The Denver Post
Bryant back in Colo. Friday for hearing
Thursday, July 29, 2004 -
Kobe Bryant returns to Colorado on Friday for one of the final two hearings before the NBA star's sexual assault trial begins and after nearly a month of upheaval over how much the public should know about the case.
The first order of business is a discussion on the use of DNA evidence obtained from Bryant during a hospital exam after the alleged attack last summer. The evidence was thrown out this month as part of a larger defense request, but Bryant's attorneys now wants the exam details admitted because they presumably support their contention the accuser had sex with someone after Bryant and before she went to the hospital. The discussion would have probably been held behind closed doors, except for a mistake this week in which a court clerk posted a sealed order from District Judge Terry Ruckriegle on a state court Web site. It included details of Bryant's exam and the accuser's last name. Also scheduled for discussion are defense requests to limit the prosecution's use of Bryant's tape-recorded statements to authorities and to keep the comments sealed until trial. "Certainly, you can read into it that there's things within those statements that the defense thinks are hurtful and doesn't want the jury to hear about and doesn't want the public to hear about," said Dan Recht, past president of the Colorado Criminal Defense Bar. Bryant, 25, has pleaded not guilty to a felony sexual assault charge, saying he had consensual sex with a 19-year-old employee of the Vail-area resort where he stayed last summer. If convicted, the Los Angeles Lakers star faces four years to life in prison or 20 years to life on probation, and a fine up to $750,000. The judge has already ruled the woman's sexual activities during the three days before her July 1, 2003, hospital exam can be admitted as evidence. The defense has said her injuries could have been caused by sex with someone else and suggested she had a lover after her encounter with Bryant, a claim her attorney has denied. The defense has noted DNA from someone else was found on the woman's body and in underwear she wore to the hospital. In Ruckriegle's mistakenly posted order, the judge said swabs taken from Bryant's body contained DNA from him and the woman, but not from an unidentified third person whose genetic material was found on other pieces of evidence in the case. Both sides will use expert witnesses to deliver different interpretations of the DNA evidence, former prosecutor Karen Steinhauser said. "I don't see it as that big a deal," she said. "This case is not going to come down to experts. This case is going to come down to credibility and either jurors will believe her or not." Attorney Craig Silverman, also a former prosecutor, said evidence that could lead the jury to believe the woman had sex with someone soon after her encounter with Bryant could damage the prosecution's case. Investigators have said she told them she had a sexual partner about two days before Bryant, and that man wore a condom. "If it turns out that there was another man during that 72-hour time period that she didn't disclose, it affects her credibility," Silverman said. "In a he-said, she-said case, obviously credibility is key." On today, Ruckriegle released a redacted and edited transcript from a closed-door hearing in June in which defense attorney Pamela Mackey said the accuser has received nearly $20,000 in compensation for mental health care - far above the state cap of $1,125 - and lost wages. Mackey said the money was a clear incentive for the woman to pursue a false claim of rape. It was unclear whether the information would be admitted as evidence. Ruckriegle released the transcript after issuing a sealed order on use of the information. On Friday, the judge is expected to hear what prosecutors and the defense want redacted from the remainder of the transcript before he releases the document publicly. Transcripts from the June 21-22 hearings were accidentally e-mailed by a court reporter to The Associated Press and six other news organizations. None has published the information, but they challenged the judge's contempt of court threat as a violation of First Amendment free press rights. Under prodding from U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer and the Colorado Supreme Court, Ruckriegle has said he intends to release a redacted version soon. |