Bryant Alleged Victim's Lawyers Speak Out

Aug. 4, 2004 -- Lawyers for the alleged sexual assault victim of Kobe Bryant say she may have to reconsider testifying against the NBA star at the criminal trial, in the wake of a series of damaging court mistakes that led to her name repeatedly being made public, along with allegations about her sexual history.

In their first television interview, John Clune and Lin Wood, the attorneys representing Bryant's alleged victim, told Good Morning America that repeated accidental releases of their client's name by Colorado's Eagle County Court violated the woman's privacy and made it impossible for her to respond to allegations the defense has made about her.

Last week, a clerk mistakenly posted a sealed document on the court's Web site that showed the alleged victim's name and said that there was a suggestion that DNA found on the woman did not belong to Bryant or to her but to a third party. An expert witness suggested in this document from a closed June hearing that the alleged victim had sex with someone after her encounter with by Bryant. Clune has vehemently denied the allegations.

It was the third time the court had accidentally posted sealed court documents in the Bryant case. The court released 200 pages from the hearing on Monday. Judge Terry Ruckriegle, who will preside over the trial set to begin Aug. 27, apologized to the alleged victim and her family.

But her lawyers said the apology helps very little. A gag order prevents the alleged victim from responding fully to the defense insinuations and accusations made public by the accidental postings.

The alleged victim's lawyers say she now has to consider whether she will be treated fairly by jurors in a criminal trial against Bryant. When asked whether she would testify at trial, one lawyer said she may be better off pursuing justice in a civil lawsuit.

"She's obviously got to rethink what she's going to do," said Lin Wood. "This young girl for over a year has stood up with resolve and with courage, despite the fact that her reputation has been smeared, her privacy has been invaded. … Now, three weeks before the trial, you have a defense paid expert's testimony released, she has to look at this and wonder whether she can be treated fairly in the criminal justice system."