|
the kobe accuser (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| torontotrance |
| But it does not comedown to what Kobe thought, it's what the girl thought. |
|
|
| JayD |
| quote: | Originally posted by torontotrance
But it does not comedown to what Kobe thought, it's what the girl thought. |
I don't get what you mean.
JaY |
|
|
| tranceaholic |
| quote: | Originally posted by torontotrance
But it does not comedown to what Kobe thought, it's what the girl thought. |
me niether...and i would also like to see any proof u have for kobe being guilty or any refutation for the alleged raped girl to have sex right after the rape |
|
|
| torontotrance |
How do you know what you heard is the exact truth? How do we know she had sex after the rape? based on leaked court documents that don't make up the entire case.
The legal definition of rape is having forced intercourse without consent. If she said No or Stop at anytime and he did not stop, that's rape, no matter if she had sex before or after with someone else. The courts only give a rat's ass about the victim, if they said no or stop, and the other person did not stop, that's rape. It does not matter what Kobe believed, his opinion is not valid in these cases. It's all about what the victim thought and that's the only thing that should matter. As far as I'm concerned, the girl could have had sex with 20 men in the week before her encounter and the claim that she told him to stop and he did not stop, is rape right there. Most people come to the defence of million dollar athletes saying they are just wrongly accused. Kobe will be taken apart in the civil trial because he was responsible for her suffering, rape or no rape and she will win damages as a result.
Kobe can claim all he wants that she said yes, but she said she said no. That's rape in my book, the girl could be a whore, it does not matter in my book, she was raped and this case showed why the justice system is flawed because the defence is allowed dig up the past of a victim and turn the trial to she is the victim. That's wrong, you should be allowed to question your accuser but not to the limits that she would have been questioned. People tend to think that rape depends on how many people you sleep with or that if you sleep with a few men and you get raped by one that you did not get raped. That's how pathetic the media and the public have become, it shows that all the rights are for the accused not the victims that's wrong. I bet less women will come forward now saying they were raped because they don't want their lives to be turned even more upside down. |
|
|
| JayD |
TTA I haven't seen a look at both perspective's and the benifit of the doubt from your side.
Someone can say the've been rapped, as they can be lying as well.
I remember a few years ago when a woman accused a police officer of rape during an arrest, but he had a recorded audio tape from the incident in his car (which the woman was unaware of). The case went to court without her knowing that he had an audio tape, and when she took the stand crying of how he'd rapped her, they played the tape as his defense. Pans out the woman was threatening him. The cop would've easily lost his job and his reputation ruined for something he didn't do.
Even though this has nothing to do with this case, it very much so prooves that you never know.
There's always the benifit of the doubt in any case.. Be so rape or any other. Nobody should force sexual intercourse on anyone, be so male or female if the other side isn't wanted. Yet, it's the fact's here that she had sex after (DNA evidense and admited by herself) the fact that she had just been rapped? It doesn't make any sense. Why would you do so? Why dismiss the case? These are questions that the defense IMO has probable cause to investigate.
She is the victim yes, but the defense / prosecutors should be able to have reasonable doubt as to defened what they think is a lie by looking at both sides of the picture and not only one arguement..
That's all I'm saying.
JaY |
|
|
| blazed it |
| quote: | Originally posted by torontotrance
It's pathetic in North American law these days and this case showed all about the flaws in the system. A girl gets raped in her mind, yet she is the one put on trial by Bryant's defence team, since when did getting raped by someone become a crime by the victim. Our laws are so twisted because we have these morons who cry foul when the criminals' rights are violated but no one seems to give a crap that the victim had his or her rights violated in the first place by the criminal, that's why charges were laid. I bet most of you think that she was a gold digging whore that never got raped thinking she was after Kobe's money. The poor girl would have been grilled by the defence about her sexual history and everything, since when did your sexual history factor into being raped. Rape is all about you saying no and then the person having sex against your will. When did how many men you sleep with actually make a damn of a difference, the question is you were raped or you were not. North America is backwards, we are too concerned with the criminal's rights but not the victim's right (if they are still alive) or their family and loved ones' right to seek justice. Kobe will always be a rapist in my book, even thought the case did not go to trial. If he was'nt a star, this case would not have made any news and she would have been just another statistic, which is pathetic and the criminal would have got life in prison. There were 3 leaks of information by the court people in the case, which got out and tainted the people and the girl thought she would not get a fair trial, it would end in acquittal and she did not want to be on trial herself. Since when did getting raped and being the victim constitute you being on trial, that's why America and Canada are backwards. The way I look at it, if you are convicted of a rape, your dick should be cut off then you cannot tape again. This case shows how bad criminal rights have become, they get more rights than the victims that is just plain wrong. John Walsh put it best, being someone who knows about the entire process, he got mistreated by the cops, the courts and everything and he says we have it backwards, the victim's rights come first but at least he is doing something about it, taking scumbags off the street. |
then why did she file only a civil trial? but not a criminal trial? |
|
|
| tranceaholic |
| quote: | Originally posted by blazed it
then why did she file only a civil trial? but not a criminal trial? |
exactly...and u r blaming the justice system however the case never went to trial..its not like kobe was tried and found not guilty...she dropped the case..u keep repeating urself by saying u dont care what happened before..well me niether..i care about what happened AFTER..she had sex after kobe..even if a prostitute is raped she wont have sex right away...she aint got nothing to lose..no one knows who she is and she might make millions from striking a deal..if we believed every girl that claimed rape then this will never end..every chick will sue every athlete in town. we live in a greedy society..dont forget its INNOCENT TIL PROVEN GUILTY..and there is no proof that he was guilty..none...if there was proof she wouldnt have dropped the case.. |
|
|
| Omegasox |
| quote: | Originally posted by tranceaholic
celebrity whoring doesnt work for athletes...even if u r in the media 24/7 but u suck on the court then u aint worth ... |
Wrong. Anna Kournikova and Dennis Rodman (Yeah, yeah, he could rebound, but he sure as hell wasn't in the media spotlight because he was a good rebounder) come off the top of my head. |
|
|
| JayD |
| quote: | Originally posted by tranceaholic
exactly...and u r blaming the justice system however the case never went to trial..its not like kobe was tried and found not guilty...she dropped the case..u keep repeating urself by saying u dont care what happened before..well me niether..i care about what happened AFTER..she had sex after kobe..even if a prostitute is raped she wont have sex right away...she aint got nothing to lose..no one knows who she is and she might make millions from striking a deal..if we believed every girl that claimed rape then this will never end..every chick will sue every athlete in town. we live in a greedy society..dont forget its INNOCENT TIL PROVEN GUILTY..and there is no proof that he was guilty..none...if there was proof she wouldnt have dropped the case.. |
Werd. Yet she still goes ahead with the civil trial. $ speaks in volumes.
JaY |
|
|
| tranceaholic |
| quote: | Originally posted by Omegasox
Wrong. Anna Kournikova and Dennis Rodman (Yeah, yeah, he could rebound, but he sure as hell wasn't in the media spotlight because he was a good rebounder) come off the top of my head. |
and where r they now with respect to the sport? |
|
|
| hadi burpee |
| quote: | Originally posted by The_One
Its called a publicity stunt. I really doubt Kobe would jeopordize his basketball carrer and family life for a mere publicity stunt.
The girl was obviously just after Kobes money. The fact that she decided to drop the case makes her look even more guilty of that. Too bad we'll never know who she was. |
yea, no one pulls a publicity stunt with a rape case, haha, thats bad publicity |
|
|
| Omegasox |
| quote: | Originally posted by tranceaholic
and where r they now with respect to the sport? |
Retired, yet they're still in the media. I don't get your point. It just shows even more that they don't need to continue to be athletes to whore their image. |
|
|
|
|
