Henderson arrested in St. Louis, MO: No cover for DAPO in Dontaye Henderson’s field file

Jan 6th, 2011 | By | Category: Gold Star Parolee, Parole, Sex Offenders, Spotlight

XREF: San Diego 290 parolee sought in wife’s murder

Dontaye Henderson, The latest in a growing cadre of DAPO albatrosses.

New Year’s Day homicide suspect arrested

ST. LOUIS, MO. — At 11:15 a.m. Jan. 4, murder suspect Dontaye Henderson was arrested by the St. Louis Police Department’s Violent Offender Unit at the Greyhound bus terminal in St. Louis, Mo. Henderson was arrested without incident and he is being held pending extradition to Oceanside. Henderson was in possession of a handgun at the time of his arrest.

Henderson was being tracked by Oceanside Police Department detectives as he traveled on a Greyhound bus en route to St. Louis. Local police worked with St. Louis authorities to coordinate the safe arrest of Henderson as he changed buses at the terminal.

Henderson is being held on a warrant for his arrest that was issued for kidnapping and murder. The kidnapping charge was added when Henderson allegedly forced Consuelo Ramirez to drive him out of the county. Ramirez is the person who was seen driving with Henderson while police were searching for him on the day of the murder..(Full text at The Coast News)

Following Monday’s post excoriating DAPO over this case, Paco was roundly criticized for “throwing the parole agent under the bus” and damning DORC/DAPO without having the “inside facts.”   To clarify my position, parole agents do not make decisions–Agents make recommendations to the Unit Supervisor, a manager.  Therefore, any criticism is implicitly leveled at the managers who call the shots.  Buttressing this was the explicit identification of “Region IV” as a culpable party in Mrs. Henderson’s murder.  Thus, the notion Paco has accused the AOR of anything improper is wholly lacking.

In response to the well-intentioned yet ill-founded defense of DAPO proper, attached is a digest of the pertinent information contained in the offender’s field file.

In reviewing this outline, take note:

  1. Even though Henderson lured his estranged wife to the crime scene using an intricate ruse and raped her at knifepoint, he was scored  zero on the Static 99 — Henderson was deemed a low risk to reoffend.  “Spousal rape” isn’t of concern under Static 99 or CSRA.  CLEARLY, DAPO’s current system of risk assessment is completely worthless.
  2. Henderson was later revoked for “Battery [of] spouse, Failure to notify others of commitment offense , Brandishing of knife, possession of knife…”  Yet, he remained on a PASSIVE GPS caseload.
  3. DAPO saw fit to impose a special condition of parole prohibiting contact with 2 prior victims.
  4. Parole was continued at the unit level 3 times, subsequent  to the last release from prison on 8/9/2008.  He was last COP’d on 1/17/2010.
  5. The Board of Parole Hearings found good cause for failure to register under PC 290 and  violation of Jessica’s Law subsequent to absconding, in 2008.  Yet, parole was revoked for only 150 days.  Additionally, local authorities failed to refer charges for these felonies to the District Attorney–DAPO also has the ability and responsibility to refer felony charges for prosecution.

Reviewing the violation history, failure to complete the batterer’s program specifically, Paco infers Henderson eventually completed the course.   Likely, he was being prohibited from living with Tamara pending completion of the nearly 5 year old state mandate.  Insofar as he was officially placed with the future victim on April 1st of last year (ironic, isn’t it?) it must also be assumed a signed future-victim-waiver was on file.  Alternately, a granted 602 or BPH order to permit co-habitation should be in evidence.   Lacking the preceding, DAPO completely screwed the pooch–All things being in order, they screwed it but not to completion.  Which is to say, waivers are accepted, appeals granted and BPH orders issued ALL under the authority of the Agency.  Therefore, nothing short of a court order directing CDCR to permit co-habitation provides any cover.

To my agent brethren, here’s the bottom line:  I understand how things are done these days–I get it.  However, these policies you all are hanging your hats upon are simply wrong-headed, extra-legal and, most importantly, stand in direct opposition to public safety.  Again, I understand these are the rules you are given to play by, but, so what?  Are parole agents policy-enforcement officers or law-enforcement officers?  Many of you are chomping at the bit to be designated “24 hour” peace officers?  Why?  Do you get a lot of call-outs to go enforce policy?

Yes, I also had many DV victims who were permitted, over my recommendation, to live with a batterer.  I also had field notes reflecting collaterals with the victim wherein warnings were constantly reiterated.  I also received lots of 602’s and 2 citizen’s complaint documents for the effort.  One of those who filed a citizen’s complaint later apologized and thanked me at her husband’s 25-to-life sentencing–He had held her hostage for 2 weeks and eventually poured gas in the home and threatened to burn out the kids, who escaped out the window to neighbors who called the police who…  (See Rider, Andre.  I long ago forgot the CDC# but he’s still CDC property–She and the kids are not dead.)

They used to call that parole work.

I am certain the AOR dotted all the i’s, crossed the t’s and, most importantly, placed an “X” in all the required boxes–Such is the nature of specialized caseloads.  Policy is to be observed and documented with the greatest of care.  The agent did his/her job as expected and required and should be left alone.

Having said that, and whether or not you think Paco is totally of the mark here, we MUST all agree on this:   The system failed Tamara Henderson and her 2 traumatized orphans.

That’s policy!

Henderson, Dontaye V19686

Prior  CDC # V02248;  Commitment offense unknown. Possibly a diagnostic commitment.
Current CDC # V19686; Commitment offense: Rape of Spouse.
Supervised by the Inland GPS Parole Unit-Oceanside Parole Office on a Passive GPS case load. ( 40-1 ).
Static 99 score = 0
CRSA score:  Likely to re-offend = 2
Initial parole release date: 12-05-2005

Special conditions of parole

  • Attend Parole outpatient clinic ( POC ) , Anti-narcotic testing, Complete 52 week Batters program, attend special sex offender classes.
  • Notify others of his commitment offenses (and numerous other special sex offender conditions of parole).
  • Not to have contact with Jeanisha Henderson and Lauriss Thomas.  Both noted previous victims.
  • Register 290 PC

Problems areas noted:

  • Possession and manufacturing of cocaine , Rape of spouse, possession of guns and knives.

Parole Violations:

  • 02-07-2007 : Battery spouse, Failure to notify others of commitment offense, Brandishing of knife, possession of knife with a blade longer than 2 inches,
  • Parole was revoked 03-13-2007:  Returned back to custody for 12 months. Ineligible for good time.
  • 02-22-2008:  Continued on parole. Unknown charge(s).
  • 03-28-2008:  Parole violations charges. Absconding, Failure to Register 290 PC, Violation of Jessica’s Law , Failure to Attend Batterers program , Failure to attend Parole Outpatient Clinic (psychiatric):  The Board of Parole Hearings made an offer of 9 months, ineligible for  good time credits. This offer was rejected. The parolee was returned to custody for 5 months (I) ineligible for  good time credits.  Revocation release: 08-29-2008.
  • 11-03-2008 Continued on Parole (COP). Unknown charge(s).
  • 12-18-2009 COP, Unknown charge(s).
  • 01-17-2010 COP, Unknown charge(s).

Parolee’s last known address became effective on 04-01-2010, Residing with the deceased.

Max. Discharge date noted as 06-05-2012, prior to current suspension of parole.

Sponsored Content

6 Comments to “Henderson arrested in St. Louis, MO: No cover for DAPO in Dontaye Henderson’s field file”

  1. SKAuthentic says:

    It’s a shit sandwich any way you look at it. However, despite his resume, DAPO (manager, supervisor, Agents) are not to blame directly or indirectly for the actions of a parolee unless deemed negligent in a court of law. This is simply what our population does (victimize inocent people). That is why we should scrutinize whether these individuals should be released from prison.
    Our job is to follow the law, give guided opportunities and hold parolees accountable. It is unreasonable to assume we can detect crimes that haven’t happened or apply and enforce sanctions on the hunch that a crime may happen. That may be why we are moving from an anecdotal method of enforcement to a science base (and therefore defensible) risk assessment method. Just the same; i do believe someone is going to get paid.
    Simple because no one has competently defended this position in public.

  2. PO 2 PA says:

    Excellent post and summary. I, however, assign a little more blame to the victim for choosing to swim in shark infested waters (or do you believe that she wasn’t aware of his history?).

    • pacovilla says:

      Absolutely, she was informed, made a poor decision and paid the price. All I am saying: DAPO needn’t have facilitated it. We are supposed to look out for potential victims, willing or not…

  3. 1962 says:

    DAPO, don’t criticize when you don’t know whats its like out here. Many times the agents (like me) send these parolees to BPH and they are given time served. Its frustrating, but they don’t want anyone violated or sent to prison anymore.

  4. niceoneDAPO says:

    And people wonder why CDC is hated. The next time you are stopped for speeding and the officer asks you if you work for the dept of corrections just kindly apologize and state “please have pitty on me I don’t let the murderers out, I’m just a lowly CO” we bear the brunt of hatred because we are the face of CDC yet we have no control over what or who they turn lose on the community.

    • nomad hermit says:

      Most people are lead by example, Fathers, mothers, clergy,etc. In most cases this will lead to a person of worth, value and morals. there are employees who do there job by what is expected of them by there supervisors, putting there values and morals aside to be a “team player”.’ Have you ever heard I don’t want to write you up but i was told to? CDCR has it’s own values and morals D.O.M. title 115, post orders, these are expected behavier while both on and off duty as a employee.As a CDC employee you are expected to act professional while performing your duties. Failure to do so can result in adverse action. My point being driving a state car on sunday while drunk is leading by example. I will never apologize for staff who eat there Christmas meal while working 16 in a housing unit. It’s about morals and values[can you fell me SCOTTIE]?