Kobe's innocent?

by **Robby** on Thu Oct 16, 2003 8:14 am

This is starting to get really interesting. It seems as though the prosecution is going to have a very difficult time convincing the jury to convict Kobe. Good news for Laker fans though.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=1638553

by **Matthew** on Thu Oct 16, 2003 9:15 am

Kobe Bryant's accuser showed up for her rape exam wearing underpants containing another man's sperm, a startling discovery that defense lawyers called "compelling evidence" the NBA star is innocent.

I can't see what this really proves. I don't care if she fucked 200 men before or after the incident, that doesn't mean the ko-be didn't rape her.. im not saying he did, but this evidence doesnt "proove" that he didnt.

I've been thinking about this for a couple of days, but its sorta fucked that in this trial (and ones similar) the defenders past cant be brought up as evidence against him (it can be used against him if he is found guilty for a tougher sentence), and i agree the past shouldnt be brought up, but why is the past being brought up by the defence against the girl? seems like a double standard...

by . on Thu Oct 16, 2003 9:38 am

I can't see what this really proves. I don't care if she fucked 200 men before or after the incident, that doesn't mean the ko-be didn't rape her.. im not saying he did, but this evidence doesnt "proove" that he didnt.

maybe not, but didnt they say that they had pictures of physical damage? so they can use this against the physical evidence that they had by saying that the damage was cost by other men, and dont have to be done by Kobe

by **Matthew** on Thu Oct 16, 2003 9:41 am

The physical evidence about the tearing could be void, but the blood on the tshirt(kobe's tshirt) could really fuck him ... no pun intended lol..

by **GloveGuy** on Thu Oct 16, 2003 9:43 am

I can't see what this really proves. I don't care if she fucked 200 men before or after the incident, that doesn't mean the ko-be didn't rape her.. im not saying he did, but this evidence doesnt "proove" that he didnt.

The only evidence they have that Kobe didn't do it is his word. It proves a lot if the prosecutors don't have a lot of hard evidence that it was Kobe Bryant. It's hard to say that this girl was not abused and have evidence that she wasn't. But it could have simply been someone else who did it.

by **Matthew** on Thu Oct 16, 2003 9:55 am

And also, just becuase she banged a few guys doesn't mean the evidence against kobe cant stand up, does it? As for it could be anyone else, well i doubt that. There must be some evidence otherwise the DA wouldnt have pursued it, would he?
I just think the defense is desperate and thats why they are trying to tarnish the victims name and reputation..

by **Robby** on Thu Oct 16, 2003 11:59 am

Kobe Bryant's accuser showed up for her rape exam wearing underpants containing another man's sperm

I'd say that's fairly consistent with what Ms. Mackey ended Thursday's hearing with. As for the blood being on Kobe's shirt, I've said many times that that is going to be a huge point in the case. I have some idea of how the defense may address the issue but it's a stretch. However, I do believe that, contrary to popular belief before the hearing, Kobe Bryant gained quite a bit from this hearing while the prosecution took a big hit.

by **Jackal** on Thu Oct 16, 2003 1:06 pm

With this peace of information they have created doubt in the jury's mind about the girls credibility, "Is she lying or is she telling the truth" Unsure.

Mackey gained alot by this revelation, the goal was to create doubt, which imo has been reached.

by **air gordon** on Thu Oct 16, 2003 2:30 pm

sounds like the defense is just trying to make the victim look worse

there's a jury already?

by **paul_pierce_the_truth** on Thu Oct 16, 2003 2:42 pm

None of this counts against anymore.
The trial will go and everything you have heard is out the window.

I really don't know Kobe Bryant or the victim in this case, so credit is not an issue to me.

What is the issue is allowing the lawyer to defend Kobe by bashing the brains out of the victim. I really think that this is overboard defense.

It's smoke and mirrors.

If Kobe didn't cause any damage, physical tearing or whatever, to me it still does not prove he did not do it. A person can be raped many ways.
If she laid down on that chair and said "give it to me" and said this to three men in two days, if at any point she said no to anyone prior to the act no matter how close they are to "giving it to her" it's felony rape.

She can screw everyone in the world, over and over, if she told Kobe to stop and he didn't, it's rape.

I have had sex with several women, I never left with their blood on my shirt.

The more serious event in preliminary hearing to me, is the relationship between this bellboy and the vic, I really want to understand completely what these two were upto that day. It seems to me that this situation is strange and will be the key to everything.

It is an interesting case, seems to showing "reasonable doubt" as a chance virdict. I wonder how strong of a lawyer the State of Colorado will bring to the table. They will need a very sharp person to deflect the darts this defense lawyer throws around. If the defense is to rough with the victim, that will be a test of the jury's patience.

the story beats on...

by **Matthew** on Thu Oct 16, 2003 5:32 pm

Well, the prosecution knows what the defense will do now, so they can prepare themselves.. i just want to know the truth. If Kobe did it, then fuck him he should be in jail and never play basketball again... but if he didnt he doesnt deserve this.. it sounds simple.. but i just want the truth... and yes im sure i can handle it :crazy:

by **LeBron James** on Fri Oct 17, 2003 3:41 am

kobe is guilty

by **GForce11** on Fri Oct 17, 2003 4:24 am

limpdilznik wrote:there's a jury already?

Nope, preliminary hearing is for the judge and some media. Judge needs to determine if there's a need for a trial before a jury is selected.

by **air gordon** on Fri Oct 17, 2003 5:21 am

Nope, preliminary hearing is for the judge and some media. Judge needs to determine if there's a need for a trial before a jury is selected.

that's what i figured, never heard of jury being used in a preliminary hearing but someone was mentioning the jury being involved already :roll:

by **Bang** on Sat Oct 18, 2003 7:18 pm

LeBron James wrote:kobe is guilty

KOBE IS INNOCENT.

by **Matthew** on Sat Oct 18, 2003 8:10 pm

Kobe is a basketball player :crazy:

by . on Sat Oct 18, 2003 11:10 pm

NBA_Fan_23 wrote:Kobe is a basketball player

by **Eugene** on Sun Oct 19, 2003 1:43 am

The defense did an excellent job with what little they had to work with. They were not allowed to bring in the victim's past medical records, nor were they allowed to cross examine the victim in person.

So, how can they "[bash] the brains out of the victim" when the victim is not even in the courtroom? The victim has other people to speak for her. And it was those testimonies, full of holes as they were, which were cross-examined and pretty much discredited.

If what the defense implied is true, in whole or part, then Kobe has a great chance of winning, even in the victim had said "no" during the incident (the defense says she didn't).

Let's say, for arguments sake, the victim found out when Kobe would be staying in the hotel, intentionally stayed and late personally gave him the tour, and assigned him one of the most remote rooms. She went up to his room having a pretty good idea of what was going to happen. They started kissing and hugging, and we know from both accounts, this was consensual, and one thing led to another. There were no bruises on her neck, or anywhere on her person. There were no bruises or scratches on Kobe. There were no signs of struggle on either of them. So, if during intercourse, when all other signs and occurrences were consensual, she says "no" once, does that make it a felony rape? When it appears that the "victim" intended something like this to happen all along, when, for the most part, the sex was consensual?

And that's the defense's case, at least for now. It's even questionable if the plaintiff had said "no" at all during the encounter. To mangle an old joke, if her saying, "No... Don't... Stop..." makes it rape (and it does), does her saying, "No, don't stop" make it also rape? It just seems that her saying "no" is totally out of context.

Of course, all of this is hypothetical, and we don't know if it happened that way at all. But the defense derived all of this from the accounts of the victim and the chief investigator. That lends it a lot of credibility. At the very least, it puts the victim's account in serious doubt.

But, you guys are right, it doesn't prove Kobe's innocence. But it goes a long way to helping his cause.

Oh, and by the way, Kobe held the victim bent over the back of a chair, then penetrated her from behind, all the while maintaining a firm grip on the victim's neck? Is that even physically possible? Well, maybe, because Kobe's a pretty tall guy, so his arms to reach, but that's an awkward way to rape someone. And there were no bruises or marks proving that ever happened. I don't know... sounds shady to me...

All the best,

Eugene

by **scubilete** on Sun Oct 19, 2003 10:28 pm

but that's an awkward way to rape someone. And there were no bruises or marks proving that ever happened. I don't know... sounds shady to me...

Kobe knows his thing, :lol:

Maybe that's the ultimate rape position he finally got to develop.

You forgot he made her kiss his dick, maybe that's the only non-consensual thing, some girls don't like kissing black dicks. Geez, some girls think black guys have white dicks, lol.

by **Matthew** on Sun Oct 19, 2003 10:50 pm

You're fucked

by **scubilete** on Sun Oct 19, 2003 11:04 pm

Just cause you are doesn't mean everone else is, :roll:

Kobe's innocent?

Kobe's innocent?

Who is online