by Robert Scott
About Phil’s family history, the report noted: He reports considerable emotional conflict with his parents during his formative years. He graduated from Lincoln Union High School in 1969. (It was actually Liberty Union High School.) Thereafter he worked on and off as a musician and began using drugs immediately. He was married in 1973, and his wife currently works as a dealer in a local casino.
Phil brought up his religious beliefs in what Dr. Gerow called “recent increasing religiosity.” Gerow noted that there were several references to God and Jesus. Phil stated that he had become more religious in recent weeks, and Gerow wrote that Phil’s verbal productions were not delusional in quality: He based his new religious interests more appropriately on the considerable guilt and fear he was experiencing since being incarcerated. He believes strongly that LSD increases his sexual powers. He was preoccupied with the idea of sex and admitted to a history of several sexual disorders. He looked and acted depressed. He would occasionally cry during the interview.
Phil denied any suicidal tendencies, and the report stated that he was “oriented” in all three spheres. His memory for immediate, recent, and remote events was at times spotty, but there was nothing specific to make one suspect the presence of a chronic organic brain syndrome. Phil did complain of hallucinations at times, but Gerow noted that was common for someone who had used a lot of LSD. Then Gerow noted, His judgment was very poor. His insight minimal. His intelligence appeared to be average.
Dr. Gerow’s diagnosis fell into two categories. In one, Gerow stated that Phil showed the symptoms of a mixed sexual deviation and chronic drug abuse. The latter might have made the former worse. Gerow related that a man with satyriasis, such as Phil experienced, often thought about sex constantly and masturbated frequently. Phil seemed to fall into this category. Someone with satyriasis could have organic dysfunctions in the temporal lobe or cerebral syphilis, and Gerow recommended that neurological testing be performed on Phillip Garrido.
As far as Phil’s ability to help his attorney in his defense and understand what was going on in court, Dr. Gerow stated that Phil was competent to do those things. Gerow added one more thing: It is also my opinion that at the time of the crime, the defendant as a result of mental illness or defect did not have substantial capacity either to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law. If indeed, Phil Garrido did not understand what he was doing was wrong at the time of the crime, then he had not formed intent to commit a crime.
With that report in mind, a federal district judge ordered on December 28, 1976: The United States Marshall is directed to take the defendant, Phillip Craig Garrido, from the Washoe County Jail to Dr. Peterman’s office at the above address for purposes of said examination (an EEG and a neurological consultation). Dr. Peterman is directed to make a written report of his findings and to furnish copies of the same on or before January 13, 1976.
In a self-report about himself just before the exam, Phil stated that he had attended high school and got mostly B’s and C’s, with an occasional D, on his report cards. Phil also noted that in the early 1970s he had taken up to five “hits” of LSD in one day. Despite taking LSD prior to the rape of Katie Callaway, Phil related that he could remember the events quite well.
After Dr. Albert Peterman ran his tests, he stated that there was no history of head injuries, skull fracture, or concussion. Just why Phil did not bring up his motorcycle accident or head trauma that he incurred, along with surgery at an Antioch hospital, is unknown. (And it would lead some detectives in the future to wonder if this accident ever took place at all. The only people to mention it would be Phil and his father, Manuel.)
Dr. Peterman also noted that there was no history of convulsive disorders or history of epilepsy in the family. Phil did suffer from migraine headaches, but he was able to counteract that by not eating certain foods to which he was allergic. A month previously, Phil had a cyst removed from his scalp, which had now healed.
Dr. Albert Peterman wrote that an EEG performed in his office that day on Phil Garrido was entirely normal: The examination reveals a quite apprehensive, somewhat withdrawn, thin, young man who is alert, well-oriented and cooperative. He did burst into tears on one occasion when I asked him to do some calculations to test organic brain function, but otherwise was reasonably well composed.
Dr. Peterman related that Phil could do serial sevens and retain five digits in forward and reverse order. The cranial nerve function was intact; pupils and eye-grounds were normal; visual fields were full to confrontation. There was no carotid bruit; muscle strength and stretch reflexes were fine; there also was no particular tremor or movement disorder.
Dr. Peterman added, He states that he is looking forward to going to court, has found religion and feels that his life will change for the better. I see no evidence either by history, examination or EEG of brain damage per se, although there is considerable evidence of anxiety and depression and personality disorder as noted by Dr. Gerow.
Just before trial, Phil Garrido’s attorney, Willard Van Hazel, wanted the judge to issue special instructions to the jurors. These included: If the evidence in the case leaves you with a reasonable doubt as to whether the defendant was sane at the time of the alleged offense, you will find him not guilty even though it may appear that he was sane at earlier and later times. This was in essence a “temporary insanity” ruling. Van Hazel noted, The law does not hold a person criminally accountable for his conduct while insane since an insane person is not capable of forming the intent essential to the commission of a crime.
Van Hazel added one more important issue on the motion. That jurors were not to take into account that Katie Callaway had been raped. Van Hazel stated that issue was a Nevada case and not part of the federal case. A judge looked at this motion, and then wrote upon it, Offered and rejected.
CHAPTER 10
A FEDERAL CASE
At Phil Garrido’s federal trial, both the prosecution and defense examined witnesses in a fairly straightforward path that had been laid down in previous police reports and interviews. It was on cross-examination and redirect that new and different avenues were explored. This began right away when Phil’s attorney, Willard Van Hazel, asked questions of Katie Callaway after her direct testimony was finished.
Van Hazel wanted to know, “Did the defendant ever threaten you with a weapon or display a weapon?”
Katie replied, “No. But he said that he would not hurt me unless I attempted to get him caught, or whatever. He said he would just bash my head so as to knock me out. The only weapon, and it probably couldn’t even be considered a weapon, but I was considering it at the time, was a pair of scissors.”
Van Hazel asked if the scissors had been used in California or in the car ride. She said, “I didn’t see them until I was inside of where he had me. Then he cut off my pubic hair with them.”
“Did he ever simulate a weapon? Like someone in a bank robbery saying, ‘I’ve got a gun here, give me your money.’”
“No, but he was six foot four. He didn’t really have to do a whole lot. I’m five foot five and weigh one hundred five pounds.”
Van Hazel also asked about the circumstances when Phil had first contacted her. Katie recalled, “He was dressed very nicely. He had on a denim jacket and denim matching pants. It looked like he had his hair pulled back, very neat. He had on a brown sweater. I may have seen him in the store. I was walking in the back of the store to gather items real fast, because I was late for my boyfriend’s, and it seemed like I glanced down an aisle and saw him, full face, standing there for just a second.”
In an era when rape victims could still be castigated for their attire, Van Hazel asked, “Was your jacket zipped while you were in the store?”
“I don’t remember.”
“Were you wearing a brassiere that night?”
“No.”
“When he got in the car, did he make any suggestive moves or suggestive conversation? By
that, I mean of a sexual overtone.”
“No, none whatsoever.”
Van Hazel wanted to know what conversation had taken place as they drove along toward an area where Phil said that he had friends. Katie replied, “I talked maybe sideways, and probably seemed very cold to him, because I just don’t talk to strangers. I am a twenty-one dealer, and I see millions of people a day. I just don’t engage in conversation with strangers.”
Asked about the conversation of when he had first handcuffed her, Katie responded, “He asked me, ‘Are you expected anywhere?’ And I said, ‘Well, I’m expected at my boyfriend’s for dinner. I have to get to work at nine A.M.’ And he said, ‘Well, if you are real good, I will try and have you back by dawn.’”
Van Hazel asked about when she was first attacked in the car, “Did you sound your horn?”
“No.”
“Or scream?”
“No.”
“Did he have his hand over your mouth at the time he first grabbed you?”
“No. At first I thought he was going to try and grab me and kiss me. But then one hand went for the keys and one hand went for my neck. He turned the car off. I kept trying to push my head up, because I didn’t understand what was going on. I thought he was kidding. It happened so fast. I had never been assaulted before, or attacked, or anything. I was waiting at any second for a weapon to be brought out. I didn’t make any fast defensive moves because of that. I was just taken by surprise by the whole situation.”
Van Hazel asked, “Now, I take it that you were in fear at this time and you were acting in such a way not to antagonize him. Is that correct?”
Katie said, “I was completely passive. I was trying to deal with the whole situation as logically as I could without allowing terror to take over. The fact of being bound, my hands handcuffed, my head strapped down to my knees and being at the complete mercy of someone. I had no idea what he was going to do with me or what was going on in his mind at the time.”
“Now, I believe you stated at one point he said if you tried to do something—if you tried to do anything, that he would use a certain amount of force to overcome you. Did he say he would kill you?”
“He said he would knock me in the head and knock me out.”
“Did he ever say to you, ‘I will not kill you. I will just use whatever force I need to’?”
“That is true. He said, ‘I am not going to hurt you unless you try—for my own protection, I will hurt you.’”
“Did you ever suggest to him that if he had sex on his mind, that perhaps you could get the whole thing over right then and there?”
“Yes, I did.”
“And what did he say?”
“He said, ‘You might as well get that out of your mind. You are going with me. You have got no choice, I have got it all planned. I am just not going to let you go now, so might as well not ask again.’”
“Did he say he would bring you back to the Tahoe area when he was done?”
“I asked him if he was going to give me gas money so I could get back. He said, ‘Don’t worry, don’t worry.’ That’s all he would say.”
“Now, when the defendant talked about a sexual fantasy or that he couldn’t help himself, and although he had a nice wife, this was just something he had to do. Where did that conversation occur? In California, or Nevada, or aren’t you sure?”
“It must have been in Nevada. He told me I had a long ride ahead of me and I tried to engage him in conversation. You know, try and figure out what kind of person abducted me and what state of mind he was in. Like I said, how to best deal with it. And I tried to talk to him more of on a peer-type basis. The same age group, type of person, you know, talk to him as a friend. And I asked him what aspect got him off doing this to young ladies. And he said that it was just fantasies that he had to live out. He said he couldn’t help himself almost, but he had to do it. He said that he had a completely happy life with his wife. They had a very happy sexual life and he was completely satisfied there. But he had to do this, and his wife knew and understood.” (That was Phil’s take on it. Christine most likely did not know, and would have been appalled if she found out.)
“Did he mention what his wife did for a living?”
“He said she was a (blackjack) dealer. I asked him why he told me that if he didn’t want to do anything about, you know, knowing him. He also told me his name was Bill, and then he slipped up later on and he said, ‘My wife said ‘Phil’ the other day,’ but I continued to call him Bill, so he wouldn’t have any idea and think I knew his real name. And when I mentioned that I was a twenty-one dealer, he kind of chuckled and said that his wife was a twenty-one dealer also. And I said, ‘Oh, then you are from Reno?’ And he responded, ‘Well, just because I told you that, she could be from Las Vegas or anywhere, you know. It doesn’t mean we are from this area.’ He said he wasn’t from the area. He was just up here doing a few things. No one even knew his real identity, where he was right now. He could be gone in a week, anyway, so it really didn’t matter. He indicated to me that he was a complete transient in the area.”
Van Hazel asked, “Did you say anything in response, of when he talked about his sex fantasy? Did you say anything about fantasies or anything like that?”
“I completely went along with everything. I said, ‘Oh, yes. Oh, I like that, too.’ You know, I tried to completely stay on good terms with him. Like, ‘I’m all for what you’re doing.’”
“In that conversation, did you say you often wondered what it would be like to be raped, or something like that?”
“Oh, yes. I said, ‘If everything you are telling me is true, that you are not going to hurt me, that all you want to do is give me pleasure and just make me feel good, even though you’ve abducted me, under force, then I guess it is not going to be so bad.’”
“Coming down that hill (into Carson City), did he talk about anything other than his sex fantasy? Did he refer to religion, for instance?”
“Yes. He talked about Jesus. He said he was going to turn himself over to Jesus next year.”
“Now, going through the evening, did he say any other things that were revealing as to who he might be or what he did?”
“I don’t know if he indicated then if he was a musician or not, but he kept saying, ‘Someday I’m going to let you know who I am. Someday I just might come back and tell you who I am.’ As if I thought he was somebody famous or something.”
Asked about the band she heard at the warehouse complex, Katie replied, “There was a loud, loud band. He said it was a band practicing. At one time when we left to go get the tire iron, we came back and I asked something about the band. And he said, ‘Oh, did you think that is the same band? Didn’t you recognize the other band we heard the first time we were here?’ It was like he was trying to confuse me.”
Asked if she thought Phil had put in a tape to simulate a live band playing, Katie answered, “It was playing when we drove up. Which means he didn’t have time to go turn on anything. And I thought maybe they were his friends. His band members. And I thought if I tried to run, all of those people were his friends.”
Van Hazel wanted to know if Phil had drugs there, and Katie replied, “I had sarcastically said on the way there, ‘Gee, I wish I had a joint right now,’ meaning to relax my nerves. And he said, ‘Oh, well. I’ve got some stuff back at the shed that will blow your head away.’ When we got there, he had some hash in a glass vial and he had some marijuana in a small Baggie. Paraphernalia, a roach clip, a pipe, things like that.”
Asked if she used any dope that Phil had, Katie replied that she had. “I tried some hashish. It was very strong. It intensified all my paranoid feelings extremely, and I didn’t smoke any more. I just wanted to be fully competent and fully alert, because of the situation I was in. It intensified everything. He had also asked me to drink some cheap wine. And he kept insisting I take a few drinks because I was shaking so terribly. I drank not even half a glass of the wine.”
Van Haz
el wanted to know if Phil had anything to drink. Katie responded, “Yes, he got almost to the point of intoxication. He got giggly and kept saying, ‘Oh, I hardly ever drink. I’m really loaded from the wine.’”
Wanting to know how Katie reacted when Officer Conrad let Phil back in the shed with her to put on some clothes, Katie said, “I don’t know why he sent him back in. The abductor scared me so bad, I didn’t even get my clothes on. He could have done anything to me at that time. His life was in jeopardy and he knew he was caught. And at one point, the abductor said he was going to fight me in court, and I would never win.”
Van Hazel asked why at first she had not told Officer Conrad that she had been raped and wanted to press charges. In fact, initially Katie had mentioned that she just wanted to go home. To this, Katie said, “I was very confused. I was very frightened. I was almost in a state of unbelief of the whole situation because of the officer’s reaction and because of Mr. Garrido’s reaction when I first cried for help. You know, there was no immediate response, and no immediate reaction. Mr. Garrido was looking at me very sorrowfully and pitifully. And I was just answering the officer questioning me with yes and no answers. As far as, ‘Is this your car? Did he drive it?’ And it was all going back and forth and getting nowhere. I just wanted to get out of there. My nerves were shot. It had been a long ordeal. A horrible ordeal. I wanted to get away from there, from that person. At that point, I was almost at the snapping point. I was almost at the point of thinking of picking up the scissors and trying to kill him. It was a very traumatic thing. At that point, I couldn’t take it any longer.”
These words rushed out of Katie’s mouth so quickly, Judge Thompson told her, “Just wait until you get a question.”
Asked how Phil’s demeanor had changed over time, Katie replied, “In the car, he seemed very nervous, very uptight. Later in the warehouse, he was a lot calmer. He would get very distant looks, like he was just spaced out. And I had no faith that he was going to take me back home, like he said he would.”
