SirStefan32
Krycek, Alex Krycek
TheRealHardaway, why does RKelly sounds so familiar to me? What is the significance of that name?
Originally posted by SirStefan32
TheRealHardaway, why does RKelly sounds so familiar to me? What is the significance of that name?
No, try because everybody who has ever known Kobe Bryant closely that has come out to talk about him has said nothing but good stuff.
Originally posted by elindholm
It's a pity I just sold my used car to someone else. I can come across as pretty truthful too.
[/B]
Originally posted by SirStefan32
Now it's nothing more than an equivalent of a date-rape.
Originally posted by Ryanwb
There are more lawyers in school right now than there are practicing lawyers. Thats all we need is another ambulance chaser showing their DUI commercials to the daytime TV audience of unemployed lowlifes.
Originally posted by schutd
By the way Stefan, you make two seperate points about how you accept that fact that people will hate you for no reason...
Get over yourself, would you? I dont care about you enough to hate you. I care that your messed up ideas are all over the internet for anyone to read and they need to refuted.
But I dont care about you personally enough to hate you. Youre not that important.
Originally posted by elindholm
SirStefan, I haven't been to law school, but I know a lot about the LSAT, having taught prep courses for it. My humble opinion is that you need to do a better job of following what the argument is really about.
The objection is to your characterization of the victim as a "*****." Your reaction is to say that, if Bryant is acquitted in the trial, that will vindicate your criticism of the girl's character.
But, when pressed, you acknowledge that the legal system is imperfect, so what you will really do is put your faith in the "accuracy" of the court proceedings.
The incorrect leap that you're making -- and which some on the other side of the argument are rejecting, even though that hasn't been made explicit -- is that any acquittal of Bryant will "prove," as far as the law is concerned, that the victim is a *****.
In other words, it is possible for Bryant to be acquitted and for the girl's story to be correct. This possibility is what you keep dodging around.
Slightly more formally,
Step 1 in the defense you are using:
(Bryant acquitted in court room)
implies
(Bryant legally not guilty).
This is correct.
Step 2:
(Bryant legally not guilty)
implies
(Rape legally did not occur)
This is correct, albeit only in the thinnest legal sense. Still, you may define the terms of the argument such that this is correct.
Step 3:
(Rape legally did not occur)
implies
(Victim lied for self-serving reasons and/or is a *****)
This is incorrect, and your reliance on this step renders your entire argument invalid.
I'm not stating an opinon here; this is an analytical perspective on what I think you're trying to say. You might want to study it before you begin your law school applications.
Originally posted by hoopfan189
I'm sure Kobe isn't a bad guy, but when you're in the heat of the moment and you just have to have "it", anything can happen.
Originally posted by elindholm
I should have said ... that Kobe's defense will portray her as such.
Ah. I think you're dead right on that one.
Originally posted by elindholm
Well, they wouldn't have to destroy her credibility if Bryant were actually innocent, but they probably would anyway, just to be on the safe side.
Originally posted by elindholm
I didn't mean to be patronizing; I just thought it was time to try to sift through the noise.
Why are you so adamant that he's telling the truth. "I DID NOT HAVE SEXUAL RELATIONS" yada yada ya. Then he said he did commit adultery.
I'm sure Kobe isn't a bad guy, but when you're in the heat of the moment and you just have to have "it", anything can happen.
Originally posted by elindholm
A picture of Eric!!
No liability for broken monitors!
Originally posted by schutd
SO NOT what I expected you to look like. Heres a picture of me: No sh*t.
http://scoot.net/gallery/pic.html?pic=45836
Now, I dont ALWAYS look so haggard, but that night was a special occasion, and I felt like going particularly freakish.
Originally posted by rkellysunsfan
Let's all be honest with ourselves here. You all believe Kobe did it, and no amount of evidence to the contrary is going to persuede you to believe otherwise. Many of you have already said that even if Kobe wins the trial it won't mean anything to you. So what if Kobe really didn't do it? Because nothing will make you believe that, there's really no point in having this conversation, or a trial, at all.
Yet another innane post from the guy who gets banned all the time.
Originally posted by rkellysunsfan
So yes, R. Kelly is somewhat of a criminal, but it doesn't make the girls who participated with him any better. Sex, if it's not rape, takes two consenting individuals. For R. Kelly, it was him and underage girls, for Kobe, it was him and the 19 year old girl, and for Chaplin, it's him and his hand.