http://www.miami.com

Also see the following thread.

https://www.alipac.us/ftopict-482-claudia.html+muro

Posted on Sat, Mar. 18, 2006


HOLLYWOOD
Nanny free, not clear
A nanny released Thursday on charges that she shook a Hollywood infant still faces immigration charges for living in the U.S. on an expired visa.
BY DIANA MOSKOVITZ AND ASHLEY FANTZ
afantz@MiamiHerald.com

Claudia Muro, the Peruvian nanny who made national headlines when she was accused of violently shaking an infant, made her first appearance as a free woman Friday after nearly 2 ˝ years in jail.

''I'm free, I'm free!'' Muro exclaimed upon her release, her lawyer, Allison Gilman, told reporters Friday night.

Muro, who always maintained her innocence, was released Thursday from a Key West immigration detention facility. Her husband, Joe Brooks, paid her bail Thursday morning, then drove with his parents and Muro's mother to Key West to pick her up.

She was exonerated, but remained in detention because her visa had expired.

Brooks and Muro's attorney, Allison Gilman, spoke briefly to the press Friday night, expressing relief.

''We're just enjoying each other as family. We've got a lot of catching up to do,'' Brooks said.

Muro was arrested Oct. 9, 2003, after she was seen shaking an infant in her care on a videotape, or ''nannycam,'' that the infant's parents had recorded.

But the case was tossed out March 6 when video experts cast doubt on the tape, saying the footage was unreliable.

Muro had been working to attain her citizenship while working as a nanny for the Hollywood couple, Jennifer and Brett Schwartz, a former prosecutor.

Brooks said the first thing she said to her husband on Thursday was, ``Hold me, don't let me go.''

When asked if Muro would be able to remain here, Gilman said, ``We are very confident she would be allowed to stay in the United States.''

Gilman said Muro was still adjusting to life outside of confinement and was not yet prepared to speak to the press Friday.

''This is very overwhelming,'' Gilman said.

Muro smiled to reporters and TV cameras for a minute from her front window. It was the first time many members of the media had seen her dressed informally outside a courtroom.

Muro, who moved to the United States nine years ago, was hired by the Schwartzes in May 2003 to care for their daughter.

Before then, she worked as a live-in nanny for three years for a Miami doctor and his wife who said they were pleased with Muro's care of their three children.

After her arrest, Muro was vilified on national TV as the baby's parents appeared on talk shows calling her ``a monster.''

Meanwhile, excerpts of the controversial nannycam -- copied from the original -- was played all over the world.

For years, her attorney tried to convince a judge that the tape was misleading.

The Schwartzes admitted that they had erased portions of it because it showed them in ``intimate moments.''

The original was destroyed, leaving prosecutors to work with a tainted copy.

''From day one Claudia was never presumed innocent,'' said Gilman.

``In the end, she was finally vindicated, but it took giving up some of the best years of her life.''

But even after prosecutors dropped the case, a new twist emerged.

The Schwartzes had filed a civil suit seeking ''damages in excess of $15,000'' against the nanny firm that had recommended Muro.

The suit claims the family endured ``pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement and scarring, mental anguish, loss of earnings, impairment of future earning capacity, impairment of the capacity to enjoy life, aggravation of a pre-existing condition, medical hospital and nursing bills and expenses and grave and severe personal injuries.''

The prosecutor, Assistant State Attorney Stacey Honowitz, said she felt blindsided by the civil case, which she said Schwartz failed to mention to her.

Further, the civil suit might have weakened the Schwartzes credibility to a jury.

In a written statement, Jennifer Schwartz called the prosecutor's allegations ``absurd.''