Kobe Bryant cleared?!?!

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally posted by fotze@Sep 1 2004, 09:44 PM
Prosecutors will file a motion this afternoon to dismiss the sexual assault charge against Kobe Bryant, according to sources familiar with the case.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/GMA/US/kobe...s_040901-1.html

This would make me puke

It just shows that justice can be bought and sold

[moon]

I don't think that money played as much of a role in the case being thrown out as the fact that the prosecution seemed to file the charges too early and then proceeded to bungle the case from there on.

Also there seemed to be a few decisions that went against the prosecution that many were not expecting that probably hurt the case against Kobe.

[troutman]

EDIT

[sbailey924]

Hellloooooo civil court!

[calculoso]

Originally posted by CaptainCrunch@Sep 1 2004, 04:09 PM
This would make me puke

It just shows that justice can be bought and sold

Isn't this making a huge assumption?

You're going on the assumption that he was guilty to start with.

[Resolute 14]

IMO, it is no bigger an assumption that to say Kobe was "cleared".

Kobe was innocent until proven guilty. His accuser was guilty until proven innocent.

It seems obvious that the defense was willing to drag the alleged victim through the mud to try and clear Kobe.

Whether he is innocent or not, all involved in this case did society a huge disservice by trying to prove the woman's innocence rather than the man's guilt.

I wonder how many raped women are looking at this and realizing that it isnt worth it to step forward?

[Thunderball]

You know judging from what I've heard and seen... I really don't think Kobe is guilty of anything but poor judgment and being a despicable husband. Neither of those things are illegal under today's system.

I mean, you can't accept an invitation (when you know Kobe wants sex), go to someone's room (knowing what that entails), willingly participate in foreplay (knowing what that will lead to) and then claim to say no, and have the case stick.

This is a girl trying to make a name for herself on the back of a shady man's career and life. Her reputation damns her in my opinion.

[moon]

One question I have is that she said that it was too much for her to go on with the criminal prosecution but yet has the fortitude to go on with the civil suit?

This is the same civil suit in which Kobe's defense team has much more leeway to drag her name through the mud but at the same time offers her the chance to cash in. Seems to me that she might be lookin for a big pay day.

[Sylvanfan]

Yeah, what would she profit from the criminal case? If she won he'd maybe go to jail, and she would have some leverage for her other case. Seems to me she deciede to focus on the case which is of more benefit to herself. Based on the statement I saw from Bryant I'm sure the Bryant team will settle that case before it ever goes to trial, and that she'll walk away with a few bucks and move on with her life. Still if you have money you have a serious advantage in the U.S. Legal system over someone who doesn't. Than again it probably serves as a good deterent for poor people to sue the rich in cases where it's not warrented.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

I don't know, at first glance it looks like a money grab by the girl, but on the radio last night I heard a quote from Kobe (being read by the radio guys, not spoken by kobe), that Kobe admitted that although it was consentual, he can understand how she may have thought that it wasn't consentual.
WTF!!! How can someone think that consentual sex isn't. Very odd statement indeed.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally posted by Sylvanfan@Sep 2 2004, 11:04 AM
Yeah, what would she profit from the criminal case? If she won he'd maybe go to jail, and she would have some leverage for her other case. Seems to me she deciede to focus on the case which is of more benefit to herself. Based on the statement I saw from Bryant I'm sure the Bryant team will settle that case before it ever goes to trial, and that she'll walk away with a few bucks and move on with her life. Still if you have money you have a serious advantage in the U.S. Legal system over someone who doesn't. Than again it probably serves as a good deterent for poor people to sue the rich in cases where it's not warrented.

Whoa, I disagree big time. What's the easiest way to make a case disappear? Settle out of court. If the rich person want's to avoid court and expensive lawyers, they can, and usually do just pay off the poor person. You even said it yourself, that's probaby what will happen hear. Whether it is waranted or not is beside the point. It is often cheaper to pay ther person off than to go to court and pay your lawyer. The exact opposite of a deterant if you ask me.

[Sylvanfan]

Originally posted by Bring_Back_Shantz@Sep 2 2004, 05:20 PM

Whoa, I disagree big time. What's the easiest way to make a case disappear? Settle out of court. If the rich person want's to avoid court and expensive lawyers, they can, and usually do just pay off the poor person. You even said it yourself, that's probaby what will happen hear. Whether it is waranted or not is beside the point. It is often cheaper to pay ther person off than to go to court and pay your lawyer. The exact opposite of a deterant if you ask me.

My point is that Kobe avoids criminal charges, and the fact that he had the clout to drag out this trial was likely an advantage for his side. He may still have to pay money to the victim in the Civil case, so my statement about not being able to sue is inaccurate (So you're right I hope you feel better). But having wealth does help some people avoid being charged for criminal offences, or can help them win a criminal case. Still in criminal court these charges are to be handled by the District attorney of the county or state or who cares, so the wealth of the victim bringing the charges is less of a factor. I get the feeling in this case that the publicity of the criminal case got to be too much for the victim and thats why the charges have been dismissed. Essentially a criminal verdict against Kobe was of less benefit to the victim than a potential civil suit would be.

[Tron_fdc]

Originally posted by Bring_Back_Shantz@Sep 2 2004, 05:18 PM
I don't know, at first glance it looks like a money grab by the girl, but on the radio last night I heard a quote from Kobe (being read by the radio guys, not spoken by kobe), that Kobe admitted that although it was consentual, he can understand how she may have thought that it wasn't consentual.
WTF!!! How can someone think that consentual sex isn't. Very odd statement indeed.

My take?

Kobe: Hey, I'm sorry for trying to put Mr Winkie where he shouldn't have been. Can I pay you bunch of cash to shut you up?
Her: Sure, you dirtbag. I want 6 million.
Kobe: Crazy talk. I'll give you 3.
Her: How about 4 million, and publicly state that you were wrong, and that you were sorry for what happened between us.
Kobe: Done, but you can't write a book or go on Oprah EVER.
Her: Done.

The fact it all came to a stop so quickly REEKS of a buy out agreement.

[Sylvanfan]

Based on the statement that Kobe Bryant made yesterday, I must say this does look like they've come to some type of settlement. Why else would you issue a statement admitting you were wrong, and that the two parties may not have been consenting to what was happening, then state that the victim has agreed not to use that statement as part of the Civil trail? The only reason I think this would happen is that the Civil trial will be settled out of court and that the victim no longer wishes to put any of her time into the case. I could be dead wrong, but thats the only reason I can think of for this seemingly sudden turn of events. Still it's too bad we'll never see the victim on Oprah!! I can just imagine the interview

Oprah: So he bent you over a chair and entered the wrong port of call so to speak?

Victim: Yes

[Wookie]

Originally posted by moon@Sep 2 2004, 02:38 AM
One question I have is that she said that it was too much for her to go on with the criminal prosecution but yet has the fortitude to go on with the civil suit?

This is the same civil suit in which Kobe's defense team has much more leeway to drag her name through the mud but at the same time offers her the chance to cash in. Seems to me that she might be lookin for a big pay day.

Well in civil court the prove ration is 49/51%

In criminal court it's beyond a reasonable doubt.

Basically criminal decisions take away a persons liberties and such the ruling is harder to reach, whereas a civil court it's all about cash, so it's if they can prove he more likely then not raped her, as opposed to raped her beyond all reasonble doubt.

Probably a lot easier, plus is civil court in the papers/press like criminal court? probably a lot easier for both parties involved.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally posted by plett22+Sep 2 2004, 05:13 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (plett22 @ Sep 2 2004, 05:13 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Bring_Back_Shantz@Sep 2 2004, 05:18 PM
I don't know, at first glance it looks like a money grab by the girl, but on the radio last night I heard a quote from Kobe (being read by the radio guys, not spoken by kobe), that Kobe admitted that although it was consentual, he can understand how she may have thought that it wasn't consentual.
WTF!!! How can someone think that consentual sex isn't. Very odd statement indeed.

My take?

Kobe: Hey, I'm sorry for trying to put Mr Winkie where he shouldn't have been. Can I pay you bunch of cash to shut you up?
Her: Sure, you dirtbag. I want 6 million.
Kobe: Crazy talk. I'll give you 3.
Her: How about 4 million, and publicly state that you were wrong, and that you were sorry for what happened between us.
Kobe: Done, but you can't write a book or go on Oprah EVER.
Her: Done.

The fact it all came to a stop so quickly REEKS of a buy out agreement. [/b][/quote]
Yeah, that's what I'm saying. If even Kobe is admitting that he can see how she could have thought it was not consentual, doens't that sort of point to the fact that it wasn't.

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally posted by Thunderball@Sep 2 2004, 12:17 AM

I mean, you can't accept an invitation (when you know Kobe wants sex), go to someone's room (knowing what that entails), willingly participate in foreplay (knowing what that will lead to) and then claim to say no, and have the case stick.

Yeah that is still sexual assault. As soon as she says no, he has to stop, simple as that.

[sbailey924]

Now I don't think it will be easy for her to win in civil court since the prosecution asked for the charges to be dismissed. I bet it'll be settled out of court, which is more than likely fine by both parties.

[Thunderball]

Originally posted by Mean Mr. Mustard+Sep 3 2004, 09:02 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Mean Mr. Mustard @ Sep 3 2004, 09:02 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Thunderball@Sep 2 2004, 12:17 AM

I mean, you can't accept an invitation (when you know Kobe wants sex), go to someone's room (knowing what that entails), willingly participate in foreplay (knowing what that will lead to) and then claim to say no, and have the case stick.

Yeah that is still sexual assault. As soon as she says no, he has to stop, simple as that. [/b][/quote]
There's no proof she said no during the act. All they have is heresay... therefore, all we can say is she "claimed" to after the fact.