BuffettNews.com

ph4ever wrote:

buffettbride wrote:

CaptainP wrote:

sirgumby77 wrote:
I belive he is guilty. Look at what he had to do to keep his wife. If he is innocent---dont you think she woulda known that too, and not had to have that multi-million dollar piece of jewelery???

He admits to sleeping on his wife. That's why he bought her the bling.

I agree. I would venture to guess he has slept around before. The Bling is for getting caught in such a public manner.

Another interesting perspective on these lines is if Kobe HAS slept around before, would it or could it behove his defense to identify witnesses from previous "flings" to back Kobe up that he is non-violent? It might be a way for his sexual history to work in his favor.

I agree the Bling is for getting caught in such a public manner HOWEVER I believe it's also a tool to keep her there until after the trial at least if not to just plain ole keep her there. After all it makes such a better show if she stands by her man

Just like the Tammy Wynette song. Staahhhnnnddd by yooourrrr maaaannnnnn.

Oh yeah, Connie...it's good to see you here *huggy smiley*

ph4ever wrote:

buffettbride wrote:

CaptainP wrote:

sirgumby77 wrote:
I belive he is guilty. Look at what he had to do to keep his wife. If he is innocent---dont you think she woulda known that too, and not had to have that multi-million dollar piece of jewelery???

He admits to sleeping on his wife. That's why he bought her the bling.

I agree. I would venture to guess he has slept around before. The Bling is for getting caught in such a public manner.

Another interesting perspective on these lines is if Kobe HAS slept around before, would it or could it behove his defense to identify witnesses from previous "flings" to back Kobe up that he is non-violent? It might be a way for his sexual history to work in his favor.

I agree the Bling is for getting caught in such a public manner HOWEVER I believe it's also a tool to keep her there until after the trial at least if not to just plain ole keep her there. After all it makes such a better show if she stands by her man

I disagree. I don't think she's staying for "the show". She could've taken the jewels and left anyway.

sirgumby77 wrote:Ok.... I do not feel like reading all through this but IMHO



Send him to jail where he belongs. Make a statement out of him to all the other thugs in the NBA that this will not be tolerated. Send him to jail, or even better yet----- Let her brothers, uncles, cousins, and father beat the living crap out of Koby in some dark alley, and let him feel like it is to be abused.

I was going to respond but then caught myself and remembered

Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.

CaptainP wrote:

ph4ever wrote:

buffettbride wrote:

CaptainP wrote:

sirgumby77 wrote:
I belive he is guilty. Look at what he had to do to keep his wife. If he is innocent---dont you think she woulda known that too, and not had to have that multi-million dollar piece of jewelery???

He admits to sleeping on his wife. That's why he bought her the bling.

I agree. I would venture to guess he has slept around before. The Bling is for getting caught in such a public manner.

Another interesting perspective on these lines is if Kobe HAS slept around before, would it or could it behove his defense to identify witnesses from previous "flings" to back Kobe up that he is non-violent? It might be a way for his sexual history to work in his favor.

I agree the Bling is for getting caught in such a public manner HOWEVER I believe it's also a tool to keep her there until after the trial at least if not to just plain ole keep her there. After all it makes such a better show if she stands by her man

I disagree. I don't think she's staying for "the show". She could've taken the jewels and left anyway.

Not if she believes in her heart of hearts that her husband did not commit rape. It's not too out there to believe the Bling pacified her angst because of the cheating.

CaptainP wrote:

ph4ever wrote:

buffettbride wrote:

CaptainP wrote:

sirgumby77 wrote:
I belive he is guilty. Look at what he had to do to keep his wife. If he is innocent---dont you think she woulda known that too, and not had to have that multi-million dollar piece of jewelery???

He admits to sleeping on his wife. That's why he bought her the bling.

I agree. I would venture to guess he has slept around before. The Bling is for getting caught in such a public manner.

Another interesting perspective on these lines is if Kobe HAS slept around before, would it or could it behove his defense to identify witnesses from previous "flings" to back Kobe up that he is non-violent? It might be a way for his sexual history to work in his favor.

I agree the Bling is for getting caught in such a public manner HOWEVER I believe it's also a tool to keep her there until after the trial at least if not to just plain ole keep her there. After all it makes such a better show if she stands by her man

I disagree. I don't think she's staying for "the show". She could've taken the jewels and left anyway.

Yea but I think like a woman. She could have done that but she could gain so much more by sticking by him thru the trial at least.

sirgumby77 wrote:I belive he is guilty. Look at what he had to do to keep his wife. If he is innocent---dont you think she woulda known that too, and not had to have that multi-million dollar piece of jewelery???

Cheating on his wife, which he admitted he did, isn't evidence that he's guilty of rape.

buffettbride wrote:

CaptainP wrote:

ph4ever wrote:

buffettbride wrote:

CaptainP wrote:

sirgumby77 wrote:
I belive he is guilty. Look at what he had to do to keep his wife. If he is innocent---dont you think she woulda known that too, and not had to have that multi-million dollar piece of jewelery???

He admits to sleeping on his wife. That's why he bought her the bling.

I agree. I would venture to guess he has slept around before. The Bling is for getting caught in such a public manner.

Another interesting perspective on these lines is if Kobe HAS slept around before, would it or could it behove his defense to identify witnesses from previous "flings" to back Kobe up that he is non-violent? It might be a way for his sexual history to work in his favor.

I agree the Bling is for getting caught in such a public manner HOWEVER I believe it's also a tool to keep her there until after the trial at least if not to just plain ole keep her there. After all it makes such a better show if she stands by her man

I disagree. I don't think she's staying for "the show". She could've taken the jewels and left anyway.

Not if she believes in her heart of hearts that her husband did not commit rape. It's not too out there to believe the Bling pacified her angst because of the cheating.

true. But then what loving wife would ever think their husband would commit such a horriable crime. How many wives will say "Yea I knew my husband was guilty". Heck even if she did know for a fact he raped her she can't be forced to testify

buffettbride wrote:Just like the Tammy Wynette song. Staahhhnnnddd by yooourrrr maaaannnnnn.

That's the same song Hillary Clinton sang, isn't it?

Thanks all for a VERY interesting discussion. I will abstain as I have had this discussion many times, often becoming heated. I think you can almost draw the lines right down gender lines. I am going to continue to try to stay out of this discussion as entering will do me no good.

LIPH wrote:

buffettbride wrote:Just like the Tammy Wynette song. Staahhhnnnddd by yooourrrr maaaannnnnn.

That's the same song Hillary Clinton sang, isn't it?

I'm sure it will be her campaign theme when she runs for president. Oh wait...she already WAS president. Silly me.

Buffett4ever wrote:Thanks all for a VERY interesting discussion. I will abstain as I have had this discussion many times, often becoming heated. I think you can almost draw the lines right down gender lines. I am going to continue to try to stay out of this discussion as entering will do me no good.

I think the reason you can draw a line down gender lines is because most woman can emphasize with the rape victum. I'm sure some of us women here are rape victums ourselves. It is rare that you hear of males being raped - not that it dosn't happen but it's rare that it is talked about. Over the years women have been able to talk about their rape experiences more openly and freely.

PH4ever, you make a good point.

But I don't think the "bait and switch" thing really holds water- I mean, if she agreed to vanilla, and he went for triple mocha almond crunch without her consent, and her reputation is already bad, don't you think she'd want to humilate the jerk? I know I would.

And I am sure most men have been in, or can imagine being in, a position of being taken to the point and then having someone say no. Most men can feel how hard it would be at that point to control themselves. It is different for men. I feel for the women who have been brutally raped or even raped for that matter. I do not feel for the women who find themselves in the position I described above. Espescially if the case was financially motivated as this case could have been.

ph4ever wrote:

Buffett4ever wrote:Thanks all for a VERY interesting discussion. I will abstain as I have had this discussion many times, often becoming heated. I think you can almost draw the lines right down gender lines. I am going to continue to try to stay out of this discussion as entering will do me no good.

I think the reason you can draw a line down gender lines is because most woman can emphasize with the rape victum. I'm sure some of us women here are rape victums ourselves. It is rare that you hear of males being raped - not that it dosn't happen but it's rare that it is talked about. Over the years women have been able to talk about their rape experiences more openly and freely.

I totally disagree No means NO no matter at what time the verbalization takes place.

Suppose you have an inexperienced teenager who has done nothing more than semi-heavy petting. Are you saying it's ok that she's raped because of her lack of inexperience she dosn't know at what point the man is "past the point of no return" And IMHO there isn't a "past the point of no return"

Buffett4ever wrote:And I am sure most men have been in, or can imagine being in, a position of being taken to the point and then having someone say no. Most men can feel how hard it would be at that point to control themselves. It is different for men. I feel for the women who have been brutally raped or even raped for that matter. I do not feel for the women who find themselves in the position I described above. Espescially if the case was financially motivated as this case could have been.

ph4ever wrote:

Buffett4ever wrote:Thanks all for a VERY interesting discussion. I will abstain as I have had this discussion many times, often becoming heated. I think you can almost draw the lines right down gender lines. I am going to continue to try to stay out of this discussion as entering will do me no good.

I think the reason you can draw a line down gender lines is because most woman can emphasize with the rape victum. I'm sure some of us women here are rape victums ourselves. It is rare that you hear of males being raped - not that it dosn't happen but it's rare that it is talked about. Over the years women have been able to talk about their rape experiences more openly and freely.

You guys are faster than I am, I should've quoted on that- the keeping her there was what I was referring to.

Coconuts wrote:PH4ever, you make a good point.

But I don't think the "bait and switch" thing really holds water- I mean, if she agreed to vanilla, and he went for triple mocha almond crunch without her consent ...

I think you're pretty close to what actuallly happened. From what I've heard it's possible she may have agreed to travel on the interstate but Kobe wanted to ride the hershey highway.

Coconuts wrote:PH4ever, you make a good point.

But I don't think the "bait and switch" thing really holds water- I mean, if she agreed to vanilla, and he went for triple mocha almond crunch without her consent, and her reputation is already bad, don't you think she'd want to humilate the jerk? I know I would.

But I think the point was made that if vanilla is OK but triple mocha almond crunch is NOT ok and she said so, then it is still rape because she did not consent. It wouldn't be trying to humiliate Kobe, it would be following the law.

However, she could have agreed to vanilla but not into the triple mocha almond crunch with Kobe, but went out with a different friend the next day and decided to try the triple mocha almond crunch.

Hmmm. Perplexing. And somehow I want a scoop of mint chocolate chip.

I have already said more than I should have said. I am just going to have to bite my tongue and tactfully say I agree to disagree.

Please carry on. I will read in quiet.

ph4ever wrote:I totally disagree No means NO no matter at what time the verbalization takes place.

Suppose you have an inexperienced teenager who has done nothing more than semi-heavy petting. Are you saying it's ok that she's raped because of her lack of inexperience she dosn't know at what point the man is "past the point of no return" And IMHO there isn't a "past the point of no return"

Buffett4ever wrote:And I am sure most men have been in, or can imagine being in, a position of being taken to the point and then having someone say no. Most men can feel how hard it would be at that point to control themselves. It is different for men. I feel for the women who have been brutally raped or even raped for that matter. I do not feel for the women who find themselves in the position I described above. Espescially if the case was financially motivated as this case could have been.

ph4ever wrote:

Buffett4ever wrote:Thanks all for a VERY interesting discussion. I will abstain as I have had this discussion many times, often becoming heated. I think you can almost draw the lines right down gender lines. I am going to continue to try to stay out of this discussion as entering will do me no good.

I think the reason you can draw a line down gender lines is because most woman can emphasize with the rape victum. I'm sure some of us women here are rape victums ourselves. It is rare that you hear of males being raped - not that it dosn't happen but it's rare that it is talked about. Over the years women have been able to talk about their rape experiences more openly and freely.

Buffett4ever wrote:And I am sure most men have been in, or can imagine being in, a position of being taken to the point and then having someone say no. Most men can feel how hard it would be at that point to control themselves. It is different for men. I feel for the women who have been brutally raped or even raped for that matter. I do not feel for the women who find themselves in the position I described above. Espescially if the case was financially motivated as this case could have been.

I am going to try to bail you out here. What you are trying to say is that you feel for the dudes because he seems to be quilty with no way to prove innocence. However, I dissagree that there is ever a situation where a girl says no, and it is not a gentleman's obligation to stop. RIGHT THERE.

buffettbride wrote:

Coconuts wrote:PH4ever, you make a good point.

But I don't think the "bait and switch" thing really holds water- I mean, if she agreed to vanilla, and he went for triple mocha almond crunch without her consent, and her reputation is already bad, don't you think she'd want to humilate the jerk? I know I would.

But I think the point was made that if vanilla is OK but triple mocha almond crunch is NOT ok and she said so, then it is still rape because she did not consent. It wouldn't be trying to humiliate Kobe, it would be following the law.

However, she could have agreed to vanilla but not into the triple mocha almond crunch with Kobe, but went out with a different friend the next day and decided to try the triple mocha almond crunch.

Hmmm. Perplexing. And somehow I want a scoop of mint chocolate chip.

with sprinkles on top