Recognizing red flags

January 27, 2015

Department of Community Justice Parole & Probation Officers Leticia Longoria-Navarro and Jamiel Brown (right) worked together to take a violent sex trafficker off the streets.
Department of Community Justice Parole and Probation Officers Leticia Longoria-Navarro and Jamiel Brown (front) worked together to take a violent sex trafficker off the streets.

When Department of Community Justice Parole and Probation Officer (PPO) Jamiel Brown received a concerning email from a state Department of Human Services worker about a medium-risk sex offender from Clackamas County recently transferred to his caseload, a number of scenarios played out in his head. Making a concise decision on what to do next with the new offender could prove challenging, given Brown’s lack of previous rapport with him. But as Brown began reviewing the case and strategizing with fellow PPO Leticia Longoria-Navarro, the answers became clear.   

“We reviewed the case together,” said Longoria-Navarro. “We knew there was some past information from DHS (the Department of Human Services) and past PPOs that he was possibly involved in human trafficking and he was involved with multiple women who had children.”

Follow-up emails and phone calls revealed details about a complaint from a woman who said the suspected trafficker had been threatening her. The woman also said that her underage children had contact with him too. With the latter being a violation of parole, a bell went off in both Parole & Probation Officers’ heads prompting them to have the offender come in for an initial assessment.

“It was just something that we said ‘hey we need to act on this,’” said Brown. “He was potentially violent with women. And we had reasonable grounds to think he was communicating with children.” When the offender came in for his assessment he was arrested. 

“If it was a regular Joe on the street (as opposed to a DHS worker) telling me this, I probably would have handled it differently,” explained Brown. “I would have had him take a polygraph test but I wouldn’t have arrested him.” 

Brown and Longoria-Navarro proceeded to ask the offender for permission to search his phone. If he refused, the offender could have risked additional parole violations, but instead he consented. The phone was reviewed at the Multnomah County Department of Community Justice Computer Forensic Lab and the beginning stages of a sex abuse case involving a child would unfold.

“He was in jail for 8 days and when he got out he asked for his phone and was told it was at the forensics lab,” said Longoria-Navarro.

The offender reported to Brown for a month and a half before cutting off a GPS monitoring device and absconding. Brown immediately notified authorities and began working with Portland Police Bureau detectives to build a case. The Clackamas County Sheriff’s Office Washington County Sheriff’s Office, and Multnomah County Sheriff’s Office  also worked to help track down the wanted criminal. Meanwhile, back at the forensic lab, a review of the phone would uncover pictures of recent drug use, firearms and contact with minors and child pornography. Evidence that was erased from the phone was recovered by Multnomah County Department Community Justice experts.

“He was interacting with minors, people who can’t make choices on their own,” explained Brown. “It was important to put him away because he was preying on kids. Kids who may have come from broken homes. And he was preying on women.”

Acting on a tip, the suspect was arrested in Clackamas County roughly two months after absconding. He was charged and convicted of a variety sex abuse charges including compelling prostitution and is currently serving a 25-year sentence.  

“It was a case that may only happen a few times in your career - where someone is sent to prison for that long,” said Longoria-Navarro.

As a PPO monitoring an average of 40 to 50 sex offenders, it’s uncommon to be involved in the investigation of a new crime but in the evolving world of supervision and technology -- roles are often changing. A key component in the case was the cell phone.

“The thing that was fundamental in this case is we don’t just confiscate and search cell phones: we have to have reasonable grounds to believe a search would result in evidence of a violation and we did. We asked for consent and he agreed without any hesitation,” said Longoria-Navarro. “If Jamiel had not asked for the phone, worked with the forensics lab and worked with detectives, he could still be out there. He built this case from the bottom up.”