So the sports world is all abuzz about Kobe Bryant. What really seems to have it abuzz lately, though, is a talk-show host revealed the identity of the accuser. People are berating the talk-show host, etc., etc., for doing it.
The host is taking flak for daring to state publicly that maybe the accused might be innocent. I'm not saying Bryant is or isn't innocent, I wasn't there, but basically he's being taken to task for trying to be sure that both sides of the story are out there for the public to hear.
I'm still trying to figure out why this is considered "wrong". Her accusation has pushed Kobe Bryant into the spotlight as a "bad person". If the case is going to be in the public spotlight, and it is, the public has a right to be able to know the identity of both the accused as well as the accuser, so as to weigh the relative credibility of both parties.
If the woman was indeed raped (and it's not for a talk-show host or a blog to decide that, it's for a court to decide), I'm sorry that it happened, and on behalf of the entire gender I'd say it's wrong. But, at the same time, you don't get to publicly besmirch someone and then hide in anonymity. That means that the defendant gets to be grilled day in and day out about where he was before, during and after, but the alleged victim is not subject to the same scrutiny. That's not "like being raped again", as a doctor in that article states. It's like having your story subjected to the same amount of scrutiny, in the same forums, as the defendant's story.
I agree!
Word Dredd!!!
That's what I'm talkin' about.....
I would agree... if this were a civil trial and she were after money. At this point, it's actual criminal charges, and it's not the media's place to evaluate the evidence, it's the court's. Kobe is innocent until proven guilty, which means it's up to the court to scrutinize her story. The fact that the media is already treating Kobe as guilty is not her fault, and there is no "turn abouts" by subjecting her to the same.
I would agree in most cases, but while I have no experience with this, I understand that rape is pretty traumatic, and if she was indeed raped, being hounded by the media would not be high on the priority of recovery tactics.
If the media these days was sane, not a big deal, but with the likes of FoxNews and CNN, I'm sure this poor woman (raped or not) is going to get hounded mercillessly. This will happen to Kobe as well, but he is a bit more accustomed to this sort of stardom (IMHO) so his situation is a bit different from hers. Also as the impression of him has been a "good guy", so I have no doubt that she'll get the "evil accusor" role from the various "news" networks, a fate I don't think I'd wish on anyone.
This is going to be all over the place until the next big thing comes up that will be front and center for the media. Until then they have to do something to fill the 24/7 schedule for this story right? *sigh*
I have no problem with anonymity for the victim. But - if you're going to protect the victim's identity, it's only fair that the accused be accorded the SAME amount of protection.
What is unfair is that one person's story (the accused) will be researched and scrutinized by the media hounds, and the other's (the victim/accuser) will NOT have their story's background similarly scrutinized.
And that's for the person who is - allegedly - innocent until proven guilty!
Imagine that the trial goes on for two or three years. Kobe Bryant this, Kobe Bryant that. Now, let's assume for a moment that he's found innocent. At that point, Jane Doe's name will be revealed, there'll be a media frenzy for a couple days, and then it'll be over.
His name will have been mentioned in the scope of "rape" for the duration of the trial, but hers would only be mentioned, very briefly at the end, as the person who falsely accused him.
Something's just not right about that.
Right on! Rape is a horrible crime and the victim should be guaranteed all their rights but making a public accusation basically gurantees that your going into the spotlight too. Its a sad, but true, fact of this country. Not just that but everyone deserves a chance to slaunder, erh, find out the truth behind both parties story.
Aren't we forgetting something here? No matter if Bryant is guilty or not, he DID commit adultery. He had a beautiful wife and new baby at home, and he chose to have sex with a young woman. As a rape victim (of a famous man, whose ego does not allow for the possibility of "NO"), I can assure you it is traumatic -- like a living hell. I never learned to trust a man again. Also, no matter how guilty the attacker, people look at you as if you are at least partially responsible. I think all of this type of situation should be kept out of the media, for the good of all.
The purpose behind the "rape shield laws" and policies of news organizations not to reveal the identity of the complaining witness in cases of sexual assault, is to encourage reporting of this, under-reported, crime. As a defense attorney, I can assure you that her story will be vigorously tested and scrutinized. Kobe is not going to be using the public defender. We don't know what happened, but Kobe Bryant has copped to "adultery". In other words, he at least voluntarily did something wrong that was likely to cause problems and throw him into the negative spotlight. So far there is nothing to show that this woman did anything wrong. Yet she is being viciously attacked. This is exactly what discourages victims from reporting these crimes. And when victims don't report, perpetrators get to stay free and find more victims. Hmmm.