Two more rumors bite the dust (Ride home and torn clothing just not true, sources say)

The Vail Daily ^ | 8/4/03 | The Vail Daily

[Smogger]

Two more reports regarding the Kobe Bryant case circulating among part of the national media were debunked Monday.

Media reports that the 19-year-old woman who Bryant allegedly assaulted received a ride home is not the case, sources said Monday. Reports that her clothing was torn are also untrue, sources also.

Sources told the Daily that the alleged victim managed to get herself home by 11:50 p.m., June 30, after ending the shift at the Lodge at Cordillera at around 11:10 p.m.

They also said that while her clothing was disheveled and showed signs that something had occurred, it wasn't torn or ripped, as some reports indicated.

"Some of the reports made it sound like something out of a bad movie," said one source. "It wasn't like that."

The reports are part of a larger set of rumors and gossip that have been circulating across the country about the case. Among them:

- That the alleged victim was in the room two hours. It was only about 20 minutes.

- When she came down, she was hysterical. She was not. Sources said she was in a stupor and a state of shock.

- A few days before the incident, the alleged victim had accused another hotel worker of sexual harassment, getting him fired. Not true, said the man who was terminated. It was not the alleged victim.

Cameras in court

Eagle County Judge Fred Gannett ruled that not only is Bryant required to appear at 4 p.m. Wednesday, he also ruled Monday that there will be cameras in the courtroom.

Gannett denied a motion by Bryant's attorneys asking Gannett to reconsider an earlier order allowing one video camera and one still camera in the courtroom while Bryant is advised of the charges against him, and also advised of his rights.

[#3Fan]

Not to worry, Mike has promised to "fade into Bolivian."

LOL It's lovely there this time of year.

[cinFLA]

Yeah. Those five. I am sure you will become familiar with their names faces and testimony as this case moves towards trial.

We haven't heard a peep since the reporter broke the story that he heard someone hear something at some party.

[robjna]

"That fat cow Rita Cosby can't getting anything right."

Remember when that corn fed heffer claimed the Supreme court ruled in Al Gores Favor. She is a bozo and I have said it all along. Can't stand to watch her. She is a classic example of Affirmative action taking place at FOX.

[Iwo Jima]

I doubt that there will be any depositions. There hardly ever are in criminal cases. But the defense will subpoena Steve Evancho (and any others who have made similar statements) and just put them on the stand live at trial. I doubt that they would defy a subpoena, but if they did the judge will deal with that.

Why in the world would you assume that these people will not testify? And do you question the significance of this testimony to the jury?

[NittanyLion]

She is a classic example of Affirmative action taking place at FOX.

Am I missing something?

[robjna]

Just as in OJ all it is going to take is 1 african american on the jury and we get a minumum hung jury.

[#3Fan]

Nice dodge trying to drag Clinton into this. You know not everything in life can be related back to Slick Willie, but I digresss. What's your question?

Your inconsistencies are showing. If you want to presume Bryant innocent out here in cyberspace, then you have to presume Clinton and OJ innocent too.

[Spook86]

Rita has always been a bit zaftig...if you'll notice, you never see her in a skirt, and when's she's in the studio, they always frame her in a head-and-shoulders shot. BTW, in her report on special ops last weekend, she did a tandem jump with one of the Army's Golden Knights parachute team. In watching the segment, I noticed that her jump suit seemed a bit tight.

While Rita may not be the ultimate babe at FNC, she remains one of the best reporters in TV news. She has great contacts, and is simply the best at FNC in digging up new info on a breaking story.

[Elsie]

 

 When I start a NEW_MAIL, there are THREE tabs at the lower left of the window....

 

EDIT

SOURCE

PREVIEW

 

 

After I type up my stuff how I like it, I press SOURCE and then snip out the code I want.

 

Here is a sample of HTML code.

 

 

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 5.50.4616.200" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
 <DIV>Here <STRONG>is</STRONG> a <FONT color=#ff0000>sample </FONT>of <FONT
face="Comic Sans MS" color=#0000ff size=5>HTML</FONT> code.</DIV> </BODY></HTML>

 

 

I just want what is between the <BODY> & </BODY> commands,

 

snip it out and paste it in...

 

Viola!!!

 

 

[cyncooper]

Why do you call Steve Evancho a "cretin?" Is that the sort of name-calling that you have said should not be done with respect to the accuser? Just what did Steve do to obtain cretin status in your eyes?

His demeanor did not impress me as a credible person.

And, cretin or not, why do you assume that the defense will not subpoena Steve and force him to repeat on the stand in front of the jury what he has already said in front of cameras? What earthly reason would they have for NOT presenting to the jury evidence that the accuser was making light of her experience?

I assume the defense will not suborn perjury.

I'm on record. $10 to Free Republic if he's called to the stand and sworn under oath. Mark it.

I think that you just don't like what Steve said and so you trivialize and discount it.

I call it discernment.

And might I add those making comments about the girl have not seen her and heard her words in order to make a judgement such as I was afforded with young Mr. Evancho. (I really don't recall making a big deal out of "name calling" though I may have expressed disagreement that some of those comments were warranted.)

[#3Fan]

When it comes down the the trial I'll be betting on who has the best lawyers. Kobe probably has the two best trial attorneys in the state on his team.

Did you root for OJ too because he had his dream team? Who cares if an innocent waiter was killed, it's worth it to root for the lawyers. eh? /sarcasm

[Saundra Duffy]

Sources said she was in a stupor and a state of shock.

That's bad enough.

[Elsie]

Some word processors also will output an HTML formatted file for you.

[#3Fan]

I have no opinion on his reporting...

Yes you do, you said he's more reliable because he's local. Suddenly you dismiss his reporting when he reports incriminating stuff about Bryant. You can't stay consistent about anything. lol

[HurkinMcGurkin]

There hardly ever are in criminal cases. But the defense will subpoena Steve Evancho (and any others who have made similar statements) and just put them on the stand live at trial.

Discovery, man. The prosecution will know who is testifying to what.

Why in the world would you assume that these people will not testify?

By asking that question, you admit that you removed any possiblity that they are lying. Interesting, I say, that you don't think there is any chance they lied.

[Quilla]

You learn something new every day. Thanks.

[#3Fan]

Just as in OJ all it is going to take is 1 african american on the jury and we get a minumum hung jury.

I try not to judge an individual by a group nor a group by an individual but it does bear watching.

[CarmelValleyite]

Who knows WHAT'S going on in this case and with those 911 calls -- but why are the basketball players generally in more trouble than those in other sports? Not always, but in general.

Is there something about basketball that attracts moronic players? I'm a fan of pro golf myself, and you never hear of such things in that world -- of course, many people don't see golf as a "sport" so maybe that's why ........

[Elsie]

You are WELCOME!

[mewzilla]

Until whatever is said is said under oath in a court of law....