Chapter 1

A Family of Fugitives - Accountability

A True Story -

This is not the movie National Lampoon’s American Family Vacation starring Chevy Chase.

This is a tale of fraud, theft, drugs, and bad checks; a family of fugitives criming and drugging their way across America, State by State. And they were not going to Disneyland.

The trip began in Florida, where the mother, a felon needing to escape outstanding warrants for fraud, possession of a firearm, and parole violations, decided to travel west. Her husband went with her.

The woman’s daughter, who had her own felony warrant out of Florida for fraud and her 19-year-old brother, accompanied their parents on this incredible American journey westward.

On their trip west, they made one stop in Texas where a second daughter had a seven-year-old. This daughter was in such a drugged-up state; the criminal family caravan appeared to be a better and safer alternative than the daughter’s own drug-addled efforts to care for her little girl.

And so, the family of four became a family of five.

In Colorado, the family found a nook that seemed safe, and they set up shop. However, it was here that the father added to the family’s criminal history by catching multiple arrests for drug possession and driving under the influence. When he still could not follow the rules, he picked up a probation violation. The maternal criminal maître d’ was also arrested on her outstanding Florida warrant.

Also, their son found himself in jail after being caught and charged with drug possession. Only the daughter, wanted in Florida for fraud, eluded arrest in Colorado.

Following their slew of new arrests, after obtaining their release once more, the family’s lives became a calendar of court dates.

Their seven-year-old grandchild? She also had a scheduled day in court. However, her court hearing did not involve a criminal act she had committed. Her court hearing included the Colorado D.H.S. (Department of Human Services) after they became concerned that her living environment was not secure. Her D.H.S. hearing required her and her grandparents to appear in court to show proof she was safe while in their custody. Their arrests, drug usage, and lifestyle were flagged as risk factors, endangering the child’s life.

At this point, the family had a sit-down and decided Colorado was no longer the beautiful, welcoming paradise they had first envisioned. They concluded their best avenue of dealing with the multiple criminal cases against them, and the risk of losing their granddaughter was to pack their bags and head further west. Although their flight from Colorado would initiate more arrest warrants, they had little concern anyone would come after them.

Three of the four family members obtained their releases through various state-run Pretrial release programs. Florida released the daughter on her own special Pretrial release and the dad and son through Colorado’s Pretrial release. The family knew that once they crossed the state line, they would have no fears. No one would spend time or money trying to track them down. A state-run Pretrial service doesn’t work that way.

As for the Mother—the criminal maître d’—she had to use a bail bond agent to help her post her $20,000 bond for her Florida fugitive from justice charge. Now, if she failed to appear in court, the bail bond agent would have to locate her, arrest her, then return her to jail or lose $20,000. Of course, the mother did not care about what a bail agent might lose and did not believe the agent would send anyone after her.

A bail bond is a monetary amount pledged to a court by a defendant or another third party who promises the Defendant will appear in court when the court requires it. If the Defendant fails to appear in court, the court can demand payment of the bond amount. It is a system of accountability that has existed in some form since the days of the Roman Empire. If the Defendant goes to court, he or she never pays the bond. If the Defendant fails to appear in court, there is a risk of financial loss.

Government-run Pretrial Services programs screen those who have been arrested and offer to release them without a financial requirement. It is a system based on what one person believes, and another agrees to. One thinks the other will go to court, the other promises to go, and the criminal suspect is released.

The problem of using a government-run pre-trial system for freeing criminal suspects is that, when it becomes the lone operating principle for release, there is no accountability. Without accountability, the operation is nothing more than a hope that a criminal suspect who promises to appear in court will show.

Where commercial bail bond agents operate, there is accountability. Each time a bond is posted to free a criminal suspect, the bail bonding agent that posted the bond becomes accountable for the Defendant’s appearance in court.

If a defendant on a commercial bond fails to appear in court, it is the bail-bonding agent’s responsibility to locate, arrest, and return the criminal suspect to jail. If they fail to find and capture the Defendant, the agent is liable to pay to the court, the entire amount of the bond posted. It is a means of accountability assuring a court that the Defendant will appear, or that someone will be held responsible for the Defendant’s non-appearance.

The three adult fugitives facing charges in Colorado decided that if they were not going to appear in court on their criminal cases, then there was really no need to appear in court for their granddaughter’s custody hearings, either. Taking hold of the little girl’s hand, they embarked on her first run from Justice.

However, before they fled Colorado, the criminal family’s maître d’ and her husband stole blank company checks and a company credit card from their employer. While making their escape, traveling Northwest from Colorado to Idaho, then Oregon, they used an app on their phone and electronically cashed these checks through a company in Florida. Their scam netted them $3,000. Flush in cash, they had enough money to find a safe house and resettle under new aliases.

That was about the time the bail bonding agent who had posted the $20,000 bond for the female ringleader, contracted with a fugitive recovery agent. The recovery agent was asked to find the fugitive, who had failed to appear in court. If he did not locate her, the bail bond agent would be required to pay the $20,000 bond to the court.

While tracking this Grandmother of Crime, the fugitive recovery agent received information that her daughter was still in Colorado in the Buena Vista area. The agent attempted to make contact, but the daughter had no interest in that contact, and after several weeks of remaining out of sight, she and her boyfriend also fled Colorado for the Northwest.

A family of fugitives, On the Run in America.

This family was a crime-wise, streetwise group. They had been in the system for many years and would not be easy to track. It took two months of street-time investigations and many hours by the fugitive recovery agent’s researcher to get a line on where this family may have settled.

On their way to the Northwest, this family attempted to use a credit card belonging to their previous employer. The credit card was rejected, but the attempted use was a directional signal. The fugitives had had better fortune with the stolen checks, and their Colorado employer lost thousands. Still, the employer was hesitant to file charges.

A dilemma for investigators tracking fugitives in America are the misguided individuals who believe covering for those on the run is a good and right course of action. Families will not supply information. Friends won’t speak out. Even, it seems, some states protect fugitives. These criminal suspects, who are arrested for a crime and released from jail on their promise to appear in court, often do not feel like keeping that promise. Instead of showing up for their court date, they show up in a new state under the care of everyone who aided their run.

The people, whether family members, friends, and even the states that prevent their capture and return to face justice, aid and abet these fugitives on their run, allowing them the freedom to prey on others and commit new crimes, criming their way from State to State.

While on the run, criminal suspects have a high propensity for committing additional crimes, putting innocent people in danger, and creating new victims. Many fugitives operate freely, having no fear they will ever be arrested on their old warrants and returned to the State that issued it. Unless they obtain their freedom by posting a commercial bail bond, they know no one is looking for them.

These individuals—jailed for an array of crimes from D.U.I.’s and domestic violence to drugs, thefts, and robberies—who gain their freedom via a state-run Pretrial release, have already been schooled on the premise that crossing the state line is their ticket to freedom.

With commercial bail, each bail-bonding agent is accountable to the court that holds the bond. Because they are responsible, they will actively pursue these fugitives, or they will contract with professional fugitive recovery agents to do the same. A bail bondsman does not allow a state line to stop them from pursuing a fugitive.

When operating as the sole principle of release from jail, government-run Pretrial Programs are considered by many as no more than Crime-for-Free Programs. Pretrial Service’s operational blueprint gave it its nickname: Crime For Free. Government-run Pretrial Release programs release prisoners without any accountability or responsibility to guarantee a defendant’s court appearance. Pretrial agents have no obligation to assure anyone that the Defendant will appear in court. If the Defendant fails to appear in court, Pretrial is not responsible for locating, arresting, or returning these defendants to the jail. It is a Crime-for-Free bond. You commit the crime, get arrested, and we’ll free you.

For those individuals who break their promise to appear in court and thereby avoid prosecution, simply crossing one or two state boundaries often assures them of freedom, untouched by the arms of the law.

Many times, the State the runner flees from will not pursue their fugitive once they have escaped their jurisdiction. The land the fugitive chooses to make their new home has no legal authority to enforce the laws of other states if no extraditable warrant is issued.

Each State has what is called an extraditable schedule. This schedule outlines the crimes that will qualify a fugitive for an extraditable warrant. The list of crimes earning these warrants varies based on each State’s financial position and interests. By assessing the costs and interest level for prosecution, the State creates an extraditable tier system that allows many fugitives to go on the run without any fear of extradition, even when caught. This schedule enables a prosecutor's office to pursue those who they consider the most severe and dangerous offenders without going broke.

The problem with attempting to determine which criminals are dangerous, and which are not, is often no more than a guessing game. The purpose of commercial bail is to allow for the protection of the justice system by giving the bail-bonding agent an incentive to ensure that the arrestee appears in court between hearings, after their release from jail on a bond. This incentive assures the bail-bonding agent will act in the best interest of the justice system by being accountable to the justice system they serve.

What needs to be clear at this point is that a court has the power to issue an extraditable warrant in any case if a defendant fails to appear in court. A judge can order an extraditable warrant for either a misdemeanor or a felony. However, if issued, it will often be left up to the local sheriff’s department to enter the extraditable warrant into the national crime computer. There are a few Colorado sheriffs who refuse to place a fugitive’s name into the national database if the crime and the extradition are of no interest to them.

When an extraditable warrant is issued and entered into the national crime database, and the fugitive caught, the district attorney’s office will decide on whether to pursue the return of the individual wanted. If the district attorney involved is not interested in the extradition, the fugitive is never returned and is released and free to start again.

Why does law enforcement refuse to extradite criminals on misdemeanor and lower-class felonies once these same suspects leave the State?

1. Money: The cost of extradition is not cheap. The process can be long and cumbersome, requiring time and commitment that is needed elsewhere. Extraditing every criminal that flees would bankrupt the State.

2. A district attorney does not wish to bother with the fugitive. The fugitive is out of the State. Good riddance. Let them bother someone else. Let the new state deal with the results and acts of this fugitive now living among their citizenry.

3. As in a few Colorado cases, and across the country, there are county sheriffs who do not care about the fugitive’s return. There are times when a sheriff may choose not to enter select fugitive information into the national crime database, even when the court orders an extraditable warrant.

Arresting a fugitive and returning them to face Justice ensures that Justice and gives life to the hope of Justice for the victim as well. The fugitive’s return strengthens the criminal justice system by securing the continuation of that system.

A fugitive’s removal from the streets also often prevents a new victim and a new crime. While on the run, most suspects continue engaging in criminal acts. Having escaped the consequences of their actions by leaving the State that issued their warrant, they have no reason to change; what has worked for them in the past will serve them well in the future.

It is unfortunate that in many cases, when a fugitive is on the run, a victim is