Phreebass called it. The #1 reason for false accusation of rape: the accuser makes the accusation to conceal consentual sex from a boyfriend/parent. Well there you have it folks. You have already read accounts that the bellboy was following the Kobe and the accuser around the hotel as she gave Kobe a tour of the facility. Phreebass rightly surmised that his romantic interest would put the moves on the Kobester. Obviously, the bellboy was anxious when his romantic interest disappeared into Kobe's room for 20 minutes. Unforutnately, the alleged victim decided to put his mind at ease that nothing consentual took place with a false allegation of rape. Sickening.
1 posted on
11/21/2003 11:44:44 AM PST by
Smogger
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-39 last
To: Smogger
I find it a bit much to surmise something so cut and dry from this bit of information. It is just as plausible that he is a confidant that she felt comfortable telling this story. The jury is not even selected yet, far from time to call the case over .. either way. There's only 2 people who know the whole story here, and they are both telling different versions. I find it abhorant to take the attitude that a promiscuous woman cannot be a rape victim. Can a whore be raped? Can a wife? Please people ... wait and see before passing judgement!
189 posted on
11/21/2003 1:47:13 PM PST by
BlueNgold
(Feed the Tree .....)
To: Smogger
Who needs SNL when you have reality as reported in "The Press"....
211 posted on
11/21/2003 1:55:17 PM PST by
tracer
To: Smogger
I don't think this is a bombshell.
A slut can still be raped. Now if she had charged the bellhop and whoever else with rape, she may have a problem.
220 posted on
11/21/2003 1:58:00 PM PST by
Vision
To: Smogger
Since his accuser had sex, Kobe can't be guilty. I know his wife is OK with this.
To: Smogger
Okay she slept around a lot and the star witness may have been one of those she slept with. And yes, it is easy to imagine that she was willing to have sex with Kobe at some point in their relationship and that she went up to his room with the idea of having an affair with him (though probably with the idea of a romantic encounter instead of a quick and arguably degrading sex act). So certainly not a person of great moral standing nor an especially sympathetic figure. But still, i think the thrust of this case will be this: whether she objected to having sex with him at that point in time and/or particularly whether she consented to having that kind of rough sex with him - not whether she has had sex a lot or would likely have eventually consented to having sex with him. In other words, i think the focus from the prosecution's standpoint will be more on the physical abuse, the rough sex, than on what we traditionally think of as rape (ie, a completely unwilling/innocent woman being suddenly attacked out of the blue).
233 posted on
11/21/2003 2:01:39 PM PST by
Humbug
(i haven't the foggiest idea what to type here)
To: Smogger
I just had a feeling early on in all this that this young woman and the bellhop had something going on, wasn't sure what, but this is not a surprise!
To: Smogger
What a crock of crap.......I don't care if she had sex the same day, within the hour....If she was raped, she was raped.
268 posted on
11/21/2003 2:18:14 PM PST by
JamesA
(Stand together, stand your ground and don't back down. Its ours to lose!)
To: Smogger
Many comments on this thread seem to miss a larger point.
Trials are not about finding the truth. Trials are about demonstrating, beyond a reasonable doubt, what can be proven.
The government only had the right to take away someone's freedom if the government can prove its case. I would not want it any other way.
If the victim has had recent sex with a key prosecution witness, that naturally calls in question his unbiasness (credibility). That does not mean that his testimony would be false, but a reasonable person could question its reliability.
Finding additional semen in the accuser's panties, not from the accused, seems to me to throw reasonable doubt as to who caused "the rape"
Many comments in this thread seem to imply that if the woman says it's rape then it's rape. Courts don't work that way. A woman's testimony is part of the evidence in a case. How much weight to put on that evidence depends on her credibility.
I don't know if Kobe raped this woman. I can see the government is going to have a very difficult time proving it.
354 posted on
11/21/2003 3:35:36 PM PST by
playball0
(Fortune favors the bold)
To: Smogger
Or her and the bellhop came up with a plan to get a LOT of money out of Kobe?
382 posted on
11/21/2003 4:22:46 PM PST by
philetus
(Keep doing what you always do and you'll keep getting what you always get)
To: Smogger
I bet 'Mr. Bryants Colorado Female Attorney' bought her entire firm dinner when she heard this.He still has to stand trial mind you.Innocent until proven guilty? OK. (With the exception of all of Bill Clinton's 8 years of hellish actions against America's interests of course.)
437 posted on
11/21/2003 6:28:23 PM PST by
Pagey
(Hillary Rotten is a Smug and Holier- than- Thou Socialist)
To: Smogger
"What fresh slut hell is this?
491 posted on
11/21/2003 7:46:32 PM PST by
185JHP
( Is a Deanbacle what they're gonna get?)
To: Smogger
"Bombshell: Kobe Accuser Had Sex with Key Witness" -- 505 Posts.
"Congress passes Syria sanctions bill" -- 21 Posts. Link
"U.S. Slams United Nations Watchdog, Suspects Iran Still Lying" -- 20 Posts.Link
Sheesh!
To: Smogger
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. Interesting. That's why I don't jump and beat up the accused without evidence, so I won't beat up on her either
just to say that prosecutors are sometimes too eager to make a name for themselves. Likewise, people are too often eager to release their negative emotions and prejudices by badmouthing others without evidence. The same people who defend the accuser in the Kobe case are the same people attacking Jackson.
You see, in Jackson's case his plastic surgeries and reclusive behavior are enough to throw him jail. No evidence is needed.
513 posted on
11/21/2003 8:53:21 PM PST by
Victoria Delsoul
(I love the smell of winning, the taste of victory, and the joy of each glorious triumph)
To: Smogger
Where have all the Kobe haters gone??? Long time calling, a whoa, whoa.. Where have all the Kobe haters gone??? Long time ago... Where have all the Kobe haters gone?? I suspect to Michael Jackson... when will they ever learn, that Kobe is the victim here..
525 posted on
11/21/2003 9:57:56 PM PST by
Porterville
(We are watching you liberal scum, soon we will take your welfare check, then we will take your home)
To: Smogger
I have a problem with this.
The fact that a person has consensual sex with someone, means that another person DID NOT rape her?
Alrighty then.
533 posted on
11/21/2003 10:29:12 PM PST by
ladyinred
(Talk about a revolution, look at California!!! We dumped Davis!!!)
To: Smogger
If true,the allegation would certainly go to the weight that the jury would give his testimony but not necessarily destroy it, if there is corroborating evidence.
585 posted on
11/22/2003 12:19:29 AM PST by
AmericanVictory
(Should we be more like them, or they like us?)
To: Smogger
Poontang makes people do lots of stupid things.
Break up marriages, marry the wrong person, kill the wife and dump her into the harbor, go broke paying child support...
To: Smogger
Bombshell: Kobe Accuser Had Sex with Key WitnessHow is this a bombshell? If, say, a woman is raped, can her husband not be a witness (assuming they have sex)?
642 posted on
11/22/2003 3:22:51 PM PST by
#3Fan
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-39 last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson