Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: AKcurly on October 23, 2003, 12:43:50 AM
-
I don't know much about the Kobe Bryant case -- pretty much ignored it. However, I saw the most incredible article at
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/sports/7032771.htm
Among other things, it says:
"While the accuser's interview with Winters is fair game, analysts were split whether defense lawyers will be able to tell jurors that the panties the accuser wore on the day of the alleged attack contained semen and pubic hair from a man other than Bryant."
I understand defense attorneys can (and will if permitted) crucify sexually promiscous women who were in fact raped. However, this appears to be stretching "protecting the victim" idea to me.
curly
-
Hey she"s a bimbo therefore she deserved to get raped.
Thats typical of defence lawyers.
You know I have really have no idea if Kobe Is guilty or not.
Don't really have an opinion.
But one thing he is guilty of and thats cheating on the beautiful
wife he has.
The man is a fool and so is she for staying with him.
:rolleyes:
-
I don't agree with this line of thinking at all.
Ok so she had sex with someone else, heck she could even be a groupie.
She could have been doing the whole TEAM! Thats not the point. Her reputation is not on trial here.
Point was he went to far, she said no, he didn't listen.
We ALL know when going out with someone new you can get away with whatever you can get away with. But when she says NO you STOP!
For me the telling evidence was the strangle marks on her neck & the bruising in the groin area.
Seems obvious to me he was going someplace she couldn't handle & pulled the whistle.
-
I can bet you anything there would be no case if Kobe weren't as famous as he was. We don't know if the strangle marks and bruises were from Kobe, we don't know if the blood and semen and pubes were Kobe's, we don't know if she said "No!" or not.
The only thing we know is what the plaintiff is saying, and to me she's out for money. I can bet you all the money in my bank account that had she not had sex with Kobe, she would not have gone to court.
-
I don't think the defense would want to paint her as a potato just to defame her Charactor as much as they would want to use this to create an alternate explaination for her injuries in an attempt to create reasonable doubt.
"Perhaps she was raped, but hey, it was someone else who raped her" would be the thinking I suppose.
-Sik
-
Point was he went to far, she said no, he didn't listen.
Says who?
This could be golddigging also...
-
Did I miss the part where the accusor's life has been in any way enriched, monetarily or otherwise, by this whole experience?
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Did I miss the part where the accusor's life has been in any way enriched, monetarily or otherwise, by this whole experience?
Stay tuned for part 2.
-
Originally posted by Maniac
Stay tuned for part 2.
So you're making uninformed speculation then. Got it.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Exactly,
And you dont speculate then?
Got it...
-
Point to where I've made any speculative statement in this thread.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Originally posted by texace
we don't know if the blood and semen and pubes were Kobe's,
Yes we do.
-
Originally posted by Dead Man Flying
Did I miss the part where the accusor's life has been in any way enriched, monetarily or otherwise, by this whole experience?
-- Todd/Leviathn
I smell a book deal followed by a movie of the week.
-
What was this young girl thinking when she...
1. Gave Bryant a private tour
2. Went up to his hotel room after she got off work
3. Consented to kissing him - She has admited to this
What was she thinking when she kissed this married man who she only knew for a few hours ....
What was she thinking... she was already having sex with other guys...
This could be rape... if she said no, and he didnt' stop - it's rape.
Why didn't she scream
Why didn't she fight back
Why didn't she scratch him
Did the other hotel guests hear any comotion?
Did he threaten her life?
Did he beat her?
Did he tear her clothing off?
Why doesn't she change her underware?
-
Yea, this is going to be an interesting trial
It seems the victim is on trial, her life, her history, etc etc...
I've been reading how Kobe apologized for committing adultery and worded it ever so carefully...
My question is...how many other women has he tagged, etc etc...we're digging dirt on the accuser, but what about Kobe?
Its too soon to say...
-
Originally posted by Jack55
I smell a book deal followed by a movie of the week.
Both of which will follow the civil case which will, of course, follow the criminal case.
She'll get her money even if she loses the first round. Talk about an expensive prostitute.
-
could have all been solved if the scumbag didnt cheat on his wife.
-
Originally posted by Saurdaukar
Both of which will follow the civil case which will, of course, follow the criminal case.
She'll get her money even if she loses the first round. Talk about an expensive prostitute.
If she loses the criminal trial, a gigantic civil suit will be next. Civil suits are much easier to win and she'll sting him there.
curly
-
Originally posted by Dnil
could have all been (avoided) if the scumbag didnt cheat on his wife.
Bingo. Right on the mark. (you meant to say "avoided" instead of "solved", right?)
-
Originally posted by Ghosth
I don't agree with this line of thinking at all.
Ok so she had sex with someone else, heck she could even be a groupie.
She could have been doing the whole TEAM! Thats not the point. Her reputation is not on trial here.
Point was he went to far, she said no, he didn't listen.
We ALL know when going out with someone new you can get away with whatever you can get away with. But when she says NO you STOP!
For me the telling evidence was the strangle marks on her neck & the bruising in the groin area.
Seems obvious to me he was going someplace she couldn't handle & pulled the whistle.
Because of the presence of semen/pubic hair from multiple men, the reliability of her accusation comes under scrutiny.
Had there been, say, a blouse torn from her or significant bruises and contusions consistent with assault, then yes, her character would not become part of the trial.
Her reliability as an individual is going to be questioned and she's going to lose.
Minor bruising around the neck and groin area is not an unusual occurrence in sex between young people.
curly
-
Originally posted by Dnil
could have all been solved if the scumbag didnt cheat on his wife.
True enough, but thats an issue to be dealt with between his wife and him. No monetary amount given to the plantiff will 'solve' that.
-
told you he'll walk when he was first accused before any of this was brought to light
they'll paint her as a potato and him as the victim
-
Originally posted by Eagler
told you he'll walk when he was first accused before any of this was brought to light
they'll paint her as a potato and him as the victim
And who knows, Eagler, your statements may well represent the truth. Stranger things have happened ...
In the absence of hard (no pun intended) physical evidence, the reliability of the accuser and accused necessarily become part of the trial.
Demonstrably, Kobe has been a solid citizen in the past. Has she?
curly
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
Demonstrably, Kobe has been a solid citizen in the past. Has she?
curly
She is not on trial, he is. You are making Eagler's point.
-
Hey, Kobe is a scumbag idiot. No doubt about it. That doesn't mean that he deserves to go to jail for rape if he didn't do it.
The chick's a slut. No doubt about it. That doesn't mean there is absolutely no way she could have gotten raped.
Personally, I don't see how they are going to get a conviction out of this. There is no way to be reasonably sure that Kobe raped that woman. Its he said she said and no one can tell with any certainty what went on in that room after the door closed.
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
She is not on trial, he is.
Actually, she is. He's innocent until she can prove otherwise. The veracity of her testimony will make or break the case. The presence of third party DNA will raise speculation as to whether he was the one that did the bruising or not.
-
Originally posted by gofaster
Actually, she is. He's innocent until she can prove otherwise. The veracity of her testimony will make or break the case. The presence of third party DNA will raise speculation as to whether he was the one that did the bruising or not.
Why, did she say the third party raped her?
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
Why, did she say the third party raped her?
No, but it makes proving Kobe's involvement 'beyond a reasonable doubt' difficult.
-
Originally posted by Saurdaukar
No, but it makes proving Kobe's involvement 'beyond a reasonable doubt' difficult.
Why?
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
Why?
Because before this new evidence, Koby was the only person there was any evidence COULD have caused whatever injuries she had. Now it appears that there may have been a 3rd person involved.
If the prosecution can not show that Koby is the one who caused these injuries, then the is reasonable to consider that someone else (whoever was leaving DNA in her shorts) MIGHT have been the one rersponsible for her injuries. For the Jury this could be enough to cause "reasonable doubt." I mean, if it could have just as easilby been one as the other, I'm not sure they could sustain a charge against Kobe....
Before the second schlong evidence, it was a question of whether or not she was raped. Now, even if that questionn is sufficiently answered, there is the additional question of "who raped her?"
It certainly looks like it will complicate the prosecution's task if allowed in.
-Sik
-
But why would a third, fourth, or fifth party cause the injuries? she could have had sex with twenty guys, did they all grab her by the throat? is that part of normal sex? Or is it part of forced sex?
-
Will they have to wip out there dorks?
In that case I think Kobe has that some one beat LOL.
I would Imagine He is Hung like a mule.:eek:
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
But why would a third, fourth, or fifth party cause the injuries? she could have had sex with twenty guys, did they all grab her by the throat? is that part of normal sex? Or is it part of forced sex?
No, only one needs to grab her by the throat, but the question becomes "which one" Before, Kobe was the only possible suspect, since he was the only one who was known to have had sex with the woman. It was my impression from the quote, that the evidence in her skivies could be used to show that she'd had sex with someone else at or around the same tmie as she did with Kobe. If that's the case, now he's one of two possibilities, instead of one of one.
-Sik
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
She is not on trial, he is. You are making Eagler's point.
Sixpence, I understand Eagler's point.
However, you don't seem to understand that when the sole source of evidence is the accuser, the accuser is in fact "on trial."
My original post "3rd party dna present in her drawers" raises the obvious question (someone else did it) as well as character issues (can a groupie be trusted to give accurate testimony.)
The character issue is gigantic because the young woman is going to get rich off of this. Can she be trusted to give accurate testimony?
curly
-
So if a woman goes out on a date, has sex. She then goes out the next night and has sex with someone else. She goes out the next the night and has sex with yet another man. She goes out the fourth night on a date with another man who rapes her. Is she discredited because she had sex the three previous nights with different men? No. It has no bearing on the person who is on trial, although his lawyer will bring it up and try to smear the victim. In most cases the jury sees right through this, and it backfires on the defendant.
-
My point has nothing to do with credibility.
-Sik
-
Originally posted by Sikboy
My point has nothing to do with credibility.
-Sik
Then why does having sex with someone else change things?
-
You guys remember the trial in Amarillo years ago where a woman was found raped and murdered in a motel room? This was *before* DNA testing. Investigation turned up a pair of mens briefs. I don't remember this part, but they somehow connected the underwear to the guy in next room.
He was charged and quickly convicted of murder. As best as I recall, he was sentenced to die.
Before they executed him, DNA testing arrived and he was cleared and subsequently released.
It was determined that a room maid had picked his underwear up from the floor and dropped them on her cart. She forgot about the underwear and when cleaning the victim's room (before she was murdered), the underwear fell from her cart.
So yes, reasonable doubt is extremely important in the Kobe Bryant case (hell, all cases.) The presence of 3/4/whatever party dna in her underwear finishes the case for me. Unless Kobe confesses, he's innocent.
curly
-
Reasonable doubt.
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
So yes, reasonable doubt is extremely important in the Kobe Bryant case (hell, all cases.) The presence of 3/4/whatever party dna in her underwear finishes the case for me. Unless Kobe confesses, he's innocent.
curly
Yep, having sex with someone else puts alot of doubt there.
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
Then why does having sex with someone else change things?
It creates an "alternate theory" of the crime, which is a good chunk of reasonable doubt.
But I've already said that.
-Sik
-
Originally posted by Sikboy
It creates an "alternate theory" of the crime, which is a good chunk of reasonable doubt.
But I've already said that.
-Sik
What would that theory be?
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
Sixpence, I understand Eagler's point.
However, you don't seem to understand that when the sole source of evidence is the accuser, the accuser is in fact "on trial."
My original post "3rd party dna present in her drawers" raises the obvious question (someone else did it) as well as character issues (can a groupie be trusted to give accurate testimony.)
The character issue is gigantic because the young woman is going to get rich off of this. Can she be trusted to give accurate testimony?
curly
Can he be trusted to give it as well, he said at first he did not have sex with her then changed that story, I call that a lie as well.
I really love the gold-digger approach that would not work if he is found guilty as he wont make much money in jail. If she were a gold-digger this would be over and not even in the media. They would have settled and she would have a mil or two, end of story, she is past the point of an out of court settlement.
I really don't think she is going to get rich off this at all.
How do you go from the "DNA in her drawers" to her being a groupie?
Could she have a boyfriend that she lives with?
Big leap there, have you an axe to grind?:confused:
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
Why, did she say the third party raped her?
Who's to say the 3rd party didn't rape her, but she chose to point the finger at Kobe because of his deep pockets? A criminal conviction would open the door to a very financially-rewarding civil trial.
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
So if a woman goes out on a date, has sex. She then goes out the next night and has sex with someone else. She goes out the next the night and has sex with yet another man. She goes out the fourth night on a date with another man who rapes her. Is she discredited because she had sex the three previous nights with different men? No. It has no bearing on the person who is on trial, although his lawyer will bring it up and try to smear the victim. In most cases the jury sees right through this, and it backfires on the defendant.
Did she change underwear each night?
-
Originally posted by gofaster
Who's to say the 3rd party didn't rape her, but she chose to point the finger at Kobe because of his deep pockets? A criminal conviction would open the door to a very financially-rewarding civil trial.
yea look how well that worked out for the folks who sued O.J.
zippa. not one red cent ever payed.
He lives in nice place in Palm Beach about an hour from here, plays a lot of golf.
-
Originally posted by gofaster
Did she change underwear each night?
ever had a morning fleck. you know it takes a while for it to all leak .... never mind;)
-
I hope Kobe gets convicted because he's black, has a big ****, was having sex with a white girl, is married to a beautiful woman and is worth millions.
I know that if I were black, had a big ****, had millions of dollars, a beautiful wife and a beautiful young blond throwing herself at me when I was in my early twenties it would have been very easy for me to say no.
MiniD
-
Originally posted by Mini D
I hope Kobe gets convicted because he's black, has a big ****, was having sex with a white girl, is married to a beautiful woman and is worth millions.
I know that if I were black, had a big ****, had millions of dollars, a beautiful wife and a beautiful young blond throwing herself at me when I was in my early twenties it would have been very easy for me to say no.
MiniD
no to sex or no to rape?
just asking;)
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
What would that theory be?
That one of the other men in the "area" at or near the time of the rape, was in fact the rapist, and not Kobe.
-Sik
-
Short of a signature on those bruises saying, "These are Kobe's property!" or a video camera showing the act, Kobe will get off because of the third party's DNA. I don't see any other way he can be convicted unless they have a new testing method that can date down to a second when a bruise occured and someone blew their load.
-SW
-
You really need to learn when to use smiley faces scooter. I'm missing the "haha" funny part of this thread.
And... if you have to ask that question, you really don't understand what was being said nor do you undestand why people that have little idea what happend are formulating oppinions based on speculation and stereotypes vs anything they have real knowledge of.
MiniD
-
This is the only other way I can think to explain it.
If the evidence points equally to two people, you have reasonable doubt on either one of them.
If the prosecutions case rests on the physical evidence that she was raped, and the DNA evidence of who she had sex with, then the presense of someone elses little swimmers significantly hurts their case, because now the evidence would (if i understand the situation) point fairly equally to at least two seperate people. If that's the case, all we have left (at this point) is the testimony of the parties involved. She says: He raped me. He says: No I didn't.
Impasse, reasonable doubt.
-Sik
Off to class with me.
-
Originally posted by Sikboy
That one of the other men in the "area" at or near the time of the rape, was in fact the rapist, and not Kobe.
-Sik
Then why would she say kobe raped her and not the "other" man?
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
Then why would she say kobe raped her and not the "other" man?
Money would be one helluva great reason.
-SW
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
So if a woman goes out on a date, has sex. She then goes out the next night and has sex with someone else. She goes out the next the night and has sex with yet another man. She goes out the fourth night on a date with another man who rapes her. Is she discredited because she had sex the three previous nights with different men? No. It has no bearing on the person who is on trial, although his lawyer will bring it up and try to smear the victim. In most cases the jury sees right through this, and it backfires on the defendant.
Well, my only question here... why didn't she change her underware?
Most people change their underware every day.
Does she go around collecting men's semen in her panties or what?
Why didn't she go to the police right away....
Could it be that she had consensual sex with Kobe, then hooked up with a friend and schemed up a plan to sue Kobe for millions... and this other guy had rough sex with her in order to put the bruises on her... and she kept the same panties because she knew that Kobe's semen was on it...
And this other guy was suppose to pull out... but you know... pre-cum.
Reasonable doubt!
Kobe has the presumption of innocence.... the prosecution has to prove their case!
And Kobe has the right to confront his accuser.
-
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
Money would be one helluva great reason.
-SW
How much money has she received? How many other men has she extorted?
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
How much money has she received? How many other men has she extorted?
Stupid question. How much money could she recieve? How many other men has she been with that were loaded?
-SW
-
Originally posted by DmdNexus
Could it be that she had consensual sex with Kobe, then hooked up with a friend and schemed up a plan to sue Kobe for millions... and this other guy had rough sex with her in order to put the bruises on her... and she kept the same panties because she knew that Kobe's semen was on it...
Then the black helicopter swooped in.
-
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
Stupid question. How much money could she recieve? How many other men has she been with that were loaded?
-SW
Why is it a stupid question? Is there a history of extortion? Is there a history of crying rape?
How much money could she receive? Stupid question, she could receive none, or want none. Do you have proof she wants money?
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
How much money has she received? How many other men has she extorted?
extorted? What does that have to do with anything? Surely you realize that a civil trial will follow... right? It always helps a civil trial to have the AG build a case and try the "defendant" on criminal charges. Especially since "reasonable doubt" is not really as much of a factor in civil settlements.
If you're looking for motivation for lieing, it's there. If you don't see it, you are chosing to be ignorant. There is a substantial ammount to be gained by pressing charges against Koby.
MiniD
-
You don't need a history when it comes down to basic greed.
She stands to win a lot *IF* she can win this case. She can't though, not unless Kobe admits to raping her.
You can't hand down a verdict just on a feeling or based on someone's past, no matter how clean or dirty it is.
-SW
-
You guys are ignoring the cold hard fact that most chicks are vengeful nutcase beyatches and driven by some sort of hormone that makes them emotionally unstable, unable to operate computers properly, lethal weapons when armed with cars, and easily attracted by bright shiney objects.
So they shag, he leaves, she packs a tantrum and cries rape.
-
Originally posted by Mini D
If you're looking for motivation for lieing, it's there. If you don't see it, you are chosing to be ignorant.
MiniD
So, if you think every rich person cannot be convicted of rape because they are being targeted for lawsuits, you are being ignorant. Most rapes do not happen in front of witnesses. So I guess when it comes down to it, he can get away with rape whenever he wants, as long as there are no witnesses.
BTW, did he take a lie detector test?
-
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
You can't hand down a verdict just on a feeling or based on someone's past, no matter how clean or dirty it is.
-SW
Yes you can, if she has a history of what has happened. If she had done the same thing before( cried rape, only not to be proven).
-
Its not about getting away with rape, its the fact that there is no evidence of rape on his behalf.
With a 3rd party involved, any thing she says could be construed as a lie since Kobe can deny it. There is no PROOF HE did the raping.
As for lie detectors, they really aren't "lie" detectors. Can be beaten, and can find the innocent guilty.
-SW
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
Yes you can, if she has a history of what has happened. If she had done the same thing before( cried rape, only not to be proven).
You have no idea how the legal system works.
-SW
-
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
As for lie detectors, they really aren't "lie" detectors. Can be beaten, and can find the innocent guilty.
-SW
Well, if I were in his shoes, the first thing I would have done would be a lie detector. I would even subject myself to gas(not too easily beaten) if I had that much to lose.
But if I were guilty.............
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
Well, if I were in his shoes, the first thing I would have done would be a lie detector. I would even subject myself to gas(not too easily beaten) if I had that much to lose.
But if I were guilty.............
If I were innocent, I would not subject myself to a "lie" detector test.
Throw a trick question in there, you stammer, your heart rate jumps, your eyes dialate. Whoops! You got that one wrong, and now that heightened heart rate is with you for the rest of the test. You fail, guilty, enjoy prison.
-SW
-
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
If I were innocent, I would not subject myself to a "lie" detector test.
Throw a trick question in there, you stammer, your heart rate jumps, your eyes dialate. Whoops! You got that one wrong,
-SW
That doesn't happen under gas. Nice try though. And it seems you don't know too much about the system, a lie detector cannot put you in jail.
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
That doesn't happen under gas. Nice try though.
Then how do they detect a "lie"? They work based on the dialation of your pupils or the raise in your circulation rate.
Gas isn't going to be some magical invisibility against trick questions you aren't expecting.
-SW
-
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
Then how do they detect a "lie"? They work based on the dialation of your pupils or the raise in your circulation rate.
Gas isn't going to be some magical invisibility against trick questions you aren't expecting.
-SW
Obviously you do not understand how gas works.
But let us put that aside, it cannot be used in the courtroom. But I believe it can be presented to the prosecution.
-
Well, it doesn't matter if it puts you in jail or not - take the polygraph and fail it. That sets one helluva precedent for the court case.
Of course, you keep talking about using someone's past to convict them on present charges that are obviously flawed in the fact that there is a third party.
Its evident I know more about the legal system than you.
-SW
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
Why is it a stupid question? Is there a history of extortion? Is there a history of crying rape?
How much money could she receive? Stupid question, she could receive none, or want none. Do you have proof she wants money?
Sixpence, remember the civil lawsuit that followed the OJ Simpson trial? Remember the award?
curly
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
Obviously you do not understand how gas works.
Gas is not going to be some magical nervous reaction prevention. It may work in 80% of the tests.
Besides, what gas are you talking about and where is evidence of it being used?
-SW
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
Sixpence, remember the civil lawsuit that followed the OJ Simpson trial? Remember the award?
curly
So you are saying OJ really was innocent and it was a plot to get his money?
-
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
Besides, what gas are you talking about and where is evidence of it being used?
-SW
Before any pretrial hearing, the defense meets with the prosecution and goes over evidence. The defense says "look, he passed a polygraph and he passed under gas, if you look at the evidence and consider what he has done to prove there was no crime, this should not go to trial" A reach, but I would leave no stone unturned if I were him.
-
Maybe, but I'm certain Kobe's million dollar lawyers already advised him on what will happen if the polygraph doesn't come out clean.
That would be the first thing truly against him in this trial - that underwear just says two men got their biology on them. Those bruises could of been put there by anyone at anytime, or by the rapist.
Simply calling rape does not make someone guilty, there needs to be strong evidence indicating that - and so far there isn't any strong evidence. The polygraph could of been the make it or break it, and if he isn't guilty but the test found him lying. End game for Kobe.
-SW
-
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
Maybe, but I'm certain Kobe's million dollar lawyers already advised him on what will happen if the polygraph doesn't come out clean.
That would be the first thing truly against him in this trial - that underwear just says two men got their biology on them. Those bruises could of been put there by anyone at anytime, or by the rapist.
Simply calling rape does not make someone guilty, there needs to be strong evidence indicating that - and so far there isn't any strong evidence. The polygraph could of been the make it or break it, and if he isn't guilty but the test found him lying. End game for Kobe.
-SW
I agree, he is innocent until proven guilty, but because he is rich and is a target for lawsuit does not create reasonable doubt.
He can do a lie detector or gas in private. Like I said, if I had that much to lose, I would leave no stone unturned. Then I would ask if she would take the same tests. Not good in court, but very good PR. I think what the public thinks of him in the end is very important to him, and the league.
I'm done with this thread, I give up, you win.:cool:
-
Originally posted by Mini D
You really need to learn when to use smiley faces scooter. I'm missing the "haha" funny part of this thread.
And... if you have to ask that question, you really don't understand what was being said nor do you undestand why people that have little idea what happend are formulating oppinions based on speculation and stereotypes vs anything they have real knowledge of.
MiniD
oh please mini D!!
you post this sarcastic crap
Originally posted by Mini D
I hope Kobe gets convicted because he's black, has a big ****, was having sex with a white girl, is married to a beautiful woman and is worth millions.
I know that if I were black, had a big ****, had millions of dollars, a beautiful wife and a beautiful young blond throwing herself at me when I was in my early twenties it would have been very easy for me to say no.
MiniD
and I get an F in humer
Very simple, Some think he's the injured party only because he is a star and she is after his money.
I think a rich and famous person can be guilty but I will let the courts decide as we have so little information on this case.
I asked would it be hard for you to say no doing the blond you describe as throwing herself on you, or to say no to what ever you had inside making you rape her, you weren’t clear.
If this was just some poor slob and he was accused of raping her, I think the feelings of many on this board would be different.
Kobe is a celebrity and you know they are special, me I am sick of the rich and famous getting away with this kind of thing (not saying he is or even saying he did it) in general.
This is a sensitive subject for me sorry.
I will work on the smiley thing, for you
:)
How was that? :aok
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
So you are saying OJ really was innocent and it was a plot to get his money?
Possibly. Makes as much sense as anything else. I doubt she's the sharpest knife in the drawer ... no telling what she thought.
curly