Jacqueline ‘Mimi’ Torres-Garcia. Credit : GoFundMe
Credit : GoFundMe
Jacqueline “Mimi” Torres Garcia was 11 years old when her body was found hidden in a 40-gallon storage bin. By the time investigators made that discovery, a 22-year-old woman had already impersonated Mimi on a Zoom call with Connecticut’s Department of Children and Families, convincing a caseworker that the girl was alive, safe and attending school. The case, which has unfolded in a New Britain courtroom since early 2026, has exposed alleged abuse, a deliberate cover-up and troubling gaps in how the state monitors at-risk children remotely.
The Zoom call that hid a killing
In January 2026, Jacklyn Goulet, then 22, logged into a scheduled video call with a DCF caseworker who believed she was speaking with Mimi, according to testimony reported by People magazine. Goulet answered routine questions about school, home life and whether the child felt safe. The caseworker ended the call without flagging an emergency.
Prosecutors say Mimi was already dead at the time. Her body, according to an affidavit reviewed by investigators, had been placed in a 40-gallon bin inside the family’s home. The deception worked: DCF did not escalate the case, and no one visited the residence in person after the call.
Goulet later testified that Mimi’s mother, Karla Garcia, coached her on what to say before the call began. She told the court she believed she was helping Garcia avoid losing custody of her children and that she did not know Mimi was dead. “I thought I was helping a friend,” she said during her testimony, according to a Yahoo News report on the hearing.
Who is Jacklyn Goulet?
Goulet has not been charged with murder. She has, however, been accused of participating in the broader pattern of abuse and deception that prosecutors say surrounded Mimi’s final months. Her decision to testify has made her a central witness for the state, providing a detailed account of what happened inside the household around the time of the video call, including who was present and how the adults coordinated their stories.
In court, Goulet described herself as a friend of the family who did not fully understand what she was being asked to do. She testified that she tried to mimic the voice and mannerisms of an 11-year-old and that the DCF worker appeared to accept her answers without suspicion. Prosecutors have not publicly stated whether Goulet is cooperating under a plea agreement, but her testimony has given investigators a firsthand narrative of the cover-up.
The defendants and the charges
At the center of the prosecution is Karla Garcia, Mimi’s mother, who faces murder charges in connection with her daughter’s death. Prosecutors allege the Zoom impersonation was one piece of a larger effort to conceal what had happened to Mimi and to prevent DCF from removing the other children in the home.
Mimi’s aunt, identified in court documents as Jackelyn Garcia, also faces charges. According to warrant documents cited in People’s reporting, Jackelyn Garcia admitted to using zip ties to restrain her niece, though she claimed she tried to minimize her involvement and did not realize how much danger the child was in. She faces multiple counts related to risk of injury to a minor rather than murder.
A third suspect has also appeared in a Torrington courtroom in connection with the case. Court records identify this individual as one of three adults charged in relation to Mimi’s death, though the specific charges and alleged role have not been fully detailed in public filings as of March 2026.
What investigators say happened to Mimi
The abuse allegations extend well beyond the Zoom deception. Warrant records describe a household where Mimi was physically restrained with zip ties and subjected to treatment that investigators say went far beyond any form of discipline. Prosecutors argue the restraints show direct, sustained abuse by multiple adults in the home.
Court filings also indicate that DCF had received concerns about the household before the fatal incident, which is why caseworkers were attempting to reach the family by video in the first place. The specific nature and timing of those earlier complaints have not been made fully public, but the existence of a prior file underscores questions about whether in-person visits should have been required.
Mimi’s cause of death has not been publicly disclosed in detail as of March 2026. What prosecutors have made clear is that she was dead before the Zoom call took place and that her body was concealed in the home while adults in the household actively worked to mislead the state.
Remote welfare checks under scrutiny
The case has forced an uncomfortable question into public view: how reliable are video calls as a tool for child welfare monitoring? During the COVID-19 pandemic, many state agencies, including Connecticut’s DCF, expanded the use of virtual check-ins as a way to maintain contact with families when in-person visits were restricted. Some of those practices persisted even after pandemic-era restrictions ended.
Child welfare advocates have pointed out that a video call offers limited ability to verify identity, observe a child’s physical condition or assess the broader home environment. In Mimi’s case, a 22-year-old woman was able to pass as an 11-year-old on camera without triggering any red flags.
Connecticut’s DCF has not issued a detailed public statement about internal policy changes in response to the case as of March 2026. But the agency’s handling of the family’s file, including whether caseworkers had enough information to justify an in-person visit before the Zoom call, is expected to face scrutiny as the prosecution moves forward.
For child safety researchers, the case illustrates a vulnerability that extends beyond one agency. Any system that relies on remote verification without robust identity checks is susceptible to the kind of manipulation prosecutors describe here. Whether Connecticut or other states move to tighten those protocols may depend on how much public pressure this case continues to generate.
About the Author
