Should witnesses to alleged crimes be intimidated from testifying?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

Kobe Bryant has been charged with sexual assault. Kobe Bryant is innocent until proven guilty. Kobe Bryant has a right to a trial before a jury of his peers to determine his guilt or innocence.
Kobe Bryant first declared that nothing happened, then backtracked and admitted that consensual sex occurred. Kobe Bryant has had an opportunity to have a press conference before his fans, something most accused of rape ever get the chance to do.

Yesterday, Tom Leykis, a radio talk show host, took the liberty of broadcasting the name of the alleged victim over the air. A KOBE fan site has published the name of the alleged victim, pictures of the alleged victim, and the address of the alleged victim over the internet.

So far the issue and argument is that the alleged victim is receiving special treatment. It seems, however, that all the attempts to reveal her identity are being forwarded NOT by individuals interested in a search for the truth but by individuals angry about the fact that Kobe has been accused.

My point is, the media campaign has not been one simply of curiosity, but one that has resulted in the mostly unprecedented broadcasting of a victim/witness of an alleged rape. To those who say she should not get special treatment, I ccounter, she already has. She GOT special treatment when her name, address and pictures were broadcast across the internet as this is not standard fare for other alleged rape victim/witnesses.

The intent of such a campaign seems not to wish to exonerate, protect and defend Kobe, but to HARM the witness. This seems to be just fine with many.

So the question...and I ask again...should witnesses to alleged crimes be intimidated from testifying? In rape cases? Murder? Corporate corruption? Government malfeasance or fraud?

Please do your best to answer the question posed or rebut the premise of this post...non sequiturs will be ignored by the thread starter.

[Sal316]

1. Absolutely not!

ANY sort of witness tampering damages the credibility of the judicial proceeding. The behavior of that talk show host makes me ill.

[JVS]

2. Ummm that is bad.

Is legal action being taken against this radio host?

[larryepke]

4. With what crime would you charge the radio talker?

His actions may be foolish, but I don't see what he could be charged with. Journalists have special rights, which they can use well or foolishly.

Anyone who does indeed make any attempt to intimidate the woman, on the other hand, should be charged and hit HARD. With today's technology, it's no trick to trace calls, emails, stalkers etc.

[JVS]

6. Isn't intimidation of a witness a crime

I don't know. That's why I ask.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

7. Unless he was part of a deliberate conspiracy to intimidate a witness

he can't be charged with a crime. Unless he was part of a deliberate scheme to discredit, he can't be sued.

I am not simply targetting the talk show host but the internet site and depending on the facts, I do believe that if one gets her info from that site and goes to her home to intimidate her then the site would NOT be protected depending upon the content of the site and what is published or suggested on it. Recent court decisions have recently upheld as much with abortion providers.

[Clete]

3. Of course not.

However, there always seems to be a tendency to paint the witness/ victim as the person at fault especially if she is a woman and the accused is a celebrity sport's figure. I am sure more of these crimes would come to light if this wasn't the case. I know if I had been raped or beaten or somehow victimized by some famous sport's figure I would probably not bring charges because of fear of the very things you mention happening.

[sangha]

5. I have a question

Aside from (presumably) reich-wing radio talking heads, is anyone else in the media broadcasting the victims name? I thought "reputable" media outlets had a policy prohibiting that.

And to answer the question, I think it's shameful, and that the media should portray it as such, but I don't think it should be illegal.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

8. They do and have so far honored it

but I am including the web-site that published her name, picture and address as well in this argument. I won't give a link as I won't suport the site being hit.

[SEAburb]

9. give it a rest

Everybody in Eagle Co knew who the victim was, so why does it matter if people who will never see or know her, know her name.

You've ran roughshod on every Kobe thread posted, isn't that enough? Are you bringing your issues to this issue?

[sangha]

11. So what?

Of course nsma is bringing her issues to this issue. If people didn't care about the issues, then there wouldn't be a DU.

If you don't like her views, put her on ignore.

[SEAburb]

15. Well, when a person posts a thread putting down

DUers who bring their issues to DU, it makes the question legit, if you know what I mean.

[buddhamama]

18. but to tell her to give it a rest?

who the heck are you,the DU board police?
if subject matter being covered again and again was an actually issue, the boards would be pretty empty.

if you don't like the subject matter don't read it.
it really is as simple as that.

i respect NSMA and others like myself might be interested in reading what she has to say.

[buddhamama]

12. it was posted on a website-- coverage beyond her local area

don't ya think? what they did was extremely dangerous to this woman and wrong! plain wrong!

i've read these Kobe threads and the underlying message that i have received is that, the girl is lying to get a bunch of momeny from the rich guy.

i haven't posted to any of those threads because what is there to say-wait and see-and having been the victim of sexual assault i tend to get a little heated around these issues.

but i will say this, not much has changed in our society when it comes to this issue. we can always find a way to blame the victim...
'her skirt was too short, she flirted with him she obviously wanted it'...on and on and on. and yet, we wonder why victims are afraid to come forward.

so now the accused and the accuser are innocent or guilty until proven otherwise.

[Alenne]

16. I have read them also

and I think it is going both ways. Either Kobe is a rapist and the person know for a fact the accuser was raped or the accuser is a liar and Kobe didn't do anything.

[ScreamingMeemie]

14. Because, lot's of us are not in Eagle County, and given the nature

and sensitivity of the charge, the name and address of a victim (alledged or proven) should never be given out. Because people are sick sometimes in their glorification of celebrity. It's called hate mail. Due process. If my daughter were raped by a man/woman, celebrity or not, how pissed would I be to have my home address-or hers-published for the sick enjoyment of others? Sorry, just my humble opinion...but it should be a no-brainer.

I agree with you nothing shocks me, but then I knew I would.

[salin]

17. Presumes that the only people who would act

on the information (phone call harrassments, death threats - which one has already reportedly been made, etc.) would be someone from Eagle Co.

To the question - couldn't a judge put a gag order on all involved? That would lessen the media circus.

[Pastiche423]

19. It matters

to her sense of security. Tom Leykis raped her of her sense of security.

He is scum and IMHO, should pay for what he did - one way or another.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

20. Guess what?

There are more women raped every day in America than soldiers killed in Iraq over the last few months. It may not be newsworthy to you, it is to me.

There are more women raped every year in America than Iraqi's killed since the start of the war.

There are more women RAPED and KILLED in America every year than biochemists who knew too much.

Just to give you a sense of the newsworthyness of this annoying distraction.


As long as I raise my issues and run roughshod within the rules, there isn't anything that says i can't.

I decline your request that I give it a rest.

[SEAburb]

21. Rape is an important issue

But your heavyhanded tactics aren't designed to win over others, just silence them. That's what I don't like. I agee with you on the issue, but disagee with your tactics.

[Pastiche423]

22. Please spell our her tactics

And please be precise.

[nini]

26. What I think is going on ..

..is people are confusing NSMA's zeal to protect the victim with not allowing Kobe to get a fair trial. It could come off that way if you don't read her comments carefully and see that she has never said he wasn't entitled to due process.

A rape victim not being raked over the coals does not mean the accused cannot get a fair trial.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

27. Gee, sorry...this is a message board read by many. If certain assertions

go undebated and unchallenged, then the reader leaves the issue with a particular sense of the issue that might not otherwise be the case.

If people get mad and don't like me, well, I can't win 'em all.

If as a result of my fierce advocacy, one less person claims that 41% of all rape claims are false (which is in itself in invalid statistic designed to obfuscate the matter and remove the issue from public policy debates) and that person gets silenced, I am not sorry and I make NO apologies.

When tort reforms first became an issue of debate, I was one of the only people arguing FOR insurance reforms and against limiting the rights of the public. Now there are at least 100 people capable of making the case. I must be doing something that works in spite of myself.

BTW, as far as running roughshod over all the KOBE threads, if you do a "logic" search for all the threads in which Kobe has been an issue, you will get no less than 25-30 threads. I have posted on less than 10. That's hardly dominating a topic.

[Pepperbelly]

10. no, they should not ...

nd there is really nothing much more to add except the Kobe Bryant affair offers a pretty good laboratory for the observation of media and social group-think.

Of course, we have had many examples of that over the last 10 years, haven't we?

[Maddy McCall]

24. Yes you are right...

that is why it is valuable to pay attention to this case. It shows how low the media will stoop, and it also demonstrates that some people will believe anything from any source.

[ProfessorGAC]

13. I Agree With Your Thesis

I don't buy Leykis' excuse. This is a grandstanding play. I don't know that he's trying to intimidate, but that might be the result.

At the same time, i think the prosecutor and sheriff could have been more discrete about the way this was handled so as not to tar the accused with the guilt brush.

Let's face it, it appears the media and a large % of the public has already decided he did it. Just read the papers and watch the news. The hue of guilt is fairly vivid. If he did it, he deserves to be punished. I'd prefer we wait until it's proven, however.
The Professor

[Maddy McCall]

23. Here's my take on it. In a normal rape case...

and I am in no way implying that rape is normal, a woman reports the offense to the police, who then consult with the DA, who then decides whether or not to charge the accused. IN a normal situation, the accused and the accuser would remain anonymous, usually, because the process of prosecuting the case would be workaday, regular court activity. In most cases, if the rape is reported in the media, it would be included with 50 other cases in the court docket report. And even in that case, the accuser is hesitant to publicize her rape by even going to court. That is one reason so many rapes go unreported.

So, let's look at this case. The alleged victim, knowing full well the lack of ethics in the media, still went ahead and reported the alleged rape. She knew the price her reputation would pay. She knew that Bryant's adoring fans, which include the press, would do everything within their means to drag her through the mud. Now, I don't know about you, but that would make me very hesitant to report. But she did. She probably assumed she would be outed, but she reported anyway. Her family has already told the press that she has no intentions of a civil suit; she only wanted justice, so anyone who says she made it up for money is wrong. I applaud her courage for standing up and reporting the assault. She is a brave young lady, considering what she will face daily until this case is resolved.

Witness intimidation is not only unethical, it's illegal.

As for all the reports of her so-called friends' accounts of her life for the past 10 years: They are taking advantage of the press being in Eagle to get their 15 minutes. I won't believe anything about this young woman unless it comes from her parents' or her mouth.

It is wrong--despicably WRONG--to treat victims in any crime this way. Domestic violence victims can go to safe houses, the locations of which are kept secret. Why should this alleged victim receive any less consideration.

I will say one more thing. It is refreshing to see DU men on this thread demonstrating that not all men so idolize Kobe that they can't think of anything else but trashing the victim or using elaborate theories to explain rape. Thank you for showing consideration for you female DU peers.

[Alenne]

25. I don't think any of us know enough

about the case to say Kobe raped her or didn't.