According ot MSNBC the race card is already being played in the Kobe case. They say a new Gallup poll says almost 66% of whites believe Kobe is probably guilty while only 24% of blacks believe he is probably guilty. IMO, the defense will most likely be laying the grounds for appeal based on these findings, if he is found guilty. Of course little or no real evidence has been released, but this same brodcast also said sources close to case say that marks on the accuser's neck are contusions consistent with pinning actions.
How could they appeal because of a media poll? Be wary of any cable news report or FOX News rumor. They're being debunked daily.
I am not a lawyer, but it appears that if he is found guilty in a predominantly white county when polls says that whites already believe he is guilty, before even hearing the evidence I would want my lawyer to appeal if I was Kobe. That was my thinking, right or wrong.
I am not a lawyer, but it appears that if he is found guilty in a predominantly white county when polls says that whites already believe he is guilty, before even hearing the evidence I would want my lawyer to appeal if I was Kobe. That was my thinking, right or wrong. Ummm, I'm not a lawyer either, but that argument is not going to fly in court. Or you could contest every single decision made by a jury involving a black and white defendent/victim. Media polls aren't going to hold any weight in an appeal.
First, the likelihood of a conviction is slim assuming that if the jury is hung that Hurlbert doesn't ask for a retrial. It's hard to imagine him trying it again. Perhaps it's possible if the decision is 9-3, 10-2, 11-1 "guilty", but there are funding issues as well as venue issues and whether Kobe is actually "convictable". As of now, I'm doubtful there will be a conviction OR an acquittal, but Kobe doesn't necessarily need an acquittal to retain his freedom. Anything less than 12-0 "not guilty" may hurt him in civil court, however. That said, IF all 12 jurors vote "guilty" (ie: he's convicted), then a stronger grounds for appeal would be to demonstrate patterns of jury bias in recent Eagle Cty cases with black defendants and linking it to "racist" policing and judicial patterns (ie: check the backgrounds of the people who investigated Kobe's case and determine if a white man would have been charged and brought to trial under the same or similar circumstances in Eagle Cty). Eagle County had to pay $800,000 in damages to a group of < 40 blacks for racial profiling in 1996. That's something that the defense will likely use to their advantage if it comes to it. At the initial press conf where Kobe professed innocence, Hal Haddon (the Shapiro of Kobe's team) said that they would look into the motives of Sheriff Hoy. That pretty much proves that race will play a card in this trial.
I think there is a reason for this. All this so called "rumors" being leaked out. (About the bellhop seeing her distraught and her clothes ripped" I myself changed my mind about Kobe's innocence and thought he was guilty. NOW, I find out that those were all lies and untrue, but I only found out through a post on this site. The media told everyone about the untrue rumor, but I haven't heard them telling em that its NOT true. So now everyone thinks, like i did, that the rumors were true and Kobe did it. I think the media is being unfair to Kobe AND the girl. First they were mean to the girl, and now they're being mean to Kobe. We MUST hold back judgement about both until we get some real facts from the case. I think this poll doesn't reflect the race card as much cause i think the media's intrusion plays a big part in that poll.
There's a race card being played alright but it's not the one you guys are talking about. Kobe is being taught a lesson - the same lesson all black males should learn BEFORE something like this happens. The lesson covers what happens to you when you are black AND stupid. They are making an example out of him.
I saw a fact vs. fiction segment on MSNBC's the countdown last night. The clothes ripped was fiction. The clothes were only disshevelled and messed up, but not ripped. Talking to the bellhop was true. She did indeed talk to the bellhop immediately after the incident happened. I don't know if that should or shouldn't change anybody's mind, because until both sides get to their story I can't imagine anybody getting anything close to the whole story.
I'm no more privy than you, but I tend not to put my faith in media reports like many do here. Mark Hurlbert has stated that their case is that Kobe forcefully sexually assaulted her. In other words, that he raped her thru forced submission. Part of the evidence of this will most likely be physical trauma (bruises, tears, and scratches) on her person. This is why Hurlbert terms his evidence as "physical". There are other means of forcing a rape victim to comply (ie: threats, blackmail, etc). However, those don't classify as physical evidence. This may include trauma to either or both her body or privates (vaginal, and not rectal as erroneously reported). Note that Hurlbert did NOT charge Kobe with "false imprisonment". This fact throws any media report that he blocked the door into doubt until the actual trial. Hurlbert can accuse Kobe of it if in fact that's what the accuser's story is. However, the lack of the specific charge seems to delegitimize the claim, making it he-said/she-said. Hurlbert may have also left off the charge so the jury wouldn't have the opportunity to convict Kobe of that lesser crime. As for the statement of mine which you questioned, if the jury is hung, then Kobe walks unless there is a retrial. If there is no retrial after a hung jury, there's no opportunity for a conviction. In order for Kobe to see any jail time, he needs -all- 12 jurors to vote "guilty". That decision may be then upheld or overturned by the judge depending on how he felt the verdict was reached. If the jury is hung (ie: anything less than 12-0 either way), a retrial can feasibly happen. In order for Kobe to be convicted in a retrial, he needs -all- 12 jurors to vote "guilty". Hence, slim...
Kobe is already playing the race card quoting Martin Luther King at the teen choice awards. Fox left the king quotes in but cut out this one: "An injustice anywhere, is an injustice everywhere." Made me sick when i read that. How about a rape anywhere is a rape everywhere!! http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/story?id=1592765
The question for the predominantly white jury pool is whether they can make a fair assessment Kobe's innocence/guilt based on evidence and testimony nothwithstanding the media coverage. Of course if the media or some pollster asks you whether you think Kobe is guilty or innocent, you will generally answer the question based only on what you hear of the media. In my opinion, just because you answer that Kobe is guilty in a poll, that doesn't mean you can't make a fair and impartial assessment at a trial.
How is that playing the race card? If he feels he's unjustly accused that's a pertinent quote. If a white guy was accused of something and felt it was unjust, the same quote would be applicable.
It WAS presumably to NOT give the jury the opportunity to convict him on the lesser charge (false imprisonment) and give him a pass on the rape charge. (according to pulished reports)
I don't think so. I understood Bryant's use of that quote (given its historical significance and all) to be a suggestion that his arrest was a racial injustice -- that he was being persecuted for his race. I'll be hard-pressed to believe that, even if he's innocent. I think most folks would just be bewildered if a white guy said that; they would wonder how it could be a racial injustice. As far as this poll being an indication of bias in the jury pool: if the jury had one or more black members and ended hung, couldn't the prosecution argue that blacks were biased in Bryant's favor, given that such a low percentage think he's guilty? I don't mean actually or successfully or justifiably, but at least with the same strength of argument that you could argue that an all-white jury was biased against him. I know this happened in the jury I was in. Just about the first thing that happened when our jury convened to decide, this white-haired Mexican on the jury said something like, "these white folks just want to stick it to the poor Mexican again. There's no way I'd vote for those white people." He then suggested we manipulate the answers to the questions given us to make sure the defendant didn't pay a dime (civil suit). He was reproached by another juror, but he had set the tone from the beginning: the jury would either be hung or would decide for the defendant.
One of the first nights after the alledged rape there was a Cable News talk Show about the case. At that time one of the guest defense lawyers said that the race card would have to be played eventually, because this was a white girl, in a white county, in a white state and a black boy from out-of-town. Hardly anything had leaked at that time except that there was evidence on the way to the State Bureau of Investigation to be analyzed. One of the things that they talked about was that Colorado law on sexual assault was very strict compared to most states. Third degree sexual assault, rape, occurs when the alledged victim ONLY believes she is being coerced, so the threshold of guilt by intimidation is very low. With bruises consistent with strangulation or pinning by the neck (which has been leaked supposedly) and barring the door, the judge could have some latitude in instructing the jury on certain points of law that will convict Kobe. Again, I am not a lawyer, and I get most of my law knowledge from TV like y'all do, but this is the gist of the case. Can not a judge instruct the jury that if they find certain facts to be TRUE that they must find the defendent GUILTY, or am I confused ? Also, the DA said he had physical evidence AND testimonial evidence against Kobe prior to his being booked. That testimony was taken the day after the incident and we don't know what anyone said specifically. But, the DA thought at the time he had enough of both kinds of evidence to convict. Henry Lee, the Medical Examiner, in LA for the Simpson trial was on this same news program. His opinion was that whichever testimony matched the evidence best would probably be the one believed. That is what got Simpson off, his hand did not fit the glove in evidence. The jury did not just let him go because they liked him. It was a major screw up by the prosecution that blew it.
America has been historically prejudice against black men - white female relationships. How could a white female ever willingly have sex with a black man? Times have changed, but the prejudice still exists. Has anyone ever read, "To Kill A Mockingbird"? I'm not saying Kobe is innocent, but perhaps if Kobe was white, he would be more likely to get the benefit of the doubt.
