Lorne Acquin

This case contains a lot of things that I would say “push” my buttons. First there is a horrific crime that involves not just one child, but several. Then there is the fact that a case was built nearly solely on a confession that was questionable at best, illegally obtained at worse. There were no forensics that tied the person to the crime and lastly the prosecution presented a theory in court that in no way seems to be backed up by anything.

As most of you know the prosecution in a case never has to present a motive, but the fact of the matter is that juries want to hear the “why.” Of course there are some defendants who will admit their motive and there are others who will leave a trail that makes the motive clear but in many cases there is never a clear motive. That does not mean that when a motive cannot be found against a defendant that they are innocent but I still take issue when a motive presented that does not match the known facts of the case or when a prosecutor suggests a motive, especially one that will rile up the jury members, without any proof. But, we will get to that in a bit.

A little after 4:00 in the morning on Saturday July 23, 1977 in Prospect Connecticut a neighbor of the Beaudoin home smelled smoke, looked outside and saw the Beaudoin home on fire and contacted the authorities. When the fire was extinguished the bodies of twenty-nine year old Cheryl Beaudoin, seven of her children who were between ages four and twelve, and one of another six year old child (sometimes said to be a family friend, in other cases said to be a niece) were found inside the home. Although it was not made clear if all of the victims had been murdered before the fire, it was clear that not all of them had died due to the fire. It would be consider the largest mass murder in Connecticut history until the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in 2012.

Cheryl's husband, Fred was at work at the time of the fire and around 5:30 that morning authorities went there to inform him of what had happened to his family. By 9:30 that morning Fred's foster brother, Lorne Acquin, was brought in for questioning. Lorne had a criminal history and been in prison twice previously, although they were minor offenses. From April of 1974 until February of 1975 he had served time for a larceny charge. Then from March of 1975 to September of 1976 he had served time on an escape charge. It seems that upon his release he had lived with the Beaudoin's, residing in their basement, for at least a short period of time but it appears that he did not live there by the time of the incident.

After being questioned for more than thirteen hours it was said that just after midnight of July 23^rd (so technically July 24^th) Lorne would confess to the crime. A seven page, typed confession would be obtained by authorities. According to this confession Lorne claimed to have gone to the home around two or three, sneaking in through an unlocked cellar door. He claimed to have used a lug wrench, a knife and a tire iron on the victims before setting the fire and leaving the home. It would be discovered that on top of the hours that were spent interrogating Lorne, it would take place in three different areas and then authorities “allowed” him to meet with the prison psychiatrist, who Lorne apparently knew. It would be said that soon after speaking to the psychiatrist he would give a confession. However there was some indication that he may have already given the confession before speaking to the psychiatrist but had refused to sign it. Lorne would testify at his own trial saying that the psychiatrist told him he would “be better off” if he signed. It would also be alleged that Lorne, who remember had been in trouble with the law prior, had asked for an attorney but it had been refused as an investigator told him they knew he “did it. Why don't you confess to it?”

An indictment against Lorne on nine counts of murder and one count of arson was received on September 7, 1977. The following month he was taken to a state mental hospital. The official reason was said for “security reasons.” At the end of October he was officially committed into the hospital. At this point it was said that he possibly suffered from schizophrenia, “or a form of epilepsy and could be a danger to himself or others.”

Lorne's trial would begin in July of 1979 and last three months. The only real proof that the prosecution had that Lorne was the perpetrator was his confession. Sure, they had some other things but it is unclear if some of the evidence they had was tested forensically. So, what else did they base their case upon? First, a neighbor testified that she had seen Lorne at the home on the evening prior to the murders. Some of the Beaudoin children were at her house and Lorne had come there to see the children, who were excited to see him. Now, this occurred around 8:30 on that evening, so several hours prior to the murders. Lorne openly admits to being there and seeing the children.

Upon inspection of Lorne's home investigators had found some bloody clothing of his in a bag by his driveway. Lorne claimed that he had been at a fight with some men outside a bar earlier in the evening. It is unclear whether the fight could have been confirmed, or if the clothing was tested in anyway. Granted, DNA testing was not yet invented but blood typing could have been done but I saw nothing mentioned about this.

The prosecution claimed that Lorne had sneaked into the house and attacked Cheryl in the kitchen by hitting her over the head with a tire iron. Three children were found in one bedroom, presumably in their beds, two were in another bedroom, one was found in the master bedroom and two were found in the bathroom. The prosecution alleged that he went one by one to the children and then returned to the kitchen, grabbed a knife and then stabbed Cheryl as she lay on the floor. They then say he lit fire to the home and left.

At some point, and I cannot say when but I assuming likely in their closing arguments, the prosecution suggest that Cheryl may have caught Lorne molesting one or more of the girls and that this had driven him to kill. This is what I take issue with. First, Lorne was never charged with sexual assault to begin with, nor does it seem that there was evidence of any having taken place. I will concede that in his confession he had stated that he had sexually assaulted the ten year old girl. Secondly, it is unclear when they suggested this sexual assault took place. If they were alleging it had happened at a time prior to the night of the murders then why is it that no one seemed to know about it? It seems unreasonable to believe that if Cheryl had caught him molesting one of the children, not only would she have told someone in authority but she would not have allowed him at the home earlier in the night. Even if it did occur earlier in the night it seems unreasonable that Cheryl would not have reported it and there be a record of this assault.

The only other explanation for claiming sexual assault and alleging Cheryl had “caught” him would indicate that it happened during the commission of the crime. Then you have to ask, if he was molesting one of the children and was walked in on, how was he able to control nine human beings? Since all of the children were found in the bedrooms or the bathroom it would be reasonable to believe that they were in one of these room when the alleged assault occurred and Cheryl would have gotten from that room to the kitchen. We can assume that had this happened she was not quiet about it and neither would he have been which would have aroused all of the other children. The four oldest were 8, 9, 10 and 12 years old. And was he holding the tire iron already when this alleged molestation occurred or where did he find it. Better yet, did the authorities ever find this alleged weapon?

If the alleged sexual assault theory was based on the confession then a) why was he not charged? And b) why was an examination not done on the body to confirm this? There would have been plenty of time to confirm any sexual assault on the bodies considering his confession came less than twenty-four hours of the bodies being found.

The defense simply said he was not guilty. Their biggest argument was that the confession that had been entered into the court was obtained illegally considering he had allegedly asked for an attorney and denied his rights to one. They attempted to point at other suspects that could have had something against the family. My research said that one of those people was Cheryl's brother, but I was not able to determine why they would say this. The defense also put on the state a state police fingerprint expert. The prosecution had not done so likely because the results were not what they wanted to hear. The witness stated that a bloody hand print and fingerprints were found in the bathroom near two of the children as well as another hand print had been found on a door jam. According to the witness these prints did not belong to Lorne or any of the victims.... so who's hand print was it? I never saw anything in which the prosecution alleged that Lorne had any sort of help.

A jury of nine men and three women took eight hours to deliberate the case and would find Lorne Acquin guilty on all charges. Just exactly what his sentence was and how it was “stacked” is not completely clear. It was said that he received 9 sentences of twenty-five years to life for the murders and twenty years for the arson charge. In another area it was said that he received a total sentence of 105 years to life and that parole was possible in 50-55 years making him eligible between 2027 and 2032. I did a search of the Connecticut Department of Corrections but I could not find him listed anywhere. I also did not find any article referring to his death, nor was there anything on findagrave.com. It is unclear exactly what has happened to Lorne.

I am going to be fair here and say that I do not know if I believe Lorne Acquin was guilty of murdering nine people, eight of them children, back in 1977 but I will say that in my opinion there was not enough evidence to convict him, and I do believe his rights were violated. One thing keeps jumping out at me in the confession. It was said that he stated he had used a lung wrench, a knife and a tire iron against the victims. Now, the knife was said to have come from the kitchen and allegedly was used only after he had returned to the kitchen and at least believed Cheryl to still be alive. While I could concede to the use of the second weapon, the knife, in this instance as it was only used on one victim as a secondary wound, the fact that he allegedly used a third weapon is odd. It is not unheard of, although it is less common, for a murderer to obtain their weapons from the crime scene, especially if the goal of the perpetrator is murder from the get go. But it is far less common, regardless of where they obtain the weapon for one perpetrator to use multiple weapons. It would have been difficult to keep track of them, as well as use them, and keep control of the victims, especially in this case. Then we add to this the unknown bloody hand and fingerprints it makes more sense to believe there was more than one perpetrator and yet this is not mentioned in the confession or by the prosecutors.

It is reasonable to believe that by the time Lorne confessed the crime scene may not have been completely gone through, let alone all of the things collected analyzed. Did investigators believe that both a tire iron and a lug wrench were used at the time and feed this to Lorne to get it into his confession? Other things later claim that the deaths were caused by a beating with a tire iron without any mention of a lug wrench. It is entirely possible that a lug wrench was found in the house to be examined only to discover later that it was not a murder weapon.

Reality is that nine people, eight of them children lost their lives on that early morning in 1977 and I do not want that lost in the shuffle as it so often can be.