The Denver Postguest commentary
Bryant's turn to be judged
Tuesday, August 31, 2004 -
Now that attorneys in Kobe Bryant's sexual assault trial have begun questioning jury candidates, let's reflect on some of the incidents in this case.
The judge ruled that Bryant's accuser's name was to be kept private. It wasn't. The judge ruled that testimony about her sexual history taken behind closed doors was to remain behind closed doors. It didn't. Finally, the judge ruled she can't be called a "victim" because that's for the jury to decide. The problem is, well before a jury has even been asked to make that decision - a decision they would make after hearing facts presented under oath in a courtroom - far too many people have decided based on rumors, speculation, hearsay and one side's presentation of one piece of evidence that she could not possibly have been a victim. People have reached this conclusion in large part because of their own judgments of how someone else is supposed to behave. I honestly don't know what happened that night in Kobe Bryant's hotel room, or whether this 19-year old is a victim or not. I do know that this case is very troubling for a number of reasons. Why are so many people jumping to conclusions without ever hearing what she has to say?Why has her credibility been judged before she has taken the witness stand and taken an oath to tell the truth? Then we have the transcript problem. Transcripts had to be released prematurely and out of context that contained statements and opinions by an expert paid for by the defense in this case. The public heard about an opinion that the young woman in this case might have had consensual sex shortly after her encounter with Bryant. I've prosecuted hundreds of sexual assault cases, and only one pattern emerges when it comes to the behavior of victims: there is no typical behavior of a victim of any type of crime, including a victim of sexual assault. The truth is, human beings deal with trauma in very different ways and no one has the right to determine whether someone was raped based solely upon how they think she should have acted if she really was raped. That's not justice. The good news is that in spite of the terrible mistakes that have been made by the inadvertent release of confidential information, in spite of death threats, adverse rulings by the court, and a media frenzy that has exposed every piece of this young woman's life, she still appears to want to go forward. The prosecution appears ready to let a jury decide what the truth is. Whatever the outcome of this case, it has made us more aware of the problems of modern technology in the dissemination of information to the public. It has given people an insight into the criminal justice system. It has raised public awareness of issues pertaining to rape-shield laws and privileges in our confidential medical records. It has made people talk candidly about when "no" means "no" regardless of what consensual behavior occurred before those words were spoken. If jury selection is done correctly, this case will be presented to a group of 12 citizens - individuals who have not made up their minds about the guilt or innocence of Kobe Bryant, who are willing to wait until the end of the trial before they decide whether this young woman is really a victim. Regardless of what these men and women have heard about the case in the media or anywhere outside of the courtroom, they will take an oath to decide this case based solely on the facts that they hear presented in the courtroom and the law as they are instructed by the judge. Isn't that what our American system of justice is really all about? Karen Steinhauser was a chief deputy district attorney in Denver for 20 years. She has worked extensively on sexual assault, child abuse and domestic violence cases. She is now an assistant professor of law at the University of Denver.
|