Posted on 11/21/2003 11:44:43 AM PST by 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.
Another sort of interesting issue is the comment during the defense response to the motion for an investigation of defense "leaks" that during a prior inquiry into sheriff's department leaks the DA's office had refused to conduct the investigation because of animosity between the two agencies.
Taking a case to trial when you're not getting along with the agency providing the witnesses isn't the most ideal of circumstances.
Gonna need lots of popcorn for this one...
Gee, you think?
Actually, with respected to the prelim, it might be more accurate to say they wanted their part of the prelim open. It's to the eternal credit of the judge that he saw through that scam.
I guess they don't get a lot of that in Eagle.......
I guess we will have to wait until the trial to get the truth about the blood evidence.
I'm leaning toward the "under the microscope" therory, at this point.
That's the stupidest thing I ever read.
If Kobe is innocent, then there is no victim, except Kobe!
If Kobe is innocent, then his accuser is a not a victim, but a victimiser and a perjurer!
If Kobe is innocent, then he needs a fair opportunity to prove it, and to prove that his accuser is a conniving liar.
If Kobe is guilty, then he should hang and his accuser will probably end up more than adequately compensated for any embarrassment that Kobe's defense team might put upon her.
The big question is whether it is rape if the John refuses to pay. Sex by force or fraud is technically rape. If the prostitute had sex with the man because he promised to pay her and he refuses to pay her, then he has committed fraud.
Since prostitution is illegal, the contract is void, and hence no fraud. However in Nevada, at a licensed brothel, refusal to pay may indeed be rape.
Precisely.
What I wonder is how all these people think Bryant is suppose to defend himself when ANYHTING he says or his attorney says brings on a chorus of "Bashing the victim!"
But the law requires that it be excluded. Do you agree with a law that would exclude extrinsic evidence that might show that the "victim" was a willing participant? Shouldn't the evidence come in and the jury make a determination as to whether it makes any difference? Aren't we interested here in getting to the truth? If so, then what purpose is served by excluding the evidence?
BTW you have been officially expelled from NOW.
Kobe: I didn't do it.
NOW GANG: How dare you call this innocent victim a liar? What kind of a pig are you? Why are you smearing this poor girl?
Kobe: But I didn't do it.
NOW GANG: Women don't lie, you lying pig. Especially about sex. Only men lie about sex.
Wow Saber, you have got some real issues - and they obviously go way beyond Kobe. Were you assulted or something?
But the way I see it -- a woman who has had consensual sex with so many guys --- apparently never told any guy no --- can't wait to clock out and run up to some FAMOUS and very RICH guy's hotel room so she can tell him "no"?
If he is innocent --- how can he get out of a false accusation without proving the accuser is a liar?
1. First rule of law: Never ask a question you don't already know the answer to.
2. If they do ask, and get the results it is not Kobe DNA - the prosecution will be obligated to forward the test results to the defense.
3. The prosecution has an inclination that they might find non-kobe DNA on their victim - (what other explanation is there?)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.