Does this just STINK of greed/payoff to anyone else?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,131071,00.html

Only to knee jerk racists that think Black = Guilty. Everyone else pretty much thinks the prosecution realized the accuser was full of shit.

Actually Kobe admitted non-consensual sex after the case was dismissed in a written statement (and after there was no chance of another criminal charge against him).

Also, the prosecution was pretty clear in its statement that the case was strong (i.e. not full of shit). However, because of the payoff to keep the accuser from testifying the proseuction would not be able to continue the prosecution.

"Although I truly believe this encounter between us was consensual, I recognize now that she did not and does not view this incident the same way I did." www.ccn.com


Thats slighlty different that saying he admitted to saying it was non consensual sex.

One of two things happened:

a) A BIG bag o'Money showed up "mysteriously" out of nowhere.

or

b) The video with her and all the Dipsy'Lala's having an orgy with a gourd surfaced.

"I recognize now that she did not...view this incident the same way I did."

I don't think you can interpret that statement any other way except that at the time of the act she did not consent to sex. What other way could she have viewed it? In his mind he obviously believes it was consensual at the time but he has admitted now that it was not consensual (recognizes now that she did not consent to sex).

Only to knee jerk racists that think Black = Guilty. Everyone else pretty much thinks the prosecution realized the accuser was full of shit.
I was more inclined to think "spoiled professional athelete" = guilty than Black = Guilty.

Hell, wasn't she black? I couldnt really tell.

I'm fairly certain that I heard on the news Kobe making that statement was requested by the accuser as part of the 'terms' for the case being dropped.

Will try to dig up a link when I'm not so busy.

Too bad this is limited edition now.

Only to knee jerk racists that think Black = Guilty

So, it only looks like she's in this for the money and dropped the case when she got some to knee jerk racists that think Black = Guilty.

You're going downhill, and you weren't too high to start with.

You might want to keep in mind that aside from making yourself look like(even more of) an ignorant asshole, calling me racist is just as much against the board rules as posting racial slurs.

It's difficult for me to think there was any payola involved here. It's a pretty serious problem to even suggest that, if some money changed hands that everyone might be better off in the future.

ESPN isn't exactly the highest regarded legal source on the planet, but they had a fairly comprehensive report from their lawyers last night. The only REAL concern is if Kobe's "apology" might come back and bite him in the ass later.

Remember, this was "The People of Colorado" against Kobe Bryant, not the complaining witness against Kobe Bryant. The AG's office dropped the case because, well, they didn't think they could win. They didn't think they could win because their "star" witness -- the complaning witness (or, if you prefer, the victim) -- wouldn't take the stand.

She's not going to be worth much in the civil trial (if there is one) under those conditions either.

Also, I never knew if the CW was white or black or some inbetween shade of pinkish-tan like the rest of us. I never thought it was material to the case. I admit, there's part of me that wants to go find her picture on a website somewhere, just to see the sort of girl Kobe like to fuck in the ass, but, well, then I'd never get to be a juror in the case, now would I! [Not living in Colorado was going to hamper my chances too, I guess.]

[Not living in Colorado was going to hamper my chances too, I guess.]
Well if you are ever in Denver, visit EAST Colfax. There are plenty of strip clubs and crack whores. You just may find her there.

It's difficult for me to think there was any payola involved here. It's a pretty serious problem to even suggest that, if some money changed hands that everyone might be better off in the future.
It wouldn't be illegal... it might be seriously unethical, but then when was the last time ethics really mattered in a case like this?

As far as no payola, I believe that in fact there will be, and the views I got from MSNBC/Fox/CNN legal contributors were overwhelmingly that her dropping the case(and make no mistake, it was dropped because she decided she didn't want to go forward..they could have continued the case and treated her as a hostile witness if they were so inclined) and his statement were the first steps of negotiation for settling the civil suit.

Now, the news stations aren't ESPN, but given the timing of a statement like that and her dropping out of the criminal case...I'm going to agree that is the most logical answer.

It wouldn't be illegal... it might be seriously unethical, but then when was the last time ethics really mattered in a case like this?

As far as no payola, I believe that in fact there will be, and the views I got from MSNBC/Fox/CNN legal contributors were overwhelmingly that her dropping the case(and make no mistake, it was dropped because she decided she didn't want to go forward..they could have continued the case and treated her as a hostile witness if they were so inclined) and his statement were the first steps of negotiation for settling the civil suit.

Now, the news stations aren't ESPN, but given the timing of a statement like that and her dropping out of the criminal case...I'm going to agree that is the most logical answer.Ok, sorry to quote so much, but you're missing a few things.

You must not understand what payola means. Here's a refresher (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payola). Will there be a civil suit, and will someone get paid? Quite possiliby; but that's not "payola."

Would the defendant in a legal case paying a witness not to testify be illegal - or merely unethical, like you suggest. You must be smoking crack. Once a case has turned criminal, it's QUITE illegal. Finding the important Colorado section could take me hours, but, well, here's a summary of the California section:Under the California Penal Code, everyone who participates in an agreement to pay a witness not to testify in a criminal proceeding can be charged with the following obstruction of justice felonies: bribing a witness not to attend trial, bribing a witness to withhold testimony, compounding a felony, and conspiracy.

The California Supreme Court has repeatedly said that civil settlements that include agreements not to testify in criminal cases are illegal and void, and that attorneys who concoct such agreements may be charged with these felonies. While a civil case is a private action by one party against another, and may be settled by those parties by private agreement, criminal cases are actions brought by the people because crimes are considered wrongs against all of us.It's not illegial. You crack me up.

Also, since I pointed out already that the People of the State of Colororado dropped the suit because they didn't think they could make a case without a cooperate witness, I have no idea why you feel a need to repeat it in rebuttal to me.

You also say the "the news stations aren't ESPN" - which is similarly uninteresting because I started my statement about ESPN by disclaiming the source. ESPN is a news station, by the way. Their news just happens to be sports-related. Their legal guy might not be as sharp as the one working for CNN, but he probably knows what payola means (something the CNN and NBC guys might not have mentioned to you...)

Palimax.. Kobe's statement says thet there is an agreement that this statement can not be used in the civil trial. I hope he got it in writting. I'm also wondering what her 2 friends from Canada were going to testify to, other than her attitude while partying with them 2 weeks after the "incident". This will probably not make fans but I'm not sure I can put faith in the words of someone who willingly goes to the room of a "mega-sports star" and doesn't think something is going to happen. In no way do I condone rape but please.... and yes I understand that NO means NO .... I have to wonder at her motives becaue of all this. I'm just glad it's over, or atleast mostly, I'm sure we'll hear more on the civil end.

Yensid - retired Wizard because I found out how UBAH Necro's are :cool:

Ok, so that slogan isn't so funny :)

Ok, sorry to quote so much, but you're missing a few things.

You must not understand what payola means. Here's a refresher (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payola). Will there be a civil suit, and will someone get paid? Quite possiliby; but that's not "payola."
It's great to see that you know how to link things, here's the problem: You you were talking about Kobe essentially bribing the victim(or how unlikely that was to be more precise).

That of course would be precisely what I was responding to, so to try and suggest I wasn't following your argument is just sad.


Would the defendant in a legal case paying a witness not to testify be illegal - or merely unethical, like you suggest. You must be smoking crack. Once a case has turned criminal, it's QUITE illegal.

Actually you don't quite follow the details yourself here, the issue wouldn't be outright paying, but a skirt around the rules in that the defendent agrees to the statement(with an agreement that it not be used in the civil trial, try to justify THAT one without this all being part of a deal) in return for the victim dropping the charges with the understanding that the ongoing civil suit would be settled out of court. Such an agreement would(again) not be illegal, but it is very unethical(Gee, I bet if you read your own links you'd find that "payola" -since it is the term you prefer- isn't always illegal).

As far as the legality of the matter, and linking California state law to demonstrate that, you are again/still working off of the oversimplified version that he is paying her directly to drop the case, instead of the actual scenerio that she is dropping the case with the understanding that they will settle the civil case outside of the courtroom(with his statement as a show of good faith).


Their legal guy might not be as sharp as the one working for CNN, but he probably knows what payola means (something the CNN and NBC guys might not have mentioned to you...)

Yeah, Palimax, I had no idea payola meant bribery, being that we were discussing Kobe in essence paying her off to drop the case.

We're all dizzied by your intellect...feelin warm and fuzzy yet?

Directly or indirectly, it's illegal. Something you're pretending it isn't.

I tell you what, when that case gets settled out of court and Colorado doesn't charge Kobe in regards to bribery I'll get you some ketchup to go with that crow.

This will probably not make fans but I'm not sure I can put faith in the words of someone who willingly goes to the room of a "mega-sports star" and doesn't think something is going to happen.
So... if you go willingly into the hotel room of a "mega sports star" that means they get to have sex with you?

Even if they are married (in which case sex outside of that relationship is grounds for termination of that marriage)

Even if adultery is illegal?

Damn...

In no way do I condone rape but please.... and yes I understand that NO means NO .... I have to wonder at her motives becaue of all this
It should send a message to all of those people who don't think the rules apply to them - if you have enough money, be careful where you stick it, because some people are going to cry rape.

I'd giggle my ass off if Colorado decided to prosecute him for adultery.

I tell you what, when that case gets settled out of court and Colorado doesn't charge Kobe in regards to bribery I'll get you some ketchup to go with that crow.And that will make it legal, how?

It is illegal -- something you said it wasn't

It wouldn't be illegal... it might be seriously unethical, but then when was the last time ethics really mattered in a case like this?

I'd giggle my ass off if Colorado decided to prosecute him for adultery.
I think that the only reason that is not taking place is someone higher up than the Prosecuting Attorney has already given instructions to back off. I sincerely believe John Elway would have been treated much differently, had he been the "mega sports star".

This was never anything more than a case of he said - she said. Only the two of them were in the room, so there were no witnesses to what took place. With polygraph testing being inadmissable, there was no way to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that either one was telling the truth (and polygraph tests are not 100% accurate either). That is why all the flurry of trying to get non-related things admissable, such as sexual history and numbers and so forth; it has nothing to do with what happened in the room, but can be used to try to discredit other testimony.

If he did in fact rape her, it will catch up to him (I believe in karma). If she was lying going for some dollar signs and a moment of fleeting fame, or if she changed her mind after the act or at the thought of a specific act, it will catch up to her.

It only took common sense on this one, not money.

If your "victim" has a proven track record of being a total slut, than perhaps what happened was our so called victim probably would have surrendered the goods with ease inspite of the super sports hero status, and decided to take advantage of Kobe's wealth to better herself. Females of the species ( lets see if you can get that old 80s tune stuck in your heads) can be just as predatory and scheming as the male when it comes to money, especially when they are pretty much at the level of trash and have little to lose. She had ZERO credibility. So, what can any kind of prosecuter do at that point other than to hope that the legal expenses incurred by the State for a total waste of time get partially recouped?

And that will make it legal, how?

It is illegal -- something you said it wasn't

Right, right..it's painfully illegal and the DA won't touch Kobe because they love him so much, nevermind that they've gone out of their way to rake him over the coals with the initial criminal case.

Yoohoo!

Reality is back over this way!

So, it's legal or illegal? I just want to be clear.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,132442,00.html

Certainly looks like Kobe's intent was there. However, although I don't know Colorado law, I do not believe it is illegal to settle an ongoing civil lawsuit even though a criminal lawsuit involving the same facts continues. So on that point I suggest Crist0 is probably right.