Bill Cosby in the spotlight looking good!

[Sir Thumpsalot]

The fact that Cosby was a womanizer is no secret. It's also not against the law.

But here is one thing that has eluded me about this case: motive.

Cosby was a "hot item" even back in the early 60's. Women were climbing over themselves for him. That was also not a secret.

So whats the motivation for him to drug them? All the man would have had to do was give a wink and a smile. Thats all it would have taken. He didn't need drugs to have almost any woman he wanted at any time.
People who use date rape drugs are people who don't have the wherewithal to get down a ladies panties. Cosby was never one of these people.

And the amount of women who are coming out of the woodwork all at once, after 30-40 years after the alleged incidents? A few of them admitting that they had a sexual relationship for years before or after?

Sorry. That dog don't hunt. There. Is. No. Sufficient. Motive.

To me, this almost seems far too convenient to be nothing more than a lot of ditched would-be gold diggers.
And the sad thing is, I don't see a good outcome from this. Regardless of what happens, the reputations of both Cosby and the genuine victims of rape in general will have fallen because of this.

 

[Fern]

Character assassination: valid only for the accusers, never the accused.

His has already been assassinated.

I have often observed in 'real life' that when someone flings accusations, the other party flings some back. This is the norm.

The hard part is telling the truth from lies. Those who are serially guilty seem good at flinging back so many accusation that the whole thing gets terribly clouded and confused. They're good at it and it's effective.

However, in this case it's not Cosby making the accusations against the accusers. It's a third party and their criticisms seem factual (arrest and court records etc.). If they're not hopefully another journalist will uncover any lies/errors.

Like others have said, with so many accusations I find it difficult to believe he's innocent. And with so many accusations I think it possible some are false. The trick is to not let any false allegation(s) taint any true ones.

Fern

 

[Fern]

The fact that Cosby was a womanizer is no secret. It's also not against the law.

But here is one thing that has eluded me about this case: motive.

Cosby was a "hot item" even back in the early 60's. Women were climbing over themselves for him. That was also not a secret.

So whats the motivation for him to drug them? All the man would have had to do was give a wink and a smile. Thats all it would have taken. He didn't need drugs to have almost any woman he wanted at any time.
People who use date rape drugs are people who don't have the wherewithal to get down a ladies panties. Cosby was never one of these people.

And the amount of women who are coming out of the woodwork all at once, after 30-40 years after the alleged incidents? A few of them admitting that they had a sexual relationship for years before or after?

Sorry. That dog don't hunt. There. Is. No. Sufficient. Motive.

To me, this almost seems far too convenient to be nothing more than a lot of ditched would-be gold diggers.
And the sad thing is, I don't see a good outcome from this. Regardless of what happens, the reputations of both Cosby and the genuine victims of rape in general will have fallen because of this.

Interesting that you bring this up. I saw an article with a psychologist discussing a a rare condition known as somnophilia. This where the person is strongly sexually attracted to sleeping women/partners. It was suggested Cosby might have this. It seems he had a girl friend/mistress who was willing to have sex with him whenever, but he liked to drug her to sleep and then have sex with her. She found it odd and confusing.

Fern

 

[Sir Thumpsalot]

Interesting that you bring this up. I saw an article with a psychologist discussing a a rare condition known as somnophilia. This where the person is strongly sexually attracted to sleeping women/partners. It was suggested Cosby might have this. It seems he had a girl friend/mistress who was willing to have sex with him whenever, but he liked to drug her to sleep and then have sex with her. She found it odd and confusing.

Fern

Yeah. "Rare". It also apparently has connections with incest and necrophilia, from what my limited research shows.
Is there any evidence of Cosby has had relations with his unconscious sister? Or a corpse?

Sorry. While possible, it is incredibly remote. I would still need sufficient evidence. And we can't even find evidence that these rapes even took place.

 

[Fern]

A quick google shows no sisters, only brothers. And dead people tell no tales.

Fern

 

[Sir Thumpsalot]

Cosby has two problems,

1) He settled with the first claimant years ago to not go to court. Celebrities often use this tactic to not have their names and reputations dragged through the mud for years while waiting for their day in court. Attorneys often recommend this for those seeking quick and quite resolution.
While not being an unusual tactic (I did the same thing years ago, when I realized that allowing my neighbor to settle without an admission of guilt was cheaper than going to court. And no, it was a civil matter concerning property of which I sued a neighbor, not criminal () ). The point is, it is a common thing to do in to stay out of court.

2) And most frustratingly, his unwillingness to respond to the allegations in interviews. And while such a tactic is common for those in his generation (to not give relevance or attention to bullshit allegations), it isn't helping him today. It is giving others the impression that he is guilty.

If you will recall, Obama had the same problem when the truthers were asking for him to produce his long-form birth certificate. His unwillingness to respond gave the impression that he was guilty of the allegations.

 

[fskimospy]

Cosby has two problems,

1) He settled with the first claimant years ago to not go to court. Celebrities often use this tactic to not have their names and reputations dragged through the mud for years while waiting for their day in court. Attorneys often recommend this for those seeking quick and quite resolution.
While not being an unusual tactic (I did the same thing years ago, when I realized that allowing my neighbor to settle without an admission of guilt was cheaper than going to court. And no, it was a civil matter concerning property of which I sued a neighbor, not criminal () ). The point is, it is a common thing to do in to stay out of court.

2) And most frustratingly, his unwillingness to respond to the allegations in interviews. And while such a tactic is common for those in his generation (to not give relevance or attention to bullshit allegations), it isn't helping him today. It is giving others the impression that he is guilty.

If you will recall, Obama had the same problem when the truthers were asking for him to produce his long-form birth certificate. His unwillingness to respond gave the impression that he was guilty of the allegations.

Considering the multitude of accusations from dozens of different people spanning many decades, isn't the more likely answer that he actually committed at least some of these assaults?

 

[SheHateMe]

In this thread, people who have never been raped discuss how easy it is for a rape victim to remember exact dates. After all, who would know better?

Nothing surprises me about this forum anymore. This is the same forum where a poster claimed the Steubenville rape victim wasn't really raped because the boys involved only digitally penetrated her and that it was akin to someone putting their finger in your nose. Oh that and that she shouldn't have been so drunk.


If you are going to assassinate the character of the accusers, then you need to do the same for the accused. Lately, its been looking like everyone who has heard about this is suddenly a member of Bill Cosby's fan club.

Its just interesting that people think its impossible for this dude to have really been a creep.

 

[Linux23]

What? LOL.

 

[rudder]

But here is one thing that has eluded me about this case: motive.

So whats the motivation for him to drug them? All the man would have had to do was give a wink and a smile. Thats all it would have taken. He didn't need drugs to have almost any woman he wanted at any time.
People who use date rape drugs are people who don't have the wherewithal to get down a ladies panties. Cosby was never one of these people.

.

Sexual fetish? One of the accusers was someone who was dating Cosby and involved with him sexually. She claims she was drugged as well while dating Cosby even stating she would not have turned him down sexually.

 

[Sir Thumpsalot]

Considering the multitude of accusations from dozens of different people spanning many decades, isn't the more likely answer that he actually committed at least some of these assaults?

Nope. With 20 people all of a sudden popping out of the woodwork all at once? I think a lot of gold-diggers smelled fresh blood. And the great thing is, with such a long span of time, any likely evidence is lost.
As a result, these women don't have to product one iota of evidence to have the sheeple eating right out of their hands. And on the reverse, there is no way Cosby can "prove his innocence" (not that one should have to anyway...).
Even if he does step forward and deny the allegations, it won't do any good. No one will listen.

I'm sorry - but there's something fishy about 20 women coming forth at the same time, after 30-40 years. And some have already proven to have less than reliable stories.

 

[SheHateMe]

People who use date rape drugs are people who don't have the wherewithal to get down a ladies panties. Cosby was never one of these people.

Welp, case closed. Looks like everything has been cleared up!

Only guys who can't get any drug and rape women. :thumbsdown:

 

[shortylickens]

Even if every single one of those women is lying, that's only 25% of the women accusing him. How about the other 15?

If anyone deserves the benefit of the doubt, its Bill Cosby.

Without evidence I refuse to believe any of them. Thats a lot more just than simply convicting a man based on testimony.

 

[Sir Thumpsalot]

Sexual fetish? One of the accusers was someone who was dating Cosby and involved with him sexually. She claims she was drugged as well while dating Cosby even stating she would not have turned him down sexually.

Isn't she the one that claimed to have stayed with him even after the alleged event?

Yeah, extortion money would have absolutely nothing to do with this. Nothing to see here... :roll eyes:

I just love how people are also just coming out the woodwork to crucify him at all costs, considering there is exactly zero evidence against him to validate these claims.

Really classy. And you wonder why some in the public have a hard time believing rape victims. That's really going to help the future rape victims who were the real deal.

 

[SheHateMe]

The fact that Mr. Cosby won't even address the allegations levied against him shows me that there is definitely some guilt there. If someone accused you of something you didn't do, you aren't going to just sit there and hope it goes away.

Isn't she the one that claimed to have stayed with him even after the alleged event?

Yeah, extortion money would have absolutely nothing to do with this. Nothing to see here... :roll eyes:

Yea, because victims of abuse never go back to their abusers..

Really classy. And you wonder why some in the public have a hard time believing rape victims. That's really going to help the future rape victims who were the real deal.

Right, because rape victims "who were the real deal" have never been accused of lying like you guys are doing in this very thread. You know why its so hard to come forward when somebody has violated you? Its because people act just like you. "real deal" victims of rape often don't come forward because they are afraid that they wouldn't be believed. They are afraid to be called a liar because they didn't come forward immediately or because they went home and showered or bathed to wash away the shame before they filed that police report. They are afraid of people who will try to use their past sexual partners or activities to slut shame them and tell me they weren't actually raped. They are afraid of going up against someone who may be popular or in a position of power or influence.

Just because someone waited 20-40 years later to speak up DOES NOT mean that they were never victimized. Its also not surprising that people come forward with their stories at the same time. If you were raped by someone who was rich and famous, you may keep your mouth closed either because you are ashamed of what happened or you are scared no one will believe you......when you hear someone else who is courageous enough to speak up about what happen, it may inspire you, and other victims may be inspired as well. It doesn't mean you are a liar. It bothers me to even have to explain this.

Bill Cosby being a famous actor and comedian shouldn't be proof that he can't be an abuser. Not all of these women have dark pasts either. That also isn't proof that they are lying about being assaulted.

Stay classy, P&N.

 

[Fern]

@SheHateMe

So what do you want done here?

My understanding is that the S.o.L's have expired.

Cosby has had his attorney deny the allegations. I think that's the smartest (and most common) way to handle it.

Somewhere in the discussion it should be noted that the media is likely whipping this up for hits/viewership. I.e., their own profit.

I doubt we'll ever know what really happened.

Fern

 

[Sir Thumpsalot]

Welp, case closed. Looks like everything has been cleared up!

Only guys who can't get any drug and rape women. :thumbsdown:

It proves significant lack of motive.

To be honest, I can understand why Cosby doesn't want to give attention to these allegations that haven't a shred of proof: with people like you coming up with all kinds of nonsense to convict him with, it's no doubt. Personally, I'm wondering why I'm wasting my time on it.

You mentioned earlier that what if he was this creep who did these things?
Maybe he did. However, there is zero evidence. None. Nada. These supposed victims sat on these stories for 30-40 years. They said nothing during that time. They waited until the statute of limitations ran out long ago.
Were they afraid? Maybe. But imagine this: in the 60's/70's, a black guy rapes a bunch of white women. Yeah, no one would have been asking for his head. Not. Think about it.

Some have claimed that no one would have believed them then. Maybe they are right.
However, this stigma was largely lifted during the 80's. Far more women came forward in the 80's successfully claiming rape. And people believed them. Why didn't this horde of Cosby victims come forward then?

But no, wait 40 fucking years and then cry victim? WTF? Does that honestly make sense to you.

But of course it does. To you, he is already guilty and convicted. End of story.

 

[Sir Thumpsalot]

The fact that Mr. Cosby won't even address the allegations levied against him shows me that there is definitely some guilt there. If someone accused you of something you didn't do, you aren't going to just sit there and hope it goes away.

He has denied them. Happy now?

Yea, because victims of abuse never go back to their abusers.

This wasn't abuse (hitting). This was rape. Who the hell gets drugged and date raped, and then comes back for more?

Right, because rape victims "who were the real deal" have never been accused of lying like you guys are doing in this very thread. You know why its so hard to come forward when somebody has violated you? Its because people act just like you. "real deal" victims of rape often don't come forward because they are afraid that they wouldn't be believed. They are afraid to be called a liar because they didn't come forward immediately or because they went home and showered or bathed to wash away the shame before they filed that police report. They are afraid of people who will try to use their past sexual partners or activities to slut shame them and tell me they weren't actually raped. They are afraid of going up against someone who may be popular or in a position of power or influence.

Just because someone waited 20-40 years later to speak up DOES NOT mean that they were never victimized. Its also not surprising that people come forward with their stories at the same time. If you were raped by someone who was rich and famous, you may keep your mouth closed either because you are ashamed of what happened or you are scared no one will believe you......when you hear someone else who is courageous enough to speak up about what happen, it may inspire you, and other victims may be inspired as well. It doesn't mean you are a liar. It bothers me to even have to explain this.

Bill Cosby being a famous actor and comedian shouldn't be proof that he can't be an abuser. Not all of these women have dark pasts either. That also isn't proof that they are lying about being assaulted.

Nice speech. Except one thing: There. Isn't. A. Shred. Of. Proof. That the rich celebrity with lots of money raped anyone.
He doesn't need to prove his innocence. He doesn't have to respond to the allegations. Thats the part that you have a hard time understanding.

Stay classy, P&N.

With examples like you, why should it?

 

[SheHateMe]

How does it prove lack of motive? Are you that dumb that you think Bill Cosby could have whatever woman he wanted with just a wink of a smile? You literally said that a few posts ago.

with people like you coming up with all kinds of nonsense to convict him with, it's no doubt.

Adjust your glasses. I didn't "come up" with anything, I was simply challenging the way some of you are choosing to explain away or dismiss these allegations. And also the way you are choosing to speak about people who allege abuse in general.

These supposed victims sat on these stories for 30-40 years. They said nothing during that time. They waited until the statute of limitations ran out long ago.
Were they afraid? Maybe. But imagine this: in the 60's/70's, a black guy rapes a bunch of white women. Yeah, no one would have been asking for his head. Not. Think about it.

It is not uncommon for victims of abuse to not come forward immediately after the abuse took place. I'm not going to bother going deep into this because I have already explained it in a previous post.

Secondly, your comment about a black guy raping a bunch of women in the 60s and 70s is just a deflection tactic. Most of these women were nobodies when the alleged assaults took place. So, exactly what do you think the reaction would have been? Please, it would have been swept under the rug.

But no, wait 40 fucking years and then cry victim? WTF? Does that honestly make sense to you.

But of course it does. To you, he is already guilty and convicted. End of story.

As someone who has been personally affected by both rape and domestic violence, the amount of time someone waits before they make an outcry is irrelevant. Even if the SOL is up, just being able to finally tell someone else about what happened is a very powerful feeling.

I never said that Bill Cosby was guilty or that everyone was telling the truth. I simply said that his behavior after these allegations came out makes him seem guilty.

This wasn't abuse (hitting). This was rape. Who the hell gets drugged and date raped, and then comes back for more?

Rape is a form of abuse, dear. Again, it is not uncommon for victims of abuse to return to their abusers. I'm pretty sure you can find a plethora of information on this....so, I'm not sure why you are pretending that this concept is so absurd.

Nice speech. Except one thing: There. Isn't. A. Shred. Of. Proof. That the rich celebrity with lots of money raped anyone.
He doesn't need to prove his innocence. He doesn't have to respond to the allegations. Thats the part that you have a hard time understanding.

So, it seems you are being intentionally obtuse. Let me state again, I never said he was guilty, I said he was acting like he has guilt. The man refuses to speak from his own mouth about the allegations. We are talking about someone who is quite famous for his work and has thousands of fans choosing to hide behind his lawyers to defend himself. And sure, he doesn't have to respond to the allegations, but when he does things like beg a reporter to remove a clip from an interview (where nothing was said except for him not wanting to talk about the allegations) because he doesn't anyone to see it....it kind of makes you wonder. Clearly, given his fame, there would be a huge amount of doubt about whether or not he is guilty. He should not be afraid of professing his innocence from his own mouth.

With examples like you, why should it?

Ooooooh, you got me there! Lets get personal

 

[werepossum]

Character assassination: valid only for the accusers, never the accused.

You misspelled "Facts", dude.

Even if every single one of those women is lying, that's only 25% of the women accusing him. How about the other 15?

Yep, there's absolutely no chance that some women would dishonestly jump onto a case demanding $100 million in damages from an extremely wealthy man. Oh wait . . .

Man, that one chick was raped so bad she forgot the year it even happened!! Poor woman, must have been traumatic.

/s

lol +1

I hope the accusations are false because I really like him. It's worth pointing out that the old axiom, "Where there's smoke there's fire", is not actually true. Sometimes there's just something smoking. Sometimes there's someone generating smoke for their own purposes.

 

[Victorian Gray]

If anyone deserves the benefit of the doubt, its Bill Cosby.

Without evidence I refuse to believe any of them. Thats a lot more just than simply convicting a man based on testimony.

Why?

 

[Sir Thumpsalot]

Why?

Because there is no evidence to charge him with.
There is no evidence that the crimes actually took place.
Several of the accusers stories have already fallen apart.
The fact that almost all of these women have stepped forward, 30-40 years later (and apparently more popping up every couple of days), is somewhat suspicious. Kind of like an unstoppable gold digger horde.
The fact that he is rich, and can be thought of to be easily extorted.

Thats a pretty good start.

But primarily because... THERE IS ZERO EVIDENCE against him. Read it again.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Because there is no evidence to charge him with.
There is no evidence that the crimes actually took place.
Several of the accusers stories have already fallen apart.
The fact that almost all of these women have stepped forward, 30-40 years later (and apparently more popping up every couple of days), is somewhat suspicious. Kind of like an unstoppable gold digger horde.
The fact that he is rich, and can be thought of to be easily extorted.

Thats a pretty good start.

But primarily because... THERE IS ZERO EVIDENCE against him. Read it again.

You didn't answer the question I was asking but thanks for playing.

 

[Sir Thumpsalot]

You didn't answer the question I was asking but thanks for playing.

Your question was in response to "If anyone deserves the benefit of the doubt, its Bill Cosby."

My answer is essentially Bill Cosbys situation in a nutshell. There is no evidence. At all. He is rich, and can be potentially extorted. The way in which women popped out claims almost daily is fairly suspicious.

If you want to include his reputation as a beloved entertainer, sure you can pop that in too if you wish. But it is obvious that answer would not be suitable for you, and you would likely refer to it as personal bias. Sorry, but that bait is too easy not to see.

Now what part of my answer did not pertain to your question again?

 

[werepossum]

It proves significant lack of motive.

To be honest, I can understand why Cosby doesn't want to give attention to these allegations that haven't a shred of proof: with people like you coming up with all kinds of nonsense to convict him with, it's no doubt. Personally, I'm wondering why I'm wasting my time on it.

You mentioned earlier that what if he was this creep who did these things?
Maybe he did. However, there is zero evidence. None. Nada. These supposed victims sat on these stories for 30-40 years. They said nothing during that time. They waited until the statute of limitations ran out long ago.
Were they afraid? Maybe. But imagine this: in the 60's/70's, a black guy rapes a bunch of white women. Yeah, no one would have been asking for his head. Not. Think about it.

Some have claimed that no one would have believed them then. Maybe they are right.
However, this stigma was largely lifted during the 80's. Far more women came forward in the 80's successfully claiming rape. And people believed them. Why didn't this horde of Cosby victims come forward then?

But no, wait 40 fucking years and then cry victim? WTF? Does that honestly make sense to you.

But of course it does. To you, he is already guilty and convicted. End of story.

At the time, there would be physical evidence that at least sex had been consummated, and likely evidence (e.g. tearing, abrasions) suggesting that it might have been non-consensual. I can see that SOME women might have decided not to come forward, but here we're expected to accept dozens of them, as well as to ignore the fact that should Cosby decide to settle then an accusation might net them a life-changing amount of money.

Doesn't mean that these rapes didn't happen, but the mere existence of an orchestrated campaign to gain money and attention is not evidence that they did.

Why?

Because by all accounts he's a very decent man. He's not being accused of acute violence against an ex like O.J. or bat shit crazy evil like Spector, but of being a monster, over decades. Some seemingly decent men are monsters, of course, but seems to me that it's very unlikely that Cosby is. I'll need more evidence than a gaggle of "He raped me thirty years ago, and I didn't bother to report it at the time but now I deserve money."