|
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=ap-bryantcase&prov=ap&type=lgns
VAIL, Colo. (AP) -- Prosecutors in the Kobe Bryant sexual assault case said
in interviews this week that they were not concerned with a ruling that many
legal experts said would have torpedoed their chances of convicting the NBA
star.
In separate interviews with two Colorado newspapers, District Attorney Mark
Hurlbert and deputy prosecutor Dana Easter said the judge's decision to
allow the defense to use evidence about the alleged victim's sexual
activities in the three days before her hospital examination would not have
hurt their case.
``The 72-hour window was not a big deal, given all the evidence in this
case,'' Hurlbert told the Vail Daily for a story in Friday editions.
Easter said defense investigators ``talked to every person she ever kissed
and never found anyone who said they had sex with her between June 28 and
June 30, and no one after the incident.''
Defense attorneys had said they would argue the 20-year-old woman had sex
with men other than Bryant in the three days, including somebody in the 15
hours following her encounter with Bryant. The defense was expected to use
the allegation, denied by the woman's attorneys, to undermine the accuser's
credibility.
But Hurlbert said the physical evidence was strong enough that the case
would not have hinged on whether jurors put more credence in her testimony
or Bryant's.
``There was so much good, credible evidence in this case. There was
certainly other evidence that would have been introduced at trial,'' he
said. ``Bryant's statements have not yet been heard by the public. Her
outcry, her demeanor. There was strong evidence, and it was a strong case.
``Compared to other cases I've won, it stacks up well,'' he said.
He said given the chance, he would file the charges again. At the alleged
victim's request, however, prosecutors agreed they will not refile charges
against Bryant.
|
| |
| |
On 09 Sep 2004 21:31:21 EDT, "s_knight8" <s_knight8nospam@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Easter said defense investigators ``talked to every person she ever kissed
and never found anyone who said they had sex with her between June 28 and
June 30, and no one after the incident.''
So DNA evidence are lying?
ROFL.
Nice case you had.
|
| |
| |
On 09 Sep 2004 21:31:21 EDT, "s_knight8" <s_knight8nospam@hotmail.com>
wrote:
So DNA evidence are lying?
ROFL.
Nice case you had.
Don't you watch cold case files? DNA in her clothes could have been
deposited weeks or even years before. Not that there aren't other problems.
|
| |
| |
Don't you watch cold case files? DNA in her clothes could have been
deposited weeks or even years before. Not that there aren't other
problems.
Don't you watch the news? The DNA wasn't just found in her clothes, it was
found in her cervix...
Damn this is getting stale.
|
| |
| |
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=ap-bryantcase&prov=ap&type=lgns
VAIL, Colo. (AP) -- Prosecutors in the Kobe Bryant sexual assault case
said
in interviews this week that they were not concerned with a ruling that
many
legal experts said would have torpedoed their chances of convicting the
NBA
star.
Is this guy Kings fan? Excuses, excuses. It's the ref's fault, no doubt.
In separate interviews with two Colorado newspapers, District Attorney
Mark
Hurlbert and deputy prosecutor Dana Easter said the judge's decision to
allow the defense to use evidence about the alleged victim's sexual
activities in the three days before her hospital examination would not
have
hurt their case.
``The 72-hour window was not a big deal, given all the evidence in this
case,'' Hurlbert told the Vail Daily for a story in Friday editions.
Easter said defense investigators ``talked to every person she ever kissed
and never found anyone who said they had sex with her between June 28 and
June 30, and no one after the incident.''
Defense attorneys had said they would argue the 20-year-old woman had sex
with men other than Bryant in the three days, including somebody in the 15
hours following her encounter with Bryant. The defense was expected to use
the allegation, denied by the woman's attorneys, to undermine the
accuser's
credibility.
But Hurlbert said the physical evidence was strong enough that the case
would not have hinged on whether jurors put more credence in her testimony
or Bryant's.
``There was so much good, credible evidence in this case. There was
certainly other evidence that would have been introduced at trial,'' he
said. ``Bryant's statements have not yet been heard by the public. Her
outcry, her demeanor. There was strong evidence, and it was a strong case.
``Compared to other cases I've won, it stacks up well,'' he said.
He said given the chance, he would file the charges again. At the alleged
victim's request, however, prosecutors agreed they will not refile charges
against Bryant.
|
| |
| |
On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 09:51:36 -0400, "John LaVoy"
<jlavoy@pobox.upenn.edu> wrote:
Don't you watch cold case files? DNA in her clothes could have been
deposited weeks or even years before. Not that there aren't other problems.
Thats the problem with all the Faber-the-whore jockers. Don't get all
the facts straight. Do you really think the DA had a strong case,
he'll drop out? If Faber really believed she could win, she'll pull
out of criminal case? Thats why she wanted a civil case, more leeway
and wants the payday like the skank she is.
|
| |
| |
The DA thanked the heavens on the arrangement for Faber to pull out.
Most legal experts agree that the case had little chance of winning.
Now since it never went to trial, he can spout all the bull #@($ that
he had a great chance of winning.
Wow, he must have great DNA evidence. Oh wait he didnt, even the
government's own crime lab will testify for the defense. Good thing
Faber is such an innocent and mentally stable person. Oh wait, she's
an attention grabing whore who attempted suicide multiple times and
sex with multiple partners before and after the Kobe incident.
The residents must be so proud that he wasted hundreds of thousands of
dollars...
|
| |
| |
"s_knight8" <s_knight8nospam@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:chr059$s3r@dispatch.concentric.net...
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=ap-bryantcase&prov=ap&type=lgns
``Compared to other cases I've won, it stacks up well,'' he said.
Wow. Maybe his past cases should be looked into.
Alex
|
| |
| |
"s_knight8" <s_knight8nospam@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:chr059$s3r@dispatch.concentric.net...
Wow. Maybe his past cases should be looked into.
He didn't fare too well in his last 2 rape cases. One of them, he dismissed
right before trial, just like this case. The other case, he lost last year,
with the same judge, who accused him of "procedural subterfuge".
--
"The Federal Reserve(Banks) are one of the most corrupt institutions the
world has ever seen. There is not a man within the sound of my voice who
does not know that this Nation is run by the International Bankers."
- Congressman Louis McFadden
|
| |
| |
On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 09:51:36 -0400,
In article <chsbh9$4chr$2@netnews.upenn.edu>
"John LaVoy" <jlavoy@pobox.upenn.edu> wrote:
Don't you watch cold case files?
Hey that's one of my favorite shows.
DNA in her clothes could have been
deposited weeks or even years before. Not that there aren't other problems.
Problem is, that means Kobe or the defense planned this before the
incident, which is impossible, or that the swabs were taken only from
her clothes which is not true.
|
| |
| |
In article <0Oi0d.30124$lP4.2005396@news20.bellglobal.com>
"Nexus" <nexus@attglobal.net> wrote:
On 09 Sep 2004 21:31:21 EDT, "s_knight8" <s_knight8nospam@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Easter said defense investigators ``talked to every person she ever
kissed
and never found anyone who said they had sex with her between June 28
and
June 30, and no one after the incident.''
So DNA evidence are lying?
ROFL.
Nice case you had.
Don't you watch cold case files? DNA in her clothes could have been
deposited weeks or even years before. Not that there aren't other
problems.
Don't you watch the news? The DNA wasn't just found in her clothes, it was
found in her cervix...
Damn this is getting stale.
The inner side of her thighs, and the back of the neck too.
|
| |
| |
Sports Fan <sports@fan.home> wrote in message news:<onu6k0d5n6sgogli06822sddgfqdtmf5ie@4ax.com>...
In article <0Oi0d.30124$lP4.2005396@news20.bellglobal.com>
"Nexus" <nexus@attglobal.net> wrote:
On 09 Sep 2004 21:31:21 EDT, "s_knight8" <s_knight8nospam@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Easter said defense investigators ``talked to every person she ever
kissed
and never found anyone who said they had sex with her between June 28
and
June 30, and no one after the incident.''
So DNA evidence are lying?
ROFL.
Nice case you had.
Don't you watch cold case files? DNA in her clothes could have been
deposited weeks or even years before. Not that there aren't other
problems.
The inner side of her thighs, and the back of the neck too.
---
But were they Kobe's or a third party? And wouldn't criminalist be
able to tell old DNA stains diluted by water and contaminated by say
laundry detergent from fresh stains?
----->Hunter
|
| |
| |
In article <32f29bdf.0409111853.1e34659c@posting.google.com>
buffhunter@my-deja.com (Hunter) wrote:
Sports Fan <sports@fan.home> wrote in message news:<onu6k0d5n6sgogli06822sddgfqdtmf5ie@4ax.com>...
---
But were they Kobe's or a third party?
Had both.
And wouldn't criminalist be
able to tell old DNA stains diluted by water and contaminated by say
laundry detergent from fresh stains?
CBI's own expert witness dismissed that theory.
|
| |
| |
Sports Fan <sports@fan.home> wrote in message news:<s999k0lv59qdfh8oijclo05hfb20bkim95@4ax.com>...
In article <32f29bdf.0409111853.1e34659c@posting.google.com>
buffhunter@my-deja.com (Hunter) wrote:
Had both.
----
If that is true then I have to ask which was fresher? Kobe's or the
third party? I am trying to establish a time line. If Kobe's fresher
then it is a sign that she had sex with someone before Kobe and does
not support her having sex after Kobe. If the third party's fresher
then it is definate that she had sex a supposed 15 hours after being
with Kobe.
CBI's own expert witness dismissed that theory.
----
Ok, then the two samples can't contaminate each other.
I swear, Kobe should welcome the law suit if all of this is true.
---->Hunter
|
| |
| |
"Hunter" <buffhunter@my-deja.com> schreef in bericht
news:32f29bdf.0409130013.63975110@posting.google.com...
Sports Fan <sports@fan.home> wrote in message news:<s999k0lv59qdfh8oijclo05hfb20bkim95@4ax.com>...
----
If that is true then I have to ask which was fresher? Kobe's or the
third party? I am trying to establish a time line. If Kobe's fresher
then it is a sign that she had sex with someone before Kobe and does
not support her having sex after Kobe. If the third party's fresher
then it is definate that she had sex a supposed 15 hours after being
with Kobe.
It doesn't matter either way.
Katelyn's dna was found on Kobe. Mr. X's dna on Katelyn,
but wasn't on Kobe.
Case closed.
The only way the amount that was recovered can be on Katelyn and
not on Kobe, is because she had sex with Mr. X. AFTER she
had sex with Kobe.
Which is what any reasonable juror would conclude, therefore
the case should never have been brought.
Alex
|
| |
| |
"Alex" <avdeelen.REMOFE@wanadoo.nl> wrote
Katelyn's dna was found on Kobe. Mr. X's dna on Katelyn,
but wasn't on Kobe.
The only way the amount that was recovered can be on Katelyn and
not on Kobe, is because she had sex with Mr. X. AFTER she
had sex with Kobe.
Which may be an interesting observation, if true- but has absolutely no
material relevance to the event in the hotel room.
If true, it speaks only to the omission about an event *after* being
assaulted- she probably ommitted the oral sex part whilst reporting in front
of her parents as well. She is, after all, not even old enough to drink hard
liquor or write a contract. Her naivete` certainly plays a part in this
whole circumstance.
Which is what any reasonable juror would conclude, therefore
the case should never have been brought.
What crap.
You've heard from people who relate stories of women having sex after a
rape- I have such an anecdote myself, and the woman had been violently
stranger-raped.
While the accuser's behaviour might be unusual, it certainly doesn't negate
the assault at all.
Further, the accuser was gagged from responding to that hypothesis about her
actions, and denies them, and is proceeding in civil court with the
expectation of confronting them.
Any woman juror would have seen that point as the strawman it has been since
it's inception.
Chas
|
| |
| |
"Chas" <chasclementsSPOOF@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<jcmdnTw46cfmT9jcRVn-sA@comcast.com>...
"Alex" <avdeelen.REMOFE@wanadoo.nl> wrote
Which may be an interesting observation, if true- but has absolutely no
material relevance to the event in the hotel room.
If true, it speaks only to the omission about an event *after* being
assaulted- she probably ommitted the oral sex part whilst reporting in front
of her parents as well.
---
As a preamble, I don't care how many sex partners she had in the days
BEFORE her encounter with Kobe. I does not matter. If she had sex with
100 dudes during the week before and Kobe would had been 101 but she
said no, and Kobe ignored her, then it was rape. That said, IF she was
raped and she had sex 15 hours after with another person, I would
think that would be an insight as to what went on in that hotel room
since from what I have heard and read forceable rape is a highly
traumatic event in a person's life. Some women develop a prejudice
against men as a result. I would think, after what Kobe allegedly had
done to her, she would not be in any mood for sex from anyone. If
there is such a thing as comfort sex from a loved one after such a
trauma, I have never heard of it (I in fact asked that question about
post rape "comfort sex" as in had anyone had heard of it in this group
recently but did not get a reply).
She is, after all, not even old enough to drink hard liquor or write a
contract. Her naivete` certainly plays a part in this
whole circumstance.
---
She is old enough to vote, surve in the military, get married without
her parent's permission and, ironically, surve on juries. She is
young, but not a kid in the narrow sense of the word.
What crap.
You've heard from people who relate stories of women having sex after a
rape- I have such an anecdote myself, and the woman had been violently
stranger-raped.
While the accuser's behaviour might be unusual, it certainly doesn't negate
the assault at all.
----
You just answered a question of mine above, that women who have been
raped have had voluntary sex after a rape, but 15 hours? Also, didn't
her boyfriend know about the rape at the time? I don't know about
anyone else but it would creep me out and be the description of
insensitivity to have sex with a recent rape victim, both for her sake
and my own feelings, assuming it did happen.
Further, the accuser was gagged from responding to that hypothesis about her
actions, and denies them, and is proceeding in civil court with the
expectation of confronting them.
---
Good. I want to know while all parties are under oath what went on and
what evidence for and against both the accuser and Kobe are valid. I
hope Kobe will stand and fight.
Any woman juror would have seen that point as the strawman it has been since
it's inception.
Chas
----
Sorry, a woman's behavior after a incident comes under scritiny as
well as the accused. The evidence you cite of post rape voluntary sex
you have admitted is anadotal. I have never heard of it previously. I
am sure a lot of people, women not excluded, have not heard about it.
This will be a major stumbling block for her in any juror's eyes, man
or woman.
----->Hunter
|
| |
| |
"Hunter" <buffhunter@my-deja.com> wrote
.....That said, IF she was
raped and she had sex 15 hours after with another person, I would
think that would be an insight as to what went on in that hotel room
since from what I have heard and read forceable rape is a highly
traumatic event in a person's life. Some women develop a prejudice
against men as a result. I would think, after what Kobe allegedly had
done to her, she would not be in any mood for sex from anyone. If
there is such a thing as comfort sex from a loved one after such a
trauma, I have never heard of it (I in fact asked that question about
post rape "comfort sex" as in had anyone had heard of it in this group
recently but did not get a reply).
In fact, there were a couple of posters here that related just such events,
including myself. It isn't unknown at all, and seemingly not as uncommon as
one might assume.
You just answered a question of mine above, that women who have been
raped have had voluntary sex after a rape, but 15 hours? Also, didn't
her boyfriend know about the rape at the time?
You have to remember that she denies, through her attorneys, that any such
sex happened at all- much less the hypotheses about why the non-event might
have happened.
Sorry, a woman's behavior after a incident comes under scritiny as
well as the accused. The evidence you cite of post rape voluntary sex
you have admitted is anadotal. I have never heard of it previously. I
am sure a lot of people, women not excluded, have not heard about it.
This will be a major stumbling block for her in any juror's eyes, man
or woman.
again- the whole question of whether the post-rape sex happened is not
answered yet. I'm sure she's prepared to address it, considering that she's
opened her own venue for a trial.
Chas
|
| |
| |
On 13 Sep 2004 01:13:56 -0700, buffhunter@my-deja.com (Hunter) wrote:
Sports Fan <sports@fan.home> wrote in message news:<s999k0lv59qdfh8oijclo05hfb20bkim95@4ax.com>...
----
If that is true then I have to ask which was fresher? Kobe's or the
third party? I am trying to establish a time line. If Kobe's fresher
then it is a sign that she had sex with someone before Kobe and does
not support her having sex after Kobe. If the third party's fresher
then it is definate that she had sex a supposed 15 hours after being
with Kobe.
DNA swabs from Kobe had only the accuser's DNA in it.
DNA swabs from the accuser had Kobe's DNA AND the third party, which was
named Mr. X.
Since the swabs were taken after the alleged incident, there can only be
2 possibilities:
1. Kobe took a shower with a magical soap that eliminated only Mr X's
DNA traces (this theory I have shamelessly stolen from Larry Coon.).
2. The accuser had sex with Mr. X. AFTER the alleged incident.
And wouldn't criminalist be
able to tell old DNA stains diluted by water and contaminated by say
laundry detergent from fresh stains?
CBI's own expert witness dismissed that theory.
----
Ok, then the two samples can't contaminate each other.
I swear, Kobe should welcome the law suit if all of this is true.
I sure hope he does something to crush that skank, but not sure if his
lawyers will back him up in that, or if not he is just too tired and
wants to put all this nonsense behind him.
|
| |
| |
On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 11:01:46 -0600, "Chas"
<chasclementsSPOOF@comcast.net> wrote:
"Alex" <avdeelen.REMOFE@wanadoo.nl> wrote
Which may be an interesting observation, if true- but has absolutely no
material relevance to the event in the hotel room.
If true, it speaks only to the omission about an event *after* being
assaulted- she probably ommitted the oral sex part whilst reporting in front
of her parents as well. She is, after all, not even old enough to drink hard
liquor or write a contract. Her naivete` certainly plays a part in this
whole circumstance.
What crap.
You've heard from people who relate stories of women having sex after a
rape- I have such an anecdote myself, and the woman had been violently
stranger-raped.
While the accuser's behaviour might be unusual, it certainly doesn't negate
the assault at all.
Further, the accuser was gagged from responding to that hypothesis about her
actions, and denies them, and is proceeding in civil court with the
expectation of confronting them.
Any woman juror would have seen that point as the strawman it has been since
it's inception.
You are just a pathetic #@($ peddler, chas.
Any unbiased and un poisoned jury would have seen that as a reasonable
doubt.
The so called injuries could have been caused by Mr. X, and a real rape
victim who claimed that she was so upset and traumatized would not go to
have sex with another man less than 15 hours after she was supposedly
raped.
|
| |
| |
On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 20:02:55 -0600, "Chas"
<chasclementsSPOOF@comcast.net> wrote:
You just answered a question of mine above, that women who have been
raped have had voluntary sex after a rape, but 15 hours? Also, didn't
her boyfriend know about the rape at the time?
You have to remember that she denies, through her attorneys, that any such
sex happened at all- much less the hypotheses about why the non-event might
have happened.
LOL.
Yeah, take the word of an already proven liar who couldn't get her own
story straight, through her attorneys.
Why would someone accusing someone else hire an attorney for a CRIMINAL
trial?
Simple, to make sure that she does not lie again.
Only chas and tjab cannot see that.
|
| |
| |
|
