Plan to drop criminal case against Kobe Bryant?

Forums: Legal, Kobe Bryant, Criminal Law
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Jury selection in Kobe Bryant criminal case is set to begin August 27

Quote:

EAGLE, Colorado (CNN) -- The judge in the Kobe Bryant sexual assault case rejected the prosecution's request for a delay in the trial on Friday, saying there was no reason to do so. . . .

Earlier this week, District Attorney Mark Hurlbert filed a motion to delay Bryant's trial date, saying he needs more time to prepare. . . .

Bryant's attorneys opposed the delay.

In a motion filed Thursday, defense attorneys said Bryant "will not waive his right to a speedy trial."

Particularly damaging to the prosecution's case, they said, is "the accuser's filing of a civil suit, thereby exposing her motivation to pursue her false accusation -- the hope of a large monetary reward."

The woman who has accused Bryant filed a lawsuit Tuesday in federal court in Denver against the Los Angeles Lakers star, seeking unspecified monetary damages. . . .

A plan to drop case?

The prosecution is obligated to proceed to trial within six months of Bryant's not-guilty plea or the government must set him free.

Colorado trial attorney Craig Silverman has said that Hurlbert's motion may be part of a plan to drop the case.

"Even though there are some good bases for this motion to continue, it seems like part of a well-orchestrated strategy for this criminal case to go away," he said. "In all likelihood, the judge will deny the motion to continue and then the prosecution may throw up its hands and say, 'We're not going to proceed. We dismiss the case.' "

Did the alleged victim hurt the state's criminal case by filing a civil case for monetary compensation? Does the civil case cast doubt concerning the alleged victim's motivations? Does the civil suit lend more credibility to Kobe's defense that he was falsely accused?

Do you think there is a link between the alleged victim's filing of the civil suit and the prosecutor's motion for a delay? Both events happened at about the same time. Is the prosecutor attempting to avoid trying a criminal case when the alleged victim's motives are questionable? Is the prosecutor looking for an excuse to drop the case?

With jury selection scheduled to commence less than two weeks away, do you think the criminal case will be dismissed before then?

Speculate here and cast your vote.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 4,035 • Replies: 21

No top replies

I think the prosecution is realizing that this matter isn't as cut and dried as they originally thought. Plus, a few rulings have been lost recently - isn't all or most of her sexual history now fair game? So the prosecutor is likely seeing that this is a high-profile case that they could lose big time. The filing of the civil suit might also be a part of it; that way the state can bow out semi-gracefully but the alleged victim doesn't necessarily leave without getting some sort of justice. So the prosecution can kind of wash its hands of the matter and go onto something else.

0 Replies

As I understand it (and I haven't been paying much attention to this case), the victim has recently become uncooperative with the prosecution. Part of that may be due to frustration with the court continually releasing documents that identify the victim -- something not permitted under Colorado's rape-shield laws. I seem to recall the victim even attempting to withdraw the criminal complaint (I'm not sure she can do that, but then criminal law is not my specialty). So the prosecution may be faced with an uncooperative victim and -- with the filing of the civil suit -- a financial motive that can be used by the defense to discredit the victim's testimony. Under those circumstances, the prosecutor may indeed be looking for a way out of this mess.

0 Replies

Yikes.

What I remember is that the sexual history within three days was allowed -- don't remember if it was the three days before the event, 1.5 days on either side, 3 days on either side for a total of 6 -- specifically in terms of lesions/ abrasions/ whatever that she received (blech) and whether they could have resulted from other sexual contact.

Mess indeed.

What happens if it's dropped? If Kobe is guilty, he actually raped her, and this is dropped, what's the worst that happens to him?

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

What happens if it's dropped? If Kobe is guilty, he actually raped her, and this is dropped, what's the worst that happens to him?

If the criminal case is dropped, the worst thing that could happen to Bryant would be if he lost the civil case: then he'd have to pay a monetary judgment to his accuser. But he couldn't be retried for rape: double jeopardy has already "attached," which means that he can't be tried a second time for the same offense (kinda' like OJ).

0 Replies

Well that totally sucks. If he's innocent and that's demonstrated in the civil case, whatever. But if he's guilty...

Thanks for the info.

0 Replies

Oh, it's a total mess - add in the "accidental" (really???) releasing of her name. Yes, mistakes are made etc. but it strikes me that that happened at around the time that the case for the prosecution started to really go South. Makes one wonder ...

0 Replies

The "accidental" releasing X 2, I think -- I don't think it was just the one time.

0 Replies

Double Jeopardy?

joefromchicago wrote:

sozobe wrote:
What happens if it's dropped? If Kobe is guilty, he actually raped her, and this is dropped, what's the worst that happens to him?

If the criminal case is dropped, the worst thing that could happen to Bryant would be if he lost the civil case: then he'd have to pay a monetary judgment to his accuser. But he couldn't be retried for rape: double jeopardy has already "attached," which means that he can't be tried a second time for the same offense (kinda' like OJ).

Double jeopardy does not attach until the jury is impaneled. If the prosecution drops the case prior to selecting a jury, DJ will not be a bar to a future prosecution. The prosecution could possibly refile charges against Bryant so long as they do so within the relevant statute of limitations.

I previously represented a defendant wherein the prosecutor failed to provide the government witness list within two weeks of the scheduled trial. This was in violation of the pretrial order; and the judge had warned the prosecutor that the pretrial order would be strictly enforced. Inasmuch as the prosecutor failed to provide a witness list, the prosecutor could not call any witnesses. The prosecutor simply dismissed the case. The dismissal was without prejudice and was an unappealable order. This meant the prosecutor could refile the charges at a later date and avoid sanctions for violations of the pretrial order. [Ticked me off--and I researched the issue extensively--and there was nothing I could do about it!]

Unless Bryant is acquitted by a jury in a criminal case, it would be detrimental to Bryant to "settle" any civil claims against him. Perhaps the prosecution will dismiss the criminal case (which will be without prejudice) and then monitor the evidence presented in the civil trial before deciding whether to refile the criminal charges against Bryant.

Even if Bryant is found liable in a civil suit, that is not the same as being found guilty in a criminal case. The burden of proof (by the preponderance of the evidence) in a civil matter is considerably less onerous than the burden of proof (beyond a reasonable doubt) in a criminal matter.

0 Replies

Re: Double Jeopardy?

Debra_Law wrote:

Double jeopardy does not attach until the jury is impaneled. If the prosecution drops the case prior to selecting a jury, DJ will not be a bar to a future prosecution. The prosecution could possibly refile charges against Bryant so long as they do so within the relevant statute of limitations.

This is correct. In my defense, I can only say that I took criminal procedure over 15 years ago, and most of it apparently didn't stick.

That being said, I think it would be rather unusual for the prosecution to nolle prosequi (drop) the case against Bryant and then re-file the charges at some later date, since the only reason they'd drop the case is because of the victim's unwillingness to cooperate. It seems unlikely that the victim would be more willing to cooperate in the wake of a civil trial (especially if it ends up being settled out of court).

0 Replies

Maybe a change in the prosecuting team? It seems like the victim is unwilling to cooperate with these specific people, who have done the unforgivable (releasing her name) at least once.

0 Replies

An interesting article on the current quandary faced by the Bryant prosecution here.

0 Replies

Hmm. I'm not really sure I buy her reasoning. It could be the way she says, regarding the actions of the alleged victim after the incident. But she seems to be irresponsibly stringing possibilities together and drawing conclusions from them.

It seems possible and even plausible to me from what I know about rape, and the counterintuitive ways that victims respond, that an actual rape victim could have had consensual sex afterwards. Maybe she was still in shock and it was something she drifted into. Maybe it was an old boyfriend she went to for comfort, and... Lots of plausible maybes IMO -- nothing definite, certainly, but I don't think too much should be read into it.

0 Replies

In the case of the OJ civil case, he was ordered to pay something like $35 mil (?). To this day he's never paid a cent and has stated quite clearly that he never intends to. So what is the point of these civil cases???

0 Replies

Although the situations are not as insane as that protrayed in Dickens' Bleak House, civil courts move rather ponderously. OJ can run, but he can't hide. Mouthing off about not paying does not help his legal team in any legitimate attempts they make to get the settlement vacated or reduced. Eventually, and it could still take years longer, OJ will have to pay. If his avenues of appeal are exhausted, and he continues to defy orders to pay up, his assets can be attached for payment.

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

It seems possible and even plausible to me from what I know about rape, and the counterintuitive ways that victims respond, that an actual rape victim could have had consensual sex afterwards. Maybe she was still in shock and it was something she drifted into. Maybe it was an old boyfriend she went to for comfort, and... Lots of plausible maybes IMO -- nothing definite, certainly, but I don't think too much should be read into it.

Well maybe, maybe not. As they say, that is for the jury to decide.

And I think that's the author's point: given this evidence, can the prosecution count on a jury to agree unanimously that the victim/accuser is telling the truth about her rape allegations. The evidence, after all, is exculpatory, it is not itself exculpation.

0 Replies

O.J. doesn't have to pay.

Setanta wrote:

Although the situations are not as insane as that protrayed in Dickens' Bleak House, civil courts move rather ponderously. OJ can run, but he can't hide. Mouthing off about not paying does not help his legal team in any legitimate attempts they make to get the settlement vacated or reduced. Eventually, and it could still take years longer, OJ will have to pay. If his avenues of appeal are exhausted, and he continues to defy orders to pay up, his assets can be attached for payment.

From what I understand, O.J. positioned himself so that he wouldn't have to pay. He moved to a state with an unlimited homestead exemption. He is no longer actively working. Thus, there is no income to garnish or attach. His retirement pension is exempt. He did extensive planning for his post-judgment safety and he will live very well for the rest of his life.

0 Replies

Smart lawyers that boy had, then. I'd be interested to know just how generous that pension is.

0 Replies

By the by, Miss Law, do you know if he sold off his assets and bought an annuity?

0 Replies

Interesting

joefromchicago wrote:

An interesting article on the current quandary faced by the Bryant prosecution here.

Thanks for the link. It was an interesting article. Our questions whether the prosecution will proceed with the criminal trial will soon be answered.

0 Replies

Plan to drop criminal case against Kobe Bryant?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know