Oops, the case of the 20-year-old woman who has accused NBA star Kobe Bryant of rape has fallen and it can?t get up. That famous Steve Urkel line seems all too relevant to the prosecution as their confidence has decamped like Jaleel White?s TV career due to the newest revelations in the eminent trial. Now that Judge Terry Ruckriegle has permitted the defense to open a 72-hour window into the alleged victim?s sexual appointments surrounding her June 30th encounter with Bryant, family matters will be the central theme of the upcoming proceedings. Jane Doe is left with the distressing decision whether to sustain her claim and detail her intimate relations to heedful ears in the courtroom and world-wide, or whether to guard her privacy and jump the shark right now.
While she decides, here are a few things to consider.
Who remembers what happened at Krusty?s 29th Anniversary show when Lisa Simpson caused a scene proclaiming that not only does she despise Ralph Wiggum but she merely endures his presence to take advantage of his tickets to the show? Needless to say, it must have been pretty embarrassing when National TV saw Lisa coupling with the nerdiest of nerds.
Well that episode is zilch compared to this elevated reality as every sexual aspect exposed will be accented throughout media outlets globally. What is at stake here is not a little bit of red-face, or mild awkwardness, the peril is the mortification of a young woman?s life. If she opts to testify and articulate her rendezvous? with at least 2, if not 3 men in a 72-hour time frame she will be shamed with the exact unchaste characteristics that modern women so desperately dissociate themselves with.
Never mind the ensued mental ramifications, how detrimental will these sexual nuggets be to the prosecution?s arguments? The defense team needs to prove Kobe?s innocence beyond a reasonable doubt, and how implausible is that task considering the one-time college student will discourse promiscuous facts such as a sex with another man?
In a court case with scarce witnesses, and credibility as the vital constituent, how will a jury be convinced that it was the second man who inflicted her injuries and not the guy less than 3 days earlier?
They won?t.
While optimists believe she still has a case, Judge Ruckriegle will allow two witnesses to testify who indicate they had intimate relations with the woman during the pertinent time period.
Jim Peters, the district attorney for Arapahoe County, seems to think this may actually help the accuser.
"Sometimes information like that ... can give the victim additional credibility and believability because the jury is able to put everything in context. I think juries understand that we are all human."
?Sometimes? is the operative word because only a jury constructed of downtown divas would believe beyond a reasonable doubt that a girl who had sexual relations before and possibly after Kobe Bryant?s visit was raped by the high profile athlete.
While she sits naked on the stand baring the happenings of her red-letter week, the one certainty will be the cross-examiners? efforts to dress her up as the most profligate, incredible woman.
None of this proves that she was or was not raped but as an impartial juror it is hard to avoid speculation.
Maybe she was raped, or maybe after business was finished she felt as inconsequential as an exhibition free throw and her remorseful feelings curved to rape allegations. Maybe she was violated by an idol who felt invincible, or maybe she envisioned the rate of return in her investment in an un-witnessed event.
An English Playwright Sir Noel Coward once said ?It's discouraging to think how many people are shocked by honesty and how few by deceit? but the jurors in this case will not be able to decipher which one is which.
English Playwrights, and rape allegations mix like Mondays and me.
?Any fool can criticize, condemn, and complain -- and most fools do? ? Dale Carnegie
While she decides, here are a few things to consider.
Who remembers what happened at Krusty?s 29th Anniversary show when Lisa Simpson caused a scene proclaiming that not only does she despise Ralph Wiggum but she merely endures his presence to take advantage of his tickets to the show? Needless to say, it must have been pretty embarrassing when National TV saw Lisa coupling with the nerdiest of nerds.
Well that episode is zilch compared to this elevated reality as every sexual aspect exposed will be accented throughout media outlets globally. What is at stake here is not a little bit of red-face, or mild awkwardness, the peril is the mortification of a young woman?s life. If she opts to testify and articulate her rendezvous? with at least 2, if not 3 men in a 72-hour time frame she will be shamed with the exact unchaste characteristics that modern women so desperately dissociate themselves with.
Never mind the ensued mental ramifications, how detrimental will these sexual nuggets be to the prosecution?s arguments? The defense team needs to prove Kobe?s innocence beyond a reasonable doubt, and how implausible is that task considering the one-time college student will discourse promiscuous facts such as a sex with another man?
In a court case with scarce witnesses, and credibility as the vital constituent, how will a jury be convinced that it was the second man who inflicted her injuries and not the guy less than 3 days earlier?
They won?t.
While optimists believe she still has a case, Judge Ruckriegle will allow two witnesses to testify who indicate they had intimate relations with the woman during the pertinent time period.
Jim Peters, the district attorney for Arapahoe County, seems to think this may actually help the accuser.
"Sometimes information like that ... can give the victim additional credibility and believability because the jury is able to put everything in context. I think juries understand that we are all human."
?Sometimes? is the operative word because only a jury constructed of downtown divas would believe beyond a reasonable doubt that a girl who had sexual relations before and possibly after Kobe Bryant?s visit was raped by the high profile athlete.
While she sits naked on the stand baring the happenings of her red-letter week, the one certainty will be the cross-examiners? efforts to dress her up as the most profligate, incredible woman.
None of this proves that she was or was not raped but as an impartial juror it is hard to avoid speculation.
Maybe she was raped, or maybe after business was finished she felt as inconsequential as an exhibition free throw and her remorseful feelings curved to rape allegations. Maybe she was violated by an idol who felt invincible, or maybe she envisioned the rate of return in her investment in an un-witnessed event.
An English Playwright Sir Noel Coward once said ?It's discouraging to think how many people are shocked by honesty and how few by deceit? but the jurors in this case will not be able to decipher which one is which.
English Playwrights, and rape allegations mix like Mondays and me.
?Any fool can criticize, condemn, and complain -- and most fools do? ? Dale Carnegie
