|
http://www.vaildaily.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040901/BREAKING/409010
05
Judge Terry Ruckriegle dismissed sexual assault charges against Kobe Bryant
Wednesday evening when prosecutors and his accuser's attorneys said the
young woman did not want to continue.
"The victim is unable to go forward," said District Attorney Mark Hurlbert,
who oversaw prosecution of the NBA star that lasted more than a year.
Also at the victim's request the case will not be refiled, Hurlbert said.
Neither Bryant nor the woman were in court Wednesday. The woman's parents
were there, sit ting in the front row as they have been throughout the
hearings. The hearing to dismiss the case began at 5:45 p.m. and lasted 27
minutes.
District Judge Terry Ruckriegle asked Hurlbert if there was any other basis
for the prosecution's request for dismissal. Hurlbert said, "No your honor,
there is no other reason."
The woman's attorney, John Clune, said, "She completely and whole-heartedly
agrees the case should not be refiled."
"My client's desire is to see an end to a very, very difficult period of her
life," Clune said.
Clune said the woman faced difficulties that were "unimaginable" and
hardships that were "staggering," including a phone call Clune received from
the FBI saying that the woman's counselor was being investigated for
conspiracy to sell her counseling files.
This on top of at least three death threats and thousands of harassing phone
calls, Clune said.
"If anyone paying attention to the case had any idea what one week of the
life of my client was like they would be astounded, as I've have been
astounded," Clune said.
The dismissal of the criminal case does not affect the woman's civil suit
against Bryant. That suit has been filed in federal court.
|
| |
| |
"s_knight8" <s_knight8nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<ch615h$944@dispatch.concentric.net>...
http://www.vaildaily.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040901/BREAKING/409010
05
Judge Terry Ruckriegle dismissed sexual assault charges against Kobe Bryant
Wednesday evening when prosecutors and his accuser's attorneys said the
young woman did not want to continue.
"The victim is unable to go forward," said District Attorney Mark Hurlbert,
who oversaw prosecution of the NBA star that lasted more than a year.
Also at the victim's request the case will not be refiled, Hurlbert said.
Neither Bryant nor the woman were in court Wednesday. The woman's parents
were there, sit ting in the front row as they have been throughout the
hearings. The hearing to dismiss the case began at 5:45 p.m. and lasted 27
minutes.
District Judge Terry Ruckriegle asked Hurlbert if there was any other basis
for the prosecution's request for dismissal. Hurlbert said, "No your honor,
there is no other reason."
The woman's attorney, John Clune, said, "She completely and whole-heartedly
agrees the case should not be refiled."
"My client's desire is to see an end to a very, very difficult period of her
life," Clune said.
Clune said the woman faced difficulties that were "unimaginable" and
hardships that were "staggering," including a phone call Clune received from
the FBI saying that the woman's counselor was being investigated for
conspiracy to sell her counseling files.
This on top of at least three death threats and thousands of harassing phone
calls, Clune said.
"If anyone paying attention to the case had any idea what one week of the
life of my client was like they would be astounded, as I've have been
astounded," Clune said.
The dismissal of the criminal case does not affect the woman's civil suit
against Bryant. That suit has been filed in federal court.
He got off a lot easier than sports writer Bob Greene, who was fired
from the Chicago Tribune. Remember that in 2002? He got fire for
having an affair with a woman of LEGAL AGE, who he did a story on -
the affair happened AFTER THE STORY. The woman tried to shake him
down 15 years later, so he called the FBI.
|
| |
| |
On 1-Sep-2004, "s_knight8" <s_knight8nospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
The dismissal of the criminal case does not affect the woman's civil suit
against Bryant. That suit has been filed in federal court.
Frankly, I'd like to see Kobe turn around and sue her for lost wages and
other compensatory damages.
|
| |
| |
"Argyle" <argyle@priest.com> wrote
Frankly, I'd like to see Kobe turn around and sue her for lost wages and
other compensatory damages.
Not after admitting it in his apology. The statement can't be used in her
civil suit, but if he counter-claimed, it probably could. The defeat of his
counter-claim would make her claim, heard afterwards, a slam-dunk.
Chas
|
| |
| |
In article <H_idnXsOBOz2_qrcRVn-uw@comcast.com>,
Chas <chasclementsSPOOF@comcast.net> wrote:
"Argyle" <argyle@priest.com> wrote
Not after admitting it in his apology. The statement can't be used in her
civil suit,
At least that's what he's been quoted as saying she agreed to. Does he have
it in writing?
but if he counter-claimed, it probably could.
No question.
|
| |
| |
On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 12:15:52 -0600, "Chas"
<chasclementsSPOOF@comcast.net> wrote:
"Argyle" <argyle@priest.com> wrote
Not after admitting it in his apology.
He didn't, Douche bag.
He said it was consensual but now after what she has told him he
understands that she didn't review it as consensual.
Go get some education.
The statement can't be used in her
civil suit,
Then you should shut the @$#* up.
but if he counter-claimed, it probably could.
Probably?
So you're not sure?
Wake us up when you are.
The defeat of his counter-claim would make her claim, heard afterwards, a slam-dunk.
Wasn't that what you morons were saying all this time?
The DA can prove it, the accuser had a slam-dunk case?
It turned out that the only slam-dunk was the one Kobe had.
Along with the facial that the DA got.
|
| |
| |
On 2 Sep 2004 14:21:42 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
In article <H_idnXsOBOz2_qrcRVn-uw@comcast.com>,
Chas <chasclementsSPOOF@comcast.net> wrote:
At least that's what he's been quoted as saying she agreed to. Does he have
it in writing?
No question.
You 2 morons are really ignorant.
|
| |
| |
The DA was a dork.
On 2 Sep 2004 14:21:42 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
You 2 morons are really ignorant.
|
| |
| |
|
