Testimony of Bryant's accuser delayed

Baltimore Sun ^ | March 2, 2004 | Steve Henson

[Smogger]

EAGLE, Colo. - Kobe Bryant's attorneys went on the offensive yesterday, making controversial allegations about the sexual activity of the woman who has accused the Los Angeles Lakers star of rape. The defense said during a pretrial hearing and in a court filing that the woman has had sex with two prosecution witnesses and that she also had intercourse only hours after her encounter with Bryant.

Early yesterday, Judge Terry Ruckriegle denied a motion by the prosecution to limit defense questioning of the woman. But after the lunch recess, the judge rescinded that decision.

It was not entirely clear why the judge had a change of heart, but some observers suggested he might have taken exception to defense attorney Hal Haddon's written motion.

Acting on a request from Eagle County District Attorney Mark Hurlbert, Ruckriegle said he would take the motion under advisement and postponed the woman's testimony until at least March 24, the date of the next scheduled hearing.

Haddon had told Ruckriegle that swabs of semen taken from the neck, thigh and vaginal area of the 19-year-old accuser during an examination 15 hours after the alleged rape were from a man other than Bryant.

Hurlbert objected to the comment, prompting an extended private conversation between the judge and attorneys.

Haddon did not mention the woman's sexual conduct again, but in a court document filed over the weekend and made public yesterday, he offered several reasons why it is relevant and should be an exception to the state's rape shield law.

[Smogger]

"Haddon had told Ruckriegle that swabs of semen taken from the neck, thigh and vaginal area of the 19-year-old accuser during an examination 15 hours after the alleged rape were from a man other than Bryant."

Yuck. Man Kobe sure can pick em.

[KantianBurke]

the case against Kobe is toast. I'll admit I called this one wrong. Hope he sues that nutcase girl for every penny she and her fellow "partners" were planning on extorting from him.

[wylenetheconservative]

It's not over yet. Let's see if these reckless nasty attacks on the victim are ACTUALLY TRUE. The word of a scumbag attorney of at best a serial adulterer may not be the basis for assuming facts about a case.

[sinkspur]

Let's see if these reckless nasty attacks on the victim are ACTUALLY TRUE.

Of course they're true. Preliminary evidence has pointed to promiscuity on the part of this accuser. But I had not heard that she had sex after being raped.

If that is true, this case is over. No rape victim has sex with another man shortly after being raped!

Howlin, onyx, there's new details in this story I had not seen.

[onyx]

YES, YES, YES. Dang it, I just erased the info. Let me go see if I can retrieve it.

Howlin, it's the info from you. If you're around please come here right away.

[sinkspur]

In addition, Haddon said the defense has established:

Evidence that the accuser engaged in multiple acts of sexual intercourse within the two days preceding her encounter with Bryant as well as within 15 hours afterward.

There is "factual similarity" between the woman's sexual acts with other men and the circumstances of her intercourse with Bryant. The acts also show the "accuser's knowledge, intent, common plan, pattern and modus operandi with respect to whether she consented to having sex with Bryant, the defense said.

There is evidence that the woman had sexual relationships with two prosecution witnesses. A source close to the prosecution said the men are the woman's ex-boyfriend, Matt Herr, and hotel bellman Bobby Pietrack. The woman called Herr on her cell phone while driving home from her encounter with Bryant. Pietrack followed her home in his car.

These facts are death to the prosecution's case. We've got a nympho on our hands here.

[Smogger]

Nevermind that.

Let's review:

"Haddon had told Ruckriegle that swabs of semen taken from the neck...

neck...

NECK...

NECK!

I mean. Did she wake up in the morning a accidentally put a dirty neck on? Did she forget mistake a penis for a bottle of perfume? What the Hell is going on with this girl? She is giving prostitutes a bad name.

[onyx]

Tuesday, March 2, 2004


Updated March 2, 2004, 10:09 a.m. ET


Bryant's defense can question accuser about sexual past on stand

EAGLE, Colo. (AP) — Kobe Bryant's defense team can ask the 19-year-old woman accusing the basketball star of rape detailed questions about her sexual past when she makes her first appearance in court, the judge ruled Monday.

The decision raises the likelihood of a long day for the woman when she testifies behind closed doors Tuesday. It will be the first time she will be in the same room with Bryant since the alleged attack at a mountain resort last summer.

The defense subpoenaed the woman to testify, saying Bryant has a right to confront his accuser. The move prompted complaints from the prosecution and women's advocates that the defense is simply trying to "embarrass" and "humiliate" her.

State District Judge Terry Ruckriegle, however, rejected a prosecution bid to limit defense questioning as he determines whether the woman's sexual conduct is relevant to the case and can be used against her at trial.

Bryant, 25, has said the two had consensual sex. The Los Angeles Lakers star faces four years to life in prison or 20 years to life on probation if convicted of the felony sexual assault charge.

The woman has told police she had sex with someone two days before the alleged attack, while the defense has said she slept with "multiple" partners that week — including someone less than 15 hours after her encounter with Bryant.

The defense says the woman had a "plan" to sleep with Bryant to attract the attention of an ex-boyfriend. Bryant's attorneys also say injuries found during a hospital examination of the woman could have been caused by other sexual partners.

Legal experts said they don't believe defense attorneys Hal Haddon and Pamela Mackey will be allowed to hound the woman about all her sexual experiences.

"The judge will still protect the alleged victim," former prosecutor Craig Silverman said. "And there's nothing preventing prosecutors from standing up and objecting when questions are asked."

The prosecution lost another battle Monday when the judge ordered them to give the defense cuttings from two pairs of underwear worn by the accuser.

In a new filing by Bryant's attorneys made public Monday, Mackey reiterated her contention that the woman had "multiple acts of sexual intercourse" in the three days before her July 1 hospital exam and that she had another sexual partner the morning after her encounter with Bryant. She also said the woman had sex with two unidentified prosecution witnesses.

Prosecutors said the defense based its arguments on rumor and innuendo.
http://www.courttv.com/trials/bryant/030204_sexpast_ap.html

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -



There's more. I wish Howlin would get here, but the crux is thus: The judge has postponed her testimony for 3 weeks. Many think she'll not take the stand, because Pamela Mackey will tear her story apart. Either way, if she takes the stand, it's all over and if she doesn't, it's all over.

Lies have a way of coming back to haunt a person.

[onyx]

Now you know dang well how the DNA likely got on her neck. Can't post it here, but you know. In fact, Howlin and I were laughing about this very thang last night :)

[sinkspur]

Surely this can't all be a surprise to Hurlburt. If he knew about these encounters, especially the one AFTER the alleged rape, and went ahead with indicting Bryant, he's the most irresponsible DA in history.

[onyx]

I agree with you. The DA must have been pressured by her parents or?

I have never been raped, but dammit, I cannot imagine a raped woman having sex with another man right away. Seems way beyond my comprehension.

You know my husband is a medical doctor with his practice in psychiatry, and I've just asked him to comment and he agrees, --- a raped woman would be too traumatized to engage in sex so shortly after the rape.

[wylenetheconservative]

It is absolutely sickening the way you are persecuting this poor girl. She was raped and called a "white bitch" by Kobe Bryant, and now she has to sit by as her character is assassinated by people like you who believe Kobe was innocent simply because he's a basketball player. All the evidence points to the conclusion that this was indeed a rape. She was distraught afterward. The nurse said the injuries were consistent with rape. Kobe Bryant tore her clothes. You are blinded by your male chauvenism and love of athletes. You are believing the word of the defense lawyer like it is absolute truth. Pathetic.

[wylenetheconservative]

IF IT'S TRUE!!!! You are acting like this is fact. She denies it, and so does the prosecution. I guess in your world defense attorneys and rapists like Kobe Bryant always tell the truth. You seem to be more inclined to believe them than the poor girl who was raped and called a "white bitch" by Kobe Bryant.

[onyx]

DNA (semen) found, but NONE of it is Kobe's. Sorry wylene, I have said from the get go that she filed a false report.

[Howlin]

She was raped and called a "white bitch" by Kobe Bryant

I defy you to provide ANY credible link that proves that accusation of yours.

Kobe Bryant tore her clothes

Nope.

She was distraught afterward.

Nope.

[Wally_Kalbacken]

Allow me to remind you of the three ring circus that is a trial - perhaps best illustrated by the O.J. criminal trial - as it was viewed at the time. You have the world at large, including a lot of uninformed punditry surrounding the courthouse. Inside that ring you have what goes on inside of the courtroom, And inside that ring you have subset - i.e. what the jury sees, and ideally, bases its decision on. These can be surprisingly different and inconsistent perspectives. The arguments and motions presented so far are just that - not evidence tested and challenged in the courtroom. There are a lot of IF'S that have to be satisfied, on either side of this matter, before any disposition. Everybody sit tight.

[Smogger]

There isn't a single fact in your entire ignorant post.

[mercy]

How can there be a trial when there is one accuser and one accusee? No injuries. No witnesses. It's crazy.

[Howlin]

She won't take the stand.

[MizSterious]

This is what bothers me. Some of us who thought she might have been telling the truth (back when it first happened) didn't know this information. Surely the DA knew this--yet he proceeded anyway? What's wrong with this picture?