This is the part of the transcript with the Agent:
And joining us now from Sacramento is Scott Kernan. Scott is undersecretary of operations, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.
The obvious, Scott, why was Philip Garrido paroled?
SCOTT KERNAN, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS & REHABILITATION: Well, he had completed his sentence both with the Feds for the kidnapping charge. He was transferred to the Nevada Department of Corrections for the rape charge. He was released from that sentence and on our Interstate compact agreement, which is typical, he was transferred to California for his parole supervision.
KING: Was he, therefore, a good prisoner?
KERNAN: I don't know about his history while in the Feds or with Nevada. But I know while he was on parole, there was no history of violations. He was compliant with his terms of parole.
KING: In retrospect, obviously, he shouldn't have been paroled.
But are you saying there's no way he could not have -- that he had to be paroled?
KERNAN: I believe it was consistent with the law in Nevada and certainly our parole supervision. Nevada has lifetime parole for sex offenders. We do not. And so he would be on lifetime parole with the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.
KING: Would you change the law in any way based on this?
KERNAN: You know, this is obviously a very serious crime that was committed. I -- I'd leave that up to the lawmakers and the governor.
KING: What did the parole supervas -- supervision entail?
KERNAN: Regular visits to both his house and then the offender would have to report to the parole office, anti-narcotic testing and compliance with some parole programs.
KING: People went to his house and didn't find anything, based on all of the stuff we have seen?
KERNAN: You know, Larry, every report right now suggests that this was so well concealed that anybody just would not have been able to see it. I know that the parole agent involved in this case -- and the details are still being kept, just so that we don't in any way jeopardize the prosecution of this case. He acted with real due diligence.
I'm very proud of my parole officer in this case. The fact of the matter is the neighbors for 18 years didn't see it. Neighbors that actually had been in the backyard hadn't seen it. Of so, you know, it was significantly concealed.
KING: Kate, do you have any question, Katie, you want to ask Scott?
HALL: When Phillip was paroled, I made an appointment with --
KING: Right there.
HALL: I made an appointment with this parole officer at the time, and he told me -- he said that, what do you want me to tell you, that he's well? He's not. He's a sick puppy. We're sure he's going to do this again, but we're pretty sure it's not directed at you.
KERNAN: Well, there is no doubt that this monster had some significant mental health issues. And, you know, that's why he was on parole supervision for life.
KING: Carl, anything you want to ask Scott?
PROBYN: Yes, I heard he was back in prison in 1999 and served some more time. Is that true or not?
KERNAN: I believe that, no, not in '99. When he came to our parole supervision, he had no revocations. He was not returned to California prison at all.
KING: Based on all we have learned, Scott, what changes would you recommend in the system?
KERNAN: Well, I can tell you right now, Larry, that, we are doing everything we can to review the case and the circumstances, and see what policy changes might be necessary. The parole agent in this case did perform his duties appropriately. But we will, of course, take best lessons from this, and see if there's some policy changes that might be necessary.
But our focus right now is in the full prosecution -- with the other jurisdictions, to prosecute this parolee to the fullest extent to the law and make sure he doesn't see the light of day again.
KING: Thank you, Scott Kernan, undersecretary of operations, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.
Read whole transcript here