Published July 04, 2008, in The Olympian (Olympia Newspaper), and later picked up by the wires and published throughout the Northwest dailies.

Suit critical of Braae supervision
Jeremy Pawloski


A Lacey woman wouldn't have been raped and killed by "Cowboy" Michael Braae in 2001 had the Department of Corrections heeded a judge's order one year earlier to more closely supervise Braae while he was on probation, according to a lawsuit filed by the woman's family.

"This is a case where there were red flags all over the place that he was a bad actor," Bryan Smith, the Yakima attorney who filed the civil lawsuit on behalf of victim Lori Jones of Lacey, said about Braae. "He was placed on the lowest level of supervision. This guy needed geographical range restrictions, field visits and drug testing."

Smith's lawsuits against Corrections mention the allegation that a Clackamas County, Ore., sheriff's detective warned the agency in 1998 that Braae was a "person of interest" in the death of a woman there and requested 24 hours' notice before Braae's release from Washington Corrections.

A report in Sunday's Olympian detailed Clackamas County Sgt. Wendi Babst's investigation after one of Braae's girlfriends, Velina Larson, was found dead there in 1998. Babst found that Braae had been investigated or arrested three times in rape cases that were never brought to trial.

Braae remains a person of interest in two unsolved ­missing-person cases in Washington: former Lacey resident Deb VanLuven's disappearance in 1997 and Susan Ault's disappearance from Wahkiakum County in 2001. VanLuven and Ault both are former girlfriends of Braae. Braae also is a person of interest in Babst's ongoing investigation into Larson's unsolved death in 1998.

Smith said that instead of placing Braae on community supervision, as ordered by a judge in October 2000, Corrections placed Braae on "LFO," which stands for "legal, financial obligations only" and requires a person on probation to only pay fines. LFO does not require home visits by probation officers.

Thurston County Superior Court Judge Christine Pomeroy ordered community supervision during a hearing in October 2000 after Braae was found to be in noncompliance with his probation after a 1997 conviction for escaping from the Thurston County Jail.

"It's very clear that there was a human error in this case," Smith said.

Smith has filed two other similar lawsuits on behalf of two other alleged victims of Braae who are alive. In each of those plaintiffs' cases, harm could have been avoided had Corrections supervised Braae more closely, as it should have, Smith said. All three lawsuits are set to have stays in their proceedings lifted in the wake of Braae's conviction in Jones' murder earlier this year.

In addition, two other civil plaintiffs have filed suits against Braae. They are:

• Marchelle Morgan, who was shot in the head and left for dead on a country road south of Union Gap on July 14, 2001. Braae was accused of attempted murder in her shooting, but the case ended in a mistrial after a judge ruled Morgan was unfit to testify as a witness because of her brain injuries.

• Karen Peterson, who alleges Braae sexually assaulted her in Yakima County, also in July 2001.

Referring to the Lori Jones case, Smith said, "Two daughters are without a mother" because of Corrections' mistake. Referring to his other clients, he added, "One son has had his mother taken from him due to brain injury, and another mother will live the rest of her life with the painful memory of the assault."

Washington Assistant Attorney General Paul James, who is defending Corrections in Smith's civil lawsuits, said Thursday, "We're going to defend the interests of the state vigorously. I think DOC has a difficult job in supervising offenders who are free to walk about in the community."

A Corrections spokesman released a statement Thursday when asked about the civil suits.

"First and most importantly, our hearts and concern remain with families who have been tragically victimized by Michael Braae," it reads. "With the resolution of the criminal trials, the civil cases can now move forward. The attorneys representing the Department will work with opposing counsel as this case progresses."