Navy QB Acquitted of Rape Charge

<p>No Penalty for Midshipman
Owens Found Guilty of Two Non-Rape Charges</p>

<p>By Nelson Hernandez
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, July 22, 2006; B01</p>

<p>The U.S. Naval Academy quarterback acquitted of a rape charge will face no punishment for having sex with a fellow midshipman in her dorm room or violating an order to steer clear of the woman, a jury decided yesterday.</p>

<p>After a high-profile, 10-day court-martial, the jury of five naval officers rejected prosecutors’ arguments that Midshipman Lamar S. Owens Jr. should be dismissed from the Navy for misconduct, a step that would have required him to repay the $136,000 cost of his four-year education.</p>

<p>The jury also declined to reprimand Owens for his actions Jan. 29 despite finding him guilty Thursday of conduct unbecoming an officer and of violating a military protective order.</p>

<p>Owens, 22, still could face administrative discipline – and a possible discharge – for breaking rules prohibiting sexual contact on campus and fraternization between members of the same company.</p>

<p>“The Academy will review his situation to determine the best course of action,” a spokeswoman wrote in response to an e-mail.</p>

<p>After the jury’s president pronounced the words “no punishment,” Owens, standing at attention, silently looked up at the ceiling of the wood-paneled courtroom with tear-filled eyes. Family members and friends sitting behind him exhaled with relief and held one another’s hands. When the judge closed the court a few moments later, they began hugging one another and Owens finally cracked a smile in relief.</p>

<p>“I had tears in my eyes because this young man needed and received justice today,” Owens’s attorney, Reid H. Weingarten, said at a brief news conference outside the courtroom in the Washington Navy Yard after the hearing. Owens and his father declined to comment; Weingarten said that Owens “feels vindicated, as he should.”</p>

<p>The outcome was a turnaround for Owens, who went from leading the Navy football team in its Poinsettia Bowl victory to facing a maximum life sentence on the charge of raping a 20-year-old female midshipman. Despite a secretly taped phone conversation in which Owens repeatedly apologized to the woman, the jury decided there was enough reasonable doubt in her account – she had been drinking that night and could not recall parts of what had happened – to acquit Owens on the most serious charge.</p>

<p>That decision reinforced some advocates’ concern that it is more difficult to convict someone of rape under the military code of justice than it is in the civilian world because the definition of rape is narrower and because the accusers are afforded fewer protections against attacks on their character.</p>

<p>“It’s unfortunate and regrettable that justice is not being provided to those who are being victimized within the military community,” said Anita Sanchez, spokeswoman for the Miles Foundation, an organization that supports victims of violence in the military.</p>

<p>Vice Adm. Rodney P. Rempt, the academy’s superintendent, said in a statement that “the allegations and referral to court martial are sad events – the alleged victim, the accused, their families and friends, and the Brigade are all affected by these actions. Preventing and deterring sexual harassment, misconduct and assault is a critically important issue that the Academy continually emphasizes.”</p>

<p>The academy, along with the nation’s other military schools, has come under criticism repeatedly for its handling of sexual assault charges. Most cases in Annapolis have been resolved through the academy’s internal discipline system and haven’t resulted in jail time.</p>

<p>For the remaining charges, Owens faced a maximum penalty of a year and a half in prison, but the prosecution did not ask for jail time, arguing instead for his dismissal from the Navy in dishonor.</p>

<p>The debate in the courtroom centered on whether the jury should forgive a young, aspiring officer who had made a mistake or whether they should throw him out of the Navy.</p>

<p>Cmdr. John A. Maksym, the judge, took on the issue at the beginning of yesterday’s hearing when he overruled a motion by the defense to throw out the jury’s decision for lack of evidence.</p>

<p>“Naval officers, Midshipman Owens, are special people,” Maksym said. “We are held to a higher standard.”</p>

<p>The jurors, allowed to ask Owens questions during the hearing, inquired into what he had learned from the experience.</p>

<p>“The first thing I think I’ve learned is that you always have to be on your guard,” Owens replied after a long pause. “Every decision you make can be an important decision. . . . Once you make that decision, you have to live with that decision. You can’t take it back.”</p>

<p>The prosecution argued that he should have to live with the consequences of what he did and that he had violated orders and a sacred trust.</p>

<p>“Orders are there for a reason, and members cannot brush them aside when they deem it appropriate,” Lt. Kathy Helmann, one of the prosecutors, said in her final statement. “Midshipman Owens was a representative of the United States Naval Academy. . . . He was given a special position of trust and leadership – a position he violated.”</p>

<p>Weingarten summoned several witnesses, many of them from the Navy football team, who argued that Owens would make a good naval officer. Weingarten said Owens had already suffered enough and had learned a lesson.</p>

<p>“He has to live with a very public allegation that he raped a woman,” Weingarten said. “This is a heavy burden to bear.”</p>

<p>Jury members would not comment on the decision, which took four hours to reach.</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/college/football/bal-maese0722,0,2678007.column[/url]”>‘AGT’ phenom Jackie Evancho to perform with BSO – Baltimore Sun;
<a href=“http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/annearundel/bal-te.md.ar.alumni22jul22,0,5997423.story[/url]”>‘AGT’ phenom Jackie Evancho to perform with BSO – Baltimore Sun;
<a href=“http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/annearundel/bal-te.md.ar.owens21jul21,0,3840479.story[/url]”>http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/annearundel/bal-te.md.ar.owens21jul21,0,3840479.story&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Wow…</p>

<p>Wow is right.</p>

<p>Doesn’t matter- his life is ruined. Forever forward, his bio will have this attached to his name forever…“the football QB that lead Navy to 3 bowl games…and aquited for rape of a fellow midshipman”…</p>

<p>as for his acusor- I hope she found justice, and if not, I trust justice will find her.</p>

<p>Enough said.</p>

<p>Living in the National Capital region, would here this story often. Have use this story to impress upon my S how alcohol can ruin your life/career. </p>

<p>Lessons to be learned:</p>

<p>Underage drinking–bad idea.
Sex with drunk girl–bad idea.
Booty call at academy–bad idea.</p>

<p>When the AFA was having its own high profile cases, believe I read that 90% of these type of cases invovled alcohol.</p>

<p>Good time to bring this subject up with our own kids, show them one lapse in judgement can ruin a lifetime of work.</p>

<p>Yup. Alcohol often complicates things in the post-college and professional world, too. I’m glad I’m happily married. </p>

<p>The physical repercussions (like STD’s) can be awful, as well. We (a group of micrbiologists and epidemiologists) once tracked a drug- resistant form of “N. gonorrhea” as it made its way across a large college campus. Alcohol over-consumption was probably its best friend.</p>

<p>I hate to ask this but what is “booty call?” Can it be explained euphemistically?</p>

<p>“I hate to ask this but what is “booty call?” Can it be explained euphemistically?”</p>

<p>A late night call from a person to another person of the other sex (sometimes the same) looking for a quickie/no strings/hook-up/one night stand.</p>

<p>College senior D-- helps to know. Friends with benefits is another phrase used for friends who sleep together with no strings.</p>

<p>My D will tell you that no one calls a person in the middle of the night “just to talk” it is an implied booty call.</p>

<p>thanks afa81 for explaining the jargon. I agree with what you said earlier about lessons learned–I hope all of those talks over the years stuck with my D. I also emphasized that women at the academies are held to a higher standard.</p>

<p>Female mids I’ve spoken with recently are furious with the accuser in this case for a couple of reasons. First, her behavior (including her drinking problem) reflects badly on all females at the Academy. Also, cases like this diminish legitimate situations involving rape and domestic violence. Finally, who is the real victim in this case: Lamar, female mids, abused women? </p>

<p>I’d like to think that members of the alumni association will continue to support Mr. Owens.</p>

<p>Why can’t they punish the accuser? She is definitely not officer material!Just because she had immunity re:rape etc…, now that he was acquitted, possibly she should be sued for wrongfully destroying his career and conduct not becoming an officer. She sounded like she had a embarrassing history with alcohol etc… since high school. How did she get into the academy?</p>

<p>“Why can’t they punish the accuser?”</p>

<p>Probably because we don’t do that in our legal system, unless the accuser is found guilty of perjury. Since she isn’t charged with perjury, I assume he was found “not guilty” more because it was a “he said, she said” case vs any real evidence on either side. I would submit that both accuser and accused have some serious ethical issues, and on the surface, neither has shown themselves to be at the level of moral and ethical standards that the Navy seeks in it’s officers. Because the evidence is not found to be of great enough weight to prove guilt, does not automatically mean the “truth” has been or ever will be fully known—about either party. The “legal” issue is resolved in these cases, however, the “truth” of what really happened is not always revealed. Perhaps neither belonged at the academy.</p>

<p>“How did she get into the academy?”</p>

<p>Probably the more important question is how did she STAY in the academy if the issues were indeed that severe—something the academy needs to address internally. Cadets and midshipmen are held to a higher standard for a reason. After 3 and 4 years in the academy, BOTH Owens and his accuser should have known and understood very clearly the results of certain actions and behavior. Neither appears to have lived up to the standard of behavior expected of cadets or midshipmen, particularly as upperclassmen.</p>

<p>Well said, Shogun. BZ. That pretty much sums this sad story up.</p>

<p>shogun, you are 100% correct in your assessment.</p>

<p>I agree with Shogun, too. They both displayed behaviour unbecoming of an officer. They both broke rules regardless of the fact that the sex was consentual or not. Drinking to the point of losing your memory and losing control doesn’t make a good officer - it sheds the academies in a bad light. The cadets/midshipmen are held to a higher standard.</p>

<p>I agree Shogun . However, wasn’t the accuser granted immunity? It just doesn’t seem right that she has no consequence for drinking etc…and her blacking out from her obvious substance abuse problem. I wouldn’t want to rely on her judgment as an officer.</p>

<p>I understand your point, Oregon Mom. Maybe our resident lawyer Bill can check in on this: Does immunity protect you from being charged with perjury or does it just protect you from being prosecuted for crimes to which you admit during the case? I wouldn’t think so, that is why I gave my original assessment like i did—but heck, Im sure no lawyer! :)</p>

<p>Depends on the kind of immunity she was offered. Some immunities are against prosecution of specific crimes related to the incident, others are against prosecution of any crime arising from the incident.
All would require that she speak the truth, doubtful that any would protect against perjury.</p>

<p>I’ve been waiting for the more bellicose factions to comment on crafty lawyers getting people off on technicalities. From what I understand teh definition of rape in the UCMJ is more restrictive than that in a civilian court. Thus, the prosecutor must prove [I think] forcible intercourse as compared to non-consenual intercourse. Thus, in this case, it seems the prosecutors could not prove “force.”</p>

<p>I am also curious as to how Mr. Owens was able to afford the high-powered, very expensive legal team that defended him. My understanding is that he comes from a middle class background. Either the attorneys worked for free, a very reduced rate, or he had some substantial help paying for his defense. Would be interesting to know.</p>

<p>Wrongfully destroying his career? I don’t think he is a victim here. Although the Navy was not able to prove Rape in accordance with military law, it is likely he could have been convicted by civilian standards. By reasonable standards, in any event, it appears he violated Academy regulations.
Not to defend her by any stretch of the imagination, but it does sound as if he took advantage of a situation in order that he might be satisfied. In any event, I wouldn’t think her career prospects with the Navy are too bright either</p>

<p>It would be interesting [for those with time] to review the comments made earlier this year about his guilt/innocence. Now that he has been found not guilty by a jury of his peers, how do those who were so intent on having them both thrown out feel about it now?</p>

<p>One of the news articles stated that the accuser would be granted immunity for her conduct violations due to the nature of her charges, i.e., “rape.” </p>

<p>Vice Admiral Rempt pretty much sums it up in his statement,</p>

<p>“The allegations and referral to court martial are sad events – the alleged victim, the accused, their families and friends, and the Brigade are all affected by these actions. Preventing and deterring sexual harassment, misconduct and assault is a critically important issue that the Academy continually emphasizes.”</p>

<p>As parents of current mids we know that Admiral Rempt repeatedly emphasizes this to the Brigade of Midshipmen and the families. Stepped up shore patrol in Annapolis during periods of liberty shows that he is serious. However, could someone explain what the shore patrol was doing at the Annapolis Mall in May?</p>

<p>One of the articles in the Baltimore Sun said that certain members of the USNA Alumni Association assisted Mr. Owens in obtaining top shelf legal representation.</p>

<p>Thanks Bill! </p>

<p>By the way, I have nothing against lawyers :)</p>

<p>I wonder if the accuser can/will take this up in civilian court. We may not have heard the last of this yet.</p>

<p>I stand by my earlier comment:</p>

<p>“I would hope the “victim” will be finishing her education at some other institution of higher learning. Not much empathy for her here.”</p>

<p>spidermom, I was thinking the opposite: Mr. Owens might sue the accuser’s family.</p>

<p>Thanks Bill–you would have loved the beach today-- ten dolphins cruisin’ through the surf–it was pure poetry! Shogun, are we melting here in California?</p>