|
http://www.nypost.com/commentary/29906.htm
September 5, 2004 -- EVERY two minutes, a vic tim is sexually assaulted in
America. Every six min utes, a woman is raped.
In other words, somewhere in the United States there are 30 women who were
sexually assaulted in the last hour - 10 of whom were raped.
How many will not come forward after witnessing the treatment of the accuser
in the Kobe Bryant case? Even before the events in Colorado, less than half
of these victims would have reported the crime.
According to national statistics, 54 percent of victims of stranger rapes do
not report the rape.
If the rapist is an acquaintance or friend, this number rises to 61 percent,
and in the case of a current or former boyfriend or husband, 77 percent of
rapes go unreported.
The Kobe Bryant case will affect these statistics. It will affect what those
30 women raped and sexually assaulted this past hour will do.
The treatment of the Colorado accuser after reporting the rape was
unconscionable. She became the subject of ridicule and death threats,
forcing her to leave her home, her school and her family.
In short, her life became a living hell.
Her public humiliation will deter more victims from entering our criminal
justice system. As a result, district attorneys, like myself, will lose the
chance to bring many sexual predators to justice.
Our criminal-justice system has little to offer crime victims and even less
to rape victims. Indeed, the price of rape victims' cooperation to assist
the prosecution in sexual-assault cases may be too great.
Of course, Kobe Bryant is presumed innocent, and a jury would have
determined his guilt or non-guilt based on evidence fairly presented in a
court of law. However, because the accuser was beaten down before the
evidence could be presented, there will be no trial.
But make no mistake, a judge had already found that there was sufficient
evidence to hold him for a criminal trial.
The trashing of the accuser that took place in that courtroom in Colorado
would have amounted to slander if said outside on the courthouse steps.
These wily attorneys skirted the line to orchestrate a public poisoning of
the accuser; she was branded a slut, a bigot and mentally unstable by
well-paid defense attorneys ingeniously spreading rumor through court
documents.
What victim would go forward when outrageous courthouse blunders included
the repeated, unethical, and possibly illegal release of her name?
Curiously, none of these "accidents" were detrimental to the defense.
A rape-crisis counselor is under federal investigation for conspiracy to
sell the accuser's confidential file, and just this past week the sealed
witness list was "mysteriously" released.
And when her attorney complained about the distortions publicly leaked and
the unfair treatment, the court took the highly unusual move to expand the
gag order.
She was even stripped of the time-honored, statutorily sanctioned ability to
be called a "victim," this in spite of blood and bruises.
In essence, it was court-sanctioned open season on her life.
A defense strategy succeeds when the potential jury pool stops thinking
about whether the defendant is innocent and starts wondering if the victim
is guilty.
You can almost hear the public chorus, "We the jury find the victim guilty."
How many of us would go forward or allow our daughters to go forward under
these circumstances?
There are myriad apologies in the Kobe Bryant case: the apology of his
attorney for inadvertently using the accuser's name six times; the apology
of court personnel for inadvertently releasing confidential victim records;
and the apology of the defendant to his accuser - but these apologies will
never change the damage to her life and the impact on those women deciding
whether to come forward.
Maybe this travesty will produce a strengthened and uniform rape-shield law
that provides confidentiality and protection to the woman who never chose to
be a victim in the first place.
Maybe then the courts will be required to strictly enforce these laws.
And maybe then we'll have a criminal justice system for which none of us
need apologize.
|
| |
| |
<snip>
But make no mistake, a judge had already found that there was sufficient
evidence to hold him for a criminal trial.
<snip>
These wily attorneys skirted the line to orchestrate a public poisoning of
the accuser; she was branded a slut, a bigot and mentally unstable by
well-paid defense attorneys ingeniously spreading rumor through court
documents.
<snip>
Curiously, none of these "accidents" were detrimental to the defense.
<snip>
And when her attorney complained about the distortions publicly leaked and
the unfair treatment, the court took the highly unusual move to expand the
gag order.
<snip>
There are myriad apologies in the Kobe Bryant case: the apology of his
attorney for inadvertently using the accuser's name six times;
<snip>
And this is what Johnny Cochran and others PRAISE in a prosecuting attorney?
Mackey should have been found in contempt of court and fined for these
underhanded tactics.
Otter
|
| |
| |
in article chfhs9$i45@dispatch.concentric.net, s_knight8 at
s_knight8nospam@hotmail.com wrote on 9/5/04 10:20 AM:
http://www.nypost.com/commentary/29906.htm
September 5, 2004 -- EVERY two minutes, a victim is sexually assaulted in
America. Every six minutes, a woman is raped. In other words, somewhere in
the United States there are 30 women who were sexually assaulted in the last
hour - 10 of whom were raped.
How many will not come forward after witnessing the treatment of the accuser
in the Kobe Bryant case? Even before the events in Colorado, less than half
of these victims would have reported the crime.
Hopefully all of them that are false will be dissuaded. This case took a
whale of a lot of time and money!
According to national statistics, 54 percent of victims of stranger rapes do
not report the rape.
If the rapist is an acquaintance or friend, this number rises to 61 percent,
and in the case of a current or former boyfriend or husband, 77 percent of
rapes go unreported.
The Kobe Bryant case will affect these statistics. It will affect what those
30 women raped and sexually assaulted this past hour will do.
The treatment of the Colorado accuser after reporting the rape was
unconscionable. She became the subject of ridicule and death threats,
forcing her to leave her home, her school and her family.
In short, her life became a living hell.
Her public humiliation will deter more victims from entering our criminal
justice system. As a result, district attorneys, like myself, will lose the
chance to bring many sexual predators to justice.
If there had been even the slightest unambiguous evidence in this case and
if the accuser had just gone to the rape exam directly so they could find
only Kobe's DNA in her, then any two bit prosecutor could have won this case
even if Kobe was actually innocent.
Our criminal-justice system has little to offer crime victims and even less
to rape victims. Indeed, the price of rape victims' cooperation to assist
the prosecution in sexual-assault cases may be too great.
Of course, Kobe Bryant is presumed innocent, and a jury would have
determined his guilt or non-guilt based on evidence fairly presented in a
court of law. However, because the accuser was beaten down before the
evidence could be presented, there will be no trial.
If she is so beaten down then why is she going into an even messier civil
case?
But make no mistake, a judge had already found that there was sufficient
evidence to hold him for a criminal trial.
That judge didn't know she had lied about important evidence.
The trashing of the accuser that took place in that courtroom in Colorado
would have amounted to slander if said outside on the courthouse steps.
These wily attorneys skirted the line to orchestrate a public poisoning of
the accuser; she was branded a slut, a bigot and mentally unstable by
well-paid defense attorneys ingeniously spreading rumor through court
documents.
What victim would go forward when outrageous courthouse blunders included
the repeated, unethical, and possibly illegal release of her name?
Oh heavenly days! What a travesty! Kobe's name has been in print for a year
as a "alleged" rapist.
Curiously, none of these "accidents" were detrimental to the defense.
Oh really?! Where did the press the following false ideas?
1. Her vagina was torn requiring stitches.
2. Her neck was bruised.
3. Her clothes were torn.
4. Kobe has done this before.
5. Kobe's story was inconsistent.
6. Kobe offered her money.
A rape-crisis counselor is under federal investigation for conspiracy to
sell the accuser's confidential file, and just this past week the sealed
witness list was "mysteriously" released.
And when her attorney complained about the distortions publicly leaked and
the unfair treatment, the court took the highly unusual move to expand the
gag order.
She was even stripped of the time-honored, statutorily sanctioned ability to
be called a "victim," this in spite of blood and bruises.
She is not a victim. Never was, and never will be again. There are no
bruises. The blood wasn't even enough to be seen.
In essence, it was court-sanctioned open season on her life.
A defense strategy succeeds when the potential jury pool stops thinking
about whether the defendant is innocent and starts wondering if the victim
is guilty.
You can almost hear the public chorus, "We the jury find the victim guilty."
We might actually hear that verdict. She purposely had sex between the time
she was with Kobe and when she was examined. During that encounter with Mr.
X she got his semen all over her and inside her up to her cervix. When asked
if she had had sex after Kobe she said no, five times, several time under
oath. That denial allowed police to come to the logical conclusion that it
was Kobe's semen. That makes her guilty of tampering with evidence, perjury,
falsifying a police report, etc.
How many of us would go forward or allow our daughters to go forward under
these circumstances?
There are myriad apologies in the Kobe Bryant case: the apology of his
attorney for inadvertently using the accuser's name six times; the apology
of court personnel for inadvertently releasing confidential victim records;
and the apology of the defendant to his accuser - but these apologies will
never change the damage to her life and the impact on those women deciding
whether to come forward.
Maybe this travesty will produce a strengthened and uniform rape-shield law
that provides confidentiality and protection to the woman who never chose to
be a victim in the first place.
Maybe then the courts will be required to strictly enforce these laws.
And maybe then we'll have a criminal justice system for which none of us
need apologize.
And maybe the justice system worked just fine.
George Evans
|
| |
| |
http://www.nypost.com/commentary/29906.htm
September 5, 2004 -- EVERY two minutes, a vic tim is sexually assaulted in
America. Every six min utes, a woman is raped.
In other words, somewhere in the United States there are 30 women who were
sexually assaulted in the last hour - 10 of whom were raped.
Umm... that's out of a population of 120 million women. It looks
impressive,
but rape is still a rare crime, less than 5 percent of violent crimes.
How many will not come forward after witnessing the treatment of the
accuser
in the Kobe Bryant case? Even before the events in Colorado, less than
half
of these victims would have reported the crime.
Umm... less than half of ALL violent crimes are reported.
According to national statistics, 54 percent of victims of stranger rapes
do
not report the rape.
Again, no different from other violent crimes.
If the rapist is an acquaintance or friend, this number rises to 61
percent,
and in the case of a current or former boyfriend or husband, 77 percent of
rapes go unreported.
Fairly consistent with intimate violence in general -- except that male
victims of intimate violence are even less likely to report it than that.
The Kobe Bryant case will affect these statistics. It will affect what
those
30 women raped and sexually assaulted this past hour will do.
No -- it will affect what women considering FALSELY accusing a man
of rape will do. Which would be a good thing -- right?
The treatment of the Colorado accuser after reporting the rape was
unconscionable.
Yes -- she should have been told to take a hike. She should be
paying back the $20,000 she received from victims compensation
funds (after refusing to testify, she's surely not entitled to them).
Hell -- she should be on trial herself.
|
| |
| |
<snip>
<snip>
<snip>
<snip>
<snip>
<snip>
And this is what Johnny Cochran and others PRAISE in a prosecuting
attorney?
Defense attorney.
Mackey should have been found in contempt of court and fined for these
underhanded tactics.
Bull#@($.
|
| |
| |
"s_knight8" <s_knight8nospam@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:chfhs9$i45@dispatch.concentric.net...
http://www.nypost.com/commentary/29906.htm
Of course, Kobe Bryant is presumed innocent, and a jury would have
determined his guilt or non-guilt based on evidence fairly presented in a
court of law. However, because the accuser was beaten down before the
evidence could be presented, there will be no trial.
That's incredibly cheritable. There was barely a case to go forward with.
Not deterred by the fact that he'd been sidelined by a rogue sheriff,
the DA went on, even when semen and hairs from different men
(not the accused) showed up during her rape exam, even though
the nurses doubted her story, even though her highly unstable
history became known. Hurlbert finally started to crumble, because
after his star medical examiner said he couldn't be certain, after
it became clear that there were loads of potential jurors who
wouldn't buy her story, and the defense filed for dismissal because
the prosecution sat on dr. Baden's opinion for weeks, and the
girl in question filed a civil suit before the criminal trial had properly
started, she finally bowed out of testifying.
I guess finally even for Hurlbert, it became to much to go ahead
and subpoena her as a hostile witness in her own case.
Alex
|
| |
| |
In article <8VM_c.12180$54.170603@typhoon.sonic.net>,
Michael Snyder <msnyder@redhat.com> wrote:
No -- it will affect what women considering FALSELY accusing a man
of rape will do. Which would be a good thing -- right?
This pious pronouncement has been brought to you by a false child
molestation accuser.
|
| |
| |
"Michael Snyder" <msnyder@redhat.com> wrote in news:iWM_c.12181$54.170545
@typhoon.sonic.net:
And this is what Johnny Cochran and others PRAISE in a prosecuting
attorney?
Defense attorney.
I've seen this particular slip way too many times in these kinds of cases
to chalk it up to the odd accident. Some people really do consider the
accuser in a rape case the defendant and the defense the prosecution, which
is so screwed up I can't begin to approach it.
--Robert
--
***
My Head Is Filled with Yeast
http://www.livejournal.com/users/spimby/
|
| |
| |
Defense attorney.
Ooops. My bad.
Bull#@($.
No, it's not BS. Judges are cracking down more and more on attorneys who
behave inappropriately in the courtroom just as they SAY they are on
attorneys bringing "frivolous lawsuits" to court. Mackey was wrong. The
judge could have censured her and should have, IMHO.
Otter
|
| |
| |
On 5 Sep 2004 19:23:35 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
In article <8VM_c.12180$54.170603@typhoon.sonic.net>,
Michael Snyder <msnyder@redhat.com> wrote:
This pious pronouncement has been brought to you by a false child
molestation accuser.
how do we know the accusation is false, were we there?
|
| |
| |
On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 15:19:58 -0600, otter <otter@oceanside.com> wrote:
<snip>
<snip>
<snip>
<snip>
<snip>
<snip>
And this is what Johnny Cochran and others PRAISE in a prosecuting attorney?
Mackey should have been found in contempt of court and fined for these
underhanded tactics.
So defense attorneys should be locked up for doing their jobs too?
First you asked for considering anyone guilty until proven otherwise.
Now you are asking to punish defense attorneys for doing their job.
One has to wonder how on Earth a psychopathic #@&@
like you is out on
the streets.
|
| |
| |
In article <f1enj016bdso73ekurct34u54vrsek3bm5@4ax.com>,
agakhan <agakhan@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 5 Sep 2004 19:23:35 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
how do we know the accusation is false, were we there?
Were you (and the mouse in your pocket) where?
|
| |
| |
On 5 Sep 2004 21:42:47 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
In article <f1enj016bdso73ekurct34u54vrsek3bm5@4ax.com>, agakhan <agakhan@yahoo.com> wrote: Were you (and the mouse in your pocket) where?
(royal we, thank you very much)
|
| |
| |
In article <o0hnj0d4ptpt9uf4avjf4kkqu315d5jpbj@4ax.com>,
agakhan <agakhan@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 5 Sep 2004 21:42:47 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
there where the alleged molestation took place.
(royal we, thank you very much)
There is no there. There's not even an alleged there.
Mikey didn't do a very good job of thinking his miscalculation
through, you see.
|
| |
| |
On 5 Sep 2004 22:12:30 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
In article <o0hnj0d4ptpt9uf4avjf4kkqu315d5jpbj@4ax.com>, agakhan <agakhan@yahoo.com> wrote: There is no there. There's not even an alleged there. Mikey didn't do a very good job of thinking his miscalculation through, you see.
unconvincing and morally despicable. why would you do that unless you
had something to hide?
|
| |
| |
In article <1hinj0p5eavekhofr4l1ubqtlarfref8sq@4ax.com>,
agakhan <agakhan@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 5 Sep 2004 22:12:30 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
i find your defense of trying to deflect blame onto mr. snyder wholly
unconvincing and morally despicable.
Blame for what?
|
| |
| |
This pious pronouncement has been
brought to you by a false child
molestation accuser.
Say no more.
<plonk>
|
| |
| |
Umm... that's out of a population of 120 million women. It looks
impressive,
but rape is still a rare crime, less than 5 percent of violent crimes.
Umm... less than half of ALL violent crimes are reported.
Right. In fact The Department of Justice data on victimization in 2001
(Table 91 Criminal Victimization in the United States--Percent distribution
of victimizations) shows that about 60% of crimes overall, and 50% of all
violent crimes are never reported.
According to national statistics, 54 percent of victims of stranger
rapes
do
not report the rape.
Again, no different from other violent crimes.
Fairly consistent with intimate violence in general -- except that male
victims of intimate violence are even less likely to report it than that.
No -- it will affect what women considering FALSELY accusing a man
of rape will do. Which would be a good thing -- right?
Yes -- she should have been told to take a hike. She should be
paying back the $20,000 she received from victims compensation
funds (after refusing to testify, she's surely not entitled to them).
Hell -- she should be on trial herself.
|
| |
| |
Mackey should have been found in contempt of court and fined for these
underhanded tactics.
Bull#@($.
No, it's not BS. Judges are cracking down more and more on attorneys who
behave inappropriately in the courtroom just as they SAY they are on
attorneys bringing "frivolous lawsuits" to court. Mackey was wrong. The
judge could have censured her and should have, IMHO.
The prosecution behaved more despicably. The judge consistently scolded the
prosecution for all their dirty tactics they used. Constantly delaying and
then trying to actually put words into the judges mouth, ignoring the
judge's orders, and trying to cut deals with him, which of course, didn't
amuse him. And of course, their last desperate act before dropping the case,
lying to the judge and defense about Michael Baden.
|
| |
| |
In article <413bf4a0$0$19712$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>,
Catullus <no_one@nowhere.com> wrote:
Right. In fact The Department of Justice data on victimization in 2001
(Table 91 Criminal Victimization in the United States--Percent distribution
of victimizations) shows that about 60% of crimes overall, and 50% of all
violent crimes are never reported.
Interesting typo in this document; a footnote says "Includes data [sic]
rape and sexual assault, not shown separately."
|
| |
| |
On 5 Sep 2004 23:56:45 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
In article <1hinj0p5eavekhofr4l1ubqtlarfref8sq@4ax.com>, agakhan <agakhan@yahoo.com> wrote: Blame for what?
blame him for "miscalculating," which is merely a variant of the nuts
and sluts defense. why not stick to the real point, which is the
accusation of child molestation against you. i find your evasiveness
quite revealing.
|
| |
| |
In article <dfapj09mreg1ercmceb7rt7gjfa5fiolov@4ax.com>,
agakhan <agakhan@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 5 Sep 2004 23:56:45 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
don't avoid the argument at hand with another evasive question. you
blame him for "miscalculating," which is merely a variant of the nuts
and sluts defense. why not stick to the real point, which is the
accusation of child molestation against you. i find your evasiveness
quite revealing.
No, you don't. But your willingness to lie repeatedly about a serious
matter in order to try and suppress an opposing point of view is duly
noted. It is *possible* that Kate Faber lied about being raped. But it
is absolutely certain that you have shown yourself to be utterly lacking
in character here today. And you can take that to the bank.
|
| |
| |
On 6 Sep 2004 16:19:22 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
In article <dfapj09mreg1ercmceb7rt7gjfa5fiolov@4ax.com>, agakhan <agakhan@yahoo.com> wrote: No, you don't. But your willingness to lie repeatedly about a serious matter in order to try and suppress an opposing point of view is duly noted. It is *possible* that Kate Faber lied about being raped. But it is absolutely certain that you have shown yourself to be utterly lacking in character here today. And you can take that to the bank.
of your mouth nevertheless.
|
| |
| |
In article <7hipj0hus6473vg5f583gvclhrufj46t27@4ax.com>,
agakhan <agakhan@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 6 Sep 2004 16:19:22 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
the bank is closed today. but you may want to take that shiny hook out
of your mouth nevertheless.
Projection. Why am I not surprised?
|
| |
| |
Cretin agakhan <agakhan@yahoo.com> wrote:
tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
the bank is closed today. but you may want to take that shiny hook out
of your mouth nevertheless.
<snicker> When a cretin is wilting, he says some variation of "I could kick
back if I wanted to, but I'm just a troll." Cretins are a sad but funny
lot.
|
| |
| |
On 7 Sep 2004 14:08:20 GMT, John Griffin <thathillbilly@yahooie.com>
wrote:
Cretin agakhan <agakhan@yahoo.com> wrote:
<snicker> When a cretin is wilting, he says some variation of "I could kick
back if I wanted to, but I'm just a troll." Cretins are a sad but funny
lot.
yes, of course you are right, i was actually serious in accusing tjab
of child molestation. and no doubt you took such offense to my
contention of just playing around with her because you yourself are a
wilted pederast who wished to recruit her into your kiddie porn ring.
congratulations on seeing right through me, you shrill castrato.
|
| |
| |
Dumb wench agakhan <agakhan@yahoo.com> wrote:
John Griffin <thathillbilly@yahooie.com> wrote:
yes, of course you are right, i was actually serious in accusing tjab
of child molestation. and no doubt you took such offense to my
contention of just playing around with her because
(Silent): as proven by your laughing at me,...
you yourself are a
wilted pederast who wished to recruit her into your kiddie porn ring.
congratulations on seeing right through me, you shrill castrato.
Oh, brother...there's a semblance of life in this one--not nearly as much
as she sees in her delusions, but maybe enough for an occasional laugh
for a few days. That's the most @$#*ing idiotic "logic" I've ever seen.
That could have been a reasonable Kindergartenish outburst if you could
find a way to affect a bit more maturity. I especially like to see the
"no caps" affectation in slower life forms of your kind. With you, it
worked well with the "little kid trying to be lofty" act, making you look
like a cheap comedy figure.
Anyway, #@&@
, you seriously need to try to dispossess yourself of the
stupid notion that you're able to offend someone. Your attempts to do so
are barely worth a chuckle, but your belief that you can change your
world by slinging such insipidity around is hilarious.
Please post another tantrum, airhead. Do better. Lots better. I want to
see just how far into the depths of pure stupidity you can drive
yourself.
|
| |
| |
agakhan wrote:
On 5 Sep 2004 19:23:35 -0400, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote:
how do we know the accusation is false, were we there?
No, but someone else's sperm was.
Annie
--
"Some mornings, it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps."
Emo Philips
|
| |
| |
the usenet roaming pederast, John Griffin <thathillbilly@yahooie.com>
wrote in a shrill castrato:
Oh, brother...there's a semblance of life in this one--not nearly as much
as she sees in her delusions, but maybe enough for an occasional laugh
for a few days. That's the most @$#*ing idiotic "logic" I've ever seen.
That could have been a reasonable Kindergartenish outburst if you could
find a way to affect a bit more maturity. I especially like to see the
"no caps" affectation in slower life forms of your kind. With you, it
worked well with the "little kid trying to be lofty" act, making you look
like a cheap comedy figure.
Anyway, #@&@
, you seriously need to try to dispossess yourself of the
stupid notion that you're able to offend someone. Your attempts to do so
are barely worth a chuckle, but your belief that you can change your
world by slinging such insipidity around is hilarious.
Please post another tantrum, airhead. Do better. Lots better. I want to
see just how far into the depths of pure stupidity you can drive
yourself.
no, mister, i don't want to see your little wee-wee... stop flirting
with me, i'm a couple of decades past your target audience.
*ker-plonk*
|
| |
| |
agakhan <agakhan@yahoo.com> wrote:
the usenet roaming pederast, John Griffin <thathillbilly@yahooie.com>
wrote in a shrill castrato:
no, mister, i don't want to see your little wee-wee... stop flirting
with me, i'm a couple of decades past your target audience.
*ker-plonk*
Another mouthy little chicken#@($ bites the dust and hauls ass away as
fast as he can, shouting preschoolish "tough talk" and absurd fanfaronade
over his shoulder...
Hilarious.
|
| |
| |
|
