Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (172562)	7/25/2003 11:23:32 AM
From: i-node	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1574031

Is anyone who had an accusation made against them automatically a sex offender? Edit: I thought you were referring to Clinton. On rereading your post, I'm guessing you were talking about Kobe. So, my answer is "No", I have not seen sufficient information for me to conclude Kobe is a "sex offender". OTOH, I have seen enough to conclude that Clinton was. I'll leave the rest of my post since the explanation above would make no sense without it (or perhaps you'll deem it not to make sense anyway <g>)... Original Response No. But when there have been a SERIES of accusations, coupled with significant supporting evidence, they do. The Juanita Broaderrick rape was supported by no fewer than six witnesses who were contemporaneously aware of the event, some of whom witnessed the victim's injury that came from his biting her lip. This story would have been believable without the stream of subsequent offenses; her statements were extremely credible. Had she been willing to take on the Attorney General of the State of Arkansas, her case would have been just about as strong as any rape case of the day could be (this was before DNA testing was in broad use). The Paula Jones incident, while perhaps not a crime, was nonetheless a civil offense by any reasonable standard. There was substantial evidence that it occurred as the victim stated. We all know the history of the Lewinsky incident; I recognize we disagree about whether there was an abuse of power involved, but it does help to establish a pattern of behavior. Willey accused him of "unwanted sexual advances" that would certainly seem to be a civil wrong within the meaning of the sexual harrassment code. Again, this accusation was substantiated by at least two witnesses at the time -- although she was not explicit as to what happened, they testified that she seemed clear shaken by whatever occurred. At some point, all this circumstantial evidence becomes a "case". As you know, there is a ton more that could be presented if someone chose to rehash it. Clinton cannnot be prosecuted for the Broaderick rape on a technicality (the statute of limitations) just as OJ can't be tried PROPERLY for murdering his wife (double jeapardy). While it makes both legally acquitted of the crime, it in no way suggests that either didn't commit the crime.

To: TimF who wrote (172562)	7/25/2003 11:51:24 AM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1574031

Is anyone who had an accusation made against them automatically a sex offender? Interesting point.......Greta on Fox News has had at a least two former girlfriends of K. Bryant on her show. Both said they couldn't imagine him raping anyone.......that never once did they see a hint of violence or meanness about him. Meanwhile, 911 has been called twice during the past 6 months in regards to his accuser for suicide attempts. And now there is a claim that she was at a party four days after she accused Bryant and was talking about his sexual equipment. Having been wrongfully accused twice of sexual harassment, I don't envy Bryant if she is lying. Its your word against their's. And even if they are lying, you may still get convicted if the jury believes her. Bryant could get 4 years to life. Its sad but true. ted