# Legal analysis of the Owen Laurie rape case **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 29, 2015, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-analysis-of-the-owen-laurie-rape-case/729343 "2015-08-29T23:41:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2015, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-analysis-of-the-owen-laurie-rape-case/729343/61 "2015-09-01T19:07:45Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > Sorry, but all the defenses of the outcome just come off as shitting on LinusK. The jury did ultimately convict him for having sex. Sure, she claimed that it was non-consensual, and maybe it was, but the jury didn’t convict him of that. > > Prosecutory discretion is never an excuse for bad law. We wouldn’t need to pass Romeo and Juliet laws if this were the case. The law is how we tell prosecutors what types of cases we want them to go after. > > Now, maybe the Romeo and Juliet laws would make this still illegal. I know of some that have it at two years, while this three. > > Now, yes, LinusK is wrong to say it would be a felony. It is, as he said earlier, a misdemeanor. But it’s still a misdemeanor that makes it illegal for anyone to have sex with someone 13-16, no matter the age. Heck, if both are age appropriate, they both could be convicted by the law as written. If sex occurs with someone 13-16, an illegal act has occurred. > > This is stupid, and should be fixed. No matter what you think of the outcome of this case. New Hampshire needs to get with the times and introduce a Romeo and Juliet law. > > Or do you want a prosecutor who hates you to be able throw your 16 year old in jail for a year for having sex? You talk all about how you can’t stop them, so it means an easy way to get back at you. So far as I know, I’ve only ever said he was convicted of one felony, and 4 misdemeanors. The felony was for prohibited use of a computer. Otherwise, I agree with you. I would add, though, that [649-B:4](http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXII/649-B/649-B-4.htm) is a bad law as well. It effectively leverages a misdemeanor - which shouldn’t be a crime at all - into a felony, just for sending a text message instead of… I don’t know - snail mail? It’s offensive when legislators can’t be bothered to think through the consequences of the laws they write, especially when the consequences include destroying someone’s life. ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2015, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-analysis-of-the-owen-laurie-rape-case/729343/62 "2015-09-01T19:29:52Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > [Here you go](https://www.nhbar.org/legal-links/criminaljuryinstructions.asp). 99% of all jury instructions are standardized. When the instructions given differ, it is generally in relation to the weight of a particular piece of evidence or a statute that is new and has no standardized instructions. You linked to a Bar site. It says nothing about the instructions in this particular case. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2015, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-analysis-of-the-owen-laurie-rape-case/729343/63 "2015-09-01T19:44:05Z")
…LinusK, this thread is called “Legal analysis of the Owen Laurie rape case”. May I ask what your legal qualifications are? Or would it be more appropriate to call this thread A layman’s analysis of the Owen Laurie rape case?" ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2015, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-analysis-of-the-owen-laurie-rape-case/729343/64 "2015-09-01T20:00:17Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > You linked to a Bar site. It says nothing about the instructions in this particular case. Perhaps you should read my post again. ---
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2015, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-analysis-of-the-owen-laurie-rape-case/729343/65 "2015-09-01T20:26:48Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > …LinusK, this thread is called “Legal analysis of the Owen Laurie rape case”. May I ask what your legal qualifications are? Or would it be more appropriate to call this thread A layman’s analysis of the Owen Laurie rape case?" It’s not titled “A lawyer’s analysis”. If you have an opinion about the analysis, or one of your own, by all means share it. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2015, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-analysis-of-the-owen-laurie-rape-case/729343/66 "2015-09-01T21:28:18Z")
> [@Ruken](#): > > It’s not titled “A lawyer’s analysis”. If you have an opinion about the analysis, or one of your own, by all means share it. …well I can’t offer a legal analysis because I don’t have a legal background. I can offer my layman’s opinion on the legal issues if you like, is that what you want? The OP states claims that parts of the NH’s Endangerment law is “poorly written.” Is it poorly written from a legal point of view, or “poorly written” because LinusK doesn’t understand what it says? It is difficult to offer a legal analysis of something if you don’t actually understand how the law works, thats all I’m trying to clarify. ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2015, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-analysis-of-the-owen-laurie-rape-case/729343/67 "2015-09-02T13:57:03Z")
> [@Moriarty](#): > > You make a fair point, and after a night of sleeping on it, I agree with you. It is my general understanding that many jurisdictions include a provision that says that there is no statutory rape when both people are teenagers, within a few years of each other. This is an important caveat. > > For example, in Florida, the standard is > > Please note that I do not practice criminal law, so there might be more nuance than just this statute (which I found with a quick google search), but my understanding is that it acknowledges that there can be legal sexual activity between consenting young people, provided that they are between 16 and 23. (Granted, this doesn’t apply to your discussion of two 15 year olds, but the law has decided to set some minimal age of consent, and while 16 _may_ be too high, I figure the legislature has decided that there has to be some minimum age before we decide that kids are old enough for sex. Do you disagree?). > > So, to your point, the law should include some “out” for consenting teenagers. > > > [@](#): > > > > Originally Posted by New Hampshire law > > 632-A:4 Sexual Assault. – > > I. A person is guilty of a class A misdemeanor under any of the following circumstances: > > … > > (c) In the absence of any of the circumstances set forth in RSA 632-A:2, when the actor engages in sexual penetration with a person, other than the actor’s legal spouse, who is 13 years of age or older and under 16 years of age where the age difference between the actor and the other person is 4 years or less. > > (My emphasis). Doesn’t the acknowledgement that the sex is legal if the differences in age is 4 years or less account for consensual teenage sex? Am I misreading this? Yes. The law says: _A person is guilty of a class A misdemeanor_ if… _difference between the actor and the other person is 4 years or less._ Otherwise - if the difference is in age is more than 4 years - the person is guilty of a felony. Owen was 18 and the girl was 15. Since the age difference was less than 4 years, he was found guilty of misdemeanor sexual assault. Additionally, he was found guilty of a felony, under [649-B:4](http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/lxii/649-b/649-b-mrg.htm) **Certain Uses of Computer Services Prohibited** , which makes it a crime to _utilize a computer on-line service, internet service, or local bulletin board service to seduce, solicit, lure, or entice_ someone under 16. It’s worth noting that this law, like New Hampshire’s statutory rape law, contains no defense relating to the age of the perpetrator - in other words, two 15 year olds “enticing” each other using the internet, would both be guilty. > [@](#): > > It’s not necessarily that I trust prosecutors to always do the right thing. Instead, it’s that the specific facts, and the cooperation of the witnesses, will impact whether the case goes forward. Even in a scenario where the law penalizes the behavior, if nobody is complaining or if witnesses refuse to cooperate the prosecutor is not likely to indict. It’s an inherent filter in the legal system. I understand the argument for relying on prosecutorial discretion, I just disagree with it. Let me take an extreme example, just to get my point across. We could replace the entire penal code with one sentence: “It’s illegal to do bad things.” If we trusted police and prosecutors - and if we agreed about what “bad things” were - that would be much simpler. The reason we have penal codes is that we don’t trust police and prosecutors that much, and we don’t all agree about what is “bad”. The penal code is where we can go to find out what is “bad” and what can get you arrested. If we have a law that says it’s a crime for teenagers to have sex, or to “solicit” or “seduce” each other using the internet, but mostly ignore it, it’s an invitation for selective prosecution. What that means is that prosecutors aren’t enforcing the law because it is the law, but for some other reason. Maybe racial animus. Maybe it’s personal. Maybe they think a particular teenager is a trouble-maker, or a “bad seed,” or comes from a bad family. Or maybe it’s just a high-profile case, and prosecutors want to ensure they walk away with some sort of victory, for something. But selective prosecution is inherently unfair, because most people aren’t subject to the law, but some are. And the people who turn out to be subject to the law, generally won’t know it until it’s too late. > [@](#): > > I was thinking of a specific case, that of [Marcus Dixon](http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/jets/marcus-dixon-overcomes-molestation-conviction-high-school-racism-long-journey-nfl-ny-jets-article-1.982917). He was a star football player and an honor student who was on his way to Vanderbilt with a scholarship when he was prosecuted and imprisoned for rape after having sexual relations with a 15 year old student. There was a lot of suggestion that the prosecution was motivated by the racial animus of the girl’s father, coupled with a general intolerance of miscegenation in rural Georgia. The case was eventually [overturned](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilson_v._State) by the Georgia Supreme Court, which found the punishment (a 10 year sentence) to be disproportionate to the crime. Well, that’s a good example of the combination of prosecutorial discretion and bad laws: “On Feb. 10, 2003, Dixon, then an 18-year-old senior with a 3.96 grade point average and full scholarship to Vanderbilt, was arrested at Pepperell High for allegedly raping Kristie Brown, a white 15-year-old virgin, in a classroom trailer.” Similar to Owen’s case, except that Owen is rich and white, and Dixon was black and not-rich. > [@](#): > > That’s the only reason I mentioned the race of the perpetrator: it was specific to my example. So, no, it wouldn’t have been better if he was white. Nor would it have been good to prosecute her or otherwise ruin her life. > > “Thankfully that’s not the norm” means what it says. I’m glad that most cases of sexual congress between teens don’t result in a decade of prison time. Me too. But the solution is to fix bad laws, not to rely on police and prosecutors not to enforce them. > [@](#): > > But I’m still not sure if this is a bad law, or if we’ve missed the nuance that says that two teenagers of similar ages are absolved from punishment. The law seems to mandate that seniors shouldn’t be screwing freshmen, and while you may think that is outlandish to legislate, it isn’t altogether unreasonable if the senior is legally an adult. I don’t think I’m missing anything. It’s not unreasonable to have a law that prohibits 18 year olds from having sex with 15 year olds. But the punishment should fit the crime. Consensual sex between teenagers shouldn’t result in a felony conviction and lifetime sex offender registration. ---
**Author:** ![PastTense](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pasttense/32/14550_2.png) [@PastTense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PastTense)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2015, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-analysis-of-the-owen-laurie-rape-case/729343/68 "2015-10-29T22:04:46Z")
> [@](#): > > A graduate of an exclusive New England prep school was sentenced Thursday to a year in jail for sexually assaulting a 15-year-old freshman girl as part of a tradition in which upperclassmen competed to rack up sexual conquests. > > Owen Labrie, 20, of Tunbridge, Vermont, was also ordered to register as a sex offender, perhaps for the rest of his life, and serve five years of probation after he gets out of jail. He could have gotten 11 years behind bars. > **[N.H. prep school graduate gets a year in jail for sexual assault](https://www.chicagotribune.com/2015/10/29/nh-prep-school-graduate-gets-a-year-in-jail-for-sexual-assault/)** > > A graduate of an exclusive New England prep school was sentenced Thursday to a year in jail for sexually assaulting a 15-year-old freshman girl as part of a competition among upperclassmen to rack … ---
**Author:** ![PastTense](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pasttense/32/14550_2.png) [@PastTense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PastTense)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2018, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-analysis-of-the-owen-laurie-rape-case/729343/69 "2018-12-26T17:40:59Z")
Updating this thread after 3 years and legal appeals, he is finally in jail to finish his sentence: > **[Owen Labrie is behind bars in New Hampshire prison - The Boston Globe](https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2018/12/26/owen-labrie-behind-bars-new-hampshire-prison/cwqCyK6H9kf0w5eETAPrkM/story.html)** > > The former St. Paul’s School student convicted of sexually assaulting a 15-year-old girl on campus in 2014 began a nine-month prison term Wednesday. ---
**Author:** ![Royal\_Nonesutch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ecb155/32.png) [@Royal\_Nonesutch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Royal_Nonesutch)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2018, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-analysis-of-the-owen-laurie-rape-case/729343/70 "2018-12-26T18:56:49Z")
It’s long been whispered that New Hampshire state prison inmates celebrate their own version of the so-called Senior Salute, but unlike at St. Paul’s Prep, the traditional “morning after” gift of chocolates & a single red rose instead consists of a contraband Camel Filter 100 and a 3 pack of Cup O’ Noodles. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2018, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-analysis-of-the-owen-laurie-rape-case/729343/71 "2018-12-27T01:32:42Z")
I think it is absurd that the punishment for soliciting a minor to have sex by a computer is harsher than actually having sex with a minor. Is there any rational basis for that at all? I cannot see any. ---
**Author:** ![Rysto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ecccb3/32.png) [@Rysto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rysto)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2018, 1:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-analysis-of-the-owen-laurie-rape-case/729343/72 "2018-12-27T01:58:03Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > I think it is absurd that the punishment for soliciting a minor to have sex by a computer is harsher than actually having sex with a minor. Is there any rational basis for that at all? I cannot see any. I have read (but have no cite supporting this) that the reasoning is that making the penalty for having sex with a minor too severe risks giving the incentive to murder the victim if the penalty for murder isn’t a lot more extreme than the penalty just for sex. For online soliciting that’s not a factor, as the offender doesn’t have direct access to the victim. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2018, 1:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-analysis-of-the-owen-laurie-rape-case/729343/73 "2018-12-27T13:00:15Z")
> [@Rysto](#): > > I have read (but have no cite supporting this) that the reasoning is that making the penalty for having sex with a minor too severe risks giving the incentive to murder the victim if the penalty for murder isn’t a lot more extreme than the penalty just for sex. > > For online soliciting that’s not a factor, as the offender doesn’t have direct access to the victim. That seems like pretty specious reasoning. Under that logic, we should have light penalties for robbery, kidnapping, malicious wounding, domestic battery, etc. so as not to encourage the killing of the victim. And this type of crime is not a forcible one. He was convicted of being 19 and having (otherwise) consensual sex with a 15 year old girl. I know that she cannot consent because of her age, but otherwise consensual (at least what the jury found). That is not the type of crime where you will kill your girlfriend afterwards. ---
**Author:** ![PastTense](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pasttense/32/14550_2.png) [@PastTense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PastTense)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2019, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-analysis-of-the-owen-laurie-rape-case/729343/74 "2019-06-24T20:22:47Z")
Updating this thread: > [@](#): > > A New Hampshire prep school graduate convicted of sexually assaulting a 15-year-old classmate as part of game of sexual conquest called ‘‘Senior Salute’’ was released from jail Monday. > > Owen Labrie, 23, reported to the Merrimack County jail just after Christmas, after a judge refused to shorten his sentence. He had been due to serve the remaining 10 months of his sentence but was released for good behavior. > **[N.H. prep school grad Owen Labrie, convicted in sex assault, released from...](https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2019/06/24/prep-school-grad-owen-labrie-convicted-sex-assault-released-from-jail/8SxeUPqlRJE4XngrUc7nGN/story.html)** > > The 23-year-old former St. Paul’s School student reported to Merrimack County’s jail just after Christmas, after a judge refused to shorten his sentence. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-analysis-of-the-owen-laurie-rape-case/729343.md?page=3)