The Denver Posteditorial
Ruling in Bryant case could be a trial killer
Saturday, July 24, 2004 -
A district judge's ruling Friday that Kobe Bryant's defense may introduce evidence of the accuser's sexual conduct during the 72-hour period preceding a rape examination may prove an insuperable hurdle for the prosecution.
Eagle County District Attorney Mark Hurlbert's case against the Los Angeles Lakers star could be in jeopardy because of District Judge Terry Ruckriegle's bombshell. Prosecutors were to meet with the accuser, who has already expressed doubts about proceeding with the case. A victim's prior or subsequent sexual conduct normally is inadmissable under Colorado's rape-shield law, but Ruckriegle ruled that it is relevant in the circumstances presented by the Bryant case. The defense claims that vaginal injuries the alleged victim supposedly suffered could have been caused by having sex with two other men before and after the incident rather than by Bryant, who admits to the liaison but says it was consensual. Ruckriegle ruled admissable "all evidence, whether direct or circumstantial, of the alleged victim's sexual conduct within approximately 72 hours preceding her physical examination conducted at Valley View Hospital in Glenwood Springs on July 1, 2003." The court said the evidence, including clothing and swabs from the exam, are relevant to determining the source of semen and the cause of injuries noted by nurse examiners. Ruckriegle, however, denied a defence motion to introduce evidence of other sexual conduct by the accuser and other witnesses. Last Monday, John Clune, the woman's lawyer, said she had considered dropping out of the case because of mistakes by the court, including the accidental transmission of a 206-page transcript of a closed hearing to seven media outlets, including The Denver Post. (On Monday, the Colorado Supreme Court upheld Ruckriegle's order forbidding publication of the material.) Clune said that the young woman felt betrayed in pursuing the high-profile case and that she and her family have had to deal with constant harassment, including death threats. "The only time this young woman has considered not going forward with her case is when the people who have been sworn to protect her failed," Clune said. Ruckriegle's ruling will allow the defense to introduce significant doubt about the physical evidence and complicate the prosecution's effort to secure a conviction. We cannot pass judgment on the truth of the matter, but surely prosecutors will have to make a hardheaded calculation as to whether to proceed with the Aug. 27 trial or drop the charges. Rape cases are notoriously difficult and become more so when the potential evidence is expanded in such dramatic fashion. |