Bombshell: Kobe Accuser Had Sex with Key Witness

The Globe ^ | 11/20/03 | Globe

[Smogger]

A new bombshell revelation in the Kobe Bryant case threatens to destroy the credibility of the prosecution’s key witness - whose testimony could send the basketball superstar to jail for years. Sources told GLOBE that the 19-year-old woman who has accused Bryant of rape told them she had sex with the prosecution’s star witness Bobby Pietrack - a week before she met Bryant.

Pietrack, a 23-year-old bellhop at the resort where the alleged rape took place, is the first person Katelyn Faber told about her encounter with Bryant. He can testify about her emotional state and physical appearance at the time.

But legal experts tell us that if there was a sexual encounter between Katelyn and the bellhop, it could wreck his credibility and sink the case of the Eagle County, Colo., prosecutor.

For all the details of this blockbuster story, pick up the new issue of GLOBE.

[Rudder]

Woe unto the uppity strumpet who doesn't know her place. Doesn't she know that that hole is for?

You're either too deep into this or your shorts are too tight.

BTW,
Is a strumpet played like a coronet?

[Sabertooth]

I gave you two examples. There are other reasons for false allegations, which was the topic of my post.

No, the topic of your post was that false rape charges happen often. Back it up.

If you want to draw me into some discussion of the absolute numbers of rapes vs. false charges, it's pointless.

Only because: 1) you couldn't back up your primary claim, and 2) you know full well that if false charges happened more often than rapes, we'd see a lot more prosecutions for it.

No justice system is perfect. Once you acknowledge that, it becomes a numbers game. We want to maximize convictions and minimize false prosecutions. Smearing the women, who are the victims in the vast majority of sexual assaults, doesn't achieve that end.

Apparently, all one needs on this forum is to be accused. Guilt is assumed.

Self-rationalizing pablum. You can argue the merits all you want, but a rape victim's sexual history is irrelevant to the crime. You don't want to argue the case, you want to smear and humiliate Bryant's accuser.

You want a world that's safer for rapists to get away with the deed. That's the inescapable consequence of your position.

That conclusion doesn't hinge on Bryant's guilt or innocence, it deals with the reality of rape, and the vast number of sexual assaults that go unreported because of folks like yourself.

But a man that hasn't shown a history of violent sexual conduct should not be sent to jail on such a witness' testimony, should they?

Irrelevant. There is more evidence than just her tesitimony.

The trial will decide what happened that night, not his or her sexual history.

[Sabertooth]

How you expect Kobe to get a fair trial if this evidence of the "victim"'s sexual history is excluded?

Because it's irrelevant to the case.

What you want is a world where punks get a free shot at a woman with a reputation.

You don't think so?

Once you allow the sexual past of the victim into the courtroom, you've just given rapists a green light for some women over others.

If Kobe is innocent, he doesn't need to smear the victim.

[Howlin]

I am absolutely correct in my representation, and after reviewing what I had previously read, I see that the transcripts support me.

Which page and line number says it was plainly visible to the naked eye?

[Crispy]

"I tend to think her bleeding as much as she did tends to indicate force by Bryant. Force would tend to indicate against her will."

It could teld to indicate a big unit also.

hmmm. An almost 7 ft basketball player with size 15 or so shoes. hmmm.

[Sabertooth]

You're either too deep into this or your shorts are too tight.

Wrong on both counts.

I've seen how this "she had it coming" crap is played, from ringside.

Lotta advocates for rapists on this site. Smearing the victim is the Phase II contingency of the crime.

[proud American in Canada]

thanks for the link! I'll go check it out. :)

[Doc On The Bay]

It's quite possible that the "accused" is Both; "Young & Stupid!"

Young, Healthy, Randy Males OFTEN let "The 'Little Head' think for the 'Big Head!'"

Young Males are Notoriously easy objects of Rape/Molestation accusations; "everyone knows" that the young, Randy Males are incapable of controlling Their Impulses!

In Such a Situation, the "Oversexed Male" is REQUIRED to prove his innocence.

Does ANYONE smell a "Setup" here????

I HOPE this accusation is real--only because there is too much prejudice against a "Not Guilty" decision.

If "Kobe" is Innocent, I estimate he has less than one chance in three for "aquittal."

"It's His HORMONES, you know......."

Doc

[Howlin]

The blood streaks on his shirt were not microscopic.

Then why didn't the detective say he saw them with his naked eye???

Did you read the cross? Notice he insinuated he SAW the blood until Mackey asked him about it?

[Sabertooth]

You would willingly send innocent men to prison rape and the end of their freedom to satisfy some perverse sense of chivalry you THINK you possess.

You'd willingly enable far more guilty rapists to go free than keep any innocent accused from incarceration.

But I'm perverse?

[proud American in Canada]

"A trial is supposed to be a search for truth and we all are rooting for truth to prevail. "


Very well said. I don't know the truth--nor will I until all the facts come out at trial.

And I hope that we, as Freepers, are all "searching for the truth," not just hearing convenient evidence and dispensing with the rest. Let us keep our minds open, one way or another, and hope & pray for justice to be served.

jmho.

Great post, Chantal!

[HighWheeler]

Look at Wynonna here\/

[Howlin]

That isn't the testimony, either--that they were only visible with dye via microscope. There were two photos introduced, one with dye and one without. The dye and magification were to enhance the ability to see, but they were not invisible.

Here is the DIRECT quote from the judge:

"Photographs of the larger lacerations were admitted into evidence. Both photographs were magnified and one was taken after the application of tolidine blue dye after the alleged victim had a speculum exam."

Nowhere does it say that they were visible to the naked eye; nowhere.

[Howlin]

What page and line number????

[ArmstedFragg]

That isn't the testimony, either-

And, just for the record, they weren't vaginal tears.

[longjack]

I heard on talk radio (Hannity??) that the mother is a lawyer. Any verification of this?

When the story first broke there were pictures circulating around the web showing a person by the name of Debbie (I think) Faber who was an assistant DA for Eagle County. She was shown in pictures involving certain goodwill activities with students at the at the high school.

I remember some early threads discretely mentioning that the captions of those pictures may lead to some interesting conjecture.

An answer came back that Debbie Faber was not the girl's mother, but it was not known if she may be otherwise related.

At that time posters weren't mentioning the girl's name so the details were hidden in references in the posts.

I haven't heard if anyone has determned if the assistant DA is related to the girl or not, but it is most likely what Hannity is referring to.

Again, I know the family name was the Faber, the first name may have been Debbie, and she was, to the best of my recollection, an assistant DA in Eagle County.

HTH

longjack

[proud American in Canada]

The rules have been relaxed as her name and appearance are now common knowledge. At least for anyone who goes to the grocery store, 7-11, or uses the Internet. A victory for free speech IMHO. "

"A victory for rapists and their fans who want to intimidate witnewsses and smear victims. Enjoy. "


I agree with Sabertooth. The Globe was wrong to print those pictures, and now that they have, they're going full blast with every piece of dirt they can dig up.

I still wonder: why would a small town girl from the Colorado mountains "cry rape" (to use the vernacular) like this? No civil case has been filed and if she were in it just for the money, any lawyer worth his salt would have told her she was basically signing the death warrant to her reputation.

Oh well, I've posted before on this. Having worked at a prosecutor's office, I can't believe they wouldn't consider all the garbage they would face if they charged Kobe.

Actually, I do think he probably raped her , though I do think she probably had sex with other guys.

So... the bottom line... Kobe walks. And both their lives are trashed.

Well, maybe not Kobe's.

[GladesGuru]

I'm not a lawyer, and I did read the transcript at SmokingGun. The transcript dosn't seem to have any significant, make that "clear and unambiguous" evidence of major trauma. Only slight tissue changes were noted and no pain killers were perscribed.

The trial likely will have to deal with where, and from whom the tissue changes noted resulted.

I am somewhat mystified as to why more have not read the transcript. One of the truely wonderful things about the net and FR is the ready access to data and expertise.

[cyncooper]

I didn't say they were. I said "tears" and noted their size.

[aristeides]

Well, maybe not Kobe's.

I think that's up to his fans. If, as I expect of them, they make no demands of their hero, then you're right. But they could always choose to turn their backs on the guy.