An Open Letter
To All Kobe’s Accuser Apologists
Her Name Alone Is Shielded From Public View. Questions As To Her Character Are Deemed Unfair And Irrelevant.
Just Where Is The Justice Here?
By Perry Hicks
I recently sent this note to a legal analyst for FOX News who, on the Hannity & Colmes Show, had made very strongly opinioned statements in defense of Colorado’s rape shield law. To my amazement, when she replied she thanked me in a way that suggested that she didn’t quite get it my drift. The following is the text of the note with but one redaction, the analyst’s name. Regard it as an open letter to all apologists for Kobe’s Accuser.
I’m with you. Why should the jury be bothered with testimony as to how many men she engaged after being brutally raped by Kobe? It might make her uncomfortable to have the extent of her injuries questioned. You know, irrelevant stuff like, “If you were injured by Kobe, how could you withstand having intercourse again so soon?” The “alleged” rape is all about her, anyway. Am I wrong? To listen to Sean Hannity, you would think this trial was all about Kobe! What the heck does Kobe have at stake here? This trial is all about vindicating her.
Personally, I don’t know why we are bothering with a trial, anyway. Women don’t lie about these things. Tell me Ms (Redacted), has anyone, ever, been found later to be innocent of rape after having served time in prison? For that matter, has any famous athletes ever been falsely accused? Note that Kobe did not tape any of what he calls a tryst! If he is so innocent, what does he have to hide?
Of course, I am certain that a hate-filled right-wing nut cake like Mister Sean Hannity still thinks Anita Hill was a liar. Jeesh! What a Neanderthal! If Kobe’s Accuser says it is rape; it is rape. It is her body and her right to choose! Even if she can’t remember telling Kobe “No”, he should have known and stopped as soon as the thought crossed her mind, even if that thought came, say, the next day!
Here is an idea; Kobe’s Accuser and other rape victims could just fill out some paperwork that would allow the police to directly incarcerate the accused. All of it could be kept very quiet and the victims would not have to suffer any more trauma. Neither would we have to refer to the victims as So-and-So’s Accuser. It would certainly be more honest: We could drop the charade of criminal defense. Think of it as the ultimate Rape Shield Law: No costly investigations; no costly trial; and you still get the result that you really want: Guilty!
I really enjoy your presentations and always look forward to your appearances on FOX. You are the best!
From the beginning I want this to be crystal clear; I am no sports fan must less a Kobe Bryant sycophant. Indeed, so divorced from sports am I that until his name arose in the news, I was oblivious to his identity.
Neither am I inured to cheating on one’s wife. I simply find it repugnant to shield any accuser from the prying eyes of the public and for good cause: In our system, defendants are deemed innocent until proven guilty. The way Colorado’s Rape Shield Law works, this assumption is turned upside down. Defendants must not just cope with prosecutorial efforts to pile on a preponderance of evidence; they must now cope with prosecutorial efforts to mount a preponderance of procedure against them.
Then there is the dark side to celebrity cases. An accuser, particularly one singling out the rich and famous, directly or indirectly, could be doing so for monetary gain. The accuser could also be unstable and want to somehow join their pathetic life to that of the celebrity. If the accusers name is secret, then anyone knowing the possible motivation for such a complaint would not have the opportunity to step forward and expose the real offender.
In just the last few years a number professional athletes have been falsely accused of sexual crimes. In Virginia, DNA evidence recently proved the innocence of a man who spent 21 years behind bars for a crime he did not commit. Perhaps I should say, spent 21 years behind bars solely on the word of his accuser. There was no forensic evidence linking him to the crime.
In fact, as of December 2003, 112 death row inmates have been released as a result of DNA testing. By one account, this is 1 exoneration for every 8 executions.
In November 2003, Nicole Dolores Milburn was charged in Michigan for falsely reporting that she had been raped by Detroit Lions Wide Receiver Scotty Anderson.
Another Michigan case of false rape allegations was reported back in March 2001 by the Detroit Free Press. http://www.freep.com/news/metro/dicker12_20010312.htm . Here, Dearborn Police Chief Ron Deziel was accused of rape by 27 year old Tammy Divetta. While Michigan does not have a rape shield law, the press routinely does not publicize the name and photo of alleged rape victims. Deziel took the heat while his accuser was kept from the public view where some of that public had very relevant information about her credibility.
In Kobe’s case, some interesting reports have been seen in the mainstream media. The Accuser is alleged to be mentally unstable, an ardent attention-seeker, extremely promiscuous (if not very sexually aggressive), and attempted suicide on more than one occasion. If true, these reports would cast grave doubt on the Accuser’s credibility. What is at stake here is a possible life sentence for Kobe Bryant.
One could say that because Kobe is a celebrity, justice will automatically run to his favor. Look at it another way, if the accused had not been Kobe Bryant, would the Accuser’s identity have leaked out through the internet? Would some of these and other bomb-shell allegations have come to light? Would the general public have cared?
Some would say that if it were anyone other than a celebrity, this case would never have reached a grand jury, much less a trial. After all, when she reported to the hospital for her rape examination the next day, someone else’s semen was found in her panties. She is also alleged to have bragged at a party about the size of Kobe’s private parts and did not seem at all upset. She is also alleged to have slept with not one but two of the prosecution witnesses.
As bad as all this sounds, it gets worse. Media reports claim that while Kobe’s Accuser admitted that some sexual activity did start with her consent, she could not be certain that she had ever told him to stop once intercourse began!
This trial is going to be very interesting from a social policy standpoint. If Kobe’s Accuser turns out to be a flake, or a grifter, a lot of feminists are going to have a lot of “splaining” to do.
Perry Hicks is a former Mississippi Coast resident and was a correspondent for the old Gulfport Star Journal. He has appeared on Fox News Channel’s “The O’Reilly Factor.” Perry has also hosted his own radio talk show on the auto industry with a mix of politics, and is a former Ford Motor Company technical trainer. He currently works as an Associate Professor of Automotive Technology at J. Sargeant Reynolds Community College in Richmond, VA.
Contact the Author: firstname.lastname@example.org