Reply #41: No, defense attorneys are NOT allowed to lie....

[Media_Lies_Daily]

...because they can be held in contempt by the presiding judge. The penealty for contempt can range from simple fines to bigger fines and time in jail. The defense attorney already defied the judge's earlier restriction on what could and could not be discussed in the preliminary hearing, so I'm thinking that the defense team does indeed have evidence to prove their contention of more than one person having sex with KB's accuser within a certain timeframe. Additionally, intentionally lying in court can result in a lawyer being disbarred...not a good thing for someone who has obviously made the law a career.

Now, having said all of that, defense attorneys ARE allowed to present alternative scenarios based on the evidence presented in a case. That's what KB's attorney is doing, and what any other good defense attorney should do. Unfortunately for those that believe that a person is guilty until proven innocent, as well as those that believe that indefinite detention without representation is a good thing, that's part of our legal/judicial system.

Here's the case so far from what I've been able to glean from various sources:

1) KB claims that he and his accuser had consensual sex.

2) KB's accuser claims that she did engage in some consensual activities up to the point where she said "No". At that point she claims she was sexually assaulted.

3) KB was taken to a hospital later that day and samples were taken of those things necessary for a case of this type.

4) It is UNKNOWN exactly when KB's accuser was medically examined. More than one account has surfaced that she was not examined that day/evening.

5) Two rulings by the judge have greatly limited KB's defense at the preliminary hearing:

a) Certain evidence has been excluded from the preliminary hearing: the accuser's previous medical history to include previous attempt(s) to commit suicide.

b) The judge has ruled that the accuser cannot be asked to testify during the preliminary hearing.

6) There is some confusion as to exactly when the accuser was bruised and scratched. A local deputy apparently stated that she had no detectable scrapes or scratches when the accusation was officially filed.

7) The accuser attended a party a short time after the alleged assault took place and apparently described what took place to include a description of KB's physical size.

8) If the accuser had sex with ANYONE prior to whatever took place in KB's room, it will taint the accuser's case because of her delay in being examined and the alleged statement by the deputy noted above. In fact, it is entirely possible that she may have suffered her physical injuries at the hands of another person sometime PRIOR to her examination by the hospital.

Having stated all of the above, this case is going to be made very difficult for the accuser if any or all of the discrepancies noted above are true. Her case will be made even more difficult if any other testimony comes to light that casts doubt on her veracity. On the other hand, if the defense cannot credibly portray accusations that she may have had sex with anyone prior to KB, KB's case will suffer some real damage.

Now, you're entitled to say whatever you want about KB and this case, but KB is still entitled to a fair and balanced judicial process. He is NOT guilty until proven innocent. On the other hand, the accuser is to be treated fairly as well and I think the judge is doing the best he can to protect her rights under Colorado law while still protecting KB's rights.