Kobe Bryant - What’s his legacy?

[4bars]

I literally said you have a point and conceded to your argument partially. However your bolded part is inaccurate. The case was dropped before he made that statement. We actually don’t know if it was advised as a part of the settlement deal or not.

Sorry i might misinterpreted when you set about smoking pot. maybe I am not proficient in english enough and I thought you were taking the piss.

And about the bolded part, as abizzz said, it could be negociated and was agreed to say it AFTER the trial was dropped, that if he didn't agree to do it (even after), they would go on trial. Basically it was a form of moral reparation (IMO bc it did happen) and after a civil trial where she got paid off. In this way he gets rid of the problem and she could get rid of the harassement of the press, the menacing fans that roamed her life and she could get something in a case that she had a slim chance to win with all the public opinion and the legal war that she was against with

 

[4bars]

Being advised by your defense team to make a statement is not the same as being pressured. But it’s actually unknown if he was advised into saying that or not. It would make more sense if he was though.

as the only true is that the trial never happened, the only true is that he said those words with all the meaning of it. We can't dismiss what it didn't happen for an argument and dismiss what did happen for another argument because it suits our narrative

 

[Abizzz]

Sorry i might misinterpreted when you set about smoking pot. maybe I am not proficient in english enough and I thought you were taking the piss.

And about the bolded part, as abizzz said, it could be negociated and was agreed to say it AFTER the trial was dropped, that if he didn't agree to do it (even after), they would go on trial. Basically it was a form of moral reparation (IMO bc it did happen) and after a civil trial where she got paid off. In this way he gets rid of the problem and she could get rid of the harassement of the press, the menacing fans that roamed her life and she could get something in a case that she had a slim chance to win with all the public opinion and the legal war that she was against with

That is just not how criminal justice works. She didn't tell the judge "I found some other way to settle this with him". The trial would have still gone on against him. It would have been the state against him, not her.

But it wasn't because the trial was dismissed.

 

[4bars]

That is just not how criminal justice works. She didn't tell the judge "I found some other way to settle this with him". The trial would have still gone on against him. It would have been the state against him, not her.

But it wasn't because the trial was dismissed.

For the third time, that is not how it works, the words are still there

on another note. Why the trial was dismissed?

 

[Florida Man]

Sorry i might misinterpreted when you set about smoking pot. maybe I am not proficient in english enough and I thought you were taking the piss.

And about the bolded part, as abizzz said, it could be negociated and was agreed to say it AFTER the trial was dropped, that if he didn't agree to do it (even after), they would go on trial. Basically it was a form of moral reparation (IMO bc it did happen) and after a civil trial where she got paid off. In this way he gets rid of the problem and she could get rid of the harassement of the press, the menacing fans that roamed her life and she could get something in a case that she could not win with all the public opinion and the legal war that she was against with

Yeah man, I tend to become more level headed after a smoke believe it or not. But we’ll have to agree to disagree on the whole matter. But I must ask of you, since it’s common for rape victims to never see justice, would you consider that multi million dollar settlement to be a form of justice served?

as the only true is that the trial never happened, the only true is that he said that words with all the meaning of it. We can't dismiss what it didn't happen for an argument and dismiss what did happen for another argument because it suits our narrative

I was reading an article where someone mentioned that he was as close to admitting guilt without actually admitting it. I’d argue his statement was more of a “no contest” type of admittance where one isn’t saying he’s innocent nor sayin he’s guilty either.

 

[Florida Man]

That is just not how criminal justice works. She didn't tell the judge "I found some other way to settle this with him". The trial would have still gone on against him. It would have been the state against him, not her.

But it wasn't because the trial was dismissed.

Good points too

 

[4bars]

Yeah man, I tend to become more level headed after a smoke believe it or not. But we’ll have to agree to disagree on the whole matter. But I must ask of you, since it’s common for rape victims to never see justice, would you consider that multi million dollar settlement to be a form of justice served?

I was reading an article where someone mentioned that he was as close to admitting guilt without actually admitting it. I’d argue his statement was more of a “no contest” type of admittance where one isn’t saying he’s innocent nor sayin he’s guilty either.

About your question. Everything and everybody has a price. Monetary, moral, etc... If she would be truly satisfied (and not feel forced to think that he would be the only thing she would get) with any kind of settlement who I am to judge. But lets no forget that a rapist it has not only obligations with the person that raped but with the society and he needs to pay and pass through the reinsertion process to not happen again. So at personal level, might, not at social level (as much money he would pay to the society also)

We will never know what happened, you got your conclusions and I got mine. But the statement, forced or not forced said that he recognized and saw after all the process that she didn't consent and he was mistaken in believing so

 

[Massive Spanner]

He is right though.

Ever since he was promoted his every post is either failed attempt at sarcasm, criticising other posters because they have their opinion, pretending he is know it all poster, you would think he is here for 20 years seeing the style of his posting. I can even understand older posters here who can't be bothered to discuss with new posters here some stuff, but literally every one of bans 20+k posts here is made of one or two sentence either criticising someone, trying to be funny, etc..

One of the worst posters of the last decade easily. And a returnee.

Yeah, just a sarcastic, spammy, one liner dope.

Basically santi without the lovable idiot thing going on.

 

[Abizzz]

For the third time, that is not how it works, the words are still there

on another note. Why the trial was dismissed?

Ok we have to agree to disagree then. To me the dismissal of his case means that they didn't see enough proof to take the case forward, never mind convicting him. Given the context it all happened in that is enough for me to feel more than certain that he was innocent.

The trial was dismissed because they had no hope in hell of winning a conviction against him. Because he was innocent.

 

[Cascarino]

We can agree to disagree then. That was settled 17 years ago with none of us knowing the real truth, including you. History will remember him fondly and he’s earned the respect of his peers and many legends around the world. If it was such a open and shut case as some random football fans on the internet would argue, then he wouldn’t be held in such high regard.

I really like you as a poster but I’m amazed you think the bolded part means anything. There’s plenty of terrible people who that applies to.

 

[4bars]

Ok we have to agree to disagree then. To me the dismissal of his case means that they didn't see enough proof to take the case forward, never mind convicting him. Given the context it all happened in that is enough for me to feel more than certain that he was innocent.

The trial was dismissed because they had no hope in hell of winning a conviction against him. Because he was innocent.

No, the trial wasnt dismissed for the reasons you say, it was dissmissed when she didn't go to testify. He did the statement the very same day. I think the conclusion is easy, they reached an agreement (as much you can say that is not how it works) being guilty or not. and if the statement said that (and afterwards money), the only think worse that could happened to him is being declared guilty officially, because unofficially he admitted the rape being an agreed statement or not

 

[RobinLFC]

Let's not forget that there is someone who thinks there's an argument for having Chris Paul over Kobe Bryant in an all-time greats list.

 

[Florida Man]

I really like you as a poster but I’m amazed you think the bolded part means anything. There’s plenty of terrible people who that applies to.

I was saying that in the sense that is how he’s going to be remembered objectively by all partly because I was attempting to wrap up my discussion. It‘s not my point in making a defense for him. It’s just how it’s going to be for his going forward.

 

[Florida Man]

Let's not forget that there is someone who thinks there's an argument for having Chris Paul over Kobe Bryant in an all-time greats list.

That’s the real tragedy.

 

[Cascarino]

I was saying that in the sense that is how he’s going to be remembered objectively by all partly because I was attempting to wrap up my discussion. It‘s not my point in making a defense for him. It’s just how it’s going to be for his going forward.

Yeah fair enough man, I’ve just woken up and snapped for no reason

 

[Florida Man]

Yeah fair enough man, I’ve just woken up and snapped for no reason

Emotions are generally high in here so don’t sweat it. Just everything about this death is so crazy, I’m still shook. And I’ve never been phased by a celebrity death ever.

 

[Abizzz]

No, the trial wasnt dismissed for the reasons you say, it was dissmissed when she didn't go to testify. He did the statement the very same day. I think the conclusion is easy, they reached an agreement (as much you can say that is not how it works) being guilty or not. and if the statement said that (and afterwards money), the only think worse that could happened to him is being declared guilty officially, because unofficially he admitted the rape being an agreed statement or not

a)This isn't allowed
b)The DA wouldn't care if he thought he had a case


The thing that is worse that could have very realistically happened to him had he commited the crime was going to jail for 20 years and all of those who cared enough wondering what could have been. He had a lot to lose.

His name was cleared in a courtroom. But some people are just too prejudiced to ever accept it. Even after his death.

 

[ZDwyr]

Let's not forget that there is someone who thinks there's an argument for having Chris Paul over Kobe Bryant in an all-time greats list.

He matches up well with Kobe - statistically - in the playoffs. That's surprising. There's an argument there that he's a better playoff performer. For what it's worth, I'd have Kobe ahead in terms of 'best of all time' lists though.

 

[RobinLFC]

He matches up well with Kobe - statistically - in the playoffs. That's surprising. There's an argument there that he's a better playoff performer. For what it's worth, I'd have Kobe ahead in terms of 'best of all time' lists though.

He matches up so well with Kobe in the playoffs that he has a grand total of 0 Finals appearances, let alone rings or Finals MVP awards. Chris Paul is a great player and there might even be a case for him to be the greatest pure PG of all-time, but I can't take anyone seriously who has him over Bryant. Just can't. Lots of other ridiculous claims in that list by the way, e.g. Wade.

 

[ZDwyr]

He matches up so well with Kobe in the playoffs that he has a grand total of 0 Finals appearances, let alone rings or Finals MVP awards. Chris Paul is a great player and there might even be a case for him to be the greatest pure PG of all-time, but I can't take anyone seriously who has him over Bryant. Just can't. Lots of other ridiculous claims in that list by the way, e.g. Wade.

Right. But those outcomes are influenced a lot by the teams they played on/against. Anyway, my point is that might be where the argument is coming from. I agree with you that he's better than most, if not all, of that second tier.

 

[4bars]

a)This isn't allowed
b)The DA wouldn't care if he thought he had a case


The thing that is worse that could have very realistically happened to him had he commited the crime was going to jail for 20 years and all of those who cared enough wondering what could have been. He had a lot to lose.

His name was cleared in a courtroom. But some people are just too prejudiced to ever accept it. Even after his death.

a) is not officially allowed. They can talk whatever they want and agree whatever they want unofficially
b) I wonder the DA would thought they had a case as long as the victim would testify. If she refused do an unofficial agreement, how they would have a case?

Yes, he had a lot to lose, it was those many years. So that statement, as damning as it was, was a little price to pay

 

[Moby]

Let's not forget that there is someone who thinks there's an argument for having Chris Paul over Kobe Bryant in an all-time greats list.

 

[RedC]

a)This isn't allowed
b)The DA wouldn't care if he thought he had a case


The thing that is worse that could have very realistically happened to him had he commited the crime was going to jail for 20 years and all of those who cared enough wondering what could have been. He had a lot to lose.

His name was cleared in a courtroom. But some people are just too prejudiced to ever accept it. Even after his death.

Your arguments in this thread are truly awful, you seem to have just resorted to calling everyone a racist, while also absolving Bryant of any blame for anything, including the smearing of a 19 year old girl(yes, it is on him if his defence team did it). I'm assuming you're black, and you are clearly right regarding the unfair treatment of black men(and women) by the US judicial system, but it's a complete strawman in this specific incident. I do concede that you are coming from a more understandable place than those than wish to ignore it due to his basketball career, but still.

I also have no idea how you can claim that without her testimony they could have still prosecuted, it was a he said/she said(as with nearly all rape cases, which is why the prosecution percentages are so awful) along with DNA evidence, if the she said element is removed, please explain how they could have still prosecuted him? To me, you are just being facetious, instead of actually meaningfully responding to the matter.

 

[Abizzz]

I also have no idea how you can claim that without her testimony they could have still prosecuted, it was a he said/she said(as with nearly all rape cases, which is why the prosecution percentages are so awful) along with DNA evidence, if the she said element is removed, please explain how they could have still prosecuted him? To me, you are just being facetious, instead of actually meaningfully responding to the matter.

If they had evidence that he had done anything they could have used that to prove he had done something. How difficult is it? They didn't so they didn't continue. You say it's a "She said, he said" thing, only that she stopped saying it. Yet some in here feel comfortable painting him as confirmed rapists (violent no less!) when they have absolutely nothing to base that on other than a accusation that wasn't repeated in court and a hit piece on a clickbait site.

I won't respond to that first paragraph you'll only get me banned.

 

[Sarni]

I don't really know how anyone can really be convinced of his guilt or the lack of it looking at evidence there is. On one hand we have her testimony, (apparently) physical evidence and his, sort of, admission that it may have not been as innocent as it should have been. On the other hand we also have (apparently) physical evidence of her having sex with a different partner the same night which, if true, would basically make the other physical evidence almost irrelevant, her refusal to testify and prosecution not willing to take this case to court.

Personally, I feel the most likely scenario is that the initial contact was consensual but it got out of hands during sex and did not stop when it should have. But I don't really know.

And I'm not a Kobe fan, and I hate Lakers.

 

[CassiusClaymore]

If they had evidence that he had done anything they could have used that to prove he had done something. How difficult is it? They didn't so they didn't continue. You say it's a "She said, he said" thing, only that she stopped saying it. Yet some in here feel comfortable painting him as confirmed rapists (violent no less!) when they have absolutely nothing to base that on other than a accusation that wasn't repeated in court and a hit piece on a clickbait site.

I won't respond to that first paragraph you'll only get me banned.

I don't know if you're being willfully disingenous but you must at least have a passing understanding of how many alleged rape cases manage to reach a trial. And that's alleged rape cases that don't involve a mutli million dollar celebrity/sports star who has more than enough money and power to make it go away.

Part of the settlement with the woman btw includes a non-disclosure agreement in which she is never allowed to talk about it.

As far as evidence goes this has already been addressed multiple times. The woman had bruises on her neck consistent with choking and tears around her vagina which experts say are markers for non consensual sex. His own story went from totally denying having any sexual contact with her to admitting it and passing the roughness of it off as a kink he regularly enjoyed with another woman at the time.

And then you have the extraordinary statement where he says "I now understand how she feels that she did not consent to this encounter" , you pretty much have to be burying your head in the sand to not see something wrong here.

 

[Sarni]

If they had evidence that he had done anything they could have used that to prove he had done something. How difficult is it? They didn't so they didn't continue. You say it's a "She said, he said" thing, only that she stopped saying it. Yet some in here feel comfortable painting him as confirmed rapists (violent no less!) when they have absolutely nothing to base that on other than a accusation that wasn't repeated in court and a hit piece on a clickbait site.

I won't respond to that first paragraph you'll only get me banned.

It would have been difficult to prosecute without victim testifying though, it has to be said.

 

[Rado_N]

a)This isn't allowed
b)The DA wouldn't care if he thought he had a case


The thing that is worse that could have very realistically happened to him had he commited the crime was going to jail for 20 years and all of those who cared enough wondering what could have been. He had a lot to lose.

His name was cleared in a courtroom. But some people are just too prejudiced to ever accept it. Even after his death.

Prejudiced? Are you suggesting this is only being discussed because of the colour of his skin?

 

[Massive Spanner]

I'm not sure why everyone's arguing anyway, Netflix will obviously clear it up with a documentary in a few months.

 

[adexkola]

He matches up well with Kobe - statistically - in the playoffs. That's surprising. There's an argument there that he's a better playoff performer. For what it's worth, I'd have Kobe ahead in terms of 'best of all time' lists though.

Jesus Christ

And I have a lot of time and respect for CP but the bolded is not true.

 

[Siorac]

You're talking about a double fecking murderer!

Over the last few pages it has been repeated over and over again that Kobe Bryant cannot be called a rapist because the criminal case against him was dismissed (@Abizzz, @Florida Man). If so, the same applies to OJ Simpson: he wasn't found guilty either so you should not call him a murderer.

 

[Abizzz]

It would have been difficult to prosecute without victim testifying though, it has to be said.

True. But one can't just ignore her being unwilling to repeat the accusation in an actual court either. It matters.

Prejudiced? Are you suggesting this is only being discussed because of the colour of his skin?

Yeah. No one would have given her the time of day had this been Tom Brady. It wouldn't even had made the media (never mind 2 decades later). The case would have been dismissed just the same but the public reaction would have been very different.

Just look at the people he's compared to in this thread. Real coincidence they're all African American too, huh?

Over the last few pages it has been repeated over and over again that Kobe Bryant cannot be called a rapist because the criminal case against him was dismissed (@Abizzz, @Florida Man). If so, the same applies to OJ Simpson: he wasn't found guilty either so you should not call him a murderer.

Call him whatever pleases you but don't expect people not to complain about it.

I don't know if you're being willfully disingenous but you must at least have a passing understanding of how many alleged rape cases manage to reach a trial. And that's alleged rape cases that don't involve a mutli million dollar celebrity/sports star who has more than enough money and power to make it go away.

Part of the settlement with the woman btw includes a non-disclosure agreement in which she is never allowed to talk about it.

To the press etc. Not a court room. You couldn't sign that away.

As far as evidence goes this has already been addressed multiple times. The woman had bruises on her neck consistent with choking and tears around her vagina which experts say are markers for non consensual sex. His own story went from totally denying having any sexual contact with her to admitting it and passing the roughness of it off as a kink he regularly enjoyed with another woman at the time.

And then you have the extraordinary statement where he says "I now understand how she feels that she did not consent to this encounter" , you pretty much have to be burying your head in the sand to not see something wrong here.

So once someone is accused he'll forever be guilty because most rapes aren't reported in the first place? Is that your point?

I'm not going to judge your "evidence", a DA and a judge had a look at it and thought it's not enough, I can't do more than that (on evidence i've never seen).

 

[Rado_N]

Yeah. No one had given her the time of dayhad this been Tom Brady. It wouldn't even had made the media (never mind 2 decades later). The case would have been dismissed just the same but the public reaction would have been very different.

Just look at the people he's compared to in this thread. Real coincidence they're all African American too, huh?

That’s pretty staggeringly stupid to be perfectly honest.

You made a hypothetical comparison to Tom Brady but you only need to look at the actual allegations made against Ben Roethlisberger to see they also received plenty of media attention and those clouds still hang over his reputation.

 

[UweBein]

I don't really know how anyone can really be convinced of his guilt or the lack of it looking at evidence there is. On one hand we have her testimony, (apparently) physical evidence and his, sort of, admission that it may have not been as innocent as it should have been. On the other hand we also have (apparently) physical evidence of her having sex with a different partner the same night which, if true, would basically make the other physical evidence almost irrelevant, her refusal to testify and prosecution not willing to take this case to court.

Not really - rather, there was some other physical evidence which could be interpreted that way.

For me the most convincing part is really the statement. It is actually a testament of the rape culture of that time.

Personally, I feel the most likely scenario is that the initial contact was consensual but it got out of hands during sex and did not stop when it should have. But I don't really know.

.....

Which constitutes rape.

 

[RedC]

I don't really know how anyone can really be convinced of his guilt or the lack of it looking at evidence there is. On one hand we have her testimony, (apparently) physical evidence and his, sort of, admission that it may have not been as innocent as it should have been. On the other hand we also have (apparently) physical evidence of her having sex with a different partner the same night which, if true, would basically make the other physical evidence almost irrelevant, her refusal to testify and prosecution not willing to take this case to court.

Personally, I feel the most likely scenario is that the initial contact was consensual but it got out of hands during sex and did not stop when it should have. But I don't really know.

And I'm not a Kobe fan, and I hate Lakers.

There wasn't physical evidence of her having had sex on the same night, there was dried semen and some pubic hair on her underwear that she wore on the day she was examined(she stated they were old underwear she had just put on from the basket).

 

[CassiusClaymore]

So once someone is accused he'll forever be guilty because most rapes aren't reported in the first place? Is that your point?

I'm not going to judge your "evidence", a DA and a judge had a look at it and thought it's not enough, I can't do more than that (on evidence i've never seen).

Oh we're doing this are we? No my point was merely a counter to your own ludicrous "How difficult is it?" statement in regards to prosecuting for rape. It is incredibly difficult and is generally a he said/she said situation, which is obviously why most victims don't even follow it up and that's without the best lawyers money can buy and an army of hostile megafans sending you death threats.

 

[Bojan11]

True. But one can't just ignore her being unwilling to repeat the accusation in an actual court either. It matters.

Yeah. No one would have given her the time of day had this been Tom Brady. It wouldn't even had made the media (never mind 2 decades later). The case would have been dismissed just the same but the public reaction would have been very different.

Just look at the people he's compared to in this thread. Real coincidence they're all African American too, huh?

Call him whatever pleases you but don't expect people not to complain about it.


To the press etc. Not a court room. You couldn't sign that away.

So once someone is accused he'll forever be guilty because most rapes aren't reported in the first place? Is that your point?

I'm not going to judge your "evidence", a DA and a judge had a look at it and thought it's not enough, I can't do more than that (on evidence i've never seen).

I take it you missed the Ronaldo thread then. Lot of people all over the world and media were giving that coverage.

So no don’t buy it because of race.

 

[oates]

On the other hand we also have (apparently) physical evidence of her having sex with a different partner the same night which, if true, would basically make the other physical evidence almost irrelevant, her refusal to testify and prosecution not willing to take this case to court.

Personally I think you should check that out a bit more. I don't know, maybe you got that from the media but my understanding is that the evidence of another sex partner was found on her underwear and not elsewhere. Explained by her as her re-using an unwashed pair of pants (as we call them in the UK). Not proof of another partner after the alleged rape but certainly something else to smear her with and muddy the waters.

 

[Abizzz]

That’s pretty staggeringly stupid to be perfectly honest.

You made a hypothetical comparison to Tom Brady but you only need to look at the actual allegations made against Ben Roethlisberger to see they also received plenty of media attention and those clouds still hang over his reputation.

Alright that was a bit over the top. Roethlisberger has two different accusers though, worth pointing out.

I take it you missed the Ronaldo thread then. Lot of people all over the world and media were giving that coverage.

So no don’t buy it because of race.

Yes I was being too extreme there. I've actually always made an effort to stay out of these threads because it's never productive but I couldn't ignore people acting like he had actually been convicted of it. I should have just stayed in the other Kobe thread.



For what it's worth there's no way CP3 is better.

 

[Sarni]

Personally I think you should check that out a bit more. I don't know, maybe you got that from the media but my understanding is that the evidence of another sex partner was found on her underwear and not elsewhere. Explained by her as her re-using an unwashed pair of pants (as we call them in the UK). Not proof of another partner after the alleged rape but certainly something else to smear her with and muddy the waters.

I wasn’t aware of that.