Kobe Scumbag Bryant speaks (Leaked Police statement)

[Zynx]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2004/magazine/09/14/kobe0920/index.html?cnn=yes

>>• When he was questioned by two police officers in the parking lot of the Lodge and Spa at Cordillera in the early morning of July 2, 2003, Bryant, after first denying an encounter took place, admitted to "holding her around her neck from behind" and graphically described a series of sex acts he engaged in with his accuser.

• As the officers and Bryant made small talk while walking to his room, Bryant told them he would pay his accuser to make the charges go away because "I'm in the worst f------ situation." <<

[Kanary]

1. When you put out a teaser, could you please at least give *SOME*

clips?

It really doesn't take that much effort, since you already had the page right there.

:shrug:

Kanary

[Zynx]

2. Article very short.

Will edit though.

[oldhat]

3. Holy shit!

Wowsers! Are you as shocked as I am that a 24 year old multimillionaire basketball superstar who has fashion model good looks to top off his effortless charisma and cosmopolitan fluency in Italian has actually has slept with other women outside his marriage and then used some of his virtually limitless money to hush them up?

For shame, Kobe Bryant! For shame!

[bloom]

31. I'm more shocked

by the denial around here of people who dismiss the rape implication of "holding her around her neck from behind" and his own admission that that he knew what he did was a problem.

[DrWeird]

4. You know, one in two people end up having extra-marital affairs.

Are you saying half of everybody is a scumbag?

[IdaBriggs]

45. I'll jump on that pyre. Yes.

If you are lying and/or cheating on a significant other with whom you have a commitment to monogamy, you are a scumbag. If you don't want to be married, get a divorce AND THEN screw around. Endangering your partner's life by exposing them to potential disease (with or without a condom) without their permission is rotten, and you are, by definition, a scumbag. Lying and/or cheating is a sign of other problems in a relationship which are NOT solvable by bringing other people into it (your relationship). If you are staying in an unhappy relationship because of children, then accept monogamy as part of the sacrifice. Deceitful behavior is usually symptomatic of selfish scumbags, and should be corrected so that people are NOT scumbags.

I also acknowledge the difference between personal PRIVATE behavior and public persona. To be frank, I was never really interested in Clinton's sex life because he was a good President; I trusted his wife to address their personal issues. I feel the same way about the people on this list -- your opinions are interesting, and what you do with in your private life is your own business (but if you behave like a scumbag, I'm okay with your significant other making your personal life hell).

My opinion, anyway. Its one of the reasons a good relationship is so much work -- the urge to BE a scumbag can occasionally be overwhelming, so resisting it is part of the price. Flame away. :)

[Commendatori]

66. I'm with you, Ida.

You won't get flames from me. With your "Endangering your partner's life by exposing them to potential disease (with or without a condom) without their permission is rotten, and you are, by definition, a scumbag," you've put forth a completely unassailable argument. I can't wait to see if people try to argue against you.

[DrWeird]

74. Alright, I'll give it a go.

If you make the statement that everybody who has an affair is a scumbag, then you're taking a fifty-fifty chance of calling your own mother a scumbag. The odds of contracting a venereal disease from a one night stand of protected sex is vanishingly small. It's a point, but I'd be more worried about the spouse exposing his or her partner to second-hand smoke for forty years.

[Commendatori]

101. I'll take that chance

If my father went around cheating on my mom, few would have a problem calling HIM a scumbag, so I fail to see why my mother, yours or anyone else deserves a pass based on different plumbing.

Also, "vanishingly small" is not small enough, and not accurate - especially with the wide variety of diseases out there.

[IdaBriggs]

122. So what? The definition still stands, even if it is my mother.

She wouldn't escape scumbag status just because I love her more than I do a total stranger, so I don't get your point. Also, I don't care what the odds are for disease because anything greater than ZERO is unacceptable if its done without consent. Second hand smoke is (if you'll pardon the pun) a smokescreen issue when it comes to infidelity because presumably the spouse is aware of it, and is willing to take a chance, while secret infidelity denies them the opportunity to remove themselves from potential danger. Bottom line: I think people who betray those who trust them with their physical health (and frankly, their emotional health) are scumbags.

[DodgeDart]

115. So are you saying

William Jefferson Clinton is a scumbag?

[IdaBriggs]

124. When it came to his personal life, yes.

I still love the guy; he was a great president. But he was a scumbag in his personal life. Since I don't have a personal relationship with him, it really wasn't my problem; it was up to his family to deal with the issue. If he had tried to involve me in the situation (as in, flaunting his mistress in my face by making out with her on my couch, for example), then I would have had a problem. He didn't do that -- the Repukes did. I trust he and Hillary to address issues about their relationship without my input (and I had complete faith in her ability to make his personal life a living hell). They were able to work through the problems which is extremely impressive. (Scumbag doesn't have to be a permanent occupation!) But if Hillary and my beloved husband weren't around, and eighty billion other impossible things happened and he wanted to date me, the whole "lying cheat" thing would be an issue for me PERSONALLY. Does that make sense to you?

[DodgeDart]

126. He wasn't a scumbag

He just made a mistake.

[IdaBriggs]

129. I disagree.

Please note I separate public versus private behavior in MY definition of scumbag. Also, "a" usually equals one, and I am given to understand that he made "mistakes" on multiple occasions. Unless his wife had given prior consent (which I understand she did not), he deceived her. I'm not going to get into the definition of "is" or degrees of infidelity; he behaved like a scumbag, got caught, and is (hopefully) not behaving like a scumbag now. Even better, ITS NOT MY PROBLEM -- ITS HILLARY'S. I still love the guy, but the definition doesn't change just because I like him. :)

[yella_dawg]

51. Only the male half n/t

[kiahzero]

52. Right. Women never cheat on their significant others.

On Edit: confused this thread with another. They both are turning into the same thing, however.

[AtTheEndOfTheDay]

62. One in two people vote for Bush.

You tell me.

[Commendatori]

67. If your state were accurate, I would say yes.

Even if you mean "one in two spouses," I can't believe it's that high. If you've got a source, please let me know, because I'm trying to talk a friend out of marriage (to a girl I used to date when SHE was married).

[DrWeird]

68. Haven't got a source on hand.

But I believe it's fairly widely known. Something that lots of people know but never talk about. I think it was shown in the Masters and Johnson study, originally, but I'm not sure.

Here's another one. Scientists in the fifties studied blood types of families. They concluded that 1 in 10 americans are not the biological offspring of who they believe is the father. And that's just based on blood type.

[Commendatori]

72. Well, I have heard

that half of all marriages end in divorce - are you sure the 50% stat didn't come from that?

BTW, I do find your second stat believable (or close, maybe a little less), but 50% adultery is too high in my opinion. Mind you, I've got nothing to back up my thoughts either.

[DrWeird]

80. No, I'm quite sure it was for extra-marital affairs.

nt

[GiovanniC]

110. Newsweek July 2004

In the July 2004 issue of Newsweek reported on "the secret lives of wives," in which marriage experts noted that 30 to 40 percent of their female clients had cheated on their spouses. Others have even claimed that percentage is closer to 50 percent.

=====================================================

Now, it seems pretty obvious to me that "marriage experts" are more likely to have clients that cheat than otherwise. But there's a statistic. And men and women are at least equal, infidelity-wise, and conventional wisdom says men are more prone to cheating. On the other side of that coin, I have never cheated on a S.O., and have had three major long-term girlfriends and a fiance (in one case) cheat on me.

[YoQuieroLiberty]

5. What surprises you?

Pro athletes get a free pass.

I'll send you another copy of the memo. It was passed out years ago, when OJ Simpson killed his ex-wife.

[Zynx]

6. Other than his stupidity - nothing.

Guy is still probably a rapist with good, brutal lawyers.

[DrWeird]

7. Does "innocent until proven guilty"

mean anything to you?

[oldhat]

9. Ask him

Ask him if "racism on the left" means anything to him.

[DrWeird]

10. I was thinking of asking...

if he's looking for any good trees.

[goddess40]

56. Doesn't apply to the rich and famous

If they have enough money and pull they don't get justice they get off.

[DrWeird]

60. "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't apply to the rich?

So you assume they're guilty regardless of the outcome of the prosecution?

[Terran]

32. "probably" a rapist--on what basis?

And "probably" makes him a "scumbag"? :eyes:

[kiahzero]

48. The media said so.

Didn't you know that's a good enough reason?

[Irishladdie]

37. Give me a Break........

She wanted him. He's famous, she wanted him. I know almost every woman I know would do Kobe. This was a joke. She is a groupie. It's so obvious, thats why she dropped the case.

[2bfree]

53. That's rude..............

Believe it or not there are many women who wouldn't do Kobe, me included. I have no desire to sleep with every good looking man I come across, celebrity or not. Ugh, what a sexist comment to make. I give Kobe the benefit of a doubt until he is proved guilty but still the whole holding her neck from behind thing makes me uncomfortable.

[bagnana]

54. why?

That hasn't happened in anyone else's consensual sex? - and the fact that he described "numerous" sex acts is very confusing. Were all of these acts forced? If so, through what means of force? Was he holding her neck the whole time? Also, his believing himself in trouble and thinking he should have paid her to keep quiet, is very consistent with a man trying to prevent his wife from finding out about an affair -- not necessarily a man who believes he just committed a rape.

[juajen]

77. Absolutely not!

I certainly am experienced sexually, and have NEVER been held by the neck. I would end any sexual experience in a New York minute if I was held by the neck. This is not only threatening, but coercion. What world do you live in?

[KT2000]

8. He is the Lakers now

sure hope the Hollywood crowd gives up their adoration of the Lakers after this - or at least keep it off the talk shows.

This piece of crap is what the new team is supposedly built around.

[ugarte]

11. Can't wait to see Kobe get knocked on his ass this year

and no Shack there to protect him.

[Kanary]

12. $$$$ buys everything....... including "justice"

Not at all surprising, just completely disgusting.

I hope that women learn to stay away from these idiots......... they will only be hurt and have their lives damanged forever.

The same morals as the shithead in the Blight House.

Thanks for the quotes.......

Kanary

[jdj]

15. more quotes:

During the interview Bryant told police about "a girl in Virginia named 'Michelle'" with whom he said he had had a consensual sexual relationship.

• In their summary of the conversation, police said Bryant told them that he should have paid the woman to keep quiet -- and mentioned another NBA player who he said had done that. Bryant said the player would pay women "not to say anything," and that he had spent up to a million dollars to get out of situations like Bryant's. Bryant told the police that he had never had to resort to paying hush money, stating that he "treats a woman with respect, therefore, they shouldn't say anything."

To date, Bryant's accuser hasn't said anything to a jury, and she probably never will. Because his lawyers negotiated a dismissal of the charges against Bryant with prejudice, he cannot be retried on the same sexual assault charges. And it's unlikely there will be a civil trial for her to testify in. The prospect of the release of the statement, which his attorneys worked so hard to have sealed, provides Bryant with a compelling incentive to seek a settlement, the terms of which may never be made public.

Issue date: September 20, 2004

[hiphopnation]

70. Money Buys Justice

tell Martha Stewart that...

[sandnsea]

13. I've kept out of this

But I have to say, the woman had another man's semen. Sorry, how do you know who did what to her in that situation? It isn't a question of her sexual history, it's current physical evidence. If I'm on a jury and I've got a woman with two men's semen, tell me how I'm supposed to figure out which one raped her if that's all I've got. And if they had more, they'd have gone ahead with the trial. Now she's got people believing she's been victimized twice, all the better to head to civil court with. I'll never understand what personal satisfaction people get from believing the worst when there isn't a shred of evidence to back up their beliefs.

[LisaL]

14. So, is your opinion then

that a sexually active woman can not be raped? Is that what you are saying here?
Geez.
No wonder many rapists get off scott free.

[DoctorMyEyes]

19. Talk about jumping to conclusions!

Of course that's not what he's saying.

Sheesh! Some people need to get a grip.

There's a difference between "sexually active" and having sex less than 24 hours after a supposedly "brutal" rape.

Who the fuck does that? And even if you are so "wiggy" as to WANT to have sex so soon (with an allegedly "wounded" orifice) - you've just fucked your evidence up!

[sandnsea]

21. Hey, leave the "wiggy" out

"you've just fucked your evidence up!" That's it and that's all. I don't care what this girl did otherwise, but there's no way to know who did what when she's got two men's semen that close together. Abused people do odd things, including repeat the abusive behavior in order to minimize the reality of it. She's a screwed up person, it wouldn't be beyond belief that she didn't know how to handle being raped, the prestige of Kobe, and tried to turn it into something normal to try to cope. People under stress do all sorts of strange things. Unfortunately in this instance, it created a scenario where it's impossible to judge someone guilty. At least in my mind.

[Dorian Gray]

36. Exactly, Sandnsea! NT

[patcox2]

109. You have it wrong. The semen is irrelevant to the "who did what" issue.

There was no dispute that Kobe was there, that he had intercourse with her. The semen was not necessary to proving that he had intercourse with her.

The critical evidentiary issue in this case was whether she gave consent to what occurred, not whether the intercourse occurred at all.

Kobe's attorneys were going to bash the "other guy's semen" thing for all its worth, not to cast doubt on whether Kobe had intercourse with her, because that was not contested, but rather to suggest that she's a slut and therefore she must have consented, and that's wrong. Of course, that line of reasoning certainly worked on a lot of people here, but its wrong, its sexist, and its the reason the rape shield laws were put in place in the first place, to put a stop to the traditional sexist defense of attacking the victim ("she's a little bit nutty, and a little bit slutty").

[Dookus]

26. Of course sexually active women can be raped

but from a criminal justice standpoint, how does a jury convict in such a case?

The physical evidence the prosecution wanted to present was that there were micro-tears in the accuser's vagina. Now if she had sex with Kobe AND with somebody else shortly thereafter, how can a jury decide that it was Kobe and Kobe alone who caused the damage?

One lesson here is that a woman who is raped should abstain from sex with others before getting a police/medical examination.

[juajen]

82. I think they should take a "measure" of the man

After all, the size of the penis in this instance would certainly tell the tale of the tail. (Please excuse, couldn't resist) I am serious about this. I have felt all along that it was possible that at first she wanted to have sex with Kobe, then changed her mind. She is a small person. The size of his penis would have a lot to do with whether she continued that encounter and would explain the damage done. This has never been brought up to my knowledge. However, the incident of more than one sample of ejaculate has been spread far and wide.

[Dookus]

100. The problem

is that the injuries can be caused by vigorous sex, and not simply a large penis.

[Mandate My Ass]

33. You got it

If it was indeed rape, oh well, the slut got what she deserved. :eyes:

[Dorian Gray]

35. No...

A sexually active woman, of course, can be raped! But, if the woman has more than one man's semen in her at the time of investigation, it is virtually IMPOSSIBLE to determine which man raped her. Sorry, but that is the state of affairs.

[LisaL]

43. I am sorry, but have it ever occurred to you

that a woman can tell which man raped her? Geez, back to stone age, I guess. Virtually impossible to tell? What about woman's testimony, for crying out loud?

[MadHound]

46. Has it ever occurred to you that her behaviour is rather bizarre?

I fully agree with the premise that a woman's sexual history is of no legal significance, just as her character is of no legal significance. But, her sexual behaviour after being allegedly raped is of major concern. I volunteered for several years at a crisis counseling center, and also was pulled into the local Womens' Shelter to interpret for the deaf, and in all that time, all those cases, never, ever have I seen or heard of a woman who was raped wanting to engage in sexual activity hours after being raped, before she reports the rape.

In fact a return to sexual activity is the furthest thing from most victims' minds, at least in the near future. Also the fact that this activity completely corrupted the evidence is also of concern, since in casts major doubt on the issues of who did what when.

Sorry, but this single factor negates the woman's entire case against Kobe, and no other conclusion but not guilty can possibly be reached. Remember those famous legal words "beyond a resonable doubt" The alleged victim's subsequent actions hurt her case irrepairably, for no jury would be able to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt when the full story was known.

And while yes, one can rely on a woman's testimony, one can only do so to a certain extent. When the evidence doesn't back her story up, reasonable doubt creeps back into the picture. And there have been cases of women making a completely false claim of rape also, such things have and do occur. That is why somebody is innocent until proven guilty.

[Ron Green]

47. It seems reasonable that in this case the woman's credibility as

a witness would be diminished by the evidence (of a second sexual encounter), and that her testimony might not carry as much weight as one who had not sought casual sex at all.

[Dorian Gray]

111. No, I am not living in the stone age...

I KNOW the woman can TELL who raped her. What I can't do, however, is convict a person on her word alone! You need evidence. And the evidence, unfortunately, is now flawed.

Look, I think Kobe is a scumbag. I am also a female, and I have been sexually assaulted myself. If, in fact, this woman was raped by Kobe, my heart goes out to her.

I am sorry that I don't think it is lawfully expedient to take a person's word on something that may put somebody into jail for a very long time without conclusive evidence. But, that's just how I feel.

If he is truly guilty, then I am sincerely sorry that she dropped the criminal charges. I think she should have fought it until the bitter end. But, that's easy for me to say coming from the position of not having been assaulted by Mr. Bryant. I don't know what she is thinking or feeling, and I think that this whole case is horrendous. And, to be honest, for her sake I hope that she WAS lying about the rape only because I would never wish that type of attack on any person. EVER!

[Eloriel]

42. No wonder so many rapes never even get reported! n/t

[Kanary]

71. Exactly what I was thinking. If so many "liberals" can say so many ugly

things about a woman, because they prefer to continue to cheer for a sports celebrity, then why in the world would *ANY* woman try to report or bring charges? You'd have to be masochistic.

I keep hoping that young women reading about these messes will finally learn to stay away from these famous idiots, but so far......

Kanary

[jdj]

16. He had her blood on his shirt. Or vice versa, or something.

Magic Johnson has AIDS. I hope she makes him pay for putting his beautiful young wife at risk of a fatal disease,and from the quotes it seems like all he was concerned about was paying her off.

I'm so sick of hearing this is about racism.

Puleeze.

[LisaL]

18. Her blood was on his t-shirt.

He wanted to pay her off, and in the end, after all of this, looks like that is exactly what is going to happen.

[DoctorMyEyes]

17. Absolutely!

I too try to avoid these damn Kobe threads.

It's not about her "sexual history" - it's about "contaminated evidence".

She tampered with her own "evidence".

It's relevent.

[DrWeird]

20. Actually, that has nothing to do with it.

The fact that she had other semen on her person is irrelevant. This is in away supporting the idea that the defense just attacked the woman's character, i.e. "he only one because they said she had it coming."

The other man's semen would only be relevant if Bryant had claimed he never had sex with the woman.

That said, the reason the defense brought up the woman's recent sexual history was not to attack her character. The medical examiner found injuries on the woman. The doctor concluded that these either came from rape, or from a large amount of sexual activity. The prosecution wanted to use this as evidence that Bryant raped the woman. However, the defense argued, successfully, that if they can use these injuries against Bryant then they, the defense, could show that the injuries could have come from some other source. i.e. all the sex the woman was having the days proceeding the alledged rape.

So the defense had a very valid reason for bringing up the woman's sexual history.

That said, Bryant should be assumed innocent. And this has everything to do with race.

[sandnsea]

22. Don't care about sexual history

You say the fact that she had other semen on her person is irrelevant. I say it's all that's relevant to me. I can judge whether injuries are from lots of sex or rape. I can't judge who caused those injuries when there's two men's semen. That's it, that's all. Not guilty. No choice.

[LisaL]

23. Her blood is on his t-shirt.

How did it get there if he didn't cause her an injury?
Even if there was any sex after this, that wouldn't cause her blood to be on Kobe's t-shirt, would it?

[sandnsea]

24. Re-injured her?

An injury the real rapist caused hours before? Two sets of semen makes it almost impossible to fairly judge.

[LisaL]

25. I am sorry,

but didn't you just claim she had sex after her encounter with Kobe? Now, unless Kobe invented a time machine, I fail to see how he could have re-injured her.

[sandnsea]

29. No, I didn't

I said two sets of semen, that's all. I have no idea who did what when, that's all I ever said about the case.

[lazarus]

28. How many women

with open wounds (or just healing wounds) from a rape would willing have sex again within hours?

[sandnsea]

30. She was at a party

Who knows what she did, I don't. I don't know what time frame any of this happened. That's the whole point. Two sets of semen, impossible to know for sure.

[LisaL]

34. Actually, she was at work, not at the party.

[sandnsea]

38. Afterwards

The days afterwards she did alot of things most women wouldn't do if they'd been raped. Like I've said over and over, none of that matters to me in regards to her character. The only thing is that she's got two men's semen, who knows who did what. That's all.

[LisaL]

40. I am sorry, but it's clear to me that you

believe that if a woman is sexually active, she can not be raped.
That's all I am going to say on this subject.

[sandnsea]

49. It's clear to me

That this is political to you. Somehow or other you've confused women's rights advocacy with fair and objective justice. When you're willing to send somebody to prison on flimsy evidence, you don't help rape victims. You raise the level for evidence necessary to convict for the next victim. Not every woman who says she's been raped actually has been raped. It's frustrating, but there are too many women who selfishly use rape and sexual assault as personal vengeance tools. I'd like to shake every one of them. If women's advocates aren't truthful about individual rape cases, we lose credibility altogether. Rape and sexual assault are the most serious crimes committed in my book. Much too serious to go backwards on over the Kobe Bryant case. Two men's semen, no way to know who did what. That's it, that's all. Don't put words in my mouth.

[kiahzero]

50. But building strawmen is so much fun, sandnsea!

And then you get to knock them down, and feel like a real big person.

[hiphopnation]

64. Excuse me but,

what's the strawman you're referring to in sandnsea's comments? Or were you referring to Lizzy? Just trying to clarify.

[kiahzero]

103. Referring to the "If you're sexually active, you can't be raped" strawman

That was used to attack sandnsea.

[VelmaD]

58. Where exactly are you getting your data...

that there are "too many women who selfishly use rape and sexual assault as personal vengeance tools"?

'Cause that sounds stunningly like a right-wing, anti-woman talking point.

[hiphopnation]

69. Taken out of context

it sounds anti-woman but as part of the whole statement I think that any reasonably intelligent person should be able to see that sandnsea is making valid judgments about how a court goes about dispensing justice in a case like this one which are, unfortunately, extremely widespread. Furthermore, it's fairly obvious to me (even without clicking the "head" to find out that she is a female) that she's an advocate for women's rights but also has an ultimate respect for the rule of law. :shrug:

[VelmaD]

73. You just parroted the assertion...

that these cases are "widespread" without backing that up with ANY numbers. Same question to you...where are you getting your info that false rape claims are widespread?

[hiphopnation]

76. What I meant was

rape cases in general are extremely widespread. Too widespread. I'm fairly confident that there are still way too many that go unreported but am hopeful that over time more women will come forward with thier stories/claims and that they hopefully will be able to bring charges against the person.

Each of those cases, however, must be tried in a court of law in front of a jury. If the evidence presented at said trial is not enough to convince twelve people that the victim was indeed raped then the accused is innocent until proven guilty. That's what I am an advocate of, above all.

[DrWeird]

78. That's a good question.

Give all crime statistics kept, you'd think there would be a clear statistic that one could find instead of just stating opinions on how widespread it is.

So I googled "false rape claims" and statistics, and found this one the first hit.

"Archives of Sexual Behavior, Vol. 23, No. 1, 1994, pages 81-90

"False Rape Allegations"
Eugene J. Kanin, Ph.D.

Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Purdue University, 1365 Winthrop E. Stone Hall, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907-1365.

ABSTRACT:

With the cooperation of the police agency of a small metropolitan community, 45 consecutive, disposed, false rape allegations covering a 9 year period were studied. These false rape allegations constitute 41% the total forcible rape cases (n= 109) reported during this period. These false allegations appear to serve three major functions for the complainants: providing an alibi, seeking revenge, and obtaining sympathy and attention. False rape allegations are not the consequence of a gender-linked aberration, as frequently claimed, but reflect impulsive and desperate efforts to cope with personal and social stress situations. "

So this guy's claiming a 41% rate of false allegations in forced rape cases. Seems pretty high, but the sample is very low. It's an interesting question though.

[VelmaD]

83. Several questions spring immediately to mind

First, he mentions "forcible rape" allegations but that may or may not include all rape allegations made for that period.

Second, how were claims judged to be false? Was it based on recantations by the complainant? Or the police determining the claim was "false"?

Third, does he breakdown the percentage of "false" claims by the age of the complainant...whether they are a child, teenager, or adult?

Finally, does he ever explain how his data compares to other research? Like the first link that pops up when you google "false rape claims"...which had numbers ranging from under 6% to around 30%.
http://www.equityfeminism.com/articles/2002/000010.html

[DrWeird]

84. Indeed, it raises many questions.

Like I said, the sample was very small, so I wouldn't draw any conclusions from that particularly study. Indeed, doing a little more googling it seems the numbers vary widely, depending on who you ask. Still, given how widespread rape is, it does not seem entirely unreasonable to say that a 6% to 30% of false rape accusations are "widespread." Given the country's particularly bloody history of white women falsely accusing black men of rape, I wonder how significantly the statistics change in that regard.

[VelmaD]

87. As much as I love statistics...

and I do stats for my job, I also have to include personal experience. I know several women who have been sexually assaulted...probably half the women I know. I don't know any who actually pressed charged, much less made a false accusation. I don't think the "big" problem here is false rape claims...I think it's that the vase majority of rapes go unreported and that a piddlingly small percentage of cases result in jail time.

[hiphopnation]

86. This is definitely "uncharted territory"

in a sense. http://www.menweb.org/throop/falsereport/refbrownm.html

The above link attempts to debunk the 2% theory and suggests that the FBI's 15% claim is closer to reality.

But my original assertion was that it was you who cut & paste one line from sandnsea's comments and turned it on it's head to imply that she was repeating an "anti-woman right-wing talking point" or, even worse, anti woman herself only because she didn't back up the claim that there are women out there who falsly claim that they were raped with hard, statistcal data, of which there doesn't appear to be very much. What say you?

On edit: here's more http://www.menweb.org/throop/falsereport/adult.html

[VelmaD]

89. I cut and pasted but did not...

"turn it on its head". It seemed pretty clear to me that sandnsea was saying there were a lot of false rape claims. I have heard that assertion over and over, mostly from right-wing men who wanted to minimize rape as a crime.

[DrWeird]

92. It's unfortunate that there are no clear statistics.

Actually, there are probably some clear statistics somewhere, but like we've said, it varies drastically depending on who you ask. And that means that there's people out there who want to exaggerate the rate of false rape allegations. Conversely, there's people out there who want to underestimate the number of false rape claims, and who apparently want to minimize false rape accusations as a crime. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that the statiistics are some where right in the middle at 15%, which the FBI is apparently claiming, again for the sake of argument. Given the number of rapes that occur, 15% of those are still a very large number. Not as numerous as those who make true rape allegations, but this isn't some kind of pissing contest. Both are a serious problem. And if somebody is cleared of criminal rape allegations by the justice system, particularly a black man given the problems with false rape allegations, then I personally don't think one should go aorund saying he obviously did it.

[hiphopnation]

96. Not to mention

the fact that 15% is way above the false claim rate for other crimes like robbery, assult, etc.

[VelmaD]

112. Another good question...

is what is a "flase" claim"? If I identify the wrong man in a lineup and he is eventually acquitted...is that counted as a "false" claim or in some other category? I was still raped. Maybe it was dark and I didn't get that good a look at my attacker. Maybe he just looks a whole lot like the person who attacked me. I think there's a substantive difference between maliciously accusing someone of rape and misidentifying someone and I hope they are seperated in the research.

[hiphopnation]

117. Yes

but you are not talking about circumstances as they relate to a court case and I am. Granted all the things you mention here are possibilites but I understand the term "false rape claim" as a woman who claims to have been raped by someone when she really was not and I'm almost sure that that's what all of the above links are referring to as well. But, given the fact that there is such lousy research on the paticualar subject I'm afraid both of us will never really know (maybe this would be a good topic to research, for all of us! :))

What I am saying, and what I think sandnsea was advocating orginally was that each of these cases must be taken on an individual basis and tried in a court of law. You and your lawyer must convince twelve of your peers that the accused is...you know the drill. If you fail to do that...again, you know the drill.

It does strike me as somewhat alarmning, however, that even if you take some of the lower figures of "false rape claims" in some of the links provided (that being 6-12%) those are still much higher than average false claims in other types of crimes.

Finally, to be clear, I advocate the most clear and concise use of the court system on a case by case basis and that an accuser is indeed innocent until proven guilty. Converesely I do not advocate a system that is immediately suspect of women who bring rape charges because they suspect them to be "false". And frankly, I don't think that's what we've got here. My $.02

[VelmaD]

119. Unforunately that is what we have in this country...

a system that oftentimes presumes women are lying. That's a part of the reason so few rape claims ever make it to court. And it's just been in the last decade or two that States starting telling judges they couldn't give the old "cautionary charge" as a part of their instructions to the jury and it's still perfectly acceptable in some States.

The "cautionary charge" basically was the judge telling the jurors that "The charge of rape is easy to make, difficult to prove, and more difficult to disprove; therefore, the testimony of the complaining witness must be examined with caution." or words to that effect. In other words...oneof the last things the judge told the jury was "don't trust the complainant she's probably lying". Fortunately this is starting to change. :)

[sandnsea]

127. My eyeballs

One is too many. There's more than that, too many women who make false claims. I didn't mean to imply that it's a majority. Just too many. I don't think it's helpful to women to blindly stand beside every single woman that makes an accusation. I don't think it's helpful to deny when a case is based on suspicious evidence. It makes one no better than a swift boat vet.

[jdj]

128. Like hell.

Bryant isn't innocent. He's an adulterer, who had unprotected sex with a strange woman he just met, putting his wife at risk for disease, and there is no telling how many times he has done this.

He sounds like a total scum. And the leaked police reports just make it worse.

Maybe it's cause I'm queer, and I have seen the people dying right and left, but I don't see how people can conduct themselves like this in this day and age, especially young healthy successful people like Kobe who have everything to live for, and especially after Magic proved it's not a gay disease, and female to male transmission happens. I mean, would Kobe hold a gun up to his wife's head and play Russian roulette? That's what he did, probably more than once.

[lazarus]

27. let's not forget

That Kobe had the woman's blood on him.

I've had sex more than a couple of times. The only time blood was involved, it was menstrual.

[kiahzero]

44. And?

Tears can happen if (A) One or both parties are especially... 'vigorous' in their gyration or (B) the size of the woman's anatomy is not large enough for the man's anatomy.

Neither of these conditions automatically imply rape. In fact, Bryant's lawyers argued a perfectly valid point, that was more than enough to inspire reasonable doubt - she had a lot of sex in the time frame, and it led to tears. I know that this can happen, from first/second-hand experience.

[lazarus]

55. And that gets blood on the man's T-shirt?

Amazing.

[noiretextatique]

88. really amazing

something i have never, ever heard of or experienced myself. sex so violent as to cause that much bleeding, that is.

[hiphopnation]

94. but do you doubt that there are those

out there whom behave in such a manor behind closed doors?

[noiretextatique]

98. i do not

some do it consenually, others do not. in this case, i believe the woman consented to sex, but not to sex that would make her bleed.

[MallRat]

39. Hey, Lawyers- did jeopardy ever attach in this case?

I mean, is Kobe eligible to be re-indicted and taken to trial in the future (if the accuser wishes to move forward)? Or is he protected by double jeopardy?

-MR

[LisaL]

41. The case was dismissed with prejudice

so, no, there is no way there will be criminal trial.

[Ripley]

57. Expect to be completely flamed.

Not by me, but by the dozens of Kobe supporters here who will not only defend him for this, but attack you and once again the "whore" he paid off.

It seems this week is "female bashing" week at DU.

[VelmaD]

59. Every week seems to be...

female bashing week. *sigh*

[DrWeird]

65. Is the presumption of innocence "female bashing?"

nt

[hiphopnation]

81. Depends on the case.

Some have the luxury of applying said philosophy at their own discretion. Must be nice!

[DrWeird]

85. presumption of innocence depends on the case?

Sounds like the same logic that people in Tulsa, Oklahoma used when they murdered some 2,000 black people after a white woman falsely accused a black man of rape.

[noiretextatique]

90. OJ, anyone?

curiously, the presumption of innocence didn't apply in that case.

[DrWeird]

91. OJ's case is interesting.

If I remember correctly, the country was pretty much split on whether or not he did it. It was only after many months of Jay Leno monologues that a widespread proportion of the country became absolutely convinced that he did it and anybody who argues otherwise is nuts.

[noiretextatique]

97. yes...and the intensity of feelings about his guilt or innocence

is as strong now as it was back then...truly fascinating, imho.

[hiphopnation]

93. (tounge frimly implanted in cheek) n/t

[Killarney]

61. Did he ever explain why her blood was on his shirt?

I stopped following the case a while ago. Was this ever explained?

[LisaL]

63. Why would he need to explain it?

There will be no trial.

[Killarney]

75. isn't a civil trial coming?

[DrWeird]

79. Yes.

Although it's apparently likely to be dropped.

[LisaL]

125. Supposedly.

But I bet he would just pay her without a trial.

[noiretextatique]

95. like the OJ Simpson case

this case is complicated by the race. the archetype of the violent, sex-crazed black man violating the pure white woman is a deep and powerful one.
however, i think OJ was guilty, and I think Kobe is also guilty.
i also think race plays a role in the sensationalism of this case, as it did in the OJ case. and of course in the intensity of feelings...that was more apparent in the OJ case. the way people STILL talk about the OJ case fascinates me...especially since two cases FINALLY ended in guilty verdicts, some 40 years after the crimes: the medgar evers and birmingham bombing cases.

having said that, i believe this woman consented to sex with byrant, but not to the type of sex that he had in mind. i think he is guilty of rape from that perspective, even though he was acquitted of the legal charge. unfortunately, i believe this society has evolved more around issues of race than gender, as evidenced in many rape cases. so...the fact that she consented to sex, but perhaps not to violent sex, is irrelevant...to many. i base my opinon on common sense.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

102. "Consent" can be rescinded at any time.

"No", is supposed to do the trick.

Beyond that, I believe that money has more to do with the case than race. I have no idea what the truth of this case is, but I have little doubt that if Kobe was represented by a public defender like most poor people are, he would be in prison already. Not to mention, that if the woman concerned is a treasure hunter, the whole thing would never have occurred in the first place.

As to OJ, it wasn't about the "sex-crazed black guy.." violating precious white womanhood, it was about a guy killing his wife and her supposed lover. Again, if OJ had been represented by other than the high powered, high paid, lawyers he had, I doubt that his execution wouldn't now be a matter of history.

IMO, both of these cases have little to do justice and a lot to do with wealth and celebrity.

[noiretextatique]

105. the intensity of the reaction to the OJ case....is THAT just about murder?

i think not. the cheering of the black students at the school i was teaching at...and the anger of the white teachers...THAT wasn't about a guy murdering his wife.
i agree consent can be recinded at anytime...but clearly the legal system and many people here (an elsewhere) don't *really* believe that.
i agree...the sensationalism is also about celebrity and wealth, in both cases. but...the INTENSITY of feelings in both cases has a lot to do with race...the race of the victims and the perpetrators.
how could it NOT be the case in america?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

113. I agree about the racism.

I think it tragic that the black students felt compelled to cheer for the likes of OJ. Which makes me wonder how that trial would have gone if his wife had been black and their reaction to his aquital. Or, if the reverse had been the case. Black wife murdered by white celebrity?

Racism is always a huge consideration in any trial involving different races, particularly black/white. It is always a huge consideration involving almost any interaction between the races.

But, my point was that the justice system is skewed in favor of the wealthy and powerful, simply because they can buy the best lawyers.

Reminds of the old socialist joke about the cop being upbraided by the irate citizen for arresting a poor man going through the garbage for food. "But", says the cop, "if it had been a millionaire going the the garbage for food, I would have arrested him too."

Equal justice? A nice myth. Kind of like the torturers in Iraq going to prison while the bigshots either walk or suffer a "reprimand".

[DrWeird]

106. But it was about a sex-crazed black guy.

That's why Time magazine altered the mugshot photo to make OJ look more black and thus "more threatening."

That's why a lead investigator being a racist (and a perjurer) were so important to the case.

You're arguing that a client being rich somehow makes the jury more stupid and thus more likely to give a false acquittal. Seems to me the bigger and more likely problem is poor people who have public defendants are more likely to have incompetent representation and thus more likely to get falsely convicted. Yes, I do not doubt that if OJ had more incompent lawyers that he very likely have gotten convicted. And that's the problem with the legal system.

[noiretextatique]

107. hello...even MOTHER JONES magazine

published a stupid, racist article by white woman musing if she was really attracted to her black lover because she was a msochistic fool longing to be humilitated, and ultimately murdered by him :puke:

[DrWeird]

108. Personally, I think it's a real condemnation of how widespread...

racism is in this country when all these white people were shocked, SHOCKED that the "justice system was broken" when a black guy got acquitted for murdering a white woman (there was reasonable doubt) even though just a few months before several white police officers were acquitted for beating a black man (there was no reasonable doubt, it was caught on video) but these same people said nothing.

[noiretextatique]

118. it's absolutely maddening, really

the things i heard people say after that OJ verdict...like someone here who claimed not to support affirmative action anymore. and on the other side...the continued vehement insistence that OJ is not only innocent, but that Nicole got what she deserved :sigh:.
the thing i remember most about the OJ saga that says it all for me when people whine about injustice and the like:
the verdicts reached in medgar evers and birmingham bomb cases. it only took 40 or so years for those victims and their families to get justice.
but...that's another story entirely.
i think the jury had to acquit OJ, but does anyone *really* believe african-americans have any reason to trust the criminal justice system?
only if you are a millionaire athelete.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

99. Equal Ju$ti$e...if you can afford it.

I've not followed the case, but I assume that Kobe isn't being represented by Joe Schmoe the public defender like most poor people are.

The very idea of "Equal Justice Under the Law" is laughable in a country dominated by the wealthy. Kind of like the "Anyone can be president"...if you have a rich daddy, friendly politicians to keep you out of harms way, and the backing of just about every fat cat capitalist in the country.

[UpsideDownFlag]

104. innocent until proven guilty.

i've held my G/'s neck from behind before, sex isn't always a transcript from a danielle steele novel.
just because it was 'rough' doesn't mean it was rape. i'm not even going to delve into the issue of this girl's associates coming forward and talking about her ulterior motives.

[MrSlayer]

114. You just knew he would get away with this.

I never had a doubt that this guy would simply walk on the charge. Too much money involved. It's a shame that poor people who are innocent get convicted because they can't afford good lawyers and rapists and murderers walk because they can. Sick.

[Cronus Protagonist]

116. Yeah, right. Uh -hu. Fer sure. Yup.

I'm not even a sports fan, and I know little about Kobe other than what's been on TV, so I have no dog in this race.

That's total hearsay ("I heard him say...") from a bungling police department and a nasty District Attorney who's seeking re-election.

You always have to think about intent when something self-serving like this is released by law enforcement, expecially if it's "leaked".

Ask yourself who benefits? And if this were true, why didn't they win in court?

Then ask yourself, would a police officer lie and exaggerate in order to support his claim that a defendant is guilty? (they ALL are guilty to the police, you know)

Ask yourself, "Would a District Attorney seeking election, having had to dismiss his biggest career-building case right before his election, have any incentive to "leak" damaging and possibly untrue information about the defendant who just walked?"

I think any person without a dog in this race would have to view the leaks as Rovian and self-serving as I do.

[LisaL]

120. I don't care what the intent is of whoever leaked it.

It might be self-serving, but what about the content of the leak?
Geez, Kobe basically repeats her testimony, but of course, he is as pure as a driven snow, and she is a slut.

:eyes:

[hiphopnation]

121. Please continue with your

extremely mypoic and judgmental posts. I hope if you or anyone you love is *accused* of something that you are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Of course, it's the court of public opinion that decides everything, now, isn't it?

On Edit: He is NOT pure as the driven snow. He probably IS a scumbag. And, frankly, I've always hated his attitude on the court. THANKFULLY these things do not factor into a courtroom judgement as to whether or not he raped someone. Or is that how you'd rather have things done?

[Christof]

123. He should be in jail right now.

He did it. We all know he did.