Denver Post
Bryant goes to court
Hearing set for October; judge seeks probe of leaks
Thursday, August 07, 2003 - EAGLE - County Judge Frederick Gannett formally advised basketball superstar Kobe Bryant on Wednesday that he is accused of sexual assault and announced that a special investigator is being appointed to look into alleged leaks of information in the case.
The 24-year-old Bryant, dressed in a light-colored suit and displaying no sign of nervousness, sat and then stood quietly, his hands folded in front of him with his two lawyers beside him. He appeared to take no notice of the crowds gathered outside the courthouse, though many of the people who turned out were his fans. During the late Wednesday afternoon hearing, most of the 69 courtroom seats were filled with the media, general public and members of the district attorney's staff. About 16 other people, staff at the Eagle County courthouse, filled the jury box. Gannett didn't read the text of the charge; one of Bryant's attorneys, Pamela Mackey, said Bryant would waive the reading. The charge accuses Bryant of using physical force or violence to coerce a young woman to have sex with him the night of June 30. The sexual assault allegedly occurred at the Lodge & Spa at Cordillera - about 17 miles from Eagle, where the woman lives. Bryant has admitted that he committed adultery that night but has claimed that the alleged victim had consensual sex with him. At the advisement, Mackey requested a preliminary hearing for Bryant and said Bryant would waive the 30-day rule, which usually requires the hearing to be held within that time. Gannett asked Bryant if he had any problems with waiving the 30-day requirement. Bryant, in a calm voice, said, "No, sir." The judge announced that Bryant's preliminary hearing will be held at 1 p.m. Oct. 9. Gannett spent the bulk of the advisement saying that he is appointing a special investigator from the Pitkin County Sheriff's Office to look into alleged leaks in the case. On Tuesday, Hal Haddon, a lawyer for Bryant, alleged in a motion that Eagle County Sheriff Joe Hoy, sheriff's investigators and other law enforcement officials were leaking negative information about Bryant to the media. In an interview following the hearing, the judge said the allegations troubled him. "It is a concern I have on behalf of the court," Gannett said. "I became concerned last Wednesday when I saw things that suggested materials were coming from what I thought (was) undisclosed information." He said that if the information reported in the media didn't come directly from the undisclosed materials, they closely "mimicked" it. The judge said that he, Eagle County District Attorney Mark Hurlbert and defense attorney Haddon met earlier Wednesday to discuss the alleged leaks. He said Hurlbert suggested, with Haddon's approval, a way to get to the bottom of the alleged leaks. The judge, a former deputy sheriff in Pitkin County, said he felt a sheriff's department should investigate the allegations. "I wanted an investigative agency that was local and has the resources, skill and training to conduct a special investigation," Gannett said. After meeting with Haddon and Hurlbert, Gannett called Pitkin County Sheriff Robert Braudis and asked him if his office could conduct the investigation. A couple of hours later, Braudis called back and said he would assign an investigator to look into the alleged leaks. The judge said the investigator will answer to him. Although he has set no deadline for the investigator to report back to him in writing, the "timeline is relatively short," Gannett said. The judge said he will share the report with Hurlbert and Haddon and decide if a hearing is necessary. Haddon said he wants a hearing at which all officers who are participating - or have participated - in the Bryant investigation are put under oath and asked what, if any, statements they've made to the media. Gannett said that by appointing the Pitkin County Sheriff's Office, there will be no cost incurred for the investigation by Eagle County. He also said he has no concerns about one sheriff's department investigating another sheriff's department. Gannett noted that the allegations of leaks are confined to a few instances and that the allegation is that leaks may have come from officials other than the Eagle County Sheriff's Office. Gannett also announced that it will be Aug. 18 at the earliest before he decides whether to unseal arrest and search warrants and affidavits that detail the investigation into the alleged assault. At the time the charge was filed in mid-July, Hurlbert said the decision was made only after a thorough review of witness and victim statements and the physical evidence.
"I have an ethical burden not to prosecute a case unless I can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt," Hurlbert said at the time. "I feel that after reviewing (the) evidence I can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt." 
VIDEO
Live report from the Eagle County courthouse, 4 p.m. Aug. 6, 2003.
At the Oct. 9 preliminary hearing, prosecutors will present evidence - probably through investigating officers - about what the alleged victim told them and what lab examinations have determined about physical evidence, including body fluids, hairs and fibers.
Gannett must view the evidence presented in the light most favorable to the prosecution and, as a result, is expected to find probable cause that Bryant should stand trial on the charge.
The preliminary hearing, however, permits defense attorneys to view the evidence, size up and cross-examine investigators and subpoena Bryant's accuser, although judges rarely compel alleged sexual assault victims to testify at preliminary hearings.
The defense also could call witnesses, especially if they believe the prosecution case is extremely weak. Defendants, such as Bryant, never testify at a preliminary hearing.
As far as the special investigator and allegations of leaks, Denver defense attorney Bob Ransome said Wednesday that the judge will closely examine whether Hoy and his deputies did, in fact, violate, his order not to comment on the case. Gannett may simply determine that if there was a violation, it wasn't motivated by malice or an attempt to undercut the defense. Rather, it may be due to Hoy's inexperience and done in an "unthinking moment," Ransome said.