|
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylc=X3oDMTBpZmFlcXBpBF9TAzk1ODYxOTQ4BHNlYw
N0aA--?slug=ap-bryantcase&prov=ap&type=lgns
DENVER (AP) -- Attorneys for the woman accusing Kobe Bryant of rape say they
should be allowed to ask the Los Angeles Lakers star about his sexual
history as part of her civil lawsuit, according to court documents prepared
Thursday.
Granting Bryant's request to bar such questions during an upcoming
deposition would be special treatment because Bryant's defense attorneys
have made clear they intend to use the woman's sexual history against her,
the woman's lawyers argued in the documents.
Bryant's attorneys have asked a judge to bar questions about what they
called his other ``consensual relationships.''
L. Lin Wood, one of the woman's attorneys, provided the documents to The
Associated Press on Thursday. He said they would be filed Monday as part of
the woman's civil lawsuit against Bryant, and that weather had delayed their
delivery Thursday to U.S. District Court in Denver.
Messages left for Bryant's lawyers were not returned Thursday.
The criminal case against Bryant collapsed in September after the woman said
she no longer wanted to participate. She filed the civil lawsuit three weeks
earlier seeking undisclosed money damages.
The woman alleges in her lawsuit that she has suffered emotional injuries
since her encounter with Bryant at a Vail-area hotel last year. Bryant has
said the sex was consensual.
The filing prepared Thursday argues Bryant's sexual history is ``plainly
relevant'' to the civil lawsuit.
The document refers to statements Bryant made to Eagle County sheriff's
investigators shortly before his arrest. During the taped interview, Bryant
says he had frequent similar sexual encounters with another woman.
Bryant had been scheduled to give sworn testimony in the case earlier this
month, but the deposition was delayed because both sides couldn't agree on
what kinds of questions could be asked. Court documents suggest his
deposition could be held in February.
|
| |
| |
Lets hear about the attorneys' sex lives too, for that matter. And the
judge's. What he wearing under those robes anyway?
I'm sensible
|
| |
| |
They want to know more about Kobe's strangling tactics
during what he calls "consensual sex". I think we know
it's not sensual for sure and probably paid for!
|
| |
| |
In article <1103911587.092858.319530@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
"Captain Sensible" <soycapitansensible@yahoo.com> wrote:
Lets hear about the attorneys' sex lives too, for that matter. And the
judge's. What he wearing under those robes anyway?
It is always amazing to see how the her attorneys, the so called victim
advocates and feminists wanted to keep the accuser's sexual and medical
history out of the criminal trial claiming that it is irrelevant, now
Kobe' sexual history is relevant just because those hypocrites want to
make it relevant.
|
| |
| |
On Sat, 25 Dec 2004 15:15:38 -0800, Sports Fan <sports@fan.home> wrote:
In article <1103911587.092858.319530@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
"Captain Sensible" <soycapitansensible@yahoo.com> wrote:
It is always amazing to see how the her attorneys, the so called victim
advocates and feminists wanted to keep the accuser's sexual and medical
history out of the criminal trial claiming that it is irrelevant, now
Kobe' sexual history is relevant just because those hypocrites want to
make it relevant.
Uhh, didn't Kobe's lawyers pretty much succeed in making her history
relevant? Why can't her lawyers now do the same to Kobe?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"There would be a lot more civility in this world if people
didn't take that as an invitation to walk all over you"
- (Calvin and Hobbes)
|
| |
| |
In article <bctrs055c6qvrci077ioa2mq2esc94uj72@4ax.com>
EGK <me@privacy.net> wrote:
On Sat, 25 Dec 2004 15:15:38 -0800, Sports Fan <sports@fan.home> wrote:
Uhh, didn't Kobe's lawyers pretty much succeed in making her history
relevant?
Not her medical and psychological history.
Have you read about the case?
For her sexual history, they were limited to the events that surrounded
the incident., within 72 hours.
Why can't her lawyers now do the same to Kobe?
Because she is the accuser, not the otherwise, and she has to present a
REAL argument on why that should be allowed.
|
| |
| |
"EGK" <me@privacy.net> schreef in bericht
news:bctrs055c6qvrci077ioa2mq2esc94uj72@4ax.com...
On Sat, 25 Dec 2004 15:15:38 -0800, Sports Fan <sports@fan.home> wrote:
Uhh, didn't Kobe's lawyers pretty much succeed in making her history
relevant? Why can't her lawyers now do the same to Kobe?
Because they can't establish a "pattern" of rape. Let alone
raping hotel workers.
On the other hand, if they look into Katelyn Faber's history,
they'll find a pattern of flakey behavior, mental problems,
drug and alcohol abuse, sex addiction, and maybe even a
pattern of making false accusations.
Remember that this is the girl who was sent to rehab, and
then BECAME PREGNANT IN REHAB from one of her
co-addicts.
Nobody in their right mind is going to believe that she went
to Kobe's room for an autograph, kissed consensually
for "5 minutes", and then changed her mind. Or that
"Kobe just snapped".
The criminal case went nowhere, and it is a surprise to
me that they still have the gall to keep harping about a
civil case.
The truth is that they're just fishing for a settlement.
Alex
|
| |
| |
"EGK" <me@privacy.net> schreef in bericht
Because they can't establish a "pattern" of rape. Let alone
raping hotel workers.
On the other hand, if they look into Katelyn Faber's history,
they'll find a pattern of flakey behavior, mental problems,
drug and alcohol abuse, sex addiction, and maybe even a
pattern of making false accusations.
Remember that this is the girl who was sent to rehab, and
then BECAME PREGNANT IN REHAB from one of her
co-addicts.
Don't take your eye off the ball that when the cops tested her underwear
for Kobe's DNA they found the semen from THREE different men on them.
|
| |
| |
In article <O9xzd.7931$L7.607@trnddc05> krp <web2457k@verizon.net>
wrote:
Don't take your eye off the ball that when the cops tested her underwear
for Kobe's DNA they found the semen from THREE different men on them.
Of course dear. When you don't take your meds, the voices do have a
nasty habit returning.
--
Lady Chatterly
"Are you replying to me, or to the Bot known as Lady Chatterly? A
rather well put together version of the old computer Liza artificial
personality." -- Gunner
|
| |
| |
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 08:40:04 +0100, "Alex" <avdeelen.REMOFE@wanadoo.nl>
wrote:
"EGK" <me@privacy.net> schreef in bericht
news:bctrs055c6qvrci077ioa2mq2esc94uj72@4ax.com...
Because they can't establish a "pattern" of rape. Let alone
raping hotel workers.
You have no idea what they could establish if they get a hold of Kobe's
history. That's the point.
So far all we know about Kobe is he has a self-admitted history of cheating
on his wife. We also have a claim from the party at Shaq's house that says
Kobe made aggressive and unwanted advances on another woman. Who knows what
else they can dig up?
On the other hand, if they look into Katelyn Faber's history,
they'll find a pattern of flakey behavior, mental problems,
drug and alcohol abuse, sex addiction, and maybe even a
pattern of making false accusations.
All the things you listed they got because they delved in to her history.
His lawyers were doing their jobs. Just like hers are now.
The truth is that they're just fishing for a settlement.
In the words of LA's self coined biggest fan, You can't handle the truth.
I don't think any of us will ever be privy to it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"There would be a lot more civility in this world if people
didn't take that as an invitation to walk all over you"
- (Calvin and Hobbes)
|
| |
| |
"krp" <web2457k@verizon.net> schreef in bericht
news:O9xzd.7931$L7.607@trnddc05...
Remember that this is the girl who was sent to rehab, and
then BECAME PREGNANT IN REHAB from one of her
co-addicts.
Don't take your eye off the ball that when the cops tested her underwear
for Kobe's DNA they found the semen from THREE different men on them.
Hey, who's looking for minor details. ;-)
The clincher was that Mr. X/Matt Herr's dna was found on Katelyn,
but not on Kobe. Strongly suggesting she had sex with Matt Herr
after she had sex with Kobe and before she went to the police station.
Alex
|
| |
| |
"EGK" <me@privacy.net> schreef in bericht news:1ents0lgpmq72rt170539lsrg0baahti2m@4ax.com...
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 08:40:04 +0100, "Alex" <avdeelen.REMOFE@wanadoo.nl>
wrote:
You have no idea what they could establish if they get a hold of Kobe's
history. That's the point.
I know that for the last year or so the the media and prosecution
attorneys have been turning America upside down looking for
previous rapes and couldn't find a single one.
So far all we know about Kobe is he has a self-admitted history of cheating
on his wife.
And that he's had consensual sex with hotel workers before.
We also have a claim from the party at Shaq's house that says
Kobe made aggressive and unwanted advances on another woman.
Tendentious nonsense from Jeff Shapiro. The truth is that
this encounter too was consensual. And that the woman
in question only came forward after prosecutors threatened
her with subpoenas.
Who knows what else they can dig up?
Trust me, whatever there is is already out. It has been a
year, and there has been huge publicity, including in the
tabloids. If there was a girl out there raped by Kobe Bryant,
she would have been found by the prosecution, or by the
tabloids and she'd be cashing in right now.
Katelyn on the other hand has been a fount stories from
old friends, there was the Canadian incident, the REAL
history of mental issues and drug addiction, etc.
The only thing that hasn't completely come out yet
is if she made false accusations in the past.
On the other hand, if they look into Katelyn Faber's history,
they'll find a pattern of flakey behavior, mental problems,
drug and alcohol abuse, sex addiction, and maybe even a
pattern of making false accusations.
All the things you listed they got because they delved in to her history.
His lawyers were doing their jobs. Just like hers are now.
I think you must have missed the last year, when Hurlbert
and all his detectives were scouring the land for Kobe's
previous sexual contacts. They found nothing non-consensual.
Alex
|
| |
| |
In article <1ents0lgpmq72rt170539lsrg0baahti2m@4ax.com>
EGK <me@privacy.net> wrote:
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 08:40:04 +0100, "Alex" <avdeelen.REMOFE@wanadoo.nl>
wrote:
You have no idea what they could establish if they get a hold of Kobe's
history. That's the point.
Nor do you.
So far all we know about Kobe is he has a self-admitted history of cheating
on his wife.
Cheating doesn't mean that he has a history of rape.
We also have a claim from the party at Shaq's house that says
Kobe made aggressive and unwanted advances on another woman.
Who knows what else they can dig up?
I am sure that any celebrity's sexual history is similar or worse.
All the things you listed they got because they delved in to her history.
Actions and history, and so did the detectives.
His lawyers were doing their jobs. Just like hers are now.
There is a difference.
His lawyers are DEFENDING him, and her lawyers are SUING him, with a big
reward if they won.
The truth is that they're just fishing for a settlement.
In the words of LA's self coined biggest fan, You can't handle the truth.
You should look in the mirror before posting such accusations.
I don't think any of us will ever be privy to it.
You don't speak for "us", and at least for me.
|
| |
| |
Lady Chatterly wrote:
In article <O9xzd.7931$L7.607@trnddc05> krp <web2457k@verizon.net>
wrote:
Of course dear. When you don't take your meds, the voices do have a
nasty habit returning.
Those must be some powerful voices if they leave stains.
--
Lady Chatterly
Regards...
|
| |
| |
In article <41cf090a$0$4915$b83b6cc0@news.wanadoo.nl>,
Alex <avdeelen.REMOFE@wanadoo.nl> wrote:
Trust me, whatever there is is already out. It has been a
year, and there has been huge publicity, including in the
tabloids. If there was a girl out there raped by Kobe Bryant,
she would have been found by the prosecution, or by the
tabloids and she'd be cashing in right now.
Clearly you have a very high opinion of women.
|
| |
| |
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 13:07:20 -0800, Sports Fan <sports@fan.home> wrote:
In article <1ents0lgpmq72rt170539lsrg0baahti2m@4ax.com>
EGK <me@privacy.net> wrote:
Nor do you.
Cheating doesn't mean that he has a history of rape.
I am sure that any celebrity's sexual history is similar or worse.
Actions and history, and so did the detectives.
There is a difference.
His lawyers are DEFENDING him, and her lawyers are SUING him, with a big
reward if they won.
The truth is that they're just fishing for a settlement.
You should look in the mirror before posting such accusations.
You don't speak for "us", and at least for me.
I think I see why so many in here dismiss you as a Kobe jock sniffer, Sports
Fan. There was nothing unreasonable about what I posted. You simply can't
fathom it. If i'm not speaking for you then pray tell, please clue us in on
how YOU know the truth? Were you there? Nowhere did I say Kobe was guilty
of anything but being a cheater. I don't know and unless you really are
riding around in his jock, you don't either. The lawyers are just doing
what they're hired to do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"There would be a lot more civility in this world if people
didn't take that as an invitation to walk all over you"
- (Calvin and Hobbes)
|
| |
| |
In article <unfus0tp3iv7poa44op4cphit7s12i7sp7@4ax.com> EGK
<me@privacy.net> wrote:
I think I see why so many in here dismiss you as a Kobe jock sniffer, Sports
Fan. There was nothing unreasonable about what I posted. You simply can't
fathom it. If i'm not speaking for you then pray tell, please clue us in on
how YOU know the truth? Were you there? Nowhere did I say Kobe was guilty
of anything but being a cheater. I don't know and unless you really are
riding around in his jock, you don't either. The lawyers are just doing
what they're hired to do.
Why are you irritated you do not know and unless they really are
riding around in his jock?
--
Lady Chatterly
"A turing test is not infallible..... -- The Poster With The Longest
Name On A Public Newsgroup (not including fish, meat, and other frozen
foods)
|
| |
| |
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 23:19:46 GMT, Lady Chatterly <me@catcher.in.the.rye>
wrote:
In article <unfus0tp3iv7poa44op4cphit7s12i7sp7@4ax.com> EGK
<me@privacy.net> wrote:
Why are you irritated you do not know and unless they really are
riding around in his jock?
Huh? English isn't your first language I take it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"There would be a lot more civility in this world if people
didn't take that as an invitation to walk all over you"
- (Calvin and Hobbes)
|
| |
| |
In article <trius018vci6eatggovkr6an9tc09o32t4@4ax.com> EGK <me@privacy.net> wrote:
Huh? English isn't your first language I take it?
Can you guys take this to somewhere else?
--
Lady Chatterly
"Pssttt...Chatterly is a bot..." -- Spike 'Toliet Sprayer' Jackson
|
| |
| |
In article <trius018vci6eatggovkr6an9tc09o32t4@4ax.com>, EGK <me@privacy.net>
wrote:
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 23:19:46 GMT, Lady Chatterly <me@catcher.in.the.rye>
wrote:
Huh? English isn't your first language I take it?
deliberate stupidity
arf meow arf
cthulu loves you
he loves the little children
with ketchup please
|
| |
| |
In article <unfus0tp3iv7poa44op4cphit7s12i7sp7@4ax.com>
EGK <me@privacy.net> wrote:
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 13:07:20 -0800, Sports Fan <sports@fan.home> wrote:
I think I see why so many in here dismiss you as a Kobe jock sniffer, Sports
Fan.
You're still under the impression that you speak for many.
And no, I am not a "jock sniffer" for anyone.
I just value something that this country was built on, innocent until
proven guilty.
There was nothing unreasonable about what I posted.
Start with you assuming that you speak for all of us, and work your way
up.
You simply can't
fathom it. If i'm not speaking for you then pray tell,
I cannot believe that someone is THIS arrogant to think that he speaks
for others, given the fact that you don't know most of the people in
all those newsgroups that this post was cross posted to, and no one has
given you power to speak for him/her.
please clue us
Who's "us"?
You're still in denial.
in on how YOU know the truth? Were you there?
Where and when exactly did I say that I know the truth?
You charged at someone telling him that he doesn't know anything.
I simply reminded you of the fact that you are the in the same position.
Go back and read the post that you replied to, carefully this time, and
if you still unable to see what I have posted then I suggest that you
should attend some reading comprehension classes.
Nowhere did I say Kobe was guilty
of anything but being a cheater.
You started building a theory based on some news that he made some
sexual advances on some girl in party, and he had a cheated on his wife.
You brought that up in the context that her Lawyers are fighting to get
that history admitted.
I don't know
Then if you don't stop telling others that they should shut up because
they don't, or start practicing what you preach.
and unless you really are
riding around in his jock,
Yawn.
Another old and tired blame bait.
If you are objective and looking for facts instead of riding the
anti-Kobe bandwagon then you must riding his jock, sniffing his jock,
....etc
Grow up, dude, this arguing style gets you nowhere.
you don't either.
Where did I say that I know the truth?
I use what was made public so far.
Nowhere in those documents there is a proof beyond reasonable doubt that
Kobe is guilty, otherwise it is the duty of the Judge to refuse dropping
the case.
The lawyers are just doing
what they're hired to do.
You finally got one thing right.
|
| |
| |
In article <trius018vci6eatggovkr6an9tc09o32t4@4ax.com>
EGK <me@privacy.net> wrote:
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 23:19:46 GMT, Lady Chatterly <me@catcher.in.the.rye>
wrote:
Huh? English isn't your first language I take it?
You are replying to a known kook.
Add this header in your kill file:
Mail-To-News-Contact: abuse@dizum.com
Or
Mail-To-News-Contact:
And your reading of these newsgroups will be a more pleasant experience.
|
| |
| |
In article <O9xzd.7931$L7.607@trnddc05> krp <web2457k@verizon.net>
wrote:
And that was on her clean underwear that she just changed to lol
|
| |
| |
In article <uumus0pa1hb7loentfbr08i5lmfjgkn537@4ax.com> Sports Fan
<sports@fan.home> wrote:
In article <unfus0tp3iv7poa44op4cphit7s12i7sp7@4ax.com>
EGK <me@privacy.net> wrote:
You're still under the impression that you speak for many.
So what if they are still under the impression that they speak for
many? What are you?
And no, I am not a "jock sniffer" for anyone.
I just value something that this country was built on, innocent until
proven guilty.
Why does it make you glad to be not a jock sniffer for anyone?
There was nothing unreasonable about what I posted.
Start with you assuming that you speak for all of us, and work your way
up.
Damn! That's funnier than #@($! But seriously, what's with the grand
conspiracy and UFO crappola?
You simply can't
fathom it. If i'm not speaking for you then pray tell,
I cannot believe that someone is THIS arrogant to think that he speaks
for others, given the fact that you don't know most of the people in
all those newsgroups that this post was cross posted to, and no one has
given you power to speak for him/her.
How do you know you cannot believe that someone is this arrogant to
think that he speaks for others?
please clue us
Who's "us"?
You're still in denial.
Do you think us is?
in on how YOU know the truth? Were you there?
Where and when exactly did I say that I know the truth?
You charged at someone telling him that he doesn't know anything.
I simply reminded you of the fact that you are the in the same position.
Were you there.
Go back and read the post that you replied to, carefully this time, and
if you still unable to see what I have posted then I suggest that you
should attend some reading comprehension classes.
Not everything is as it seems Dick Tracy.
Nowhere did I say Kobe was guilty
of anything but being a cheater.
You started building a theory based on some news that he made some
sexual advances on some girl in party, and he had a cheated on his wife.
We all know he's an attention slut. What type of slut are you?
You brought th<SPLORK!>
That I feel like tickling your stupid bone is only relevant to the
flonk. That you are humping my post like a #@&@
in heat is your
problem.
I don't know
Then if you don't stop telling others that they should shut up because
they don't, or start practicing what you preach.
Are you positive that is why?
and unless you really are
riding around in his jock,
Yawn.
*yawn*
Another old and tired blame bait.
If you are objective and looking for facts instead of riding the
anti-Kobe bandwagon then you must riding his jock, sniffing his jock,
....etc
So what if you think that they are objective and looking for facts
instead of riding the anti kobe bandwagon then they must riding his
jock? What are you?
Grow up, dude, this arguing style gets you nowhere.
Your head is so far up his ass one might postulate that he has two
brains.
you don't either.
Where did I say that I know the truth?
I use what was made public so far.
Nowhere in those documents there is a proof beyond reasonable doubt that
Kobe is guilty, otherwise it is the duty of the Judge to refuse dropping
the case.
Perhaps he's suffering from a case of false mammary syndrome...
The lawyers are just doing
what they're hired to do.
You finally got one thing right.
It is been nice stalking with you.
_~
--
Lady Chatterly
"This is hilarious. Watching people unable to stop responding to it
gives bot a whole new definition." -- Woodshifter
|
| |
| |
"EGK" <me@privacy.net> schreef in bericht
news:unfus0tp3iv7poa44op4cphit7s12i7sp7@4ax.com...
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 13:07:20 -0800, Sports Fan <sports@fan.home> wrote:
I think I see why so many in here dismiss you as a Kobe jock sniffer, Sports
Fan.
It is telling that instead of facts, all you have are personal attacks.
Which is pretty much how the evidence of this case breaks down -
the facts don't look good for Katelyn Faber.
Alex
|
| |
| |
In article <41cfecaf$0$65733$abc4f4c3@news.wanadoo.nl>
"Alex" <avdeelen.REMOFE@wanadoo.nl> wrote:
"EGK" <me@privacy.net> schreef in bericht
news:unfus0tp3iv7poa44op4cphit7s12i7sp7@4ax.com...
It is telling that instead of facts, all you have are personal attacks.
That all he managed to post so far, along with the assumption that he
speaks for all of "us", which he is unable to understand why he cannot.
Which is pretty much how the evidence of this case breaks down -
the facts don't look good for Katelyn Faber.
Now you'll be accused of being a "Kobe jock sniffer", since you dared to
post some facts and not theories.
|
| |
| |
"tjab" <tjab@wam.umd.edu> schreef in bericht news:cqnb18$n51@rac1.wam.umd.edu...
In article <41cf090a$0$4915$b83b6cc0@news.wanadoo.nl>, Alex <avdeelen.REMOFE@wanadoo.nl> wrote: Clearly you have a very high opinion of women.
Main Entry: ad hominem
Pronunciation: (')ad-'h-m&-"nem, -n&m
Function: adjective
Etymology: New Latin, literally, to the person
1 : appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect
2 : marked by an attack on an opponent's character rather
than by an answer to the contentions made
Alex
|
| |
| |
In article <41d1b28a$0$31069$d5255a0c@news.wanadoo.nl>,
Alex <avdeelen.REMOFE@wanadoo.nl> wrote:
"tjab" <tjab@wam.umd.edu> schreef in bericht news:cqnb18$n51@rac1.wam.umd.edu...
From Merriam Webster's dictionary: http://www.m-w.com/
Main Entry: ad hominem
Pronunciation: (')ad-'h-m&-"nem, -n&m
Function: adjective
Etymology: New Latin, literally, to the person
1 : appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect
2 : marked by an attack on an opponent's character rather
than by an answer to the contentions made
Alex
A small correction: clearly you have a very high opinion
of "girls."
From Alex's post:
"If there was a girl out there raped by Kobe Bryant,
.... she'd be cashing in right now."
|
| |
| |
|
