The Berrien County Prosecutor's Office has issued a detailed report regarding the alleged sex scandals involving Berrien County Sheriff's Deputies and jail inmates that first came to light last fall. Here is the full report issued today by Prosecutor Michael Sepic:
The Berrien County Sheriff’s Department Detective Bureau has investigated allegations of departmental and criminal law violations by jail personnel at the Berrien County Jail. As a result, the bureau has submitted reports to the Berrien County Prosecutor’s Office for review of possible criminal charges. The reports include interviews of at least 15 former female inmates.
The Berrien County Sheriff has made departmental disciplinary decisions; those decisions are not the topic of this press release.
The submitted reports involve four particular deputies. The three uncharged deputies will not be referred to by name. The allegations implicate the following criminal statutes: criminal sexual conduct with prisoner/probationer and prostitution offenses. In addition to the reports referred to above, the Prosecutor’s Office also reviewed a civil complaint filed recently in Federal Court whose plaintiffs were many of the woman previously interviewed (file number 1:16-cv-00346). Below is the analysis of all the facts available.
Deputy 1 is alleged to have had sexual contact or a sexual relationship with two women who had previously been incarcerated at the Berrien County Jail. It is alleged that Deputy 1 met these women as a result of his employment with Berrien County and pursued contact with them following their release from jail.
The contact with the first woman evolved into sexual contact up to and including multiple occasions of sexual intercourse. It is also alleged that on multiple occasions, Deputy 1 paid the woman for sexual favors. This conduct is alleged to have occurred over a period of years beginning in 2010. Charges have not been filed against Deputy 1 for this conduct. Although this woman did speak with detectives, she has not made herself available to the Prosecutor’s Office despite multiple attempts to contact her. Contact with the Prosecutor’s Office prior to authorization of charges is common when allegations of criminal sexual conduct are involved. Without confirmation of the witness’ statement and their willingness to appear and participate in prosecution, the Berrien County Prosecutor’s Office has declined to authorize charges at this time. Even with the presence of some corroborating evidence, cases of this nature rely heavily upon the cooperation and testimony of the alleged victim.
Allegations with regard to the second woman involve Deputy 1 depositing money into her prison account while she was incarcerated in a state prison facility; sexually explicit discussions using a state prison telephone service; and upon her release, funding a shopping trip before initiating sexual contact. These allegations date back to 2014. In determining whether this behavior constituted a crime, the Prosecutor’s Office considered the alleged victim’s prisoner/probationer status, as well as any possible coercion due to the nature of Deputy 1’s position. At the relevant times, based upon the victim’s interview, Deputy 1 could not be found to be coercing the woman based upon his position. At those times, the woman was not on probation nor incarcerated in a facility where Deputy 1 was in a position of authority. During the last alleged contact, the woman rebuffed the sexual advance of Deputy 1, and their contact ended. Therefore, no charges have been have been filed against Deputy 1 for this contact.
A third woman, named in the Federal Complaint, has not reported any allegations of sexual misconduct by any Deputy to police investigators.
None of the conduct involving Deputy 1 is alleged to have occurred within the Berrien County Jail.
At this time, Deputy 1 is no longer employed with the Berrien County Sheriff’s Department.
Deputy 2 was alleged to have sought and maintained contact with multiple adult women who had been incarcerated at the Berrien County Jail and who he met through his employment there. He is alleged to have sought contact with these women via Facebook, text messaging, telephone calls, and through other inmates. The length of contact with these women varied with the longest being approximately 10 years.
Although interviews of these women resulted in disclosure of discussions of a sexual nature with Deputy 2, only one woman disclosed actual sexual contact or any offer of payment for sexual contact. With regard to the woman who is alleging sexual contact, repeated interviews during the police investigation did not reveal information of a sufficiently credible nature on which to base criminal charges.
No charges involving any other women have been filed against Deputy 2 because there was no disclosure of sexual contact in the jail itself, solicitation of sexual contact for money or of coerced sexual contact due to Deputy 2’s position in the jail.
None of the conduct involving Deputy 2 is alleged to have occurred within the Berrien County Jail.
At this time, Deputy 2 is no longer employed with the Berrien County Sheriff’s Department.
Deputy 3 was alleged to have met with a woman at a location away from the jail who he originally came into contact with while she was an inmate in the Berrien County Jail and he was a jail deputy. As there were no allegations of sexual contact within the jail or otherwise, or solicitation of sexual contact for money; no charges have been authorized. Deputy 3 is still employed with the Berrien County Sheriff’s Department.
Deputy 4 was alleged to have met with two women away from the jail following their incarceration at the Berrien County Jail.
The first woman is one he is alleged to have known prior to her incarceration at the Berrien County Jail. It is alleged that following periods of incarceration at the jail, he had contact with her in 2015 by responding to her backpage.com advertisement for companionship. Deputy 4 arranged a meeting for the purpose of engaging her services as a prostitute; however, the investigation revealed no actual sexual conduct occurred. Therefore, the deputy was charged with offering to engage the services of another for the purpose of prostitution by payment of money pursuant to MCL 750.449a. This offense is a misdemeanor punishable by up to 93 days in jail and/or a fine of $500. The witness will not be charged with a criminal offense.
Deputy 4 is Keegan Oscar Trail, age 23, of Eau Claire, Michigan. He is no longer employed with the Berrien County Sheriff’s Department. Today, Mr. Trail appeared in court today, was arraigned on a warrant alleging 1 count under section MCL 750.449a as noted above, and pled no contest. He was sentenced to fines and costs in the amount of $505.00 and he was ordered to perform 40 hours of community service.
The second woman is one Trail is alleged to have initially come into contact with during her incarceration at the Berrien County Jail while he was a deputy there. Following her release, Trail allegedly made contact with her via Facebook where they made arrangements to see each other. It is alleged that this led to sexual intercourse in exchange for money in June 2014. His alleged conduct during this incident meets the elements of engaging the services of another for the purpose of prostitution by payment of money. Therefore, the deputy could be charged pursuant to MCL 750.449a. This potential charge will not be pursued as a result of a plea agreement. The witness will not be charged with a criminal offense.
None of the conduct involving Trail is alleged to have occurred within the Berrien County Jail.
The incarcerations of most, if not all, of the women involved were related to drug addiction. Their statements to investigators described a feeling of vulnerability to the alleged advances from the deputies due to their continued addiction.
