Don't Compare Duke Lacrosse to Kobe Bryant

Andrea Peyser begins her column in the New York Post today about the Duke lacrosse case like this:

REVERSE the races, change the sport, and you have the Kobe Bryant "rape" hoax all over again.

A March 21 Delores Williams column begins like this:

It is striking the similarities of the Duke Case and the Kobe Bryant case, just a reversal of the color of the alleged victim.

Both columns go on to make comparisons between the Duke lacrosse case and the Kobe Bryant rape case of 2003. No one should make that comparison. The two cases aren't similar at all.

The charges against Bryant were dropped for one reason, and one reason only: The accuser decided she did not want to testify. The charges against the lacrosse players were dropped even though the accuser did want to testify. The reason? All the evidence in the Duke case pointed to the innocence of the defendants. In the Bryant case, the evidence was ambiguous.

Also consider the public statements of the accused. From the time they were accused until they were declared innocent yesterday, the Duke lacrosse players never wavered in their claims of innocence. Bryant's statements evolved, concluding when he said this after his case was dismissed:

"Although I truly believe this encounter between us was consensual, I recognize now that she did not and does not view this incident the same way I did."

We'll never know for sure what happened between Bryant and his accuser. But we do know for sure that the Duke lacrosse players are innocent.