Brooke Bennett, 12 years old Randolph VT #22

[christine2448]

Please continue GENERAL discussions here. Look around BROOKE'S FORUM (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=163)there are several threads started on specific topics to try and stay organized.

I advise everyone to read the RULES of WS, Long (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66869)and Short Version (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66872)and also to read THIS STICKY (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=67094) before participating. TIA.


Links to previous and similar threads can be found toward the bottom of the page.

Newbies

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y171/christine2448/WELCOMETOWSBLUE.gif

I am sad such a tragedy is bringing us all together.

[Elley Mae]

In the conversations between AR and MJ,Rauel and c they had to delay the take down (if not mistaken)more then once. Maybe the machine was on back order. For over 6 weeks this was planned. They had a strong need for Brooke to be taken care of. The question is Why? Why did AR hate her so much that she wanted to see Brooke suffer. If MJ wanted to make a stuff film,in the 6 weeks of planning this he probably could have found someone that would not have lead back to him.

[marly56]

In the conversations between AR and MJ,Rauel and c they had to delay the take down (if not mistaken)more then once. Maybe the machine was on back order. For over 6 weeks this was planned. They had a strong need for Brooke to be taken care of. The question is Why? Why did AR hate her so much that she wanted to see Brooke suffer. If MJ wanted to make a stuff film,in the 6 weeks of planning this he probably could have found someone that would not have lead back to him.
was brooke supposed to visit rg? didnt ar and mj have a 3-way with rg 2 weeks or 2 months prior?

[Elley Mae]

June 2007 in South Royalton according to Gagnon in his affidavit, is when that happened.

[marly56]

June 2007 in South Royalton according to Gagnon in his affidavit, is when that happened.
yeah! imo just speculating here. there may be some definite connection between ar jealousy and brookes relationship with rg............ar allegedly had 3-way encounter with rg and mj......and brooke was going to visit rg according to the emails. the mj calls to rg rg goes into brookes webpage and makes changes [edits?] her emails. phew! im grasping at straws here.

[marly56]

In the conversations between AR and MJ,Rauel and c they had to delay the take down (if not mistaken)more then once. Maybe the machine was on back order. For over 6 weeks this was planned. They had a strong need for Brooke to be taken care of. The question is Why? Why did AR hate her so much that she wanted to see Brooke suffer. If MJ wanted to make a stuff film,in the 6 weeks of planning this he probably could have found someone that would not have lead back to him.
the first report i remember hearing after brooke was found ..the media said her death may be the result of an accident. were they saying that because le requested them to in order to not alert a possible ring?

[Elley Mae]

According to her father she was looking forward to the trip at the time of her disappearance it was only a few weeks away that she would have left.

[marly56]

yeah! imo just speculating here. there may be some definite connection between ar jealousy and brookes relationship with rg............ar allegedly had 3-way encounter with rg and mj......and brooke was going to visit rg according to the emails. the mj calls to rg rg goes into brookes webpage and makes changes [edits?] her emails. phew! im grasping at straws here.
i dont think brooke knew any of this stuff. i think she was just a regular teenager and she probably a normal daughter/stepfather relationship with rg.

[Elley Mae]

I don't know anything about that being reported.

[MoonFlwr]

O/T I know this was discussed a few threads back...about Russia and sex laws etc. Thought somebody might find this interesting.

http://edition.cnn.com/

(OO/T! Breaking news about the Pope's address on there, too!)

[marly56]

According to her father she was looking forward to the trip at the time of her disappearance it was only a few weeks away that she would have left.
i think mj filled ar's head with somany bogus lies about brooke and this is why ar was jealous of brooke. i also think that mj and rg had many shared secrets and when mj discovered that brooke was innocently going to spend time with rg, mj became jealous and started a blitz of lies to ar in order to thwart brooke from ever getting to visit. i think this is why the desperate timeline. to get brooke befor she left .. just the fact that mj ''shared'' ar with rg. mj may have had a paranoid suspicion that rg [loves cp] maybe would get lucky with brooke. i think the jealousy was in mj that rg would have this young clean innocent girl there .

[texas48]

There was a MSNBC special several years back referencing Snuff films. Yes, they do exist. None of us want to believe there are people in this country and other countries that film and make big bucks from this horrific crime. People that pay for these films are just as evil as those that make them. I will do some research and find when this aired. Also, Elly Mae, I hate thinking the way I am thinking but I believe more than MJ is involved with Brooke's death. Too hard on the mind and the heart to think about all these juv involved in this but I think you are headed in the right direction with your thoughts. We will find out soon enough.

[texas48]

Has Brooke's father made any comments/statements to the effect of the relationship between Brooke and her stepfather and Brooke's mother? I have heard him say that he did not mind Brooke going over to MJ house and even staying over because Brooke enjoyed spending time w/her cousins. Brooke was 12, AR was 14..how old were her other cousins that lived in the house w/MJ and Denise? So many players in the crime.

[lisalei321]

Just to throw something out here OK? AR is a VICTIM of MJ's anything she did or didn't do should be layed straight onto him. He has had her to "groom" since she was 2 years old, the actual "abuse" may have started when she was 9, but I can't believe he didn't have her under his absolute control, I believe she would have done anything he said no questions asked (I think it's called stockholm syndrome). If she had anything to do with what happened to BB MJ needs to pay the price. He is responsible for everything she may have done or everything that she did, I can't even imagine the pain that child is feeling right now, knowing that everything she has done is being discussed in the "real" world.

OK sorry for the rant, but I have 4 girls and I can't imagine what I would do as a mom in a situation like this.

[marly56]

Has Brooke's father made any comments/statements to the effect of the relationship between Brooke and her stepfather and Brooke's mother? I have heard him say that he did not mind Brooke going over to MJ house and even staying over because Brooke enjoyed spending time w/her cousins. Brooke was 12, AR was 14..how old were her other cousins that lived in the house w/MJ and Denise? So many players in the crime.
from the little ive read about brookes real dad ,he seems like an easy going guy clueless to the monster in mj . i cant even imagine having someone so close in the family like mj. mj wust have had a charm about him in order to go undetected even among the other men in the family.

[DianeB]

Just speculating here...

What if the intent was for MJ to 'break-in' (horrible thought) Brooke into Breckenridge before she went to Texas where her ex-stepdad could continue as another 'trainer'?

Something went wrong (possibly because from her friends' remembrances it appears Brooke had a definite mind of her own), and it was at that point MJ decided it was safer to kill her. It would support to some extent the half-dozen phone calls between Jacques and Gagnon that started within half an hour of the missing person's report being filed.

[marly56]

Just speculating here...

What if the intent was for MJ to 'break-in' (horrible thought) Brooke into Breckenridge before she went to Texas where her ex-stepdad could continue as another 'trainer'?

Something went wrong (possibly because from her friends' remembrances it appears Brooke had a definite mind of her own), and it was at that point MJ decided it was safer to kill her. It would support to some extent the half-dozen phone calls between Jacques and Gagnon that started within half an hour of the missing person's report being filed.
speculating of course...this is the scenario that seems more possible considering the timeline. and the first report from the le said it might have been an accident. maybe brooke putup a fight .

[believe09]

I think that it is clear enough by Jim Bennets statements to the media-he knew MJ's background and didn't consider it an issue. He was unaware that Brooke was ever with him unless there was another adult there as well.

Gosh, I wonder if this information was ever presented to the children in the homes? Ya know how we train our children regarding appropriate and inappropriate touch? And knowing you have a sex offender smack dab in the middle of all of you would certainly increase the likliehood of these conversations, right??? NOT.


I think it is safe to say that virtually all of the adults named in this case woefully failed these children...some clearly more than others.

[LI_Mom]

i dont think brooke knew any of this stuff. i think she was just a regular teenager and she probably a normal daughter/stepfather relationship with rg.

I believe that also.

It's important to remember that RG had NO RECORD before Brooke's disappearance.

Cassandra most likely had no idea what kind of sick man he was.

[LI_Mom]

from the little ive read about brookes real dad ,he seems like an easy going guy clueless to the monster in mj . i cant even imagine having someone so close in the family like mj. mj wust have had a charm about him in order to go undetected even among the other men in the family.

Plus he & his wife ASKED Brooke if everything was ok & told her if there was ever a problem to come to them & tell them.

All these years, there was no problem with her going to visit her cousins. As long as Denise was there, her parents felt she'd be safe.


Does anyone think AR would have admitted to Denise that MJ was abusing her? I don't. We can see in her emails that she doesn't trust or even like her mother & wants desperately to protect MJ.


The one thing I want to know is WHAT Denise knew about MJ's past. I want to know if she ever read his arrest record or just believed whatever he told her.

[marly56]

Plus he & his wife ASKED Brooke if everything was ok & told her if there was ever a problem to come to them & tell them.

All these years, there was no problem with her going to visit her cousins. As long as Denise was there, her parents felt she'd be safe.


Does anyone think AR would have admitted to Denise that MJ was abusing her? I don't. We can see in her emails that she doesn't trust or even like her mother & wants desperately to protect MJ.


The one thing I want to know is WHAT Denise knew about MJ's past. I want to know if she ever read his arrest record or just believed whatever he told her.
i agree with you. i doubt ar would have told her mother... the two of them may have competed for mjs attention. as i said in a previous post,mj must be very charming on the surface and this is the charm that denise fell for.

[Mohabi]

There was a MSNBC special several years back referencing Snuff films. Yes, they do exist. None of us want to believe there are people in this country and other countries that film and make big bucks from this horrific crime. People that pay for these films are just as evil as those that make them. I will do some research and find when this aired. Also, Elly Mae, I hate thinking the way I am thinking but I believe more than MJ is involved with Brooke's death. Too hard on the mind and the heart to think about all these juv involved in this but I think you are headed in the right direction with your thoughts. We will find out soon enough.

I had a good friend in the special sex crimes unit in a European country. He was involved in investigations of snuff films and assured me that they do truly exist, and that was....30 years ago.

[marly56]

I had a good friend in the special sex crimes unit in a European country. He was involved in investigations of snuff films and assured me that they do truly exist, and that was....30 years ago.
as soon as the general public has the courage to realize that there are underground crime networks we will be able to face the facts.

[Leanne]

Plus he & his wife ASKED Brooke if everything was ok & told her if there was ever a problem to come to them & tell them.

All these years, there was no problem with her going to visit her cousins. As long as Denise was there, her parents felt she'd be safe.


Does anyone think AR would have admitted to Denise that MJ was abusing her? I don't. We can see in her emails that she doesn't trust or even like her mother & wants desperately to protect MJ.


The one thing I want to know is WHAT Denise knew about MJ's past. I want to know if she ever read his arrest record or just believed whatever he told her.

In one of the articles recently regarding MJ's early release from probation, it stated DJ spoke at the hearing in favour of him being released from probation so I doubt she could have been unaware of his prior acts.

[LaLaw2000]

I certainly haven't forgotten about Brooke, but nothing is happening in this case. I just read everyday, tho.
I would like to see MJ get the DP, and Gagnon at least LWOP. I want everyone that had anything to do with Brooke's death to pay for it.
JMO

[Lola]

i think mj filled ar's head with somany bogus lies about brooke and this is why ar was jealous of brooke. i also think that mj and rg had many shared secrets and when mj discovered that brooke was innocently going to spend time with rg, mj became jealous and started a blitz of lies to ar in order to thwart brooke from ever getting to visit. i think this is why the desperate timeline. to get brooke befor she left .. just the fact that mj ''shared'' ar with rg. mj may have had a paranoid suspicion that rg [loves cp] maybe would get lucky with brooke. i think the jealousy was in mj that rg would have this young clean innocent girl there .

I would agree with you, marly. I do, however, continue to fluctuate between RG as a peripheral player with MJ sucking him in so that RG wouldn't talk....to ANY one, especially the family OR RG as an active participant. The more I read, the more I continue to be shocked --

as for Brooke's dad -- I wouldn't be surprised if he, and other members of the family just didn't get it. We don't know how much they knew about MJ's past with his sister. She was not willing to prosecute and his second victim was an older teenager while he was of a similar age. His family and extended family may have heard his "version" of events and not bothered to check the court case AND figured this wasn't a kid...not like a 9 year old or a 12 year old and that it wasn't a worry. Plus, as the family said, they had talked to Brooke. One wonders if AR's mother had talked to her...and I also wonder if by the time AR's mother thought there was an issue that perhaps AR had been so brainwashed as to lie to her mother that nothing was going on.

[Lola]

There was a MSNBC special several years back referencing Snuff films. Yes, they do exist. None of us want to believe there are people in this country and other countries that film and make big bucks from this horrific crime. People that pay for these films are just as evil as those that make them. I will do some research and find when this aired. Also, Elly Mae, I hate thinking the way I am thinking but I believe more than MJ is involved with Brooke's death. Too hard on the mind and the heart to think about all these juv involved in this but I think you are headed in the right direction with your thoughts. We will find out soon enough.

While not infallible, Snopes is a good source for debunking urban legends. Sources to support this??

A Pinch of Snuff (http://www.snopes.com/horrors/madmen/snuff.asp)

[lilacwine]

Just because they're not sold commercially does not mean they don't exist. I'm sure there are sickos out there who would "share" it with their other twisted friends.

[marly56]

Just because they're not sold commercially does not mean they don't exist. I'm sure there are sickos out there who would "share" it with their other twisted friends.
it doesnt take a genius to operate a video cam. besides i think of all the other horrible things that are on film ,why would there not be snuff films?

[LI_Mom]

I certainly haven't forgotten about Brooke, but nothing is happening in this case. I just read everyday, tho.
I would like to see MJ get the DP, and Gagnon at least LWOP. I want everyone that had anything to do with Brooke's death to pay for it.
JMO

If they only have RG on the CP charges plus aiding & abetting AFTER Brooke's disappearance, I wonder what the maximum sentence can be?

[LI_Mom]

Just because they're not sold commercially does not mean they don't exist. I'm sure there are sickos out there who would "share" it with their other twisted friends.

Real. Not real.

If real, they're probably very rare & probably not limited to one type of victim.

[swanniee11]

I will begin this with an I'M SORRY TO ASK... with that said, i've been following this case until 7/4. I just got back from vacation and no internet. (ugh). Can someone please give me an update. I was wondering if the cause of death has been determined and also if both uncle and stepfather are being charged with her murder?

[Elley Mae]

swanniee11 No cause of death has been reported that I am aware of, MJ (uncle) Gagnon her (ex-stepfather)are in jail being held on kidnapping and the ex-stepfather is being held for having child porn and some federal charge I think in reference to receiving child porn,whatever, and the court case got postponed because the lawyer was busy thursday.

[Elley Mae]

lightinthedark: Was there a date given that you saw or heard for the next appearance?

[texas48]

it doesnt take a genius to operate a video cam. besides i think of all the other horrible things that are on film ,why would there not be snuff films?
You are so right marly...People are more than willing to pick up a video cam and depending on amount of money offered will give buyers anything they want. Money can get people to do alot of things.

[becca]

If they only have RG on the CP charges plus aiding & abetting AFTER Brooke's disappearance, I wonder what the maximum sentence can be?

its obstruction not aiding and abetting... different crime... why I don't know ... but the CP charges will carry some heavy prison time.

[lightinthedark]

lightinthedark: Was there a date given that you saw or heard for the next appearance?

No, I haven't heard or read anywhere of a rescheduled appearance.

[lightinthedark]

"Jacques, Bennett's uncle who is charged in her kidnapping, requested a 20-day delay and Gagnon, her former step-father accused of obstructing justice, asked for a two-week delay.

New hearings have not yet been scheduled, prosecutors said."



Click the link below for the whole article.


http://www.timesargus.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080718/NEWS02/807180367/

[Tom'sGirl]

Jul 19, 1:47 PM EDT
Library confrontation points up privacy dilemma
By JOHN CURRAN
Associated Press Writer

http://hosted.ap.org/photos/6/66e10951-b7be-4dca-982a-10ca01e9a9a1-small.jpg (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/photos/6/66e10951-b7be-4dca-982a-10ca01e9a9a1.html?SITE=FLTAM&SECTION=US&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT)
AP Photo/Toby Talbot

RANDOLPH, Vt. (AP) -- Children's librarian Judith Flint was getting ready for the monthly book discussion group for 8- and 9-year-olds on "Love That Dog" when police showed up.

They weren't kidding around: Five state police detectives wanted to seize Kimball Public Library's public access computers as they frantically searched for a 12-year-old girl, acting on a tip that she sometimes used the terminals.

Flint demanded a search warrant, touching off a confrontation that pitted the privacy rights of library patrons against the rights of police on official business.

"It's one of the most difficult situations a library can face," said Deborah Caldwell-Stone, deputy director of intellectual freedom issues for the American Library Association.
cont'd:http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/L/LIBRARY_PRIVACY?SITE=FLTAM&SECTION=US (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/L/LIBRARY_PRIVACY?SITE=FLTAM&SECTION=US)

[Elley Mae]

lightinthedark thanks for the information on the new scheduled hearings.

[lightinthedark]

lightinthedark thanks for the information on the new scheduled hearings.

You're welcome :)

[LI_Mom]

its obstruction not aiding and abetting... different crime... why I don't know ... but the CP charges will carry some heavy prison time.

Right, thanks....it is obstruction now.

I was just wondering if LE might have found he played a bigger part in the Brooke case than they made public.

Yes, the CP will get him some heavy time... but nothing like MJ is facing.

[becca]

Right, thanks....it is obstruction now.

I was just wondering if LE might have found he played a bigger part in the Brooke case than they made public.

Yes, the CP will get him some heavy time... but nothing like MJ is facing.
I would guess 10-15 if not more... MJ is looking at the DP for his role in the kidnapping.
There has to be a reason that RG is charged in different states for the same thing... they really want this guy behind the eight ball..... so LE must think he knows more than he's said... its a bargaining thing.

[swanniee11]

Thanks for the updates.

[LI_Mom]

I would guess 10-15 if not more... MJ is looking at the DP for his role in the kidnapping.
There has to be a reason that RG is charged in different states for the same thing... they really want this guy behind the eight ball..... so LE must think he knows more than he's said... its a bargaining thing.

ITA, becca.

With so many calling for all the parents to be thrown in jail or worse....

I really just wanted to try to remind people to be more realistic about the few pieces of FACT we know & what will probably happen with all the people involved in this complicated case.


RG has a problem in more than one state, since he had/used computers in Texas AND Ala & who knows where else? Hopefully they can give him consecutive sentences for his CP charges.

And isn't he facing some assault charge or something down in Texas? Not at all involved in the Brooke case.

[lisalei321]

From the links thread (thanks Liz):

http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pb.../NEWS/10176938

In 1997, a year after his release, Jacques committed his only parole violation; failing to notify authorities of an address change. Jacques was dating Denise Rice, whom he later married, and had been staying with her and her 3-year-old daughter at least five nights a week, according to court records. One of the conditions of his release was no unsupervised contact with children under the age of 16.

Why in the name of all that's Holy, wasn't he violated then and there????? What was his PO thinking?:furious:

[Aleph]

You are so right marly...People are more than willing to pick up a video cam and depending on amount of money offered will give buyers anything they want. Money can get people to do alot of things.

And I think it's pretty obvious that there would be a market for such a thing.

Someone posted that one scary article about the upper-class British perv; he and his online friends were apparently into just this kind of fantasy. They cannot be the only ones out there, and I'm sure plenty of them have money.

It is believable to me that, twenty years ago, snuff films were only an urban legend and a horror story. But in the Internet age, with the networking possibilities we have now and the relative ease of making a video and uploading it, it's only logical that there is material of this kind being made, bought, and sold.

For some reason, the government keeps pretty quiet on this topic. Look at the secrecy surrounding even this case. Perhaps it's just too horrifying.

[becca]

ITA, becca.

With so many calling for all the parents to be thrown in jail or worse....

I really just wanted to try to remind people to be more realistic about the few pieces of FACT we know & what will probably happen with all the people involved in this complicated case.


RG has a problem in more than one state, since he had/used computers in Texas AND Ala & who knows where else? Hopefully they can give him consecutive sentences for his CP charges.

And isn't he facing some assault charge or something down in Texas? Not at all involved in the Brooke case.
I agree we need to be careful of the FACTS . We don't have that many and what we do have is sparse. Meaning I think they are half the truth and not all of it.
In otherwords there is alot we don't know about that is going on here. Things that will come out at trial but not before.

[Liz]

From the links thread (thanks Liz):

http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pb.../NEWS/10176938

In 1997, a year after his release, Jacques committed his only parole violation; failing to notify authorities of an address change. Jacques was dating Denise Rice, whom he later married, and had been staying with her and her 3-year-old daughter at least five nights a week, according to court records. One of the conditions of his release was no unsupervised contact with children under the age of 16.

Why in the name of all that's Holy, wasn't he violated then and there????? What was his PO thinking?:furious:


You're right, Lisa and it's maddening ... what *were* they thinking!?

[RiverRat]

From the links thread (thanks Liz):

http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pb.../NEWS/10176938

In 1997, a year after his release, Jacques committed his only parole violation; failing to notify authorities of an address change. Jacques was dating Denise Rice, whom he later married, and had been staying with her and her 3-year-old daughter at least five nights a week, according to court records. One of the conditions of his release was no unsupervised contact with children under the age of 16.

Why in the name of all that's Holy, wasn't he violated then and there????? What was his PO thinking?:furious:

I have had that same thought as it was what - Only two years ago that he was released from probation? What was the punishment he received for that violation instead of being reincarcerted for the remainder of his sentence?! I highly doubt that any of the children within reach of this monster made it out without a story to tell.

IF there is any law suit - Brook's dad might have a chance fown this avenue. There were cases here in Florida where the victim's family sued the State and the Department of Corrections(:rolleyes:) for the early releases of inmates that went on to commit further crimes on a date that they should have been behind bars. :behindbar

[angelwngs]

I have had that same thought as it was what - Only two years ago that he was released from probation? What was the punishment he received for that violation instead of being reincarcerted for the remainder of his sentence?! I highly doubt that any of the children within reach of this monster made it out without a story to tell.

IF there is any law suit - Brook's dad might have a chance fown this avenue. There were cases here in Florida where the victim's family sued the State and the Department of Corrections(:rolleyes:) for the early releases of inmates that went on to commit further crimes on a date that they should have been behind bars. :behindbar

ITA, RR. That is exactly what I posted early on in this case, that I imagined the probability of a family lawsuit, with total justification, IMO.

[lightinthedark]

I'm curious about the search for the safe/hard drive. Did LE/Feds find it in the landfill? Are they done searching the landfill? Has anyone heard any updates about this? TIA.

[Starr58]

From the links thread (thanks Liz):

http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pb.../NEWS/10176938

In 1997, a year after his release, Jacques committed his only parole violation; failing to notify authorities of an address change. Jacques was dating Denise Rice, whom he later married, and had been staying with her and her 3-year-old daughter at least five nights a week, according to court records. One of the conditions of his release was no unsupervised contact with children under the age of 16.

Why in the name of all that's Holy, wasn't he violated then and there????? What was his PO thinking?:furious:


Thats why sexual predators migrate to Vermont. The DOC in Vermont and the Judicial System is a JOKE!!

[Starr58]

I agree we need to be careful of the FACTS . We don't have that many and what we do have is sparse. Meaning I think they are half the truth and not all of it.
In otherwords there is alot we don't know about that is going on here. Things that will come out at trial but not before.

If there is one.....could just plead guilty to a lessor charge and the secrets in this family would remain hidden ....until the next offense

[christine2448]

I'm curious about the search for the safe/hard drive. Did LE/Feds find it in the landfill? Are they done searching the landfill? Has anyone heard any updates about this? TIA.

I am curious about this too.

[Medea]

I'm just wondering what caused the new probation officer to have such a different view than the one from 1996.

http://www.timesargus.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080720/NEWS/106817325/0/FRONTPAGE


"Mr. Jacques and I have often discussed his history in detail, not just in relation to his current offense .... These discussions revealed the following. He has committed multiple offenses, including: sexually assaulting a 13-year-old female, which led to conviction for L&L - lewd and lascivious - (amended from sexual assault), for which he received a deferred sentence; He had coerced sexual activities with (the aforementioned victim) when she was eight years of age. These activities included fondling, oral sex and sexual intercourse and took place over a period of years. (The victim) eventually was impregnated by him and an abortion was performed. Mr. Jacques was charged with L&L which [sic] later dismissed; An incident at a party he was attending, during which he disrobed and raped an unconscious woman. There were no charges or investigation of this matter; And the current offense, during which he hand-cuffed an unconscious woman...He forced the victim to participate in a variety of sexual activities over several hours. He took her to an area in a wood and forced her to her knees while he stood behind her with a knife to her throat, telling her he was going to execute her ... I have spoken with the victim in this case, and she remains convinced that Mr. Jacques' true intent was to execute her and that she was in fact, spared for unknown reasons. It should be noted that during the period that Mr. Jacques held the victim captive, he related to her that he had previously committed a similar offense in Arizona with a 12-year-old child, that he killed her by cutting her throat. While Mr. Jacques had spent time in Arizona, no evidence of his claim was found.

"Mr. Jacques has engaged in risky, manipulative and deceitful behavior since his release. He has caused an employer to believe that he had been convicted of 'date rape,' which was a simple 'misunderstanding' - referring to the 1993 case...He has reportedly taken an intoxicated female stranger to his grandfather's house, to "drop off his dog," which replicates certain aspects of his most recent offense...He has given other indicators that he continues to engage in various fantasies and misconceptions.
---------------------------------------------

This shows that Jacques admitted to having sex w/his 8 year old relative, and admits to another uncharged rape of an unconscious woman AND there is an incident where he brings an unknown unconscious woman to his parent's home.....

Based on what the probation officer says, it seems like Jacques likes his victims incapacitated, so I wonder if people who suspected he may have given Brooke some kind of drug might be right...

This just doesn't sound like someone who is a candidate for rehabilitation.

[lightinthedark]

I can't find anything new about the search. Almost as if the media forgot about it. :waitasec: Is it possible if something did turn up in the landfill that they would keep it completely under wraps? I'm thinking that may be the case as to not "tip" anyone off, meaning there may actually be more people involved. I just find it odd I couldn't find anything stating they are still currently searching or not... Regardless of something being found. :confused:

[DeltaDawn]

I can't find anything new about the search. Almost as if the media forgot about it. :waitasec: Is it possible if something did turn up in the landfill that they would keep it completely under wraps? I'm thinking that may be the case as to not "tip" anyone off, meaning there may actually be more people involved. I just find it odd I couldn't find anything stating they are still currently searching or not... Regardless of something being found. :confused:

You might want to try writing to one of the reporters in Texas that covered that part of this crime. They may have the info or be willing to find out for you. It can't hurt to contact them.

[RR0004]

I'm just wondering what caused the new probation officer to have such a different view than the one from 1996.

http://www.timesargus.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080720/NEWS/106817325/0/FRONTPAGE


"Mr. Jacques and I have often discussed his history in detail, not just in relation to his current offense .... These discussions revealed the following. He has committed multiple offenses, including: sexually assaulting a 13-year-old female, which led to conviction for L&L - lewd and lascivious - (amended from sexual assault), for which he received a deferred sentence; He had coerced sexual activities with (the aforementioned victim) when she was eight years of age. These activities included fondling, oral sex and sexual intercourse and took place over a period of years. (The victim) eventually was impregnated by him and an abortion was performed. Mr. Jacques was charged with L&L which [sic] later dismissed; An incident at a party he was attending, during which he disrobed and raped an unconscious woman. There were no charges or investigation of this matter; And the current offense, during which he hand-cuffed an unconscious woman...He forced the victim to participate in a variety of sexual activities over several hours. He took her to an area in a wood and forced her to her knees while he stood behind her with a knife to her throat, telling her he was going to execute her ... I have spoken with the victim in this case, and she remains convinced that Mr. Jacques' true intent was to execute her and that she was in fact, spared for unknown reasons. It should be noted that during the period that Mr. Jacques held the victim captive, he related to her that he had previously committed a similar offense in Arizona with a 12-year-old child, that he killed her by cutting her throat. While Mr. Jacques had spent time in Arizona, no evidence of his claim was found.

"Mr. Jacques has engaged in risky, manipulative and deceitful behavior since his release. He has caused an employer to believe that he had been convicted of 'date rape,' which was a simple 'misunderstanding' - referring to the 1993 case...He has reportedly taken an intoxicated female stranger to his grandfather's house, to "drop off his dog," which replicates certain aspects of his most recent offense...He has given other indicators that he continues to engage in various fantasies and misconceptions.
---------------------------------------------

This shows that Jacques admitted to having sex w/his 8 year old relative, and admits to another uncharged rape of an unconscious woman AND there is an incident where he brings an unknown unconscious woman to his parent's home.....

Based on what the probation officer says, it seems like Jacques likes his victims incapacitated, so I wonder if people who suspected he may have given Brooke some kind of drug might be right...

This just doesn't sound like someone who is a candidate for rehabilitation.
Or probabtion...IMO.

[Medea]

This piece also gives more info. on why the DA went for the plea agreement in the first place..highly intoxicated victim who I think had been at a bar earlier with Jacques and another man..left willingly...then was involved in some type of accident...

I can see where the prosecutor could have easily feared that a jury would not convict Jacques based on a defense of consensual rough sex with a drunken woman who had a car wreck the same night, it is only her word that he pulled a knife on her.

Which brings me back to my core belief that the REAL problem with sex offenders is not the lack of tough laws but the problem with convictions...same exact reason that Avila was acquitted of child molestation and the guy who killed Carlie Brucsia was acquitted of attempted kidnapping....juries have a very narrow view of 'rape' and if the case doesn't fit that view then they are most likely going to acquit.

Plus, the fact that Jacquies priors would not have been admitted...which is an area of the law that needs to be changed.

[Hailiejade77]

I was thinking about Brooke today. It will be a month that she went missing in 4 days.

[Starr58]

http://www.wcax.com/global/story.asp?s=8710454

Chittenden County, Vermont - July 21, 2008

Chittenden County authorities are looking for 21 convicted sex offenders.

Police say the annual check of the county's 307 registered sex offenders revealed that 26 have moved without notifying the registry as required by law. Five have already been found and arrested. Police are getting warrants to go after the others.

[lightinthedark]

http://www.wcax.com/global/story.asp?s=8710454

Chittenden County, Vermont - July 21, 2008

Chittenden County authorities are looking for 21 convicted sex offenders.

Police say the annual check of the county's 307 registered sex offenders revealed that 26 have moved without notifying the registry as required by law. Five have already been found and arrested. Police are getting warrants to go after the others.

Thanks for the link Starr58.

[marly56]

I'm just wondering what caused the new probation officer to have such a different view than the one from 1996.

http://www.timesargus.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080720/NEWS/106817325/0/FRONTPAGE


"Mr. Jacques and I have often discussed his history in detail, not just in relation to his current offense .... These discussions revealed the following. He has committed multiple offenses, including: sexually assaulting a 13-year-old female, which led to conviction for L&L - lewd and lascivious - (amended from sexual assault), for which he received a deferred sentence; He had coerced sexual activities with (the aforementioned victim) when she was eight years of age. These activities included fondling, oral sex and sexual intercourse and took place over a period of years. (The victim) eventually was impregnated by him and an abortion was performed. Mr. Jacques was charged with L&L which [sic] later dismissed; An incident at a party he was attending, during which he disrobed and raped an unconscious woman. There were no charges or investigation of this matter; And the current offense, during which he hand-cuffed an unconscious woman...He forced the victim to participate in a variety of sexual activities over several hours. He took her to an area in a wood and forced her to her knees while he stood behind her with a knife to her throat, telling her he was going to execute her ... I have spoken with the victim in this case, and she remains convinced that Mr. Jacques' true intent was to execute her and that she was in fact, spared for unknown reasons. It should be noted that during the period that Mr. Jacques held the victim captive, he related to her that he had previously committed a similar offense in Arizona with a 12-year-old child, that he killed her by cutting her throat. While Mr. Jacques had spent time in Arizona, no evidence of his claim was found.

"Mr. Jacques has engaged in risky, manipulative and deceitful behavior since his release. He has caused an employer to believe that he had been convicted of 'date rape,' which was a simple 'misunderstanding' - referring to the 1993 case...He has reportedly taken an intoxicated female stranger to his grandfather's house, to "drop off his dog," which replicates certain aspects of his most recent offense...He has given other indicators that he continues to engage in various fantasies and misconceptions.
---------------------------------------------

This shows that Jacques admitted to having sex w/his 8 year old relative, and admits to another uncharged rape of an unconscious woman AND there is an incident where he brings an unknown unconscious woman to his parent's home.....

Based on what the probation officer says, it seems like Jacques likes his victims incapacitated, so I wonder if people who suspected he may have given Brooke some kind of drug might be right...

This just doesn't sound like someone who is a candidate for rehabilitation.
i suspect this also and if ar was truthful in her statement then i believe [imo] where ar states that they went back to mj's place she [ar] and brooke stayed on couch and watched tv . maybe brooke was given a drug and mj was waiting for the drug to take effect before the ''take down''

[marly56]

This piece also gives more info. on why the DA went for the plea agreement in the first place..highly intoxicated victim who I think had been at a bar earlier with Jacques and another man..left willingly...then was involved in some type of accident...

I can see where the prosecutor could have easily feared that a jury would not convict Jacques based on a defense of consensual rough sex with a drunken woman who had a car wreck the same night, it is only her word that he pulled a knife on her.

Which brings me back to my core belief that the REAL problem with sex offenders is not the lack of tough laws but the problem with convictions...same exact reason that Avila was acquitted of child molestation and the guy who killed Carlie Brucsia was acquitted of attempted kidnapping....juries have a very narrow view of 'rape' and if the case doesn't fit that view then they are most likely going to acquit.

Plus, the fact that Jacquies priors would not have been admitted...which is an area of the law that needs to be changed.
i think the only way a jury can get a COMPLETE PROFILE on a perp is to view their priors.

[LI_Mom]

From the links thread (thanks Liz):

http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pb.../NEWS/10176938

In 1997, a year after his release, Jacques committed his only parole violation; failing to notify authorities of an address change. Jacques was dating Denise Rice, whom he later married, and had been staying with her and her 3-year-old daughter at least five nights a week, according to court records. One of the conditions of his release was no unsupervised contact with children under the age of 16.

Why in the name of all that's Holy, wasn't he violated then and there????? What was his PO thinking?:furious:

I guess since the mother was there, this didn't fall under the category of "unsupervised contact?"

[Catfish]

I just completed reading all 22 threads on this horrific case. There is one thing that has puzzled me from the beginning of Brooke's disappearance that I didn't see discussed here and I was wondering if anyone has any insight or theory about.

Brooke was reported missing about 9:00 pm on June 25th. We now know that prior to her disapperance, Uncle Michael Jacques took several steps to make it appear that she had met someone online, took her into a convience store so they would be taped leaving in opposite directions from the store and had A.R. confirm taking Brooke to the store to meet a friend, to visit that friend's relative in the hospital.

On June 26th, "police believe Brooke Bennett lied about meeting the girlfriend and may have been bound for a meeting with an unknown individual with whom she had communicated through MySpace.com, an online social networking site." http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080626/NEWS/154350035

An Amber Alert is issued.

M.J.'s plan seemed to be working well. There is 1700 miles of highway between Vermont and Texas to be searched. And Texas is a very, very large state to begin searching for Brooke.

With the police statements and the Amber Alert directing attention west towards Texas, why, on June 26th, did Uncle Michael "find" articles of Brook's clothing just a few miles from his home? I don't understand why he brought the search to his own "backyard" in less than 24 hours after she was reported missing?

-Catfish

[LI_Mom]

i suspect this also and if ar was truthful in her statement then i believe [imo] where ar states that they went back to mj's place she [ar] and brooke stayed on couch and watched tv . maybe brooke was given a drug and mj was waiting for the drug to take effect before the ''take down''

We have to wonder if he secretly drugged her at breakfast time, even before Denise left for work....

They sure don't want to take a chance Brooke would start to suspect what they were up to & blow the whistle at Cumberland Farms.

Taking her in public was a BIG risk at this point.

[Aleph]

Based on what the probation officer says, it seems like Jacques likes his victims incapacitated, so I wonder if people who suspected he may have given Brooke some kind of drug might be right...



Is Jacques small in stature? He looks pretty scrawny in his mugshot.

[LI_Mom]

I just completed reading all 22 threads on this horrific case. There is one thing that has puzzled me from the beginning of Brooke's disappearance that I didn't see discussed here and I was wondering if anyone has any insight or theory about.

Brooke was reported missing about 9:00 pm on June 25th. We now know that prior to her disapperance, Uncle Michael Jacques took several steps to make it appear that she had met someone online, took her into a convience store so they would be taped leaving in opposite directions from the store and had A.R. confirm taking Brooke to the store to meet a friend, to visit that friend's relative in the hospital.

On June 26th, "police believe Brooke Bennett lied about meeting the girlfriend and may have been bound for a meeting with an unknown individual with whom she had communicated through MySpace.com, an online social networking site." http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080626/NEWS/154350035

An Amber Alert is issued.

M.J.'s plan seemed to be working well. There is 1700 miles of highway between Vermont and Texas to be searched. And Texas is a very, very large state to begin searching for Brooke.

With the police statements and the Amber Alert directing attention west towards Texas, why, on June 26th, did Uncle Michael "find" articles of Brook's clothing just a few miles from his home? I don't understand why he brought the search to his own "backyard" in less than 24 hours after she was reported missing?

-Catfish

You're right.... that really made no sense.

I wonder if there was any DNA found on this evidence? WHO left it there?

They're being watched & can't travel further away to plant the evidence OR the person who planted it didn't follow the original plan.... got lazy & dumped it there?

[Catfish]

You're right.... that really made no sense.

I wonder if there was any DNA found on this evidence? WHO left it there?

They're being watched & can't travel further away to plant the evidence OR the person who planted it didn't follow the original plan.... got lazy & dumped it there?

Hi LIMom,

Thank's for your reply. I agree, I cannot make any sense of him bringing the search to his "own backyard."

DNA was found on this evidence. On page 2. paragraph 6 of the Federal Affidavit we learn that preliminary results show that DNA consistent with Brooke's was found on her underwear and on the handkerchief. We also read in that same paragraph that semen found did not belong to Uncle Michael.

Here's something else I don't understand. Why didn't the perpatrator simply bury the underwear and handkerchief with the body. Then, IF the body was ever discovered, semen stains (from Juv 2) would "prove" Uncle Michael wasn't involved.

-Catfish

[Vegas Bride]

You're right.... that really made no sense.

I wonder if there was any DNA found on this evidence? WHO left it there?

They're being watched & can't travel further away to plant the evidence OR the person who planted it didn't follow the original plan.... got lazy & dumped it there?

Yes I believe the dna evidence was some blood that belongs to Brooke :( and semen that was supposedly collected from AR's boyfriend.
The place where the items were found was supposed to be a popular gathering place for kids so pos uncle could have been thinking it would look good for things to be found where police had the dna pointing to an unknown. IMO he wanted them to have that dna evidence, he mistakenly thought that would stop them from looking at him.

VB

[vt8881]

I think key questions are being raised - the actions of MJ are very confusing - seems to have no logic or cunning at all. Almost as if 2 opposing scenarios are happening at the same time.

vt8881

[Medea]

I had wondered that as well...maybe he panicked once the FBI had the computers and figured they would find out he changed the entires or maybe something internal to the 'plan' went wrong...I have believed Brooke died the day she went missing and probably died that afternoon, but it is possible that he kept her alive for longer than that and she died after a couple of days, at which time he knew he was being watched and so he 'found' the items in order to have time to burry her....

I agree that based on what we know of Jacques plan...all of his actions can't be understood.....

[marly56]

I had wondered that as well...maybe he panicked once the FBI had the computers and figured they would find out he changed the entires or maybe something internal to the 'plan' went wrong...I have believed Brooke died the day she went missing and probably died that afternoon, but it is possible that he kept her alive for longer than that and she died after a couple of days, at which time he knew he was being watched and so he 'found' the items in order to have time to burry her....

I agree that based on what we know of Jacques plan...all of his actions can't be understood.....
there is a possibility that he gave the items to someone else [involved] to plant and that other person left them close to his property to bring attention to him. in other words to expose him as the killer...maybe the death was an accident.. maybe mj and/or others were abusing brooke[rip] and mj went off the deep end and and...

[Catfish]

there is a possibility that he gave the items to someone else [involved] to plant and that other person left them close to his property to bring attention to him. in other words to expose him as the killer...maybe the death was an accident.. maybe mj and/or others were abusing brooke[rip] and mj went off the deep end and and...

Hi Marly,

When I discussed this case with my wife, this was her theory also. She also pointed out that leaving the plastic "sandwich" bag may have been done to show the semen evidence was planted also, since the bag probably contained traces of Juv2's semen.

However, when I read the Federal Affidavit for Uncle Michael, I learned on Page 2, Pargraph 5 that on June 26th, Jacques notified Vermont State Police he had located a sneaker.

If someone else planted this evidence close to Uncle Michael's to implicate him, I think he wouldn't have notified police that he found it.

I believe he planted the shoes, underwear, handkerchief, and the plastic bag himself. But why, and especially why leave the plastic bag?

-Catfish

[jnodrog]

Hi Marly,

When I discussed this case with my wife, this was her theory also. She also pointed out that leaving the plastic "sandwich" bag may have been done to show the semen evidence was planted also, since the bag probably contained traces of Juv2's semen.

However, when I read the Federal Affidavit for Uncle Michael, I learned on Page 2, Pargraph 5 that on June 26th, Jacques notified Vermont State Police he had located a sneaker.

If someone else planted this evidence close to Uncle Michael's to implicate him, I think he wouldn't have notified police that he found it.

I believe he planted the shoes, underwear, handkerchief, and the plastic bag himself. But why, and especially why leave the plastic bag?

-Catfish
Just so you all know the planted evidence was not that close to MJs home, it is actually almost 9 miles from the Floating Bridge swimming area in Brookfield to MJs home. But it is 9 miles in the total opposite direction of the burial area.


Allen

[jnodrog]

I think the evidence was planted to absolutely lead the ppl looking away from his home area, i think MJ was so dumb to think that by him finding it they wouldnt look his way, i think they were already looking his way.

Allen

[marly56]

Hi Marly,

When I discussed this case with my wife, this was her theory also. She also pointed out that leaving the plastic "sandwich" bag may have been done to show the semen evidence was planted also, since the bag probably contained traces of Juv2's semen.

However, when I read the Federal Affidavit for Uncle Michael, I learned on Page 2, Pargraph 5 that on June 26th, Jacques notified Vermont State Police he had located a sneaker.

If someone else planted this evidence close to Uncle Michael's to implicate him, I think he wouldn't have notified police that he found it.

I believe he planted the shoes, underwear, handkerchief, and the plastic bag himself. But why, and especially why leave the plastic bag?

-Catfish
good point !

[Catfish]

Just so you all know the planted evidence was not that close to MJs home, it is actually almost 9 miles from the Floating Bridge swimming area in Brookfield to MJs home. But it is 9 miles in the total opposite direction of the burial area. Allen

Thank you Allen for this information. When I posted about Uncle Michael "finding" evidence in his own "backyard," I was thinking more of the closeness of his home versus the distance from Vermont to Texas.

The evening before MJ "found" the sneaker, he showed LE Brooke's MySpace page where she discusses with skittlemeup "...I'm going to Texas..." (I realize the entire message was planted by Uncle Michael.)

MJ, for unknown reasons, "found" Brooke's clothing fairly close to his home within 12-16 hours after showing LE her MySpace page. So far as we know, LE's focus at that time was that this was an Internet case. By "finding" her clothing, MJ forced the police to search the area within 9 miles of his property, rather than search the highways from Vermont to Texas.

And MJ surely would have known LE would inspect his computer, since the hard drive on his personal computer was missing with no explaination. He must have believed the deleted eMails to AR on his business computer were not recoverable.

-Catfish

[marly56]

I think the evidence was planted to absolutely lead the ppl looking away from his home area, i think MJ was so dumb to think that by him finding it they wouldnt look his way, i think they were already looking his way.

Allen
right...it must have NEVER dawned on uncle mike that le would look into his past.

[marly56]

Just so you all know the planted evidence was not that close to MJs home, it is actually almost 9 miles from the Floating Bridge swimming area in Brookfield to MJs home. But it is 9 miles in the total opposite direction of the burial area.


Allen
now with the 9 mile distance in the opposite direction info... could there still be a possibility that others involved drove and dropped it there? ar did tell le that jv2 picked her up [car?] remember ar did get the semen from jv2 . we dont know as of today whether or not jv2 was aware of the facts but we have ar saying to le that the semen was jv2 and also that when mj called brooke to come upstairs, this is the last time that ar saw brooke because ar was picked up by her boyfriend jv2. so imo if ar told le the truth then the planted evidence could have been moved by someone other than mj. then of course this would make more sense to me personally... of course this is only my oppinion and i do not want to be the one that accuses but wouldnt this sort of tie things things together? getting someone elses semen in order to set someone else up? if ar really cared about her boyfriend[jv2] would she let him take the fall? or would she have told him what was going on when he picked her up.

[Catfish]

...if ar really cared about her boyfriend[jv2] would she let him take the fall? or would she have told him what was going on when he picked her up.

Hi Marly,

This is an excellent question. Perhaps a partial answer is found in a statement made by AR as presented in the State of Vermont Affidavit: State of Vermont V. Michael Jacqures.

On June 29th, 4 days after Brooke was last seen by AR, she is interviewed by Det. Sgt. William Jenkins. This interview is where she tells Det. Jenkins about Breckenridge.

In paragraph 6 on page 2, "AR expressed for some reason she was not killed and did not know how she was alive."

If AR is truthful in this statement, then on June 25th she may well have been torn between caring for her boyfriend and her own survival. And survival is a pretty strong instinct.

-Catfish

[marly56]

Hi Marly,

This is an excellent question. Perhaps a partial answer is found in a statement made by AR as presented in the State of Vermont Affidavit: State of Vermont V. Michael Jacqures.

On June 29th, 4 days after Brooke was last seen by AR, she is interviewed by Det. Sgt. William Jenkins. This interview is where she tells Det. Jenkins about Breckenridge.

In paragraph 6 on page 2, "AR expressed for some reason she was not killed and did not know how she was alive."

If AR is truthful in this statement, then on June 25th she may well have been torn between caring for her boyfriend and her own survival. And survival is a pretty strong instinct.

-Catfish
hi catfish...yes i agree...just wish we had more information ..maybe this is why there is such a media blackout, if we had more information we would be able to connect all the dots and this would not bode well for le if they are in the gathering information process. the way word travels via internet and in a small town local area, the truth be told, it would have a profound effect on the precincts there.

[jnodrog]

I have thought all along that the evidence was not planted by MJ, and the leaving the baggy behind was a so called rookie mistake, im sure le new that evidence was planted as soon as they found that baggy. Im still not so sure where Brooke was after that first day I live within 15 miles and i cant believe that there would have been open casket if she was buried for a week, just my opinion, i personally think someone else did the dirty work, hmmmmmmm and i wonder where RG was when he first got to Vermont, they talked a lot on the phone about something and it had to be more than just getting rid of porn.


Allen

[marly56]

I have thought all along that the evidence was not planted by MJ, and the leaving the baggy behind was a so called rookie mistake, im sure le new that evidence was planted as soon as they found that baggy. Im still not so sure where Brooke was after that first day I live within 15 miles and i cant believe that there would have been open casket if she was buried for a week, just my opinion, i personally think someone else did the dirty work, hmmmmmmm and i wonder where RG was when he first got to Vermont, they talked a lot on the phone about something and it had to be more than just getting rid of porn.


Allen
you've really sparked my imagination now. i never considered rg but more than a bit player.

[SeriouslySearching]

Sorry, I am behind now. Did the court dates take place on July 17th for MJ and RG? I can't find any threads on them if they did.

[Starr58]

Sorry, I am behind now. Did the court dates take place on July 17th for MJ and RG? I can't find any threads on them if they did.

Nope...rescheduled due to scheduling conflict....see media threads for MJ & RG

[Catfish]

(MJ and RG) ...talked a lot on the phone about something and it had to be more than just getting rid of porn.
Allen

Hi Allen,

You pointed out that MJ and RG talked a lot on the phone and “it had to be more than just getting rid of porn.” I reread Raymond Gagnon’s affidavit and news releases about him. From what I read, those six phone calls must not have been about getting rid of porn at all!

Between 9:26 pm on June 25th. and 12:59 am the next morning, Raymond Gagnon received 6 phone calls from Michael Jacques. While we don’t know the subject of these calls, we do know that R.G. left Texas for Alabama on June 26, leaving his laptop computer and a safe behind in San Antonio, Texas. In other words, these 6 phone calls did not alarm RG enough to destroy his child porn before he left Texas.

On June 26, Gagnon flies to Alabama and enters his former residence in Cullman. From there, he flies to Vermont. Investigators later went to the home and said they found child pornography stored on two computers belonging to Gagnon. Again, Gagnon was not alarmed enough on June 26th. to destroy his collection of CP before he left Alabama.

In fact, it wasn’t until 4 days later, on June 30, that something alarmed Gagnon enough that he called Grosenheider in Texas and asked him to throw away his safe and contents.

I admit my earlier assumption was that those 6 calls from Jacques were to inform Gagnon of what happened to Brooke and to give Gagnon time to destroy his collection of child porn and other incriminating evidence. Rereading the affidavit, I see that was not the case. This makes those 6 calls even more curious to me now.

-Catfish

[jnodrog]

Hi Allen,

You pointed out that MJ and RG talked a lot on the phone and “it had to be more than just getting rid of porn.” I reread Raymond Gagnon’s affidavit and news releases about him. From what I read, those six phone calls must not have been about getting rid of porn at all!

Between 9:26 pm on June 25th. and 12:59 am the next morning, Raymond Gagnon received 6 phone calls from Michael Jacques. While we don’t know the subject of these calls, we do know that R.G. left Texas for Alabama on June 26, leaving his laptop computer and a safe behind in San Antonio, Texas. In other words, these 6 phone calls did not alarm RG enough to destroy his child porn before he left Texas.

On June 26, Gagnon flies to Alabama and enters his former residence in Cullman. From there, he flies to Vermont. Investigators later went to the home and said they found child pornography stored on two computers belonging to Gagnon. Again, Gagnon was not alarmed enough on June 26th. to destroy his collection of CP before he left Alabama.

In fact, it wasn’t until 4 days later, on June 30, that something alarmed Gagnon enough that he called Grosenheider in Texas and asked him to throw away his safe and contents.

I admit my earlier assumption was that those 6 calls from Jacques were to inform Gagnon of what happened to Brooke and to give Gagnon time to destroy his collection of child porn and other incriminating evidence. Rereading the affidavit, I see that was not the case. This makes those 6 calls even more curious to me now.

-Catfish
Yep i think your on to something also. Just my opinion or thoughts but i think RG had something to do with the burial myself, but maybe not. Im just thinking he had to be into this way deeper to fly all over and come here to Vermont. Just to support the family and go to church?? i dont think so.

Allen

[marly56]

Hi Allen,

You pointed out that MJ and RG talked a lot on the phone and “it had to be more than just getting rid of porn.” I reread Raymond Gagnon’s affidavit and news releases about him. From what I read, those six phone calls must not have been about getting rid of porn at all!

Between 9:26 pm on June 25th. and 12:59 am the next morning, Raymond Gagnon received 6 phone calls from Michael Jacques. While we don’t know the subject of these calls, we do know that R.G. left Texas for Alabama on June 26, leaving his laptop computer and a safe behind in San Antonio, Texas. In other words, these 6 phone calls did not alarm RG enough to destroy his child porn before he left Texas.

On June 26, Gagnon flies to Alabama and enters his former residence in Cullman. From there, he flies to Vermont. Investigators later went to the home and said they found child pornography stored on two computers belonging to Gagnon. Again, Gagnon was not alarmed enough on June 26th. to destroy his collection of CP before he left Alabama.

In fact, it wasn’t until 4 days later, on June 30, that something alarmed Gagnon enough that he called Grosenheider in Texas and asked him to throw away his safe and contents.

I admit my earlier assumption was that those 6 calls from Jacques were to inform Gagnon of what happened to Brooke and to give Gagnon time to destroy his collection of child porn and other incriminating evidence. Rereading the affidavit, I see that was not the case. This makes those 6 calls even more curious to me now.

-Catfish
thanx for the recap of the calls. brooke [rip] may have still been alive during those calls which would explain rg not needing to get rid of any incriminating links to him. she may have been alive for several days .

[LI_Mom]

thanx for the recap of the calls. brooke [rip] may have still been alive during those calls which would explain rg not needing to get rid of any incriminating links to him. she may have been alive for several days .


Or MJ called & told him he killed Brooke by accident & RG got SO upset he didn't think to protect his own computers.... MJ sent him on some type of mission to help him deal w/ the Brooke situation?

That's why I don't think RG had any knowledge of the plan to kidnap Brooke.... he would have known in advance that there could be BIG trouble & he would have protected his own computers before he headed to VT.

I think his reaction shows someone who is completely caught off guard.

[Catfish]

...I think his reaction shows someone who is completely caught off guard.

Hi LI_Mom,

I think you are correct. The only action Gagnon took to dispose of his child porn, that we are aware of, was on June 30, when he called Grosenheider in Texas at 3:00 am and asked him to dispose of his safe.

This was a few hours after A.R. gave her testimony to LE at 2:20 pm on June 29th. And at 4:15 pm on that same day, State police arrest Brooke’s uncle, Michael Jacques.

Gagnon may not even have been aware of Jacques arrest until later on June 29th. Hence, the phone to Texas at 3:00 am to dispose of the safe. It does seem possible Gagon may have been "completely caught off guard."

Given this possibility, this makes me even more curious as to what the 6 late night phone calls on June 25th. from MJ [and Gagnon accessing Brooke's MySpace in Texas and in Alabama] were all about. Uncle Michael must have fed him a believable line of BS to get his unwitting cooperation in changing Brooke's password on MySpace.

-Catfish

[LI_Mom]

Hi LI_Mom,

I think you are correct. The only action Gagnon took to dispose of his child porn, that we are aware of, was on June 30, when he called Grosenheider in Texas at 3:00 am and asked him to dispose of his safe.

This was a few hours after A.R. gave her testimony to LE at 2:20 pm on June 29th. And at 4:15 pm on that same day, State police arrest Brooke’s uncle, Michael Jacques.

Gagnon may not even have been aware of Jacques arrest until later on June 29th. Hence, the phone to Texas at 3:00 am to dispose of the safe. It does seem possible Gagon may have been "completely caught off guard."

Given this possibility, this makes me even more curious as to what the 6 late night phone calls on June 25th. from MJ [and Gagnon accessing Brooke's MySpace in Texas and in Alabama] were all about. Uncle Michael must have fed him a believable line of BS to get his unwitting cooperation in changing Brooke's password on MySpace.

-Catfish

I think MJ was a master at BS'ing people.

How else do you explain RG getting himself mixed up in this murder case when he was so far away from the crime scene? No, I don't think he had any idea that Brooke was in trouble.... other than maybe she wanted to meet some friends behind her mother's back & MJ was helping her with an alibi.... as a favor to Brooke & AR.



It also seems clear that MJ talked himself out of trouble when Denise found the child porn on the computer at home. I wonder if MJ & maybe w/ AR's help convinced Denise that someone else used the computer & they had no clue this rotten person downloaded that 'crap.' And if Denise notified authorities, he'd be back in jail & in major trouble.... blah, blah, blah.

Same with all the times Denise didn't believe her own eyes to the clues around her.... she probably had BOTH of them telling her she was crazy to think such terrible things.

[Catfish]

I think MJ was a master at BS'ing people.

How else do you explain RG getting himself mixed up in this murder case when he was so far away from the crime scene? No, I don't think he had any idea that Brooke was in trouble.... other than maybe she wanted to meet some friends behind her mother's back & MJ was helping her with an alibi.... as a favor to Brooke & AR.

It also seems clear that MJ talked himself out of trouble when Denise found the child porn on the computer at home. I wonder if MJ & maybe w/ AR's help convinced Denise that someone else used the computer & they had no clue this rotten person downloaded that 'crap.' And if Denise notified authorities, he'd be back in jail & in major trouble.... blah, blah, blah.

Same with all the times Denise didn't believe her own eyes to the clues around her.... she probably had BOTH of them telling her she was crazy to think such terrible things.

Hi LI_Mom,

Excellent points all. My feelings also about RG and MJ.

ETA -
...How else do you explain RG getting himself mixed up in this murder case when he was so far away from the crime scene?

Rereading Gagnon's affidavit, he seems to be trying to distance himself as much as possible from Brooke's murder. [Brooke's body was recovered on July 2, but LE possibly told Gagnon they found the grave on July 1, the day Gagnon is testifying.]

When LE questioned him, he admitted that he had accessed Brooke's MySpace from Texas, changing her user name and password at MJs request. This seems to be all LE knew of Gagnon's connection with Brooke's disappearance.

However, while being questioned on July 1st, Gagnon voluntarily admits to downloading "a vast amount of child pornography," and admitted he had "still photographs of Juvenile1 engaged in sexual acts with her minor boyfriend." [page 10, paragraph 16 ]

In other words, on July 1st, Gagnon admitted to possession of CP prior to LE even being aware he had it. And LE found out Gagnon asked to have his safe in Texas disposed of when he told them! [paragraph 18]

So Gagnon was 'singing like a canary,' admitting to illegal activity to show LE that he was cooperating in their investigation. While he admitted committing criminal acts, he's telling them that accomplice Brooke's disappearance was not one of them.

-Catfish

[lightinthedark]

Hey everyone,

Just an FYI... RG's new court date is Thursday July 31st @ 1:30 pm. MJ's new date is Wednesday August 6th @ 10:00 am.

[Tom'sGirl]

Hey everyone,

Just an FYI... RG's new court date is Thursday July 31st @ 1:30 pm. MJ's new date is Wednesday August 6th @ 10:00 am.
Thanks so much for the info!

[Hailiejade77]

Just wanted to say Rest in Peace Brooke Bennett. It has been exactly one month since her disappearance.

[pjsmommy]

Hey everyone,

Just an FYI... RG's new court date is Thursday July 31st @ 1:30 pm. MJ's new date is Wednesday August 6th @ 10:00 am.
can't hardly wait!

[Lola]

you've really sparked my imagination now. i never considered rg but more than a bit player.

Ditto, I think you guys are definitely on to something. I would still like to know what the circumstances were that led to RG and Cassandra's divorce. Surely if it were child porn or the like, she wouldn't have dreamed of letting Brooke go to visit him??

[LI_Mom]

Ditto, I think you guys are definitely on to something. I would still like to know what the circumstances were that led to RG and Cassandra's divorce. Surely if it were child porn or the like, she wouldn't have dreamed of letting Brooke go to visit him??

BEFORE Brooke's disappearance, RG had NO ARREST RECORD.

We know for a FACT that RG traveled to Vt to visit. We don't even know where he stayed when he came up north.

Do we know for a FACT that Brooke went to visit RG after the separation/divorce???? IF Brooke DID travel back to her old state.... did she stay with RG OR at a friends' house?

We know for a FACT that MJ doctored Brooke's MySpace page to make it appear that she missed Texas & might head that way.



This is curious:


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.

--

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.

------


I wonder how someone assaults a minor in 2007 & isn't even charged with anything until 2008?

If it was a stranger to RG, the victim might have recognized his name when the story broke & finally stepped forward & told someone she was assaulted by RG. Since this tidbit hit the news so early into the case, I tend to think the victim might have been Brooke's sister.

Maybe that explains why Cassandra went back home with her kids.... the kids might have told her Ray was making advances & they were scared & she protected them as best as she could.



We just don't know very many actual facts in this whole sad story & we can't fill in the blanks by assuming what these people knew or didn't know or what they did or didn't do.

[Lola]

LI Mom, if I am not mistaken this 2007 charge of RG stems from information the police have gotten from AR and it involves her as the minor. I also believe that he confirmed it, but I could be wrong.

[cheko1]

I certainly haven't forgotten about Brooke, but nothing is happening in this case. I just read everyday, tho.
I would like to see MJ get the DP, and Gagnon at least LWOP. I want everyone that had anything to do with Brooke's death to pay for it.
JMO


I'm with you LaLaw!
I had hoped we'd hear something from the families.

[LI_Mom]

LI Mom, if I am not mistaken this 2007 charge of RG stems from information the police have gotten from AR and it involves her as the minor. I also believe that he confirmed it, but I could be wrong.

That doesn't ring a bell with me at all but I suppose it would explain why he was never charged.


All I'm getting at here is that it's unfair to judge Brooke's family too harshly without knowing all the facts.

KG had NO arrest record prior to Brooke's disappearance & it's very possible that Cassandra or James B. had NO CLUE he was such a creep.

[lisalei321]

IIRC the charge on RG stems from his own admission in the affadavit, (sex w/Juv1 and MJ) and AR(Juv1?) admits to the same encounter, only says she was drugged at the time and couldn't identify the 2nd person.

Time to go back and read the affidavits (gotta go to work shortly will do it tonight though)

[Lola]

That's it, lisalei321 - thx. It happened in 2007, LI_Mom, he is only charged with it now.

[Catfish]

Hi,
On page 12 of the Federal Affidavit for Michael Jacques, I found a curious entry. The second paragraph from the bottom is from an email sent by Chevy Pickup to Juv1:
Unfortunately that means we will not be able to get together this weekend. I won’t even be in town until Monday night now, unless we get the problem sorted out before that. Please let Corey know I will see him, just can’t be this weekend. I am hoping Monday or Tuesday night we can get together and C has said that, right now, we still can. First, I am under the impression that Michael Jacques is ‘Chevy Pickup,’ but Juv1 (A.R.) is not aware of this. Second, I am assuming that when he writes “I am hoping Monday or Tuesday night we can get together…” he is telling Juv1 that he hopes to get together with Corey, not Juv1. Otherwise getting together with Juv1 would blow his cover.

‘Chevy Pickup’ also wrote “Please let Corey know I will see him, just can’t be this weekend. ” From this sentence, I assume Juv1 must know who Corey is and MJ believes Juv1 will deliver this message to him.

Okay, when Juv1 tells Corey that ‘Chevy Pickup’ can’t see him this weekend, Corey has to know ‘Chevy Pickup’ is Michael Jacques, otherwise the message wouldn‘t make any sense. And MJ is counting on Corey to not tell Juv1 anything that would let Juv1 know who ‘Chevy’ really is.

Since Corey must know who ‘Chevy’ really is, does this imply that he might also be aware of the whole Breckenridge charade?

Could this be one the ‘three men’ AR has testified to?

-Catfish

[jnodrog]

Hi,
On page 12 of the Federal Affidavit for Michael Jacques, I found a curious entry. The second paragraph from the bottom is from an email sent by Chevy Pickup to Juv1:
First, I am under the impression that Michael Jacques is ‘Chevy Pickup,’ but Juv1 (A.R.) is not aware of this. Second, I am assuming that when he writes “I am hoping Monday or Tuesday night we can get together…” he is telling Juv1 that he hopes to get together with Corey, not Juv1. Otherwise getting together with Juv1 would blow his cover.

‘Chevy Pickup’ also wrote “Please let Corey know I will see him, just can’t be this weekend. ” From this sentence, I assume Juv1 must know who Corey is and MJ believes Juv1 will deliver this message to him.

Okay, when Juv1 tells Corey that ‘Chevy Pickup’ can’t see him this weekend, Corey has to know ‘Chevy Pickup’ is Michael Jacques, otherwise the message wouldn‘t make any sense. And MJ is counting on Corey to not tell Juv1 anything that would let Juv1 know who ‘Chevy’ really is.

Since Corey must know who ‘Chevy’ really is, does this imply that he might also be aware of the whole Breckenridge charade?

Could this be one the ‘three men’ AR has testified to?

-Catfish

The name Corey was mentioned to me a while ago as a Real person that AR and Brooke new, this was told to me by a person that lives in Randolph, but i think i posted that when all the name stuff was being eliminated and stuff.
But i think Corey is a real person as i was told the day after Brooke came up missing that the name Corey was of interest. Just a thought.


Allen

[believe09]

Are they really going to hold it until closer to trial??

[Catfish]

The name Corey was mentioned to me a while ago as a Real person that AR and Brooke new, this was told to me by a person that lives in Randolph, but i think i posted that when all the name stuff was being eliminated and stuff.
But i think Corey is a real person as i was told the day after Brooke came up missing that the name Corey was of interest. Just a thought.
Allen

Thank you Allen,

I seem to recall that you did post this information earlier. I've read all 22 threads in this forum... just so much information for me to hold in my head...lol. Thanks for the reminder. :)

You said that you posted when all the "name stuff was being eliminated." I hope I haven't been remiss when I used Corey's name. It wasn't redacted in the Federal Affidavit for Michael Jacques that I read. Is Corey a minor?

-Catfish

[lightinthedark]

Jacques court date has been moved yet again... Tuesday August 12th @ 2:30pm, according to the United States District Court-District of Vermont court calendar.

[jnodrog]

Thank you Allen,

I seem to recall that you did post this information earlier. I've read all 22 threads in this forum... just so much information for me to hold in my head...lol. Thanks for the reminder. :)

You said that you posted when all the "name stuff was being eliminated." I hope I haven't been remiss when I used Corey's name. It wasn't redacted in the Federal Affidavit for Michael Jacques that I read. Is Corey a minor?

-Catfish
Speaking only of the name COREY from the affidavit, it was mentioned to me as a boyfriend of AR at one time. But only as Corey from affidavit.


Allen

[jnodrog]

I only live like less than 15 miles from Randolph and the name was mentioned to me before i even joined here, and this was by someone who lives about 2 miles from MJ home on Ridge Rd, which is the road that takes you to Floating Bridge where shoe and other items were found. I know the area very well and said form day onewhen those items were found that they were planted, the area isnt an easy area to get to if you dont know your way well. You just wouldnt go that way if you abducted someone.

Allen

[jnodrog]

Speaking only of the name COREY from the affidavit, it was mentioned to me as a boyfriend of AR at one time. But only as Corey from affidavit.


Allen
Thats why im thinking that you are right and this is an actual person considering i had that name before any affidavits.

Allen

[Catfish]

...it was mentioned to me as a boyfriend of AR at one time. ... Allen

Thank you again Allen!

In the affidavit we read an email where "Chevy Pickup" asks AR to give a message to Corey. AR thinks "Chevy" is someone with Breckenridge.

Since MJ is comfortable asking AR to give a message to Corey, under the guise of "Chevy Pickup", he knows Corey will know who "Chevy" is and will understand the message.

When this all comes out, I think we will see Corey is/was involved with the Breckenridge charade also.

-Catfish

[Rhett]

In the conversations between AR and MJ,Rauel and c they had to delay the take down (if not mistaken)more then once. Maybe the machine was on back order. For over 6 weeks this was planned. They had a strong need for Brooke to be taken care of. The question is Why? Why did AR hate her so much that she wanted to see Brooke suffer. If MJ wanted to make a stuff film,in the 6 weeks of planning this he probably could have found someone that would not have lead back to him.
Wouldn't AR's mom have seen this machine? In my opinion she had to know something and either participated or ignored it all.

[LI_Mom]

Wouldn't AR's mom have seen this machine? In my opinion she had to know something and either participated or ignored it all.

We don't know where the items were shipped. When did they arrive? Who was home when they were delivered?

If they were shipped to the home, they might have been in an unused or rarely used portion of the basement.

[strach304]

After reading todays media links I find it disgusting that prison officials still want to brag about their success rate with these perverts. No, in Brooke's case it wouldn't have helped because Jessica's law wasn't in place at that time but the authorities knew what MJ's conviction was all about. Using him as a success rate should show them that he wasn't and has proven that he was still at it but didn't get caught up until he murdered a child.

How many more have to die before they see that these so-called rehabilitated scum suckers are simply not getting caught. Very good possibility in my mind knowing all the missing children from all over may have become victims of their successes. Many examples of these types that we know of that do travel from state to state. I can imagine a certain amount of success with the 14 year olds they cite but c'mon enough is enough.

[marly56]

After reading todays media links I find it disgusting that prison officials still want to brag about their success rate with these perverts. No, in Brooke's case it wouldn't have helped because Jessica's law wasn't in place at that time but the authorities knew what MJ's conviction was all about. Using him as a success rate should show them that he wasn't and has proven that he was still at it but didn't get caught up until he murdered a child.

How many more have to die before they see that these so-called rehabilitated scum suckers are simply not getting caught. Very good possibility in my mind knowing all the missing children from all over may have become victims of their successes. Many examples of these types that we know of that do travel from state to state. I can imagine a certain amount of success with the 14 year olds they cite but c'mon enough is enough.
these ''rehab programs'' probably yield large competitive financial contracts so there may be PRESSURE for these programs to succeed. which would explain the WHY and HOW did one probation officer say mj was dangerous, while the other po gave mj the ok and released him early so he [mj] could get to his job. seems mj was really needed at his job. he was very successful as a company man and went straight from prison and back to work.

[Tom'sGirl]

[quote]We don't know where the items were shipped.
YES, we do, the affidavits say they were shipped to their home.

When did they arrive? Who was home when they were delivered?

That info. has not been released although we know the LE has that information.
If they were shipped to the home, they might have been in an unused or rarely used portion of the basement
The items he ordered may have been kept in a place other than the home, don't know. or has the LE realeased that info.

[Catfish]

Wouldn't AR's mom have seen this machine? In my opinion she had to know something and either participated or ignored it all.

Hi Rhett,

The company that sold the machine, Extreme Restraints, ships via UPS. My experience with UPS is that a package can be tracked over the Internet, so a person will know what day it will arrive. Also, UPS only does home deliverys Monday through Friday. My experience with them has shown that they deliver at approximately the same time of the day for each delivery.

If Denise Jacques works through the week, MJ could have arranged to be home the day it was delivered. Thus, Denise would not have seen it delivered.

When disassembled, the machine would not require a large space to store it in. MJ could have stored it in the attic, garage, an outside shed, back of a closet or even under his bed.

As far as could or would Denise ignore it if she found it? From the State of Vermont affidavit against MJ, it appears that Denise either ignored a lot going on that house or she didn't follow up too deeply into events she herself witnessed.

-Catfish

[Liz]

Jacques court date has been moved yet again... Tuesday August 12th @ 2:30pm, according to the United States District Court-District of Vermont court calendar.

Light - thanks for the info! :)

[LI_Mom]

[quote=LI_Mom;2428499]
YES, we do, the affidavits say they were shipped to their home.

That info. has not been released although we know the LE has that information.

The items he ordered may have been kept in a place other than the home, don't know. or has the LE realeased that info.

Thanks, Tom'sGirl.

[Tom'sGirl]

Prosecution requests extension in Jacques investigation (http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080730/NEWS/80730024/-1/NEWS05)
BurlingtonFreePress.com (http://burlingtonfreepress.com/) - Burlington,VT,USA

The U.S. Attorney for Vermont asked a federal magistrate Wednesday for 60 more days before prosecutors have to decide whether to indict Michael Jacques of Randolph in connection with the killing of his 12-year-old niece, Brooke Bennett.
snip
The delay is the third requested by federal prosecutors. Jacques was originally scheduled to appear in court to face the kidnapping with death resulting charge on July 17 before the hearing was rescheduled for Aug. 6, then again to Aug. 12. No new date for a hearing in the case has been scheduled.

[lightinthedark]

Here's the link to the story.

http://www.woai.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=cdd3c3cf-9ba4-47da-b4ec-b8453e73da21

[Medea]

Prosecution requests extension in Jacques investigation (http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080730/NEWS/80730024/-1/NEWS05)
BurlingtonFreePress.com (http://burlingtonfreepress.com/) - Burlington,VT,USA

The U.S. Attorney for Vermont asked a federal magistrate Wednesday for 60 more days before prosecutors have to decide whether to indict Michael Jacques of Randolph in connection with the killing of his 12-year-old niece, Brooke Bennett.
snip
The delay is the third requested by federal prosecutors. Jacques was originally scheduled to appear in court to face the kidnapping with death resulting charge on July 17 before the hearing was rescheduled for Aug. 6, then again to Aug. 12. No new date for a hearing in the case has been scheduled.

That's not good.

I would read that as meaning they didn't get any physical evidence from her body that ties Jacques to her murder and that so far nothing else...I would assuming including Gagnon's statements about their conversations right after she disappeared are sufficiently inculpatory.

I have to say I'm surprised by this, I figured they had him dead to rights for her murder....

It could also mean they still don't know which of the many bad actors in this tragedy did the actual killing...and that IMO includes AR.

[gigi2009]

I posted this on the myspce thread but thought I'd post it here if anyone was interested in talking about it,LOL.

It looks like AR has a new myspace and to be honest, it seems like despite Brooke's murder, AR is just moving along nicely with her life. Also the "corey" mentioned in the other thread also has a myspace page. It's set to private but I've noticed the profile on other pages in the same group of friends.

[LI_Mom]

Is it possible they're holding off because they want to make a deal with him...... LWOP in exchange for a guilty plea on all counts?

A trial will be devastating to Brooke's family.... to AR, AR's sister & to many other minors who have some small connection to anyone involved.

Or... perhaps the psychiatrists working with AR have said she's not ready to testify & needs more time.

[LI_Mom]

I posted this on the myspce thread but thought I'd post it here if anyone was interested in talking about it,LOL.

It looks like AR has a new myspace and to be honest, it seems like despite Brooke's murder, AR is just moving along nicely with her life. Also the "corey" mentioned in the other thread also has a myspace page. It's set to private but I've noticed the profile on other pages in the same group of friends.

Awwwww.... "isn't that special?" :furious::furious:

If it were me.... considering how MySpace played into this sick kidnapping & torture.... just the mention of the name MySpace would turn my stomach... I'd never want to see the site again!

Isn't this girl getting ANY psychiatric help????


This is CRAZY!!!!!!!!

[Medea]

Is it possible they're holding off because they want to make a deal with him...... LWOP in exchange for a guilty plea on all counts?

A trial will be devastating to Brooke's family.... to AR, AR's sister & to many other minors who have some small connection to anyone involved.

Or... perhaps the psychiatrists working with AR have said she's not ready to testify & needs more time.

They can make a deal w/him right up until the jury goes in to deliberate, I can't see why that would prevent them from charging him w/murder if they have the evidence, to me, a murder charge is MORE leverage to get him talk and tell the truth.

I wont' say my feelings on AR other than, they are not warm and fuzzy.

I really can't see this as anything but a very, very bad sign.

[gigi2009]

I agree totally limom! According to the blurb (the profile is set to private) she's going to Maine. Seems excited and not at all regretful. Could be just my interpretation but considering Denise's role or lack of responsibility, not a long shot by any means.

[Catfish]

Prosecution requests extension in Jacques investigation (http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080730/NEWS/80730024/-1/NEWS05)
BurlingtonFreePress.com (http://burlingtonfreepress.com/) - Burlington,VT,USA

The U.S. Attorney for Vermont asked a federal magistrate Wednesday for 60 more days before prosecutors have to decide whether to indict Michael Jacques of Randolph in connection with the killing of his 12-year-old niece, Brooke Bennett.
snip
The delay is the third requested by federal prosecutors. Jacques was originally scheduled to appear in court to face the kidnapping with death resulting charge on July 17 before the hearing was rescheduled for Aug. 6, then again to Aug. 12. No new date for a hearing in the case has been scheduled.

Thanks for the link Tom'sGirl.

I'm wondering if the Feds are simply being very cautious before they proceed in court. IIRC, the involvement of the Feds is only because of the newly signed Adam Walsh Child Protection And Safety Act Of 2006. Without this Act, this case would be a State case.
( http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/07/20060727-7.html )

So far as I know, this Act has never been tested in court and remains controversial among many in LE. New definitions of "kidnapping" and "sexual exploitation of minors on the Internet" are untested.

If the Adam Walsh Act is judged unconstitional, it could result in a mistrial in this case.

So, it is possible the delays are because of time needed to study the new law rather than the absence of evidence as to who and what killed Brooke.

-Catfish

[Medea]

Maybe, but it still seems like a bad sign...either they have evidence that proves Jacques killed her or they don't. The way I read the act they need LESS evidence to convict than the state would since 'kidnapping leading to death'...could mean that the kidnapper did not commit the murder but it resulted from the act of kidnapping. If they've got the evidence he killed her, then even IF his conviction were to be overturned on the grounds of the law being unconstittutionally vague, he could still be tried for the state charges, I don't think double jeapardy applies w/federal vs. state...

Maybe I'm being too negative but this really feels to me that they don't have the evidence and/or don't know what really happened to her and who exactly was involved.

I guess we can count out the idea that Jacques will be pleading guitly anytime soon.

[Lola]

Unfortunately, I would tend to agree, HOWEVER, perhaps it is so complicated, and we have a minor or perhaps even two minors that may be implicated in some way (no matter how peripherally) that the Feds want to proceed with as air tight a case as possible.

[Catfish]

Hi,

From timesargus.com comes following story:

Delay is sought in Jacques case - Prosecutors say they need more time to investigate

-snip-

"The investigation involves the collection of significant amounts of tangible and electronic evidence in multiple jurisdictions and the forensic analysis of such evidence," Anderson wrote. "Numerous federal, state and local law enforcement agents in Vermont, New York, Alabama and Texas have worked and continue to work on this investigation."

Complete article: http://www.timesargus.com:80/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080731/NEWS01/807310352/1002/NEWS01

I was aware of investigation in Vermont, Alabama and Texas. Perhaps I've missed an article somewhere, because this is the first I've read of investigation in New York.

Would someone fill me in about New York. TIA

-Catfish

[Medea]

hard to say...it could be just that NY agents are working on the case OR it could be that there is a NY connection to online child porn that they've found since having more time to look at the computer records, which to a degree would make sense...large city, lot of very sophisticated technology folks...would probably be fairly easy to operate something under the radar I'd think.

[LI_Mom]

They can make a deal w/him right up until the jury goes in to deliberate, I can't see why that would prevent them from charging him w/murder if they have the evidence, to me, a murder charge is MORE leverage to get him talk and tell the truth.

I wont' say my feelings on AR other than, they are not warm and fuzzy.

I really can't see this as anything but a very, very bad sign.


I agree from a legal standpoint BUT LE might feel they have more leverage to get him to make a deal IF they hold off formally charging him. Hopefully this is a psychological/legal ploy only & NOT a sign that there's any trouble with the case.

I'm just grasping at straws & hoping I'm right & you're wrong here.

And I'm with you as far as AR. 100%

[LI_Mom]

I agree totally limom! According to the blurb (the profile is set to private) she's going to Maine. Seems excited and not at all regretful. Could be just my interpretation but considering Denise's role or lack of responsibility, not a long shot by any means.

Ugh. Hopefully she's talking about going to a residential treatment center in Maine.

Frankly, I have to wonder WHY she's not in one now & how on earth she can be chattering away on the internet as if nothing happened.

What are they waiting for..... another victim????

[bdmama]

Just found this on our County court calendar




Friday, Aug. 29 Jacques vs. Jacques
at 2:00 PM in Room cmc 119-7-08 Oedm/Divorce
Case Managers Conference
Atty(s): Todd C. Steadman

[Medea]

I agree from a legal standpoint BUT LE might feel they have more leverage to get him to make a deal IF they hold off formally charging him. Hopefully this is a psychological/legal ploy only & NOT a sign that there's any trouble with the case.

I'm just grasping at straws & hoping I'm right & you're wrong here.

And I'm with you as far as AR. 100%

I hope I'm wrong too, but I was fairly certain they were only waiting for the autopsy report before charging him with murder and that since her body was found in good enough shape for an open casket it would be pretty easy to determine COD...and figure out who killed her. I figured that between Gagnon, juvenile 2 and electronic/forensic records they could come pretty close to reconstructing Brooke's last hours and who did what...solve the mystery, figure out if AR left when she said or not, get the time of death fairly close and work from there...

I am having trouble believing AR is really back on myspace...so, on this, I am going to ignore it and believe that its a fake entry, because IF this is true, if she is really back on myspace posting about her trip to Maine...dear god in heaven, its only a matter of time before she gets mixed up in another crime...as it would to me show ZERO remorse, that she has been so victimized that now she simply doesn't have any compassion left in her soul...and if that is the case then she's dangerous, whether or not its her fault, a person with no capacity for remorse, reflection or compassion is dangerous.

[Lola]

Just found this on our County court calendar




Friday, Aug. 29 Jacques vs. Jacques
at 2:00 PM in Room cmc 119-7-08 Oedm/Divorce
Case Managers Conference
Atty(s): Todd C. Steadman

So, it looks as though Denise is not standing by her man.

On the NY link, do you suppose this had anything to do with Brooke's trip to NY?