# Kobe Bryant rape accuser confessed to lying to police and the prosecution continued **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 10, 2004, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kobe-bryant-rape-accuser-confessed-to-lying-to-police-and-the-prosecution-continued/268495 "2004-10-10T18:34:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![launchpad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@launchpad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/launchpad)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2004, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kobe-bryant-rape-accuser-confessed-to-lying-to-police-and-the-prosecution-continued/268495/1 "2004-10-10T18:34:27Z")
[http://www.nydailynews.com/front/st...8p-206105c.html](http://www.nydailynews.com/front/st...8p-206105c.html) > **[Documents: Kobe accuser contacted mother](https://www.espn.com/nba/news/story?id=1897836)** > > The woman who accused NBA star Kobe Bryant of assault called her mother the day after the incident and begged her to come home, where she said: "Mom, I was raped last night," according to previously sealed documents released Friday. This is an outrage. How could any ethical person continue to try to put a man in prison for life, knowing the accuser admitted to lying about such an important detail as being forced to wash her face? ---
**Author:** ![launchpad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@launchpad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/launchpad)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2004, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kobe-bryant-rape-accuser-confessed-to-lying-to-police-and-the-prosecution-continued/268495/2 "2004-10-10T18:36:45Z")
Something got messed up with the first link. This should work: > **[Breaking News, World News, US and Local News - NY Daily News - New York Daily...](https://www.nydailynews.com/)** > > Find breaking US news, local New York news coverage, sports, entertainment news, celebrity gossip, autos, videos and photos at nydailynews.com. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2004, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kobe-bryant-rape-accuser-confessed-to-lying-to-police-and-the-prosecution-continued/268495/3 "2004-10-10T18:53:03Z")
> [@](#): > > knowing the accuser admitted to lying about such an important detail as being forced to wash her face? Really? While the incident (or lack) would provide the defense an opportunity to challenge her testimony, the three details about which she admits lying do not overturn the other testimony (such as that of the bellman who appears to have been the first to see her after she left Bryant’s room and trhe recollections her mother provided of their first conversation). I do not know what really happened that night, but this rant seems a bit odd: Why should the police simply drop the case based on a couple of nearly irrelevant discrepancies? I suspect that nearly every case is filled with discrepancies, since few people have perfect recall or wander around video-taping their entire lives. ---
**Author:** ![launchpad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@launchpad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/launchpad)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2004, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kobe-bryant-rape-accuser-confessed-to-lying-to-police-and-the-prosecution-continued/268495/4 "2004-10-10T19:03:57Z")
It was a largely he said/she said case. And she wrote in her letter that she lied about being forced to wash her face. From the ESPN article: > [@](#): > > She also said she had wrongly told investigator Doug Winters that Bryant had “made me stay in the room and wash my face.” > > “While I was held against my will in that room, I was not forced to wash my face,” she wrote to Sandberg. “I know that none of these things change what happened, but I wanted you to know.” You point to the testimony of other people she told her story to as evidence. But if she lied to the police about this, how can we trust that she did not lie to the others as well? Perhaps you consider this an insignificat lie? Saying someone forced you to do something is not a simple “mix up”. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2004, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kobe-bryant-rape-accuser-confessed-to-lying-to-police-and-the-prosecution-continued/268495/5 "2004-10-10T19:29:05Z")
> [@](#): > > knowing the accuser admitted to lying about such an important detail as being forced to wash her face? Lying about washing her face does not seem to have the same effect on her testimony as a claim that she was forced to use a bidet. I have no problems with people taking sides on the Bryant case; I simply found your utter outrage that the police could have the audacity to continue the case, despite knowing that she chose to wash her face, herself, and that she had overslept before work, to be a bit of an overreaction. YMMV, obviously. ---
**Author:** ![launchpad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@launchpad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/launchpad)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2004, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kobe-bryant-rape-accuser-confessed-to-lying-to-police-and-the-prosecution-continued/268495/6 "2004-10-10T21:14:11Z")
I think you are missing the date of her confession letter. It is July 31, 2004, after much of the preliminary hearing was over. (This should remind you that I am outraged at the prosecution, not the police who were no longer the main players, for continuing the prosecution. ) According to the New York Daily News article: > [@](#): > > “While I was held against my will in that room, I was not forced to wash my face . . . Instead I stopped at the mirror by the elevator on that floor to clean my face up,” she wrote. > > “While there is no excuse for that mixup, I said what I said because I felt that Detective Winters did not believe what had happened to me,” she added. I do not think a mirror by the elevator would have any water, like a bathroom sink does. And there is likely a significant difference in terms of the amount of makeup or whatever else was supposedly on her face that you would expect from a water washing versus a hallway touch up. In that sense, the lie is relevant. And the above quote gives her motive for lying. How can you argue it is insignificant if she says she did it because she thought it would make her story more believable? ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2004, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kobe-bryant-rape-accuser-confessed-to-lying-to-police-and-the-prosecution-continued/268495/7 "2004-10-10T21:17:23Z")
You’re not thinking this through, **launchpad**. What **Tom~** said was absolutely correct. These details in no way detract from the core of her accusation. There is a case to be made that the case should have been dropped long before it was, but not because of that. ---
**Author:** ![launchpad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@launchpad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/launchpad)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2004, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kobe-bryant-rape-accuser-confessed-to-lying-to-police-and-the-prosecution-continued/268495/8 "2004-10-10T21:27:08Z")
By the way, I am not arguing anything based on her lie about why she was late to work. Although I agree that lying to the police should be a crime (as it is), I think there is a big difference between that and lying about being forced to wash your face. It makes Bryant look worse, and it distorts intepretation of physical evidence. (Because a hallway mirror and a bathroom sink will allow you to clean up your face in differing ways.) ---
**Author:** ![launchpad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@launchpad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/launchpad)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2004, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kobe-bryant-rape-accuser-confessed-to-lying-to-police-and-the-prosecution-continued/268495/9 "2004-10-10T21:28:45Z")
This Year’s Model - her accusation was most of the prosecution’s evidence. If she admits to lying about being forced to wash her face to have a more believable story, how can you call any of her story evidence? ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2004, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kobe-bryant-rape-accuser-confessed-to-lying-to-police-and-the-prosecution-continued/268495/10 "2004-10-10T21:36:18Z")
> [@launchpad](#): > > This Year’s Model - her accusation was most of the prosecution’s evidence. If she admits to lying about being forced to wash her face to have a more believable story, how can you call any of her story evidence? Because there was physical evidence that _something_ happened. Absent clear and convincing evidence that she was making the incident up out of whole cloth, the case should have been pursued. Minor inconsistentcies are not clear and convincing. The real inconsistencies did not begin to arise until much later. And it is clear that something _did_ happen. I believe that both of them are telling the truth as they see it. ---
**Author:** ![launchpad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@launchpad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/launchpad)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2004, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kobe-bryant-rape-accuser-confessed-to-lying-to-police-and-the-prosecution-continued/268495/11 "2004-10-10T21:54:27Z")
> [@This Year's Model](#): > > Because there was physical evidence that _something_ happened. Absent clear and convincing evidence that she was making the incident up out of whole cloth, the case should have been pursued. Minor inconsistentcies are not clear and convincing. The real inconsistencies did not begin to arise until much later. > > And it is clear that something _did_ happen. I believe that both of them are telling the truth as they see it. What then were the real inconsistencies in your mind, and when did they arise? I’ll try to guess what you are refering to. Is it the same evidence that caused the prosecution to reportedly say: “If in fact you were to rule that all of the rape-shield evidence were going to come in in this case, I’m thinking the prosecution is going to sit down and re-evaluate the quality of its case and its chances of a successful prosecution” I got this quote from this article: [http://www.allstarz.org/kobe/trialgraphic51.htm](http://www.allstarz.org/kobe/trialgraphic51.htm) which seems to place the statement in the June 21-22 hearings, which is a little over a month BEFORE the letter. So if you don’t have the timeline mixed up (in which case I think we agree), what is this other evidence of inconsistency? ---
**Author:** ![betenoir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/258eb7/32.png) [@betenoir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/betenoir)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2004, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kobe-bryant-rape-accuser-confessed-to-lying-to-police-and-the-prosecution-continued/268495/12 "2004-10-10T23:54:07Z")
> [@launchpad](#): > > And the above quote gives her motive for lying. How can you argue it is insignificant if she says she did it because she thought it would make her story more believable? I don’t think anyone’s arguing that the lie is insignifigent. It’s certainly relavent to her credibility. But saying that is not the same as saying once inconsistencies are found in an alleged victim’s testomony, the case should, of course be dropped. I don’t find it hard to imagine (this is in the hypothetical now) a woman raped by a rich and powerful man, not particularly used to dealing with autority figures (like the police) making the mistake of lying to reinforce a story she worries will not be believed. She might make that mistake and still have been raped. I would hope the police would not give up the investigation based soley on that. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2004, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kobe-bryant-rape-accuser-confessed-to-lying-to-police-and-the-prosecution-continued/268495/13 "2004-10-11T01:05:07Z")
> [@launchpad](#): > > So if you don’t have the timeline mixed up (in which case I think we agree), what is this other evidence of inconsistency? You are, of course, correct. I do have the timeline mixed up. Doesn’t invalidate my argument though! (Too much.) 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![launchpad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@launchpad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/launchpad)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2004, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kobe-bryant-rape-accuser-confessed-to-lying-to-police-and-the-prosecution-continued/268495/14 "2004-10-11T14:53:20Z")
> [@betenoir](#): > > I don’t think anyone’s arguing that the lie is insignifigent. It’s certainly relavent to her credibility. But saying that is not the same as saying once inconsistencies are found in an alleged victim’s testomony, the case should, of course be dropped. > > I don’t find it hard to imagine (this is in the hypothetical now) a woman raped by a rich and powerful man, not particularly used to dealing with autority figures (like the police) making the mistake of lying to reinforce a story she worries will not be believed. She might make that mistake and still have been raped. I would hope the police would not give up the investigation based soley on that. I was lazy in my initial post, and did not make sure to point out the date of the letter. At that point, the defense had pretty much decimated the prosecution’s case, and it seemed to me that the prosecution was relying almost entirely on her testimony and what she told her friends and family as evidence. This letter was not publicly released until very recently (I think it was last Friday). Knowing that the prosecution knew this, while they continued to appeal to the state supreme court to have the physical evidence from the defense supressed, indicated to me that they are highly unethical. I don’t think “highly unethical” is a strong enough term for what I think of them.