Prep School Rape

Prep School Admissions Prep School Parents
521

I brought up the Havard “scholarship” (as opposed to “financial aid”) several pages ago as indicative of a pattern of exaggeration and spinning. I do think he’s carefully trying to craft a very respectable, laudable biography (he possibly honed his craft while writing all those admissions essays), but it’s really up to his attorney to keep him from spinning to the point of coming off as lacking credibility. And I think that’s a real possibility here.

Labrie told the prosecutor yesterday that he was attracted to the accuser and liked her, but from what I recall, he initially approached her via some creepy online communications that she initially found off-putting. My recollection also is that it took the intervention of a mutual underclassman friend to persuade her to participate in this “senior salute” with him. Are we to believe he’s this unbelievably bright and talented student headed to Harvard and that he’s also an awkward dork as in over his head as she was? I’m not buying it, not after hearing about some of those FB posts.

FWIW, I saw a little bit of testimony online (and heard the accuser sobbing under cross-examination by Carney), and it was chilling how calm and cool he appeared (and sounded), and frankly it worried me that she would be dismissed by jurors as being histrionic (that’s a word my mother used to use against me when I was 16!).

One thing I recall from having sat on the jury of a very lengthy trial was that the jurors (assuming they behave as instructed by the judge) are not privy to half of what is being discussed in the news, online, etc. I think it’s unwise to try to speculate how they will find unless you were in the courtroom every day hearing the testimony and seeing their reactions. (And even then you could be wrong. In my case both the plantiff’s and defendant’s attorneys offered to pick up my lost wages after the trial dragged on for weeks because both thought I would find in their favor.)

522

Not meaning to be insulting, but that’s because it would support your view of events.

Let’s turn it around. What if a rape victim had a history of enthusiastic and aggressive participation in sex? Does that mean she couldn’t have said no THIS time? That was the kind of thing that happened in the bad old days. I think that’s why it isn’t admissible.

I find it interesting that many say his demeanor is “chilling.” There is a pattern of interpreting everything he says or does in a way that imputes bad faith on his part. Is anyone willing to consider the possibility that he may not actually be the uber villain you thought he was? I’m not coming down on one side or the other, personally. There just isn’t enough solid public information to know, IMHO.

523

It’s also inadmissible because the judge doesn’t want the case going off on tangents. If Ms. X comes and says Labrie was aggressive on a date, the defense may call 4 other female SPS students who say he was always a perfect gentleman and 2 SPS students to testify that the girl who testified for the prosecution has a history of lying/seeking attention.

524

Well, personally, as the parent of two teenage boys, I’d love to believe he’s innocent. But neither of my kids would appear so calm and confident if they were accused of rape and sitting on the witness stand at their own trial.

525

@Consolation, I’ve thought about this for the past day, since I heard him testify. I agree that one way to interpret the situation is that he was somewhat shy around a girl he thought was pretty and was very bold in his “guy talk” messages about “slaying,” and it was all a horrible interlude that got out of control but not to the point of rape.

I want to give him the benefit of the doubt, but the girl’s testimony (in the clips when it’s not distorted) is very compelling. SOMETHING upsetting happened up there, and there is physical evidence (the vaginal laceration) to support her story. Following from that evidence, everything he did afterwards/did on the stand to proclaim his innocence by necessity becomes a sign of his sociopathy.

I know hearing only the brief clip of the accuser and the longer clip/footage of the defendant is not enough to decide for sure. This is where the juror’s life experience will come in. In my experience, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck and there’s smoke, then there’s fire (to mix a couple of metaphors in honor of the defendant’s father the copywriting landscaper/landscaping copywriter).

526

I can’t stand Nancy Grace, watching her cover this story at the moment, I really can’t stand her. Granted, I’m the mother of 3 boys but she could care less about anything other than the girl said she was raped so that is it…done, guy should get 20 years. She must have been a very scary prosecutor.

527

Nancy Grace is crazy and horrible. She should be banned from television.

528

As it stands right now, I really can’t decide what happened here. I think Labrie acted like a jerk, but that’s not a crime.

If he penetrated her in any way, then boom I would find him guilty of a misdemeanor at a minimum. But their stories -and the scientific evidence- are too muddled and inconclusive in my mind. Being there to assess these witnesses would make all the difference in the world, but that’s something none of us was able to do.

529

@GnocchiB and @Youdon’tsay - It didn’t surprise me that he came across well. Explains why he fooled so many adults in the school community as well - the Eddie Haskell effect.

530

Perfect, DOSCHICOs, Eddie Haskell effect.

I think he penetrated her a little, then pulled out & ejaculated. He elevates her to Princess and puts his SEC down, to raise sympathy. Frankly, I wish the prosecutors had a tiger like nancy Grace to stir them up, and point out all the changes in his appearance.

531

I have been following this case closely. I do not know either the accuser or the defendant, but have several sons and daughters who all attended or attend boarding schools, including a daughter who attended SPS a few years ago. In my opinion there are many things both the prosecution and the defense could have done to bolster their respective cases. At this point, I do not believe the standard has been met for conviction.

A few (non-sequential) comments that I haven’t seen made elsewhere:

Where was an expert witness linguist to discuss the vernacular used at St. Paul’s? Small enclosed communities develop their own vocabularies and usage. “Score” appears to have been used at SPS to characterize any sexual or romantic interaction, from the relationship of a couple who has been together a year to a quick kiss between relative strangers at a dance.

Senior salute was a term used by anyone who wanted to have a sexual interaction (from a hug to intercourse) with a senior. In this case, and undoubtedly most commonly, it was a senior boy wanting to “senior salute” a freshman girl. But it was also used by girls of any grade wanting to “senior salute” a senior boy.

I can’t shed light on the other words that came up, but a linguistic investigation could have.

Email appears to be used much more ubiquitously among students at SPS than in most other boarding schools, where texting is much more common. I believe this is because there are difficulties with coverage on the SPS campus.

No mention was made by the defense of a long-standing SPS tradition, a school-sanctioned dinner dance held every year where seniors invite freshmen as their dates. (Perhaps it has been discontinued?) Visitation policies allow students of any age to visit each other at certain times in dorm rooms. These are some of the underlying messages given to students that SPS does not explicitly discourage senior-freshmen relationships.

This freedom does all students a disservice, as we are seeing. Will 18 and 19 yr old boys be mature enough to refrain from pursuing a younger girl that they are interested in and whom they see as a peer? And how many freshman girls, living away from home for the first time, would see interest from a senior boy as exciting proof that they themselves are grown up? The school can provide structural barriers that make these relationships/encounters far less likely.

This case is a tragedy for everyone involved. Both the accuser and the accused are high-school age children, with the undeveloped decision making capacities that we are just beginning to recognize characterize this age group so completely.

I don’t believe any of us, including the two kids involved, can understand fully what happened that night. Nor do I believe that being in the courtroom and being able to assess their demeanor would make any kind of difference in evaluating the case. Many an innocent person has been sentenced because they “looked guilty” and many a sociopath has gone free because they appeared to be genuine and earnest. We have to judge on the evidence only.

Both of their lives have been changed forever. The posts about throwing him to the wolves or happy speculation on the terrible things that might happen to him in his future bother me deeply. We should wish both of them well, and pray that they will move forward in life and that this defining event will motivate and strengthen them. The girl because she has spoken out, and refused to cower, the boy because he has learned in a terrible way, the price of using another to gratify oneself.

532

Maybe Labrie’s punishment should include being Nancy Grace’s lackey for a year or two. :smiley:

533

“No mention was made by the defense of a long-standing SPS tradition, a school-sanctioned dinner dance held every year where seniors invite freshmen as their dates.” < This practice was discontinued several years back and rightly so.

Agree with your point, @Quenn, that a linguistic expert would have been helpful to jurors in understanding the lingo used by students at the school, however, in this case I think both sides wished to use the lack of clarity to their advantage.

534

“No mention was made by the defense of a long-standing SPS tradition, a school-sanctioned dinner dance held every year where seniors invite freshmen as their dates.” < This was discontinued several years back and rightly so."

Glad to hear it.

535

Really perceptive post, @Quenn

536

My sense of the prognostication being done about the defendant’s future is that it’s based on the presumption that he will not be convicted.

If he is convicted, and is punished, then I think he will absolutely have the right to move forward with his life and put this behind him once he has “paid his debt” to society. I don’t think he will need the CC community or internet haters to continue haunting him.

The condemnation I see being directed towards him assumes he is going to get out of bearing any legal or moral responsibility for his part in the incident. Declarations of guilt and the application of punishment serve as a release valve for any community - as a way of saying “this is not acceptable.” I don’t think I’m going out on a limb to say that women are sexually victimized with higher frequency than men are, and the “boys will be boys” or “she was asking for it” mentality is still prevalent in many places. There is a very real possibility that he will not be legally sanctioned for his atrocious behavior – which has been established through the testimony – and therefore, some sort of social stigmatization is desirable and helpful.

To my knowledge, as someone with no relationship to anyone at St. Paul’s, he has not officially been sanctioned by the school (as in, revocation of his award or diploma, or banning him from alumni events), so in that sense he has “gotten away with something” in that community. Also to my knowledge, he is not enrolled at Harvard but it is not 100% clear to any of us that he will not be permitted to enroll at a future time if he is not convicted.

Obviously it’s for the jury to decide what happens. What you are seeing as “happy speculation” has more to do with what happens if he walks.

537

It came up in the trial during his testimony and questioning by Carney (I assume to send the message to the jury that he was punished by the St. Paul’s community? Minor considering the school rules broken let alone any criminal charges of which he may be found guilty ) that he had his Rector’s award revoked and his name was not included on the wall with other graduates. My guess is he is persona non grata on campus but who knows?

538

I have been going back and forth about whether or not to post on this thread. I am going to preface my comments with the following:

  1. I was a victim of sexual assault.
  2. I knew the person who assaulted me.
  3. My case went to trial.
  4. My attacker was convicted and is currently serving a sentence of 58 to life. Our state has some of the most strict sentencing laws in the U.S. for sexual assaults, especially with weapon enhancements.

While none of this makes me an expert, it does give me some insight into the proceedings as I went through a trial.

I also am wondering why the victim was in the courtroom after she testified. I was told by the DA on my case that I shouldn’t be in the courtroom at all as it could prejudice my testimony if I heard something and then was recalled. Now, I never asked her if I could legally be there, but the DA on my case didn’t want me in the courtroom. I was in the courtroom to testify and for closing arguments. To be perfectly blunt, I think I would have shattered if I had heard some of the testimony that was shared with me long after the fact.

As an adult woman of 47, I did not want my mom in the courtroom when I testified. My father was unable to be there because it was too emotionally upsetting for him. I really didn’t want my mom in the courtroom at all. OTOH, I wanted my sister in the courtroom. She was in the courtroom for every minute of the trial and my testimony. She was my rock. When I was testifying, I wasn’t allowed to use euphemisms. I was stopped and told to use the actual words. At sixteen, this young lady has to be mortified to have her family hear all the intimate testimony of her case.

I never cried during my trial, I just shook uncontrollably for a week, 24/7. I had absolutely no control over it. When I reached to pour myself a cup of water before the jury came back in for afternoon testimony. I couldn’t even hold the pitcher because I was shaking so hard. I dropped the pitcher and water flew everywhere. I can understand why the victim was crying uncontrollably. It is an emotional release over which she has no control. This is another reason why she possibly shouldn’t have been in the courtroom. The defense actually mentioned my shaking in closing arguments, intimating that I was faking it.

I ironed my pants before I went to the police station to report the crime. The defense also made a big deal about this as if to say that I really wasn’t raped/traumatized if I stopped to iron my pants. I don’t think that there is one standard way that someone reacts to being assaulted. Still not sure why I felt the need to iron my pants. I was on auto-pilot.

I am slightly confused about the semen/dna. My understanding is that Labrie’s dna could not be tied to the semen that was found on her underwear, but they did find his dna on her underwear. Dna can be found from skin cells. If he was rubbing himself against her, it is very possible that his dna would be on her underwear. However, I am stymied as to how they couldn’t tie the semen back to Labrie through dna testing. In my case, they were able to identify both my attacker’s and my SO’s dna from the rape kit that was done. The fact that the defense did not bring up the fact that the semen could not be tied to Labrie, leads me to believe that it was based on a ruling that the judge made.

I personally don’t feel that anyone puts themselves through a rape trial unless they believe they have been assaulted. In many respects, the trial was worse than the assault itself. Having said that, because Labrie would not plead, the victim had no choice but to testify. I was subpoenaed to testify at my trial. Up until the actual day of the trial, the DA of my trial told me that she would extend a plea offer if that was what I wanted. My attacker wouldn’t accept a plea offer that had him listed as a registered sex offender. No plea was offered.

I haven’t been in the courtroom and I have only read what is in this thread, but I am going to say that if I were on the jury, I wouldn’t be able to convict Labrie of felony sexual assault. Here’s why:

  1. At first she said it was consensual and then she said it wasn’t. While I can believe that she lied at the beginning and it is possible she was assaulted, there is room for doubt.

  2. She knew that she was going up there for one reason and that was to have a sexual encounter. I understand that she said no, but by her own admission, she was laughing when she said it. Once again, the door is open for doubt.

  3. According to what I read on this thread, after the encounter, the victim didn’t seem to be sure if she had sex or not. Whether Labrie bragged about it or not, the victim herself wasn’t sure if sex had taken place based on the texts that were exchanged. Once again, doubt.

I think it is going to be hard to convict him of a felony based on the conflicting testimony and the dna mystery. By that, I mean that there was semen on her underwear, but it couldn’t be tied to Labrie.

Also, the DA on my case said that juries have a very hard time convicting defendants in sexual assault cases where the parties know each other.

FWIW, I agree with the author of the article in the NYT that Renaissancemom posted. There are really only two people who should know what went on and neither of them seem to be exactly sure what took place. How can anyone expect a jury to be sure?

539

I wonder why the defense counsel brought that up on direct?

540

@momofmusician17, thank you for sharing your viewpoint. I am so sorry for what you went through. I hope seeing your attacker sentenced for his crime has helped you to heal. You are a very strong woman.