I know little about the case, except what has been reported, but one thing I do know is that police and prosecutor “instincts” are worth precisely squat, and I am reminded of this every time some poor slob is freed 10 years after the fact by DNA evidence, that the police and cops were absolutley, positively sure did the deed.
There’s a biiiiiig difference between getting pulled into a broom closet and a consensual make out session. If Kobe were a 43-year old executive, I’d still ask the same questions.
As I said before, I’ve taken no sides this. My question still stands, though. If a couple engages in rough sex by way of mutual consent and the woman claims she’s been raped how can a man prove his innocence?
As you stated in your title, you’ve pretty much made up your mind so you don’t have to answer.
I know little about the case, except what has been reported, but one thing I do know is that police and prosecutor “instincts” are worth precisely squat, and I am reminded of this every time some poor slob is freed 10 years after the fact by DNA evidence, that the police and DA’s office was absolutley, positively sure did the deed.
Diogenes, the mere fact that he’s famous is what makes it plausible. She sure as hell wouldn’t go anywhere for rough sex with ME.
The more you try to make your case, the more this sounds like Rob Lowe all over again. Let’s wait to see how this pans out, OK?
If a woman claims she was raped then she has the burden of proof, not the man she’s accusing. That burden of proof looks like it’s going to be met, IMO, by the forensic evidence, She has physical injuries consistent with what she says happened and her blood is on Kobe’s clothes.
AFAIAC, the burden of proof now shifts to Kobe to prove that she wanted to be injured. If he can’t prove it then it comes down to personal credility. Who will the jury believe? The injuries have already been proven, the only question is did she want it. She says she didn’t. I personally find it implausible that she did.
This thread is about my personal gut reaction, I’m not trying to present a case to a jury. I just think that based on what came out today that he probably did it.
You still haven’t answered my question. How beat up would the victim have to be before a “consensual rough sex” scenario could be discarded as a theory?
The only way – and it is FAR from perfect – is to put the victim and the accused in front of the jury and let them judge the crediblity, demeanor, and testimony of the witnesses under cross examination. The jury will have to sift through what everyone says and try to reach a fair conclusion.
The interesting tactic of trying to skirt a rape shield law by claiming the victim had sex very recently is probably a good way to argue for a change in the existing law, or to make the potential jury pool question the existing law, or to get reprimanded by the judge. Maybe all of the above.
My first impression is that it violates the rape shield law. But, it is hard to argue that such evidence, if it exists, would not be probative in this case due to the nature of the physical evidence against the accused. Experts on these types of injuries might disagree. I don’t know.
Let’s wait to see how this pans out, OK?
Oh please. Why wait?
He will walk. He will walk even if a smoking gun videotape of the rape turns up. He is a celebrity, he is rich, his lawyers have ways of making the jury do what they want. If Kobe’s lawyers have a brain cell between them, they will make sure that jury is full of men who want to be Kobe and women who want to fuck him.
Worked for OJ, didn’t it?
Apples and oranges.
In this case the jury won’t hear DNA evidence for half a year. That would make me vote “whatever” to escape also.
I could make a hypothetical. Kobe likes the hands around the neck thing. The girl bruises easily. Him doing the same thing with his wife doesn’t bruise his wife, who, for the sake of this argument, doesn’t bruise easily.
He’s a big guy. She’s young and inexperienced. The size of him causes some tearing. She screams, possibly even screams rape. He stops. He yells at her. She leaves crying, determined to get even.
Implausible, sure. Not impossible.
Did he finish inside her? If he did, I’d have trouble believing he’s innocent. If he didn’t, I’d have trouble believing he’s guilty.
The “I have to be somewhere” argument is completely worthless. Have you never given in to a partner who ignored your pleas of “I’m going to be late for work”? I know I have been late more than once, even though I protested. Does that mean I was raped?
The “hands around the neck thing?”
Well, don’t I feel like a provincial all the sudden.
:shudder:
I had the same feeling watching The Sopranos last season.
Some people are freaky.
Has anyone here every seen the Rolling Stones documentary 25 X 5?
There’s some footage in there of band and some groupies (2? I forget how many) on the band’s charter plane. I think the “cameraman” turned the machine on after the action was well underway, but what was shown was Richards with one of the women’s legs on his shoulders as he spun her around wildly (she was also naked). Or maybe he was sort of tossing her around. Anyway, it was something that involved her being flung around like a rag doll, causing her to shriek, and not with pleasure.
My friend who showed me the video warned me ahead of time that this scene would be pretty rough. I didn’t ask him to turn it off, but I did have to take a breather afterwards, and clearly my defense mechanisms have pixillated the memory.
My point is, though, that these may be similar scenarios. There were and are a lot of women who wanted to have sex with the Rolling Stones. Maybe even all five of them at once. The groupies were on the plane because they wanted to be there, and knew that some kind of sex would take place…but I don’t think that one woman was entirely okay with what was being done to her.
Similarly, there are a lot of women (well, were) who want(ed) to have sex with Kobe Bryant. His accuser may well have gone to his hotel room willingly, but everything changes when you realize that you’re at this person’s mercy, and you don’t know quite what he’s capable of, but it could be anything.
Ellis, I’m not sure it’s plausible that he stopped, as a rape kit generally includes semen. Perhaps it didn’t and we haven’t heard about it yet, I don’t know.
What I’ve heard so far makes me think he did it, but the circumstances of my life (and the horrific response the girl has gotten from some quarters) don’t make me an objective observer, though I think I can judge the facts fairly. Anyway, like I said, I think he did it based on what I know at the moment. But there’s the matter of what I don’t know yet.
The hearing today was apparently pretty down and dirty and was suspended abruptly. Anyone know why Mackey would do this? She mentioned the accuser’s name SIX times (the judge reprimanded her and she said it was an accident, which just befuddles me), and then she threw out the random comment about sex with three men in three days. Why would she do that?
Airman, what the fuck? Someone got dissed by a cheerleader in 1982 or whenever, so that means that a rape victim will have to pay?
Why don’t we just compile the Men’s Bill of Rights?
Amendment 1: All males shall be issued a motor vehicle and provided with insurance at the age of 16.
Amendment 2: The right of a male to get laid by age 18, being necessary to preserve one’s Guy Credentials, shall not be infringed.
Amendment 3: Teases, being defined as females who wish to preserve their virginity despite having caused arousal in adolescent males, shall be displayed in the stocks for 30 days (first offense).
There are three basic defenses to a charge of rape:
- It never happened.
- It happened, but it was consensual.
- It happened, but it was some other guy, not me.
Date rapes are not conducive to #3. Injuries tend to weaken #2. Physical evidence tends to weaken #1.
If you have injuries to the complainant and a positive ID, rough sex becomes the only real possibility to argue.
That doesn’t mean that it wasn’t rough conseensual sex.
- Rick
Marley23: My complete WAG is that the defense is trying to prejudice people against the (alleged) victim. I can’t see how a competent attorney could screw that up six times.
Rilchiam, I don’t think Airman is condoning that. I think he was being cynical about the motivation of some male jurors when confronted with the “she’s just a tease, she led him on” accusations.
And Kobe admitted they had sex, so they’ve already thrown out #1 and #3.
Yes, I agree, Ferret. I gotta say, the nerve that woman had: claiming that she, a very high-priced defense attorney, screwed up like that six times? Yipes.
I’m sorry, the “three basic defenses” thing was Bricker. Not Rilchiam.
The really interesting thing is going to be Kobe’s (secretly recorded) statement to the police. If Kobe’s story doesn’t square with the physical evidence he’s really goinf to have a problem.