← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · kminta
Thread ID: 14890 | Posts: 11 | Started: 2004-09-02
2004-09-02 01:16 | User Profile
[I]I think it's safe to say that most of us saw this coming. I personally think that the whole thing was orchestrated to manipulate public response. Because most blacks didn't even know who Kobe Bryant was, what choice was left but to drop the case.[/I]
[I]After all this, maybe Mr. Bryant will now think twice before he decides to cheat on his wife again.[/I]
[B][URL=http://abcnews.go.com/sections/GMA/US/kobe_bryant_dismiss_040901-1.html]Case Closed[/URL][/B] [B]Charge Against Kobe Bryant Dropped; Bryant Apologizes, But Maintains Innocence[/B]
[I]By Ellen Davis and Bill Redeker[/I]
[B]E A G L E, Colo., Sept. 1, 2004[/B] ââ¬â A judge dismissed the sexual assault charge against Kobe Bryant today after prosecutors made it clear the alleged victim refused to testify. Bryant maintained he did not rape the young woman, but apologized to her and her family.
Noting that the alleged victim was "unable to go forward," prosecutors filed a motion to dismiss the case this afternoon. Judge Terry Ruckriegle granted the request.
The charge was dismissed with prejudice, meaning it cannot be refiled at a future date. Bryant's statement was issued with the understanding it cannot be used in the civil suit the woman has filed against him.
Opening statements in the criminal trial had been expected to begin Tuesday, with prospective jurors being interviewed this week.
The Los Angeles Lakers star was accused of raping the young woman on June 30, 2003, at an Eagle resort where she worked and he was a guest. He pleaded not guilty to one felony count of sexual assault.
Bryant, 26, has admitted having sex with the woman, who was 19 at the time, but claims it was consensual.
If convicted of felony sexual assault, Bryant could have faced four years to life in prison or 20 years to life on probation, and a fine up to $750,000.
The woman's attorney, John Clune, said his client has been through an extremely difficult time over the past 14 months and was disturbed by a series of courthouse mistakes that included the release of her name and medical history and defense allegations about her sexual activities.
"When this case ends she does not want to be brought back into the criminal process," Clune told the judge.
"The difficulties that this case has imposed on this woman the past year are unimaginable," he said.
Ruckriegle admitted mistakes had been made by the court and took full responsibility.
[B]Motion Seen as Embarrassment for Prosecutors[/B]
The 11th-hour withdrawal from the criminal case can only be seen as an embarrassment for the embattled prosecution, which has struggled for months against defense claims that DNA evidence indicated the alleged victim had sex with another man after her encounter with Bryant. The woman has denied that.
The alleged victim filed a civil suit against Bryant on Aug. 10, seeking monetary damages of $75,000.
The dropping of the criminal case does not affect the civil suit. The young woman is expected to testify in that case.
2004-09-02 01:19 | User Profile
Just goes to show you... the NAACP is right sometimes. A black man can't get a fair trial in the U.S.
2004-09-02 02:36 | User Profile
Who cares about black basketball players? They are the scum of the earth.
2004-09-02 02:50 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Bardamu]Who cares about black basketball players? They are the scum of the earth.[/QUOTE] And none too bright. A few years ago, Shaquille O'Neal, until recently a star player on the Las Angeles Lakers, upon returning from a trip to Greece to play an exhibition game, was asked if he had visited the Parthenon. His reply-- "I can't remember the names of all the clubs we went to."
:oh:
2004-09-02 06:14 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Bardamu]Who cares about black basketball players? They are the scum of the earth.[/QUOTE]
Which is precisely why some of us were hoping (albeit without much optimism) that he would receive a lengthy term in prison for his crime(s). Oh well, I suppose there's still an outside chance her civil suit against him will strip him of some of his unearned wealth....
2004-09-02 13:36 | User Profile
With the wrong jury, the evidence doesn't matter.
2004-09-02 14:06 | User Profile
All too true. [QUOTE]". . . basketball players? They are the scum of the earth."[/QUOTE]
He is a sick animal and he did it!
2004-09-02 14:27 | User Profile
The alleged victim filed a civil suit against Bryant on Aug. 10, seeking monetary damages of $75,000.
Am I the only one who's disturbed by this "civil suit" business? Naturally, we all want to see this dusky rapist punished for his outrages, but the practice of launching "civil suits" against people who haven't been found guilty of criminal charges seems to me to be used most often as a weapon by people whose allegations are of dubious legal value.
"Civil suits" are the preferred bludgeon of antigun crusaders and shady shyster outfits like the SPLC. The rules of evidence in civil cases are a lot looser than in criminal trials, and the outcome strongly favors the side who can afford the highest-priced lawyers -- or which can wield the most powerful political pressure, as in "wrongful death" suits against White cops by the drooling famblies (sic) of the latest "urban teen" to be gunned down during a botched drug deal.
Yes, once in a while civil suits do serve justice, as in the case of o.j. chimpson. But mostly they are getting to be a dangerous form of barratry that sidesteps the criminal-justice system altogether. Imagine shooting a drugged-up thief who's entered your house in the middle of the night, not being charged with any crime, but then finding yourself slapped with an expensive "civil suit" by the scum's survivors. And oh, yes, it [I]does* happen.
Using the civil courts as vehicles to exact punishment upon -- or extort money from -- those whom the criminal courts have exonerated is becoming a booming business, and dangerously so.
2004-09-02 15:12 | User Profile
This serves notice to any White sluts looking to bed down a buck Negro: Don't complain after you allow your own vaginal violation by one of these specimens. This woman who bedded Kobe probably welcomed it at first, but he probably forced her to take it up the poop chute and that's where she balked. She has no defense, therefore. She is a waste of White genes; polluted and violated. As for Kobe, he ain't the first nor the last black man to cheat on his wife and get away with it.
2004-09-02 15:23 | User Profile
[QUOTE=arkady]Using the civil courts as vehicles to exact punishment upon -- or extort money from -- those whom the criminal courts have exonerated is becoming a booming business, and dangerously so.[/QUOTE]
You bet. But Jews aren't about to let go of one of their most cherished sources of income and subversion. So until they are knocked from power, you will see precious little in the way of reform. Common sense ought to crush out the remaining Dicky Scruggs's and John Edwards's who make killings with this dirty business.
[QUOTE=Happy Hacker]With the wrong jury, the evidence doesn't matter.[/QUOTE]
Or, from the perspective of the bad guys, with the RIGHT jury, the evidence doesn't matter. O.J. is Exhibit A. Race is the driver of jury decisions, not evidence. A box full of blackies doesn't care if the black defendant saunters in and admits on the stand that he did it. They'll acquit. In a civil case, it's about the same thing.
2004-09-02 15:35 | User Profile
[QUOTE=arkady]Am I the only one who's disturbed by this "civil suit" business? [/QUOTE]
The lower standard of proof for a civil suit means it should be expected that there will be be people found "not guilty" (by whatever reason, rather than found "innocent") but found liable in a civil suit.
What I really object to in the civil suit business is that there appears to be no concept of reasonableness in the awards. Thus, people are bankrupted for life for non-crimes because a jury really wants to punish them for something other than the alleged wrongdoing itself.
There should be caps punative awards, not to exceed twice actual damages with both actual and punative damages reduced by the percent of contribution to the incident of harm.