Kobe
September 2, 2004 11:24 AM   Subscribe

Kobe Kobe Kobe Kobe Kobe Kobe Kobe

Clearly a SportsFilter post . . .
posted by geekyguy (75 comments total)
 
Yes, I heard. And?
posted by agregoli at 11:30 AM on September 2, 2004


Ahhh, so another rich sports hero avoids criminal charges...
posted by Eekacat at 11:35 AM on September 2, 2004


Were I in possession of a rat's ass, I would neglect to offer one forth.
posted by dhoyt at 11:41 AM on September 2, 2004


Who is this Kobe that you speak of?
posted by adampsyche at 11:44 AM on September 2, 2004


Oh boy, Kobe's lawyers successfully browbeat his accuser into submission, justice in action!

As I wrote this morning, just because the charges were dismissed doesn't mean he's not guilty.
posted by fenriq at 11:46 AM on September 2, 2004


Adampsyche -- he's talking about burgers.
posted by Robot Johnny at 11:48 AM on September 2, 2004


Kobe
posted by gwint at 11:53 AM on September 2, 2004


Don't forget about Kobe!
posted by jasper411 at 12:03 PM on September 2, 2004


Kobe?
posted by Robot Johnny at 12:05 PM on September 2, 2004


No, Kobe!

who's the kobe guy?
posted by bob sarabia at 12:32 PM on September 2, 2004


Badger Badger Badger Badger RaaaaAAAAPE! RaaaaAAAAPE!!
posted by Stan Chin at 12:34 PM on September 2, 2004


it's impossible to think that the young lady who refused to testify would have, oh i dont know, been exaggerating, and was really only after the multi-millionaire's money?

i suppose thats out of the range of probability

seeing as she didnt sue the other men she had sex with that next day.

you know, the non millionaires.
posted by tsarfan at 12:38 PM on September 2, 2004


SoBe!

Flowbee!
posted by emelenjr at 12:40 PM on September 2, 2004


Kobo?
posted by iamck at 12:42 PM on September 2, 2004


You never know without a trial, tsarfan. I suppose we might find something out in the civil trial if it ever happens. Luckily (for Kobe the adulterer) the millionaire can browbeat the accuser into not testifying. Once again money buys justice.
posted by Eekacat at 12:46 PM on September 2, 2004


oh whatever. you know she liked it
posted by bob sarabia at 1:02 PM on September 2, 2004


Once again money buys justice.

You are assuming he's guilty of rape. Adultery is not a crime. If he did not rape her, money bought him what he deserved, although he still had to suffer through the whole ordeal until now, with another one ahead.

Being rich shouldn't get people off, but being rich doesn't make them guilty either.
posted by callmejay at 1:03 PM on September 2, 2004


Actually, Eekacat, if you believe in innocent until proven guilty then isn't innocence the absence of guilt?

Alleged victim. Nothing was proven in court.

Kobe's actual adjudicated crime(s) are less than those of Chris Webber. Less than those of Charles Barkley. Less than an of those listed at The Smoking Gun - Kobe hasn't even gotten a DUI.

The moral crime he is guilty of is between him and his wife. If you want to point out that it is a crime then charge him, get your conviction if that will make you feel better to sit morally higher than Kobe Bryant. Whatever.

Alleged Victim

as posted on spofi
posted by geekyguy at 1:12 PM on September 2, 2004


The ridicule and death threats received by the victim, directly a result of Bryant's fame, had a lot to do with the case being dismissed. Bryant may or may not be guilty, but future celebrity rapists stand a pretty good chance of never even being charged with anything.
posted by transona5 at 1:14 PM on September 2, 2004


I assume nothing, callmejay. Perhaps you might see the comment I made about the civil trial? You're right, being rich doesn't make anyone guilty, but being rich does give you the ability to buy justice. If you are rich, you can buy a legal team that can get you off of murder. Being anything less than rich gets you (if you are lucky) a plea bargain.
posted by Eekacat at 1:15 PM on September 2, 2004


Conversely, Eekacat, if the defendant wasn't wealthy would the prosecution have pursued what was a weak case from the beginning as fervently as they did this one? Seriously, would this witness have stood the scrutiny of a public defender much less the team that Kobe assembled?

The admitted crime.
posted by geekyguy at 1:23 PM on September 2, 2004


This is the best Kobe post ever IF it is the last Kobe post.
posted by Busithoth at 1:24 PM on September 2, 2004


Well, she didn't really get a fair chance, did she.
posted by agregoli at 1:25 PM on September 2, 2004


It's worth noting that the case was dismissed with prejudice, meaning that prosecutors reserve the right to bring those charges up again at some point in the future.
posted by clevershark at 1:27 PM on September 2, 2004


If you are rich, you can buy a legal team that can get you off of murder.

I agree with this statement, but i don't think the Kobe case is a good example of it.

Being anything less than rich gets you (if you are lucky) a plea bargain.

I think an average man would have had a good shot at being cleared in this case, from what I know, which is admittedly little. She didn't have a great case.
posted by callmejay at 1:27 PM on September 2, 2004


BOO TO THAT
posted by chrid at 1:31 PM on September 2, 2004


I still don't know what to make of this. Sure celebrities often think they're above the law and delve into criminal activity. On the other hand some people are nuts and make up stuff about celebrities. Tucker Carlson got falsely accussed of rape a couple years ago by some stalker. Who knows.
posted by bobo123 at 1:33 PM on September 2, 2004


with prejudice means the opposite of how you took it, clevershark.

The charges are reportedly being dropped with prejudice, meaning that the charges cannot be refiled at a later date. - from The Sports Network
posted by geekyguy at 1:35 PM on September 2, 2004


I don't understand why Kobe's lawyers would have him give a statement that "I now understand how she feels that she did not consent to this encounter." Isn't that pretty much an admission that she's not after money or attention (leaving the defense to claim something like mental illness)?
posted by transona5 at 1:35 PM on September 2, 2004


Was it a weak case? I have only marginally followed this, but I've read that the evidence included non-menstrual blood from her genitals found on Kobe's t-shirt and the area between the vagina and the anus was bruised. These are strong signs of violent, forced sexual intercourse, also known as rape. Strong signs, not weak. In fact, the prosecuters had less hard evidence in the Mike Tyson rape case and he ended up in jail.
posted by sic at 1:39 PM on September 2, 2004


oh whatever. you know she liked it

bob sarabia, I hope you are cursed with a dozen daughters for that ridiculous bullshit you spouted.

No means no, its always meant no and will always mean no.
posted by fenriq at 1:42 PM on September 2, 2004


The proven crime was done by the local government in how they handled the case. Leaks and errors on their part are in the public record and are not debatable. This certainly led to an environment that was unfair to the victim.
Innocent until proven guilty is the most unfair in cases of sexual assault. It's just plain brutal.
posted by fluffycreature at 1:42 PM on September 2, 2004


Also a bruise on the woman's jaw where he allegedly his thumb was pressing down as he held her head down from behind and (allegedly) forced her over a chair. That bruise coupled with the blood on his tshirt from the bleeding vaginal tears is, um, suspicious. Of course it could have been consensual rough sex. The fact that she had sex with another man either before or after the alleged rape does not eliminate rape as a possibility.
posted by sic at 1:50 PM on September 2, 2004


Sex with blood and brusing like that is rarely consensual.
posted by agregoli at 2:00 PM on September 2, 2004


Beats me, Geekyguy, but there are plenty of rich folks in Eagle county (you've heard of Vail, I believe?). I hardly believe that Kobe was the lone target of a radical prosecutor. Maybe you've followed this case? Others have pointed to some compelling evidence. As a middle class blue collar type I might have beat these accusations, but I would have gone broke in the process spending years of salary in the interim. Luckily for Kobe he just has to spend a few games worth of earnings. The best outcome for me might have been a plea bargain. Of course, Kobe is much more important to me in society since he bounces a ball and throws it through a netted hoop really well. Long live our sports heroes, and lets all look the other way.
posted by Eekacat at 2:02 PM on September 2, 2004


Fenriq, your sarcasm detector is outa whack.
posted by zpousman at 2:03 PM on September 2, 2004


It's not funny even if it is sarcastic.
posted by agregoli at 2:20 PM on September 2, 2004


No one questioned it humor value, agregoli, Frenriq responded as though it were a serious comment, which it clearly wasn't.
posted by jonson at 2:33 PM on September 2, 2004


It doesn't matter - it shouldn't even be said, which is fenriq's point.

I have zero tolerance for comments like that as well.
posted by agregoli at 2:38 PM on September 2, 2004


I see everyone is bringing their own prejudices to this debate.

Either Kobe was falsely accused of rape, or he is indeed a rapist who has gotten away with it.

Both possibilities produce a victim who will (most likely) never see that justice is done.
posted by SpaceCadet at 2:40 PM on September 2, 2004


Actually it wasn't Fenriq's point... the whole "No means no" implied that Fenriq thought bob was serious. I don't know bob, but I honestly doubt he genuinely thought a rape victim enjoyed herself. He was parodying the response a heartless person would give. We're in sad, overly sensitive shape if mocking evil is on the same moral par with being evil.
posted by jonson at 2:45 PM on September 2, 2004


Even a mocking tone or a sarcastic comment intended to be funny perpetuates that sentiment. I don't care to see it, and I'll say so when I do. I don't see the point in saying it at all. It's disgusting whether said seriously or in jest.
posted by agregoli at 2:49 PM on September 2, 2004


As a middle class blue collar type I might have beat these accusations, but I would have gone broke in the process spending years of salary in the interim. Luckily for Kobe he just has to spend a few games worth of earnings. The best outcome for me might have been a plea bargain. Of course, Kobe is much more important to me in society since he bounces a ball and throws it through a netted hoop really well. Long live our sports heroes, and lets all look the other way.

So, what? Is your problem that the result was bad or that Kobe's wealthy because hes good at basketball?
posted by Yelling At Nothing at 3:00 PM on September 2, 2004


Yelling At Nothing, if you must question what I said, then you missed the point.
posted by Eekacat at 3:02 PM on September 2, 2004


There is no public clamor to revive the era of adultery prosecutions, but, curiously, no dead statute was ever thrown a surer lifeline than Colorado's adultery law.

Anybody wanna try getting a silly law thrown out? Betcha Kobe'd take this one all the way to the Supremes...
posted by swell at 3:11 PM on September 2, 2004


I can't believe this is still here.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 3:12 PM on September 2, 2004


oh whatever. you know she liked it
posted by bob sarabia


Fuck off.
posted by jokeefe at 3:35 PM on September 2, 2004


Innocent until proven guilty is the most unfair in cases of sexual assault.

What the hell does that mean?

I see everyone is bringing their own prejudices to this debate.

Indeed. None of the Monday morning quarterbacks in this thread has any idea of the truth of the situation. But I guess it's fun to rubberneck.
posted by rushmc at 3:42 PM on September 2, 2004


Conversely, Eekacat, if the defendant wasn't wealthy would the prosecution have pursued what was a weak case from the beginning as fervently as they did this one? Seriously, would this witness have stood the scrutiny of a public defender much less the team that Kobe assembled?

Um...you're logic is way faulty here, geeky. most defendants would not have had the financial resources Kobe did to turn over every rock in this woman's past to make her a witness that would not have withstood scrutiny. he has millions to throw at private detectives, jury analysts, high priced legal talent, etc. When you can outspend the prosecution, you will win every time.

Best judicial system money can buy.
posted by prodigalsun at 3:45 PM on September 2, 2004


To complete my rambling thought above, prosecutors like cases they can win, ones they can't make them look bad. In a celebrity case like this, where the opponent's resources are formidable, I'm sure they felt that they could win in the face of that. Because now they just look silly.

Does anyone here not think that a settlement is all but in the can right now?
posted by prodigalsun at 3:52 PM on September 2, 2004


By the way, here's the SI article where I read about the woman's injuries.

Pretty nasty stuff.
posted by sic at 3:54 PM on September 2, 2004


zpousman, there are things that aren't funny, joking about bombs in airport security lines is one, joking about a victim of a sexual assualt is another.

I couldn't give the first damn if he was kidding or not. He posted it here without any disclaimers and I stand by my reaction.

Funny, I have yet to see old Bob back in here since he wrote it. Why? Wouldn't he defend himself if he was joking?

He's helping to perpetuate an incredibly offensive mindset that women fantasize about being raped and therefore, its okay to rape them. Fuck him and, for that matter, fuck you for defending his grotesque humor.

On Preview: Prodigalsun, I saw the prosecutor interviewed on the news this morning, he said he wanted to try the case and the sole reason the charges were dropped was because the accuser requested it.

Why is it silly to respect the wishes of the victim? She's been through hell because of this, maybe she's just had enough of the death threats from rabid and moronic Laker fans?
posted by fenriq at 3:55 PM on September 2, 2004


Dahlia Litwick in Slate (via SpoFi, where this little horrorshow should have stayed.)
posted by caitlinb at 3:58 PM on September 2, 2004


The fact that the accused "apologized" to the alleged victim makes me think that there is a global out of court settlement that probably includes the civil suit.
posted by sic at 3:58 PM on September 2, 2004


None of the Monday morning quarterbacks in this thread has any idea of the truth of the situation. But I guess it's fun to rubberneck.

Clarity amongst the hyperbole. I felt like I'd come up for air when I read that.

When you can outspend the prosecution, you will win every time.

Mike Tyson was convicted of rape in 1992, when he had plenty of cash to "outspend the prosecution". Hey, sometimes the law actually does the job it's supposed to.
posted by SpaceCadet at 4:16 PM on September 2, 2004


prodigalsun - I also suggested that this particular witness could have been handled if Kobe had had a public defender. With the history that Ruckreigle allowed, it seems this was a doomed case. Should it be allowed? Not for me to say.

caitlinb - I brought this over here and will admit to being surprised/disappointed that the more mature discussion is taking place at SpoFi. I am proud to be a member of both and always interested in real opinions, not some of the early comments and certainly not what bob s crapped in here.

The Slate article is pretty much where I stand. Great piece, thanks caitlinb.

SpaceCadet - everyone played their part except the plaintiff/witness. In many jurisdictions if a woman is beaten by a significant other she cannot just 'not press charges'. If they had physical evidence that would have stood completely without her testimony then they should have gone forward regardless. In the name of justice. They did not have a case.
posted by geekyguy at 4:28 PM on September 2, 2004


Sorry to not have met your maturity requirement, geekyguy.
posted by Eekacat at 4:40 PM on September 2, 2004


Oh, and geekyguy? Your knowledge of the law and this case is astounding.
posted by Eekacat at 4:45 PM on September 2, 2004


None of the Monday morning quarterbacks in this thread has any idea of the truth of the situation. But I guess it's fun to rubberneck.

As is true with just about any news story in which we are not personally involved. So is it "rubbernecking" to discuss any legal case or political dispute in which the truth is in question?
posted by transona5 at 4:49 PM on September 2, 2004


Wasn't directed at you at all, Eekacat.

It isn't necessary to post to every thread. dhoyt and adampsyche could have simply moved along.

As far as the maturity level take a look at the SpoFi thread where no one was so starved for attention that they felt the need to come in and simply crap in the thread.

Just like everyone else I am only stating my opinion/perception. Why the need to get personal? Relax, this isn't about you.
posted by geekyguy at 4:50 PM on September 2, 2004


geekyguy, you did point out the early comments in your post. I was the second comment. I realize it's not about me, but truly in a sense it is about me since I am not a rich person who gets his case in the public eye and can afford an expensive defense. Eagle county is not without it's rich and influentual. Living near there I am all too aware of it, and all too aware of the fact I cannot afford to live there, nor afford their rich games. Kobe came in, got caught, and got away since he could afford an incredible defense. I seriously doubt that a public defender could do what his team did. Maybe you have more faith in the law than I do, but unless you are quite wealthy, I hope you don't find yourself in the same situation as Kobe, no matter what the jursidiction. Good luck with your public defender.
posted by Eekacat at 5:09 PM on September 2, 2004


all too easy
posted by bob sarabia at 5:56 PM on September 2, 2004


I'm sorry, what were we taling about? Oh, yeah, the catch.

You have to have faith in the system. It is flawed but it is the best system we have. She chose to go forward within that system. If your problem is with the system then seek change from within.

The only person who did not fully participate in the system was the alleged victim. Don't pretend she wasn't warned of the potential dangers of pursuing this case. She agreed until she no longer wanted to participate because those warnings had proven true. Countless people would have counseled her including the District Attorney.

By opting out she has made a victim of everyone else involved. Kobe. Taxpayers. Media. Public.
posted by geekyguy at 6:06 PM on September 2, 2004


all too easy

hehehe easiest blog on the web bob.
posted by a3matrix at 6:48 PM on September 2, 2004


What killed the case:

"renowned pathologist Dr. Michael Baden-- an erstwhile prosecution witness in the case who was abruptly dropped by prosecutors without explanation in mid-July — [...] had advised prosecutors that the young woman's injuries were at least as consistent with consensual sex as with forcible sexual assault." (Emphasis mine.)

and

"Baden's words would be coupled with recently surfacing DNA evidence seemingly implicating a "Mr. X" as a more likely culprit in causing the microscopic gynecological injuries observed during the subsequent "rape kit" examination."

Also, the DA is up for reelection and this case broke the state's budget for such things.
posted by mischief at 7:04 PM on September 2, 2004


i don't care much for pro basketball. i say we kill him just in case.
posted by bargle at 7:59 PM on September 2, 2004


As is true with just about any news story in which we are not personally involved. So is it "rubbernecking" to discuss any legal case or political dispute in which the truth is in question?

Discuss? Most people here are assuming Kobe is a rapist. Let me suppose another alternative. Imagine for a second that he had consensual sex with this woman, and she is falsely accusing him of rape? (i.e. she's lying). Her motives would be financial. Hey presto! She gains financially in an out-of-court settlement.

If that imagined scenario were true, do you think Kobe should prosecute the accuser for slander or something similar? Supposing this is true, Kobe is the victim of a false accusation, and any future rape accusation that is actually genuine will have to face just that little bit more of cynicism from those listening to it.

Some balance.....
posted by SpaceCadet at 1:12 AM on September 3, 2004


That bitch was just after his money. He should sue her for all the money he lost in endorsements because of her lies
posted by WLW at 6:39 AM on September 3, 2004


zpousman, there are things that aren't funny

There are, but those things will vary from person to person: you don't get to be arbiter.

So is it "rubbernecking" to discuss any legal case or political dispute in which the truth is in question?

To some degree, probably so. Particulary when what is being discussed is the issue of guilt/innocence, which cannot be determined from this remove, rather than the legal details of the case itself. People love gossip, but gossip isn't particularly laudable.

You have to have faith in the system. It is flawed but it is the best system we have.

That is a meaningless statement. If we immediately executed everyone who was even accused of any crime, that too would be "flawed" but the best system we had. Anyone who has faith in the current system at this point simply hasn't been paying attention.
posted by rushmc at 7:36 AM on September 3, 2004


Space Cadet, do you really think that she would go through all this for money? Be painted as a drug addicted, mentally unbalanced, money-grubbing slut? Lose her job? Death threats? Have her name and address all over the internet? Is money worth that? My feeling is that if it were just for money, she would have quit a long time ago-like when the idiotic judicial clerk "accidentally" mailed confidental information to the media (how on earth does that happen confidentally?) But once the judge threw out the rape shield law, she finally said, "I give up, this is too much."

So, yet again, a woman who has the balls to come forward about rape is slandered, slammed, destroyed, painted as a whore, and loses. It's sad and pathetic.
posted by aacheson at 8:15 AM on September 3, 2004


zpousman, there are things that aren't funny

There are, but those things will vary from person to person: you don't get to be arbiter.


True, but at least as a community we get to decide what's tasteless.
posted by agregoli at 8:18 AM on September 3, 2004


Er, I meant, .. how on earth does that happen accidentally??
posted by aacheson at 8:19 AM on September 3, 2004


Space Cadet, do you really think that she would go through all this for money?

Absolutely. It's easy money compared to earning it in and office or a factory over several years (I'm guessing a substantial payment). Notice how even Kobe tries to "understand" how she'd think consensual sex was rape (in his final statement), as if it was part of a deal to make her look not so bad when the case was rejected. I definitely smell a deal there.

So, yet again, a woman who has the balls to come forward about rape is slandered

You obviously are bringing your prejudice to this thread and believe all those accused of rape are indeed rapists. The accusation is enough. This kind of attitude undermines genuine cases. The boy who cried wolf and all that.
posted by SpaceCadet at 9:07 AM on September 3, 2004


Hrm, thinking about this some more here.

Of course whenever this comes up, someone will bring up the issue that she should have kept herself safe by not going into his room. That's all well and good, but if false accusations are as frequent as is claimed by same, would it not make sense for men to avoid the risk of being accused of sexual impropriety by avoiding sexual encounters with women they barely know, in ways that might lead to a difference of opinion about consent?

I for one am not leaping to judgement that he is a rapist or she is in it for the money. In my mind, there are enough questions about this case that it should have been decided by a jury rather than, in part, by a mafia-like extortion racket of Lakers fans. And that is rather the point here is that in this case, the system may not have worked. The case was decided not by the legal system, but by a kangaroo court of media and public opinion.
posted by KirkJobSluder at 10:04 AM on September 3, 2004


Wow, what an ugly thread. Bunch of know-nothings spouting misogyny on the one side and uninformed moralizing on the other (as if it were necessary to choose a "side" in this miserable sordid case). I'm starting to forget why I used to like coming to MeFi.
posted by psmealey at 8:59 PM on September 3, 2004


« Older New York's Finest Sweep Up Streets   |   The Night They Missed the Horror Movie Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments