Tag Archives: effective intervention in a stalking case

Is there something very wrong in #Garfield County, or is it just me?

Posted on by
garfieldcountyLong ago, right after the blog of Morgan’s stalking was just getting going I was contacted by a local author writing a piece about the great disparity between suicides, and homicides in Garfield County.  What was shared with me was fascinating, and troubling all at the same time.  But back then we were being told by Garfield County that Morgan’s death was from natural causes, while at the same time Morgan’s doctor believed her death was a homicide, and another forensic pathologist was telling me she did not die from natural causes, it was a suspicious death and should have been listed at the very least as undetermined until a full investigation had been done.  Along with all of this I was being threatened by the contracted forensic pathologist for Garfield County.  He said that Morgan’s manner of death could be revisited, and could possibly be changed from natural causes to an accidental overdose or suicide if I didn’t back off…I believe the grief, shock and stress I was feeling at the time was paralyzing me in so many ways, and I heard what I was being told by all these different parties, but at the same time my mind couldn’t properly grasp it all.  Writing on this blog about the things that happened to Morgan during her stalking helped keep me going, but looking back on it now I only thought I was pushing hard, truth be told I was only a fraction of myself.  Oh the things you learn as you come out of your grief bubble…
 I  honestly do not think Morgan’s case is the only one like this in Garfield County.  I have talked to other families and friends of missing, and dead loved ones, and I hear the same run-around that we received given to others, along with all the same non answers that we got.  These other families speak of the same unanswered phone calls, emails and letters.  They speak of evidence that the Sheriffs department or Coroner’s office had that has now gone “missing” or was “accidentally destroyed”, I even received a call from a mom that had spent her whole retirement account hiring a ballistic expert, private investigator, etc. and had solid evidence that her son did not shoot himself, but was shot with a completely different gun then the gun the police took into evidence (the gun that had been collected from the scene had never been shot and it was a different caliber than the gun that shot the bullet into her son’s body), and they still would not open that case or change his manner of death from suicide.  
In an article written by John Colson for the Post Independent newspaper about Morgan’s manner of death being changed from natural causes to suicide (and yes, this was after I was threatened by the pathologist to back off in trying to facilitate other doctors, and experts into explaining to him how his first conclusion was incorrect, that Morgan did not die from natural causes, and yes again, the Sheriff and Coroner had been notified about the threats, but would never respond) on August 31, 2012 Garfield County Sheriff Lou Vallario is quoted as saying that he would stick by the contracted forensic pathologist Dr. Kurtzman’s conclusion of suicide.  Sheriff Vallario wrote in an email to the reporter, “The results of the autopsy and pathology reports were that the manner of death was suicide.”  The sheriffs knew that her death was considered a suspicious death because of her stalking (that is why an autopsy was done, that was why crime scene tape was put up all around our house and we were asked to leave the scene), but they decided on the exact morning her body was found that it had nothing to do with her stalking.  Then right after the Post Independent article came out, Jeff Todd a reporter for CBS in Denver filmed Sheriff Lou Vallario right in the front of the courthouse in Glenwood Springs, CO stating that he would never open Morgan’s case.  Never?  I thought if evidence is brought forward in a capital crime that there is no statue of limitations, and a case can be opened at any time?  Am I mistaken here, or was Morgan’s case, like so many other suspicious cases in Garfield County closed, shut down, and buried for some sinister reason?  I really need to know the answer to that question – I feel that I deserve an answer to that question, wouldn’t you?  Please look at the following report from Garfield County and tell me what you think.  Is it just me or does something look wrong with these numbers?
 garco.suicide.homicide
garco.suicide.homicide2
Maybe it is just me, but when I look at this stat sheet for Garfield County it suggests to me a story about a county that does not want any murders on its books…natural causes, accidental, or suicide those are all okay, along with run aways, but not foul play, murder, kidnapping, or rape…they don’t want any of those on their stats. As you can see on the Garfield County stats that listed results of Colorado Death Dataset Query for suicides, and homicides- I have circled the 5 years ending in 2011 (the year Morgan was murdered) it shows 53 deaths (due to suicide or homicide), 50 were determined to be suicide and the other 3 are not listed under homicide, so they are either not accounted for, or undetermined…in my opinion this is why Garfield County has been said to have one of the highest suicide rates in the country, but I don’t believe they are all suicides, I think they have listed other types of deaths like Morgan’s as suicides that were really not suicides.  Anything to not have a homicide on their stats.  This type of protocol only causes to re-victimize the already traumatized families.  Not only re-victimizing families, but allowing a murder to never be investigated would seem to me to be dangerous to others in the community, unless of course Garfield County feels confident that a murderer will never murder again.  How confident do you feel about that?
Does anyone know when this type of thing started?  When did Garfield County start to go down this slippery road?  Is there any turning back?  I have to hope they can turn this all around, and start to uphold the law, protect their citizens, make the truth their number one priority.  It may take the citizens of the county to join their voices in protest and show the elected officials what they expect, and in an election year such as this one, it seems like a good time to make your vote count.  Speak out – write in to the local newspaper (like the Aspen Times, or the Post Independent).  Take a stand, make your voice heard.  No one wants this to ever happen to their family, so please make sure it can never happen to another family in Garfield County, or anywhere else.  Change is needed and change will come – hopefully sooner rather than later.  Thank you so much – each and every one of you have the power to move mountains!

“Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” 

 

Yesterday – it’s been 2 years & 6 months since we found Morgan’s body

Posted on by

Yesterday…  I could not for the life of me figure out why my whole body was vibrating.  I was in such an emotional state of frustration and could not shake it.  This morning when I woke up and looked at the calendar I realized that as of yesterday it has now been 2 years and 6 months since we found Morgan’s body – I can not believe it has been this long and an investigation into her death has never happened…I am outraged!

COLORADO – TAKE A STAND TO END VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN

Map_of_CO.svg

I can not understand why Garfield County does not care about violence against women.  In March 2013 President Obama signed the revitalized Violence Against Women Act  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/07/obama-violence-against-women-act_n_2830158.html 

Under the leadership of then-Senator Joe Biden, Congress recognized the severity of violence against women and our need for a national strategy with the enactment of the Violence Against Women Act in 1994. This landmark federal legislation’s comprehensive approach to violence against women combined tough new provisions to hold offenders accountable with programs to provide services for the victims of such violence.  Read the Act at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/vawa_factsheet.pdf

In the Act it is proudly points out that all states have passed laws making stalking a crime.  In the state of Colorado (the state that Morgan was born in, the state that she grew up in, and the state that she was killed in) the following stalking law is in place:

Colorado’s legislative declaration states:

C.R.S. 18-3-601. [Formerly 18-9-111 (4) (a)] Legislative declaration. (2010)
(1)  The general assembly hereby finds and declares that:

 (a)  Stalking is a serious problem in this state and nationwide;

(b)  Although stalking often involves persons who have had an intimate relationship with one another, it can also involve persons who have little or no past relationship;

(c)  A stalker will often maintain strong, unshakable, and irrational emotional feelings for his or her victim, and may likewise believe that the victim either returns these feelings of affection or will do so if the stalker is persistent enough. Further, the stalker often maintains this belief, despite a trivial or nonexistent basis for it and despite rejection, lack of reciprocation, efforts to restrict or avoid the stalker, and other facts that conflict with this belief.

(d)  A stalker may also develop jealousy and animosity for persons who are in relationships with the victim, including family members, employers and co-workers, and friends, perceiving them as obstacles or as threats to the stalker’s own “relationship” with the victim;

(e)  Because stalking involves highly inappropriate intensity, persistence, and possessiveness, it entails great unpredictability and creates great stress and fear for the victim;

(f)  Stalking involves severe intrusions on the victim’s personal privacy and autonomy, with an immediate and long-lasting impact on quality of life as well as risks to security and safety of the victim and persons close to the victim, even in the absence of express threats of physical harm.

(2)  The general assembly hereby recognizes the seriousness posed by stalking and adopts the provisions of this part 6 with the goal of encouraging and authorizing effective intervention before stalking can escalate into behavior that has even more serious consequences.

And then:

C.R.S. 18-3-602.  Stalking – penalty – definitions – Vonnie’s Law. (2012)

(1) A person commits stalking if directly, or indirectly, through another person, the person knowingly:

(a) Makes a credible threat to another person and, in connection with the threat, repeatedly follows, approaches, contacts, or places under surveillance that person, a member of that person’s immediate family, or someone with whom that person has or has had a continuing relationship; or

 

(b) Makes a credible threat to another person and, in connection with the threat, repeatedly makes any form of communication with that person, a member of that person’s immediate family, or someone with whom that person has or has had a continuing relationship, regardless of whether a conversation ensues; or

 

(c) Repeatedly follows, approaches, contacts, places under surveillance, or makes any form of communication with another person, a member of that person’s immediate family, or someone with whom that person has or has had a continuing relationship in a manner that would cause a reasonable person to suffer serious emotional distress and does cause that person, a member of that person’s immediate family, or someone with whom that person has or has had a continuing relationship to suffer serious emotional distress. For purposes of this paragraph (c), a victim need not show that he or she received professional treatment or counseling to show that he or she suffered serious emotional distress.

(2) For the purposes of this part 6:

(a) Conduct “in connection with” a credible threat means acts that further, advance, promote, or have a continuity of purpose, and may occur before, during, or after the credible threat.

 

(b) “Credible threat” means a threat, physical action, or repeated conduct that would cause a reasonable person to be in fear for the person’s safety or the safety of his or her immediate family or of someone with whom the person has or has had a continuing relationship. The threat need not be directly expressed if the totality of the conduct would cause a reasonable person such fear.

 

(c) “Immediate family” includes the person’s spouse and the person’s parent, grandparent, sibling, or child.

 

(d) “Repeated” or “repeatedly” means on more than one occasion.

(3) A person who commits stalking:

(a) Commits a class 5 felony for a first offense except as otherwise provided in subsection (5) of this section; or

 

(b) Commits a class 4 felony for a second or subsequent offense, if the offense occurs within seven years after the date of a prior offense for which the person was convicted.

(4) Stalking is an extraordinary risk crime that is subject to the modified presumptive sentencing range specified in section 18-1.3-401 (10).

(5) If, at the time of the offense, there was a temporary or permanent protection order, injunction, or condition of bond, probation, or parole or any other court order in effect against the person, prohibiting the behavior described in this section, the person commits a class 4 felony.

(6) Nothing in this section shall be construed to alter or diminish the inherent authority of the court to enforce its orders through civil or criminal contempt proceedings; however, before a criminal contempt proceeding is heard before the court, notice of the proceedings shall be provided to the district attorney for the judicial district of the court where the proceedings are to be heard and the district attorney for the judicial district in which the alleged act of criminal contempt occurred. The district attorney for either district shall be allowed to appear and argue for the imposition of contempt sanctions.

(7) A peace officer shall have a duty to respond as soon as reasonably possible to a report of stalking and to cooperate with the alleged victim in investigating the report.

(8)

(a) When a person is arrested for an alleged violation of this section, the fixing of bail for the crime of stalking shall be done in accordance with section 16-4-103 (2) (d), C.R.S., and a protection order shall issue in accordance with section 18-1-1001(5).

(b) This subsection (8) shall be known and may be cited as “Vonnie’s law.”

(9) When a violation under this section is committed in connection with a violation of a court order, including but not limited to any protection order or any order that sets forth the conditions of a bond, any sentences imposed pursuant to this section and pursuant to section 18-6-803.5, or any sentence imposed in a contempt proceeding for violation of the court order shall be served consecutively and not concurrently.

So where was the effective intervention before Morgan’s death?  Only 3 days before we found her dead body the felony stalking detective (Detective Robert Glassmire) who was assigned to her case told me that he felt like the stalker was going to escalate – his words not mine.  So where was the intervention?  How did he know the stalker was going to escalate?  And why did he tell us the morning we found her body that her death had nothing to do with the stalker?  This is before her body was taken away for an autopsy.  He said her death was a “mystery” at that time.  A mystery?  If it was a “mystery” then why not do an actual investigation, collect evidence, interview our next door neighbor that had information and waited for a call that never came, a Pitkin County Sheriff’s wife that had information, all Morgan’s close friends, her teachers, fellow students, employer, as well as us, her mom and dad.  Why didn’t they ask the really important questions?  More correctly, why didn’t they ask any questions at all.  Why was was Morgan, an innocent women being stalked, completely ignored, while her stalker was given a free pass?

Also, where are all the Sheriff’s reports for ALL the incidents of stalking that Morgan, as well as Steve and I told them about?  The detective met with Morgan once a week to get all updates and this was in addition to the daily calls we were making to dispatch.  In Morgan’s case were they really responding, and investigating the reports?  If that ever happened where are the reports?  I’ll tell you there are not any.  It felt like it was more like the felony stalking detective was trying to convince us that the car with the suspect in it that Morgan reported to him wasn’t really the suspect or his car, and the truck that Steve and I saw surveilling our house over 3 times, and we wrote down the license plate number and gave it to the detective, along with an exact description of the vehicle, he told us it had not really been there, plus more and more incidents that the Sheriff’s office refused to investigate and went as far as to make up excuses for.  Is this what they call investigating a report or cooperating with the witness?

To treat a stalking victim/murder victim in this manner is not only disgusting, but needs to end…2 years and 6 months later this is now only the start.  Morgan will get justice and Steve and I will never give up!