Sealed filing on evidence in Kobe case released (NEW!!)

FOXSports.com ^ | 7/28/2004 | Jon Sarche

[tallhappy]

Thanks. I'll try sperm or semen on PubMed -- not Google -- thanks to your warning.

Actually, you've made it pretty clear what is done now. Thanks very much.

[mikegi]

I don't really know any of the details on the case. I do know that sperm isn't motile for very long but I would suspect it would live longer inside of her than just being deposited in her undies. Maybe it leaked out later?

I did a search on google to see if there was a clear answer to this question. There isn't. Here's a link:

http://www.ivillagehealth.com/experts/fertility/qas/0,,166253_127700,00.html

Basically, all you can say, assuming there actually was motile sperm, is that either a) she had sex after Kobe, or b) there was "leakage" from an encounter before Kobe. I bet you could get a good idea of the time frame based upon on amount of motile sperm that was found. Just a few would point to (b) while plenty would point to (a).

[JLS]

Good to see you yet again struggling against the willfully uniformed on this subject.

To me the most interesting NEW thing in this article or at least new to me is that this "victim" is being paid to be a "victim" by the state of Colorado. That someone in a case like this can be compensated by the state victims compensation fund before it is established that they are a victim is very odd. She thus has two reasons to keep up this possible farce, her reputed love for publicity and the money she is being paid.

[TheOtherOne]

The question is why has the court had repeated releases of information helpful to the defense?

That's an easy one, because all of the information is helpful to the defense whenever it is released. This is not a hard case, since he has admitted having sex with her, the ONLY issue is one of consent. What facts do you imagine there are that are helpful to the alleged victim's case? Hard to even imagine facts supporting her, but there are a boatload of facts against her: non-Kobe DNA in her panties, non-Kobe DNA in her person, Text messages she sought to surpress, no physical injuries seen by investigating police, swabs from her with 3+ peoples DNA.

Where is the evidence of non-consensual sex? It will be a he said, she said, with all the facts supporting his contetion that the sex was consenual. Please, let us all know the facts that point to a lack of consent? (don't even go to her 'vaginal injuries' as those are of disputed origin - precisely becuase of the multiple DNA samples found on her)

[airedale]

So she's a slob and doesn't follow her mother's advice to wear clean underwear. Who knows when those other stains got there. As for the rest I'll believe it exists when it's actually introduced into evidence and handled through the Judaical system. To many of the insta pundits are spinning and commenting on others speculation as if it's the truth or even evidence that's been introduced. Heck these same pundits had Peterson convicted with rock solid evidence. They've pulled a 180 on that case as all the stuff they speculated about go down in flames. I still think Scott did it but their case is in flames.

We'll see how things play out. Kobe's got the best defense money can buy. I think he's spending more than the annual budget of the county does for all of it's court cases.

It would have been a lot easier on the woman if she was a victim of a sexual assault to keep her mouth shut. Her lawyers had to tell her what the defense would put her through.