Steff Posted July 20, 2003 Share Posted July 20, 2003 If anyone is interested. She's a former choir singer... oye ve!! http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/sports/6340428.htm Also, supposedly the girls father is a billionaire. Majority stockholder in Boeing and Lockheed. And Jim Gray from ESPN as well as some of the girls friends were on LKL. http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0307/18/lkl.00.html Pretty interesting and detailed forensics stuff. And it appears it's not just he said, she said. Blood, torn clothes, skin under her nails.. etc, etc. Not good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmr31 Posted July 20, 2003 Share Posted July 20, 2003 If anyone is interested. She's a former choir singer... oye ve!! http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/sports/6340428.htm Also, supposedly the girls father is a billionaire. Majority stockholder in Boeing and Lockheed. And Jim Gray from ESPN as well as some of the girls friends were on LKL. http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0307/18/lkl.00.html Pretty interesting and detailed forensics stuff. And it appears it's not just he said, she said. Blood, torn clothes, skin under her nails.. etc, etc. Not good. Hey to me the most important thing you said is her father is a billionare. If thats the case, where would her motivation be to lie? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aboz56 Posted July 20, 2003 Share Posted July 20, 2003 If anyone is interested. She's a former choir singer... oye ve!! http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/sports/6340428.htm Also, supposedly the girls father is a billionaire. Majority stockholder in Boeing and Lockheed. And Jim Gray from ESPN as well as some of the girls friends were on LKL. http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0307/18/lkl.00.html Pretty interesting and detailed forensics stuff. And it appears it's not just he said, she said. Blood, torn clothes, skin under her nails.. etc, etc. Not good. Hey to me the most important thing you said is her father is a billionare. If thats the case, where would her motivation be to lie? I've not heard that he is wealthy, can anyone confirm this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aboz56 Posted July 20, 2003 Share Posted July 20, 2003 http://espn.go.com/nba/news/2003/0720/1583145.html This article puts a big blow to the accuser. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Critic Posted July 20, 2003 Share Posted July 20, 2003 I don't see how a previous overdose has anything to do with this. If you mean that it hurts her credibility, I don't know about that. Bryant has acknowledged that they had some sort of sex - the only question is consent. An overdose months ago is completely irrelevant, in my eyes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmr31 Posted July 20, 2003 Share Posted July 20, 2003 http://espn.go.com/nba/news/2003/0720/1583145.html This article puts a big blow to the accuser. Ahhhhhh here we go........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmr31 Posted July 20, 2003 Share Posted July 20, 2003 I don't see how a previous overdose has anything to do with this. If you mean that it hurts her credibility, I don't know about that. Bryant has acknowledged that they had some sort of sex - the only question is consent. An overdose months ago is completely irrelevant, in my eyes. It shows her lack of stability, which leads people to make up s*** like this. Trust me. if its true, her credibility is f***ed. That isnt saying Kobe is innocent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aboz56 Posted July 20, 2003 Share Posted July 20, 2003 I don't see how a previous overdose has anything to do with this. If you mean that it hurts her credibility, I don't know about that. Bryant has acknowledged that they had some sort of sex - the only question is consent. An overdose months ago is completely irrelevant, in my eyes. It shows her lack of stability, which leads people to make up s*** like this. Trust me. if its true, her credibility is f***ed. That isnt saying Kobe is innocent. That's what I say as well. Not to say he is innocent because I believe he is guilty based on what I know so far, but this could be a huge piece of damage to her credibility. It's too bad her dumb friend had to open her mouth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CubKilla Posted July 20, 2003 Share Posted July 20, 2003 If Bryant's defense isn't successful getting a change in court venue (which is not usually granted), just refer to Kobe Bryant as Gobe to prison. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CubKilla Posted July 20, 2003 Share Posted July 20, 2003 I don't see how a previous overdose has anything to do with this. If you mean that it hurts her credibility, I don't know about that. Bryant has acknowledged that they had some sort of sex - the only question is consent. An overdose months ago is completely irrelevant, in my eyes. It shows her lack of stability, which leads people to make up s*** like this. Trust me. if its true, her credibility is f***ed. That isnt saying Kobe is innocent. That's what I say as well. Not to say he is innocent because I believe he is guilty based on what I know so far, but this could be a huge piece of damage to her credibility. It's too bad her dumb friend had to open her mouth. If I'm not mistaken, the OD issue will be one that the defense will not be able to bring up until they run it by the judge and convince the court that it is an integral part of their defense. Her past OD has nothing to do with what happened in that hotel room that night. Kinda like when Ito allowed the OJ Murder Trial to become the LAPD/Mark Fuhrman Do Cops Use the "N" Word Trial. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmr31 Posted July 20, 2003 Share Posted July 20, 2003 I don't see how a previous overdose has anything to do with this. If you mean that it hurts her credibility, I don't know about that. Bryant has acknowledged that they had some sort of sex - the only question is consent. An overdose months ago is completely irrelevant, in my eyes. It shows her lack of stability, which leads people to make up s*** like this. Trust me. if its true, her credibility is f***ed. That isnt saying Kobe is innocent. That's what I say as well. Not to say he is innocent because I believe he is guilty based on what I know so far, but this could be a huge piece of damage to her credibility. It's too bad her dumb friend had to open her mouth. If I'm not mistaken, the OD issue will be one that the defense will not be able to bring up until they run it by the judge and convince the court that it is an integral part of their defense. Her past OD has nothing to do with what happened in that hotel room that night. Kinda like when Ito allowed the OJ Murder Trial to become the LAPD/Mark Fuhrman Do Cops Use the "N" Word Trial. Yeah it does bro, it establishes credibility, or lack there of. Its totally relevant...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxfest Posted July 20, 2003 Share Posted July 20, 2003 IF this is true his ass is Swiss and Kobed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted July 20, 2003 Share Posted July 20, 2003 If anyone is interested. She's a former choir singer... oye ve!! http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/sports/6340428.htm Also, supposedly the girls father is a billionaire. Majority stockholder in Boeing and Lockheed. And Jim Gray from ESPN as well as some of the girls friends were on LKL. http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0307/18/lkl.00.html Pretty interesting and detailed forensics stuff. And it appears it's not just he said, she said. Blood, torn clothes, skin under her nails.. etc, etc. Not good. Well that blows Clu's whole she's only after his money defense. Her daddy is richer than 50 Kobe's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted July 20, 2003 Author Share Posted July 20, 2003 http://espn.go.com/nba/news/2003/0720/1583145.html This article puts a big blow to the accuser. For every one good article there will be 50 bad ones. And it's the media.. of course they are going to protect their "darling" superstar. Wait for the facts in court. Even if half this stuff is true, the other half are lies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted July 20, 2003 Author Share Posted July 20, 2003 If anyone is interested. She's a former choir singer... oye ve!! http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/sports/6340428.htm Also, supposedly the girls father is a billionaire. Majority stockholder in Boeing and Lockheed. And Jim Gray from ESPN as well as some of the girls friends were on LKL. http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0307/18/lkl.00.html Pretty interesting and detailed forensics stuff. And it appears it's not just he said, she said. Blood, torn clothes, skin under her nails.. etc, etc. Not good. I've not heard that he is wealthy, can anyone confirm this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted July 20, 2003 Author Share Posted July 20, 2003 I don't see how a previous overdose has anything to do with this. If you mean that it hurts her credibility, I don't know about that. Bryant has acknowledged that they had some sort of sex - the only question is consent. An overdose months ago is completely irrelevant, in my eyes. Not to say he is innocent because I believe he is guilty based on what I know so far, but this could be a huge piece of damage to her credibility. It's too bad her dumb friend had to open her mouth. If it were your sister, mother, girlfriend, etc... would you think something that happened months ago should hurt her credibility? And I agree with CK 100%. No change of venue and they might as well fit him for a jumpsuit right now. For every 1 person talking s*** about her, there are 100 who have had nothing but positive things to say. This girl seems to be very well liked in the community. Doesn't have a scratch on her record (other then this) and what her "friends" are saying about her "looking for attention" is not admissable in court. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiff Posted July 20, 2003 Share Posted July 20, 2003 It may or may not be admissable in court, but since they haven't begun jury selection or anything the public (especially in the area) already knows about it. The judge will tell them to disregard any prior knowledge, but bias on both sides will come into play when deciding this case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted July 20, 2003 Share Posted July 20, 2003 If I'm not mistaken, the OD issue will be one that the defense will not be able to bring up until they run it by the judge and convince the court that it is an integral part of their defense. Her past OD has nothing to do with what happened in that hotel room that night. CK, you are exactly right as to law. And as it should be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted July 20, 2003 Author Share Posted July 20, 2003 It may or may not be admissable in court, but since they haven't begun jury selection or anything the public (especially in the area) already knows about it. The judge will tell them to disregard any prior knowledge, but bias on both sides will come into play when deciding this case. Completely agree. Although, this is a fairly small town 30K in the entire 51 mile are I think I heard. Odds are that since they are a pretty prominent family that they are known and probably liked. I'm guessing that they've been in the public eye a long time. During jury selection they will be told to disregard all that they've heard and that it can't be a factor in their decision. Yeah... I know, it'll be too late, but I guess you just have to hope that jurors will deliberate based only on the pertinant information of what took place that night. I was on jury duty 2 years ago on a fairly public case. With all the information that was thrown at us in court I totally forgot about what I had heard the previous 11 months leading up to the trial. Regardless.. I have total sympathy for whomever is on this jury (if it even gets that far). It is not a easy task deciding the fate of another person. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmr31 Posted July 20, 2003 Share Posted July 20, 2003 Its admissable and will be allowed, believe me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted July 21, 2003 Author Share Posted July 21, 2003 Spiff.. I just wanted to clarify that her friends "opinions", IMO will not be admissable. You're probably right that her mental state (and whether she was on anti-depressents after the suicide attempt, etc.. ) will more then likely be an issue the defense will be all over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiff Posted July 21, 2003 Share Posted July 21, 2003 Spiff.. I just wanted to clarify that her friends "opinions", IMO will not be admissable. You're probably right that her mental state (and whether she was on anti-depressents after the suicide attempt, etc.. ) will more then likely be an issue the defense will be all over. Yeah I doubt there is anyway they'd testify against her as a character witness in the first place. They might grill her about it the overdose etc, then it could get ugly. But since it was two months earlier, it might be up to the judge how relevant that is. Either way I don't think that is going to decide the case. The main issue is whether or not the rape took place, and it'll be up to the prosecution to provide the evidence. No lack of credibility can change that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmr31 Posted July 21, 2003 Share Posted July 21, 2003 Yeah I doubt there is anyway they'd testify against her as a character witness in the first place. They might grill her about it the overdose etc, then it could get ugly. But since it was two months earlier, it might be up to the judge how relevant that is. Either way I don't think that is going to decide the case. The main issue is whether or not the rape took place, and it'll be up to the prosecution to provide the evidence. No lack of credibility can change that. You are missing something. They are going to do the same thing they did in the OJ case. Pick apart everything, bring up race, whatever it takes. Her OD is GOING to be part of this. Im sorry to say, its not going to be fair, and Kobe is likely to get off , just as OJ did. The OD is going to help set Kobe free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiff Posted July 21, 2003 Share Posted July 21, 2003 Yeah I doubt there is anyway they'd testify against her as a character witness in the first place. They might grill her about it the overdose etc, then it could get ugly. But since it was two months earlier, it might be up to the judge how relevant that is. Either way I don't think that is going to decide the case. The main issue is whether or not the rape took place, and it'll be up to the prosecution to provide the evidence. No lack of credibility can change that. You are missing something. They are going to do the same thing they did in the OJ case. Pick apart everything, bring up race, whatever it takes. Her OD is GOING to be part of this. Im sorry to say, its not going to be fair, and Kobe is likely to get off , just as OJ did. The OD is going to help set Kobe free. No, I'm not missing anything. I know what they're gonna try to do, but if that is all they have it's not gonna work. Kobe's not on his home turf, the hometown jury is not going to give him the benefit of the doubt. They're gonna believe her before they believe him, but the evidence carries more weight than what either of them say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmr31 Posted July 21, 2003 Share Posted July 21, 2003 Yeah I doubt there is anyway they'd testify against her as a character witness in the first place. They might grill her about it the overdose etc, then it could get ugly. But since it was two months earlier, it might be up to the judge how relevant that is. Either way I don't think that is going to decide the case. The main issue is whether or not the rape took place, and it'll be up to the prosecution to provide the evidence. No lack of credibility can change that. You are missing something. They are going to do the same thing they did in the OJ case. Pick apart everything, bring up race, whatever it takes. Her OD is GOING to be part of this. Im sorry to say, its not going to be fair, and Kobe is likely to get off , just as OJ did. The OD is going to help set Kobe free. No, I'm not missing anything. I know what they're gonna try to do, but if that is all they have it's not gonna work. Kobe's not on his home turf, the hometown jury is not going to give him the benefit of the doubt. They're gonna believe her before they believe him, but the evidence carries more weight than what either of them say. Worked for OJ There was OVERWHELMING evidence against oj....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.