I don’t do criminal law. I know some posters on this board do. I actually thought that the victim impact statement and the defense sentencing memorandum did as much to hurt as help.
While it may have been her authentic feeling, IMO, the victim’s statement and her father’s statement spent too much time dwelling on how awful the trial and Carney’s cross-examination of her were, how the faculty abandoned her, his friends harassed them, etc. I’m sure it’s all true, but the judge isn’t going to give Labrie a tougher sentence based on those things. And the stuff about the embarassment dealing with this with the uncle, a Jesuit priest, isn’t something that’s going to matter either.
The defense memorandum relied so much on how smart he was and how his father didn’t support the family financially --and got basic things wrong, like the shrink saying he was paying his father’s rent, when it was his mother he was helping. I checked the judge’s credentials. He’s Penn State and Temple Law. I don’t think the “he’s been punished enough because he can’t go to Harvard” schtick is likely to work with him either.
For me, the defense memorandum, with all the letters from friends, made me believe more that Labrie should be punished. Obviously, he’s intelligent and charismatic, and he scammed people into believing that he cared about the other students at school. But when you look at what he actually did to the victim, and what he said to his friend (“feign intimacy and throw em in the dumpster,” “imma do absolutely whatever,” “complete indifference to anything with a vagina”) he was just using people. And he has no remorse even now.
I see no reason whatsoever to think he wouldn’t reoffend. He doesn’t appear to have a conscience.
A couple of the texts said, in effect, “Now that I am into schools, I’m going to do absolutely whatever.” (Close paraphrase; I didnt go back to look at exact quote). i don’t doubt that his whole external persona was carefully crafted for the express purpose of impressing admissions officers.
@jonri, I am not qualified to determine whether Labrie is likely to re-offend after all of this - but I don’t think anybody here is qualified to make that determination. My understanding was that a psychological evaluation concluded that he would not…and that carries more weight with me than anybody’s opinions here. None of us were in that courtroom, saw all of the evidence, or evaluated him psychologically. So, yes, based on the extremely limited information I have seen, I opine that he is not a threat to the public at large.
Of course, I could be grievously wrong. Which is why I think the best solution is to make all persons convicted of any sex-related offense undergo a psych eval and a separate hearing to determine whether the – truly awful and forever life changing – label of “sex offender” should be branded on a person, before anybody reaches these types of conclusions and imposes that type of sentence.
I think the lawyers, the jury, and the judge generally did well, overall, with a very difficult case. IMO the term of incarceration is appropriate given the jury’s verdict. I am only sorry that SPS can’t be sanctioned in some way.
I believe that speculaton on this thread as to whether or not he is a sociopath, or is likely to reoffend, is unreasonable and unfair. Those of us who are not experts, were not in the courtroom, and who have not tested him are not in a reliable position to say.
The sexual offender registry will make it very difficult for him to turn his life around. He will not even be able to find work as a trash collector. In my view, a far more effective punishment would be to impose stringent conditions of probation over a long period of time following his release from the house of corrections on the misdemeanor charges. The sexual offender registry virtually sets him up to fail.
Bear in mind that a conviction is a public record whether someone is registered as a sex offender or not. An employer, date, or whatever can still do a background check and find the conviction. In Labrie’s case, the conviction made the press, so you don’t even need to look at records to find this; it’ll be the first Google hit for the rest of his life. So a lot of what the sex offender registry is meant to achieve is already taken care of when someone with an unusual name gets a high-profile trial.
@MidwestDad3, with all due respect, I disagree with you. From a sociological standpoint, a case like this is instructive in helping communities understand the boundaries of morality - what behavior is OK in civilized society and what is not. That’s why posters have been dissecting the narratives that both the state and the defense have put forth.
I myself have been trying to make sense of the scenario all along, which is why I have been reading and posting to this thread. I don’t think anyone who is commenting is suggesting that their opinions are the gospel truth, or would suggest that they are in a position to dictate punishment, guilt or innocence.
Open trials (except in extremely narrowly drawn fields like national security) benefit our society. I would imagine we all would think that if the trial had been closed to the public, or this forum shut down, we would say that such a communication blackout on a crime against a minor is dangerous, “unreasonable and unfair.”
Just because people express their thoughts does not mean that their opinion is unreasonable or unfair. As far as I know, most posters do not know the victim or the defendant and are not speaking on actual authority. I think almost all posters believe this situation to be tragic in almost every respect. I see the postings as evidence of the CC community trying to come to grips with a truly evil crime.
Others may see it differently, and I’m just as interested in their viewpoints as I am in those who agree with my take on it. For instance, I’m interested in knowing more about your comments regarding how the sex offender registry is setting him up to fail. From the little I’ve read about it, he has no restrictions on where he can live, which is much more forgiving than the analogous statute in my state. I’d be interested in hearing your flesh out that thought. Perhaps a grave injustice has been done to the defendant, and I’m not aware of it - I’m interested in the discussion.
To the extent your comment is directed to me, let me explain that I was reacting to a statement by @prospect1 saying that in this case the defendant is not a threat to the community and therefore registration is not needed. I value prospect1’s opinions and I had a sincere desire to know why she thought that. She replied:
Now I know it was based on the psycho evaluation done before the trial and attached to the sentencing recommendation submitted by the defense. For a variety of reasons, including those mentioned by the prosecutor yesterday and my own reading of the opinion and understanding of the circumstances in which it was written , I don’t think it’s sufficient. The judge apparently doesn’t think it’s dispositive and is asking that Labrie be evaluated by an expert employed by the state correctional system. As I said, I think that’s the right thing to do. I said that I think there is “probable cause” —not really the right phrase–to think he will and that further evaluation by someone who has more experience dealing with sex offenders than the defense “expert” apparently does is appropriate.
One of the reasons I respect the way the judge handled this case is that he is requiring Labrie to undergo another evaluation to see if therapy for a sex offender is necessary----the defense psychologist said it was not.
I don’t agree with the sex registry since even the jury could not get to calling this a rape. I suspect the computer felony will go away. I hope he becomes a minister, I think given what the past and the short term will bring him, he should have a perspective that will enable him to do good things if he so desires and the sex registry could turn what could be good into an impossibility unfortunately and I don’t find that “rehabilitation”. I’m not convinced that he is a threat to society, nor do I think we necessarily need to incarcerate people that aren’t a threat to society as a whole, But I think the judge came to the best decision that he could. I can’t believe the “mom” of the young lady is out stumping the media circuit, but I think she played a large hand in this and I rather think the risk of exposing her daughter and keeping this in the media is not doing her daughter any help.
It’s not a unique name. There are a couple of other people with the same name who belong to Facebook. Labrie–sometimes spelled LaBrie, but Google doesn’t differentiate–is a fairly common last name of French Canadians, an ethnic group quite common in New Hampshire. I don’t think it’s that common among Americans if you take the whole US into account, but in Northern New England, it’s not that uncommon.
I am posting this not to be difficult but because in the aftermath of the Samantha Dietrich mess a poor high school kid with the same name as one of the boys who sexually molested her was harassed. People assumed it was the same person and it wasn’t. There is more than one Owen Labrie in the US and at least one is about the same age.I feel very sorry for him. Anyway…if you happen to meet someone named Owen Labrie, don’t assume it’s “that” Owen Labrie.
No, I haven’t read every available detail…I presume the jury saw and heard whatever was released when they came to their decisions. Like I said, I think the judge came to the best conclusion he could given the ages of the kids at the time of the incident and the controversy over the computer and the pending appeal. It might be premature to predict that a high school senior is not fit to minister to people at age 30 or 40 or 50 etc. Time will tell, as with all things.
@momofthreeboys Did you read the prosecution’s sentencing report? He says in his texts he had sex with an unnamed 12 year old who attends junior boarding school. He should not ever work with children.
I was amused that the defense report repeats the “full Harvard scholarship” fiction three or four times.
Anyway I came here that the victim’s parents will be on NBC’s Dateline at 10 p.m. 10/30/15 (tonight.) I hope they sue the pants off St. Paul’s for allowing the hostile environment the daughter endured when she returned for fall 2014.
^^^^Where did it say that Labrie had sex with an unnamed 12 year old??!! Did I miss something?
In any event, If a truly impartial psychologist finds that Labrie is likely to re-commit a sex-related crime, then I am in support of sex offender status to alert the public at large. As far as I am aware, there exists no such finding, currently. The only finding made is that he is NOT a risk to commit a sex crime, and therefore is not a threat to the public at large. Whether or not this finding was made on poor information or misinformation, that is the only finding out there at this time.
Therefore, I am very opposed to labeling somebody a “sex offender” such that it requires sex offender registry, unless and until such a finding is made. I agree that the judge was right to order that the psychoanalysis be done; I do not agree that sex offender status should be automatically conferred unless there is a finding that warrants it, with a proper evidentiary hearing. In this case, there exists no such finding other than in the court of public opinion, which as we know can be notoriously flawed.
That said, as I understand it, this is not the law and the conviction on the felony charges requires that Labrie register as a sex offender. As I said, I do not agree with this law because it is too a hefty punishment if the defendant, in fact, is highly unlikely to re-offend due to the circumstances of the crime/mental condition of the defendant/other factors.
^^^When you read the sentencing report there are several blank pages at the end. Scroll down to read the exhibits. There are transcripts of Owen’s texts and email messages.
“I can’t believe the “mom” of the young lady is out stumping the media circuit, but I think she played a large hand in this and I rather think the risk of exposing her daughter and keeping this in the media is not doing her daughter any help.”
Not sure why you put mom in quotations, @momofthreeboys. Are you questioning her ability as a mom because she is telling their story? Perhaps her motivation is to demonstrate that there is no shame in being a victim. Perhaps her motivation is to get the word out there that young males shouldn’t objectify females. Perhaps her motivation is to send a message to other victims that it is ok to come forward and not to hide in fear of telling your story. Perhaps its something else entirely. I’m not sure if I would want to speak to the media if I were her, but having not walked in her shoes for the past 18 months, I will refrain from judging the victim’s mother and family.
As far as the State’s sentencing report, it is my understanding that the blank pages actually contained info as it was mentioned during the sentencing that things like the list of girls’ names that Labrie created were included in the report. My guess is these were taken out from the public’s view to preserve the privacy of the victim and other minors and innocent people.