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.

[nyconse]

I am saying they will not testify under oath because they are not telling the truth and will be contradicted by other witnesses. It is not in the best interests of the defense to call them as witnesses- assuming such evidence is admissable.

[pamlet]

The first link didn't work for me -

The second - which did was obviously one of many of kids in the athletic department of a school. He probably had nothing to do with writing it.

[nyconse]

My point exactly-nothing we read or post has any validity until it reaches court. I pulled those quotes from this thread-by the way. This thread does not in any way help the Kobe defense.

[Iwo Jima]

There is no gag order for witnesses. Witnesses have first amendment rights which no court can violate just because they may be called upon to testify in court. The DA cannot "tell" witnesses not to speak out. He does not make the law or control them.

The prosecution or even the hotel -- in the case of hotel employees -- might request that someone who has been interviewed not give public statements, and reasonable people might honor that request. But it is only that -- a request.

[sinkspur]

Clearly those with an emotional investment in a preordained outcome are the "Kobe is INNOCENT!" camp.

How can you tell? There are so few here. You "KB IS GUILTY" cheerleaders have chased the rest away.

Cyn, it's OK that you presume KB's guilt. Really. I do. I just don't feel the need to jump down the throats of those who might have a question or two about the accuser.

Any objective reader of the KB threads would have to conclude that the KB defenders have thrown in the towel.

[Howlin]

No, that isn't you point; your point is to try to denigrade anything that you construe as being pro-Kobe as being wrong.

And this thread proves one thing; somebody is lying; the witnesses who, so far, have ALL being "friends of the accusers."

[reg45]

It wasn't rape until the check bounced!

[nyconse]

The rape shield laws cover a great deal of evidence. For example a defendent could get his friends to swear they heard a victim making all kinds of statements that would smear the victim, thus helping the defendent. The law protects against that sort of thing. Rape shield does not only cover prior sexual history.

[Iwo Jima]

Of course we will. Janelle was one I remember best. These women are very credible and -- unlike other, anonymous sources -- willing to go public and have their statements linked personally to them. Their statements carry great weight with me and, I feel sure, the jury.

[Howlin]

Clearly those with an emotional investment in a preordained outcome are the "Kobe is INNOCENT!" camp.

I cannot believe you posted that with a straight font.

Do you actually READ the posts of the people who are in agreement with you that all things Kobe = guilty?

[cyncooper]

As was explained earlier, some of us are speculating that Evancho and company were making up their story and the lawyers will know it and not call them.

It's just a guess, as I plainly stated. You don't like the guess and think they are credible and will be called.

Fine. Why do you keep badgering others for thinking differently? Time will tell if they are called or not.

[nyconse]

It is possible no one is lying. Gossip and rumor are being reported. I am sure you know how unreliable such talk can be. People are reporting what they heard.....their neighbors heard....the man at the tire store heard etc. It doesn't mean anyone is lying-just the gossip is out of control.

[cyncooper]

When I read the debunking of "hysterical" I was puzzled as I had not even gotten to hear that rumor in order to have been under that false impression.

In fact, if anybody had described her as hysterical can you imagine those that would posit that she was actually experiencing ecstasy? Or they would have thought it was an act----which I must say, would be very conceivable.

The stupor description is more incriminating, that is for sure.

[Howlin]

For example a defendent could get his friends to swear they heard a victim making all kinds of statements that would smear the victim, thus helping the defendent.

First of all, that statement doesn't even make sense.

Don't forget -- in your rush to fairness -- to acknowledge that it's just as likely that

The victim could get her friends to swear that they saw her when she came out of the room and she looked all a mess and was in a state of shock, thus helping the accuser.

[sinkspur]

Funny, I think of the Westerfield effect as not thinking the defendent is guilty no matter the incriminating evidence there seems to be. Then trash the "accuser".

No. The Westerfield effect is the behavior of those on one side, or the other, which mirrors those who defended David Westerfield.

In this case, it's the "KB is guilty" crowd, who seem to get their backs up at any questioning of the accuser. Have you noticed how few "defenders of KB" are left? Virtually none. You have Howlin and Iwo Jima, who are making legal arguments, but they're open-minded about the outcome of the trial.

Will you become so emotionally invested in seeing KB go down that you'll leave FR if he doesn't? I hope not, but many of the Westerfield defenders have not returned to FR, to this day.

I supect KB is guilty, but will be able to discredit the accuser, given her behavior before and after the incident. But, if he's guilty, I hope he goes to jail for a long time.

But, in the scheme of things, the outcome of this case amounts to the outcome of the Rangers vs. Yankees ball game tonight.

Which is, not much.

[nyconse]

Chased the others away? It seems as if Cyn and I are the only ones willing to say Kobe may be guilty. We don't state it as fact-only as a possibility depending on the evidence. What- people who think Kobe may be guilty shouldn't be allowed to state their opinion? Only those convinced that Kobe's innocent should post? Think how boring that would be. You all would have no one to insult and belittle.

[Iwo Jima]

Now you are really getting ridiculous. I cannot imagine why you would think that the opinions of the friends/former friends about the accuser's reputation for truth and veracity, emotional background, and penchant for attention-seeking, risky behavior and stirring up trouble would "carry no wait in court."

But even if you are right, that only goes to the weight not the admissibility of evidence. Or are you going to tell me that you don't think that they will testify because you don't believe what they say?

Is there one person whom you have heard make statements adverse to the prosecution that you 1) believe or 2) will be allowed in court? Name one, just one. I bet you can't which proves my point that you are irrationally biased.

[Howlin]

Actually, it is NOT gossip; Rita Cobsy reported it as FACT. Now is she lying -- or are the people who are telling her lying?

Somebody sure is.

[Howlin]

Is there one person whom you have heard make statements adverse to the prosecution

There's only one problem with your question:

So far nobody on Kobe's side has made ANY statements that have been reported.

All the "talking" is coming from one side, yet people here continue to state as fact that Kobe is smearing this girl.

[sinkspur]

You all would have no one to insult and belittle.

The Westerfield effect. You've got it.

Nobody's "belittling" you. You think asking questions is "insulting."

Take a day off from these threads. You'll come back with a new perspective.