Agree. Am I the only one that finds it troubling that the accused had a key to the building where the incident took place? I really can’t think of a legitimate reason for ANY student to have keys to rooms other than their own dorm room. Really think the school has some liability around this, and it wouldn’t make me feel very comfortable if my children attended St. Paul’s.
He was a prefect.
In affidavits, Labrie is quoted as saying that the keys had been handed down from senior class to senior class for the purpose of aiding the hookups…had nothing to do with his status as a prefect.
@maters - I heard that comment on a news report as well about the victim’s family moving out of Concord. The family doesn’t live in state so to me it is another case of the press getting some details wrong. The victim did leave the school so perhaps that got misinterpreted by someone who didn’t get the whole boarding school thing.
Not sure how Labrie got the key. The building is very new. It wasn’t finished and occupied until the end of 2011 so if it was passed down from one senior to another, then it wasn’t something that happened more than once or twice, not long standing. No students are given keys to any building on campus, not even prefects, so the key must have been obtained in some nefarious manner.
From St. Paul’s handbook:
Just reading over the summary in this morning’s Concord Monitor, I think the victim’s testimony was strong on several points. She was cordial with the defendant afterward because it was graduation weekend and her sister was graduating. This seems entirely plausible IMO. She described the encounter in detail, and said “no” three times.
On the other hand, several statements undercut her testimony, unfortunately. She doesn’t remember telling a friend beforehand exactly which acts she would be willing to participate in with the defendant. The police report lists these in crude detail, which the defense attorney read aloud. Jurors hate this sort of thing–they think, if she doesn’t remember this from before the trauma occurred, how can we be sure that she remembers the actual event correctly? The prosecutor made a serious error in not dealing with this on direct examination, because their entire case hinges on the veracity of this one witness. Additionally, she testified on direct examination about wanting “power” in this situation. I don’t think the prosecutor should have gone there–the jury may wonder if she is now using her power to get back at the defendant. These jurors are parents of sons, too, not just daughters.
It also doesn’t help the prosecution that the victim had a sister in the senior class.
The prosecutor also made a critical error in timing. She should not have turned the victim over for cross-examination just before the end of the day.
It will be a shame IMO if the defendant walks free due to either the prosecutor overcharging in this case, or due to the prosecutor’s inadequate preparation of the case. The school, the victim’s “friends” who failed to dissuade her from going through with this and everyone who was a part of this culture comes out looking very badly indeed.
@midwestdad3 - Why do you think it doesn’t help the prosecution that the victim had a sister in the senior class?
Agree with you on the end of the day timing thing. Even just watching a lot of movies and reading books set in courtroom settings, I thought of that immediately. I do worry about the strategic capabilities of the prosecutor vs. the defense counsel.
I would imagine (hope) that the prosecutor will bring in an expert in rape victim psychology at some point to talk about how victims of acquaintance rape often act.
If I am reading the account correctly, today the girl testified that she shaved “down there” the night before their encounter. Why would she do that? It sounds very much like she expected some nefarious activity. She also testified that she was laughing during the encounter. I can see how an 18-year-old boy might confuse that type of behavior as consenting.
That said, even if she consented and consented and consented up until the last minute, I believe a single “NO” or “STOP” is legally sufficient to constitute rape if the boy continued with the act despite her last minute command to stop. She has testified that she did say no before the actual act.
Of course, I am not at the trial and cannot assess anyone’s demeanor or veracity for myself. I can see how this could be a close call though.
^^Because unless the prosecutor puts the sister on the witness stand to testify that she and the victim never discussed school, boys, etc (which would not be believable, anyway), it dilutes the suggestion that the victim might be naïve about what to expect in an encounter like this. I think SPS is a fairly small school, with just 500 or so students. This means that while you might not know everyone, you certainly “know of” everyone. Already this morning, apparently, defense counsel was probing into the relationship between the two sisters while the mother was on the stand.
BTW, a reporter has posted that in NH, a child under 16 is legally incapable of consent. If that is the case, then at least all the issues surrounding “no” are off the table.
^@prospect1 Her friend has apparently testified that the victim said beforehand there was some sexual activity she was willing to undertake, but not all. It will be a tough one for the jury.
@doschicos - I think the older sister testimony was elicited by the defense to convey that there may have been some pre-existing tension between this girl’s sister and this boy/his friends. There was some statement she gave to police to the effect that the boys in the senior class liked to say “hi” to the victim/girl so that they could get under her sister’s skin.
Hmmm…sounds like the girl is not happy with her testimony. According to Jess Bidgood of the New York Times, the girl left the courtroom today crying and was overheard telling the prosecutor, “I’m so sorry.”
I must say, and this is just me personally, the fact that this girl has made some statements and given some testimony that is a little bit damning to her case makes me believe her MORE. She sounds like an honest girl. Again, of course, I’m not there so no way to really tell.
Edit: Jess BidGOOD not Bidwell
SPS went co-ed in 1971, along with Andover, Exeter, etc. One wonders: why? There were already tons of all-girls schools and “sister” schools (like Abbot Academy with Andover). Can someone enlighten me as to why 100+ years of boys-only education got overturned? What was in the '60s/70s water or zeitgeist that propelled all of the boys schools to go coed (which, by the way, gutted the quality of virtually all the remaining girls schools).
^^^^ I think the point of going coed was to make such institutions available to women as well and therefore support the cause of equality; but I do agree that, in the end, this ended up harming women rather than helping because the all-girls schools have truly been gutted as you say, and that’s a shame.
Here’s where I think that older sister is relevant in a way that will help the prosecution - a point I assume the prosecution will bring up to the jury. The prosecution is likely to build a case that Labrie pursued the victim specifically out of all the girls at the school due to the points that were assigned in this twisted contest:
"Prosecutors in the St. Paul’s rape case began outlining on Monday the annual competition they claim propelled a graduating senior to force sex onto a 15-year-old student last year, saying he and friends shared lists with each other of potential conquests, used a rating system based in part on attractiveness and referred to their encounters with terms like “slaying.
They also provided a judge with the list reportedly created by the senior, Owen Labrie, and noted that the alleged victim is the only one whose name appears in all capital letters.
“We consider that to be relevant, your honor,” said Deputy County Attorney Catherine Ruffle. “Highly, in this case.”"
“Ruffle noted Monday that scoring might have been part of the reason Labrie contacted the girl in the first place, as he had reportedly engaged in a sexual encounter with one of her relatives, who was also a student, increasing the point-value of the encounter.”
A gag order has stopped all tweeting from the courtroom because a reporter revealed the name of the victim.
shouldn’t have been allowed in the first place, IMO.
Yes, I think the public can wait a few hours to get their info in this case. (But in other circumstances, such as covering political protests, live tweeting can be critical IMO.)
^^^Re the older sister, the defense elicited testimony from the mother that the victim viewed her as “a role model.” I would expect that the judge might bar any testimony as to the sister’s relationship (if any) with the defendant as highly prejudicial.
I generally support the idea of open courtrooms which, in today’s society, means allowing the proceedings to be followed live through social media. HOWEVER, when there are minors involved and sensitive situations, I believe such proceedings should be closed COMPLETELY; i.e. no reporters at all.
From that Concord Monitor article linked to above:
Has there been any reporting on who contributed to the “unsanctioned fundraising campaign”? It must have been a pretty successful “campaign” if Labrie could afford Whitey Bulger’s attorney. Why would “alumni and parents of students” want to get involved in helping one student over another? Is the accuser in this case from a very wealthy background?
I wondered the same thing, LucieTheLakie. Maybe they feel that they are supporting the defendant and the school? Did I read somewhere that there were more points in this Senior Salute for this particular student? Why was her name on a list in all capital letters?
This whole situation is so very sad. It breaks my heart. I cannot imagine being the parent of either student.