Kobe Details

[Timber Loftis]

Well, all this talk of her promiscuity is coming out now, because the EVIL rape shield laws will prevent such evidence being presented in court. Sorry, but from my point-of-view, it is unfair for the man. The rape shield laws were a knee-jerk to allow women to testify without fear of reproach and encourage the prosecution of real rape cases -- but they went too far, and make it such that a man accused of rape can't put on a real defense. The fact a woman is an utter puta is relevant as far as I'm concerned, and I think it's a constitutional violation to write it out (the right to face your accuser).

Okay, [img]graemlins/rant.gif[/img] over.
__________________________________________________ _____
Defense Claims Evidence Clears Kobe
By TIM DAHLBERG, The Associated Press

EAGLE, Colo. (Oct. 16) - Prosecutors tried to portray Kobe Bryant as an arrogant superstar who forced himself on a woman and wouldn't take no for an answer. Defense attorneys were just as rough with his accuser, suggesting she had sex with several men in the days before she said Bryant raped her.


Reuters
Kobe Bryant arrives at court Wednesday.

Now it's up to a judge to decide whether the Los Angeles Lakers' guard will stand trial on charges that could send him to prison for the rest of his life.

A two-day preliminary hearing jammed full of revealing details about both Bryant and his accuser ended Wednesday with one more startling revelation - that the panties the woman wore to her rape exam had the semen of another man on them.

Both sides claimed victory, with the prosecution saying it presented clear evidence the woman was raped and the defense contending she lied about a sexual encounter with a celebrity she was more than eager to meet.

''She is not worthy of your belief,'' defense attorney Pamela Mackey said.

Judge Frederic Gannett is expected to decide that by Monday, when he said he would likely issue a ruling that will either result in the case being dismissed or Bryant being sent to trial on sexual assault charges.

Most legal analysts said they expected Bryant would be ordered to trial, and a prosecutor said there was ''uncontradicted'' evidence that Bryant raped the 19-year-old woman at a mountain resort.

''He held her by the back of the neck with his hand during sexual intercourse,'' Greg Crittenden said. ''He lifted up her skirt. She said 'no.' He pulled down her underpants and she said 'no.' He penetrated her from behind and she cried.''

Crittenden was largely successful in getting the woman's story of her encounter with Bryant on June 30 at the Cordillera Resort & Spa told during the hearing that drew a horde of media members to this tiny mountain town.

He put Eagle County Detective Doug Winters on the stand to lead him through details of an encounter that began with innocent flirtation, got more serious with some consensual kissing and finally escalated into sex with the woman draped over the back of a chair in Bryant's hotel room.

But while prosecutors were eager to let the public hear graphic details of how the woman said Bryant forced her into sex, they also got an indication of how savagely the defense will go after his accuser should the case go to trial.

During Wednesday's hearing, Mackey got Winters to admit that another man's semen was on the yellow panties the woman wore to her rape test the day after her encounter with Bryant. The panties were a different pair than the underwear the woman said she wore the night she met Bryant.

The revelation plays into the defense's contention that the woman had multiple sexual encounters in the days before she claims she was raped and that her injuries may have been caused by those encounters.

''It's startling, it's impressive but its negative public relations value for the prosecution is more significant than its legal value,'' said Stan Goldman, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles.

Indeed, both sides appeared to be playing to public sympathies during the hearing in an effort to bolster their cases among any potential members of a jury.

That's why prosecutors brought out details such as the woman's claim that Bryant made her kiss his penis before she was allowed to leave, and that's why Mackey suggested last week that the accuser's injuries were consistent with someone having sex with three men in three days.

If the case goes to trial, though, any discussion of the women's sexual past will be limited by Colorado's Rape Shield Law. And prosecutors may have trouble convincing a jury that a woman enamored of Bryant's celebrity had no intention of having sex with him as they kissed in his room.

Eagle County District Attorney Mark Hurlbert said there was more to come from the prosecution if the case goes to trial. He said prosecutors deliberately limited the hearing to testimony by Winters so they would not have to lay out their entire case.

''No prosecutor puts on their whole case at preliminary hearing,'' he said. ''In this case you saw kind of a sanitized version.''

Bryant, who has traveled to Eagle three times over the last two months for court sessions, will likely hear of the judge's decision on his trial from his lawyers. Gannett said he would post the decision on the court's Web site, probably on Monday.

If a trial is ordered, Bryant will have to come back within 30 days to enter a plea. After that, a trial could be held within six months, though many expect it to be delayed until next summer's NBA offseason.

Meanwhile, Eagle will return to normal as television sets in front of the courthouse are torn down and members of the media leave town. Already, the excitement of having a celebrity trial in town appears to be wearing down, with most in Eagle ignoring the spectacle taking place at the small courthouse on the town's outskirts.


10-15-03 2156EDT

Copyright 2003 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press. All active hyperlinks have been inserted by AOL.

[Rokenn]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Well, all this talk of her promiscuity is coming out now, because the EVIL rape shield laws will prevent such evidence being presented in court. Sorry, but from my point-of-view, it is unfair for the man. The rape shield laws were a knee-jerk to allow women to testify without fear of reproach and encourage the prosecution of real rape cases -- but they went too far, and make it such that a man accused of rape can't put on a real defense. The fact a woman is an utter puta is relevant as far as I'm concerned, and I think it's a constitutional violation to write it out (the right to face your accuser).

That is so much bullshit TL you should be ashamed. So I guess by your reasoning you could go out and rape a prostitute and then use that fact to get away with it. The fact that the victim may or may not have had sex with 20 other guys the day before is totally irrelevant. If she said no, then Kobe should have kept it in his pants. End of story.

[Timber Loftis]

But it is completely relevant of whether or not she said "No," which is a He-said-she-said here. If they can (and will) be talking about every time Kobe was aggressive in public or on the court as evidence of his character, why can't they discuss her character? I don't disagree that her promiscuity forgives a rape. But, it certainly speaks to whether or not there was in fact a rape.

[pritchke]

Personally I don't think he is guilty. She goes back to a celebrities room and kisses him. If she didn't want sex why go back to the bedroom and do things that lead to sex. Surely an experienced girl like her is not that dumb to put herself in a situation were sex may take place when she doesn't want it. I think she is lying and normally I would take the side of the prosecution in a rape case.

[ 10-16-2003, 12:45 PM: Message edited by: pritchke ]

[khazadman]

Well Pritchke, even if she was stupid enough to do those things it still doesn't give Bryant the right to rape her. And to tell you the truth, I wish the judge had forbidden everybody to shut up about the case, because I'm f$$kin' sick of having to turn the news every time a story about this comes on.

[Rokenn]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: But it is completely relevant of whether or not she said "No," which is a He-said-she-said here. If they can (and will) be talking about every time Kobe was aggressive in public or on the court as evidence of his character, why can't they discuss her character? I don't disagree that her promiscuity forgives a rape. But, it certainly speaks to whether or not there was in fact a rape.

Showing that the alleged perp has a history of agressive sexual behavior is far different that saying the victem is easy.

disclaimer:
I have not been following the Kobe case so I have no clue what is going on in it (maybe I could be on the jury [img]tongue.gif[/img] ). I'm talking in a more general sense here.

[Timber Loftis]

Showing that the alleged perp has a history of agressive sexual behavior is far different that saying the victem is easy.

Yeah, they are mirror images. That's a difference, and precisely why it is unfair to allow evidence of one without the other. Both go to "character" and proclivity. Both are relevant, ESPECIALLY in he-said-she-said.

I joked about famous folks needing to carry waivers around for casual sex encounters. Well, it is becoming an increasingly-discussed alternative.

The big charge is that he held her by the neck as he had sex with her from behind. Sorry, but this is not atypical, and in my experience is sometimes requested. Yes, it can leave bruises. Sex is often a physically exertive thing. The mere fact that the sex was rough is equally indicative of nothing (except in extreme cases, of course) -- yet it will be paramount evidence in the case.

As I said, the law stacks the deck against the male perp here.

Here's a killer of a tale. Grad student expelled from school for not working hard. Then she goes to a faculty/student party, where she hits on a professor in the bathroom ("I'm not a student anymore") and has sex with him. She asks he hit her a time or two during this encounter.

She then files charges to show that the lowly grad student can jerk the school around -- charges for rape. The professor is suddenly guilty and placed on sabbatical. He starts drinking and his wife leaves him -- taking his son to Spain.

Then, the student drops the charges and moves away, figuring her self-created monster has gotten out of hand.

However, the community assumes the man is guilty and got off on a technicality or because the rape victim couldn't pursue it. So, the assumed rapist loses his job, becomes and alcoholic, will never work as a professor again, and is "damaged goods." He starts working as a mechanic.

He gets one letter from the former student. One line that says "I am so very sorry." Lotta good that does the former professor.

The story is The Life of David Gale. Kevin Spacey stars. It's a great rental, and I highly encourage it.

[Cerek the Barbaric]

While not nearly as dramatic as Timber's story, I know of an example that happened here in my hometown a few years back. A guy younger than myself actually spent time in jail due to a fabricated rape charge.

He was the son of a somewhat prominent local businessman and he got a little wild in high school. He experimented with some minor drugs and alcohol, but nothing hardcore - so far as I know. Still, it was known that he and his friends liked to party. One night, a buddy tells him he knows a girl that is will to do both of them. Being the young, virile teenager he was, he thought "Cool, why not?". They get together and have their party. A few days later, the police come knocking on his door and arrest him for rape. It goes to trial and his "wild habits" are brought out. It also doesn't help that the girl was underrage (15 IIRC). He is found guilty and is sent away to do his time. Fortunately for him, his lawyer keeps digging back at home. Lo and behold, he discovers that this SAME girl pulled the exact SAME stunt in the next county over just a year earlier and had another guy convicted of rape. So he is finally released from jail, but still had to serve a few more years probation for having sex with a minor.

The point of the story - and of Timber's rant in general - is that a promiscous past certainly does not pardon the act of forcible rape...however, it is a very relevant factor in determining whether the act truly was forcible as opposed to consensual.

[Timber Loftis]

Actually, Cerek, I find your story equally dramatic.

I mentioned it before, but I do know a girl who falsely accused a guy of rape once. Believe me, this girl never said no to anything. Anyway, she ended up not filing charges, but just ruining his rep in college. Which, like the David Gale thing I mentioned, is really unfair, because he was never afforded the chance to prove/argue his innocence. And society, unlike the legal "high ideals" enforced (we hope) in the courtroom, society presumes guilt -- always. Look at O.J. -- and the fact I'll be laughed at for using him as an example is the proof of what I'm saying.

None of this is to excuse actual forced sex. It is just to point out that men falsely accused of rape have little hope of putting up a defense.