Richard Gagnon and the Murders of Charles and Diane Parker

 

I generally decide on the title of a blog as I am putting it together. When it is a crime where there are multiple arrests and perpetrators you will generally see the title reflect the name of the victims, other times the title is generally the name of the perpetrator. I knew going into this one that Richard Gagnon was convicted, and later exonerated for the murders of Charles and Diane Parker. I also knew that another person would later also be convicted of the murders, long before Gagnon would be exonerated. But, in all fairness I should point out that while website after website have called Gagnon's release and the dismissal of charges an exoneration, in a legal sense that may not be completely true. Do not confuse this with the idea that I believe Gagnon to be guilty, I am just stating how things played out in this case.

It is not necessarily uncommon for someone who has been convicted to have their convictions overturned and a new trial ordered. It is not an every day occurrence but it also is not unheard of by any stretch of the imagination. This happens most when the courts have determined there was an error made within the trial. That “error” could be something as simple as a question asked during during selection or something that was or was not said to the jury when the judge gives them instructions before they head to deliberate. There are also cases where “new” evidence has been uncovered. Once a new trial has been ordered it is left up to the prosecutors to determine what to do next. Basically their case has been taken all the way back. They have to look at the evidence again and determine if they still have the evidence or can use it based on the reasoning of the “new trial” and decide if they are going to continue with the case or drop the charges. If they do the latter they have to decide if they are going to do so “with prejudice” or “without.” This part is very important. If charges are dropped with prejudice it means that the prosecutors can never again charge the defendant for that crime, however if it is “without” it allows them to re-charge the person if they later determine the evidence and the prosecutors think it warrants the charge.

On April 12, 2005 Charles and Diane Parker were found dead inside their Nixonville South Carolina home. Almost immediately Diane's daughter, Bambi Bennett and her boyfriend, Richard Gagnon, were considered suspects. It was quickly learned that there were court records between Bambi and Diane. One apparently concerned a child custody fight between the two. Bambi had two sons who were twelve and fourteen. Another court report showed there was a dispute between mother and daughter over some land that Bambi had inherited from her grandfather. I am going to be fair here in saying that I have no idea what surrounded or “caused” these court filings.

Bambi and Richard Gagnon had lived with the Parker's at some point. Some reports stated that at one point the couple was living in a tent with Bambi's two sons on the Parker property. However, by the time that the murders occurred the couple had moved out and lived in or near Myrtle Beach. It was said they had moved due to the disagreements in the home.

Investigators got a search warrant for the home in which Bennett and Gagnon shared. It would be reported that blood would be found on shoes belonging to each of them. Two weeks after the murders both Bennett and Gagnon were arrested and charged with murder.

Eventually blood analysis and DNA testing would come back on the shoes. While the blood on Bennett's shoes was considered to be “inconclusive,” the blood on Gagnon's shoes was said to match Charles Parker. Other DNA testing was done on the crime scene and there was an “unknown” sample found. It was unclear whether there was any more evidence or DNA found in the home connecting Bennett or Gagnon. Keep in mind, considering a) they were family and b) they had recently lived in the home, if any of their DNA was found in the home it would have to be scrutinized more than normal. Based on the findings however, in May of 2007 charges were dropped against Bambi Bennett “citing lack of evidence.” Charges against Richard Gagnon would remain and move forward.

Richard Gagnon's trial began in March 2008. Prosecutors placed a man named Robert Lee Mullins on the stand. Mullins was an inmate in the jail where Gagnon had been held. He claimed that Gagnon confessed to the murders, saying that he committed the crime with another person but never said who that person was.

The defense argued three points. First, they argued that Mullins was lying. Gagnon testified that on the day the bodies were found the police had released the home to the family and Bambi Bennett had asked him to go into the house and get her purse and keys. He testified that there were pools of blood within the house and by his estimate he must have stepped in or near one, hence the blood on his shoe. The defense also pointed out the unidentified DNA found in the home. The prosecution argued that the “unidentified DNA” belonged to Gagnon's co-conspirator and Gagnon was not talking.

On March 13, 2008 Richard Gagnon was convicted on two counts of first degree murder and first degree burglary. It appears that his sentencing took place at another time and he was sentenced to life without parole. By the time he was sentenced the “unidentified DNA,” while still not identified, had been found in connection to a 2006 home invasion in Tennessee. Gagnon had been in custody when this home invasion occurred so he obviously was not involved in that crime but prosecutors would continue to argue that this person, whomever it was, was known to Gagnon and his co-conspirator in the murder of the Parkers.

In 2009 this unknown person was identified as twenty-four year old Bruce Hill. Prosecutors in South Carolina charged him with the murders of Charles and Diane Parker, still claiming that he had committed the murders with Gagnon. It is unclear whether Hill ever confessed or made any statement about the murders. In 2011 Hill was convicted and given a sentence of life without parole to be served in South Carolina when his prison term in Tennessee for the home invasion ended. He was taken to South Carolina in September of 2014.

In 2012 Gagnon's lawyers filed for a new trial claiming that Hill gave a prison interview and said he had never met Gagnon or Bennett, among other things. When it came time for a hearing on this matter however Hill refused to testify and pleaded the Fifth Amendment. However another man by the name of Robert Troy Taylor testified at the hearing. He testified that he had met Robert Mullins in jail and while he did not know at the time who Mullins was referring to, stated that Mullins claimed that he had lied about Gagnon confessing to the murders. Later in 2012 Taylor met Gagnon himself.

In January of 2013 the judge in charge of the hearing granted Gagnon's request. Richard Gagnon's convictions were vacated and he was granted a new trial. The judge stated that “Mr. Taylor's statements were subject to rigorous cross examination and he did not waiver in his statements.” The following month, after serving eight years of his sentence, Gagnon was released on a $50,000 bond to await a decision from the prosecutors about a new trial. On April 23, 2015 the prosecution chose to dismiss charges again Gagnon “without prejudice” meaning that they left the door open to re-charge him if they later felt that the evidence warranted such. In my personal opinion I wonder if this was not done in order to prevent some sort of compensation to Gagnon for wrongful imprisonment. I did not find anything in my research that stated he had sued and/or received anything from the state. I believe that by dismissing the charges without prejudice for the prosecution had them “saving face” and monetary damages for getting the case wrong. While Gagnon is listed on websites and is considered to be exonerated, by dismissing the case this way the prosecution did not have to admit any wrong doing on their part.

Bruce Hill has continued to appeal his case but it appears that they have all failed.

I want to point out that this case was a bit difficult to search in the beginning because believe it or not there are more than a few Richard Gagnon's who have been involved in murders. One was on trial in 2014 in Texas and there were others, both as perpetrators and as victims.