Kobe Followup

David Friedman writes:

The answer, of course, is that it would be absurd to judge Duncan's entire career on the basis of one game during which his teammates shot 22-59 from the field, including a combined 10-30 performance from Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili. I doubt that anyone thought for one moment about writing such a stupid, slanted article about Duncan in the wake of that game. So it is worth asking why so many people--from heavy hitting mainstream writers to Joe Blogger--instantly had such a visceral anti-Kobe Bryant reaction to game four.

Is this really so hard to figure out? I think if Kobe weren't a rapist people would have fewer visceral anti-Kobe reactions. Across a whole variety of dimensions, Kobe's not "boring" like Duncan but by the same token nobody is predisposed to knock a solid citizen who sports four rings. Obviously, Kobe's extracurricular activities aren't stricty relevant to assessing his hoops skills, but I can imagine greater injustices than an athlete being judged unusually harshly due to his record of bad acts in real life. The fact that Kobe's partisans insist not only that he's an excellent basketball player, but that he deserves to be compared to the clearly superior Jordan doesn't help either. Most guys' fans are prepared to accept a compliment.

Comments

I thought the Kobe slagging is because the basketball press discounts his rings because Shaq was on the team.

Posted by Nicholas Beaudrot | June 15, 2008 6:03 PM

Look I hate Kobe, but it's not right to call him a rapist.

Posted by Brad | June 15, 2008 6:07 PM

Come on Matt, no serious person still thinks Kobe was guilty of rape. Have you read anything about the case?
At least say accused rapist; he wasn't convicted.
And I agree with Nicholas-Ginobili in '05 and '07 was very good-so was David Robinson in '99. Neither of them was even close to Laker-Shaq-in-his-prime. And in '03, Duncan absolutely dominated and carried a relatively mediocre Spurs team to a championship. Let's see Kobe do that at least once.

Posted by jamie | June 15, 2008 6:08 PM

I'm not a lawyer, but you see newspaper always stick the word "alleged" in there for a reason, Matt. This error is one you should go back and "correct."

Posted by G C | June 15, 2008 6:12 PM

I think if Kobe weren't a rapist...

Really Matt? I thought we were past that. Kobe's definitely guilty of infidelity, but someone like you would be able to see past the "Kobe is a rapist" meme.

Posted by dannity | June 15, 2008 6:13 PM

Brad's right. We'll never know if Kobe is a rapist because he paid his vict--er, partner--an undisclosed amount to refuse to testify against him.

Posted by Joe | June 15, 2008 6:15 PM

Rapist? Seriously? This is ridiculous.

There was some serious racial overtones to the entire thing -- the big scary black man who fucked the pretty little white girl and whatnot. I realize that sexual assault is serious, but there was really no reason to think that Kobe was guilty of anything other than cheating on his wife and using his celebrity status to have consensual sex with a woman of age. Just because she regretted it later doesn't make Kobe a rapist.

I'm disappointed in you, Matt. Truly pathetic.

Posted by What? | June 15, 2008 6:16 PM

That, and also because the world isn't full of fanboys claiming that Tim Duncan is better than Jordan, or Russell, or Wilt. P.S.: O.J. Simpson is an alleged killer.

Posted by Ethan | June 15, 2008 6:18 PM

The Kobe is a rapist thing is pretty nuts to assert given that the accuser then went and had sex with someone else within a few hours after the alleged crime and then lied repeatedly to the police about it. Not to mention the fact that he was never convicted of any crime...

A retraction and apology for misleading people on something which is not really a matter of opinion is in order I think...

Posted by v | June 15, 2008 6:20 PM

I think I'm done with the NBA - I was such a huge fan, but the refs have done it for me . . . claiming that the ref's aren't improperly influencing the outcome of important games, when it's obvious that they are and have been for quite some time.

that's why star players get calls and rookies don't. If they were calling it fair, that wouldn't happen.

Matthew, have you seen this: http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-32-308/A-Professional-Gambler-s-Take-on-the-Tim-Donaghy-Scandal.html

Puts into words what I've been thinking about for quite awhile.

And Stern's response seems to me to be, "Who are you gonna believe, me or your own lying eyes?"

Posted by Joshua James | June 15, 2008 6:20 PM

Yeah, not to pile on, but there is no way Kobe even gets charged with rape if he isn't a famous black athlete given the evidence and credibility problems of the complaining witness. Not nearly as clear a case of prosecutorial misconduct as Nifong in the Duke-Lax thing, but still irresponsible.

Posted by Pooh | June 15, 2008 6:20 PM

I think I'm done with the NBA - I was such a huge fan, but the refs have done it for me . . . claiming that the ref's aren't improperly influencing the outcome of important games, when it's obvious that they are and have been for quite some time.

that's why star players get calls and rookies don't. If they were calling it fair, that wouldn't happen.

Matthew, have you seen this: http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-32-308/A-Professional-Gambler-s-Take-on-the-Tim-Donaghy-Scandal.html

Puts into words what I've been thinking about for quite awhile.

And Stern's response seems to me to be, "Who are you gonna believe, me or your own lying eyes?"

Posted by Joshua James | June 15, 2008 6:23 PM

Posted twice accidently, sorry!

Posted by Joshua James | June 15, 2008 6:25 PM

On second thought, this omission of 'alleged', rather than merely an oversight, could be one of Matt's ill-fated forays into pseudo-feminism, along the lines of his suggesting that men give up the vote for a century or so to somehow recompense past generations of oppressed women.

Posted by jamie | June 15, 2008 6:31 PM

Matt, you're a pathetic weasel if you think it's kosher to call Kobe a rapist. That kind of bullshit should be reserved for your comments, not for your blog posts.

The guy was innocent. What a sad country we live in that even when wrongly accused you still can never get your good name back.

This deserves a retraction and a correction, Matt.

And I'm not even a fan of Kobe's. Jeez.

Posted by Bubblegoose | June 15, 2008 6:32 PM

Folks, Matt doesn't read his comments. Let him live with the lawsuit he's tempting. You can't help him.

Posted by Antid Oto | June 15, 2008 6:38 PM

So much for "innocent until proven guilty"...

Posted by Noah | June 15, 2008 6:40 PM

Yes, you guys all know Kobe is innocent. Because you were all there.

I particularly like the part where someone says he was targeted because he was a rich athlete. Funny thing, guys-- rich people don't go to jail in this country, and rich famous people really don't go jail in this country.

But forgive me for not joining the chorus in lauding a man who had at least sex with a teenager he had known for less than a half hour who was not his wife, lied about it repeatedly to the police and then recanted, paid hush money to his accuser and later said "I now realize the sex was not consensual." Yeah. He's a price.

Posted by Freddie | June 15, 2008 7:04 PM

This is one of those moments when a blogger can suddenly lose most of his credibility.

A rapist? Really?

What term do you use to describe Bill Clinton?

Do you not get so graphic with Bill because he's a former president, or because he's white?

Or do you just hate Kobe?

It's nice to see a political blogger talk about basketball, even if he doesn't know anything about the sport.

Have some class, Yglesias.

And print a correction.

Posted by Washington Shuffle | June 15, 2008 7:06 PM

Yeah, not to pile on

Nobody knows one way or the other. The strength of the evidence is also unknown. There was no trial.

To be fair to Yglesias, I believe that he's always maintained that Bill Clinton raped Juanita Brodrrick, sexually assaulted Kathleen Willey, and sexually harassed Paula Jones. He's an allegation = verdict kind of guy. Hell, he backed the Iraq war on the same grounds.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | June 15, 2008 7:07 PM

What Freddie said.
Seriously folks, you've got some thin skins on this topic. And if you're going to freak out in Kobe's defense, at least take the time to notice that Matt only *implied* Kobe was a rapist. Which is what he is, an implied rapist. So please, enough of the bullshit libel claims on a sports celebrity's behalf.

Posted by Curly | June 15, 2008 7:14 PM

Matt only implied Kobe was a rapist? I suppose he didn't make the declarative sentence "Kobe is a rapist." But he created a sentence which makes no logical sense except if he is saying that.

Beyond that, I don't think anyone is lauding Kobe. Just saying that Matt shouldn't call him a rapist as though that was uncontroversial, when in fact that case totally collapsed.

Posted by John | June 15, 2008 7:22 PM

Misrepresenting Larry Summers...calling Kobe a rapist...there must be SOMEONE Matt is trying to impress with this more-feminist-than-thou shtick.

Judging by the reaction of the commenters here, its not even conventional wisdom among progressives...so what gives? If Matt felt so strongly about the Kobe verdict, why didn't he express it when the verdict came out?

R. Kelly, OTOH, is one guy who really did get away with it.

Posted by DJ | June 15, 2008 7:24 PM

Kobe rapes someone, but it's Matt who has the credibility problem?

Look, whether or not Kobe raped the woman he raped, he's still an asshole. That, like raping someone, ought to count against him.

Posted by phil | June 15, 2008 7:25 PM

Then call him an asshole or an arrogant prick, but "I think if Kobe weren't a rapist people would have fewer visceral anti-Kobe reactions" suggests that Matt considers this a fact and it's just not.

Posted by Buster | June 15, 2008 7:30 PM

The reason that Kobe is slagged on while Tim Duncan
is not, is that Kobe said (or strongly suggested), just this playoff season, that he could 'go off' any time on another team after he had done just that for huge points in the
second half of game 1 against San Antonio.

Now, when he doesn't actually do that, he gets criticism.

If you say you can deliver, and don't, then you open yourself to criticism. Nothing about Colorado.

Am I reporting something that I think I read, but did not actually happen?

What he said was:
"I know I can make that push and I knew once I did, I could get the game back under control, get it under 10 where we knew we could be in striking distance," Bryant said. "In the first half, we were a little rusty, a little sluggish and a little tentative. Second half, it wasn't there."

Notice all the use of I, rather than we?

Posted by catclub | June 15, 2008 7:33 PM

Wow. If only Kobe Bryant weren't a rapist. I can't believe you would insinuate such a thing so openly in your blog. Well, if a person is accused, they must be guilty.

Posted by BK | June 15, 2008 7:36 PM

And if you're going to freak out in Kobe's defense...

I wasn't freaking out in Kobe's defense. I was freaking out in Matt's.

Posted by G C | June 15, 2008 7:48 PM

The other thing is that people didn't exactly warm to Kobe before the alleged rape. He generally comes off as arrogant, reserved. Suggesting, as Matt does, that this single incident of bad behavior is responsible for people's coolness towards Kobe is just an inaccurate representation of history.

Posted by Buster | June 15, 2008 7:49 PM

Crazy, right? The next thing you know, Matt'll be openly insinuating that OJ and Robert Blake are murderers. On his BLOG!

Posted by Curly | June 15, 2008 7:49 PM

Look, whether or not Kobe raped the woman he raped, he's still an asshole.

If he raped the woman, he is considerably worse than an asshole.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | June 15, 2008 7:53 PM

The Next Jordan.

Jordan's greatness. Jordan was transcendent because nobody could have predicted him. Nobody had ever dominated the basketball court in the way that he did: with his grace and fluidity. Very few seriously argue with the assertion that Jordan was the greatest player ever to play the game of basketball.

The next Jordan will not play the game like Jordan. This is the mistake that is made with Kobe Bryant, whose body, athletic game, carriage (affected or not) are very similar to Jordan's.

To be like Jordan is not to have a style like his, or to be acknowledged as the greatest contemporary NBA player of one's era. The next Jordan, by definition, will be someone whose style and method of dominance we cannot predict. I don't think Chris Paul is that person, but there is something about his play that is unlike anything we've seen before and that is why so many people are excited about him.

Posted by Seth | June 15, 2008 8:03 PM

I feel like you guys are kind of missing the point-- Matt is saying that it is in fact natural for people to hold Kobe to a different standard than other players, because Kobe is a well-known douche-nozzle. Now, I don't know if Kobe raped that woman or not. Luckily, my personal feelings towards him don't have to meet the same burdens of proof as a criminal accusation, and I'm free to consider him a jerk for getting himself into that position in the first place.

And yeah, aside from Colorado, Kobe has always demonstrated a petulance, selfishness and sense of entitlement that I really don't like. Like Matt said, this doesn't affect my perception of him as a player: he's a great basketball player, but to compare him to Jordan is ridiculous. And I also think the numbers and the narratives demonstrate that he hasn't had nearly the careers that Shaquille Oneal or Tim Duncan has had.

Posted by Freddie | June 15, 2008 8:08 PM

You know, if we all tried not to sleep with people that we were not in steady relationships with, these sort of difficult-to-prosecute rape cases would not come up nearly as often. Just a thought.

Posted by Hector | June 15, 2008 8:09 PM

The guy was innocent. What a sad country we live in that even when wrongly accused you still can never get your good name back.

Hang on there for a second, Sparky. You don't know Kobe is innocent unless you were in the room. It's true that the government failed to prove his guilt, but that hardly means he didn't do the crime. People have a right to their opinions. In my opinion, for instance, it's patently obvious that O.J. Simpson is a murderer. And yet the government failed to meet its prosecutorial burden. I think we'd be a far sadder country had we accepted the jury's verdict in that particular case. Sometimes, the skeptics are right. And sometimes, the truth is the opposite of what a jury says. I think citizens ought to feel free to loudly trumpet their opinions about another citizen -- even when that opinion contradicts the findings of a jury. When allegations are made and those allegations don't get a proper hearing in court (as in Kobe's case) all bets are off. If Kobe don't like people saying he's a rapist, let him sue.

Posted by Anonymous | June 15, 2008 8:32 PM

It's wrong for you to say "if Kobe weren't a rapist" and not mention the fact that the criminal case against him never went to trial and the civil case was resolved without comment. Not everybody reading this post knows the details of the case and whatever opinion you have of the events in that hotel room in Eagle, CO it's wrong to issue a declarative statement with no context -- even in a blog.

Posted by joejoejoe | June 15, 2008 8:41 PM

Kobe Bryant settled a civil case out of court in which he stated, "Although I truly believe this encounter between us was consensual, I recognize now that she did not and does not view this incident the same way I did."

Posted by Mike | June 15, 2008 8:41 PM

isn't Kobe actually a butt rapist? I thought I read that somewhere.

Posted by MP | June 15, 2008 8:51 PM

There was nothing in the evidence that screamed 'INNOCENT' to me, but there was nothing that screamed 'GUILTY' either. The bottom line is that amounts to reasonable doubt, and he has never been tried or convicted of this crime. Apparently, progressives believe in fair trials and innocent until proven guilty unless the crime is rape. Then you hang the man because women would NEVER lie about that. Matt should really read the disclaimer under his own comment submittal form.

Posted by soullite | June 15, 2008 9:01 PM

Look I hate Kobe, but it's not right to call him a rapist.

Agreed, Kobe was not convicted of anything and it's libelous to call him a racist given that.

However, while he may not be a rapist, he clearly is an adulterer, a malignant narcissist, a punk, and a tool, and the schaudenfreude being directed at him right now is perfectly understandable.

Posted by Xeynon | June 15, 2008 9:10 PM

Actually, with respect to OJ, he was found liable for his wife's and Ron Goldman's deaths. He was found not guilty of their murder.

Thus, legally it is completely factual to say that Simpson killed them, but while he killed them, he was not guilty of murder.

So life and the American legal system are funny that way.

Posted by Greg | June 15, 2008 9:46 PM

There is a perfectly legitimate sense in which Bryant is a rapist, and it is not necessary to get up on a "feminist high horse" to take that view. As a few folks mentioned, Kobe said publicly he had non-consensual sex. Non-consensual sex is a non-tortured, though expansive, definition of rape.

Another definition is the legal definition. Bryant is clearly not a rapist according to the legal definition, in that he was never convicted of rape in a court of law.

I personally would not call Kobe a rapist in print because I would worry that an uninformed reader would believe, wrongly, that Kobe was a rapist in a legal sense and would source this mistaken belief to me, hurting my credibility.

But then I clearly have less credibility to burn than Matt and he's welcome to use it as he wishes. What he said isn't really wrong, just easily misconstrued.

APS

Posted by Ape Man | June 15, 2008 10:15 PM

Greg,

You're massively misunderstanding the difference between factual matters and legal conclusions. OJ either did or did not kill Ron and Nicole (of course, he clearly did). He was found liable for their deaths in a civil case, but not guilty in the criminal case. He was found liable in the civil case because, of course, that jury thought he killed them. But, the fact and the legal outcome are two separate things.

Posted by Goldberg | June 15, 2008 10:19 PM

Kobe is obviously a loathsome fuck and I think he's a probable rapist, too. The frenzied rush to defend him is baffling.

Anyone else catch the orchestrated "Kobe kisses his kids" bullshit at the end of the first half? The NBA is desperate to rehabilitate his soiled image.

Personally, I'd love to see him humiliated on the court, repeatedly, until the end of his career.

GO TICKET

Posted by ethan salto | June 15, 2008 10:24 PM

The threshold for libel against public figures in the US is pretty high, but this post is damn fucking close to it.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | June 15, 2008 11:01 PM

The reason why Kobe gets a visceral reaction is because he came after Jordan, and people jump at the chance to say that so and so proves he is not comparable.

It's also the same reason people jump to defend him. Because he's been getting the same treatment his whole career. Whatever character flaws he has, Jordan had the same flaws in spades. But he is the one who gets crucified for them.

Is he a better player? No. He has a better skillset, but has lapses where he breaks down on defense, or breaks the offense. Jordan did almost everything right at all times, within his abilities. But, yes, he warrants a comparison.

Posted by C | June 15, 2008 11:01 PM

He has a better skillset

How? Jordan was a more prolific scorer, and a more efficient scorer. He was a better defender. He averaged more assists, more steals, more blocks, has more triple doubles and higher FT%, FG% and TS%. He played without the hand-checking rules which made everyone score more. He was a much, much better teammate and leader.

There's no comparison and no contest.

Posted by Freddie | June 15, 2008 11:17 PM

Go fuck yourself Matt.

Rapist?

You ignorant asshole. He was never tried and never found guilty. Are you a convicted goat-fucker? Her undergarments had semen from two men on them. And you're positive that Kobe was the racist? On what grounds?

Fuck you and blog, and your stupid over-promoted blog. I used to find correcting your constant typos somewhat amusing, but fuck this. Enjoy living off your trust fund, you sloppy-ass ignorant POS.

Posted by MY strikes again | June 15, 2008 11:20 PM

Go fuck yourself Matt.

Rapist?

You ignorant asshole. He was never tried and never found guilty. Are you a convicted goat-fucker? Her undergarments had semen from two men on them. And you're positive that Kobe was the racist? On what grounds?

Fuck you and your blog, and your stupid over-promoted book. I used to find correcting your constant typos somewhat amusing, but fuck this. Enjoy living off your trust fund, you sloppy-ass ignorant POS.

Posted by MY strikes again | June 15, 2008 11:20 PM

Man, I've learned such amazing things today in this thread. If a woman had sex with a different man, she can't have been raped! And if a guy is rich and famous, he can't commit rape! And if a women is promiscuous, she can't be raped! And the courts unerringly reach a conclusion that's consistent with the truth! (Guess a lot of people owe OJ an apology.)

They don't teach this stuff in high school.

Posted by Freddie | June 15, 2008 11:31 PM

No one's suggesting what you are, Freddie. But, in this situation, the case against Bryant is ambiguous at best. Given that he was never convicted of rape and there were legitimate reasons to doubt the victim's story, it's probably inappropriate to label him a "rapist" for the rest of his life. There's plenty of other reasons to dislike Kobe Bryant.

Posted by Buster | June 15, 2008 11:36 PM

If you people want to defend a man who told police that it was his "thing" to choke women and cum in their face, go right ahead. He told the police they could go ask his mistress if they didn't believe it. I for one, can understand why a young woman might find that objectionable after the fact of consent, even Kobe admits that she said no. The people who still defend Kobe on this score are exactly the type who harassed this poor girl into deciding that it was smarter to take the money than to insist on a conviction. Anyone who quibbles with labeling Kobe a rapist needs to ask themselves if they would let their daughter or sister go out with him. Your loyalties to that jerk are misplaced. He has as much class as Mike Tyson.

Read the police transcripts at smoking gun:

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0924041kobea1.html

Posted by Just Karl | June 15, 2008 11:37 PM

Freddie -- you are retarded. Nobody has said anything even remotely similar.

The point is that so much doubt surrounds this situation that simply branding a person a rapist is beyond ridiculous. The point is that the presence of the second semen sample is that *somebody eles* may have raped her (and yes, she may well have been raped). Your idiocy & obtuseness is really rather impressive.

Posted by MY strikes again | June 15, 2008 11:38 PM

dictionary.reference.com/browse/joke

joke Audio Help [johk] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation noun, verb, joked, jok·ing.
–noun
1. something said or done to provoke laughter or cause amusement, as a witticism, a short and amusing anecdote, or a prankish act: He tells very funny jokes. She played a joke on him.
2. something that is amusing or ridiculous, esp. because of being ludicrously inadequate or a sham; a thing, situation, or person laughed at rather than taken seriously; farce: Their pretense of generosity is a joke. An officer with no ability to command is a joke.
3. a matter that need not be taken very seriously; trifling matter: The loss was no joke.
4. something that does not present the expected challenge; something very easy: The test was a joke for the whole class.
5. practical joke.
–verb (used without object)
6. to speak or act in a playful or merry way: He was always joking with us.
7. to say something in fun or teasing rather than in earnest; be facetious: He didn't really mean it, he was only joking.
–verb (used with object)
8. to subject to jokes; make fun of; tease.

Posted by Client #11 | June 15, 2008 11:39 PM

MY strike again,

Ah, so the victim was "mistaken" as to who raped her. An odd thing to be mistaken about, one must admit.

He paid hush money. He admitted it was non-consensual. He gamed the courts. The rape shield was basically tossed aside, and the victim was made into a pariah. This isn't hard.

Posted by PTS | June 15, 2008 11:48 PM

PTS -- no, I didn't say she was mistaken. I said WE can't know the truth. She could very well be telling the truth & it was Kobe, or she could be lying. We don't, and can't, know.

Also, ask yourself this, would the other guy have been able to pay her a lot of money to settle a civil case & agree not to help the state make a criminal case? Which guy would you choose to accuse in such a scenario?

Are you a lawyer? I am. Do you practice criminal law? I do. The application of the rape shield law in that case was not atypical.

Posted by MY strikes again | June 15, 2008 11:52 PM

Right there, David Stern defenders. That last sequence is precisely why people think the NBA is crooked. That was an absurd sequence. Paul Pierce was fouled about 5 times. I can't take it. I can't take it.

Posted by Freddoe | June 15, 2008 11:57 PM

Bryant never admitted that the sex was non-consensual and he paid no hush money. In the statement settling the matter, he said that "No money has been paid to this woman" and "Although I truly believe this encounter between us was consensual, I recognize now that she did not and does not view this incident the same way I did." Which always suggested to me that both parties just wanted to put the whole thing behind them without an admission of guilt on either side.

Posted by Buster | June 15, 2008 11:59 PM

Yes Freddoe, the NBA is crooked.

KG sets illegal screens nearly every time down the court & shouldn't make it to halftime. Somehow he manages to play roughly 40 minutes a night, however, while conducting himself in a manner that should receive upward of 20 or 30 fouls.

Posted by MY strikes again | June 15, 2008 11:59 PM

Jordan was better, there's no doubt. I agree that KB warrants an argument, but that's all.

Also, Jordan definitely cheated on his wife, gambled compulsively, and used to humiliate his teammates after they messed up. No, he wasn't accused of rape. But he was definitely a "malignant narcissist" as well.

It's just damn foolish to assume an athlete's character is as good as their game. Chances are, they're scum.

Posted by JD | June 16, 2008 12:02 AM

Buster, it has been widely reported that Bryant paid the victim a large cash settlement. And saying "she did not believe the encounter between us was consensual"? How can that mean anything but "she didn't consent"?

Posted by Freddie | June 16, 2008 12:04 AM

I couldn't care less about Kobe Bryant and have no interest in defending him. Nor do I think a legal not-guilty verdict should lead to a social not-guilty verdict. Feel free to call OJ a murderer.

In the Kobe case, however, Matt kept his trap shut when the case was thrown out. He could have certainly brought some clarity to the muddle of facts. After all, that's what bloggers do, don't they? NOW he casually flings the "rapist" epithet as if its no different from calling someone an asshole or a dickhead.

Posted by DJ | June 16, 2008 12:07 AM

Maybe he did pay. Maybe he paid her a small fraction of his personal fortune to go away. It's not a confession.

Did she explicitly refuse her consent? Did she say "no"? Did she resist in any way, other than refusing the ejaculation, which Kobe mentioned in his statement? In that statement, he's sticking to his story that he didn't know at the time that the sex wasn't consensual. Whatever may have been going on in her mind as to her consent, he claims that he was unaware of it.

Look, I don't know what happened in that hotel room. Maybe he did rape her. Maybe not. I just don't think Bryant can be clearly tagged as a rapist for the rest of his life on the basis of one woman's rather shaky story.

Posted by Buster | June 16, 2008 12:14 AM

My previous post refers to two different statements, first his police statement and the other the one settling the civil suit. My bad on the lack of clarity.

Posted by Buster | June 16, 2008 12:33 AM

From the transcript:

Detective Loya: Did you ever ask her if you wanted, if you could cum in her face?

Kobe: Yes, that's when she said no. That's when she said no. That's when she said no.

Detective Loya: So what did, what did you say?

Detective Winters: What did you say, how did that, how did that come about?

Kobe: Um, you know, that's when I asked if I could cum in her face she said no.

Detective Loya: So you like to cum in your partner's face?

Kobe: That's my thing, not always, I mean, so I stopped. Jesus Christ man.(inaudible)

Detective Winters: So how was this, how was this consensual, I mean, wha, wha, explain to me how this was consensual.

Kobe: It sounds pretty fucking crazy to me. (inaudible) and all that.

Detective Loya: Is this, I don't mean to offend you in any way, but is this a habit of your's that you cheat on your wife?

Detective Winters: Has this ever happened before?

Kobe: Um yes with one other person. And she could actually testify I do that um, the same thing, I hold her from the back, I put my hands (inaudible)

Detective Winters: And I understand just let me finish oaky. So one you lied to us, okay, and that doesn't help. Two, um, then, then we confront this issue and you seemed a little skeptical on the details of exactly what happened throughout the entire incident, okay? I agree with you, I agree that you got caught up in the moment. Okay. No doubt about it, no doubt about it whatsoever. What I think you got caught up in Mr Bryant is that, and I agree, I, I completely agree with you it was consensual up to the hugging and kissing issue I agree, completely consensual. I have no issue with that whatsoever. What I, what I'm being, what I'm skeptical on is that I don't know how consensual the sexual intercourse was. Okay. I don't, I don't, I guess to be honest with you I'm not sure we're getting all the facts presented to us as far as what exactly happened. See this is the way I look at it, I, you know, I look at it this way, she was an attractive young lady.

Kobe: She wasn't that attractive

Posted by Just Karl | June 16, 2008 1:01 AM

'my biggest fear is my career and image'

apparently Kobe didn't care that he had just sodomized a girl whose name he couldn't remember.

Posted by Kobe es un violador | June 16, 2008 1:02 AM

He's an allegation = verdict kind of guy. Hell, he backed the Iraq war on the same grounds.

Shoots, and he scores. That had to hurt. Count me in the camp of thinking Matt calling Kobe a "rapist" is outrageous. Innocent until proven guilty. Applies to blacks as well as whites.

Posted by CrazyTrain | June 16, 2008 1:22 AM

You guys really don't know what happened? They were having (consensual) doggy style... then Kobe tried to put it in her butt, she said no, but he did it anyway. I thought everyone knew that.

is it rape? You tell me.

Posted by jimbob | June 16, 2008 1:42 AM

What jimbob said.

Posted by Mike | June 16, 2008 2:23 AM

The real problem with the Friedman argument is the presumption that Tim Duncan has never been criticized on the basis of playoff performance. In fact, he's often been derided as soft. The reason Jordan has never been criticized the way Bryant and Duncan have is that his teams didn't lose.

This thread certainly does tend to confirm Yglesias' point that much of the criticism of Bryant is based on animosity.

Posted by Robert Fiore | June 16, 2008 2:31 AM

The folks trying to defend poor Kobe here are pathetic. He got himself into a potential rape situation with incredibly poor judgment and lower morals. He may not be a convicted rapist, but he's a slimeball, an adulterer, and an alleged rapist. So, he can shoot a basketball - good for him. But people attacking Matthew for saying what much of the public believes - get over yourselves. Kobe's been convicted in the court of public opinion long before this blog posting.

Posted by Cindy | June 16, 2008 4:11 AM

Kobe's been convicted in the court of public opinion long before this blog posting.

Really, Cindy? What was the margin?

Big difference between being called a slimeball and a rapist. Big, BIG difference.

As long as rape is still a criminal [and extremely moral] offense, and not merely just a synonym for douchebaggery, I think we're right to draw the line here.

Posted by scythia | June 16, 2008 4:29 AM

And if you have moral compunctions about cheering adulterers then you're going to have to give up following the NBA altogether.

Posted by Robert Fiore | June 16, 2008 4:56 AM

The reason why Kobe gets a visceral reaction is because he came after Jordan, and people jump at the chance to say that so and so proves he is not comparable.

Perhaps people wouldn't be so inclined to make the comparison if Kobe wasn't constantly trying to be the next Jordan, with the imitations of Jordan's head-wagging and tongue-lolling, the transparently phony public persona, the egomaniacal demands about coaches and teammates, etc. Jordan is clearly a very flawed human being, but he was a far better basketball player than Kobe is.

And if you have moral compunctions about cheering adulterers then you're going to have to give up following the NBA altogether.

Actually, the fact that a large number of (though by no means all) professional athletes are certified scumbags in their personal lives is a reason a lot of people, myself included, don't follow professional sports all that closely.

Posted by Xeynon | June 16, 2008 6:23 AM

Pretty amazing that no apology has been forthcoming. I guess plagiarizer Matthew Yglesias is learning the Washington way of offhanded baseless slander of people one has even a slightly negative opinion of.

Oh, and I love the commenter who tries to keep the anti-Kobe train rolling but uses the term "sodomy".

Oh nOeZ -- not teh SoDoMy! Ah guess he's a goin to hail!

Posted by Rock | June 16, 2008 7:18 AM

Pretty amazing that no apology has been forthcoming. I guess plagiarizer Matthew Yglesias is learning the Washington way of offhanded baseless slander of people one has even a slightly negative opinion of.

Oh, and I love the commenter who tries to keep the anti-Kobe train rolling but uses the term "sodomy".

Oh nOeZ -- not teh SoDoMy! Ah guess he's a goin to hail!

Posted by Rock | June 16, 2008 7:20 AM

I think it's clear that Yglesias's reference is to the prominence the issue has had in Bryant's image.

People do love to ride the highest horse they can, don't they?

Posted by Jeffrey Davis | June 16, 2008 8:12 AM

I find it amazing the totality of ignorance demonstrated by many of the commentors on the subject of the rape allegations against Mr. Bryant. Just for the record, I will take up some computer storage space to explain what actually happened.

There was a hearing held in the judges' chambers in order for him to determine the extent to which the rape shield law in Colorado applied to the complaintant, Kate Faber, relative to any previous sexual activity. A DNA expert for the defense, Dr. Elizabeth Johnson, testified that motive sperm was found on Ms. Faber during the hospital examination by the SANE nurses and that sperm remains motive for a period of about 12 hours after ejaculation. DNA tests indicated that the sperm was not donated by Mr. Bryant. Based on this finding, Dr. Johnson testified that Ms. Faber must have had a sexual encounter with an unknown individual subsequent to the encounter with Mr. Bryant. Unfortunately, Ms. Faber had testified at the hearing, before Dr. Johnsons' testimony, that she had not had such an encounter subsequent to the Bryant encounter. Further, the prosecutor, a Mr. Hurlburt, had hired two world renown forensic experts, Dr. Michael Baden and Dr. Henry Lee to advise him on DNA issues. After the testimony of Dr. Johnson, Mr. Hurlburt requested a time out to allow him to confer with his experts. After the time out, he then cross examined Dr. Johnson but in no way caused her to retreat from her conclusions. What is remarkable, considering the fact that the judge was obviously impressed by Dr. Johnsons' testimony, Mr. Hurlburt did not call either Dr. Baden or Dr. Lee to the stand to dispute it, a strong indication that they probably agreed with her testimony (by the way, the DNA expert from the Colorado Department of Justice also concurred in Dr. Johnsons' expert opinion). Subsequent to the hearing, the judge, obviously irritated by the apparent Faber perjury, ruled that testimony as to Ms. Fabers' sexual activity in the period of 72 hours prior to the hospital examination would be admissible.

After the hearing, Ms. Faber hired a high profile Atlanta attorney, Lin Wood. We, of course, don't know what advice Mr. Wood gave Ms. Faber. We only know that she refused to testify in the pending criminal case against Mr. Bryant, which cut the legs out from under the case. The DA then dropped the charges against Mr. Bryant. I think it is fair to speculate that, given the apparent perjury committed by Ms. Faber in the judges' chambers, Mr. Wood, as would any competent attorney, probably advised her not to testify in the upcoming criminal case as she would be opening herself up to a charge of perjury if Mr. Bryant was acquitted. I think that there is very little doubt that Mr. Bryant would have signed a complaint in that circumstance.

None of this should be taken as an indication as to the truth or falsity of Ms. Fabers' allegations. Given the circumstances of her apparent perjury in the judges chambers, the chances of a conviction in a criminal case with proof beyond a reasonable doubt were slim.

Posted by SLC | June 16, 2008 8:56 AM

I think if Kobe weren't a rapist people would have fewer visceral anti-Kobe reactions.

I agree with the above commentators that it is unconscionable to imply that he is a rapist given that he was not convicted, and the evidence is not clear cut. One technical note, though: while this line implies he is a rapist, it does not explicitly state that he is, due to the hypothetical "if, then" construction.

Posted by Jim W | June 16, 2008 9:50 AM

MY: "I can imagine greater injustices than an athlete being judged unusually harshly due to his record of bad acts in real life"

Well: "I can imagine greater justice than an prominent blogger being judged unusually harshly due to a less than smart sports post."

To elaborate:
A blogger's attractiveness depends to no small part on the impression of competence he achieves in his readers. This impression can be easily built if the blogger writes about a topic few people have an expertise in (say foreign policy).

What the blogger should not forget is that the impression of competence is easily reversed, if the blogger writes something less than smart about a new topic.

The reader might ask himself: Does this blogger always present "facts"in such a dishonest way, and this was only the first time it appeared to me?

After 2 more "Kobe-Posts" The reader will probably not return to the blog (except he anyhow agrees with the blogger’s less than smart posts).

GB

Posted by GB | June 16, 2008 10:18 AM

The funny thing is that Matt's point would hold up better if he simply said "alleged rape" instead. As a plus, he wouldn't be committing libel and the commenters would be talking about his point as opposed to rehashing the rape case.

Posted by Mo | June 16, 2008 10:59 AM

On the basketball playgrounds here in NYC, my argument against the Lakers begins and ends with "Kobe is a rapist." Still, by the standards of talking smack on the court, this is a pretty tame assertion.

I'm not concerned in the least about Kobe as a person. He exists as a fictional construction in the highly ceremonial realm of sports entertainment. He exists purely for my amusement and diversion. It's the deal he signed up for.

I have no problem differentiating between this and other public figures whom I also know only through the media, like politicians. And even though it seems unbelievable at times, the actions of politicians affect the circumstances of people's lives. I would wholeheartedly endorse the tenor of this debate if the subject were Mr. Obama or Mr. McCain.

Posted by NIck | June 16, 2008 11:16 AM

Pretty amazing that no apology has been forthcoming.

Dude, Matt doesn't read his comments. That's been pretty evident for a while now.

Posted by Antid Oto | June 16, 2008 11:35 AM

Dude, Matt comments here all the time and frequently notes that he does read his comments. That's been very evident.

Posted by too many steves | June 16, 2008 11:45 AM

The people defending Kobe from the rapist tag is pathetic. Whether or not he used his money to get her to shut up about the level of force he used on her, the man proves every single night he plays in front of thousands (or millions when broadcast), that he's slimey, narcissistic, spectacularly immature, and treats his teammates on and off the court like exactly what he is, a born asshole who never matured past being a 13 year old dominant middle school basketball star and knowing, KNOWING, that that made him the awesomest, coolest, bestest person ever who no one could ever make do anything... Wheee!

And comparison to Jordan? Come on. Jordan made the players around him spectacularly better. He may still have been arrogant and a bit narcissistic, but please. The level of players that Jordan dominated the league with the level Kobe's proved he needs with him aren't even close.

Posted by Matt | June 16, 2008 12:39 PM

Kobe probably gets called a rapist about 1,000 times every day on the ESPN NBA boards.

Posted by blah | June 16, 2008 1:47 PM

If Kobe sued Matt for libel, he would have to prove that Matt was wrong - that Kobe was not, in fact, a rapist. Matt would get to put on evidence that Kobe is, in fact, a rapist.

That would be fun!

Posted by blah | June 16, 2008 1:51 PM

Sportswriters have blown smoke up Michael Jordan's ass for years, saying he's hand-down the greatest of All-Time.

Bill Russell has more rings though, even coached a team to rings.

And Wilt had better numbers.

Kobe scored 81 in a game, Jordan never did that. Kobe won three championships before he was 25, Jordan never did that.

Kobe just brought a ragtag bunch of kids who are either too soft or too young (mostly too soft) not only to the playoffs, but to the NBA Finals in a year when most analysts said the Western Conference was the toughest conference ever!

Jordan never did that. Jordan never won anything without another All-Star at his side, usually not without two (Pippen who is Top 50 player of all-time and either Horace Grant, who was a multiple time All-Defensive second team member, or Rodman, who is one of the best defenders of All-Time and after Russell probably the best rebounder ever).

Are people really comparing Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom, two guys that aren't even legit All-Stars, to Pippen, Horace Grant and Rodman??? Man, I hope not. Do people really think Jordan Farmar can hold Steve Kerr or John Paxton's jock? Man, I hope not.

Kobe can do everything Jordan can do as a basketball player except keep up a squeaky clean image in spire of being another flawed man. Jordan was an AWFUL teammate, an egotist, philanderer, unrepentant gambler, etc, etc.

Kobe cheated on his wife. I love all the folks here thinking they're so clean they can throw the first stone. Ya'll are just jealous, you wish hot young blondes were throwing themselves at you so you'd have the chance to have some fun, too.

As for calling dude a rapist, please! Ya'll know that girl was a highly medicated, unstable moneygrabber who had two different men's semen in her panties over a course of 12 hours! Ouch! And you're trying to convince us that Kobe raped her? That was never gonna fly in front of a jury, not even a racist Colorado one wanting Kobe to fry in the electric chair. Girl cried wolf, couldn't handle the ensuing attention, then quit the charade.

Yes, there are many many young girls out there who are date raped, and it's an awful thing. But this case to anyone with two eyes never fit that paradigm. Instead, it was a young girl who slept around who thought she had a chance to fuck the biggest basketball star in the world. This happens every day. Feminists don't want to admit that there are thousands upon thousands of groupies out there who will open their legs for any athlete or rock star that will give them the time of day.

The Kobe situation was not a feminist lesson. Instead, it was a lesson for all athletes. Before you fuck a groupie, make sure she signs the "Pre Fuck-tual Agreement," which states that the sex in consensual, and that if you cum in their face, they won't cry foul.

Posted by Yglesias Groupie Love | June 16, 2008 4:06 PM