The Denver Post
Bryant judge issues ruling on language
Wednesday, June 02, 2004 -
The judge in the Kobe Bryant sexual-assault case Tuesday instructed the two sides to refer to the accuser as the "alleged victim" in all court proceedings, more neutral language that does not assume a crime was committed.
District Judge Terry Ruckriegle agreed with defense attorneys that the prosecution's preference to call the 19-year-old woman a "victim" without qualification could taint a jury. "The common understanding of the term 'victim' certainly implies that a person has been the subject of a particular wrong or crime, and its use under these circumstances could improperly suggest that a crime has been committed such that the presumption of innocence might be jeopardized," Ruckriegle wrote in his three-page ruling. The order apparently sets a precedent in Colorado, although Ruckriegle relied on court decisions in other states cited by the defense that found that the term "victim" incorrectly assumes a crime has been committed. District Attorney Mark Hurlbert had argued that Colorado law refers to a victim as "the person alleging to have been subjected to a criminal sexual assault" and wanted to ensure that the woman is afforded the full set of rights spelled out under the state Victim's Rights Act. "It's important that it be recognized that victim's rights attach to the victim as soon as a crime is reported," said Krista Flannigan, spokeswoman for the prosecutor. "And under the Victim's Rights Act, the district attorney's office is required by law to call the person who is alleging that a crime was perpetrated against them a 'victim."' Bryant, 25, a star on the Los Angeles Lakers basketball team, has said that the sexual liaison in an upscale hotel near Edwards last summer was consensual.
Click here for an interactive presentation on Kobe Bryant's career.
Click here for an archive of court documents in the People v. Bryant case.
Click here for The Denver Post's graphic on the events of June 30.
Click here for the 9NEWS archive on the case.
Click here for the CourtTV archive on the case.
Defense attorney Hal Haddon wrote that calling the woman simply a "victim" would create a bias against Bryant that would harm his right to the presumption of innocence. He suggested the alternate phrase of "complaining witness." "What it does is it creates a lock in a lot of people's minds," acknowledged Eagle defense attorney Dave Lugert, one of the architects of the state Victim's Rights Act. "If you constantly use the word 'victim so-and-so, victim such-and-such,' some start to accept in their minds the fact that she is indeed a victim. They did have a good point." He called the ruling reasonable and fair but suggested the debate could have been resolved between the two sides as a courtesy. "Once the trial starts, everybody will know the prosecutors believe she's a victim. And everyone will know the defense believes she's making allegations, and there is a question about whether a crime occurred," Lugert said. Cynthia Stone, spokeswoman for the Colorado Coalition Against Sexual Assault, was disappointed with the ruling, noting that there is no dispute about victims in other crimes, such as robberies or muggings. "It flies against the philosophy of prosecutors who bring these cases," she said. "In Colorado, a district attorney is under an ethical obligation to file charges only if they in their heart of hearts believe a crime has been committed, and if they believe they can win the case. This is forcing them to compromise on that." Staff writer Steve Lipsher can be reached at 970-513-9495 or slipsher@denverpost.com . |