For the prosecution: The prosecution presented photographs taken the day after the assault during evidence collection by two sexual-assault nurse examiners that show numerous small lacerations near her vagina. This, the nurses say, is consistent with forced sexual penetration in the previous 24 hours.

For the defense: Defense lawyer Pamela Mackey established that the woman has admitted to having sexual intercourse with someone else two days before the alleged assault, and that police never asked the nurses whether the vaginal injuries would also be consistent with her having multiple, consensual sexual partners.

What it means: The significance of these small injuries will depend largely on how effectively they are presented in a trial, through the testimony of the nurses themselves. At a trial, testimony about these injuries will come directly from nurse examiners, not a male detective who claims no expertise in this area. Their persuasiveness with jurors will be critical.

Adams County District Attorney Bob Grant said it's far from certain that a judge will even allow the defense to present much evidence of the woman's other sexual encounters.

"But there will be a hearing on this, and the District Court judge will make the ultimate decision as to whether it's going to be heard by the jury. It may, or may not, come in."

For the prosecution: The alleged victim told police that she said "no" at least twice during the encounter, was crying during intercourse and that Kobe Bryant forced her to turn her head and face him, as she promised not to tell anyone. One small bruise was found on her left jaw line.

For the defense: Eagle County Sheriff's Detective Doug Winters, er cross-examination, admitted he was concerned after hearing the woman's statement that she did not say "no" more clearly or forcefully. He also conceded that when the woman pulled Bryant's hand away from her throat, Bryant immediately ceased intercourse. Also, the detective said he didn't notice the bruise when he first met with the woman the day after the incident. It was noticed only later that day as she was being examined by nurses.

What it means: The question of consent is critical in a case where both sides agree that a sex act took place. A jury's verdict could well be swayed by their perceptions of the woman's level of resistance.

"These are valid points for the defense, but the way our law is, it doesn't matter if she kissed him, it doesn't matter if she even consented to fondle him," said former Denver sex-assault and domestic-violence prosecutor Karen Steinhauser, a visiting professor at the University of Denver College of Law.

"All that matters is if he attempted to have sexual intercourse, and she said no, and he forced himself on her anyway."

For the prosecution: The public has not heard the audiotape of Bryant's first comments to investigators, captured by a concealed recording device when they first spoke to him the night of July 1 at the Lodge & Spa at Cordillera. But sources say it preserved remarks Bryant made that he later contradicted. Prosecutors have had the tape electronically enhanced.

For the defense: Bryant's team has termed the tape barely audible, complained about the "surreptitious" manner in which it was obtained and said it is inadmissible because Bryant had not been read his rights, despite the fact that he was - in their opinion - in custody at the time.

What it means: Because of questions surrounding its admissibility at trial, testimony concerning the tape was heard in the judge's chambers, and the public doesn't yet know its contents.

"In all fairness to the prosecution, I bet you there are probably some statements (on the tape) that are inconsistent," said Denver criminal-defense lawyer Lisa Wayne. "I seriously doubt that he ever admitted that he sexually assaulted her. I would be surprised if there aren't some statements that, taken out of context, could look incriminating."

For the prosecution: Testimony was heard that some of the alleged victim's blood was found in the underwear she wore the night of the incident.

For the defense: There was also testimony that a second, yellow-knit pair she wore the following day to the hospital where she was examined contained sperm and semen that is not Bryant's and has not yet been identified.

What it means: With the alleged victim's admission that she had consensual sex shortly before meeting Bryant, jurors may have doubts as to whether the blood in her underwear was caused by one forced encounter with Bryant or multiple consensual encounters close in time to the alleged assault. The sperm and semen in the second pair may only underscore such doubt.

"Bob Grant is talking about how they're (the defense) not going to be able to get this evidence (concerning other, consensual encounters) out at trial, and that's just crazy," Wayne said.

"They take your medical history and your sexual history during the rape-kit examination, and those questions are mandatory. I'll bet you there are inconsistent statements that she made to the nurse. And if that's true, then the rape shield (protections) gets pierced, and you can go after her credibility."

For the prosecution: The alleged victim told police that Bryant asked her to kiss his penis after their sexual intercourse. When she declined, he allegedly forced her to do so.

For the defense: Bryant's lawyers did not seek to counter that, or challenge it in any way, in its cross-examination of Winters, the detective.

What it means: Currently uncontested, that piece of the young woman's allegations appears to support her claim that Bryant was physically controlling her actions, a critical element of the charge against him.

"That boils down to the credibility of the parties," Wayne said. "On its face, it flies in the face of, or seems inconsistent with, a forcible rape.

"But again, any of the pundits who say that, they don't try rape cases, because there's a lot of bizarre things that happen in rape cases."

For the prosecution: Three streaks of the alleged victim's blood on the inside of Bryant's T-shirt, at the waist.

For the defense: The defense established that the blood was so faint that detectives didn't see it at first, when Bryant turned over the clothes he wore that night.

What it means: "I think it's pretty meaningful," said Dan Recht, past president of the Colorado Criminal Defense Bar. "Clearly, he has her blood on him, and clearly, she was bleeding from her vagina. So you can't suggest that she wasn't hurt. She was. The defense has to explain the injury, and somehow show that it wasn't inflicted by Kobe Bryant."

The lead prosecutor against Bryant is Eagle County District Attorney Mark Hurlbert, appointed to his post last December. He remained silent throughout the preliminary hearing but is expected to take a more visible role in a trial. He is assisted by Deputy District Attorney Gregory Crittenden, who conducted all of the direct examination of the state's lone witness in the preliminary hearing. The third member of the prosecution team is Deputy District Attorney Ingrid Bakke, on loan from the Boulder district attorney's office, where she leads the sex-assault and domestic violence unit.

Copyright 2003, Rocky Mountain News. All Rights Reserved.