Exactly.
Kobe Bryant
- Thread starter Chaplin
- Start date
Exactly.
PhiLLmattiC
Last of a Dying Breed
hm.....kobe's defense
SirStefan32
Krycek, Alex Krycek
I've been following this but didn't want to be the first one to bring it up, but the defense is doing exactly what I predicted they would do, and the girl is turning out to be exactly what I said she was.
scotsman13
Registered User
No means No. it doesnt matter if she had sex with 20 people 10 minutes before kobe raped her. no mean you cant not go any farther. i personally believe that he raped her and i hope with all my heart that kobe (that worthless pos) go to jail for life.
elindholm
edited for content
I've been following this but didn't want to be the first one to bring it up, but the defense is doing exactly what I predicted they would do, and the girl is turning out to be exactly what I said she was.
Not quite. The defense is doing exactly what you predicted, and they are saying that the girl is exactly what you said. That is much, much different.
The prosecution says that Bryant is a rapist, and the defense says that the victim is a *****. Both sides have some evidence and a lot of rhetoric behind them. But saying something doesn't make it true. I agree that Bryant will almost certainly be acquitted -- I've said that all along -- but it won't be because of any facts we know about the victim's character.
Not quite. The defense is doing exactly what you predicted, and they are saying that the girl is exactly what you said. That is much, much different.
The prosecution says that Bryant is a rapist, and the defense says that the victim is a *****. Both sides have some evidence and a lot of rhetoric behind them. But saying something doesn't make it true. I agree that Bryant will almost certainly be acquitted -- I've said that all along -- but it won't be because of any facts we know about the victim's character.
LakeShowMan
Registered
Do all that were so ready to convict Kobe still feel the same way?
I only ask because it goes to show we still have a long way to go until ALL the facts are out there. Like I said before, I am not making any judgement until I get all the facts, it is simply unfair to do so.
Although I doubt it will happen, I would not be surprised if this case was thrown out, it seems from what we are privy to that the only real solid evidence against Kobe is heresay. That being said, we must remember that a lot of the evidence shown at this hearing was behind closed doors. This case will most likely go to trial, because the level of of evidence to do so does not have to be much.
We'll see what happens. I just hope justice is done either way.
I only ask because it goes to show we still have a long way to go until ALL the facts are out there. Like I said before, I am not making any judgement until I get all the facts, it is simply unfair to do so.
Although I doubt it will happen, I would not be surprised if this case was thrown out, it seems from what we are privy to that the only real solid evidence against Kobe is heresay. That being said, we must remember that a lot of the evidence shown at this hearing was behind closed doors. This case will most likely go to trial, because the level of of evidence to do so does not have to be much.
We'll see what happens. I just hope justice is done either way.
I still think it's too early to make a judgment, but I'm definitely leaning more towards "not guilty" now.
We'll see what comes out in the trial.
Joe Mama
We'll see what comes out in the trial.
Joe Mama
OP
OP
Chaplin
Better off silent
Then why do you ask anyone to do what you will not?
SirStefan32
Krycek, Alex Krycek
Fair enough. I was correct in my assesment of Bryant's defense, and I still mantain that the girl is exactly what I said she was. Didn't you read this part:
"The young woman wore underwear containing semen and sperm not belonging to Bryant when she went to Valley View Hospital in Glenwood Springs the day after the alleged assault to be examined by nurses trained in rape evidence collection."
Of course he is not guilty.
He is still a stupid moron but he's no rapist.LakeShowMan
Registered
Because, half of you already said he was guilty. In fact, a lot said he was DEFINETLY guilty before they heard any facts.
I was just wondering if anyone was starting to change their mind. I have said from the start that we should hear all the evidence, before we make up our mind. So people had already begun to do, what I would not.
That is why I asked "all theat were ready to convict him", if they had changed their mind.
schutd
ASFN Addict
Originally posted by SirStefan32
Fair enough. I was correct in my assesment of Bryant's defense, and I still mantain that the girl is exactly what I said she was. Didn't you read this part:
"The young woman wore underwear containing semen and sperm not belonging to Bryant when she went to Valley View Hospital in Glenwood Springs the day after the alleged assault to be examined by nurses trained in rape evidence collection."
Of course he is not guilty.
Based on that quote do you mean that he will be found not guilty in court, or that he truly did not rape here. Those are two different things. ANd that quote you use, while it may be damning to the prosecution (though I wouldnt know why, it seems irrelevant to the facts of this case, her previous promiscuity is not relevent, nor is her proclivity for not doing laundry apprently) it certainly shows nothing one way or the other as to his guilt or innocence.
OP
OP
Chaplin
Better off silent
It shows that Stefan doesn't need proof in order to make up his mind!
elindholm
edited for content
A woman does not forfeit her right to say "No" by having multiple sex partners. We do not legislate morality in this country.
It wouldn't matter if there were six guys in the room at the same time, and she asked to have ********* with the other five but not Bryant. It's her right to draw the boundaries however she wants.
It wouldn't matter if there were six guys in the room at the same time, and she asked to have ********* with the other five but not Bryant. It's her right to draw the boundaries however she wants.
LakeShowMan
Registered
The reason that is important is because the only evidence other than her story (which is technically heresay) that the prosecution brought up was the 'trauma' found at that examination that was supposed to be done by Kobe (and showing rape). Now if she has someone else semen and pubic hair in those panties, how could anyone be sure that said 'trauma' was done by Kobe or by the other man whose stuff (for lack of a better word) was found in the underwear that day?
I think most would find it very hard to believe that she would just put on dirty underwear. So basically any findings in that examination would have to be very much in question.
SirStefan32
Krycek, Alex Krycek
Of course it does Dave, it goes to her character. Her previous promiscuity is very important, that's why the DA has been doing everything he can to keep it out of court.
From what I know, he did not rape her. No screaming, no bruisings on Kobe, she had an intercourse with somebody else who might have hurt her. Remember the question about the wounds being consistent with somebody who had three intercourses in three days?
He didn't do it. That's all there is to it. This shouldn't even go to trial.
From what I know, he did not rape her. No screaming, no bruisings on Kobe, she had an intercourse with somebody else who might have hurt her. Remember the question about the wounds being consistent with somebody who had three intercourses in three days?
He didn't do it. That's all there is to it. This shouldn't even go to trial.
Chaz
observationist
True her promiscuity or lack thereof is irrelevent to whether Kobe raped her.
The fact, if established, of previous recent sexual contact calls into question if her injuries were caused by Bryant or someone else.
This would only affect the evidence of her injuries not the assult charge.
The fact, if established, of previous recent sexual contact calls into question if her injuries were caused by Bryant or someone else.
This would only affect the evidence of her injuries not the assult charge.
SirStefan32
Krycek, Alex Krycek
Eric, I predicted the exact strategy his attorney was going to use.
Ain't ain't a word.
Ain't ain't a word.
The prosecutor was on the radio yesterday saying that a lot of their case against Bryant was discussed in the judge's chambers, including many things he could not disclose at this time. He said he was confident that this case would go to trial.
Well, pat yourself on the back. You are a master of the obvious. A 3rd grader could have predicted Kobe's defense.
schutd
ASFN Addict
DOnt forget her blood was found on his shirt. This is all nothing more than standard stuff. I know youre not going one way or the other, but in reminding us about the bruising, which could of course now be called into question, you did fail to mention the blood on his shirt. So its not ALL heresay.
SirStefan32
Krycek, Alex Krycek
That alone speaks volumes.
schutd
ASFN Addict
Looks like we're back to day 1 when the story broke. When lack of logic starts occuring, I'm out.
LakeShowMan
Registered
Well of course. I even wrote that in an earlier post. I still haven't made up my mind either way.
However, I think it says something when the prosecuter feels he has to do press conferences, and the like, to defend his case.
From what I have heard, I am starting to agree with a lot of the lawyers that have said this case 'seems' to be very weak, but we must remember there is a lot more that we haven't heard yet. Most likely we won't hear about until the trial this summer.
SirStefan32
Krycek, Alex Krycek
Originally posted by Brian in Mesa
Well, pat yourself on the back. You are a master of the obvious. A 3rd grader could have predicted Kobe's defense.
I don't remember you predicting Kobe's defense. Oh, that's right, you already convicted him without hearing the facts.
