There are 48 inmates from Colorado whose locations are being kept secret by the Department of Corrections because prison officials want to protect their lives even though victims want to know where they are.
Among the secret inmates is serial rapist Brent J. Brents, who asked to be sent out of Colorado to serve his time because of threats to his life.
In a brief telephone interview Thursday, Brents said he does not want anyone to know where he is because he is afraid for his life. “The threat is very, very real,” he said.
He said he understands why his victims want to know where he is, and he said he expects they will find out.
Brents assaulted 14 women and children in Denver and Aurora in 2004 and early 2005. He was sentenced to 1,500 years in prison. As a condition of his guilty plea, Brents asked to be moved to a prison outside Colorado.
“It’s just one of those things,” he said. “If the threats are made, then they would be carried out.”
Colorado Attorney General John Suthers said the state is obligated to protect him and inmates like him.
If prison officials reveal his identity and Brents is killed, the state could be liable, Suthers said.
Some of Brents’ victims, including a woman raped in her Capitol Hill pet store, are upset that they can’t be told where he is because it would bring them a sense of security.
Gang made threat
Victims say they are not worried about Brents’ safety because he should have known what risks he was taking when he assaulted them.
“As an advocate for a victim of such a heinous crime, you can understand she wants peace of mind of knowing exactly where he is,” said James Miletich, attorney for a woman who was raped by Brents on Feb. 11. “Without knowing that he’s incarcerated in a certain location, it’s difficult for my client to feel safe.”
The 211 Crew, a white-supremacy prison gang Brents associated with, threatened to kill him when he returned to prison because of the nature of his crimes, prosecutors said.
Suthers said Brents may not stay anonymous for life if prison officials decide his safety is no longer at risk, Suthers said. At that time, the victims and the public may be notified of where he is.
“They are most notorious when they first come into the system,” Suthers said. “I would not expect Brent Brents to be in protective custody for life.”
The Department of Corrections does not have specific written policies regarding its secret prisoners, said spokesman Walt Ahrens.
Prison authorities made the decision to protect the identity and location of these 48 inmates on their own.
Like Colorado, Arizona also sends high-security risk inmates out of state for their own protection and won’t reveal who or where they are.
“We are obligated to make sure the inmate is kept safe. It’s beneficial not only to the inmate but the institution,” said Arizona Department of Corrections spokesman Bart Graves.
States such as California and Texas have inmates who are even more infamous than Brents, but they do not keep their locations a secret.
The locations of cult leader Charles Manson; Robert F. Kennedy’s killer, Sirhan Sirhan; and Scott Peterson, who murdered his pregnant wife, Laci, are available from the California Department of Corrections even though their lives have been threatened.
Those inmates are usually in cells by themselves 23 hours a day for their own protection. Victims have a right under California state law to know where the offenders are. Victims are also entitled to a copy of the offender’s most recent photo and are notified if the inmate is moved to another prison, said California corrections spokeswoman Terry Thornton.
If these inmates can be named publicly, victims ask, then why protect the location of someone like Brents?
“That’s not right”
Theresa Kautz, a rape victim who agreed to be identified in The Denver Post, was attacked in 1980 while walking home in Denver.
Her rapist, Paul Henninen, was released four years later, and she was not notified when he got out.
She says it’s shaky notification systems or inmate escapes that make it necessary for victims to know where their attackers are at all times.
“They’re protecting him at the expense of the victims, and that’s not right,” Kautz said of Brents. “…I don’t see that he deserves any special treatment. When he did those crimes, he knew what could happen.”
State Rep. Terrance Carroll D-Denver, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said prison officials must balance the needs of the victim with the safety of the inmate.
“As a lawmaker, I would want to sit down and look at the victim notification law to make sure that it’s not being kept from them arbitrarily,” Carroll said.
“I think it’s worth … having a longer conversation about ensuring the victims of sexual assault and other violent crimes have a voice and feel like they’re being heard and that they haven’t been forgotten by the system.”
Concession was made
Denver lawyer and legal analyst Scott Robinson said there is no reason victims can’t know where offenders are.
“The inmate grapevine runs very quickly,” Robinson said. “Chances are very good that Brent Brents is known for what he is, wherever he is. If he is facing the risk of harm, it’s from his fellow inmates, not from the victims.”
But Denver District Attorney Mitch Morrissey said an agreement was made to protect Brents’ life.
“The reason we were able to resolve the Brents case without a lengthy trial, without putting a number of young children on the witness stand, was we made that concession,” he said, “and in order to abide by that concession, I think it’s important that where is he remain secret.”
Morrissey says victims may want to know where Brents is but are not necessarily entitled to know.
“There’s no question Mr. Brents would have been at risk in any facility that he was in in Colorado,” Morrissey said. “I think for him that was a legitimate concern, and certainly for the DOC, that’s always a concern.”
Denver Post researchers contributed to this report.
Staff writer Felisa Cardona can be reached at 303-820-1219 or fcardona@denverpost.com.
