|
|
|
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=11091577&BRD=1675&PAG=461&dept_id=18168&rfi=6
Colorado State District Judge Terry Ruckriegle ruled that
Bryant’s attorneys can ask the woman accusing him of rape
detailed questions about her sexual history. Prosecutors will ask the
state Supreme Court to overturn the judge’s decision, which
seems to contradict the current state law.
Under Colorado’s rape-shield law, the sexual activity of alleged
victims is presumed irrelevant. Defense attorneys have to convince the
judge otherwise in order to present details of past sexual activity to
jurors.
This is the latest horror to arise from this well-publicized case.
Under law, a man charged with rape on six separate occasions cannot
have that fact brought up at his seventh trial. But, a judge thinks
it’s OK to detail any consensual sexual encounter of the alleged
victim! Does that mean a single woman who has consensual sex cannot be
raped?
This trial promises to have a chilling effect on all future rape
victims. After the resort worker accused the basketball star of rape,
her identity was splashed around the world on Web sites. Defense
attorneys, even after being warned by Ruckriegle, mentioned her name
in court six times. Her family received death threats and one of those
classy tabloids available on supermarket stands put her picture on the
cover.
Colorado legislators, alarmed at the treatment of the alleged victim
by Bryant fans, his attorneys and the media are considering
legislation to further protect accusers’ identities. Most news
organizations, like the Daily Times, do not print victims’
names, and most state laws already protect the victim’s sexual
history. At least that’s what people thought until this case
made it perfectly clear that enough money and fame can override any
legal protection.
One law being considered in Colorado would allow prosecutors to decide
whether to list accusers’ names in legal proceedings under a
pseudonym, such as Jane Doe.
A second state legislator proposed a bill that would allow victims to
sue people who released their names for actual damages, collect a
$5,000 civil penalty and be repaid for attorney fees and costs.
The Kobe Bryant case is not the only rape trial stirring debate. In
Hawaii, the Supreme Court overturned the conviction of a man accused
of molesting a 13-year-old girl, citing conversations with a
therapist.
So, in a nation where a woman is raped every six minutes, victims have
to worry whether the status of the accused is high enough to cause her
life to be in danger, or at least plastered all over the Internet or
publications that seek the sensational over the responsible. Or, a
victim who turns for psychological counseling will have to worry that
anything she says to her counselor is fodder for the courts.
|
| |
| |
s_knight8 wrote:
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=11091577&BRD=1675&PAG=461&dept_id=18168&rfi=6
But, a judge thinks
it’s OK to detail any consensual sexual encounter of the alleged
victim! Does that mean a single woman who has consensual sex cannot be
raped?
Why do all the apologists play this angle? Did ANYONE say anything about
her sex life meaning should couldn't have been raped?
I didn't hear that.
All I've heard was intriguing evidence suggesting her sexual activities
right before her encounter with Kobe could have caused her minor
injuries and cast reasonable doubt over the case.
Yeah, I know she's an alleged victim and all -- but this is a man's life
we're talking about.
This trial promises to have a chilling effect on all future rape
victims. After the resort worker accused the basketball star of rape,
her identity was splashed around the world on Web sites. Defense
attorneys, even after being warned by Ruckriegle, mentioned her name
in court six times. Her family received death threats and one of those
classy tabloids available on supermarket stands put her picture on the
cover.
Colorado legislators, alarmed at the treatment of the alleged victim
by Bryant fans, his attorneys and the media are considering
legislation to further protect accusers’ identities. Most news
organizations, like the Daily Times, do not print victims’
names, and most state laws already protect the victim’s sexual
history. At least that’s what people thought until this case
made it perfectly clear that enough money and fame can override any
legal protection.
One law being considered in Colorado would allow prosecutors to decide
whether to list accusers’ names in legal proceedings under a
pseudonym, such as Jane Doe.
A second state legislator proposed a bill that would allow victims to
sue people who released their names for actual damages, collect a
$5,000 civil penalty and be repaid for attorney fees and costs.
The Kobe Bryant case is not the only rape trial stirring debate. In
Hawaii, the Supreme Court overturned the conviction of a man accused
of molesting a 13-year-old girl, citing conversations with a
therapist.
So, in a nation where a woman is raped every six minutes, victims have
to worry whether the status of the accused is high enough to cause her
life to be in danger, or at least plastered all over the Internet or
publications that seek the sensational over the responsible. Or, a
victim who turns for psychological counseling will have to worry that
anything she says to her counselor is fodder for the courts.
--
MF
See L.A. for class
On March 21 in Los Angeles, former Celtics great (who broke the hearts
of many Lakers fans) Bill Russell had his picture on the scoreboard.
The fans gave him a long ovation.
The previous night, when it was announced that Shaq O'Neal scored his
20,000th point, the fans in Sacramento booed. Then, to make matters
worse, a the game ball was defaced, presumably by a Sacramento fan.
Clinton E. Parish
Sacramento
Rest in Peace, Francis Dayle "Chick" Hearn : 1916 - 2002
|
| |
| |
Michael Fletcher wrote:
s_knight8 wrote:
Why do all the apologists play this angle? Did ANYONE say anything about
her sex life meaning should couldn't have been raped?
I didn't hear that.
All I've heard was intriguing evidence suggesting her sexual activities
right before her encounter with Kobe could have caused her minor
injuries and cast reasonable doubt over the case.
It doesn't matter if she participated in the Houston 500 right before meeting Kobe.
If he raped her, he raped her. Regardless of her sexual history.
BH
|
| |
| |
On 9-Mar-2004, Biznatch Hadhersnatch <biznatch_hadhersnatch@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Michael Fletcher wrote:
It doesn't matter if she participated in the Houston 500 right before
meeting Kobe.
If he raped her, he raped her. Regardless of her sexual history.
BH
Yes, that is true, but it is much more difficult to prove beyond a
reasonable doubt that she was raped if it is shown that she is a slut. The
'only' evidence they have are her used pussy, and her word. Her pussy seems
to be used a lot, and it is shown that she is mentally unstable. I think
kobe will walk. Victim shield laws are bs anyway, as there is a presumption
of guilt. She is not a victim until he is proven guilty.
----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
|
| |
| |
On Tue, 09 Mar 2004 20:52:11 -0800, Biznatch Hadhersnatch
<biznatch_hadhersnatch@yahoo.com> wrote:
Michael Fletcher wrote:
It doesn't matter if she participated in the Houston 500 right before meeting Kobe.
If he raped her, he raped her. Regardless of her sexual history.
A loose definition of rape is sex without consent, forced sex, ...etc.
I don't see how someone throwing herself on Kobe, flirting, following
him all around when he arrived there, even by her own admitting (or at
least of what has been quoted so far), insisted on taking his room
service order to his room by herself after room service hours, flirting
more there in the room, got raped.
And then there is the "irrelevant" boring tactic.
|
| |
| |
Biznatch Hadhersnatch wrote:
Michael Fletcher wrote:
It doesn't matter if she participated in the Houston 500 right before meeting Kobe.
If he raped her, he raped her. Regardless of her sexual history.
Holy crap... how can I make it any clearer!?
No one said her sexual history ITSELF means she wasn't raped. Her sexual
encounters right before Kobe, however, might explain the very minor
injuries that are being blamed on Kobe. How is this not relevant?
BH
--
MF
See L.A. for class
On March 21 in Los Angeles, former Celtics great (who broke the hearts
of many Lakers fans) Bill Russell had his picture on the scoreboard.
The fans gave him a long ovation.
The previous night, when it was announced that Shaq O'Neal scored his
20,000th point, the fans in Sacramento booed. Then, to make matters
worse, a the game ball was defaced, presumably by a Sacramento fan.
Clinton E. Parish
Sacramento
Rest in Peace, Francis Dayle "Chick" Hearn : 1916 - 2002
|
| |
| |
Biznatch Hadhersnatch wrote:
Michael Fletcher wrote:
It doesn't matter if she participated in the Houston 500 right before meeting Kobe.
If he raped her, he raped her. Regardless of her sexual history.
How will you accurately determine whether or not he raped her
without considering all the circumstances?
M
|
| |
| |
In article <404EBF2F.5020605@serverart.org>,
Michael Fletcher <mfletcher@serverart.org> wrote:
Biznatch Hadhersnatch wrote:
Holy crap... how can I make it any clearer!?
No one said her sexual history ITSELF means she wasn't raped. Her sexual
encounters right before Kobe, however, might explain the very minor
injuries that are being blamed on Kobe.
Even if they did, that still wouldn't ITSELF mean she wasn't raped.
|
| |
| |
Biznatch Hadhersnatch <biznatch_hadhersnatch@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<404E9EFB.74F5EA56@yahoo.com>...
Michael Fletcher wrote:
It doesn't matter if she participated in the Houston 500 right before
meeting Kobe.
I suspect that the physical evidence of this would be presented *to*
the jury as evidence that she was raped. You know, the rape kit and
all that.
Do you think that perhaps the jury needs to know *what* the rape kit
results are the results of? Or do you think it right and proper to
present the physical evidence of her sexual encounters with other men
as evidence that the man on the stand raped her?
If he raped her, he raped her. Regardless of her sexual history.
And if he did not rape her, he did not rape her, regardless if his
sexual history, which is expected to be brought up in a rape trial.
Is not the crucial question what, if anything, happened? I just don't
see how justice can result when the jury is lied to that the rape kit
results were caused by the defendant, if, in fact, they were caused by
her sexual encounters with other men. Can you explain it to me? Please
write slowly.
BH
Rich
|
| |
| |
s_knight8 wrote:
This trial promises to have a chilling effect on all future rape
victims who sleep with a third party the following morning.
Fixed that for zwire.com
--
Gary Collard
SABR-L Moderator
gmcollard@yahoo.com
David Letterman, on reports of friction between Derek Jeter and Alex
Rodriguez: "But listen to this. The San Francisco Giants have a very
different problem. I was stunned when I heard this. Their shortstop
and their third baseman got married."
|
| |
| |
_knight8 wrote:
Colorado State District Judge Terry Ruckriegle ruled that
Bryant’s attorneys can ask the woman accusing him of rape
detailed questions about her sexual history. Prosecutors will ask the
state Supreme Court to overturn the judge’s decision, which
seems to contradict the current state law.
Unless one actually READS the current state law. The RSL
deals with the admissibility of evidence AT TRIAL. We aren't
there yet. Further, the RSL supplies a test for admissibility,
which is that the judge screens the evidence first to
determine whether its probative value outweighs its prejudicial
value. In order to decide, he has to hear it. So rather than
"contradict" the law, it's a vital part of the process. Is the
writer of this article being disingenuous, or stupid?
Under Colorado’s rape-shield law, the sexual activity of alleged
victims is presumed irrelevant. Defense attorneys have to convince the
judge otherwise in order to present details of past sexual activity to
jurors.
This is the latest horror to arise from this well-publicized case.
The FIRST horror being that victim's advocate groups seem
to want to believe without questioning every rape claim,
which would imply dispensing of due process.
Under law, a man charged with rape on six separate occasions cannot
have that fact brought up at his seventh trial. But, a judge thinks
it’s OK to detail any consensual sexual encounter of the alleged
victim!
Bzzzzt! He will decide IF sexual encounters CAN be
admitted, but only based on a showing that such evidence
is relevant to the elements of the case.
Does that mean a single woman who has consensual sex cannot be
raped?
The natural conclusion from such a flawed line of thinking.
In reality, the advocates' line of thinking means that the
prosecution should be allowed to proffer evidence which the
defense is not allowed to refute.
So rather than meaning that a woman who has consensual sex
cannot be raped, it means someone accused of rape cannot be
innocent.
This trial promises to have a chilling effect on all future rape
victims.
Not to mention the future false accusors.
After the resort worker accused the basketball star of rape,
her identity was splashed around the world on Web sites.
This will have a chilling effect on "all" future rape victims?
It'd only apply to future victims of famous people, which is
probably 0.001% of all rape victims, not "all" of them.
And the accused's identity was splashed all around the world
by web sites, newspapers, TV networks, radio, etc., etc.,
etc.
Defense
attorneys, even after being warned by Ruckriegle, mentioned her name
in court six times.
In a CLOSED court, not in public. And it was a mistake --
here's a quote from Craig Silverman: "As apparently stated
in Shapiro's book, my former boss, ex-Denver District
Attorney Norm Early said Mackey's naming of the victim was
intentional. However, Norm was not in the courtroom. Norm
was apparently in the listening room. Norm could not see
(as I did) that Mackey had the alleged victim's name
written on her prepared questions. Norm could not see Mackey
physically recoil as she realized her mistakes. Norm could
not see an irritated Hal Haddon go up to Mackey and tell her
ways to avoid the mistake again."
Besides which, I still don't see the damage done by having
the victim's name mentioned in a closed hearing. Are they
afraid that the media present would suddenly rush out and
publish it? First of all, they already know it. Second,
as this article goes on to state, the news organizations
don't publish them anyway. So seriously, what was the harm
caused by the victim's name being mentioned in the courtroom,
in a closed hearing?
Her family received death threats and one of those
classy tabloids available on supermarket stands put her picture on the
cover.
Colorado legislators, alarmed at the treatment of the alleged victim
by Bryant fans, his attorneys and the media are considering
legislation to further protect accusers’ identities. Most news
organizations, like the Daily Times, do not print victims’
names, and most state laws already protect the victim’s sexual
history. At least that’s what people thought until this case
made it perfectly clear that enough money and fame can override any
legal protection.
1) Nothing done so far overrides legal protection. Nothing.
2) It really makes me fear for future victims of false
accusations, who can't afford adequate legal representation.
One law being considered in Colorado would allow prosecutors to decide
whether to list accusers’ names in legal proceedings under a
pseudonym, such as Jane Doe.
Well, since the rule was already in place that Mackey was not
supposed to use the accusor's name in the courtroom, wouldn't
this be redundant?
A second state legislator proposed a bill that would allow victims to
sue people who released their names for actual damages,
What ARE the actual damages? Serious question.
Second, if the allegations DO turn out to be false, is
Kobe allowed to recover actual damages? Having had his
name published without due process having played its
course has quite deonstrably cost him lots and lots of
money.
collect a
$5,000 civil penalty and be repaid for attorney fees and costs.
The Kobe Bryant case is not the only rape trial stirring debate. In
Hawaii, the Supreme Court overturned the conviction of a man accused
of molesting a 13-year-old girl, citing conversations with a
therapist.
In California, a man spent eight months in jail after a
trio of adolescents made up a molestation story in order
to avoid getting in trouble with their parents.
Besides, what were the facts regarding the overturning of
the conviction? The writer of the article provides NO
information -- just says that the conviction was overturned,
expecting us to all say, "ooh, that's bad!"
So, in a nation where a woman is raped every six minutes, victims have
to worry whether the status of the accused is high enough to cause her
life to be in danger, or at least plastered all over the Internet or
publications that seek the sensational over the responsible.
And the people of "high status" (read: rich & famous) have
to worry about whether anyone they meet could make a false
statement which causes them to lose life, liberty and property.
Or, a
victim who turns for psychological counseling will have to worry that
anything she says to her counselor is fodder for the courts.
No, they already ruled that such evidence IS privleged. The
author should keep up.
What they are STILL debating is whether someone could blab
about such information to others, and then try to keep it
out of trial by claiming
|
| |
| |
Miguel wrote:
Biznatch Hadhersnatch wrote:
How will you accurately determine whether or not he raped her
without considering all the circumstances?
M
Her sexual activities before and after the rape have no bearing on what actually happened in
that hotel room.
BTW, I think it's funny that you all know what the Houston 500 is.
BH
|
| |
| |
"Biznatch Hadhersnatch" <biznatch_hadhersnatch@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:404F7FBB.B1B4AE29@yahoo.com...
Miguel wrote:
Her sexual activities before and after the rape have no bearing on what actually happened in
that hotel room.
It does if the prosecution brings forward physical evidence that can be accounted for by recent prior sexual activity.
It is the judges decision in this case if this is relevent or not period.
BTW, I think it's funny that you all know what the Houston 500 is.
BH
|
| |
| |
Michael Fletcher <mfletcher@serverart.org> wrote in message news:<404EBF2F.5020605@serverart.org>...
Biznatch Hadhersnatch wrote:
Holy crap... how can I make it any clearer!?
No one said her sexual history ITSELF means she wasn't raped. Her sexual
encounters right before Kobe, however, might explain the very minor
injuries that are being blamed on Kobe. How is this not relevant?
It is irrelevant because that would make them look like an idiot
arguing against it?
BH
--
MF
|
| |
| |
tjab wrote:
Holy crap... how can I make it any clearer!?
No one said her sexual history ITSELF means she wasn't raped. Her sexual
encounters right before Kobe, however, might explain the very minor
injuries that are being blamed on Kobe.
Even if they did, that still wouldn't ITSELF mean she wasn't raped.
Nor did I say it did -- but without those injuries, what evidence other
than her word do you have that she was raped?
--
MF
See L.A. for class
On March 21 in Los Angeles, former Celtics great (who broke the hearts
of many Lakers fans) Bill Russell had his picture on the scoreboard.
The fans gave him a long ovation.
The previous night, when it was announced that Shaq O'Neal scored his
20,000th point, the fans in Sacramento booed. Then, to make matters
worse, a the game ball was defaced, presumably by a Sacramento fan.
Clinton E. Parish
Sacramento
Rest in Peace, Francis Dayle "Chick" Hearn : 1916 - 2002
|
| |
| |
Huang Gang wrote:
Michael Fletcher <mfletcher@serverart.org> wrote in message news:<404EBF2F.5020605@serverart.org>...
It is irrelevant because that would make them look like an idiot
arguing against it?
Right, nice call. I think you hit the nail on the head.
BH
--
MF
See L.A. for class
On March 21 in Los Angeles, former Celtics great (who broke the hearts
of many Lakers fans) Bill Russell had his picture on the scoreboard.
The fans gave him a long ovation.
The previous night, when it was announced that Shaq O'Neal scored his
20,000th point, the fans in Sacramento booed. Then, to make matters
worse, a the game ball was defaced, presumably by a Sacramento fan.
Clinton E. Parish
Sacramento
Rest in Peace, Francis Dayle "Chick" Hearn : 1916 - 2002
|
| |
| |
Biznatch Hadhersnatch wrote:
M
Her sexual activities before and after the rape have no bearing on what actually happened in
that hotel room.
And again, no one is saying they do -- what we're saying is... her
sexual activities directly before the rape might explain the minor
injuries that are currently being used against Kobe.
BTW, I think it's funny that you all know what the Houston 500 is.
BH
--
MF
See L.A. for class
On March 21 in Los Angeles, former Celtics great (who broke the hearts
of many Lakers fans) Bill Russell had his picture on the scoreboard.
The fans gave him a long ovation.
The previous night, when it was announced that Shaq O'Neal scored his
20,000th point, the fans in Sacramento booed. Then, to make matters
worse, a the game ball was defaced, presumably by a Sacramento fan.
Clinton E. Parish
Sacramento
Rest in Peace, Francis Dayle "Chick" Hearn : 1916 - 2002
|
| |
| |
Rich wrote:
I just don't
see how justice can result when the jury is lied to that the rape kit
results were caused by the defendant, if, in fact, they were caused by
her sexual encounters with other men. Can you explain it to me? Please
write slowly.
With more eloquence than I could ever muster. Nicely written.
Rich
--
MF
See L.A. for class
On March 21 in Los Angeles, former Celtics great (who broke the hearts
of many Lakers fans) Bill Russell had his picture on the scoreboard.
The fans gave him a long ovation.
The previous night, when it was announced that Shaq O'Neal scored his
20,000th point, the fans in Sacramento booed. Then, to make matters
worse, a the game ball was defaced, presumably by a Sacramento fan.
Clinton E. Parish
Sacramento
Rest in Peace, Francis Dayle "Chick" Hearn : 1916 - 2002
|
| |
| |
tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote in message news:<c2n4if$8e0@rac2.wam.umd.edu>...
In article <404EBF2F.5020605@serverart.org>,
Michael Fletcher <mfletcher@serverart.org> wrote:
Even if they did, that still wouldn't ITSELF mean she wasn't raped.
But that that ITSELF means the prosecution CANNOT use those very minor
injuries to prove she was raped.
Unless you purposely forget, the prosecution used those injuries to
support the accuser's rape claim. The defense just responding to what
the prosecution brought up.
I thought in your country, the accused have a right to confront
his/her accuser and the right to a fair trial. It hardly seem fair if
the evidence the prosecution uses are not allowed to be questioned.
|
| |
| |
s_knight8@hotmail.com (s_knight8) wrote in message news:<6bd12cd6.0403091928.42b1c2cb@posting.google.com>...
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=11091577&BRD=1675&PAG=461&dept_id=18168&rfi=6
Colorado State District Judge Terry Ruckriegle ruled that
Bryant’s attorneys can ask the woman accusing him of rape
detailed questions about her sexual history. Prosecutors will ask the
state Supreme Court to overturn the judge’s decision, which
seems to contradict the current state law.
Under Colorado’s rape-shield law, the sexual activity of alleged
victims is presumed irrelevant. Defense attorneys have to convince the
judge otherwise in order to present details of past sexual activity to
jurors.
This is the latest horror to arise from this well-publicized case.
Under law, a man charged with rape on six separate occasions cannot
have that fact brought up at his seventh trial. But, a judge thinks
Under the law, a woman who makes false rape accusations on six seperate
occasions cannot have that fact brought up at the seventh trial.
it’s OK to detail any consensual sexual encounter of the alleged
victim! Does that mean a single woman who has consensual sex cannot be
raped?
This trial promises to have a chilling effect on all future rape
victims.
This "journalist" misspelled "false rape-accusors"
After the resort worker accused the basketball star of rape,
This journalist misspelled "sex-crazed celebrity-stalking cunt who
sneaks into guests rooms without their permission who bent herself
over a chair, and lifted her dress up for the accused"
her identity was splashed around the world on Web sites. Defense
attorneys, even after being warned by Ruckriegle, mentioned her name
in court six times. Her family received death threats and one of those
classy tabloids available on supermarket stands put her picture on the
cover.
Colorado legislators, alarmed at the treatment of the alleged victim
by Bryant fans, his attorneys and the media are considering
legislation to further protect accusers’ identities. Most news
organizations, like the Daily Times, do not print victims’
names, and most state laws already protect the victim’s sexual
history. At least that’s what people thought until this case
made it perfectly clear that enough money and fame can override any
legal protection.
One law being considered in Colorado would allow prosecutors to decide
whether to list accusers’ names in legal proceedings under a
pseudonym, such as Jane Doe.
How about her real name?
Men should have an opportunity to know the identity of repeat rape-accusors.
A second state legislator proposed a bill that would allow victims to
sue people who released their names for actual damages, collect a
$5,000 civil penalty and be repaid for attorney fees and costs.
What about false-accusors?
How about protecting the identity of the not-convicted?
The Kobe Bryant case is not the only rape trial stirring debate. In
Hawaii, the Supreme Court overturned the conviction of a man accused
of molesting a 13-year-old girl, citing conversations with a
therapist.
So, in a nation where a woman is raped every six minutes, victims have
Oh reallly... every SIX minutes.
that's 88,000 rapes per year.
Uniform Crime Report figures don't back that up
In fact, rape is the most frequently FALSE-REPORTED crime in the country--
precisely because NO actual evidence of a crime is needed and because women
are addicted to spreading lies, rumors and gossip against anyone they
don't like.
to worry whether the status of the accused is high enough to cause her
life to be in danger, or at least plastered all over the Internet or
publications that seek the sensational over the responsible. Or, a
victim who turns for psychological counseling will have to worry that
anything she says to her counselor is fodder for the courts.
|
| |
| |
In article <40fff905.0403110022.a6b2e9b@posting.google.com>,
kongwong@hotmail.com says...
tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote in message news:<c2n4if$8e0@rac2.wam.umd.edu>...
But that that ITSELF means the prosecution CANNOT use those very minor
injuries to prove she was raped.
Unless you purposely forget, the prosecution used those injuries to
support the accuser's rape claim. The defense just responding to what
the prosecution brought up.
I thought in your country, the accused have a right to confront
his/her accuser and the right to a fair trial. It hardly seem fair if
the evidence the prosecution uses are not allowed to be questioned.
Yep..welcome to the rape shield law. We have no special laws here
protecting just men but we do have laws protecting just women.
|
| |
| |
In article <40fff905.0403110022.a6b2e9b@posting.google.com>,
Huang Gang <kongwong@hotmail.com> wrote:
tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote in message news:<c2n4if$8e0@rac2.wam.umd.edu>...
But that that ITSELF means the prosecution CANNOT use those very minor
injuries to prove she was raped.
Unless you purposely forget, the prosecution used those injuries to
support the accuser's rape claim. The defense just responding to what
the prosecution brought up.
I thought in your country, the accused have a right to confront
his/her accuser and the right to a fair trial. It hardly seem fair if
the evidence the prosecution uses are not allowed to be questioned.
I agree. If the prosecution enters those injuries, the defense should be
allowed to enplore whether other sexual activities around the same time
caused those injuries. And I will be very surprised, and will denounce it
as loudly as anyone, if they aren't. (I'll also be surprised if the
prosecution doesn't bring in the blood on Bryant's shirt as evidence
that he caused the injuries.)
|
| |
| |
kongwong@hotmail.com (Huang Gang) wrote in message news:<40fff905.0403110022.a6b2e9b@posting.google.com>...
tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote in message news:<c2n4if$8e0@rac2.wam.umd.edu>...
But that that ITSELF means the prosecution CANNOT use those very minor
injuries to prove she was raped.
Unless you purposely forget, the prosecution used those injuries to
support the accuser's rape claim. The defense just responding to what
the prosecution brought up.
I thought in your country, the accused have a right to confront
his/her accuser and the right to a fair trial. It hardly seem fair if
the evidence the prosecution uses are not allowed to be questioned.
Let this be a lesson as to what feminism does to a country's political
and legal systems.
|
| |
| |
Biznatch Hadhersnatch <biznatch_hadhersnatch@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<404F7FBB.B1B4AE29@yahoo.com>...
Miguel wrote:
Her sexual activities before and after the rape have no bearing on what
actually happened in that hotel room.
Cite even ONE other rape victim in all of history who ran off and had sex
with a co-worker within HOURS of being raped.
Name even ONE.
BTW, I think it's funny that you all know what the Houston 500 is.
BH
|
| |
| |
You're right, the Kobe Bryant case has set back rape victims, but not
because he gets to question his accuser about her sexual activity
proximate to her encounter with him, but rather because the case was
brought in the first place. Before Kobe, Eagle County and District
Attorney Mark Hurlbert, were notorious for dropping rape cases, indeed
some of his employees resigned for that reason.
One case in particular stands out, a young woman, Melissa Holcomb, was
visiting Eagle County when, an intruder, Daniel Alan Orzech, entered
her hotel room while she slept, and raped her. She immediately called
the police, and her roommate was a witness. Daniel Alan Orzech was
apprehended fleeing the state, and he gave conflicting statements. Two
DA’s found probable cause and described both witnesses as
credible, but three days before the case was set to go to trial, Mark
Hurlbert called Melissa Holcomb to inform her that he was not going to
prosecute her case because he did not believe that he could obtain a
conviction.
Melissa Holcomb doesn't have a mental health history that challenges
her credibility, like Kobe's accuser. She did not go to a strange
man's room late at night, like Kobe's accuser. She did not engage in
some consensual intimacy, like Kobe's accuser. She did not delay
reporting the incident, like Kobe's accuser. She did not have multiple
sexual encounters before and after the contact, like Kobe's accuser.
She did not provide DNA that did not implicate the man she was
accusing, but that did implicate several other men, like Kobe's
accuser. And unlike Kobe's accuser, she had a witness... Clearly,
there's a disparate standard operating in Eagle County.
Who among us, if accused of injuring someone, would not believe that
we would be allowed to show a jury that they were hit by several
people before and after our encounter with them. Otherwise, like in
the Martha Stewart case, the absence of an alternative explanation,
leaves the jury with no choice except to infer that the answer must be
found in the facts that they have. So, if Kobe's accuser has a nick
in her vagina that she ascribes to an encounter with Kobe, he has the
right to show that there are other explanations for her "injury".
Otherwise, it would force the inferrence that the "injury" was caused
by him.
|
| |
| |
Huang Gang wrote:
tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote in message news:<c2n4if$8e0@rac2.wam.umd.edu>...
But that that ITSELF means the prosecution CANNOT use those very minor
injuries to prove she was raped.
Thank god. SOMEONE gets it. I didn't think it was that hard.
Unless you purposely forget, the prosecution used those injuries to
support the accuser's rape claim. The defense just responding to what
the prosecution brought up.
Mmmm hmmm.
I thought in your country, the accused have a right to confront
his/her accuser and the right to a fair trial. It hardly seem fair if
the evidence the prosecution uses are not allowed to be questioned.
Amen.
These guys don't actually want a fair trial -- they just want to make
sure that their idea of "protecting the accuser" is upheld, even at the
cost of justice.
--
MF
See L.A. for class
On March 21 in Los Angeles, former Celtics great (who broke the hearts
of many Lakers fans) Bill Russell had his picture on the scoreboard.
The fans gave him a long ovation.
The previous night, when it was announced that Shaq O'Neal scored his
20,000th point, the fans in Sacramento booed. Then, to make matters
worse, a the game ball was defaced, presumably by a Sacramento fan.
Clinton E. Parish
Sacramento
Rest in Peace, Francis Dayle "Chick" Hearn : 1916 - 2002
|
| |
| |
AnotherView wrote:
You're right, the Kobe Bryant case has set back rape victims, but not
because he gets to question his accuser about her sexual activity
proximate to her encounter with him, but rather because the case was
brought in the first place. Before Kobe, Eagle County and District
Attorney Mark Hurlbert, were notorious for dropping rape cases, indeed
some of his employees resigned for that reason.
One case in particular stands out, a young woman, Melissa Holcomb, was
visiting Eagle County when, an intruder, Daniel Alan Orzech, entered
her hotel room while she slept, and raped her. She immediately called
the police, and her roommate was a witness. Daniel Alan Orzech was
apprehended fleeing the state, and he gave conflicting statements. Two
DA’s found probable cause and described both witnesses as
credible, but three days before the case was set to go to trial, Mark
Hurlbert called Melissa Holcomb to inform her that he was not going to
prosecute her case because he did not believe that he could obtain a
conviction.
Melissa Holcomb doesn't have a mental health history that challenges
her credibility, like Kobe's accuser. She did not go to a strange
man's room late at night, like Kobe's accuser. She did not engage in
some consensual intimacy, like Kobe's accuser. She did not delay
reporting the incident, like Kobe's accuser. She did not have multiple
sexual encounters before and after the contact, like Kobe's accuser.
She did not provide DNA that did not implicate the man she was
accusing, but that did implicate several other men, like Kobe's
accuser. And unlike Kobe's accuser, she had a witness... Clearly,
there's a disparate standard operating in Eagle County.
Who among us, if accused of injuring someone, would not believe that
we would be allowed to show a jury that they were hit by several
people before and after our encounter with them. Otherwise, like in
the Martha Stewart case, the absence of an alternative explanation,
leaves the jury with no choice except to infer that the answer must be
found in the facts that they have. So, if Kobe's accuser has a nick
in her vagina that she ascribes to an encounter with Kobe, he has the
right to show that there are other explanations for her "injury".
Otherwise, it would force the inferrence that the "injury" was caused
by him.
Youch... nice take, man.
--
MF
See L.A. for class
On March 21 in Los Angeles, former Celtics great (who broke the hearts
of many Lakers fans) Bill Russell had his picture on the scoreboard.
The fans gave him a long ovation.
The previous night, when it was announced that Shaq O'Neal scored his
20,000th point, the fans in Sacramento booed. Then, to make matters
worse, a the game ball was defaced, presumably by a Sacramento fan.
Clinton E. Parish
Sacramento
Rest in Peace, Francis Dayle "Chick" Hearn : 1916 - 2002
|
| |
| |
You're right, the Kobe Bryant case has set back rape victims, but not
because he gets to question his accuser about her sexual activity
proximate to her encounter with him, but rather because the case was
brought in the first place. Before Kobe, Eagle County and District
Attorney Mark Hurlbert, were notorious for dropping rape cases, indeed
some of his employees resigned for that reason.
Clearly, there's a disparate standard operating in Eagle County.
Stories like this makes one wonder about Hurlbert's motivation for filing
the case against Kobe. Assuming the case described above happened as
reported, if Hurlbert didn't think he could get a conviction in this case,
how would he get a conviction with, what appears to be, flimsy evidence
against Kobe?
Could it be that Hurlbert did see the Kobe case as one big photo op.? Or
maybe he just figured that his re-election would be jeopardized if he didn't
file.
Regardless, everyday it appears more and more likely that the decision is
going to backfire on him.
Greg
|
| |
| |
Biznatch Hadhersnatch wrote:
Her sexual activities before and after the rape have no bearing on what actually happened in
that hotel room.
Seeing as you don't know what happened in that hotel room, what evidence
is relevant to you in trying to determine what actually happened in there?
BTW, I think it's funny that you all know what the Houston 500 is.
I don't know what the Houston 500 is.
|
| |
| |
Miguel <MickBarr@juno.com> wrote in message news:<1059aftg21b8m62@corp.supernews.com>...
Biznatch Hadhersnatch wrote:
Seeing as you don't know what happened in that hotel room, what evidence
is relevant to you in trying to determine what actually happened in there?
I don't know what the Houston 500 is.
Isn't it a Nascar event?
chuckle
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
