Bryant’s Accuser Now Considers a Civil Suit

The woman who has accused Kobe Bryant of sexual assault is considering a civil suit, her attorneys said Wednesday, and she plans to discuss with prosecutors whether to continue with the criminal case.

Two days after a judge released transcripts from a closed hearing that included testimony damaging to the 20-year-old woman, attorneys John Clune and Lin Wood appeared on ABC’s “Good Morning America” and MSNBC’s “The Abrams Report.”

Late Wednesday, Judge Terry Ruckriegle took steps to make sure those were their last interviews before the trial begins Aug. 27. Responding to a sealed motion by Bryant’s attorneys, the judge issued an order prohibiting further comments by anyone connected with the case, saying he was “seriously concerned” that they would “disrupt the process by which a fair trial may be preserved.”

Clune, a former Eagle County, Colo., prosecutor, has been increasingly vocal about the damage done to his client by a series of mistakes by court personnel that resulted in the woman’s name and sealed evidence about her sex life being made public. The woman says the Laker star raped her on the night of June 30 last year, at a Colorado mountain resort where she worked and he was a guest. Bryant says they had consensual sex.

Whether his client finds justice in criminal court or civil court, Clune said, doesn’t matter. “This young woman is not going away,” he said. “ ... justice is going to be had for this young woman.”

Among evidence revealed was graphic testimony from a DNA expert working for the defense that details why Bryant’s attorneys believe the accuser had sex with someone else in the hours after the alleged rape and before her medical examination the following day.

Ruckriegle has ruled that evidence of the woman’s sexual conduct in the 72 hours before the medical exam and her sexual history with two key witnesses will be admissible at trial. A decision on the admissibility of evidence of the woman’s multiple suicide attempts, mental health, and drug and alcohol use is pending.

The prosecution is unable to respond to the leaked information because “the judge won’t allow parties in the case to discuss evidence,” Clune said. “What we have now is on the eve of trial ... this very damaging evidence that nobody is allowed to respond to.”

Therefore, Wood said, “She has got to look at this and wonder, ‘Can she be treated fairly in the criminal justice system?’ ”

Wood, a high-profile libel attorney who joined the accuser’s legal team in early July, said the woman could get “a more level playing field” in a civil case because Bryant would be required to give a deposition and could be required to testify.

Legal experts said the standard of proof in a civil trial is more favorable to the plaintiff. The woman’s attorneys would have to show a “preponderance of evidence” that a crime was committed. In a criminal trial, prosecutors must show guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

“I’m of the mind that she’s only going to be treated fairly in a civil case where ... Mr. Bryant’s life will be scrutinized,” Wood said.

Bryant, 25, has pleaded not guilty to felony sexual assault, which carries a sentence of four years to life in prison or 20 years to life on probation and a fine of up to $750,000.

A verdict against Bryant in a civil trial could lead to the awarding of monetary damages but not prison time or probation.

Wood also said Ruckriegle should remove himself from the case because of the mistakes by court personnel. The woman’s name has been mistakenly published on a court-sanctioned website three times, and sealed evidence has been made public on two occasions.

Clune and Wood both said the damage was “irreparable” and refused to say whether the woman would continue to cooperate in the prosecution of Bryant.

Prosecutors have not heard from the woman’s attorneys regarding dropping the case, said Krista Flannigan, a spokeswoman for the Eagle County district attorney’s office.

“From our standpoint we are moving forward to a trial date,” she said. “We’ve had no indication from the victim or her attorneys that anything could change.”

Flannigan said comments made by Clune on “Good Morning America” had been misconstrued in some media reports during the day.

“He didn’t really say anything about the victim not moving forward,” she said. “He stated the opposite, that she had strong resolve. People got confused. Just because they would file a civil suit doesn’t preclude a criminal action.”

Flannigan said she could not comment on whether the case would go forward without the accuser’s cooperation.

Experts had different interpretations about what motivated Wood and Clune to make public statements.

“It’s a way to get her side out,” said Karen Steinhauser, a Denver law professor.

Said Scott Robinson, a Denver defense attorney: “It would seem odd to go this far and now give up. Maybe it is a mixed message because they have mixed emotions.”

Larry Pozner, a Denver attorney who has followed the case closely, said the attorneys had a clear purpose: “A lawyer as smart as Lin Wood doesn’t go on TV and talk about pulling the plug unless he has a good reason to think that’s going to happen.”

Based on evidence that has been made public, the accuser probably would be in a better position to win a civil judgment against Bryant if there is no criminal trial, experts said.

Wood said that Bryant should compensate his accuser financially.

“It’s not about money, it’s about establishing truth, and it’s about accountability,” Wood said. “The fact that the civil justice system puts accountability into financial terms doesn’t make this young girl a gold digger, it makes this girl determined to pursue the truth, and that can be found in the civil justice system.”