The Denver Post
Ruling pressures Bryant's accuser
Sunday, July 25, 2004 -
With jury selection scheduled to start in a month, the 20-year-old woman who has accused Kobe Bryant of rape is faced with an agonizing decision.
Does she walk away from a case in which she has steadfastly maintained for more than a year that Bryant forced himself on her after she said no? Or does she testify at a trial in which the details of intimate sexual relations she had will be heard not only by a jury in her hometown of Eagle, but will be broadcast worldwide? That, legal analysts said Saturday, is the dilemma that the one-time college student faces in the aftermath of Friday's order from Judge Terry Ruckriegle to allow some evidence of the alleged victim's sexual history to be presented in trial. For the past year, Bryant has repeatedly maintained that the sex was consensual. The judge's ruling gives the NBA star the chance to present his best case. Ruckriegle said he will let the defense introduce evidence at trial of the woman's sexual activity in the 72-hour period surrounding her June 30, 2003, encounter with the NBA basketball star. Under Colorado's rape-shield law, a woman's sexual history is presumed irrelevant in sex-assault trials. But that presumption can be overcome if a judge determines at a closed rape- shield hearing that the evidence is relevant and may help lawyers in defending the suspect. Ruckriegle said the evidence about the alleged victim's sexual conduct is relevant because it could help a jury determine who caused injuries to her vaginal area and who was the source of DNA and other bodily fluids found on her. Some analysts said that prosecutor Mark Hurlbert and the accuser should drop the case. Others said that although the ruling may present difficulties for the prosecution and might subject the accuser to embarrassing cross- examination, the case should continue. The DA's office informed the accuser on Friday of the ruling, and they plan to discuss whether to go to trial.
Ruckriegle has extended the deadline for a plea bargain until Wednesday. The deadline previously announced by the judge was last Tuesday. A pretrial hearing is scheduled in the case on Friday in Eagle. Potential jurors are to report to the courthouse Aug. 27 to fill out jury questionnaires. Jury selection will begin Aug. 30. Opening statements in the trial are scheduled for Sept. 7.
"I think the prosecution is going to have to argue - and the jurors are going to have to wonder - why would someone go through this ... if it didn't happen?" she said. Ruckriegle's ruling was hailed as a major victory for Bryant by many legal commentators. The judge ruled that evidence of another man's semen found in the woman's underwear and on her body during a rape exam is relevant to the defense. The defense has argued that her injuries may have been caused by sex with at least one other man around the same time, possibly even in the hours after her encounter with Bryant. "This is a devastating opinion for the prosecution," said Denver defense attorney Dan Recht. "You can't overemphasize or overestimate the significance of this ruling. It goes to the heart of the case, which is who inflicted the injuries and whether this woman is being honest. "It calls into question her credibility. That is a big deal." But Bill Buckley, a former Denver prosecutor, said the introduction of the woman's alleged sexual activity may not be damaging. "It's hard to know how a jury is going to view that," Buckley said. "She's a young girl who probably has had several boyfriends. It depends upon the makeup of the jury, quite frankly.
Krista Flannigan, Hurlbert's spokeswoman, said prosecutors haven't yet sat down with the alleged victim to talk about how to proceed. Also Friday, the judge extended the plea-bargain deadline to Wednesday. Bryant defense attorney Pamela Mackey declined to comment on the ruling. Ruckriegle also will allow testimony indicating the woman may have had intimate relations with two "outcry" witnesses, who would support her claims. Jim Peters, the district attorney for Arapahoe County, said the admission of the evidence may actually help the accuser. "Sometimes information like that ... can give the victim additional credibility and believability because the jury is able to put everything in context," Peters said. "I think juries understand that we are all human." Most observers praised Ruckriegle's ruling. Nathan Chambers, a former Denver prosecutor who is now a defense lawyer, said Ruckriegle's decision was an "absolutely correct application of the law." "This is a victory for the defense, and it is a victory for the truth-seeking process of the criminal justice system," Chambers said. But Steve Siegel, past president of the Colorado Organization for Victim Assistance, said that while he was sure Ruckriegle did his best to balance the contending rights of the accused and the accuser, he believed the ruling was wrong. "I thought the ruling was an unfortunate statement about how far we still have to go in our society," Siegel said. Siegel believes that if prosecutors appeal Ruckriegle's decision to the Colorado Supreme Court, the court may review it. The appeal might argue that Ruckriegle is allowing more information about the woman's sexual history than the law permits. During the rape-shield hearings, a transcript of two sessions was mistakenly e-mailed by a court reporter to seven media organizations, including The Denver Post. Ruckriegle issued an order barring publication of the material. Attorneys for the media, claiming the order was unconstitutional censorship, lost an emergency appeal to the Colorado Supreme Court and have now appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. Staff writer Steve Lipsher can be reached at 970-513-9495 or slipsher@denverpost.com . Staff writer Howard Pankratz can be reached at 303-820-1939 or hpankratz@denverpost.com . |