Kobe's accuser

[The Brain]

Originally posted by Sloats
I think this is what Brian is leaning towards: Believe it or not, but black on white crime is quiet rare, but when it happens, the media loves to pump it up because all of us whities want to feel justified in our fear of you swoogies.

Nope, you're wrong on that point. When Tyson was accused of rape, it was against a black woman. Again, the only info that was known about her at the time was that she was a beauty pageant contestant, and nothing else. But again, Tyson's entire life was thrown out there, and he was judged by the public long before any trial ever took place.

Because its a law to protect victims of serious crimes. Something to do with they did nothing wrong so they don't deserve to be harrased, kinda like how Sloats put it

Whatever happened to the accused being "innocent before proven guilty"? Doesn't the accused person have the same rights to privacy that the accuser does? Wouldn't Kobe Bryant in this case have the right not to be harassed, or be forced to hold press conferences, to tell his side of the story until after any possible trial has been concluded?

<b>EDIT:</b> I just happened to mention <a href=http://board.yourmomsbox.net/viewthread.php?tid=1098&page=1#pid27493 target=_blank>Scott Peterson</a> in a different thread. Now, he is neither black nor a celebrity (at least, not before the case), and it wasn't even a sexual assault involved. But even in this case, all the skeletons in his closet are being let out-- affairs, behavior displayed, etc. before the actual trial is done. Is that fair to him, as the accused murderer, not convicted in a a court, but convicted as far as the public is concerned?