I get the desire to punish him, but the fact is he'll die in prison. Does it really matter if that's next week or in ten years? Next week would be a lot cheaper.
Maybe it's only fair we donate 50 sacrificial maidens to such a pure minded god. Apparently the god seems to see it that way.
I see it as quite common for the psychopath to hide his inner sickness behind virtue. Of course it is also quite common to attack a virtuous person with the claim of moral corruption. I believe that trials, especially ones in which there is money for the best legal representation, to sort out one from the other. I have no logical reason to despute the verdict. I did not hear the case. I also can't imagine anybody independent of those who appear to have been harmed wanting to see the result that we have.
I see it as quite common for the psychopath to hide his inner sickness behind virtue. Of course it is also quite common to attack a virtuous person with the claim of moral corruption. I believe that trials, especially ones in which there is money for the best legal representation, to sort out one from the other. I have no logical reason to despute the verdict. I did not hear the case. I also can't imagine anybody independent of those who appear to have been harmed wanting to see the result that we have.
woolfe9998
Lifer
- Apr 8, 2013
- 16,242
- 14,245
- 136
OK this is a clever legal strategy. Evidently 7 of Cosby's accusers have filed defamation lawsuits against him. The theory being that he called them liars when he denied their accusations. All but one of them have settled with Cosby's insurance carrier, without his permission (according to him).
https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/celebr...ut-my-insurer-will/ar-BBVFcrU?ocid=spartanntp
A defamation theory would of course turn on the question of the whether the underlying sex crimes happened or not. Meaning that is what a jury would be deciding. It seems like an end around the statute of limitations for the sex allegations. Paradoxically, Cosby could have avoided liability by admitting the allegations or saying nothing about them at all.
What do people think about this?
https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/celebr...ut-my-insurer-will/ar-BBVFcrU?ocid=spartanntp
A defamation theory would of course turn on the question of the whether the underlying sex crimes happened or not. Meaning that is what a jury would be deciding. It seems like an end around the statute of limitations for the sex allegations. Paradoxically, Cosby could have avoided liability by admitting the allegations or saying nothing about them at all.
What do people think about this?
UberNeuman
Lifer
- Nov 4, 1999
- 16,937
- 3,087
- 126
UglyCasanova
Lifer
- Mar 25, 2001
- 19,275
- 1,361
- 126
I honk hst opens up an enormous can of worms and the last thing we need in this country is more lawsuits.
woolfe9998
Lifer
- Apr 8, 2013
- 16,242
- 14,245
- 136
Haven't made up my mind yet, but that's not an unreasonable observation. The SoL's are in place because the courts don't want to be clogged with lawsuits over stuff that happened eons ago where the evidence and witness recollections are stale. One of these plaintiffs says she was raped by him in the early 1970's.
This theory is a total end around that. The jury would have to first decide if the sex allegations are true to determine if there's defamation, then they're supposed to only award damages for the defamation, but it seems likely that if they believe the accuser, they're going to award damages for the underlying sex claims. It's a problem but I can't think of a way around it since legally speaking the defamation claim is sound. There doesn't seem to be a good theory where they can just be thrown out. One court did throw one of the plaintiff's suits out, but I don't think their reasoning was sound.
It also creates an odd situation for those accused. You can either admit you did it, in which case you're a [rapist/other hoprrible thing] deny it, in which case you can be sued for calling the accuser a liar, or you can say nothing, in which case everyone assumes you're a [rapist/other horrible thing].
I think Cosby is almost certainly guilty of raping at least some of these women, maybe most or all of them. I just think allowing these defamation claims is a problem but I don't see a way around it under our legal system.
Last edited:
woolfe9998
Lifer
- Apr 8, 2013
- 16,242
- 14,245
- 136
That's good because 6 of his accusers have gotten payouts on it. I wonder why the other 50 haven't sued. Maybe he hasn't specifically denied each accusation.
cytg111
Lifer
- Mar 17, 2008
- 26,745
- 16,031
- 136
I can see the problem in this. The only way to play this game is to shut up.. If you are a public person that would probably be career suicide and thus it would be easy as snapping your finger to end a public persons career. Also for whatever crime the punishment should be that of the law not creative lawyers. I am pretty convinced that Cosby is a POS but there is still the prospect of miscarriage of justice ... who is going to pay back the defamation package if someone gets cleared down the road?
MomentsofSanity
Lifer
- Jan 25, 2011
- 17,162
- 9,680
- 146
Oh man the irony...
So now he is regretting doing those commercials? Btw do they still make those?
woolfe9998
Lifer
- Apr 8, 2013
- 16,242
- 14,245
- 136
Yeah it's a problem. The only thing I can think of is issue a public statement, "on advice of counsel, I will not publicly comment on these allegations unless or until there is a legal proceeding." Accusations can be denied in court and there can't be a defamation claim because of litigation privilege. Still, I don't think that comes off much better than saying nothing. Still pretty much career suicide.
MomentsofSanity
Lifer
- Jan 25, 2011
- 17,162
- 9,680
- 146
Nope. They got yanked in the late 90s from shelves. They just stopped being profitable.Oh man the irony...
Jello licensed the name to the Popsicle company in 2004 and they began making their own version. It was terrible. And that was the end of pudding pops.
Time for a Threaaaaaaaaad Backfire! OP Made an inaccurate thread title apparently.
www.reuters.com
Seriously, what in the flying fuck.
Bill Cosby home from prison after court reverses sexual assault conviction
Bill Cosby was freed from prison and returned home on Wednesday, less than two hours after Pennsylvania's highest court overturned his sexual assault conviction, saying he never should have faced charges after striking a non-prosecution deal with a previous district attorney more than 15 years ago.
Seriously, what in the flying fuck.
ch33zw1z
Lifer
- Nov 4, 2004
- 39,838
- 20,433
- 146
The Reuters link has like nothing in it
www.nbcnews.com
Prosecutor mistakes, ruh roh!
Bill Cosby released after assault conviction overturned by Pennsylvania Supreme Court
A previous prosecutor had decided not to charge the comic and actor, and he relied on that move to speak freely and give incriminating statements.
www.nbcnews.com
Prosecutor mistakes, ruh roh!
If that's the case then he should go free as that's egregious prosecutorial misconduct.The Reuters link has like nothing in it
Bill Cosby released after assault conviction overturned by Pennsylvania Supreme Court
A previous prosecutor had decided not to charge the comic and actor, and he relied on that move to speak freely and give incriminating statements.
Prosecutor mistakes, ruh roh!
That being said, that means a monster is going to be free again and nobody should be happy about that.
ch33zw1z
Lifer
- Nov 4, 2004
- 39,838
- 20,433
- 146
I'm not a legal expert by any stretch. It just says that a previous prosecutor had decided not to charge him. How is that misconduct?
Lost_in_the_HTTP
Lifer
- Nov 17, 2019
- 13,432
- 7,904
- 136
After this and Epstein, these 'agreements' need to be outlawed.
If one chooses not to charge, that should have no bearing on future charges since Jeopardy wasn't attached.
If one chooses not to charge, that should have no bearing on future charges since Jeopardy wasn't attached.
The previous prosecutor made an agreement with him not to be charged in exchange for him providing what amounted to incriminating testimony in a civil case. Prosecutors then used that testimony against him at trial. That's a pretty egregious violation of his rights.
It wasn't that they decided not to charge him, it's that they promised not to charge him in exchange for him essentially incriminating himself in testimony that they later used against him for a conviction.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter