Hearsay When Kobe Bryant Faced Research Proposal

Some of these exceptions could have applied to the Kobe Bryant prosecution. The medical exam evidence could have been allowed had the alleged victim not placed fault on Mr. Bryant. The burden would then have been on the prosecution to prove Mr. Bryant's fault. However, the prosecution submitted a conclusory statement with regards to the findings at the medical exam. Had they not done so, an exception to the hearsay evidence would have been made.

Another exception that may have been available to the prosecution was forfeiture by wrongdoing. In this case, the high profile of the trial was a consideration in the plaintiff not wanting to proceed with the trial. The accuser was going to be subject to humiliation with respect to her sexual history, before an international media spotlight. Indeed, the prosecution moved midway through the preliminary hearing to have the remainder of the hearing closed for this reason. The defense argued that the hearing should remain open. The argument could have been made that this situation constituted wrongdoing on the part of the defense. However, the defense had originally requested a closed hearing, which effectively eliminated the potential for obtaining an exception on the use of hearsay based on wrongdoing.

Without the above, the use of exceptions to hearsay would have been limited to those that are allowed when the declarant is available.

These are limited to excited utterances, present tense impression and declarations of present state of mind. None of these exceptions applies to the Kobe Bryant case. Therefore, there was little chance of an exception being granted to the prosecution. As a result, the prosecution was forced to drop the case when the alleged victim refused to take the stand.

The Kobe Bryant case was based largely on hearsay, which was admissible in the preliminary hearing but would have not been admissible during the main trial. The case highlights the rules surrounding the admissibility of hearsay evidence. There were a couple of potential avenues the prosecution could have taken to have the evidence admitted, but the odds of success were low.

Works Cited

No author. (2009). Hearsay Rule. Legal Dictionary. Retrieved March 29, 2009 at http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/hearsay+rule

No author. (2003). Rape evidence against Bryant revealed. Reuters. Retrieved March 29, 2009 at http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/10/16/1065917526371.html

No author. (2003). Kobe Bryant must stand trial, judge rules. CNN. Retrieved March 29, 2009 at http://quiz.cnn.com/2003/LAW/10/20/bryant.hearing/index.html

No author. (2004). Rape case against Bryant dismissed. MSNBC. Retrieved March 29, 2009 at http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/5861379/

People of the State of Colorado v. Kobe Bryant: Defendant's Response to Prosecution's Motion to Close Remainder of Preliminary Hearing. Retrieved March 29, 2009 at http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/bryant/cobryant101503drsp.pdf

Trachtenberg, Ben L.W. (2009). The Exception Swallowing the Hearsay Rule: Coconspirators, Coventurers, and the Confrontation Clause. Social Science Research Network. Retrieved March 29, 2009 at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1358530