Kobe's accuser's story told in court

  • Thread starter 4xchampncountin
  • Start date
4

4xchampncountin

Guest
EAGLE, Colo. -- The 19-year-old resort worker accusing Kobe Bryant of rape told investigators the NBA superstar attacked her from behind, grabbing her by the neck and forcing himself on her despite repeated protests, according to testimony Thursday.

The woman described a consensual sexual encounter that spiraled suddenly out of her control, Eagle County Sheriff's Detective Doug Winters said at a hearing to determine whether Bryant stands trial.

According to Winters, the Los Angeles Lakers star was joined by the front desk worker on a tour of the posh mountain resort last June. After some flirting, Bryant asked her back to his suite.

The woman showed Bryant a tattoo on her back but turned down his request to join him in the hot tub, Winters said.

Her shift was ending and she "wanted to go home," he said. "She stated she was starting to feel a bit uncomfortable."

She stood up to leave and Bryant gave her a hug that led to some consensual kissing, Winters said.

When she turned around to leave, Bryant grabbed her by the neck, pulled up her skirt and raped her against a chair, Winters said. She told investigators she told Bryant "no" at least twice, before bursting into tears as the five-minute attack went on.

During and after the attack, he said, Bryant kept asking, "You are not going to tell anyone, right?" She said she agreed at one point.

"She said the reason she told him no was for fear of -- she didn't want him to commit more physical harm to her," Winters said.

He also said a nurse who examined the woman later at a hospital found injuries consistent with a sexual assault.

Bryant faces up to life in prison if he stands trial and is convicted of the single felony charge of sexual assault.

That testimony came after, in a surprising move, Bryant's lawyers went ahead with the hearing to determine whether the NBA superstar should stand trial for rape.

Legal experts had expected the defense to waive the hearing and head straight to trial rather than allow prosecutors to lay out their case publicly for the first time.

"The only reason the defense would choose to go ahead with a preliminary hearing when it doesn't have to is it believes, given the minimal amount of evidence the prosecution is going to be putting on, it may gain more by cross-examining those witnesses," said Stan Goldman, a professor at the Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, when the decision to hold the hearing was announced.

Goldman suggested the defense may call witnesses to testify -- a list that could include Bryant himself.

The judge had already rejected defense requests to have the woman testify in person and to see her medical records.

Earlier in the afternoon, Bryant arrived at the courthouse, ignoring a throng of reporters and spectators gathered outside. He had to take off a necklace and was checked with a metal-detecting security wand before walking through a metal detector and into the courtroom.

Thursday morning, people began lining up at the courthouse to get into the hearing. Security for the hearing was beefed up after dozens of threats have been made against the prosecutor, the judge and Bryant's accuser. Judge Frederick Gannett has acknowledged receiving letters containing death threats, and two men have been charged with threatening Bryant's accuser.

Court officers examined photo identifications before issuing passes to the handful of people. Among them was George Zinn of Salt Lake City, who arrived on a Greyhound bus to watch the spectacle.

"I don't consider Kobe a role model," he said.

Virginia Ricke, an Ames, Iowa, retiree sightseeing in Colorado, drove to Eagle from nearby Glenwood Springs to watch. She said she believes the justice system will work but her intuition tells her something went awry between Bryant and the woman in a room at a nearby resort last June.

"I kind of believe that what happened in that room was dumb, whether it was rape or not, because he had such a good, clean image before," she said.

Nearby, a group of University of Colorado students handed out packages of condoms and legal contracts that both parties would sign to agree to consensual sex.

The case against Bryant could lead to a celebrity trial the likes of which have not been seen since O.J. Simpson was acquitted of murder charges eight years ago.

Since Monday, about 300 television, print and radio reporters and camera crews have been arriving in Eagle, filling motel rooms and parking TV satellite trucks in a vacant lot across from the courthouse that normally is a lumber dealer's back yard.

At Bryant's initial court appearance on Aug. 6, he said just two words: "No, sir," when Gannett asked if he objected to giving up his right to have a preliminary hearing within 30 days. Unlike that appearance, cameras were banned from the courtroom this time.

Prosecutors planned to put a sheriff's detective on the witness stand to describe some details of what allegedly happened between Bryant and his accuser.

Bryant needed to appear for a bail hearing regardless of whether his lawyers waived the preliminary hearing. There also is a possibility he could enter a plea during an arraignment before another judge.

Two district judges were on notice they might be called to preside over an arraignment if the defense asks, state courts spokeswoman Karen Salaz said. By agreeing to an immediate arraignment, Bryant would not have to come back to Eagle again in the next 30 days to answer the charge.

Under Colorado law, Bryant must be arraigned within 30 days of the preliminary hearing or the decision to waive the hearing. After that, he is guaranteed the right to go to trial within six months, but he could waive that right as well.
 
This really doesn't look good for Kobe. This is kind of the story I was expecting to hear. It is virtually impossible for the defense to prove that it didn't happen just the way she said it happened. It really comes down to her word against his. It is a shame that he may go to prison for 20 yrs or more for a momentary lack of judgement, but if indeed it went down like she said it did, he certainly deserves to serve some time for it.

She certainly played a part in what led up to this. But that doesn't by any means mean that she deserved it.

It also can't look good to his wife that he basically tried to seduce her for quite some time. Obviously, he had plenty of time to change the course of his actions as a husband that was about to something really stupid. But he chose not to. :mellow:
 
-------It really comes down to her word against his. It is a shame that he may go to prison for 20 yrs or more for a momentary lack of judgement, but if indeed it went down like she said it did, he certainly deserves to serve some time for it.----------

How much time do you think he deserves for this crime? NO means NO! 20 years is so little if he's convicted of this. I'm not attacking you or your opinion. I just wanted mine heard also
 
Originally posted by sgbg88@Oct 10 2003, 01:59 AM
-------It really comes down to her word against his. It is a shame that he may go to prison for 20 yrs or more for a momentary lack of judgement, but if indeed it went down like she said it did, he certainly deserves to serve some time for it.----------

How much time do you think he deserves for this crime? NO means NO! 20 years is so little if he's convicted of this. I'm not attacking you or your opinion. I just wanted mine heard also
I'm not saying 20 years is excessive if he did what he is accused of. I'm just saying it seems kind of weird that he could be convicted and sentenced for that long with no actual evidence except her word. It is just an ugly situation, but he put himself in it all by himself.
 
plain and simple, it could have been prevented. she should have went home after the "tour" and he should have let her be on her way. but in a matter such as this, you dont know who to beleave. just hope she's telling the truth and not messing with anothers life and freedom.
 
No! always means No! of course.But it isn't impossible that the 'No!' is added after the initial Yes! as an after thought to prevent shame...or in this case to beneifit the 'victim' monetarily.Which will happen,of course.
 
A couple questions I have are:

Why did she enter the room willingly?

Did she ever give a firm "No" ?

If she did resist vehemently, then why didnt Bryant have any scratches on him?

Why did the accuser allegedly have another man's hair and DNA in her underwear?
 
Originally posted by Happy29@Oct 16 2003, 01:04 AM
A couple questions I have are:

Why did she enter the room willingly?

She answered that. He invited her and she liked him. That does not mean that she wanted him inside of her.
 
Originally posted by Happy29@Oct 16 2003, 01:04 AM
Did she ever give a firm "No" ?

She answered that also. She said she said no firmly and repeatedly.
 
If she did resist vehemently, then why didnt Bryant have any scratches on him?


Maybe she isn't as violent as he is. I'm guessing he is just a little bigger and stronger than she is.
 
Originally posted by Happy29@Oct 16 2003, 01:04 AM
Why did the accuser allegedly have another man's hair and DNA in her underwear?
She didn't answer that one, but I fail to see the relevance.

If she had chosen to sleep with 20 guys that night before she entered that room it wouldn't matter. If she said no to Kobe then he had no right to enter therein.
 
Originally posted by 4xchampncountin@Oct 15 2003, 09:35 PM
If she had chosen to sleep with 20 guys that night before she entered that room it wouldn't matter. If she said no to Kobe then he had no right to enter therein.
You are very right about that 4X. But if she had sleep with 20 guys the night before do you really think she would have told Kobe no? I mean come on he's a good looking rich man.. MY opinion, the more I read, is that the no was an after thought.
 
Originally posted by DeeDee@Oct 16 2003, 10:55 AM

You are very right about that 4X. But if she had sleep with 20 guys the night before do you really think she would have told Kobe no? I mean come on he's a good looking rich man.. MY opinion, the more I read, is that the no was an after thought.
[/quote]
That is exactly what is so distressing about these cases. Noone except them will ever really know what happened in that room. There have been plenty of cases where the woman feels so guilty about what she did that she decides that it was rape. But if he did what she says he did, it would be a shame if he got away with it. What a mess :huh:
 
Very true 4x. And on the flip side, he could also get convicted of this and what if he really didn't rape her? That would be horrible.
 
Originally posted by DeeDee@Oct 16 2003, 11:36 AM
Very true 4x. And on the flip side, he could also get convicted of this and what if he really didn't rape her? That would be horrible.
That is exactly right. If he didn't do it, he could still be convicted and end up in prison where he find out what violation is all about. Like I said, what a mess :unsure:
 
It's not looking good for the prosecution, it's gonna be a tougher battle than they thought.



EAGLE, Colo. -- Kobe Bryant's accuser showed up for her rape exam wearing underpants containing another man's sperm, a startling discovery that defense lawyers called "compelling evidence" the NBA star is innocent.

But Bryant's preliminary hearing ended Wednesday with prosecutors telling a judge there was "uncontradicted" evidence that the Los Angeles Lakers guard raped the 19-year-old woman at a mountain resort.

"He held her by the back of the neck with his hand during sexual intercourse," prosecutor Greg Crittenden said. "He lifted up her skirt. She said 'no.' He pulled down her underpants and she said 'no.' He penetrated her from behind and she cried."

Judge Frederick Gannett said he hoped to rule by Monday whether Bryant will have to stand trial on a sexual assault charge that could send him to prison for life.

Gannett only has to find there is probable cause to believe Bryant raped the woman, something defense attorney Pamela Mackey told the judge prosecutors failed to prove because the woman told her story through a sheriff's detective.

"She is not worthy of your belief," Mackey said.

Eagle County District Attorney Mark Hurlbert said, however, he was confident the judge would send the case to trial.

"No prosecutor puts on their whole case at preliminary hearing," he said. "In this case you saw kind of a sanitized version."

If the two-day preliminary hearing wasn't the entire prosecution case, it still contained graphic details about an encounter that began with the woman excited to meet the basketball superstar, escalated into consensual kissing and hugging, and ended with sex across the back of a chair.

Prosecutors tried to portray Bryant as an arrogant athlete who held the woman down and raped her, concerned only that she might talk about the encounter.

Six days after prosecutors revealed details of the alleged attack, it was the defense's turn to question the lead detective in the case about what happened the night of June 30 at the resort where she worked.

When it was the defense's turn to question the lead detective in the case, Mackey tried to poke holes in the woman's story, raise doubts about whether she told Bryant ``no'' and show she had sex with someone else two days before the alleged assault June 30.

"This is an extremely thin case based mostly on hearsay," Mackey said.

Mackey wasted no time getting Detective Doug Winters to say that the yellow underwear the woman wore to her rape exam at a nearby hospital the next day contained sperm from another man, along with Caucasian pubic hair.

The 25-year-old Bryant, who is black, contends he had consensual sex with the woman.

Winters said the woman told him she had consensual sex with another man on June 27 or June 28 and used a condom, backing earlier defense suggestions she was sexually active before her encounter with Bryant.

Winters also said two pairs of panties from the woman were tested -- one from the night of June 30, the other being the one she wore to a hospital for an exam the next day.

The latter pair contained blood and semen, Winters said.

"The accuser arrived at the hospital wearing panties with someone else's semen and sperm in them, not that of Mr. Bryant, correct?" Mackey asked.

"That's correct," Winters responded.

Mackey suggested injuries found during the woman's exam could have come from having repeated sex, a contention she first made in court last week.

The defense contends the tests on the underpants provide Bryant with "compelling evidence of innocence."

Stan Goldman, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, said the argument might be more of a public relations move.

"The defense may be spinning this more for the public than the court," he said. "It's impressive, but its negative public relations value for the prosecution is more significant than its legal value."

Bryant sat stoically with his hands folded watching his attorney tear apart the prosecution's version of the case. Occasionally, he leaned over and talked to his other lawyer, Hal Haddon.

Mackey, who was subdued while questioning Winters, also managed to introduce something prosecutors didn't talk about last week -- a statement by the night auditor at the hotel who was the first person the accuser saw when she left Bryant's room.

The night auditor sent police a letter saying she saw the woman as she came back to the front desk at the Cordillera Lodge & Spa.

"What the night auditor says in her letter is the accuser did not look or sound as if there had been any problem," Mackey said, asking Winters "Correct?"

"Yes," Winters responded.

Winters also acknowledged the woman didn't tell him she told Bryant "no" when he interviewed her the day after the alleged rape.

"I asked the accuser why she never told Mr. Bryant 'no,' " Winters wrote in his report.

Last week, however, Winters testified the victim told him she told Bryant "no" repeatedly, and that Bryant even forced her to turn around and face him and say it at one point.

It was not clear if that came from a later interview with the woman.

Some of the testimony -- mostly concerning statements Bryant gave police -- was given behind closed doors because the issue of whether they are admissible has yet to be decided. That led to some courtroom exchanges that didn't always make sense to the public and media who crowded the small courtroom.

"What you get to see in connection with the open hearing may appear to be slightly schizophrenic," Gannett warned.

Some legal experts said the evidence of the woman's previous sexual partners and her admission she was excited to meet Bryant makes the prosecution's case appear weak.

Eagle attorney Jim Fahrenholtz called the hearing "a disaster for the prosecution."

Most, though, said they expected the judge to order a trial for Bryant, which would probably not take place until next summer, at the earliest.

"It will be pretty hard for this judge to say you don't have enough non-hearsay evidence," former Denver prosecutor Craig Silverman said.
 
In my opinion, it doesnt matter if a woman has had sex with a thousand men, if she says " no" , the man has got to stop. I can imagine that things got hot and heavy. Then maybe at the last minute she said no or stop but HE was too out of control at that time and he didnt stop. I know that she is young. Just because this guy has alot of money and is famous, shouldnt mean that he can get away with going forward with an act even after the girl said no or stop. His money will buy his way out of this. In his field of work, he is aggressive. This aggressiveness is in him. I can imagine that he got too aggressive with that girl.


With all his money, power, and fame- he didnt think he had to stop. Now this girl will be slandered because she wasnt a virgin when all this occurred. A woman has the choice to say yes to sex with 10 men, and then no to the 11 th. ( It's a sexist thing also. )
 
I agree, but they have to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that she said no and he didn't stop. This whole thing is about creditability and they are destroying hers by proving she is promiscious. In my opinion she shouldn't have been there in the first place and she put herself in that position. Now, hold on a minute before you go to slamming me, I never said that what happened was right because it wasn't, just maybe some of the blame needs to be placed on her as well.
 
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I know we all dont really know what happened there. But I think its stupid to say that the girl is the bad guy because she had other sexual partners. Just because a girl goes up to a room with a guy doesnt entitle him to have his way with her. Thats crazy. We may as well be one of those muslim countries. ( I swear, I'm not trying to bash you!!!)


All I can say is .....I think men could dance around naked with all their glory hanging out and we women would not try to have our way with them. We can resist. We have self control.



Sorry......I swear I am not trying to male bash!!! I better leave this subject.
 
Originally posted by JrFan4ever@Oct 17 2003, 10:24 AM
I know we all dont really know what happened there.
You sais a mouthful right there, we don't know what happened, so lets don't be so quick to pass judgement on Kobe just because he is a male. And believe me, I am not saying this because I am a Kobe fan, I have never seen him play basketball.
 
Originally posted by JrFan4ever@Oct 17 2003, 10:24 AM



All I can say is .....I think men could dance around naked with all their glory hanging out and we women would not try to have our way with them. We can resist. We have self control.



Believe me, if you did, you wouldn't hear any bitchin' about it. :lol:
 
Originally posted by 4xchampncountin@Oct 9 2003, 05:20 PM
Nearby, a group of University of Colorado students handed out packages of condoms and legal contracts that both parties would sign to agree to consensual sex.
We'll have to sign contracts before we get laid? What the heck is up with that crap?
 
Originally posted by bowtie+Oct 17 2003, 11:01 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (bowtie @ Oct 17 2003, 11:01 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--JrFan4ever@Oct 17 2003, 10:24 AM



All I can say is .....I think men could dance around naked with all their glory hanging out and we women would not try to have our way with them.&nbsp; We can resist.&nbsp; We have self control.



Believe me, if you did, you wouldn't hear any bitchin' about it. :lol: [/b][/quote]
:lol: :lol: :lol: Yes, I know. :rolleyes:
 
Originally posted by fury+Oct 17 2003, 02:38 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (fury @ Oct 17 2003, 02:38 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--4xchampncountin@Oct 9 2003, 05:20 PM
Nearby, a group of University of Colorado students handed out packages of condoms and legal contracts that both parties would sign to agree to consensual sex.
We'll have to sign contracts before we get laid? What the heck is up with that crap? [/b][/quote]
That might be a good idea. But I am sure that some trouble could arise.
 
Back
Top Bottom