Kobe Case Twist - Prosecution to ask for dismissal

[heybrad]

Heres the link.... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5861379/

Heres the story...

Prosecutors will ask for Kobe dismissal — with a catch
D.A. reportedly wants the right
to refile charges at a later date
NBA star Kobe Bryant arrives at Eagle County Justice Center on Monday.
NBCSports.com news services
Updated: 4:55 p.m. ET Sept. 1, 2004EAGLE, Colo. - Prosecutors have agreed to dismiss sexual assault charges against Los Angeles Lakers star Kobe Bryant with one big catch — they want the right to retry the case at a later date, NBC News has learned.

The prosecutors will move to dismiss the case "without prejudice", according to the report, which means they can refile the case later. It is not known whether or not the judge is inclined to accept the motion.

Attorneys for Bryant asked the judge to dismiss the case earlier in the day, saying prosecutors have refused to turn over details that could suggest he is innocent.

Court rules require prosecutors and defense attorneys to exchange evidence and witness opinions before trial, a process called discovery.

In a motion made public Wednesday, defense attorneys said a forensics expert whom prosecutors had planned to call as a witness had information that “undermined the accuser’s allegations and the prosecution’s case, and corroborated Mr. Bryant’s defense on a central issue — the cause and significance of the accuser’s alleged injuries.”

The filing said those opinions were not disclosed to the defense until they contacted the expert Friday, despite repeated requests to prosecutors for the information. Prosecutors have said they have turned over all information they were required to.

The judge gave prosecutors until Tuesday — the day opening statements are scheduled to begin — to respond to the defense motion.

“A person’s life and liberty are at stake,” the defense attorneys wrote. “The game of hide-the-ball, find-it-if-you-can discovery is intolerable.”

Defense attorneys asked that the judge either dismiss the case or bar prosecutors from introducing any expert testimony relating to the accuser’s injuries.

The motion does not identify the expert, but prosecutors this spring had said they planned to call former New York City medical examiner Michael Baden to testify about the woman’s injuries.

District Attorney Mark Hurlbert said during a July 19 hearing that he had decided against using Baden. He did not elaborate. Prosecution spokeswoman Krista Flannigan declined to comment, citing a gag order imposed by the judge.

The motion was first reported by ABC News, which cited unidentified sources who said Baden told prosecutors the woman’s injuries could have been caused by consensual sex. A message left for Baden was not immediately returned.

Motions to dismiss on the eve of trial are not uncommon and often are unsuccessful, said Scott Robinson, a defense attorney familiar with the case. He said the judge likely will schedule a hearing quickly because if such motions are granted after a jury is sworn in, charges cannot be refiled.

Bryant, 26, has said he had consensual sex with a then-19-year-old employee of a Vail-area resort where he stayed last summer. If convicted of felony sexual assault, he would face four years to life in prison or 20 years to life on probation, and a fine up to $750,000.

Meanwhile, the last round of questioning of individual jury candidates resumed Wednesday. In all, 160 prospective jurors have been questioned through Tuesday with 40 more to go.

Open-court jury selection is expected to begin Thursday, with opening statements scheduled for Tuesday. The jury will include 12 panelists and two alternates.

[heybrad]

Isnt the prosecution asking to dismiss without prejudice the same as asking for a continuance that they were already denied? What about Kobes right to a speedy trial? This just seems fishy.

[SirFozzie]

The HELL?

No, I don't think THAT will fly with the judge at all..

[John Galt]

That really isn't a "catch" - since the jury hasn't been sworn in, double jeopardy doesn't attach. Allowing the prosecutors to refile isn't really abnormal at all. And it is different than a continuance because Kobe is no longer out on bail (or detained in jail if he doesn't pay bail). The state would still be bound by the statute of limitations, so they would have to refile before it expires.

With that being said, the judge will probably deny the motion because it is soooo late (on the eve of trial).

[MacroGuru]

Now the question I have is this.

Since the prosecution brought up the dismissal request, could the judge grant it, without the ability to retry? Basically what the defense is asking for?

[heybrad]

Originally Posted by John Galt

That really isn't a "catch" - since the jury hasn't been sworn in, double jeopardy doesn't attach. Allowing the prosecutors to refile isn't really abnormal at all. And it is different than a continuance because Kobe is no longer out on bail (or detained in jail if he doesn't pay bail). The state would still be bound by the statute of limitations, so they would have to refile before it expires.

With that being said, the judge will probably deny the motion because it is soooo late (on the eve of trial).

So you're saying they can file charges, making Kobe pay boatloads for a defense, then decide, we want a do over. I would think they would have to have some unbelievably compelling reasons for something like that to be granted.

[SirFozzie]

*waves, heybrad*

[John Galt]

Originally Posted by heybrad

So you're saying they can file charges, making Kobe pay boatloads for a defense, then decide, we want a do over. I would think they would have to have some unbelievably compelling reasons for something like that to be granted.

Well, I don't think the judge will really care about the cost of defense (Kobe is choosing to spend that much money and most defendants don't have that luxury). Either way, though, the work done will be just as useful the second time around. I think the reason the judge will deny the motion is because of judicial efficiency - judges don't like it when you mess with their calenders at a late date.

[John Galt]

Originally Posted by indoorsoccersim

Now the question I have is this.

Since the prosecution brought up the dismissal request, could the judge grant it, without the ability to retry? Basically what the defense is asking for?

I think the judge would just tell the prosecution they have to proceed or dismiss without leave to refile - I don't think he would ever make the decision for them.

[heybrad]

Now I'm hearing that the case is dropped. Trying to confirm.

[John Galt]

Originally Posted by heybrad

Now I'm hearing that the case is dropped. Trying to confirm.

If you find a source, let us know.

[heybrad]

This ESPN article believes that it will be a dismissal with prejudice meaning no retrial possibility.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=1872740

ESPN.com news services
Kobe Bryant's legal drama may soon be over.

ABC News is reporting Wednesday afternoon that the prosecution in the Bryant case will ask the judge later in the day to dismiss the case with prejudice, meaning the case cannot ever be brought back for trial.

NBC News was reporting that the request for dismissal would be without prejudice, meaning a future trial would be possible. ESPN legal analyst Roger Cossack, however, told ESPNews that it would be unlikely for a judge to grant that request after more than a year of pre-trial hearings and the start of jury selection.

This news comes on the heels of Bryant's defense attorneys filing for dismissal earlier Wednesday, saying prosecutors have refused to turn over details that could suggest he is innocent.

Court rules require prosecutors and defense attorneys to exchange evidence and witness opinions before trial, a process called discovery.

In a motion made public Wednesday, defense attorneys said a forensics expert whom prosecutors had planned to call as a witness had information that "undermined the accuser's allegations and the prosecution's case, and corroborated Mr. Bryant's defense on a central issue -- the cause and significance of the accuser's alleged injuries."

The filing said those opinions were not disclosed to the defense until they contacted the expert Friday, despite repeated requests to prosecutors for the information.

"A person's life and liberty are at stake," the defense attorneys wrote. "The game of hide-the-ball, find-it-if-you-can discovery is intolerable. This court must vindicate Mr. Bryant's constitutional rights and impose meaningful sanctions against the prosecution."

Prosecutors have said they have turned over all information they were required to.

Information from The Associated Press was used in this report.

[cartman]

Yep, a Google News search is coming up with the same info. But still no official notifications as of yet.

[Easy Mac]

Sportscenter just said Kobe is a free man

[Ksyrup]

So, not only will he possibly be getting away with a crime, but he also got 70% of his salary for the 2004-2005 season paid upfront last week.

Lucky guy.

[Noop]

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

So, not only will he possibly be getting away with a crime, but he also got 70% of his salary for the 2004-2005 season paid upfront last week.

Lucky guy.

A lot of the NBA players get paid up front like that. That's how much Shaq's contracts worked out with the Lakers.

Now about the millions of dollars of endorsements he lost...

[panerd]

The accuser and her attornies have decided she no longer wishes to cooperate. Why does the cynic inside of me think that guilty or not another rich man has just side-stepped the justice system?

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by panerd

The accuser and her attornies have decided she no longer wishes to cooperate. Why does the cynic inside of me think that guilty or not another rich man has just side-stepped the justice system?

Or alternatively, a man, regardless of wealth, was freed from having to go through a mud-slinging trial where it seemed pretty obvious the prosecution didn't have a whole lot of ammunition and would have to rely soley on the testimony of a psychologically unstable girl who sleeps with a lot of men. The cynic inside of me thinks that her father forced the issue so that the could go to a civil suit and take Kobe's money.

[MacroGuru]

Why is he being labeled as side stepping the justice system?

From what I can tell, her showing up with another mans semen to her rape exam and then on top of that, filing a civil suit against him....brings a lot of questions onto her.

We will never know the truth correct, but side stepped cause he is rich? no.

[MacroGuru]

Oh, and one other thing, now she has file the civil suit, her name isn't protected correct?

[panerd]

Once again the cynic tells me that her attornies and Kobe's have already wrapped up a $ way to end the civil procedings. Maybe I am wrong, but I am guessing that trial will never happen and somehow the accuser's bank account will grow a little bit.

[MrBug708]

Kobe will drop a few million and tell her to move to Canada. The Raptor's need fans anyways...

[John Galt]

I'm amazed at how people firmly believe she made it up. Kobe's statement certainly didn't indicate that and the 3 swabs of her blood found on his shirt aren't easily explained away.

[MrBug708]

So she had sex on her period....

[stevew]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

So she had sex on her period....

Her period was 9 days before their encounter.

[MrBug708]

Obviously it was a serious answer I gave...but just because it was 9 days before doesn't mean it couldnt have still been going on, just unlikely

[John Galt]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

Obviously it was a serious answer I gave...but just because it was 9 days before doesn't mean it couldnt have still been going on, just unlikely

The reports I saw say the period ended (not began) 9 days before. Either way, I think the blood evidence would be pretty damning in a civil case (where the burden of proof is much lower).

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by John Galt

The reports I saw say the period ended (not began) 9 days before. Either way, I think the blood evidence would be pretty damning in a civil case (where the burden of proof is much lower).

Agreed, but I don't think it would have been enough in the criminal case. I don't think he was very likely to be convicted. I also doubt there will be a civil trial. From the willingness to give the statement I would take that he is willing to settle.

[John Galt]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Agreed, but I don't think it would have been enough in the criminal case. I don't think he was very likely to be convicted. I also doubt there will be a civil trial. From the willingness to give the statement I would take that he is willing to settle.

Couldn't agree more (see the other Kobe thread where I'm convinced a settlement is already in place).