Missing and Murdered Children

June 29, 2008: Below is the text of the Friday morning news conference regarding progress in the search for Brooke Bennett:

Director Of Vermont State Police James Baker’s Statement From Friday Morning News Conference:

Good Morning Ladies and Gentlemen. Thank you all for coming. Your patience throughout this investigation is greatly appreciated and it has not gone unnoticed. When it comes to a missing child, I can assure you, as Director of the Vermont State Police, that getting information to the media to relay to the public are crucial. You are as much a part of this investigation as the investigators working the case. With that said, I will update you on where the investigation is at:As of late yesterday afternoon, the FBI assigned two agents to work on this investigation full- time. In addition, the FBI is sending a five person team made up of agentswho specialize in child abduction cases to assist in the investigation. In addition to a large number of Troopers and Detectives, the Orange County Sheriff’s Department, the Randolph Police Department, the Attorney General’s Office, the Orange County State’s Attorney’s Office, the New England K-9 Team, Border Patrol, Vermont State Police K-9 and the Vermont State Police Dive Team and the Vermont Forensic Laboratory are also a part of this investigation.With information of Brooke communicating with an individual through MySpace, members of the Internet Crimes against Children (I.C.A.C.) have been working on the computer forensics portion of the investigation throughout the night. The results of their findings is not yet complete, therefore I am unable to comment on that at this time.Yesterday morning items of clothing were recovered off of Rt. 65 in Brookfield in the vicinity of the floating bridge. After further development in the investigation, the State Police was reasonably assured that one of the items belonged to Brooke. As a result, Vermont’s first Amber Alert was issued at approximately 5:25 PM. Detectives have been following up on leads generated by the Amber Alert throughout the night.In an effort to not compromise the case, I cannot discuss at this time the items that were found that are believed to belong to Brooke.The last known sighting of Brooke was inside the Randolph Village Laundromat around 9:45 AM. We are asking the public if you were in the area of the Cumberland Farms or the Randolph Village Laundromat, between the hours of 9:00 AM and 11:00 AM to please call the State Police or your local law enforcement agency. Regardless of whether you feel you don’t have any information to offer, we would still like to speak with you. I can’t emphasis enough that we need the public’s help. Please, if you think you may have ANY information pertaining to the disappearance of Brooke Bennett, I ask that you immediately call the State Police or your local law enforcement agencies.⁴

8:30p.m. PST: Michael Jacques, the uncle of missing Brooke Bennett, and the last person known to see her has been arrested on unrelated charges. He has been arrested for sexual assault of a minor. The information came to light during the investigation into Brooke’s disappearance. The alleged victim lives in the same town.⁵

Two days ago, WCAX asked Brooke’s father, Jim Bennett, whether he believed a family member was involved with Brooke’s disappearance. He said, “I guess there’s some question about the uncle, but I don’t personally know him that well, so I can’t say.”⁶

I wonder why Brooke’s father would not be aware of Jacque’s sex offender status. This girl did not have to worry about the predators on the web when she had just spent the night at a registered sex offender’s home the night before she disappeared.

Jacques is not a stranger to law enforcement or this type of crime. He is a registered sex offender in Vermont. He was convicted in 1993 of sexual assault and kidnapping. The Vermont Sex Offender Registry indicates he is treatment compliant and is no longer under supervision.⁷
Police are insistent that this arrest is in no way connected to Brooke’s disappearance.

I bet they find out otherwise later on something different.

Jacques will be arraigned on the charges Monday. He is being held on $100,000 bail. If found guilty of aggravated sexual assault he could face 10 years to life in prison plus fines.

June 30, 2008 – 9p.m. PST: I was not far off the mark when I got that gut feeling of mine about this case and hesitated to write for a few days. Since posting the news of Michael Jacque’s arrest for allegedly sexually assaulting a minor who lives in Randolph, more has come to light.

The victim, now 14 years of age is a family member. Her alleged victimization at the hands of her uncle, Michael Jacques began when she was just 9 years old. The abuse lasted for 5 years and only just ended a few weeks ago.

She claims she was contacted by telephone and via a note left underneath her pillow, purportedly left by Jacques. It was an invitation. She was told she had been ‘chosen’ by the President of the United States to participate in a sex program called the Brekenridge Program. She was told that Michael Jacques had been chosen to be her trainer and that there were 2 other girls participating. Whoever participated first would live, the other would have their throat slashed.

Court documents revealed the girl was pretty much tortured for the past 5 years and there were at least 3 other adult males involved who told her what sex acts she needed to perform in order to graduate from the program.⁸

Time and time again pedophiles insist they are getting a raw deal by having to register on the sex offender registry, especially when they have already served their time. They claim they can be trusted to live amongst our children.

If the charges against Michael Jacques are true, let’s examine the situation:

Michael Jacques was arrested and convicted in 1993 for the crime of sexual assault and kidnapping. He served 3 years in prison for those crimes. He participated in sex offender treatment inside of prison and I will assume that treatment continued after his release while he was under supervision. The supervision ended in 2006 and the Vermont Sex Offender Registry entry indicates that he was ‘treatment compliant’.

Five years ago it was 2003 and Jacques was under supervision, perhaps still undergoing treatment, and all the while it is alleged he was sexually assaulting at least one minor, and police believe there could be additional victims.

In view of Michael Jacques’ past history, the new, serious charges against him, and the revelation that he was the one to find the item’s of Brooke’s clothing by the lake, one would think the judge would have denied him bail.

No, that was not the case. His attorney fought for bail indicating the evidence against his client is sparse, he is a home owner, has a job in another state and needs to get to work. The judge agreed and put a 24 hour curfew on him except for work.

He is married and his wife attended his arraignment today. She did not have any comment for the press.

While Jacques was in court being arraigned state police agencies from Massachusetts, Vermont, and Connecticut converged on the Jacques’ property to search for Brooke.

Jacques is now considered a ‘person of interest’ in the disappearance of his niece.⁹

July 1, 2008 – 2:45p.m. PST: There is a new twist to the case that broke yesterday regarding the arrest of Brooke’s uncle. Brooke’s former step-father, Ray Gagnon, of Texas was taken into custody by the FBI and charged with sexual assault of a minor. This charge stems from an alleged assault that occurred in the summer of 2007 in Royalton, Vermont. Authorities have indicated the assault was not committed against Brooke. Gagnon is being housed at the same correctional facility as Michael Jacques.

Gagnon was supposed to appear in court this afternoon for arraignment, but that scheduled court appearance was suddenly canceled. Now authorities are saying Gagnon is facing federal charges and he will be arraigned in federal court on Wednesday. ¹⁰

Authorities have stated they will not make public the federal charges against Gagnon until he appears in court. However, KVIA.com is reporting the following on their website:

Authorities say 40-year-old Ray Gagnon of San Antonio, Texas, is set to appear Wednesday in federal court in Burlington to answer a charge of obstruction of justice. Gagnon is accused of destroying evidence in connection with the probe into the disappearance of 12-year-old Brooke Bennett.¹¹

According to Brooke’s father, Brooke lived with Gagnon for 6 years in Alabama before he moved to Texas. He and Brooke’s mother were divorced in 2006. ¹²

I am really puzzled about the makeup of this family.

Brooke was living with her mother, grandmother, brother and sister before she was reported missing. However, she has not appeared in any interviews with the media. Brooke’s father has appeared twice on Greta Van Susteren’s Fox program On the Record. However, it was Brooke’s grandmother who made the call to police reporting her disappearance 12 hours after she was last seen.

On another note, you can read the Probable Cause Affidavit against Michael Jacques. Warning, some of the details are graphic.

3:p.m. PST: I found a video interview with Brooke’s mother, sister and father on the Early Show. It was held this morning. I am not sure what to make of the mother and her holding the teddy bear. The sister is about to come unglued. She is the only one showing any emotion.

4:00p.m. PST: Below is a statement made by Colonel James Baker of the Vermont State Police:

“…Good Afternoon. Thank you all for coming. I’m Colonel James Baker, Director of the Vermont State Police.

The media and the public’s patience and understanding throughout this investigation continue to be valued, and as this investigation rapidly unfolds, your patience and understanding will be even more vital.

This case is making progress. We continue to have over fifty investigators working the investigation. The focus of today’s investigation continued with the search of the Jacques’ property. The New England K-9 team assisted in this search. We continue to gather evidence in the investigation.

As you know, Michael Jacques of Randolph, Vermont was arrested on Sunday for sexually assaulting a minor. As a bi-product of this investigation, the Vermont State Police have arrested Ray Gagnon of San Antonio, Texas for Aggravated Sexual Assault, which is in connection with Jacques’ arrest. Gagnon was placed in Federal Custody prior to his arrangement. Special Agent in Charge, John Pikus will comment on this further at the conclusion of my statement.

Michael Jacques continues to be a person of interest in the disappearance of Brooke Bennett.

My purpose for calling this press conference today is two-fold. First, to continue to keep the media and the public informed as to the progress of this investigation. Second, to re-emphasize to the public that the State Police, the FBI and other law enforcement agencies are continuing to aggressively investigate the nature of Brooke’s disappearance. It is important that the citizens of this State feel safe, and I ask again, for you to have faith in us.

I want to acknowledge and thank Attorney General William Sorrell, Assistant Attorney General Cindy Maguire and the staff at the Attorney General’s Office. The Attorney General’s Office has been very active in this investigation and continues to provide guidance and support. I failed to acknowledge that at yesterday’s press conference.

Tomorrow night at 8:00 PM, the community is holding a candle light vigil for Brooke at the Gazebo on Main Street in Randolph. This is a noble way for the community to come together to pray for the safe return of Brooke. Members of the Vermont State Police will attend the vigil. I asked the media and the public to respect the purpose of this event, which is to pray for Brooke and to show support to her family, not to question the State Police about the investigation.” ¹³

5p.m. PST: The criminal past of Michael Jacques looks relatively tame on the Vermont Sex Offender Registry. It states he was treatment compliant and he was released from supervision. Some might look at that information and think, well the guy was following the rules and he was pretty much harmless.

The reality of what caused his charges is much more brutal and truthful:

In 1992, he was convicted of kidnapping and rape. Court records show that the victim was an 18-year-old woman he supervised at a fast-food business in Rutland. The records show he and a friend got her drunk and then he alone forced her into his car and over the next four hours raped her several times while she was choked with a rope around her neck, gagged with a cloth in her mouth, and handcuffed with police-style cuffs.

The victim later told police that Jacques told her he had killed a 12-year-old girl he raped in Arizona in 1985 because she threatened to go to the police, so he had to kill her.¹⁴

So what is clearly established is that he has been proven to not only be a sexual predator he also has a propensity for being a violent sex offender. His claim of murdering a 12-year-old Arizona girl in 1985 that could never be proven now takes on more emphasis given the fact that Brooke is the same age. Maybe Jacques was sexually assaulting Brooke and she threatened to tell and he murdered her just as he claimed about the other young witness in 1985.

Even though the crime was brutal he was allowed to enter a plea of No Contest to the charges and received a plea bargain:

Jacques did plead no contest to the charges of kidnap and rape in Vermont. In return, under a plea agreement, he got six years in prison, but was released after serving only four and half with credit for good time.¹⁵

He was also required to complete sex offender treatment before being released from supervision and probation. Given the new charges against him we know how well that treatment was working.

And there is another conviction:

Jacques does have another conviction– in 1985 in Washington County for lewd and lascivious conduct. (Ibid.))

Currently there is no further information on that 1985 conviction.

What baffles me even more is that the family knew about all of this and they still allowed children to be around him on a regular basis.

July 2, 2008 – 2p.m.: Last night I expressed my shock about how Brooke’s family could continue to embrace Michael Jacques considering his past conviction for kidnapping and sexual assault. I found an article that shed some light on their belief system.

During an interview on Tuesday with Burlington FreePress Reporter Joel Banner Baird, Brooke’s grandmother, Lucinda Milne, addressed the issue of Michael Jacque’s past and involvement.

“My family’s being torn apart,” she continued. “Michael has been my son-in-law for 12 years. That’s why I can say that I love him. I hugged him when Brooke went missing. And then I found out about this — well, you know what that did to my stomach.”
Close family friend Lorretta Hutchinson of Randolph nodded in agreement.
“He was a good uncle and he loves his children,” she said. “He’s just sick.”¹⁶

I do not agree with Loretta Hutchinson as far as being a good uncle and father. A good uncle and father would not prey on his own nieces and children as it is alleged in court documents. – And a good father and uncle would certainly not pimp them out to other pedophiles as it appears may have happened. A good person just does not do that. As far as being sick, well he was participating in this activity while he was in treatment for his sickness. Why didn’t he ask for help during the time he was under supervision while he was reoffending? I will say it is because they would have violated his probation and he would have been sent back to prison to serve the remainder of his twenty-year sentence.

Now, today, according to federal court documents it was revealed that Brooke was taken back to Jacques’ house:

A 14-year-old told authorities she helped Michael Jacques, Brooke Bennett’s uncle, take the 12-year-old to Jacques’ Randolph home on June 25 to be initiated into a sex ring called Breckenridge. Brooke has not been seen since that day. The girl said she understood that as part of the initiation, Brooke “would have sex with adult males,” according to the affidavit in U.S. District Court.¹⁷

On that day, she and Brooke watched television for awhile until Jacques told her to leave. She left with her boyfriend and that was the last time she saw Brooke.

I am not sure, but I am going to guess at this point the 14-year-old was getting too old for the Breckenridge Program and she was told if she would help get Brooke into the program then she would graduate and no longer have to participate.

4:11p.m. PST: In a short statement at a news conference Vermont State Police confirmed the discovery of a body that is believed to be Brooke Bennett:

“It is with a heavy heart… and deep sadness… that I announce we have located what we believe to be the remains of Brooke Bennett,” said Vt. State Police Col. James Baker. “This death is clearly suspicious. It appears to be foul play.” ¹⁸

Police say they have advised Brooke’s family of the discovery.

Her remains will be taken to the medical examiner’s officer for positive identification and cause and manner of death.

I had hoped this story was not going to turn out this way but I somehow knew it would be bad from the time she was reported missing.

The investigation has revealed so far that the people allowed into Brooke’s life were dangerous and they were not strangers. They were people familiar to her, people she should have been by all rights able to trust.

Most likely what happened was Jacques tried to have sex with Brooke and she fought him off and he killed her because she would not go along with the ‘program’.

I wonder how many more victims he has. Maybe authorities should go back and investigate that claim he made about killing the 12-year-old girl in Arizona back in 1985. He claimed he killed her because she threatened to go to the police. Perhaps there is a pattern.

I wonder what the family friend has to say now about Michael Jacques’ sickness.

It is expected that Michael Jacques will be back in court tomorrow and charged with Brooke Bennett’s kidnapping.

More was revealed regarding the Obstruction of Justice charges against Ray Gagnon, Brooke’s former stepfather. It is alleged he had a laptop computer at his Texas home in a safe. The contents of that laptop included hundreds of images of child pornography including a still image of two minors engaging in a sex act. The female minor is the one making the allegations against both Gagnon and Jacques. The male minor is her boyfriend. You can read the entire affidavit here. It contains graphic content.

7:30p.m. PST: While I realize it is pretty early to begin thinking about punishment for Michael Jacques, I am sitting here wondering if he might be death-penalty eligible. That is of course, if he is charged with Brooke’s murder and found guilty. I didn’t think Vermont was a death penalty state and I am right.

However, news late today indicated Michael Jacques will be charged with federal charges of kidnapping as it pertains to Brooke’s disappearance. The website, Death Penalty Information Center indicates that there are a few instances where the death penalty can be sought that might be appropriate in the Michael Jacques case.

Federal law allows for the administration of the death penalty for the following crimes:

1. murder during the commission of a kidnapping
2. murder related to rape or child molestation
3. murder related to sexual exploitation of children

Just on the surface it appears one or more of those charges will fit.

I hope they prosecute him all the way at the federal level. I also hope they can tie the stepfather to enough of the crimes that he can be executed as well.

8p.m PST: Just sitting here thinking about the Breckenridge Program. I was wondering where they came up with that name and what the connection could be. All I could think of was the 1970′s movie called Myra Breckenridge. It was a movie with Raquel Welch, Farrah Fawcett and Mae West, among others. The plot of the movie is a man who wants to undergo a sex change. The movie was loosely based on the book written by Gore Vidal. Although he never saw the movie, he claimed the movie stopped the sale of his book for 10 years because it was so bad.¹⁹

Anyway, I thought I was on the wrong track with this idea until I came upon the following quote:

“Myra Breckenridge is about as funny as a child molester.”²⁰

Just food for thought.

July 11, 2008 – 7p.m. PST: I had to take a break from writing about this case for a few days because it is just so emotional for me.

The day after I mentioned the possibility of Jacques being death penalty eligible under federal statutes it was announced that it is indeed a good possibility. Federal prosecutors are awaiting the autopsy results before they make that final determination which could take months. All that has been released to the public thus far is that Brooke’s death is classified as a homicide.

During Michael Jacques’ appearance in federal court on Monday he was formally charged with Brooke’s kidnapping and bail was out of the question as far as this judge was concerned.

The state sexual assault as it pertains to juvenile1 have been withdrawn for the present time to allow the federal charges to proceed. The state charges could be filed again at a later date.

Also appearing in federal court that day was Ray Gagnon, Brooke’s former stepfather. His charges were originally obstruction of justice stemming from his call to his roommate in Texas instructing him to get rid of his laptop computer. Gagnon was also charged that day with possession of child pornography in Alabama.

According to the criminal complaint in United States of America v. Raymond Alfred Gagnon, after learning of the disappearance of his former stepdaughter, Gagnon flew from San Antonio to Burlington, Vt. “by way of Cullman.” The document states, “Gagnon admitted that while in Cullman, Alabama, Gagnon went to the Cullman Public Library to attempt to access B.B.’s (Brooke’s) MySpace account and Amber Alert Information.”
Also it states Gagnon admitted to having sexually explicit contact with another minor and “downloaded a vast amount of child pornography from the Internet.”²¹
The document also reveals that a former co-worker of Gagnon, Bill Barksdale, contacted authorities after seeing a TV report on Gagnon’s charges to inform them Gagnon owned a home in Cullman. An unnamed relative of Barksdale, who lives near the residence, said they recently observed Gagnon entering the residence with computers, the document states.²²

I find this information really interesting. I wonder why they felt a need to call law enforcement unless they knew about Gagnon’s propensity for child pornography.

In an area on the east side of San Antonio, Texas on July 10, FBI agents were searching a landfill for Gagnon’s laptop computer.²³

On another note, Brooke’s funeral was attended by nearly 1,000 people. The funeral was held in an outdoor tent. I watched part of the funeral on video, but I had to turn it off. Frankly, I could not stomach the speaking of comfort and love from God. I really have a problem with a loving God that allows this type of thing to happen to innocent children.

August 8, 2008: Michael Jacques is expected in court on August 13 for a probable cause hearing.²⁴

August 11, 2008: Michael Jacques appeared in court today and the judge assigned him a husband and wife legal team from New Jersey. They are to assist the Public Defender assigned to Jacques’ capital kidnapping case. The article stated that the legal team are specialists in death penalty cases and none of their cases have ever resulted in a death penalty conviction.

One more time, Michael Jacques has the legal system wrapped around his little finger. I know these are his rights as afforded him by the United States Constitution but some how it just seems so unfair to Brooke.²⁵

August 13, 2008: Michael Jacques was supposed to appear in court today for a probable cause hearing. This hearing would have allowed prosecutors the opportunity to reveal the reasons why they believe Michael Jacques should be tried for Brooke’s kidnapping.

Michael Jacques decided to waive his right to this hearing through his Public Defender. No reason was given to the court for waiving the hearing and no further court dates were set.²⁶