All about the money

[ReiAyanami]

Originally posted by: gigapet
I knew it. Thats so Fvcked up......ruined kobes image for money. DUM SLOOT.

he ruined his own image when he committed adultery. of course her allegations made it worse. if he had just listened to shaq's advice he wouldn't be in this mess and shaq would still be a ball hogging laker.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

You're joking right? All you have to know is that KOBE HAS A D*CK just like every other male in here. Sht happens when the kitty is thrown in your face, just ask Chipper Jones (who has "discipline and dedication to his craft" lmao)...

and where in my entire post did i say one thing about Kobe not having a d*ck.

mb next time understand what you read before you respond or argue against it. i'm referring to the fact that RAPE is an arguement about state of mind, he said she said.

because it is primarily a he said she said, a persons perceived character comes into play when jurors try to determine innocence or guilt.

hence, kobe's work ethic etc vs tysons raw animalistic ability says a lot about who jurors would vote guilty or not guilty.

Comparing Kobe's (or anyone's for that matter) work ethic and Mike Tyson's is absolutely absurd when assuming it will influence a jury's verdict. You could just as well show Mike Tyson's workout tapes and claim he has a better work ethic than Kobe, as well as portray Kobe's "animalistic ability" by including allegations from the Portland, OR hotel worker who claimed she was propositioned by Kobe. To say that Kobe's "work ethic" "says a lot about how jurors would vote guilty or not guilty" is ridiculous. It's just one minute aspect of Kobe's portrayed image by the defense, the prosecution could rip it to shreds many times over and spit it out (i.e. something as small as Shaq questioning Kobe's work ethic publicly). Hard evidence is what makes or breaks this, NOT Kobe's "work ethic".

 

[PlatinumGold]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

You're joking right? All you have to know is that KOBE HAS A D*CK just like every other male in here. Sht happens when the kitty is thrown in your face, just ask Chipper Jones (who has "discipline and dedication to his craft" lmao)...

and where in my entire post did i say one thing about Kobe not having a d*ck.

mb next time understand what you read before you respond or argue against it. i'm referring to the fact that RAPE is an arguement about state of mind, he said she said.

because it is primarily a he said she said, a persons perceived character comes into play when jurors try to determine innocence or guilt.

hence, kobe's work ethic etc vs tysons raw animalistic ability says a lot about who jurors would vote guilty or not guilty.

Comparing Kobe's (or anyone's for that matter) work ethic and Mike Tyson's is absolutely absurd when assuming it will influence a jury's verdict. You could just as well show Mike Tyson's workout tapes and claim he has a better work ethic than Kobe, as well as portray Kobe's "animalistic ability" by including allegations from the Portland, OR hotel worker who claimed she was propositioned by Kobe. To say that Kobe's "work ethic" "says a lot about how jurors would vote guilty or not guilty" is ridiculous. It's just one minute aspect of Kobe's portrayed image by the defense, the prosecution could rip it to shreds many times over and spit it out (i.e. something as small as Shaq questioning Kobe's work ethic publicly). Hard evidence is what makes or breaks this, NOT Kobe's "work ethic".

and what HARD evidence would you be refering too?

what is not at dispute is that the girl entered the room willingly, they engaged in sexual intercourse and this is where there is a disagreement.

she claims it was non consentual, he claims it was.

what "HARD" evidence do you think you can find to prove otherwise?

no, this case is about inference, everything is based on what we infer about the two parties at hand.

why do you think her sexual activities are so vital to this case. it tells us something about her character.

i was just pointing out the difference in perception between Tyson and Kobe not making a conclusive argument about the innocence or guilt of either party.

in my opinion, we will never know what happened in the respective bedrooms. it's possible that the parties themselves no longer remember what exactly happened. our memories are not so accurate as we would like to believe.

ultimately it will come down to perceptions. how each of these parties will be perceived will determine the outcome of these two trials (civil and criminal).

 

[digitalsm]

Originally posted by: fivespeed5

Originally posted by: pyonir
might as well. I doubt he'll get convicted of anything. Might as well take the 51% rule in civil court (or is it 50%?) and get the money out of it. I hope she wins some.

I hope she doesn't win any. It just means that if you have sex with someone, claim rape, and sue you'll get some type of money. Bad precedence

Uh huh sure.

Her life is the one that is ruined, not Kobes. Hell that court it Colorado should be punished by the State Supreme Court for its careless actions.

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: Ynog

Originally posted by: XietyCOM

Are you comparing Mike Tyson to Kobe Bryant? :roll:

Yes, I am. The situatoins are extremely similar except that Kobe's defense team is
probably 100 million dollars better than Tysons.

And for the Kobe's accuser in for the money. Desiree not only sued Tyson, but
had negotiated both movie and tv rights before the trial began.

Also Desiree waited 3 days before accusing Tyson of rape.

Just saying that everyone who has said, the woman is in it for money, or that
any woman that goes to a star's hotel room at night isn't just going for an autograph,
basically better believe Iron Mike is innocent as well. Because those were nearly the
same conditions of his accusation. Except Mike went to trial much faster than Kobe.

Actually, I probably shouldn't have said I definately did. I really didn't know anything about tysons case. I just figured that a guy who would bite some ones ear off on national television wouldn't have any qualms about raping a woman.

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
You're joking right? All you have to know is that KOBE HAS A D*CK just like every other male in here. Sht happens when the kitty is thrown in your face, just ask Chipper Jones (who has "discipline and dedication to his craft" lmao)...

Are you saying just because some p*ssy is in front of you, you must fvck it? Even if you have to rape the owner of said p*ssy? Please. :roll: Sexual attraction/desire/whatever influences our decisions no doubt, but everything else in our life doesn't suddenly disappear because some girl has her panties around her ankles...

 

[Lioness]

She should have never entered his room and Kobe should have kept his hands off her. The only one I have sympathy for is his wife.

Rape has not been proven. Until then I stand by my statement.

 

[ectx]

I think you should change the titile of the thread.

 

[holden j caufield]

It sure looks like this is done for money but on a sidenote for some odd reason when Tyson goes on TV and proclaims his innocence I do believe him. Here is someone who does not care about his image whatsoever speaks his mind about anything including eating children. He just simply does not care what people think of him yet he vehemently denies raping this woman.

I read an article sometime ago where Tyson's defense was one of the worst and that the judge was hardly impartial. As for Kobe's case an adultery does not make a rapist, hardly correlated at all and the woman's history speaks volumes in a case dependent on one's character.

 

[Howard]

Originally posted by: SampSon

Originally posted by: moshquerade
eh, you can continue the pigpile on mosh.
feel free - gotta pass the time at work somehow.

That usually happens when you open your mouth and silly stuff comes out.

Silly cream!

 

[MrChad]

I don't see how the accuser filing a civil suit automatically undermines her criminal case. Regardless of whether Kobe raped her or not, this criminal case is not an easy one to prosecute. It's a "he said, she said" case, and while there is physical evidence of "rough sex", there's nothing to prove Kobe's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Character and reputation play big roles in "he said, she said" cases; they probably contributed to Tyson's conviction in 1992 (an angry thug from Brooklyn), and they will likely contribute to Kobe's acquittal in this trial (a polite, hard-working and good-looking celebrity). Even if Kobe did rape her, the state of Colorado would have a difficult time proving it.

If Kobe raped her, and she knows that her chances of a conviction are slim, I don't see why pursuing civil damages automatically makes her a "money-grabbing slut."

 

[faenix]

Kobe is a punk. Get over it.

 

[GeneralGrievous]

Kobe has no reason to rape someone that ugly when there are thousands of girls that would just give it to him in a second.

 

[shimsham]

Originally posted by: sixone

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: sixone

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
those quotes for the word raped above are accurate and true UNTIL KOBE IS PROVEN GUILTY.

that's what innocent until proven guitly means.

I agree. Too bad his accuser doesn't get the same benefit of the doubt.

Sure she did. Until people found out she was a lying, drug-addled, psycho.

IF that's true, that doesn't mean she wasn't raped. She may have gone into that room willingly, she may have agreed to have sex. But if she told him no, to anything, and he did it anyway, whatever she did 5 minutes ago doesn't mean jack. I'm not saying that's what happened - I don't claim to have been there or to have some psychic power that tells me what happened. Only two people know for sure what happened in that room, the rest of us are guessing. Calling her names and judging her motives based on a guess is pretty low.

it has been her conduct since accusing kobe that has convinced me that shes lying. is it normal for rape victims to go to parties, get drunk, and brag about how big the accuseds c0ck was? if i recall correctly, didnt she have sex with someone else soon after?

to find a person accused of rape guilty, you HAVE to judge their character. you can only make a fair decision by judging to accusers character also.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: PingSpike

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
You're joking right? All you have to know is that KOBE HAS A D*CK just like every other male in here. Sht happens when the kitty is thrown in your face, just ask Chipper Jones (who has "discipline and dedication to his craft" lmao)...

Are you saying just because some p*ssy is in front of you, you must fvck it? Even if you have to rape the owner of said p*ssy? Please. :roll: Sexual attraction/desire/whatever influences our decisions no doubt, but everything else in our life doesn't suddenly disappear because some girl has her panties around her ankles...

First off, we don't know if Kobe "raped" her, he put his plow in field which = beginning of this whole crap. Anytime p*ssy's thrown at you, you know dam well that over half the time judgement IS thrown out the window. It's why unwanted pregnancies/abortions and STD's occur, sht happens in the heat of the moment. For someone to say that Kobe had too much to lose, apparently he didn't because got caught up in the heat of the moment by committing adultery. Anything goes after that, possibly even rape.

Like I said, read up on Chipper Jones with the illegimate child while married, do you think he thought about his wife when it was thrown at him? Sht happens due to the power of the kitty.

 

[jyates]

Originally posted by: faenix
Kobe is a punk. Get over it.

He may be but he also got Punk'd too.

I heard something on the news last night that the
"victim" would be expecting at least $75K in her
civil suit.

I'm sure she could have gotten at least that much
via blackmail to keep this story away from the
wife not counting the media.

I hope she ends up holding an empty bag in the end
was a tear in her eye.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

You're joking right? All you have to know is that KOBE HAS A D*CK just like every other male in here. Sht happens when the kitty is thrown in your face, just ask Chipper Jones (who has "discipline and dedication to his craft" lmao)...

and where in my entire post did i say one thing about Kobe not having a d*ck.

mb next time understand what you read before you respond or argue against it. i'm referring to the fact that RAPE is an arguement about state of mind, he said she said.

because it is primarily a he said she said, a persons perceived character comes into play when jurors try to determine innocence or guilt.

hence, kobe's work ethic etc vs tysons raw animalistic ability says a lot about who jurors would vote guilty or not guilty.

Comparing Kobe's (or anyone's for that matter) work ethic and Mike Tyson's is absolutely absurd when assuming it will influence a jury's verdict. You could just as well show Mike Tyson's workout tapes and claim he has a better work ethic than Kobe, as well as portray Kobe's "animalistic ability" by including allegations from the Portland, OR hotel worker who claimed she was propositioned by Kobe. To say that Kobe's "work ethic" "says a lot about how jurors would vote guilty or not guilty" is ridiculous. It's just one minute aspect of Kobe's portrayed image by the defense, the prosecution could rip it to shreds many times over and spit it out (i.e. something as small as Shaq questioning Kobe's work ethic publicly). Hard evidence is what makes or breaks this, NOT Kobe's "work ethic".

and what HARD evidence would you be refering too?

what is not at dispute is that the girl entered the room willingly, they engaged in sexual intercourse and this is where there is a disagreement.

she claims it was non consentual, he claims it was.

what "HARD" evidence do you think you can find to prove otherwise?

no, this case is about inference, everything is based on what we infer about the two parties at hand.

why do you think her sexual activities are so vital to this case. it tells us something about her character.

i was just pointing out the difference in perception between Tyson and Kobe not making a conclusive argument about the innocence or guilt of either party.

in my opinion, we will never know what happened in the respective bedrooms. it's possible that the parties themselves no longer remember what exactly happened. our memories are not so accurate as we would like to believe.

ultimately it will come down to perceptions. how each of these parties will be perceived will determine the outcome of these two trials (civil and criminal).

You said: "because it is primarily a he said she said, a persons perceived character comes into play when jurors try to determine innocence or guilt."

I said I disagree because the defense/prosecution can smash/refute any claim regarding their client's "work ethic" or character rather easily. Shaq said Kobe's work ethic and heart was questionable, that he was a selfish btch. The defense will say that Kobe has done XYZ for the community, and Phil Jackson in 2001 said he was a great team leader. Both sides will have ammo, what it will come down to is hard evidence. Hard evidence > perceived notions about "work ethic" and character.

What hard evidence, you ask? Don't play dumb here, it's been all over the media: text messages sent immediately after the incident by "victim", DNA samples from her uterus, pics of the injured area during the rape kit at the hospital (which included minor vaginal lacerations), the bloody shirt that Kobe was wearing, the interview that Kobe gave to the DA immediately following the incident, etc... Those are things that will make or break the case, not their perceived "work ethic" or notions about their personality.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
but we do know kobe. we know of his incredible discipline. it isn't just raw ability and rage with him the way it was with Tyson. with kobe, we know of his discipline and dedication to his craft. we know that he works to improve his game every off season. we know he is very mindful of history (he does want to be the next MJ). all those things don't add up with a man throwing everything away for a moments pleasure.

Discipline? Fsck if he actually had Discipline the Lakers would have won last years NBA Finals. Kobe is a prime example of the Me First selfish attitude that is so prevelant into's Pro Athletes. I no problem believing that he raped that woman. Even if she went up there to have sex the moment she said no and he continued it was rape!

 

[Linflas]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
but we do know kobe. we know of his incredible discipline. it isn't just raw ability and rage with him the way it was with Tyson. with kobe, we know of his discipline and dedication to his craft. we know that he works to improve his game every off season. we know he is very mindful of history (he does want to be the next MJ). all those things don't add up with a man throwing everything away for a moments pleasure.

Discipline? Fsck if he actually had Discipline the Lakers would have won last years NBA Finals. Kobe is a prime example of the Me First selfish attitude that is so prevelant into's Pro Athletes. I no problem believing that he raped that woman. Even if she went up there to have sex the moment she said no and he continued it was rape!

Not according to a lot of the neanderthals posting in this thread. Evidently their penises are in primary control of their bodies. Their mothers and sisters must be proud of their attitudes towards women.

 

[allisolm]

Interesting tidbit from the article at cnn.com about the civil suit:

"The suit also claims Bryant has a 'history of attempting to commit similar acts of violent sexual assault on females he has just met.'"

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: allisolm
Interesting tidbit from the article at cnn.com about the civil suit:

"The suit also claims Bryant has a 'history of attempting to commit similar acts of violent sexual assault on females he has just met.'"

Yup, it was on cnn.com when the case broke that another woman in Portland, OR had said Kobe propositioned her when she worked in a hotel. If she testified along with the other women, Kobe would probably be toast regardless of whether it's true or not. He better send out the hitmen now...

 

[classy]

Originally posted by: moshquerade
too bad the blame is always put on the woman, after all Nicole Simpson asked to be murdered :roll:

Oh boy. Why couldn't you use Robert Blake? No doubt he capped his wife. Stop hating on the Juice.

 

[classy]

Originally posted by: LordUnum
I knew it from the beginning. I had a sneaking suspicion that Kobe (without the slightest criminal history) would never do a thing of this sort (sexual assault / rape). When some details came out about the night of question and we found out more about his accuser, it only strengthened my opinion. It was amusing though to see all these asses between now and then who didn't know a thing about the case come on 'x' message board and boldly predict and wish for Kobe's future to lie in prison. :roll:

For those who have been following the case, this isn't of the slightest surprise. The DA knew the DNA evidence did NOT support her allegations as early as three weeks after the scandal broke... yet he proceeded to charge Kobe with this serious crime. Since then, the prosecution (which should be looking for the truth) has worked to supress this irrefutable DNA evidence... which in a he said/she said case such as this, is the only objective way to re-create the events before, during and after the supposed crime. Lest we forget how she sponged off the Colorado Victims Compensation fund to visit expensive drug rehab centers and party it up in Canada, etc., etc., etc.....

This mess should've never happened. Stupid Kobe... and lying, crazy, filthy, criminal b!tch!!! :|

Cha Ching

 

[classy]

Originally posted by: allisolm
Interesting tidbit from the article at cnn.com about the civil suit:

"The suit also claims Bryant has a 'history of attempting to commit similar acts of violent sexual assault on females he has just met.'"

Yea right. And the tooth fairy visits all the little kids who lose their teeth and gives them presents. Give me a break. Not only is that bs, up until this incident no even knew Kobe fooled around on his wife, let alone going around sexually assaulting women. Ask yourself one question, with all the slimy hoes he runs across, you mean to tell me no has ever come forward with Kobe allegations? You know why? There was none. This guy is a cheating husband. And he fooled with the wrong one this time. But its like 70% of all married men have cheated on their wives. All we found out is Kobe is just another one of the guys. And the hoe is a fruit basket.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: yllus
Hmm, well I knew that part. I meant what justification is there for separating the two when a one-shot deal would be far more efficient and fair. It's like the civil suit system is structured to allow a greater number of frivolous lawsuits through...

for one thing, it would sure confuse the hell out of the jury because in a civil suit some things are allowable that aren't in a criminal suit, plus a criminal suit a 'beyond a reasonable doubt' burden of proof, while a civil suit has some lesser burden.

for another, it is really the prosecutor that controls a criminal suit. while the victim exerts some control by consenting to being a witness or requesting charges being pressed, the prosecutor has the final say. in a civil suit the plaintiff has the control. a prosecutor and a plaintiff may have differing goals, they have differing resources at their disposal, have different ideas about what is an acceptable settlement, etc.

plus, the objective of a criminal and a civil suit differ. while the reasons may be mostly theoretical, they are important. a criminal suit is about society's relationship with the accused, while a civil suit is about the victim's relationship with the accused.