victim.

This guy isn't a paedophile ?

Jaycee Lee Dugard: Phillip Garrido 'kidnapped, drugged and repeatedly raped 14-year-old nearly 40 years ago'


The monster who held Jaycee Lee Dugard captive for eighteen years was released by police after being arrested for raping and drugging a 14-year-old-schoolgirl 37 years ago, it was revealed last night.

The extraordinary new development raised new questions over why Phillip Garrido was allowed to remain free to abduct Jaycee when she was eleven-years-old.

Police said the earlier attack happened in Antioch, California - the same town where Jaycee was locked up in Garrido’s back garden prison - in April, 1972.

Full article at link:

www.dailymail.co.uk... ears-ago.html

The monster who held Jaycee Lee Dugard captive for 18 years was stalking young girls as far back as the 1960s, it emerged yesterday.

Phillip Garrido confessed that he would park outside schools to leer and sexually fantasise about children aged from seven to ten.

www.mailonsunday.co.uk...


This guy isn't a paedophile ?

Wasn't he just arrested for selecting, kidnapping and repeatedly raping a child of 11 years of age .. Jaycee Dugard ?

The big problem here is that our justice system keeps releasing these predators back out onto the public, when they know they will go out and commit the same crimes.

The thing is that they are sexual predators, willing to hunt down victims to satisfy their perverted desires. They are willing to prey on adults as well as children.

Anyone vulnerable can become their victim, which is what makes them the worst kind of criminals.

Ah, but these crimes bring massive publicity.

When people hear about what these animals have done, they are more willing than ever to devote more tax dollars to the justice system, and support more laws.

We don't need more courts, more cops, or more laws, we need our jails to stop letting these people out, when they know they will continue to be such vicious predators.

We need to find out why Garrido, or Duncan, was let out of prison early, when neither should have ever been paroled. Garrido should have been kept in jail for fifty years, and should not have gotten out of jail until around 2026. Duncan should have been kept in jail for his twenty year sentence, and then watched like a hawk when he got out of prison. The next time Duncan obtained a gun, or tried to snatch someone, then they should have put him in prison for at least another twenty years.

The thing is, the police did their job, they caught Garrido. The court did their job, they tried him and sentenced him to fifty years on prison, which is what he deserved.

Then the system screwed up. This is the part that needs to be fixed. They let Garrido out because he had not committed enough crime.

The case is even worse with Duncan. They kept letting Duncan out of prison, even though he kept demonstrating that he would continue to prey on the public. Over and over Duncan proved that he would continue to kidnap and rape victims, and yet they kept letting him out until he finally committed a crime so heinous that it drew national attention.

Heck, they are probably still doing it to this day. These sexual predators are sure fire money winners for the PTB that wants to build up the police state.

A pedophile is someone who is sexually imprinted on children.

Garrido is not. He is imprinted on the idea of control and using sex for domination. He did it to adults, teens, and pre-teens. His choice of this girl is not based on her age, but on her availability and ease of control.

I am interested in Garrido's treatise.

It sounds possible that they guy may actually have something in his little primer on how he dealt with himself. Just because the guy is a schizo, and he is a horrible criminal, doens't mean that he didn't actually find some way to desensitize himself to his problems.

Considering how bad the current rehab of these guys is, any improvement, even if it came out of the life experience of a whack job figuring something out.

He may be a worthwhile study.

reply to post by Aeons


AS long as his kind remains locked behind bars while they are studying them.

What I wonder is our parole system still putting these people back out on the street in auto mode until they have been caught three time brutally raping the innocent.

I think there are certain crimes for which the animals who committed them should be locked up for the rest of their lives to protect the community.

Originally posted by Aeons
A pedophile is someone who is sexually imprinted on children.

Garrido is not. He is imprinted on the idea of control and using sex for domination. He did it to adults, teens, and pre-teens. His choice of this girl is not based on her age, but on her availability and ease of control.

don't they usually have a fairly small age range that they are attracted to? i think they can be male or female, but they need to be the right age. do you know if this remains pretty stable? or does the appeal of power, and reinforcement of experiencing that, change it over time?

to make it clear, I'm not suggesting that that you know from personal experience but because you seem to know something about this subject.

Depends on the crime.

In the case of heinous-violent / heinous-violent-sexual crimes, I think that once they've proven beyond doubt that the person committed the crime they are incarcerated for there should then be an attached reverse onus.

The original onus is to prove guilt, where the person is assumed innocent. The reverse onus after conviction is that said convict must prove to a high standard of reasonability that they are fit for release. The assumption should be that a convict of this nature has proven themselves to be unfit, and may not be released until they prove otherwise.

This leaves the possibility for rehab totally in the hands of the convict. The burden of proof, to prove they have been rehabilitated is their responsibility.

reply to post by poet1b


I love how you slipped the '___' addiction in there. Way to go!

I have 40 years of INTENSIVE FIELD RESEARCH into '___' and other hallucinogens and I have never seen them induce anyone to commit a crime or hurt another living thing. The evil is in the man. Not in the sacrament.

Originally posted by earlywatcher

Originally posted by Aeons
A pedophile is someone who is sexually imprinted on children.

Garrido is not. He is imprinted on the idea of control and using sex for domination. He did it to adults, teens, and pre-teens. His choice of this girl is not based on her age, but on her availability and ease of control.

don't they usually have a fairly small age range that they are attracted to? i think they can be male or female, but they need to be the right age. do you know if this remains pretty stable? or does the appeal of power, and reinforcement of experiencing that, change it over time?

to make it clear, I'm not suggesting that that you know from personal experience but because you seem to know something about this subject.

Pedophiles are attracted to children.

Opportunists taken any advantage given.

The two types of offenders are easy to confuse, because opportunists often offend against children to teens due to ease of access and control granted to adults.

I would say I have merely gone out of my way to expose myself to the different types of mental states, and to look closely even if I'm disgusted. Believe me, reading the stuff these people write about themselves is hard to stomach. Hearing them talk about themselves is worse.

I have met people in both categories. Opportunists are more common by far. The only thing holding back a group of people is the potential for being caught. I haven't sought them out mind. I don't work with this type, and this isn't my area of study or anything.

I think that sometimes it may be possible that Opportunists develop a preference for children due to other factors - repetitive opportunity reinforcing fantasy, enjoyment of taboo factor to opportunity, that sort of thing. Given another outlet, they would still take it though. Handicapped, child, senior, woman or man unprepared....doesn't really matter.

Oppoturnists span a large cross-section of behaviour. The Ob/Gyn who "accidentally" moves his hands across parts that aren't necessary. The guy who happens to "accidentally" cop a feel, but just pass it off because the other person isn't 100% sure.

To the person who takes advantage of someone who is passed out. They guy who claims that screwing a 13 year old is okay so long as others have and the 13 year old looks sexually mature. The guy who is inappropriate driving by the middle school kids. The co-worker that traps someone in a hallway. All of these are examples of opportunists, and you have probably run into cases of them. We all do, but we dismiss them. We aren't sure, we think it was just a one time thing, etc.

Quite a lot of opportunists fly under the radar. They don't really have a "profile" of person, like the pedophile who clearly does.

I'm not an expert. I'm fairly certain though that you will find that my observation is essentially correct, and that I am describing a category of behaviour in non-clinical but socially understandable terms.

[edit on 2009/9/8 by Aeons]

reply to post by groingrinder


Sorry, that was not my intent at all. Certainly it was NOT the sacrament, but the evil inside the man.

His abuse of the sacrament, however, is just another sign of his instability.

Nice term.

reply to post by Aeons


I agree, when it can be established that the actions were predatory in nature, that the perp actively hunted down his victim under premeditated circumstances, then the person should be locked up for life, at the very least.

History has clearly shown that should these people ever be released, they will resume their predatory activities, and some innocent will again be tortured, and possibly murdered. Most likely numerous victims will be tortured and killed.

Garrido should never have been released. Who knows how many lives he destroyed.

Our parole systems is completely screwed up, and needs to be fixed.

Sadly, the mainstream press continues to ignore this issue.

I think the PTB want these people out there, so the sheople remain afraid of the big bad wolf.

reply to post by Aeons


a local detective has said to friends that it appears that the therapy they get in prison instead of curing them seems to convince them to kill the child after the molestation, in order to get rid of the evidence, whereas before they let the child go when finished.

this is speculation of course, but it's possible that one could develop a taste for increased violence associated with the original crime.

this is the thing that predatory protectors have started harping on. Sentencing makes them become more violent.

They are using this to instead instill fear of going against these people - you punish them they get worse. So instead, I assume we are supposed to give them lollipops and ask them kindly to refrain.

The opposite, but still within the field of modern justice, is to reverse the onus and put the responsibility for proof of rehab into the hands of the convicted. Currently the assumption is the time has been paid, they get out. Instead, it should be you've met a standard that shows you are unlikely to commit another heinous-violent offence. Make them carry the burden of proof.