Dude, I have no idea, what you mean about impressing friends. You're making a broad judgement that rape victims should all scream, and that's narrow minded.
And that's your personal judgement. But the reason I took exception to that in the first place, is because as men, or just as people who have never experienced something like this, we all make assumptions about what women should do in situations like this, or we question things such as why she even went in his room in the first place, and I think issues like that have no bearing on the case either way. I understand you are using that to help you make your judgement but I just feel every case is different.
pgabriel, in this instance you are obviously correct. For a *man* to make a wide generalization regarding how a *woman* will react to being raped is beyond absurd. It's just laughable.
You still don't get it, do you Billie? Even one of your most reliable partners, pgabriel, has told you that you are dead wrong on this issue. The difference, and something that you still don't understand, is that the D.A. would be laughed out of the courtroom if they said that "all rape victims scream when they are being raped." You just don't get it.
I have rarely seen anybody discredit himself in a worse way than Another Brother did in this thread. pgabriel, on the other hand, is a voice of reason in this thread.
You don't get it homey, let me give you a real example from REAL experience. In the early 90's I made a call in which the complainant said she was raped. After following police procedure with regard to the claim I had to call the DA's office to see if they would accept charges based on what the lady told me. Among the asst. DA's questions were, "Were there any witnesses" and "Did they hear any screaming". If it is a factor as it pertains to the arrest of an individual, it is a factor in court. BTW I have very few "reliable" partners on here, and pgabriel is not one of them. Now go ahead and debate my experience with your conjecture, you're pretty good at that.
I thought AB's main point is if there were screams or crys for help or something that would be some heavy evidence against Kobe. Now maybe he also became somewhat more elightened about some incorrect assumptions from the rape victims perspective he held--well, we all learn some things here and there and aren't a sensitive as we should be, I hardly see gross pattern of insensivity to the matter. Not that screams are necc., but I agree with AB that sure would make a much stronger case if there were because it would further reduce it from a he said versus she said case. This case has to be beyond a reasonable doubt--to me that means 99.9% she is telling the truth and Kobe is lying. IMO very tough case to make with just her word versus his and only vaginal tearing as physical evidence (unless it was like a Bosnia war victim or something). And do you not doubt 95 (or 99%) of accused rapists do infact get off when 1) with a defense team like Kobe has, 2) when there are no witnesses, and 3) no physical evidence of injury outside the genital area? Not trying to be crude, defend Kobe, or even offerring an opinion on what actually went down (if I had to guess I would say Kobe probably did it but it far from solidly convinced), but just being realistic about what the prosecution has to show. Again though, I believe if a guilty verdict comes out I will have little doubt the victim's story was accurate.
Here is how Another Brother's logic works, tell me if you agree or disagree with this logic: Evidence: I kicked my dog one day. It let out a bark. Conclusion: All dogs bark when kicked. Laughable.
All this reminds me very much of the thread where Another Brother kept saying something along the lines of being more or less convinced that O.J. did it, but still being happy that he got off. Disgusting.
How needy are you anyway? Damn dude you need friends in real time. I'm off to start my beautiful weekend, keep an eye on things for me here Jorge. SJC give him a hug, you know you want to.
Why do you feel that sufficient vaginal tearing is not enough for a conviction? Sure, we'd like to think everyone would struggle and scream in this situation but as pgabriel said, everyone is different. Besides, what if the vaginal tearing was as bad as it could be?? Since Kobe already admitted being with her, the defense would have to show that physical evidence was self-inflicted or something to that effect.
...and Another Brother turns to the personal insult (as irrelevant and outright false as it is) to try to salvage something from another lost and highly embarrassing exchange. You are still waiting for that one argument where you may be able to best me. Keep trying -- you might want to address your weaknesses first, but keep trying. The public has learned their lesson once. I'm predicting that Kobe is found guilty.
Amidst all the speculation we have to rely on as to whose side to believe and what conclusions will come from the physical evidence, I think MC has brought up one of the more telling points. IMO, the transcripts of Kobe's intial responses to the detectives will weigh in heavily with the jury as to his credibility in this case.
