Two Separate Rewards in Mitrice Richardson Case Have Different Terms

BY ANNE SOBLE

With the announcement of what is described as a credible but still unverified sighting of Mitrice Richardson came a flurry of media coverage exceeding all of the attention received by the case so far.

With this attention came misstatements that were reported by many in the mainstream media and then picked up by multiple news outlets and blogs, a number of whom further compounded the mistakes. 

Major among these is that there is a $25,000 reward for information leading to the missing woman’s whereabouts. This was misstated by law enforcement officials at the Las Vegas press conference who put the single amount on a flyer and then repeated it during the actual briefing.

In reality, there are two separate rewards with different requirements.

One is a $10,000 reward offered by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors. It states that the board “has established a reward in the amount of $10,000 in exchange for information leading to the whereabouts of Mitrice Richardson, who disappeared after being released from the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Substation in Calabasas, on Sept. 17, 2009 [and] for successful resolution of any criminal prosecution of person or persons who were involved in her disappearance.”

The second reward is in the amount of $15,000 from the City of Malibu. This reward is more narrowly defined. It is “for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the person or persons responsible for the disappearance of Mitrice Richardson.”

As previously reported in The News, the City of Malibu has not allocated funds for the reward from the current municipal budget, as is required from year to year.

But Malibu City Manager Jim Thorsen told the newspaper, “The council has already committed to the reward and the city will stand behind it.”

Thorsen added, “Our only issue is a bookkeeping one, as the funds were not carried over into this fiscal year. I am fully confident the council would approve the re-appropriation of reward funds for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the person or persons responsible for the disappearance of Ms. Richardson at such time it is necessary. Therefore, I have not planned to go to council and have the funds placed into the budget, unless it is deemed necessary.”

The city manager reiterated that “the reward is for information leading to the arrest and conviction of anyone involved in the disappearance. It is not a reward for finding her.”