| |
|
WRT to the last link to Hard Facts: Let's take a look
Kobe Bryant's attorney may have broached the subject of his alleged victim's reported sexual history during last Thursday's preliminary hearing because it probably won't be admissible at trial, local attorneys say.
They also say there's already enough evidence on the table to bind the case over for trial.
Facts here; Kobe Bryant's attorney has broached the alleged victim's sexual history; local attorneys are OF THE OPINION that (a) this is probably because it won't be admissable at trial (with the inference the attorney is being sneaky) and (b)that the case has enough evidence to be brought to trial. Hard facts 1, opinons (legal or otherwise), 2.
What happens if it's bound over, though, is still a matter of hot debate. "I think this is the Titanic," said local defense attorney Jim Fahrenholtz, suggesting the prosecutors have a weak case. "This thing is going to sink quickly."
Fact, what happens is still a matter of hot debate; opinion, the case will sink quickly.
Not so fast, said local attorney Rohn Robbins, who pointed out the physical evidence, especially Bryant's T-shirt stained with the victim's blood. "That's a very damning piece of evidence. They should not raise the white flag, but the bloody shirt," Robbins said, referring to the 1876 presidential election in which Republicans embraced "Raise the Bloody Shirt" as a successful campaign slogan to woo the votes of Civil War veterans, leading their candidate, Rutherford B. Hayes, to victory.
Fact; Kobe Bryant's t-shirt is stained with victims blood; a 1876 presedntial election had a 'raise the bloody shirt campaign' which led a candidate to victory. Opinion; that the T-shirt should be raised in court.
Norm Early, former Denver district attorney, said Eagle County Judge Fred Gannett should pull the plug on the preliminary hearing right now.
"The district attorney has already presented sufficient evidence to bind this case over for trial," said Early. "There's no question this case will be bound over. They had probable cause since halfway through the detective's testimony."
Opinon; the case should be bound over for trial.
I could go on, but you see my point; these stories, which come from that sensational media which you said you distrusted, nowthink, are a mixture of both fact and opinion.
As regards your query about what reception the Kobe Bryant case is getting over in Britain; hardly any. I'm in Wales, England and the case seems to be getting no coverage at all. I had to use Google to find out whether Kobe Bryant was basketball or baseball, both of which are minority sports in terms of coverage and public interest over here in the UK. I'm no sports fan anyway, but I think few people in the UK could tell you outright who the hell Kobe Bryant is. As a result, few papers will bother reporting the story - 'Man you've never heard of in court case!'
As regards the reception you've got here; would you have started this thread, if the tables were turned, with a reference to a 'coon' or a 'nigger'? Some people get offended by the words ho or bitch used to describe women. It's just courtesy - whether being satirical or not - to take people's feelings into account. Maybe a more considerate tone in your language would elicit a far better response from your potential readership. |
|
|
