Bryant Case

[Steff]

Now we are starting to see why there were the questions about 3 different guys...

 

A nurse is saying she had different seman on her underwear.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=1638553

She admitted to sex with her ex 2 days before being with Kobe in her initial statement to police. What that means for the case against him, I do not know.

Yet more instability on her part. What kind of woman has sex with 2 guys in 2 days (and that's all that's confirmed at this point, there could be more)? A normal, mentally healthy person does not do that type of stuff, and anyone who thinks that type of behavior is acceptable is likely a whore too.

 

And if you don't think the semen of another guy on her underwear is a key piece of information and relevant to this case, I suggest you try to put your biases aside, because it is VERY key. Any objective person can clearly see that.

Hmmm... so if I have sex with Jim.. and then 2 days later get raped then the story automatically gets called into question? C'mon.. IF she was raped how is that hurt HER story? Obviously more has come to light, but your logic is completely flawed in thinking it's instability on her part IF she was raped to have 2 types of semen in her panties.

[southsider2k5]

Now we are starting to see why there were the questions about 3 different guys...

 

A nurse is saying she had different seman on her underwear.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=1638553

She admitted to sex with her ex 2 days before being with Kobe in her initial statement to police. What that means for the case against him, I do not know.

Yet more instability on her part. What kind of woman has sex with 2 guys in 2 days (and that's all that's confirmed at this point, there could be more)? A normal, mentally healthy person does not do that type of stuff, and anyone who thinks that type of behavior is acceptable is likely a whore too.

 

And if you don't think the semen of another guy on her underwear is a key piece of information and relevant to this case, I suggest you try to put your biases aside, because it is VERY key. Any objective person can clearly see that.

The thing is, it doesn't matter how many other guys she had sex with. Not one bit.

 

Kobe Bryant’s accuser showed up for her rape exam wearing panties 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

 

They have yet to attack the actual happenings that I have seen. They have just put her personal life on trial. This is exactly what Colorado law is supposed to prohibit, instead Bryants lawyers have run an end around the law, and are doing just that. All that matters is what happened in that room. She can be the most evil slutty coniving b**** in the world, but if she said no, and Kobe Bryant kept going, Kobe Bryant raped her. Period. End of story.

[Steff]

And if you don't think the semen of another guy on her underwear is a key piece of information and relevant to this case, I suggest you try to put your biases aside, because it is VERY key.  Any objective person can clearly see that.

There is no bias.... the irony that coming from you who callled her a whore the second the story broke

 

You are clearly the biased one. Prostitutes can get raped, clu. (Nick Cages Las Vegas movie) Girls who "sleep around" can get raped (Jodie Foster in The Accused). Little girls get raped (Sally Field movie with Keifer Sutherland - sorry guys.. can't remember any of these titles today). Yep.. movies. But excellent examples, IMO.

[SuperSteve]

Steff, he case if falling apart. From what I have heard, no marks. C'mon, even if she did have any marks, how do we know they are from Kobe. Doesn't she ever change her underwear too? Apperantly she had the same pair on for a few days. I think the sex was just consensual, and she's a bit of a wacko.

[Steff]

Steff, he case if falling apart. From what I have heard, no marks. C'mon, even if she did have any marks, how do we know they are from Kobe. Doesn't she ever change her underwear too? Apperantly she had the same pair on for a few days. I think the sex was just consensual, and she's a bit of a wacko.

Excuse me.. I am not commenting AT ALL on the case specifics. I am SPECIFICALLY commenting on Clu's comments. Address those, and what I said and I can comment back to you.

[SuperSteve]

Excuse me.. I am not commenting AT ALL on the case specifics. I am SPECIFICALLY commenting on Clu's comments. Address those, and what I said and I can comment back to you.

YOU ARE BIAS. No question about it. You have it set in your mind that she already got raped. You bring up having sex, and then two days later getting raped. We don't know if she did or didn't.

 

BTW, only comments that were meant for you was her case is falling apart.

[Steff]

YOU ARE BIAS. No question about it. You have it set in your mind that she already got raped. You bring up having sex, and then two days later getting raped. We don't know if she did or didn't.

 

BTW, only comments that were meant for you was her case is falling apart.

What the hell are you talking about? Reading comprehension issue? Show me ONCE where I have said she was definitely raped? Go on... can't. Cause I have NO IDEA since I was NOT there.

 

 

I put MYSELF in Clujers comments. "Me and Jim..... " :dips***

[clujer420]

Show me ONCE where I have said she was definitely raped? Go on... can't. Cause I have NO IDEA since I was NOT there.

 

You've been saying from the beginning that Kobe is guilty. If you deny that, you have more severe issues than I ever could have imagined.

[clujer420]

There is no bias.... the irony that coming from you who callled her a whore the second the story broke 

 

Ummmm....yes, I did call her a whore from the beginning. And guess what? I was correct, she IS a whore.

 

You are clearly the biased one. Prostitutes can get raped, clu. (Nick Cages Las Vegas movie) Girls who "sleep around" can get raped (Jodie Foster in The Accused). Little girls get raped (Sally Field movie with Keifer Sutherland - sorry guys.. can't remember any of these titles today). Yep.. movies. But excellent examples, IMO.

 

Well, thank you for pointing out the obvious. Fact is, MANY athletes have been accused of rape, and outside of Mike Tyson (who IMO and many other's opinion did not do it) none that I know of have been convicted.

 

Listen...the defense cannot prove that Kobe did not make those marks. You cannot prove a negative. So, what they have to do is show that there is REASONALBE DOUBT that Kobe made them. That is where previous partners around the time the "rape" occured come into play. If you cannot see that correlation, that's not my problem, because clearly the judge can see it, as he permitted the defense to go with the line of questioning. If the judge felt it was simply smear tactics, he would not have allowed it to continue.

 

The defense's job is very clear -- show the jury that there is reasonable doubt. They do that, and justice will be served. If they cannot do that, justice will be served.

 

Here are the FACTS...

 

1) The detective (who is speaking on behalf of the accuser) has changed his story. At first, she never said "no", but now he's saying that she did say "no", and that Kobe stopped IMMEDIATELY when she did.

 

2) Kobe "held her by the neck with both hands" while he pulled down her panties, lifted her skirt, and raped her. First of all, how can he hold her by the neck with both hands and pull down her panties at the same time? Does he have Gumby arms? And if he was holding her by the neck with both hands and raping her for 5 minutes, don't you think there would be marks on her neck? THERE WERE NONE. And don't you think she would try to fight him off by scratching and clawing at him? KOBE HAD ZERO MARKS ANYWHERE ON HIS BODY. The only mark on the woman was a small bruise on her cheek -- a bruise so small, in fact, that the detective DID NOT EVEN NOTICE IT when he first spoke to her.

 

3) Kobe had some blood marks on his shirt that came from the woman. That only proves that Kobe was in the room with her and that they had sex -- all of which he has admitted to.

 

4) The first person to see the woman after she left Kobe's room was the night auditor at the hotel. She came down to count her money before she went home for the night, and the night auditor has said that she "did not look nor sound troubled".

 

5) The woman was in charge of putting Kobe and his bodyguards in a room, and she chose to put Kobe in a room in a secluded part of the hotel, while his bodyguards were put in a completely different part of the hotel. To me, it sounds like she had this planned from the beginning. Remember, she knew he was coming and was "excited" because of it.

 

6) The woman had sex with at least 1 other guy in the hours prior to her encounter with Kobe. This is relevant for only 1 reason -- she had vaginal tearing that is being blamed on Kobe, and a mark on her cheek that is being blamed on Kobe. Is it not conceivable that the tearing and bruise on her cheek occured PRIOR to her meeting with Kobe? Is it not even possible? The answer is YES, it is possible.

 

Looking at the above FACTS, I CANNOT see ANY reason why this should even go to trial. I'm quite certain it will, but unless the prosecution has a MAJOR bombshell that they are saving, I cannot see how this will end in anything but "not guilty".

 

Go ahead, Steff, you're the expert, refute the above FACTS I have just stated.

[SuperSteve]

YOU ARE BIAS. No question about it. You have it set in your mind that she already got raped. You bring up having sex, and then two days later getting raped. We don't know if she did or didn't.

 

BTW, only comments that were meant for you was her case is falling apart.

What the hell are you talking about? Reading comprehension issue? Show me ONCE where I have said she was definitely raped? Go on... can't. Cause I have NO IDEA since I was NOT there.

 

 

I put MYSELF in Clujers comments. "Me and Jim..... " :dips***

I apreciate you making me feel good about reading. You feel his guilty, I feel he is innocent. Get over it. I never said anything negative towards you, and you turn around and basically are rude towards me. Ya call me nuts earlier, now ya say I have issues with reading. I have no problem saying I am bias. Ya seem to have an issue, ya think your not bias. Ha, best joke I have heard today. I NEVER SAID YA SAID KOBE WAS DEFFINATELY GUILTY. Wow, who's the one with reading comprehesion problems. I haven't heard anything to make me think he is guilty.

 

Oh, and she is a whore. Ya know having sex with ex-boyfriends and going and messing around with Kobe (and yes she did, the whole kissing s***, don't tell me she just kissed him). Change her damn underwear please. If I was the defense, I would bring that fact up. She had semen stains in her underwear from two days prior. I would guess that she had more likely had sex with someone else closer to the time Kobe 'raped" (ha) her.

 

Open ya eyes. Look at both sides.

[SuperSteve]

Ummmm....yes, I did call her a whore from the beginning.  And guess what?  I was correct, she IS a whore.

 

 

 

Well, thank you for pointing out the obvious.  Fact is, MANY athletes have been accused of rape, and outside of Mike Tyson (who IMO and many other's opinion did not do it) none that I know of have been convicted. 

 

Listen...the defense cannot prove that Kobe did not make those marks.  You cannot prove a negative.  So, what they have to do is show that there is REASONALBE DOUBT that Kobe made them.  That is where previous partners around the time the "rape" occured come into play.  If you cannot see that correlation, that's not my problem, because clearly the judge can see it, as he permitted the defense to go with the line of questioning.  If the judge felt it was simply smear tactics, he would not have allowed it to continue. 

 

The defense's job is very clear -- show the jury that there is reasonable doubt.  They do that, and justice will be served.  If they cannot do that, justice will be served. 

 

Here are the FACTS...

 

1) The detective (who is speaking on behalf of the accuser) has changed his story.  At first, she never said "no", but now he's saying that she did say "no", and that Kobe stopped IMMEDIATELY when she did.

 

2) Kobe "held her by the neck with both hands" while he pulled down her panties, lifted her skirt, and raped her.  First of all, how can he hold her by the neck with both hands and pull down her panties at the same time?  Does he have Gumby arms?  And if he was holding her by the neck with both hands and raping her for 5 minutes, don't you think there would be marks on her neck?  THERE WERE NONE.  And don't you think she would try to fight him off by scratching and clawing at him?  KOBE HAD ZERO MARKS ANYWHERE ON HIS BODY.  The only mark on the woman was a small bruise on her cheek -- a bruise so small, in fact, that the detective DID NOT EVEN NOTICE IT when he first spoke to her.

 

3) Kobe had some blood marks on his shirt that came from the woman.  That only proves that Kobe was in the room with her and that they had sex -- all of which he has admitted to.

 

4) The first person to see the woman after she left Kobe's room was the night auditor at the hotel.  She came down to count her money before she went home for the night, and the night auditor has said that she "did not look nor sound troubled".

 

5) The woman was in charge of putting Kobe and his bodyguards in a room, and she chose to put Kobe in a room in a secluded part of the hotel, while his bodyguards were put in a completely different part of the hotel.  To me, it sounds like she had this planned from the beginning.  Remember, she knew he was coming and was "excited" because of it.

 

6) The woman had sex with at least 1 other guy in the hours prior to her encounter with Kobe.  This is relevant for only 1 reason -- she had vaginal tearing that is being blamed on Kobe, and a mark on her cheek that is being blamed on Kobe.  Is it not conceivable that the tearing and bruise on her cheek occured PRIOR to her meeting with Kobe?  Is it not even possible?  The answer is YES, it is possible.

 

Looking at the above FACTS, I CANNOT see ANY reason why this should even go to trial.  I'm quite certain it will, but unless the prosecution has a MAJOR bombshell that they are saving, I cannot see how this will end in anything but "not guilty".

 

Go ahead, Steff, you're the expert, refute the above FACTS I have just stated.

Ya the man Clu.

[Chisoxfn]

The big thing is...if your raped, you'd be feeling real dirty. What the hell was she doing, trying to see how many different guys sperms she could get on the same panties?

[WHarris1]

What the hell was she doing, trying to see how many different guys sperms she could get on the same panties?

Didn't you hear about the new fad?

[clujer420]

The big thing is...if your raped, you'd be feeling real dirty.  What the hell was she doing, trying to see how many different guys sperms she could get on the same panties?

 

Sick whore. :puke :puke :puke

[Steff]

 

 

You've been saying from the beginning that Kobe is guilty.  If you deny that, you have more severe issues than I ever could have imagined.

Go find it. Aint gonna happen...

[clujer420]

 

 

You've been saying from the beginning that Kobe is guilty.  If you deny that, you have more severe issues than I ever could have imagined.

Go find it. Aint gonna happen...

For some reason my "Sex, Lies, and Politics" board only goes back 10 pages, and it doesn't have our original Kobe discussions where it was obvious that you felt he was guilty.

 

Are you saying you don't think Kobe is guilty?

[Steff]

Ummmm....yes, I did call her a whore from the beginning.  And guess what?  I was correct, she IS a whore.

 

 

 

Well, thank you for pointing out the obvious.  Fact is, MANY athletes have been accused of rape, and outside of Mike Tyson (who IMO and many other's opinion did not do it) none that I know of have been convicted. 

 

Listen...the defense cannot prove that Kobe did not make those marks.  You cannot prove a negative.  So, what they have to do is show that there is REASONALBE DOUBT that Kobe made them.  That is where previous partners around the time the "rape" occured come into play.  If you cannot see that correlation, that's not my problem, because clearly the judge can see it, as he permitted the defense to go with the line of questioning.  If the judge felt it was simply smear tactics, he would not have allowed it to continue. 

 

The defense's job is very clear -- show the jury that there is reasonable doubt.  They do that, and justice will be served.  If they cannot do that, justice will be served. 

 

Here are the FACTS...

 

1) The detective (who is speaking on behalf of the accuser) has changed his story.  At first, she never said "no", but now he's saying that she did say "no", and that Kobe stopped IMMEDIATELY when she did.

 

2) Kobe "held her by the neck with both hands" while he pulled down her panties, lifted her skirt, and raped her.  First of all, how can he hold her by the neck with both hands and pull down her panties at the same time?  Does he have Gumby arms?  And if he was holding her by the neck with both hands and raping her for 5 minutes, don't you think there would be marks on her neck?  THERE WERE NONE.  And don't you think she would try to fight him off by scratching and clawing at him?  KOBE HAD ZERO MARKS ANYWHERE ON HIS BODY.  The only mark on the woman was a small bruise on her cheek -- a bruise so small, in fact, that the detective DID NOT EVEN NOTICE IT when he first spoke to her.

 

3) Kobe had some blood marks on his shirt that came from the woman.  That only proves that Kobe was in the room with her and that they had sex -- all of which he has admitted to.

 

4) The first person to see the woman after she left Kobe's room was the night auditor at the hotel.  She came down to count her money before she went home for the night, and the night auditor has said that she "did not look nor sound troubled".

 

5) The woman was in charge of putting Kobe and his bodyguards in a room, and she chose to put Kobe in a room in a secluded part of the hotel, while his bodyguards were put in a completely different part of the hotel.  To me, it sounds like she had this planned from the beginning.  Remember, she knew he was coming and was "excited" because of it.

 

6) The woman had sex with at least 1 other guy in the hours prior to her encounter with Kobe.  This is relevant for only 1 reason -- she had vaginal tearing that is being blamed on Kobe, and a mark on her cheek that is being blamed on Kobe.  Is it not conceivable that the tearing and bruise on her cheek occured PRIOR to her meeting with Kobe?  Is it not even possible?  The answer is YES, it is possible.

 

Looking at the above FACTS, I CANNOT see ANY reason why this should even go to trial.  I'm quite certain it will, but unless the prosecution has a MAJOR bombshell that they are saving, I cannot see how this will end in anything but "not guilty".

 

Go ahead, Steff, you're the expert, refute the above FACTS I have just stated.

Why? This case is obviously BS.

 

Now back to my posts... ya know.. the ones where I used Jim and myself and stuck them into you analogy. The point of my replies.. NOT the KOBE BRYANT CASE...

[Steff]

YOU ARE BIAS. No question about it. You have it set in your mind that she already got raped. You bring up having sex, and then two days later getting raped. We don't know if she did or didn't.

 

BTW, only comments that were meant for you was her case is falling apart.

What the hell are you talking about? Reading comprehension issue? Show me ONCE where I have said she was definitely raped? Go on... can't. Cause I have NO IDEA since I was NOT there.

 

 

I put MYSELF in Clujers comments. "Me and Jim..... " :dips***

I apreciate you making me feel good about reading. You feel his guilty, I feel he is innocent. Get over it. I never said anything negative towards you, and you turn around and basically are rude towards me. Ya call me nuts earlier, now ya say I have issues with reading. I have no problem saying I am bias. Ya seem to have an issue, ya think your not bias. Ha, best joke I have heard today. I NEVER SAID YA SAID KOBE WAS DEFFINATELY GUILTY. Wow, who's the one with reading comprehesion problems. I haven't heard anything to make me think he is guilty.

 

Oh, and she is a whore. Ya know having sex with ex-boyfriends and going and messing around with Kobe (and yes she did, the whole kissing s***, don't tell me she just kissed him). Change her damn underwear please. If I was the defense, I would bring that fact up. She had semen stains in her underwear from two days prior. I would guess that she had more likely had sex with someone else closer to the time Kobe 'raped" (ha) her.

 

Open ya eyes. Look at both sides.

Excuse me.. I feel he's guilty..? What the hell have you been reading? Show me ONCE where I said he was GUILTY. Once.. just once.. c'mon... I dare you.

 

 

I have looked at both sides. After the report that there wasn't even his semen anywhere on here, I think the entire Eagle County Law Enforcement Agency should be hung by their balls.

 

Now you know how I feel... :dips***

[Steff]

 

 

You've been saying from the beginning that Kobe is guilty.  If you deny that, you have more severe issues than I ever could have imagined.

Go find it. Aint gonna happen...

For some reason my "Sex, Lies, and Politics" board only goes back 10 pages, and it doesn't have our original Kobe discussions where it was obvious that you felt he was guilty.

 

Are you saying you don't think Kobe is guilty?

Oh yes.. all the archives are there.

 

Now.. I say he's 100% innocent. His semen wasn't even on her. Anywhere. At the begining, and up until last week I always maintained that there was a 50/50 chance he did it. The morning of the prelim when we had only heard her side I did think he was forceful - because of the supposed bruising that turned out to be invisible - and said that IF he did rape her he'd walk because of her previous history. However, never, not ONCE did I EVER say he was guilty.

[Steff]

Ya call me nuts earlier,

I called you nuts because you made the comment "what did she expect".

 

I think that was an incredible stupid statement. If I walk into the parking garage alone at night... and get raped.. "what did I expect"..? And if I meet one of my male friends at their hotel rooms.. and get raped... "what did I expect"..?

 

If your mom or sister or girlfriend was walking to her car from work at dark.. and she got raped.. "what did she expect"..?

[clujer420]

Oh yes.. all the archives are there.

 

Now.. I say he's 100% innocent. His semen wasn't even on her. Anywhere. At the begining, and up until last week I always maintained that there was a 50/50 chance he did it. The morning of the prelim when we had only heard her side I did think he was forceful - because of the supposed bruising that turned out to be invisible - and said that IF he did rape her he'd walk because of her previous history. However, never, not ONCE did I EVER say he was guilty.

 

Congratulations, you have seen the light. There's virtually no way in hell that he is guilty of rape, and IMO this should not even go to trial.

 

And by the way, do not tell me that the archives are there, because it's only going back 10 pages on my computer, and it does not go back to our initial Kobe discussions. I am not a liar.

[clujer420]

I called you nuts because you made the comment "what did she expect".

 

I think that was an incredible stupid statement. If I walk into the parking garage alone at night... and get raped.. "what did I expect"..? And if I meet one of my male friends at their hotel rooms.. and get raped... "what did I expect"..?

 

If your mom or sister or girlfriend was walking to her car from work at dark.. and she got raped.. "what did she expect"..?

Well that's assuming she got raped.

 

She obviously went to his room with the intent on having sex, and it is my opinion that she did so and then cried rape for either attention and/or money.

 

But I think when someone says "what did she expect would happen", they aren't saying she's at fault for what happened. I think they're saying she knew what she was going there for, and she should just own up to it. IMO it would make her case more solid than saying she "just went there to kiss and he went nuts".

[Steff]

Oh yes.. all the archives are there.

 

Now.. I say he's 100% innocent. His semen wasn't even on her. Anywhere. At the begining, and up until last week I always maintained that there was a 50/50 chance he did it. The morning of the prelim when we had only heard her side I did think he was forceful - because of the supposed bruising that turned out to be invisible - and said that IF he did rape her he'd walk because of her previous history. However, never, not ONCE did I EVER say he was guilty.

 

Congratulations, you have seen the light. There's virtually no way in hell that he is guilty of rape, and IMO this should not even go to trial.

 

And by the way, do not tell me that the archives are there, because it's only going back 10 pages on my computer, and it does not go back to our initial Kobe discussions. I am not a liar.

Screw you Clu.. seen the light. I was never in the dark. I decided not to make a decision the day the news came out so that makes me in the dark? I seem to remember many others not willing to make a decision at that point either.

 

 

Mine goes back 16 pages to the begining of September. Check your preferences. And while your at it... where is that liar comment I made.

[Steff]

I called you nuts because you made the comment "what did she expect".

 

I think that was an incredible stupid statement. If I walk into the parking garage alone at night... and get raped.. "what did I expect"..? And if I meet one of my male friends at their hotel rooms.. and get raped... "what did I expect"..?

 

If your mom or sister or girlfriend was walking to her car from work at dark.. and she got raped.. "what did she expect"..?

Well that's assuming she got raped.

 

She obviously went to his room with the intent on having sex, and it is my opinion that she did so and then cried rape for either attention and/or money.

 

But I think when someone says "what did she expect would happen", they aren't saying she's at fault for what happened. I think they're saying she knew what she was going there for, and she should just own up to it. IMO it would make her case more solid than saying she "just went there to kiss and he went nuts".

At that point none of the information (no semen, other semen, etc..) was not revealed. So his comment was, IMO, out of line.

 

Holy s***!! When did it become a crime to have a friggin opinion on this board?

[clujer420]

Screw you Clu.. seen the light. I was never in the dark. I decided not to make a decision the day the news came out so that makes me in the dark? I seem to remember many others not willing to make a decision at that point either.

 

 

Mine goes back 16 pages to the begining of September. Check your preferences. And while your at it... where is that liar comment I made. 

Yes, seen the light. His guilt or innocence was never in question in my eyes. And if you're going to try and say you were 50/50 on it, I'm going to say you are trying to rewrite history.

 

And yes, mine goes back to September 16th as well. Kobe Bryant was arrested on the 4th of July. So that's more than 2 months of discussions that are not in the archives. Correct?