I think it's absolutely amazing and wonderful that she got out. I hope she can recover to an acceptable degree. I wonder if there will ever be a memory wiping technology for people like this to erase the damaging memories. I think in her case it would be a blessing.

I wonder about her children, what are they like? Do they remind her of him? How would a woman deal with that, having children of rape?

I think he's a sicko, mentaly ill for sure, evil, well, I'm tempted to say yes, certainly evil deeds, but I don't think evil comes from nothing. He either has birth defect brain damage or psychological trauma brain damage, or both which has caused the evil doing. I don't have pity for him though. And I hope he and his wife are put away for good.

I haven't heard much yet myself though. I was thinking of looking up more info, like what is his wife like? Is she also a victim, or a suportive co-purpretator?

I remember seeing a film called "I know my name is Steven" when I was about 15, about a kidnapped boy who ended up committing suicide rather than go home . It was very shaking. I still remember it with fear and trepidation.

This story is really a miracle. There is no doubt that both Jaycee and her children will have serious issues to deal with, but with God, all things are possible.

As for the offender - sick? evil? Both, really. I would think that it was some tiny bit of goodness in him that let him keep Jaycee and her children alive, and perhaps even secretly hope that his imprisonment of them would come to an end.

What really strikes me here is the similarity between the Garrido kidnapping and what goes on in polygamous communities, both in the US and here in Canada in British Columbia. Both involve the taking of young girls, and forcing them into sexual relationships and child bearing for much older men. Both involve a form of captivity - in Garrido's case, he had to create his own environment of captivity. In the case of the polygamists, the social and pseudo religious environment they have created is the method of captivity.

And in this case, society condones the sexual captivity of these young women, under the guise of "freedom of religion"...so are we sick? or evil? or are we just like the neighbours who glance over the fence and say "it is none of our business".

This is a powerful story...and I keep  hearing the words of Jesus echoed..that he has come to "set the captives free". I hope we will hear more of such stories in the future.

It's a very sad case. Supposedly she has fallen in love with her captor and is unable to understand why this is happening to the father of her children.

Her whole sense of what we consider normal is messed up. (Stockholm Syndrome?) And I think the police have stated it may be what kept her alive---adjusting to the situation rather than be non cooperative.

My heart goes out to Jaycee, her children and her mother who has had a daughter returned that must be like a virtual stranger but then again isn't.

I get angry when I hear that this man was put away for life for something similar when he was 25 and then he is granted early parole. Possibly due to overcrowding in the jails. So is he sick or evil? Probably both. Hard to say which came first. Maybe he was abused also. In things such as this I am a casual observer akin to someone driving by a car crash and gawking with morbid curiousity. So the best I really can do is pray that those close to the situation will guide the victims family and they will recieve much needed support.

I feel disgust when it comes to the perpetrator but I have the luxury of dumping this one in God's lap (because of the distance) and hoping God's infinite wisdom, as to how the universe allows such things, has purpose in the entire scheme of things. Others closer to the situation will probably be more effective and create new laws and  change many things pertaining to this case. If anything things like this teach us all to hold our children tighter and love one another dearly.

angelanb:

Don't pay a lot of attention to Jes, she's a troll. Doesn't matter what you say, she'll just take the opposite just to abuse you with it.

As for your comment, I don't think there was any particular degree of altruism that caused him to allow her to escape. I think he just got sloppy, or tired, or both.

 Doesn't matter what you say, she'll just take the opposite just to abuse you with it.

No but I will tell you this it's that kind of attitude that I bet this guys wife had , how could she stick around and allow this to happen and don't think for a second that she was innocent or a victim ... she musta thought this is the will of the lord

"Inferior opinions"?

Jes, your train of thought wasn't derailed - it just didn't go anywhere.

Greetings!

From the little I know it seems that in some cases of child abduction that the child is brainwashed by the abductor, whether a stranger or even a parent, into believing that their family does not want them, does not love them, gave them away, etc. etc. etc. or are told horrible stories about their family from whom they have been taken.  The abducted then enters into a kind of dependency or relationship with the abductor.  Children are so impressionable and in these cases probably believe what they are told because it is an adult telling them that. This must make it extremely hard to enter back into one's family years later.

For someone to do something like this to a child, to think it is okay to take them away from their loved ones, perhaps brainwash them, abuse them, and possibly dispose of them when no longer needed or when threatened - there has to be some element of mental illness.  And, there is also probably some element of evilness also.

For all what this girl has been through, I hope at some time she is able to make a new life for herself and her children and experience healing and peace.

Hope, peace, joy, love ...

Mentally ill? As us country folks are apt to say, he probably "ain't wired up right". Is that a medical diagnosis? No. That I will leave to professionals. He will likely have one or more diagnosis. I don't use sicko for the mentally ill. His behaviour and actions were however certainly sick.

Evil? Morally objectionable, painful, harmful. malicious...? Yes.
From the devil/Satan? No.
I do not believe in a good entity forcing or controlling behaviour and I do not believe in a bad entity capable of same. I believe in freewill.

If the devil can be made responsible, then all are capable of being a Garrido. I do not buy that.

Miracle? I cannot go there. Crediting God with keeping her alive means I have to contemplate a God who was capable somehow. That, for me, means a God who allowed/permitted it in the first place biding time to do the "miracle". It is like football players thanking God for a win. It begs the question where God is when they lose. With the other team? If God was with Jaycee the day she went to a police station, was he with Garrido all those 18 years? Nope, not my theology.

That Garrido, who was an abuser, called his wife "retarded" simply means he was abusive in speech also and that his abuse extended to his wife.

I have met many good and intelligent people who stay with abusers, even those who abuse children (their own or others). If everytime someone abused a child the other party left with the child, we would not have the abuse that happens in homes. So, we know many, if not most, stay for some length of time and abuse.

I think there is plenty bad to see in the situation and some shreds of good. If we look we can find either or merely what we want.

I, personally, see nothing of heaven or hell, God or Satan.

I see, in all involved, the vast array of the faces of our own realm and humanity, even when it is repulsive to claim some as fellow human beings.

seeler,

As late as 1989, under U.S law, the mentally challenged were not only held accountable, they were executed in all but 2 states. The Supreme Court in 1989 said that it did not violate the 8th amendment (cruel and unusual punishment)as long as the judge instructed the jury on considering mitigating circumstances related to the impairment. That is, if the impairment was brought out at trial.

When the Supreme Court finally ruled that executing the mentally retarded DID violate the 8th Amendement, it applied to a number of states. Figures I had way back when said that 10-15% of men on death row were then diagnosable as mentally retarded.

I personally became involved in stopping the execution of the mentally retarded. Some were/are incapable of understanding their crime and some were/are incapable of understanding the punishment.

The case that brought me to my feet was Terry Washington. He was about to be executed in Texas. His initial attorney (who specialized in divorce) never mentioned his retardation. His mental retardation was not post crime. It had been documented when he entered school. He was always in Special Ed. He also was documented to have brain damage. Those who objected worked tirelessly. Our efforts and the efforts of his appeal attorney, Dina Hellerstein, could not get his life spared.

There were also cases like Ricky Ray Rector. He essentially had a lobotomy by a suicide attempt prior to arrest. Arkansas executed him in 1992. Then Gov. Clinton did not stay the execution. He left his last meal's pie on the plate "for later". Could he comprehend his punishment?

When the US Supreme Court ruled in 2002 (Atkins v. Virginia) that executing the mentally retarded was cruel and unusual punishment and commuted those mentally retarded on death row to life sentences, the numbers were about 300 confirmed  mentally retarded then held on death row. It was in large part thanks to the European Union making statements about how out of touch the US policy was.

So, the mentally retarded, the mentally ill, and the mentally diminished are held accountable.

In the case of many, they are read Miranda rights they do not understand. They sign confessions they cannot read. They do not understand the importance and miscarriage of justice when their lawyers fail to mention their mental status. In fact, for many they work, like Terry Washington, to impress how smart they are.

They have paid for crimes they committed and did not commit, often with their lives.

We have to remember sometimes that the way we wish the world was, the way we think things should be, is often not how it is.

RIP Terry

I'm confused Jes.

Are you really confused or just pretending to be ?

I wasn't going for the medical /legal/ technical /

I was going for the fact that she was a dumb b**** and should be held just as accountable because women like her love to play the victim when they get caught ...

No miracle at all.  I would have to completely agree with every thing that Gone-di has said in that respect. 

As for mental illness or evil?  I personally think that all evil, every thing that is evil or wrong or "sin" that is committed by someone is a "mental" limitation of some sort.  But to be clear, I don't claim that a mental limitation is evil, only that evil is a mental limitation. 

The main organizers of the Khmer Rouge were all accomplished graduates of the Sorbonne. 

Which only proves that you can only get a degree without getting an education !!!

No miracle here.   This is a tragic story and I agree the monster should be executed.  He is the embodiement of evil.

This is one of those times I wish I had tv, or a newspaper delivered.  I haven't been listening to the news lately and had not heard anything about this.

I think I will read up some.

Yeah, I just saw that.  Was reading stuff.  He ran his own church, his "family" the only members, and of course let them have a CD copy of the Bible, blood stains all over the compound that the victims lived in.  It is a pretty bizarre case for sure.  I guess he carried around a machine that he said let him hear people's evil thoughts.

I don't know what they will diagnose him with, but I am sure it will be something.

Why because she is a woman and therefore incapable ?

We are just as capable as any man ... we're just in denial until it happens

I don't believe in capital punishment.

Of course you're not it's not you're kid or you up there ...... having been raped and kidnapped ....

Rose colored glasses anyone ?

Jes has the right answer for every question. Just ask her...

I think the eye for an eye thing was more to keep people in check anyhow, in a society and time when people were able to extract vengenace.  This is also why they had the cities of refuge, a haven to gain justice.  The eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, wasn't so much, "you have to take an eye for an eye," but more, "you can only take an eye for an eye."  This of course still allows people to think a life for a life, but even in the OT law there had to be witnesses and such for this sort of a thing to happen.  You weren't supposed to kill someone just because they seemed the most likely to have done it.

For me though I don't like to close the door on the possiblity for change in people, or the possiblity that the system screwed up.  I like what Seeler said about the goal being preventative.  This guy has proven that we can't trust him, so he should be prevented from ever being given the opportunity again.  Capital punishment would surely prevent him, but as Stevie G pointed out, even California doesn't think he should get the death penalty unless he killed someone, eye for an eye, not eye for a tooth.

It's not hard at all to see why.  Christians opposed the idea of an empire built on the oppression of "enemies." They advocated instead a kingdom based on love, compassion and forgiveness  Christians also liked the idea of a more equitable distribution of wealth and shared amongst themselves as a community.  Christians also opposed such things as "exposing," i.e., the common practice of leaving newborns (most often female) to die if the family didn't want them.  None of these things were liked by the pagan Romans since it challended their idea of empire, social order and obedience.  It was dangerous at times to be a Christian.

Elanorgold, I just can't see Jesus pulling the switch. 

Elanorgold - I agree that he is probably not going to be found curable.  I think the success rate for even just a one time pedaphile is somewhere around 3%, to not reoffend.  Seeing how far this guy was into it, and beyond, I doubt he will fall in that 3%.

-For me it comes done to whether the people, through the government, think it is acceptable to pay for someone to live out a life sentence.  Perhaps someone else knows for sure, but I think I heard somewhere that it costs more to put someone on death row than to give them a life sentence, probably because of the appeal processes and everything.

-Then there is the issue of perhaps we have wrongly convicted someone.  We all know of various times that this has happened.  Do the people think it is an acceptable loss to accidentally kill a few people in order to not have someone serve a life sentence?

It's called an acceptable loss

Yes sometimes innocent people get caught up in things

But not the majority of people are not innocent ....

I'm sure Jebus would feel differently after having some orfices violated

That is a silly comparison

Who cares what he would do he is not here living our lives ....

There's a quotable line.