Posted on 07/23/2004 3:32:50 PM PDT by sinkspur
While her previous sexual history will not be admitted, the judge has just ruled that any post-KB-sexual activity WILL be admitted.
People like to either assume it was rape or assume it was consentual based on this indicator or that. The truth is that nobody knows so it all comes down to which story is more believable, based on the character of the person making the claims (not particularly good either way) and assumptions about the details of the story. Either way, "I don't know" isn't "beyond a reasonable doubt" and it not sufficient for a conviction. Even if he did rape her, the jury needs to believe that's what happened or there won't be a conviction. Unjust? If he's guilty, sure. But that's why having good character and believable is important. There is a reason why parents used to tell their kids about the little boy who cried wolf. If you've heard the story, a real wolf eventually does come along. The story isn't about whether there are real wolves or not or about whether the boy deserves to get eaten. The story is about being believed by others.
No. That's an improper purpose. The complainant's history of voluntary sexual activity is inadmissible for the purpose of proving a tendency. It's admissible if it explains how she got the injury or, arguably, whether her behavior after the "assault" was consistent with that of a true victim (though that'd be a stretch). The dividing line is between evidence of her character and evidence that tends to prove the defendant's alibi.
What did she think they were going to do? Sit down and have tea?
And he should never have invited her to his suite at that time of night alone.
What did he think, he would never be charged with--and possibly convicted of--rape?
No, I'm not offended! I know exactly what you mean about the ED commercials. I was just being silly.
No offense taken. It's Friday. You're allowed to be silly.
But, I have an overwhelming affection for animals. I have two Shetland Sheepdogs who bring absolute joy to my life.
I'm also a whole bunch ticked off by a recent post about the bozo who killed the Lab by duct taping him. These people don't deserver "human" status.
I can't abide people who abuse animals.......
You are right. This case is a joke.
Catholic boy urban legend? :^)
What did he think, he would never be charged with--and possibly convicted of--rape?
Who said "he" invited her? She was the one in charge of assigning rooms. She put him on the top floor at the end of the hall, out of the way of everyone.
She put his body guards on a floor below. She ran to his room up the back stairs after 1030 at night. What woman in her right mind would go to a man's room (especially at night and especially alone), and not believe that this left her wide open to what ever happened.
I'm afraid you and I on a jury would hang it good. That one aspect of this whole case about her going to his room alone is what stops me right in my tracks. Women do not 'do' this.
All of you, think about this: Suppose she was anal raped, and then had vaginal intercourse afterwards. Who knows? Some people's sexual desires are 'exotic' to many, but to them, it turns them on. I can't relate to pain, but there are others who ENJOY it. Go figure.
Hey, we don't know what went on in that room, but the alleged victim and Kobe do. Maybe she's just a hustler? We'll all see soon enough.
Afterall, it isn't what we think that matters, it's what the jurors think. Don't think so? I got two cases for you: 1.O J Simpson 2.LA Cops in Simi Valley (Rodney King case)
What you said.
You and me both. I have gone ballistic on a few FReepers on those threads.
Please TRY to keep abreast of the FACTS in this case.
She was NOT penetrated in the area you mentioned,
nor has she claimed such.
Hey, I watched almost the entire OJ Simpson trial and I was sure OJ would be in jail! Surprise, surprise! He is now stealing oxygen in my state.
Well, I don't want to argue with anyone.....but that's my take on it.
Being a woman, I would never go alone to a man's room at night if I didn't have something else on my mind.
The same about getting into a car with a stranger. No way!
:)
It's not just that. But her behavior in the room (if we can believe the admissions that she made) was less than chilly. She supposedly admits flirting and heavy kissing.
And he has no prior history of rape or other such actions jumping out of the closet, meanwhile her closet is jumping all over the place.
That's right. They were "necking." I'm not sure if she gave him an ultimatum and he refused and then she cried fowl or what. But this whole court case is a mess.
I think she bit off more then she could chew......pardon the pun.
:)
Professional jurors are needed in Los Angeles.
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.