Kobe Bryant - Time Up?

Jack Remington said:

I understand how consent works. Thanks for the veiled personal attack there.

I'm saying the statement likely did not seem like a huge concession in 2004.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

It wasn't really a personal attack, just some snark because you're being kind of ridiculous. Him admitting that she didn't view it as consensual should be all the evidence that we need TODAY to stop defending his actions and to STOP pretending that's he's perfectly innocent. Ignore the context of 2004, think about the things that people are saying about him and that statement right now.

It went to trial and was dropped. It's been 15 years. No other accusers have come forward. Kobe has a great reputation.

Since I have no ability to know whether he did it or not, and for the above reasons, I don't feel like I have legitimate reason to hold this against him. He shouldn't have cheated of course but that's not my business.

That said, I want to say that sports culture is is disgusting when it comes to treatment of women. I've been to UT football games and seen actually convicted rapists on the field. They don't get in trouble because they are good at sports. It's sickening. So even though I don't fit Kobe in with them, the public still needs to be vigilant in standing up for women especially with sports figures.

All charges were dropped.

Driggonny said:

What is it about Kobe that brings out all these people making excuses that wouldn't fly for anyone accused nowadays.

Oh right he's a rich basketball superstar

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Or maybe because he already went through this 15 years ago and it was a much bigger deal back then. Or maybe because the charges were also dropped.

There's a difference between Kobe and a lot of these other people. Mainly because it was a one time incident and as I said, the charges were dropped.

If multiple women came out against Kobe and this wasn't just a one time thing, then yeah, he should be put through the ringer. But you can't just keep bringing up the same thing over and over again after it was already resolved 15 years ago.

That's like your mom or wife saying "you always forget to take the trash out" just because you forgot one time and haven't forgotten since.

He's not a rapist. Let him live.

Deepwater said:

kobe stans

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Your argument is over when you roll this out.

I remember this being a huge deal when it happened. I was never a huge fan of Kobe and this incident made me dislike him even more. However, my respect did increase for him as his career went on. It definitely seemed like he matured as a person, but maybe that's just because of good PR.

I'm not really qualified to determine if he's guilty or not but I can only hope that his accuser is at peace.

Servbot24 said:

It went to trial and was dropped. It's been 15 years. No other accusers have come forward. Kobe has a great reputation.

Since I have no ability to know whether he did it or not, and for the above reasons, I don't feel like I have legitimate reason to hold this against him. He shouldn't have cheated of course but that's not my business.

That said, I want to say that sports culture is is disgusting when it comes to treatment of women. I've been to UT football games and seen actually convicted rapists on the field. They don't get in trouble because they are good at sports. It's sickening. So even though I don't fit Kobe in with them, the public still needs to be vigilant in standing up for women especially with sports figures.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Kobe is an alleged rapist who had his lawyers put pressure on the victim so that she would not testify which was the foundation of the entire case. Then settled the civil suit for an undisclosed amount of money and a gag order. Saying it went to trial and it was dropped is missing a lot of context.

Ketkat said:

But, you do understand how consent works right? Its not a one way street, you BOTH have to view it as consent.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

That's not how a court case works. They gather evidence, testimonies and then decide based on how thry perceive the evidence whether the encounter was or was not consentual. If it was just based on your interpretation we wouldn't still be having all these cases.

And the dude did not admit to raping her in that statememt. Like I said in the other thread, that's a wild interpretation there.

I still think he did it though. But that's a separate issue from what you're pushing. The dude definitely had his image trashed when this was going on. But he pretty much recovered fine because when you're in the prime of a crazy career bar murderimg someone on camera everyone is gonna let it pass.

But like, tbh I dont think anyone really forgot about this.

Servbot24 said:

It went to trial and was dropped. It's been 15 years. No other accusers have come forward. Kobe has a great reputation.

Since I have no ability to know whether he did it or not, and for the above reasons, I don't feel like I have legitimate reason to hold this against him. He shouldn't have cheated of course but that's not my business.

That said, I want to say that sports culture is is disgusting when it comes to treatment of women. I've been to UT football games and seen actually convicted rapists on the field. They don't get in trouble because they are good at sports. It's sickening. So even though I don't fit Kobe in with them, the public still needs to be vigilant in standing up for women especially with sports figures.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

He did do it. He says in the settlement he realizes that the woman in question felt the sex they had was not consensual.

In other words, she was raped.

est1992 said:

Or maybe because he already went through this 15 years ago and it was a much bigger deal back then. Or maybe because the charges were also dropped.

There's a difference between Kobe and a lot of these other people. Mainly because it was a one time incident and as I said, the charges were dropped.

If multiple women came out against Kobe and this wasn't just a one time thing, then yeah, he should be put through the ringer. But you can't just keep bringing up the same thing over and over again after it was already resolved 15 years ago.

That's like your mom or wife saying "you always forget to take the trash out" just because you forgot one time and haven't forgotten since.

He's not a rapist. Let him live.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

We don't know this for certain

Now, what we can say is that he ain't had shit be called out against him in 15 years, but we cannot for certain say he is not a rapist. We don't know what happened that night. We just don't.

Imma still get my jokes off the same way I do with Ben tho

15 year old BS accusations. Keep reaching though.

Servbot24 said:

It went to trial and was dropped. It's been 15 years. No other accusers have come forward. Kobe has a great reputation.

Since I have no ability to know whether he did it or not, and for the above reasons, I don't feel like I have legitimate reason to hold this against him. He shouldn't have cheated of course but that's not my business.

That said, I want to say that sports culture is is disgusting when it comes to treatment of women. I've been to UT football games and seen actually convicted rapists on the field. They don't get in trouble because they are good at sports. It's sickening. So even though I don't fit Kobe in with them, the public still needs to be vigilant in standing up for women especially with sports figures.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Sports culture and how women are treated in said culture around the world is the biggest issue at hand. It's disgusting in every sport and an issue that won't be resolved anytime soon. The same goes for racism and homophobia in sports. Sports outside of sports is evil shit...

Where was all this energy the past 15 years? The man wins an Oscar and now we gotta drag his name through the mud? Again?

And I like all of the one-sided quotes about the case. Why not bring up the multiple DNA samples collected because the victim had sex AFTER the interaction with Bryant? The Victim claimed she wore dirty underwear to the exam, but the 2nd mans DNA was on both pair of underwear. And if her interaction with man #2 would have occurred before the interaction with Bryant, the mans DNA would be present on Bryant's clothing as well. It was not.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/04/us/papers-reveal-new-details-in-kobe-bryant-rape-case.html

So there is fishy information in the case, it was settled out of court, Kobe's family is OK with things now, but we are supposed to act like he's a monster?

ryutaro's mama said:

Your argument is over when you roll this out.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

your dismissing what are plainly attacks on a person's character as "They're just bringing up a possible scenario!"

Your argument has been over.

Trey said:

He did do it. He says in the settlement he realizes that the woman in question felt the sex they had was not consensual.

In other words, she was raped.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Thank goodness you aren't asked to read and interpret legal documents.

JackFrost said:

"Money will always trump justice"

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Should translate it into latin and put it on our currency as it is the single closest thing to truth we have in the U.S.

Lost said:

Yup. Absolutely pathetic.

His musics not even good either.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Absolutely false

MylesDevin said:

Where was all this energy the past 15 years? The man wins an Oscar and now we gotta drag his name through the mud? Again?

And I like all of the one-sided quotes about the case. Why not bring up the multiple DNA samples collected because the victim had sex AFTER the interaction with Bryant? The Victim claimed she wore dirty underwear to the exam, but the 2nd mans DNA was on both pair of underwear. And if her interaction with man #2 would have occurred before the interaction with Bryant, the mans DNA would be present on Bryant's clothing as well. It was not.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/04/us/papers-reveal-new-details-in-kobe-bryant-rape-case.html

So there is fishy information in the case, it was settled out of court, Kobe's family is OK with things now, but we are supposed to act like he's a monster?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Fuck off with the victim blaming bullshit. Goddamn it.

Deepwater said:

nah these are the same kinds of excuses people make in every other thread.

The kobe stans are the ones throwing their hands up like "it was 15 years ago, lets just move on!"

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I wonder why it feels like there's more to me.

Honestly thinking it's a sports fan thing but I could be wrong.

est1992 said:

Or maybe because he already went through this 15 years ago and it was a much bigger deal back then. Or maybe because the charges were also dropped.

There's a difference between Kobe and a lot of these other people. Mainly because it was a one time incident and as I said, the charges were dropped.

If multiple women came out against Kobe and this wasn't just a one time thing, then yeah, he should be put through the ringer. But you can't just keep bringing up the same thing over and over again after it was already resolved 15 years ago.

That's like your mom or wife saying "you always forget to take the trash out" just because you forgot one time and haven't forgotten since.

He's not a rapist. Let him live.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

My mom totally does this is that just a mom thing

Fuck Kobe

Deepwater said:

your dismissing what are plainly attacks on a person's character as "They're just bringing up a possible scenario!"

Your argument has been over.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I'm saying that it's what legal teams are supposed to do for their client. Introduce a variety of scenarios.

And I didn't have to resort to childish names to say it.

The guy threw a t shirt he ejaculated into at an officer's face. He's a giant arrogant asshole anyway you look at it, and it's unfortunate that he has seen so much success in the ensuing years.

Selina said:

The thread is open again. Please keep in mind that we do not tolerate victim blaming and will not allow users to trivialise sexual assault allegations.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Why was ryutaro's mama banned simply for bringing up evidence that was brought up in a trial? He made no dismissive statement.

Honestly if discussing evidence is bannable, there is no room to have any kind of discussion about any allegations that ever come up.

Jack Remington said:

Why was ryutaro's mama banned simply for bringing up evidence that was brought up in a trial? He made no dismissive statement.

Honestly if discussing evidence is bannable, there is no room to have any kind of discussion about any allegations that ever come up.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I agree, that's not "victim blaming", that's just stating facts that were from the case.

I don't understand what the purpose of this thread is if the case is not allowed to be discussed in any sort of discourse.

Jack Remington said:

Why was ryutaro's mama banned simply for bringing up evidence that was brought up in a trial? He made no dismissive statement.

Honestly if discussing evidence is bannable, there is no room to have any kind of discussion about any allegations that ever come up.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Vire said:

I agree, that's not "victim blaming", that's just stating facts that were from the case.

I don't understand what the purpose of this thread is if the case is not allowed to be discussed in any sort of discourse.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Pretty sure it was more to do with the defense of the attacks on her character. If you really don't understand why that kind of garbage is harmful to use, then you need to take the time to go around reading about the experiences of sexual assault victims that have had to take a stand. Or even from the ones who don't want to step forward.

And from the victim blaming angle, trying to paint someone as a slut to say they were asking for it is common in these cases.

Ketkat said:

Pretty sure it was more to do with the defense of the attacks on her character. If you really don't understand why that kind of garbage is harmful to use, then you need to take the time to go around reading about the experiences of sexual assault victims that have had to take a stand. Or even from the ones who don't want to step forward.

And from the victim blaming angle, trying to paint someone as a slut to say they were asking for it is common in these cases.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

It's not attack on her character, she really did have sex with another man in that same period of time.

That's not an attack, that's a fact.

Whether or not that affects the case or not is really not for me to decide.

Vire said:

It's not attack on her character, she really did have sex with another man in that same period of time.

That's not an attack, that's a fact.

Whether or not that affects the case or not is really not for me to decide.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Is that a fact? She said it was a dirty pair of underwear

It was a trial. There's no victim blaming in a trial, because the point is that the defense is arguing that there is no victim. I am not making any kind of statement as to the truthfulness of the allegations against Bryant or categorically denying that there was a victim in this particular case. But a defense team cannot just hold back if there is evidence that may appear exonerating.

And if we can't discuss said evidence here, I don't see the point of allowing any of these threads to even remain open.

Jack Remington said:

It was a trial. There's no victim blaming in a trial, because the point is that the defense is arguing there's no victim. I am not making any kind of statement as to the truthfulness of the allegations against Bryant or categorically denying that there was a victim in this particular case. But a defense team cannot just hold back if there is evidence that may appear exonerating.

And if we can't discuss said evidence here, I don't see the point of allowing any of these threads to even remain open.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

There's no victim blaming in a trial? You can't be serious with something like that.

Ketkat said:

There's no victim blaming in a trial? You can't be serious with something like that.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Framing it as victim blaming in the context of a criminal trial is inaccurate.

The defense's argument is that there was no assault and therefore no victim. It is their job to make this argument. And there are, occasionally, false charges. Around 5% of the time, according to the last study I saw. It certainly wouldn't be victim blaming to bring up potentially exonerating evidence in a trial that happened to be among those 5%.

Ketkat said:

Is that a fact? She said it was a dirty pair of underwear

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

So she just keeps around underwear for months on end without washing it and accidentally provides the wrong underwear in a situation where she knows it will be tested for Kobe's DNA? I mean okay, if that's what you choose to believe, so be it.

Jack Remington said:

Framing it as victim blaming in the context of a criminal trial is inaccurate.

The defense's argument is that there was no assault and therefore no victim. It is their job to make this argument. And there are, occasionally, false charges. Around 5% of the time, according to the last study I saw. It certainly wouldn't be victim blaming to bring up potentially exonerating evidence in a trial that happened to be among those 5%.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Why are you thinking of it from the perspective from that 5%? What about the 95% that are being told that they were asking for it because they're sluts? What about the 95% being told they're hysterical, they weren't raped, because they take medication? In the VAST majority of these cases, there is a victim. Stop pretending that there is no victim blaming.

Vire said:

So she just keeps around underwear for months on end without washing it and accidentally provides the wrong underwear in a situation where she knows it will be tested for Kobe's DNA? I mean okay, if that's what you choose to believe, so be it.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

That's what she said happened. Its not a FACT that anything else did.

Jack Remington said:

It was a trial. There's no victim blaming in a trial, because the point is that the defense is arguing that there is no victim. I am not making any kind of statement as to the truthfulness of the allegations against Bryant or categorically denying that there was a victim in this particular case. But a defense team cannot just hold back if there is evidence that may appear exonerating.

And if we can't discuss said evidence here, I don't see the point of allowing any of these threads to even remain open.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

There was no criminal trial. The prosecutor never moved forward as the victim refused to testify after settling the civil lawsuit. There were preliminary hearings.

Jack Remington said:

Why was ryutaro's mama banned simply for bringing up evidence that was brought up in a trial? He made no dismissive statement.

Honestly if discussing evidence is bannable, there is no room to have any kind of discussion about any allegations that ever come up.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Yep. I'm not getting this rationale at all. There was a court decision that dismissed the charges. This is not denying the seriousness of the allegations. The mod warning is ill informed.

I know this is a sensitive topic, but there is a lot inconsistencies here due to conflating legal decisions with opinions.

I can't stand Kobe btw and I think he's guilty in my mind.

Okay. So if Kobe Bryant did rape that woman, then it is very unfortunate that those issues the defense believed to be exonerating existed. But they did, and the defense would not have been doing their jobs not to bring them up.

Not every rape case is going to have such potentially exonerating evidence for the defense to present.

Ketkat said:

Why are you thinking of it from the perspective from that 5%? What about the 95% that are being told that they were asking for it because they're sluts? What about the 95% being told they're hysterical, they weren't raped, because they take medication? In the VAST majority of these cases, there is a victim. Stop pretending that there is no victim blaming.



That's what she said happened. Its not a FACT that anything else did.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

It's also not victim blaming to bring up these points that occurred. Other men's semen was found on her underwear and like I said whether that is relevant to the case is not for me to decide.

Deepwater said:

Mike Vick was RUINED. Absolutely a shame what white america did to that man.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I'm pretty sure that it would be a thing if Tom Brady got caught hanging dogs from a tree with a nylon cord.

Vire said:

It's also not victim blaming to bring up these points that occurred. Other men's semen was found on her underwear and like I said whether that is relevant to the case is not for me to decide.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Can you explain the relevancy of bringing up the medications that she's taken? Her history with depression and suicidal ideation as well? What about her failing a tryout for American Idol? What do you think their goal is in bringing up these?

entremet said:

Yep. I'm not getting this rationale at all. There was a court decision that dismissed the charges. This is not denying the seriousness of the allegations. The mod warning is ill informed.

I know this is a sensitive topic, but there is a lot inconsistencies here due to conflating legal decisions with opinions.

I can't stand Kobe btw and I think he's guilty in my mind.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Personally, I'm still trying to figure out how Myles's post was victim blaming.

hippopotamus said:

I'm pretty sure that it would be a thing if Tom Brady got caught hanging dogs from a tree with a nylon cord.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Holy shit. I never followed the story that closely. I knew the dog fighting, which is horrible. I did not know about the hanging and I just read about drowning dogs as well. How the fuck is that piece of shit and his colleagues not in jail for life?

Ketkat said:

There's no victim blaming in a trial? You can't be serious with something like that.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

What he's saying is that the purpose of the trial is to determine whether there is a victim. You can't victim blame without a victim. This is also why I don't understand the Myles ban above: he isn't victim blaming because the discussion is about whether or not she was actually a victim. The multiple semen angle was used by the defense to show that if, for example, she went and had sex with another man after Bryant, that seems incompatible with the psychological mindset of a rape victim. And frankly it makes no sense to use facts in this thread that support Kobe being a rapist but not allow facts from the case that call that into question.

Vire said:

It's not attack on her character, she really did have sex with another man in that same period of time.

That's not an attack, that's a fact.

Whether or not that affects the case or not is really not for me to decide.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

But it was a dismissal, because it was a claim that her promiscuity had fooled the rape kit.

"[The nurse] stated that there were several lacerations to the victim's posterior fourchette or vaginal area, and two of those lacerations were approximately one centimeter in length," testified Det. Winters. "And there were many, I believe, 2 millimeter lacerations. Too many to count… [The nurse] stated that the injuries were consistent with penetrating genital trauma. That it's not consistent with consensual sex."\

Detective Winters further stated that the nurse told him the vaginal injuries had most likely occurred within "24 hours," and that the accuser had "a small bruise on her left jaw line." Also, that examiners had found "blood excretions" on Bryant's T-shirt "to about the waistline." The blood, testified Det. Winters, had "the same DNA profile as the victim in this case."

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

The issue wasn't whether or not it was a 'valid legal defense' because we weren't arguing over that. The issue was whether or not Kobe's defense team attacked her character as a means to discredit her allegation. This was, mind you, after several posts of asking for proof. Saying "well you can't blame them they were obligated to make a legal defense" is separate from the idea that they did attempt to throw her character into question.

There are a few avenues you could go from there:

1. The victim enjoys rough sex and her promiscuity reflects the findings
2. Kobe did assault her and the cuts are indicative of that
3. The cuts came from somewhere else?

Vire said:

It's also not victim blaming to bring up these points that occurred. Other men's semen was found on her underwear and like I said whether that is relevant to the case is not for me to decide.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Like I said above, you'd have to think that she was assaulted by other men within 24 hours of meeting Kobe or consensual sex would create the lacerations.

Jack Remington said:

It was a trial. There's no victim blaming in a trial, because the point is that the defense is arguing that there is no victim. I am not making any kind of statement as to the truthfulness of the allegations against Bryant or categorically denying that there was a victim in this particular case. But a defense team cannot just hold back if there is evidence that may appear exonerating.

And if we can't discuss said evidence here, I don't see the point of allowing any of these threads to even remain open.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I'm not sure what fruitful discussion there even is to be had. It's a 15 year old case. We have as much evidence as we are ever going to have. Both sides are just talking at walls.

Ketkat said:

Can you explain the relevancy of bringing up the medications that she's taken? Her history with depression and suicidal ideation as well? What about her failing a tryout for American Idol? What do you think their goal is in bringing up these?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Obviously to paint her in a light of someone who is not mentally stable. It's not my words, that's Kobe's lawyers, that being said I do see some sort of value in bringing these things to the table (specifically the medication) aside from the American Idol thing (don't really understand that).

Either way, discussing the events of the trial should not be bannanle offense. I think Kobe is guilty as fuck for what it's worth and don't respect him as person but what do I know.

The blood seems to be my personal hang up. I'd like to believe there was an honest communication error, and Kobe made a huge, life-ruining error. But, the cuts make it seem more brutal. Hard thing there.

Deepwater said:

Mike Vick was RUINED. Absolutely a shame what white america did to that man.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Yea white america should feel bad for not forgiving him for hanging and slaughtering dogs for fun and $$$.

Cordy said:

Man, even to this day I'm still surprised that some didn't know about Kobe's case. You couldn't escape it back then. You saw it all over tv, in music, hell it was even referenced on wrestling. I get people aren't from the US but I figured when you think of Kobe this is the #2 thing you think of.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

But this is also why people need to get over it. It happened 15 years ago, he paid his dues, his reputation took the hit and his marriage suffered...but since then he has kept his nose clean and head above the water. He has done whatever the hell he can do to make things right, and some people forgive him and some haven't. But since people currently have a hard time even knowing it was once a thing means he is probably a different person than he was back then. People have a right not to forgive him, but people should also have the right to be redeemed.

Deepwater said:

Mike Vick was RUINED. Absolutely a shame what white america did to that man.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Vick got what he deserved, and because of that he's turned himself around and done a lot of good and by all accounts is a great guy.

Just because Big Ben hasn't gotten what he deserved (if the allegations are true) doesn't mean what happened to Vick was a shame. It means Ben needed to go to trial.