Posted on 08/16/2004 9:38:54 AM PDT by Hawk44
DENVER - With Kobe Bryant's sexual assault trial scheduled to begin in less than two weeks, speculation is mounting that prosecutors are looking for a way to dismiss the charge after a series of setbacks.
The NBA star is due in court Monday in Eagle, his final court appearance before jury selection begins on Aug. 27.
But events of the past two weeks suggest prosecutors might be seeking an avenue to dismiss the charge with minimal embarrassment, legal experts said.
"We have too many things happening in this case that we just don't normally have," said Larry Pozner, former president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. "The big picture? None of this bodes well for the prosecution."
Officials connected with the case are barred from commenting in detail to the media, but district attorney's spokeswoman Krista Flannigan has said prosecutors still plan to try Bryant, who acknowledges having sex with the then 19-year-old hotel employee last summer but insists she consented.
Among the setbacks for prosecutors:
_In late July, District Judge Terry Ruckriegle lost a battle with media attorneys and was forced to release transcripts of a closed-door hearing that prosecutors called "extremely harmful" to their case. The transcripts had mistakenly been e-mailed to a handful of media organizations.
In the transcripts, a defense expert witness explained why she believed DNA evidence indicated the alleged victim had sex with another man after her encounter with Bryant but before her hospital exam the following day. The defense has suggested it would make that argument to undermine the accuser's credibility.
The woman's attorney denied the claim, but prosecutors said release of the transcript threw into question whether a fair jury could be seated.
_Soon after the transcript was released, the accuser's attorneys, John Clune and Lin Wood, appeared on national television to criticize courthouse blunders that they said damaged their client's faith in the justice system. They questioned whether the mistakes — the e-mailing of the transcripts in June to several news organizations, and the posting of the alleged victim's name on a state court Web site — would prevent a fair hearing of their clients' accusation.
_Last week, the woman's lawyers filed a civil suit against Bryant in federal court, seeking unspecified monetary damages for pain, "public scorn, hatred and ridicule" they said she has suffered since her encounter with the Los Angeles Lakers (news) guard. Bryant attorney Pamela Mackey said in a court filing that the lawsuit had the effect of "exposing her motivation to pursue her false accusation — the hope of a large monetary reward."
_On Friday, Ruckriegle dealt the prosecution another blow, turning down a motion to delay the trial.
A state hearing officer on a panel that determines violations of Colorado's Rules of Professional Conduct, Tom Overton, told The Denver Post he was "appalled" by interviews in which Wood and Clune have criticized the judge. Overton said that if media reports of the lawyers' comments are correct, "their actions have shown an utter contempt for the integrity of the state judicial system and the court."
Clune said Friday that neither he nor Wood could comment because of a gag order. However, Denver civil rights attorney David Lane contends Wood and Clune are not covered by the order, since they are not part of the criminal case.
Bryant, 25, faces four years to life in prison or 20 years to life on probation, and a fine up to $750,000.
Despite the setback Friday, the judge did give the prosecution some good news. He issued another ruling prohibiting or limiting testimony about the woman's mental health, including purported suicide attempts and any drug and alcohol use.
Legal experts said the ruling on the woman's mental health history could help encourage her to continue participating in the criminal case by keeping potentially embarrassing information out of public view.
The developments had some legal experts guessing the case was about to be dismissed. Others said the alleged victim might be trying to win judgments against Bryant in both civil and criminal court.
"If this woman is really angry about what happened to her and doesn't want to see it happen to other women, she might proceed with the criminal case win or lose, just to put Kobe Bryant through some additional hoops, just to have 12 people looking at Kobe Bryant and wondering about him for the duration of a trial, just to have the possibility that he might get convicted," said former prosecutor Norm Early.
It would be to her advantage in civil court to have prosecutors drop the felony charge and avoid the possibility of acquittal, said Dan Recht, former president of the Colorado Criminal Defense Bar. He said an acquittal would make it more difficult to convince a civil jury that Bryant harmed the woman, despite the lower standard of proof required to win a civil case.
More information.
Bryant Prosecutors Can't Bar Testimony
By JON SARCHE, Associated Press Writer
EAGLE, Colo. - In another setback to the prosecution in the Kobe Bryant sexual assault case, the Colorado Supreme Court refused Monday to hear an appeal of a key ruling that allows the NBA star's attorneys to tell jurors about the accuser's sex life.
District Judge Terry Ruckriegle last month ruled that the defense can use information about the woman's sexual activities in the three days before her hospital exam, which occurred 15 hours after her encounter with Bryant.
In their one-page order, justices did not explain why they decided against considering the appeal. It came as Bryant's final pretrial hearing got under way.
Bryant is no victim
He CHOOSE to have adulterous sex with a teenager, consenual or not
He wouldn't be in court today if he had morals or character
I respectfully disagree - from everything I've seen there was sufficient evidence to proceed to trial, and if additional evidence turned up before the trial, that's what discovery is for. For how he handled the case after indictment, on the other hand...
If I'm not mistaken, the alleged victim is NOT a teenager.
An argument which is absolute poppycock, since the only information released is information the jury was going to hear anyway.
There's one bright spot though.... the story managed to use "Kobe" and "hoops" in close proximity, providing some small degree of frivolity in its otherwise deadly-grim prose.
"Bryant is no victim
He CHOOSE to have adulterous sex with a teenager, consenual or not
He wouldn't be in court today if he had morals or character"
At the time, the young woman was 19, which is of legal age in every state in this country. Consensual sex between adults is not illegal.
The only question here is whether or not that sex was consensual or not. In one case it's no crime; in the other it is.
Will this case come to trial? Probably not. Will money change hands between Bryant and the young woman? Probably.
Is Bryant a nice man? Probably not, but that's really not the issue before this court.
Bryant appears to be the victim of an abuse in our system. He is not a victim in the sense that he was not physically injured by this ordeal, but his credibility was ruined through an act of greed on her part, and an act of weakness on his part. It is true that he participated in the events that brought this about, but that does not excuse the abuse of the system that was put in place to protect victims of rape.
At best, I would like to ask his past sponsors to remind him that even if he is cleared of the rape charges, he is not entitled to their sponsorship. Adultery is still not an acceptable practice in the eyes of the sponsors, and they should tell him that its tough, and even if the rape charges had never been lodged, he would've lost their sponsorship based on the adultery alone.
But that won't happen. He'll have new sponsors soon enough.
It's called, "THEY do the trials, WE do the appeals". It's a fairly rare event when an appeals court will second-guess a trial judge at this stage of a case. The appeal had more utility for posturing purposes than any real chance of success.
Well, I sure am glad her mental health problems, suicide attempts, drug use, and alcoholism will be kept private. (heavy dripping sarcasm)
"Legal experts said the ruling on the woman's mental health history could help encourage her to continue participating in the criminal case by keeping potentially embarrassing information out of public view."
Can you be just a little more specific on exactly what will not be discussed in court? (more heavy dripping sarcasm)
Do you think money was offered to her (by Kobe or his attorney) before this all got started? Or do you believe Kobe thought the bad publicity was worth whatever she wanted?
Can you smell the ozone?
"Isn't nineteen considered a teenager?"
Sure. It's also considered to be an adult capable of consent. Courts aren't ruling on whether it's a good idea to have adulterous affairs. They're ruling here on criminal matters.
You could be 80 years old and have sex with a 19 year old, or 20 19 year olds and not have broken the law. Indeed, if you were 80 and doing that, you'd get three cheers from most folks here on FR.
By using the word "teenager," you implied that this was some sort of illegal activity. If consensual, it was not illegal anywhere.
"From post 15 you can see I agree pretty much with your post. It may sound nitpickie, but adultery and fornication are not legal in all 50 states...
"
While that is true, adultery and fornication are prosecuted in any of the 50 states. Such a prosecution would be laughed out of court.
The only jurisdiction I know of that prosecutes adultery cases is the military, under the UCMJ, and even there, prosecutions are rare, indeed.
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.