Ken Papaleo © News Kobe Bryant leaves court Tuesday during a lunch break at the Eagle County Justice Center. Bryant pleaded not guilty to sexual assault, but the judge did not set a trial date as he had been expected to do.

Judge does not set trial date on charge of sexual assault

By Charlie Brennan, Rocky Mountain News
May 12, 2004

Los Angeles Lakers star Kobe Bryant on Tuesday, to no one's surprise, entered a plea of not guilty to the charge of sexual assault.

It was Bryant's first courtroom utterance since his initial appearance last summer. He spoke just four words during his arraignment, which consumed all of about two minutes.

Advertisement

"Yes, sir," Bryant said firmly and clearly, when asked by Eagle County District Judge Terry Ruckriegle whether he understood the charge he faces. Ruckriegle addressed the athlete by his full given name, Kobe Bean Bryant.

And, flanked by defense lawyer Pamela Mackey to his right and defense lawyer Hal Haddon to his left, Bryant promptly answered "Not guilty," when asked how he wished to plead.

He last spoke Aug. 6, when, at his initial appearance, he responded, "No, sir," to a question.

As Bryant entered his plea, his alleged victim's parents sat impassively in the courtroom's first row, directly behind the prosecution table. Their 19-year-old daughter, who made a surprise visit to a pretrial motions hearing Monday, was not present Tuesday.

If convicted in the alleged June 30 assault, Bryant could face four years to life in prison, or 20 years to life on probation. He has admitted having sex with the young Eagle woman, a concierge at the Lodge & Spa at Cordillera in nearby Edwards at the time, but said their contact was consensual.

Bryant was out of the courthouse by 2:40 p.m. and was met in the parking lot by an SUV convoy waiting to take him to the Eagle County Regional Airport. There, he boarded a private jet to whisk him to Los Angeles for the Lakers' playoff matchup at 8:30 p.m. with the San Antonio Spurs.

Ruckriegle, contrary to some expectations, did not set a trial date during Tuesday's arraignment.

Because there are some outstanding issues that could still alter the two sides' readiness for trial, such as determining the status of all necessary forensic testing in the case, Ruckriegle did not want to set a date only to then have to set a new one.

Attorney John Clune, who is representing the alleged victim, said she and her family were disappointed that a date had not been announced.

The judge did, however, set yet another pretrial hearing for May 27 and said that he likely will set a trial date at that time. A weeklong hearing is scheduled to begin June 21. It is expected that Bryant's trial could last at least three weeks.

Previously, Eagle District Attorney Mark Hurlbert said he would be ready for trial by August. Defense attorney Mackey said Bryant's team would prefer not starting until late August or early September.

The entering of Bryant's plea means that under Colorado's speedy trial rule, a jury must be sworn in and empaneled no later than six months from Tuesday - Nov. 11.

Bryant had been in court since Monday morning, mostly for closed-door testimony and arguments over two pivotal issues in the case.

The defense wants Bryant's initial statement to detectives ruled inadmissible, and Bryant's lawyers also want to be able to introduce evidence of previous and subsequent sexual conduct on the part of the alleged victim.

Testimony concerning Bryant's contested statement is now complete, but the sexual history issue will be subject of further closed-door testimony in June. The one prosecution expert witness to testify on that issue Tuesday was Jean McAllister, a member of the University of Colorado investigative panel on the school's recruiting scandal. McAllister testified about two hours Tuesday morning and left without speaking to reporters.

Rulings on the admissibility of both Bryant's statement and the alleged victim's sexual history are not due for several weeks.

Another remaining point of contention is one of legal semantics. Prosecutors and defense lawyers are arguing over whether Bryant's alleged victim should be referred to as the "victim" in court. The defense team, asserting that since his sex with the woman was consensual, it's for a jury to decide whether a crime even occurred, and by calling her a victim now, that will prejudice the case - and a jury - against Bryant.

"Until Mr. Bryant is acquitted, he is a victim - or at least, arguably is," said Haddon.

Hurlbert told Ruckriegle that under Colorado law, a complainant in a sexual assault case is legally termed "victim" from the moment a formal allegation is made, and that with that designation come a number of rights, under Colorado's Victim's Rights Act.

Referring to the word "victim," Hurlbert told Ruckriegle, "To strip her of that designation has the effect of re-victimizing her."

The defense is asking that Bryant be referred to not by the word "defendant" but by his name, and that his alleged victim be referred to by her name or as the "accuser" or "complaining witness."

Haddon also argued during Tuesday's hearing that Colorado's rape shield law, which presumes a victim or witness's sexual history to be irrelevant unless it has a direct bearing on the facts of the case, is unconstitutional. The state's rape shield law, enacted in 1978, has been upheld by the state Supreme Court.

Ruckriegle's ruling on that issue is also expected to be weeks away.

brennanc@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-892-2742

Copyright 2004, Rocky Mountain News. All Rights Reserved.