we'll see...i think his previous choir boy image actually hurts him with the physical evidence...there's a shock value to it. i'm hoping none of this is true...but at this point i'm persuaded by the prosecution's evidence we've seen so far...and the circumstances of the stories.
AMEN. I am pretty damn convinced that he raped her. I don't think he'll be convicted though, becuase of his notoriety. I am equally pissed at the moron fans who support him regardless of facts or just the sheer heinous act of the crime he is accused of. That is truly frightening. It reminds me of that movie, Primary Colors. In it, the politician running for president is caught commiting adultrey. His wife's response is, "How will this affect the campaign?" You should never let your goals interfere with what is right and wrong. The fact that so many Kobe supporters are ignoring what he possibly did ofr blind support is disturbing and all too indicative of the American ideology that money and fame buy a ticket to outside the law. Pathetic. P.S. For an interesting take on what constitutes sexual assault, read this article in today's chronicle. I think it poignantly displays the weakness in Kobe's case: consent. http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/2157441
You are basing your judgement on what the prosecutor presented so far, which is a story told by the women pressing charges. Let's look at what the defense have now uncovered. 1) the panties that the girl wore on the alleged day of the rape doesn't have blood, the one's she wore to the hospital did and also the semen in that underwear wasn't Bryants. "Winters also said two pairs of panties from the woman were tested -- one from the night of June 30, the other being the one she wore to a hospital for an exam the next day. The latter pair contained blood and semen, Winters said. "The accuser arrived at the hospital wearing panties with someone else's semen and sperm in them, not that of Mr. Bryant, correct?" Mackey asked. "That's correct," Winters responded." 2) After the rape, the women was in normal shape, and did not seem emotionally distraught as some "witness" claimed. Mackey, who was subdued while questioning Winters, also managed to introduce something prosecutors didn't talk about last week -- a statement by the night auditor at the hotel who was the first person the accuser saw when she left Bryant's room. The night auditor sent police a letter saying she saw the woman as she came back to the front desk at the Cordillera Lodge & Spa. "What the night auditor says in her letter is the accuser did not look or sound as if there had been any problem," Mackey said, asking Winters "Correct?" "Yes," Winters responded. 3) People made a huge deal about Kobe lying and changing his story. It's now proven that the victim did also, severely hurting her credibility. Winters also acknowledged the woman didn't tell him she told Bryant "no" when he interviewed her the day after the alleged rape. "I asked the accuser why she never told Mr. Bryant 'no,' " Winters wrote in his report. Last week, however, Winters testified the victim told him she told Bryant "no" repeatedly, and that Bryant even forced her to turn around and face him and say it at one point. It was not clear if that came from a later interview with the woman. So we now see a lot of evidence for possible doubt. 1st argument proves either she bleeds easily from consentual sex (some else's semen and her blood) or she had multiple sexual encounters in a few days (defense's argument regarding blood). Either way, it hurts the prosecution a lot. 2nd argument shows that she didn't show any outward signs of being raped, which kills a lot of evidence from testimonies of the bellboy and such. 3rd argument shows that she changed her story (or the DA/ Police convinced her to change), hurting her credibility just as much if not more than Bryant. Bryant had reason to lie initially about the initial 'sexual encounter' as it can hurt his image and endorsements. The girl on the other hand had a no reason to say she didn't say 'no' when she's the one pressing the charges, which means it's more like the the to be true than the testimonies that came out later. You see how easily we viewed arguments made by either side as the whole truth? While both sides are presenting evidence, before any major rebuttals, it's just that so far stories. It's not until they go to trial until one knows which side is or isn't lying.
Another thing is that since the burden of proof is on the prosecution and Kobe needs to be convicted by overwhelming evidence that he did the crime, it's very likely Kobe gets off. The underwear with blood and someone else's semen pretty much throws a significant amount of doubt. Technically Kobe should win, the prosecution right now have to stir the emotions of the jury to overwrite their assigned duty. It's not uncommon and in some cases neccessary to put someone who did the crime behind bars.
I agree, There is serious doubt now.... Kobe walks, case thrown out, or if tried.....he is aquitted. DD
I don't think that anyone is supporting a rapist. If Kobe was caught on film, there was an eyewitness or even OVERWHELMING evidence that he committed the crime I would be the first to recommend a life sentence. People on here are upset that anyone would even entertain the fact that Kobe is innocent, that's just not fair.
wizkid, I still think he is guilty. He acknowleged they had sex. If it wasn't consensual, it was rape. Period. I'm not saying that the girl is an angel or anything, but that should not be the deciding factor regardless. Two things make me suspicious: 1) The girl is apparently not after money. 2) Kobe's lawyers are turning this into a character-bashing anyway. What's her motivation to have all the chaos in her life if not money? Likewise, why are Kobe's lawyers trying to bash her credability, unless thats all they have? And it ticks me off that her character could swing the case anyway. So what if she was promiscuous. Even if she was a murdering psychopath that doesn't mean the rape was any less than, well, rape!
One more thing wizkid that I forgot to say and cannot edit into my previous post: Your post was very good.
i'm a lawyer, but i don't know the answer to this question: how much of this character bashing of the alleged victim ever even makes it into evidence at trial??? i do civil work...wouldn't be able to try a case out of a paper bag in a criminal court.
I know some people, especially women get offended by Defense tatics in these cases, but how else can you beat a rape case in this situation.
This case should never have been open to the public. The character assassination of the girl is merciless. So far we know: She flirts She's promiscuous It's implied she had sex with three men in a night She may have struggled with depression or mental health issues She schemed to be alone with bryant. None of this should be relevant if the sex was not consensual. It is not ok to rape a girl if she has personal issues, if she flirts, if she comes on to you, or if she sleeps with others. It should not be necessary that at least four men of good character personally witness a rape (ideally with video evidence) before a man can be convicted of rape. That said, Bryant is entitled to a proper defense. And it IS entirely possible that her accusations are not entirely accurate. This is, after all, more akin to 'date-rape' than a psycho attacking a girl in a dark alley. When did she say 'no?' Is it a case of going too far and regretting it later? Should Bryant have known it was non consensual? Men, especially high profile men, are sometimes falsely accused. These are difficult issues to hash out. And, I suppose, some mud will fly. It's the nature of a criminal trial. Discrediting witnesses. What does she have to gain? It's quite possible that this girl's been through one of the most horrible violations a woman can endure. And yet we expect her to endure this character bashing and airing of her personal life too. As well as reporting the graphic details of the night for us all to ponder over our morning coffee. I don't know how else a case like this can be tried. It's a 'he said/she said' ' he meant/she meant' type thing that will, by nature, get ugly. I do expect the publicity of this case will discourage some women from reporting rape. I would fully understand why a woman would not be willing to go through the ordeal this girl will have to endure. And for no personal gain, other than a potential sense of vindication or justice. And even if Bryant is found guilty -- the judgment on her character will continue. How many here, who currently believe Bryant is wrongly accused, will fully accept a guilty verdict? For the girl’s sake, and for Bryant's sake, i wish this trial had been closed to the press. Just let us know that he's been charged. And then announce the verdict. No good has come of this. The only good that can come, is if process of trying a rape case is changed, so that the gory details of a woman's past, and of the alleged crime are not out for all to see. At least without protecting her anonymity. I fully understand freedom of the press issues, but this is clearly its dark side.
how is her sexual history relevant to whether or not she consented at that very moment? physical evidence is the key, it seems...you don't have to beat a rape case as a defendant...the prosecution has the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. if the prosecution shows up with absolutely nothing, there is no evidence to convict. so you challenge the evidence they do produce...but this is why rape shield laws are in place..to keep the trial from going into a liturgy of a woman's sexual history.
If its the same day you think its relevant. As Bnb stated, we're talking about something akin to date rape. Sure, what she did the prior week isn't relevant but the same day?
i don't get to make that decision...that's the judge's job. but i hear what you're saying...it seems to me that's relevant as to the physical evidence.
In this case, the defense seems to be playing pretty loose with rape shield laws (as i understand them). Identifying her by name, medical records from months ago, snide remarks about number of partners... I don't like this one bit.
i guess thats' what i'm getting at...my knowledge of rape shield laws isn't real strong...but from what i understand of them, none of this stuff they're parading around will be in evidence at trial.
Each day I dislike the defence lawyers more and more. Yeah, sure, she is ho. But it's still wrong to rape a ho.
It's not about "beating" a rape case it's about justice. When either side starts bringing things into the picture (and minds of prospective jurors) that are only meant to sway the jury not support their case it's wrong. Kobe will get away with what he did because he is rich and can afford expensive lawyers
First off, thanx for the compliment, it was appreciated, but now I'm gonna rebute and the gloves are off j/k. 1. You don't know if the girl is after money or not, there's always possibility of a civil trial post criminal, think OJ. Even if Kobe's not convicted, any mud slinging can be used in the civil trial, and if he is committed, her case would be real strong in civil trial when asking for punative damages. 2. It's definitely character bashing, a low low tactic but if that's what it takes to win, it will be done. As sad as it is to say, if I was Kobe I'd be pissed if they don't do it. However the first evidence of someone elses semen and her blood will throw doubt into wheter blood on Kobe was the result of consentual sex or rape. As far as rape shield laws, I know mad max said he was a lawyers, so my question is this, if it's considered physical evidence that can clear his name (some one elses semen in underwear and her blood), doesn't it make it permissible in court now. A rule that can't be broken can surely be bent, can't the defense circumvent the reape shield law by putting forth 'physical evidence' and witness testimonies near the time of the crime?
