Case Study 2: People v Lauria

  1. Lauria knew that the three prostitutes used his service to arrange meetings with their clients and was charged with conspiracy to promote prostitution accordingly. The court reversed his conviction. Do you agree with the outcome of this case? Why or why not? What would the potential consequences be if nothing more than mere knowledge that the supplying of lawful goods or services somehow contributed to an illegal venture resulted in conspiratorial liability for the supplier?