Attorney General releases redacted Larochelle documents

By Shawn Cunningham

Documents formally requested by The Chester Telegraph under Vermont’s Public Documents law were released by Vermont’s Attorney General over the weekend. The documents show that the Vermont State Police investigation of Chester Police officer Paul Larochelle concluded that the officer’s behavior was “inappropriate and unbecoming,” but that it did not warrant criminal charges. The Criminal Division of the Attorney General’s office reviewed the investigation along with recorded interviews and did not find “probable cause to believe Officer Larochelle has committed a crime.”

The documents also show that the State Police investigation and the Attorney General’s review of the case were completed in February and forwarded to the town. After that time, the Town of Chester kept Larochelle on paid administrative leave – with other officers to cover shifts that he was not working – for more than three months. During the entire time Larochelle was on administrative leave, he collected about $22,000 in pay plus health and vacation benefits.

On Friday, May 23, the Chester Select Board voted unanimously to extend Larochelle’s town paid medical insurance for two people through August 2014. This was part of a settlement arranged by lawyers for the town and Larochelle. Larochelle had tendered his resignation effective that day.

The documents make it clear that State Police Detective Trooper Andrew Campagne and Department of Children and Families Social Worker Danielle Fogg interviewed parents and students at Chester-Andover Elementary School amid allegations of “grooming of underage females.” The DCF defines grooming as “a subtle, gradual, and escalating process of building trust with a child.” (see further details:  http://dcf.vermont.gov/stepup/educate/how_it_happens/grooming)

The first report cited in the investigation was dated Wednesday, Oct. 30 and was taken by DCF, “reviewed and denied” while two subsequent reports were “accepted and assigned.” According to Karen Shea, Child Protection and Field Operations director for DCF, the role of the department is confined to the behavior of those persons responsible for the welfare of a child. A complaint may be denied if the subject is not responsible for the child in question. A source close to the case confirmed that the first incident occurred outside of school while the others appear to be school related. This may explain the difference in the way these were handled.

Campagne and Fogg’s interviews with juveniles ran from six to 52 minutes in length. What they all have in common is that they asked a form of the question “does he (Officer Larochelle) make you feel uncomfortable?” All of the children answered that he did not, while parents of those children said they did feel uncomfortable with him.

Det. Andrew Campagne and Social Worker Danielle Fogg’s interviews with juveniles ran from six to 52 minutes in length. What they all have in common is that they asked a form of the question “does he (Officer Larochelle) make you feel uncomfortable?” All of the children answered that he did not, while parents of those children said they did feel uncomfortable with him.

All of these interviews have substantial numbers of lines blacked out. In the longest interview, the record shows that the child knew Larochelle’s first name and age and answered that Larochelle had not made the child uncomfortable. After that information, 28 lines were blacked out until the phrase “end interview” followed by another 11 lines blacked out. Because there seems to be a great number of details in the blacked out areas The Telegraph plans to appeal several of the redactions. The Telegraph is not seeking confidential information including names and personally identifiable information.

In November, the Chester Police conducted a separate investigation with five interviews of children, parents and others who were identified as having “expressed concerns about Officer Larochelle.” In these interviews, adults associated with Chester-Andover Elementary School noted that Officer Larochelle spent a lot of time at the school – both on and off duty – often having lunch there and attending recess with the children. Some staff members also expressed concern with Larochelle’s hugging of children.

On Friday, Nov. 22, 2013 , Chief Richard Cloud spoke with Campagne and Fogg. It was during this meeting that Cloud advised them that “he has spoken to Officer Larochelle numerous times about his behavior.” [Cloud] advised that Larochelle “believes he is not doing anything wrong and that people are out to get him.” Officer Larochelle consented to an interview with Campagne and Fogg that afternoon, coming in of his own accord without representation.

According to Campagne, “At no time during the interview, did Larochelle admit to any criminal act. His body language suggested that he was defensive and guarded. His demeanor would be characterized as angry. There were some inconsistencies in his accounts. (four lines redacted) We concluded the interview.”

According to Det. Campagne, “At no time during the interview, did Larochelle admit to any criminal act. His body language suggested that he was defensive and guarded. His demeanor would be characterized as angry. There were some inconsistencies in his accounts. (four lines redacted) We concluded the interview.”

The State Police and Attorney General closed their investigation and review in January and February respectively. The Department for Children and Families is not allowed to give details of any of its files including whether an investigation is complete or is continuing. On Tuesday, June 3, Police Chief Rick Cloud said that between the closure of the investigations and the acceptance of Larochelle’s resignation, the town spent a lot of time making sure that everything was done correctly from a legal standpoint. “It’s a long process,” said Cloud.

In early May, The Chester Telegraph made two public documents requests for information relating to Larochelle’s leave. One was addressed to the Attorney General and the other to the Town of Chester. The town – through its lawyer – refused to release documents. That decision has been appealed by the Telegraph.