“Under New Hampshire law, juries can convict a person of sexual assault based solely on the testimony of the alleged victim. Ruffle noted, however, that there is physical evidence in this case: a rape test that showed vaginal abrasions that “could be” consistent with intercourse, and the girl’s underwear, which was tested days after the encounter and had semen on it. Though the semen cannot be traced to Labrie, Ruffle said, the girl insists she did not have sex with anyone else at the time.”
We’re always hearing about how prosecutors won’t take on most unwitnessed rape cases because they are just too hard to prove. I’m wondering why this prosecutor took on this case. From what I am reading here, this is just a lose lose for BOTH of these kids. She comes out of it publicly bullied on the stand and being branded a liar, and he’s not going to easily distance himself from these events even if he didn’t rape her. This will follow both of them around for years. I’m wondering if this prosecutor actually believes in his case or if he was willing to sacrifice this girl in order to give himself name recognition.
I guess I need to read more about this case, but right now it just strikes me as a big mistake that doesn’t help rape victims at all, least of all this particular young lady.
Nrdsb4-when I worked in a victim’s right office as a volunteer, the lead prosecutor for that county (not Merrimack County) told us that if they take a case to trial, they believe that it is winnable, that they absolutely believe in the guilt of the defendant. They do consider the victims, of course, and sometimes because of the age of the victim they may go for a settlement first. NH isn’t really a hotbed of workplace climbers to use young victims to rise to a better position-many in the prosecutors’ offices stay for many years. Also, the defendant’s original atty is verry good at what he does. If he was willing to settle, which he was, from what I’ve read, he thought that Labrie had a good chance of being convicted.
I don’t think the prosecutor is making a “big mistake”.
@Nrdsb4, I disagree- this girl believes she was raped and she is standing up to the young man who allegedly abused her. If this case helps other 15 year old girls realize what a dangerous game it is to play, to find yourself alone in a broom closet with an 18+ year old who was allegedly expecting sex of some sort, who has power over you in every possible way both physically and emotionally/socially (as a prefect), then all the better for this case to help/teach/scare young ladies to stay clear of such danger. But at least this young lady is getting her day in court no matter how painful the process.
Moreover, I think the prosecutor took the case because the prosecutor thinks a crime occurred- that a 15 year old was victimized- and wasn’t going to let it go even if hard to prove. “Missoula” is worth the read, and touches on how erring on the side of not prosecuting certainly doesn’t help rape victims.
@MidwestDad3 - You said, “I admired the young woman for standing up to defense counsel and insisting he should read her “umms” and pauses when he quotes her statements that were given. There is a downside to this, though. By showing jurors that she can push back on aggressive defense counsel, they might infer that she should have been able to be more forceful in telling the defendant no.”
Very good point, and I agree with you it could be interpreted that way. If I were the prosecution, I would definitely address this. Without a doubt, the girl has been to extensive rape criss counseling and other counseling over the past 15 months. Plenty of time to process and learn, to gain strength and to grow skills in speaking about her experience and advocating for herself in such situations. BECAUSE of this incident and the outgrowth of it, she definitely is NOT the girl she was 15 months ago. The accused has caused constant delays in the trial with the constant changes in defense counsel. Upon finishing with her cross examination, the victim is reported to have said to a rape counselor who is speaking as the family’s spokesperson, “I am a now a survivor not a victim.” That is very much sentiments and language she probably has learned through her counseling. Good for her for having such strength!
Labrie’s first attorney has a very strong reputation and track record. They were very close to working out a plea bargain before the lawyer left and Labrie obtained new counsel.
In addition to sending a message to other 15 year old girls, it sends a message to other teenage boys not to objectify females. It allows the school to take a very hard look at its culture and find ways to address issues that might have enabled the accused. It sends that same message to any other boarding school or private school in the nation. I think it’s a brave move and one that will help countless people.
Do you think there was a “senior salute” at St. Paul’s in 2105? I rather doubt it. So, even if Labrie is acquitted, the mere fact that the prosecution brought this case, IMO, may have stopped other young men from engaging in this game. That means some other young women in this years “crop” weren’t exploited and humiliated.Even if Labrie walks…if I were a citizen in NH, I’d be applauding the prosecutor for bringing the charges. And if I had a 15 year old D or one 13 or 14 who lives in NH, I’d be eternally grateful.
Earth to @Nrdsb4, the fact that rape victims are in reality put on trial means most of them won’t press charges. If I were a prosecutor and one was willing to do it AND had the support of her parents, I’d bring the case too.
Why this young woman? She was 15. Having sex with her is statutory rape in NH. Maybe “just” a misdemeanor, but nevertheless a crime. I kind of suspect that every young man at St. Paul’s knows that now. So do all the other young people at Exeter and all the other preps schools in NH. If the accuser were 16+,with same “he said” “she said” issues around the question of consent, it’s likely that there would be no conviction. Those are just the odds. Odds for the prosecution are much better when the victim cannot legally give consent. A misdemeanor conviction is better than no conviction. if you are only going to prosecute one “he said” “she said” case, picking one involving someone too young to consent is a smart move.
@jonri, it was my impression that this defense lawyer was confusing her on the stand and bringing her whole case into question. For her to go through that AND see her accused acquitted would just seem to be victimizing her again. And I read that she was sobbing afterward, so my impression of her wasn’t a strong and steadfast accuser. It seemed like she was just being fried. I admit I don’t know many of the details of the case, so should have read more before posting, but it seemed as though the prosecutor had perhaps let her down by not preparing her properly for cross examination and not addressing the predictable defense moves in advance.
I agree that would be better than nothing, but didn’t someone just post the statutes (post #155) that says this guy gets a total pass for that that by virtue of only being 3 years older than she IF he can convince even one juror that this was consensual?
Agree with @jonri – a misdemeanor conviction is better than no conviction.
I hope that the elements of penetration (or whatever NH law requires) have been met so even if the defense has established reasonable doubt about the consent issue, the jury will be able to find that a crime has occurred.
I’ve been reading articles written before the trial that mention that the defendant emailed at least one other underclass girl seeking a “senior salute” and that a female classmate had sworn an affidavit stating that he was sexually aggressive with her when they dated. Clearly he’s guilty of poor judgment and boorishness at an absolute minimum.
What happens if he gets off? Does he have a shot at attending a selective college? I hate the thought of him being in a residential college setting with unsuspecting female classmates. I guess in the internet age he’ll have trouble escaping his past, no matter what the verdict.
If he is convicted, I guess he will be a guest of the state of NH and I bet he’ll get a very clear understanding of how it feels to receive unwanted sexual advances.
It sounds like the accuser has very supportive parents. From what I know she’s living about as far away from NH as she can get, and I hope that she will be able to move past this and have a good life.
He only gets a total pass if the jury finds that the alleged victim and defendant did not have sex at all. (That’s his version of events.) f the jury finds they did have sex, he’s guilty of a misdemeanor even if she consented.
Frankly, in the real world, the fact that this accusation and trial means he isn’t going to Harvard after all is probably enough to stop most other St. Paul’s students from playing the game. The fact that some St. Paul’s female students may now consider the possibility that if you say “NO” to a smart, popular guy he may not stop when you ask him to is a good thing too. Lets hope young women who don’t attend St. Paul’s get the message that letting an older guy take off your bra and slacks while you are “making out” or whatever when the two of you are alone is not the smartest of moves.
@jonri, if the jury finds they did have sex, how is he guilty of a misdemeanor even if she “consented,” given the loophole in the statute quoted in #155? What am I missing?
ETA: okay, I see it now. “where the age difference is 4 years or less.”
Well, at least that’s something, though I suspect he’ll end getting that expunged.
I have no idea how it works in New Hampshire, but in many states it’s virtually impossible to get sexual offenses committed when you are an adult…and at 18 he WAS an adult under the law… expunged. It’s true that he won’t have to register as a sex offender if he is ONLY convicted of the misdemeanor sexual assault charge but the judge can still sentence him to jail.
Agree that the prosecution must feel strongly they can secure a conviction or they would not have taken it this far.
Also, I just do not see how Labrie gets off without at least a misdemeanor. Sounds like the only way he gets off completely is if he can convince at least one juror that they did not have sexual intercourse at all… and does ANYONE believe that could possibly be true? Does ANYONE believe that this girl, who he had to convince to meet with him in the first place, who is only 15 years old, had sex with someone else (there is evidence that she did have intercourse with someone, it just can’t be tied to him in particular).
I think what will sink his case is not that she can prove she clearly communicated her “no” (I think that she did say “no” and it should have sufficed but I’d like to hear his evidence on this point). What will sink his case is his ridiculous contention that they did not have sex at all, which is an offensive position for him to take. I also think that the jury might take this opportunity to send a strong message to young men in general that they need to KEEP THEIR HANDS OFF girls who are this young, consent or no. I don’t like these “close in age” exceptions UNLESS they are being applied in a boyfriend/girlfriend/committed relationship context as someone noted above.
Would you mind saying where you’ve found these articles?
I don’t know if anyone here followed the Parker Gilbert case at Dartmouth, but I still can’t believe that NH jury found him not guilty. It seems to me that there is as much “doubt” in this case as in that one.
Labrie sent a “senior salute” email to at least one other St. Paul’s freshman in February, and that girl’s mother forwarded the email to investigators. - Concord News 7/26/14
@prospect1 I don’t think the defense will make the argument that the defendant and victim did not have sex because, as you say, it is ridiculous. The defendant does not have to prove anything in court. It is the prosecutor’s job to prove every element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. They can’t just prove some, they must prove all. So what the defense will do in closing argument is to hammer away at the inconsistencies. The student told her friends, “I think we just had sex.” Is that beyond a reasonable doubt? Some jurors may feel that statement should have been stronger: we HAD sex. The victim showed on the witness stand that she prefers precision as to statements. If that’s the case, some jurors might wonder we she didn’t just say precisely, we had sex. (Like it or not, Carney had a brilliant textbook cross-examination.)
I’m sorry to say, but the medical testimony is not helpful beyond a reasonable doubt. The redness just doesn’t prove enough. Anything could have caused it. Yes, I fully agree with posters that it was almost certainly caused by penetration that was unwanted by the victim. But, for better or worse, “almost certainly” doesn’t cut it in the criminal court system. It WOULD cut it in civil court (where I hope this case also is brought), because the standard of proof there is by a preponderance of the evidence. I think, at this point, a compromise verdict is likely: guilty on some of the less serious counts, not guilty on the most serious ones. And I think there is a 99% chance that the defendant will not testify.
The victim is enormously brave. I hope the case, regardless of outcome, starts a conversation among male and female students about choices, consent, respect, power and the abuse of it–there are so many issues. Prep schools might start by having small groups of male and female 9th graders read the case, and discuss it under leadership from a trained adult. It always amazes me that schools don’t adequately address the hardest issues proactively, and then are surprised when it actually happens, and a top student is the perpetrator.
@Consolation, The article with the information about the previous person he he dated may have been from the Valley News website. I’ve exceeded my free article allotment for the time being.
@midwestdad3, that is a very helpful analysis. I think you are spot on. You are right, he does not have to prove they did not have sex, nor will he even argue it. He just has to plant that tiny seed of doubt in the jury’s mind.
Given these odds, yes, the victim is very brave. She has gone forward knowing that her case does have some muddy waters and ambiguities, and has testified honestly nonetheless. I hope that, even if the defense prevails, this girl is made to understand that she has helped other girls enormously. Even if Labrie completely walks, there will be many a boy who will think twice before going down the same path.