Bill Cosby in the spotlight looking good!

[Sir Thumpsalot]

AAAAANND another accuser shows up...

Dr. Phil asks, "Do you know if he molested you in some way, do you know, you don’t really know what did happen?"

"No," responds Lisa, who says she is coming forward after Janice Dickinson's allegations against Cosby made Lisa concerned for what may have happened to her.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/18/bill-cosby-scandal_n_6349842.html

Obviously he's guilty

My question would be, when do so many accusers show up with little to no evidence that maybe the allegations DO start to become hard to swallow?

 

[zinfamous]

I want the same level of evidence that you would want if you were accused of such a crime. I'm tired of the media and attention-whores who think they know the law from their asses running around convicting celebrities on such flimsy evidence.
If they are being truthful, then they need to live with the ramifications of their decisions to sit on this for 30-40 years.

Sorry if that offends your sensibilities (well, no I'm not, to be honest...), but thats the way it goes. I really couldn't care less if you disagree with me.

And if you don't believe that celebrities can be wrongfully accused and have the media get it wrong, just ask Keanu Reeves, Tucker Carlson, and David Copperfield, to name a few. All were accused of rape, all had to go to court (if memory serves, I might be wrong on this...), all were convicted in the eyes of the media. And oh right...they were later considered totally innocent.

repeating the same tired and roundly defeated arguments over and over and over and over and over again?


Incorruptible?

 

[zinfamous]

lol +1 That is a nice round number.

Carla Ferrigno has said Bill Cosby assaulted her - I think it was more a pawing thing. I know (or at least knew, it's been awhile) someone who actually is friends with the Ferrignos and described them as the nicest, most down-to-earth people you'd ever meet, so I find that more believable than most such accusations. She was a Playboy bunny at the time, so probably half the men there pawed her (a LOT of men seem to think such women are there to be groped rather than ogled) but it is consistent with other accusations.

awesome.

playboy bunny makes an accusation. Good thing she can be discredited because, obviously, she is meat deserving of nothing more than to be groped. So, anything she says is instantly invalid.

I hate contemporary 3rd wave feminism, but this is pathetic.
I expect better from you.

 

[Victorian Gray]

repeating the same tired and roundly defeated arguments over and over and over and over and over again?


Incorruptible?

But that's what Thiker, nehalem and a couple of others all do as well. Mind you, they've all suddenly disappeared and, lo and behold...

 

[Victorian Gray]

Possible criminal charge? This one, if true, seems to fall with in the statute of limitations timeline.

"A model who claims Bill Cosby drugged and sexually abused her at the Playboy Mansion met with Los Angeles police on Wednesday to pursue criminal charges against the comedian over the 2008 incident.

An attorney for Chloe Goins said after the meeting that his client is the first woman accusing Cosby of sexual misconduct whose case may fall within the statute of limitations. More than 15 women have accused Cosby of sexual misconduct, including several who say the comedian drugged and raped them in incidents dating back at least four decades."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/arts/bill-co...h-police-to-pursue-criminal-charges-1.2900971

 

[Linux23]

Proooooooof

 

[CZroe]

Alegaaaation

FTFY

 

[zinfamous]

FTFY

I read that as him asking for proof.

 

[Hugo Drax]

Just because a bunch of people say something about somebody does not make it true. Could be a lynch mob out for money. Is it possible that a these women could be a bunch of copy cats? First one comes out, then others think they'll get a piece of him too, so they jump on the bandwagon. Let's go get us some of a wealthy black man's money. Aren't they all white women, so far?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kern_County_child_abuse_cases

The Kern County child abuse cases started the day care sexual abuse hysteria of the 1980s in Kern County, California.[1] The cases involved claims of pedophile-sex-ring-performed Satanic ritual abuse, with as many as 60 children testifying they had been abused. At least 36 people were convicted and most of them spent years imprisoned. Thirty-four convictions were overturned on appeal. The district attorney responsible for the convictions was Ed Jagels,[2] who was sued by at least one of those whose conviction was overturned,[3] and who remained in office until 2009.[4] Two convicts died in prison, unable to clear their names.

 

[compuwiz1]

As a politically incorrect uncle Tom, who has pissed off many a liberal, is it any wonder that there could be a mob of character assassins? I'm not buying it. They all had their opportunity to file criminal complaints. They all waited until now. I smell a fish, a rat and gold digging beavers.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Just because a bunch of people say something about somebody does not make it true. Could be a lynch mob out for money. Is it possible that a these women could be a bunch of copy cats? First one comes out, then others think they'll get a piece of him too, so they jump on the bandwagon. Let's go get us some of a wealthy black man's money. Aren't they all white women, so far?

As a politically incorrect uncle Tom, who has pissed off many a liberal, is it any wonder that there could be a mob of character assassins? I'm not buying it. They all had their opportunity to file criminal complaints. They all waited until now. I smell a fish, a rat and gold digging beavers.

What a repugnant, ignorant, misogynistic piece of commentary. No, they are not "all white women," by any stretch, and the great majority of them stand to gain nothing from this. Cosby, on the other hand, stands to have his legacy tarnished, to lose millions of dollars, and to, worst case scenario, go to prison.

I find it nauseating that there are people whose hunger to defend Cosby is so great that they are willing to tar and feather the victims (er, I mean, "gold digging beavers"). As far as I'm concerned it takes a truly insane level of willful suspension of disbelief to side with Cosby at this point, and anyone who would refer to his victims as "gold digging beavers" is, for lack of a better term, an asshole.

 

[NetWareHead]

All that just sounds like is you're an idiot with a terrible memory.

I remember the exact date my grandpa died, which was 8 years ago. I also remember the exact date I closed on my house, almost 4 years ago.

Getting raped legitimately is an extremely traumatic event, which can change your life and your personality forever. You'll at least remember the YEAR it happened in.

Agreed. And if you are going to make accusatory statements about rape, you better have all your facts straight.

 

[Aegeon]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kern_County_child_abuse_cases

The Kern County child abuse cases started the day care sexual abuse hysteria of the 1980s in Kern County, California.[1] The cases involved claims of pedophile-sex-ring-performed Satanic ritual abuse, with as many as 60 children testifying they had been abused. At least 36 people were convicted and most of them spent years imprisoned. Thirty-four convictions were overturned on appeal. The district attorney responsible for the convictions was Ed Jagels,[2] who was sued by at least one of those whose conviction was overturned,[3] and who remained in office until 2009.[4] Two convicts died in prison, unable to clear their names.

You realize that truly has practically absolutely nothing to do whatsoever with the Cosby case in any respect whatsoever?

You're talking about children who generally ended up inadvertently (or apparently deliberately in one case) coached to give testimony while they were young about acts supposed committed against them while they were kids. Today we have plenty of evidence that young children are maluable and can end up accidentally telling an adult in question whatever testimony they believe the adult wants to hear in certain situations if they are not careful in how the adult conducts the interview. (Children can also basically be persuaded to falsely remember certain events if they are young enough and pressured the right way.)

In this case involving Cosby, at least virtually all the victims were at least 18 at the time of the incidents, and are old enough by the time they have reported these incidents that its obviously nothing vaguely resembling a young child being coached to say they remembered some specific. The specifics of what they would be expected to remember about the incident are also different than a child remember an incident in the past. You simply have to believe every accuser in this case is intentionally lying (with perhaps at most one or two simply being crazy which should still come out eventually with all the scrutiny in this case) in order for Cosby to be innocent here.

It should be noted there is no evidence whatsoever that some of the accusers are going to sue Cosby, which makes the gold digger label on all of them especially glaringly dubious.

 

[soundforbjt]

Bill Cosby has admitted to getting prescription Quaaludes to give to women he wanted to have sex with, newly released documents show.

The documents, dating back to 2005, stem from a civil lawsuit filed by Andrea Constand -- one of the dozens of women who have publicly accused the comedian of sexual assault. The records were made public Monday after The Associated Press went to court to compel their release.

In a sworn deposition, Cosby answered questions from Constand's attorney, Dolores Troiani.

"When you got the Quaaludes, was it in your mind that you were going to use these Quaaludes for young women that you wanted to have sex with?" Troiani asked.

"Yes," Cosby replied.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/07/us/bill-cosby-quaaludes-sexual-assault-allegations/

 

[CZroe]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/07/us/bill-cosby-quaaludes-sexual-assault-allegations/

Look at how carefully worded it is. It isn't the damning confession they want us to assume it is. He basically said "I offered them a high so they would sleep with me." It's almost more of a bribe.

 

[zinfamous]

Look at how carefully worded it is. It isn't the damning confession they want us to assume it is. He basically said "I offered them a high so they would sleep with me." It's almost more of a bribe.

So, the fact that he's long been: "I never drugged women for sex" to this rather old admission of "yes, I drugged these women for sex" doesn't really register anything in you?

Not yet?



...how about now? Maybe a little something? Whatever--it's been a rather well-known truth in his community for decades now. The carefully guarded snippets from past depositions, I suppose, aren't going to sway those that never had exposure to any of this until very recently.

His defenders seem to be digging deeper into the "Not proven in court!" argument. Which is, basically, "He's as innocent as OJ!"

 

[CZroe]

Sure enough, the report jumps to a bunch of people ignoring that it didn't lead to a conviction and assuming that it says more than it says and printing their statements claiming it proves or says something it didn't say.

People offer drugs and alcohol to prospective consensual sex partners all the time. "Can I buy you a beer?" It doesn't prove or admit to drugging anyone against their will to have an unconsensual sexual encounter with them.

So, the fact that he's long been: "I never drugged women for sex" to this rather old admission of "yes, I drugged these women for sex" doesn't really register anything in you?



Not yet?







...how about now? Maybe a little something? Whatever--it's been a rather well-known truth in his community for decades now. The carefully guarded snippets from past depositions, I suppose, aren't going to sway those that never had exposure to any of this until very recently.



His defenders seem to be digging deeper into the "Not proven in court!" argument. Which is, basically, "He's as innocent as OJ!"

Offered them drugs != "drugged"

You are doing exactly what the others in the article are doing: claiming that something was said which wasn't said with a response that only makes sense with that interpretation.

 

[jhbball]

Look at how carefully worded it is. It isn't the damning confession they want us to assume it is. He basically said "I offered them a high so they would sleep with me." It's almost more of a bribe.

Holy shit, stop. He's clearly a rapist. Let me guess, you're a gamergate fan?

 

[soundforbjt]

Holy shit, stop. He's clearly a rapist. Let me guess, you're a gamergate fan?

Well, now Trump knows who's doing the raping ! :sneaky:

 

[CZroe]

Holy shit, stop. He's clearly a rapist. Let me guess, you're a gamergate fan?

Stop WHAT? I didn't say that he isn't a rapist. I said that this statement does not say what people are assuming it says. I'm trying to stop the run-away stupid train before it leaves the station before people make idiots of themselves with replies that make assumptions about what was said. You should appreciate it.


I do not follow Gamergate and don't know which side "pro-Gamergate" represents.

Example:
"About Bill Cosby. Sadly his own testimony offers PROOF of terrible deeds, which is ALL I have ever required to believe the accusations"
this was spoken by a former supporter. Does "proof of terrible deeds" mean proof that he bought drugs ("terrible deed!")? Proof that he shared them? That's all he admitted to. People look like illiterate idiots when they talk like this.

Another alleged victim said "And now that the truth has come out -- that he has bought drugs in order to drug women to have sex with him -- I'm just so relieved that the truth has come out." What came out was that he bought drugs for women he wanted to have sex with and shared them with them. That's not the same as drugging them, but she doesn't shy away from saying "in order to drug women." Reading comprehension. Also, doesn't this mean that the truth also came out back then? Why is it suddenly more meaningful now than when he was actually facing an accuser in court?

It's ominous, but hardly damning, especially in light of the previous case where it failed to convict him. He very well may be guilty, but take it for what it TRULY is: one more thing that makes him look guilty but doesn't actually prove anything.

 

[soundforbjt]

Stop WHAT? I didn't say that he isn't a rapist. I said that this statement does not say what people are assuming it says. I'm trying to stop the run-away stupid train before it leaves the station before people make idiots of themselves with replies that make assumptions about what was said. You should appreciate it.


I do not follow Gamergate and don't know which side "pro-Gamergate" represents.

Example:
"About Bill Cosby. Sadly his own testimony offers PROOF of terrible deeds, which is ALL I have ever required to believe the accusations"
this was spoken by a former supporter. Does "proof of terrible deeds" mean proof that he bought drugs ("terrible deed!")? Proof that he shared them? That's all he admitted to. People look like illiterate idiots when they talk like this.

Another alleged victim said "And now that the truth has come out -- that he has bought drugs in order to drug women to have sex with him -- I'm just so relieved that the truth has come out." What came out was that he bought drugs for women he wanted to have sex with and shared them with them. That's not the same as drugging them, but she doesn't shy away from saying "in order to drug women." Reading comprehension. Also, doesn't this mean that the truth also came out back then? Why is it suddenly more meaningful now than when he was actually facing an accuser in court?

It's ominous, but hardly damning, especially in light of the previous case where it failed to convict him. He very well may be guilty, but take it for what it TRULY is: one more thing that makes him look guilty but doesn't actually prove anything.

Are you citing the case where he settled out of court? Pretty hard to get a conviction when you settle out of court.

 

[xBiffx]

Are you citing the case where he settled out of court? Pretty hard to get a conviction when you settle out of court.

And its hard to get a criminal conviction in a civil court. A settlement isn't the same a plea bargain which happens outside criminal court precedings with the district attorney.

 

[alien42]

Horseshit. I have watched Cosby for decades now on TV. Anybody watching can tell that he is a decent and honorable person. You have a bunch of hearsay and smears. That is ALL you have. Shame on you.

With regards to OJ, there was physical evidence that he committed the atrocity, her blood in his car, his blood at the scene, etc... In Cosby's case you have NO physical evidence whatsoever, just accusations made decades later. Cosby has MORE than earned the benefit of the doubt.

You are judging his behaviour based on scurrilous, unproven accusations and NOT the proven record. If you can't prove it, IT DID NOT HAPPEN! Every proven fact that I am aware of STONGLY indicates that Bill Cosby is indeed a decent and honorable man.

Um right..... Gloria Allred (a lawyer representing some of these hags) has called for a $100 million fund to be set up by Cosby for the victims. This reeks of an old fashioned money grab...

Um, how about the fact that we know and love Bill Cosby and everything he has done for American culture? You know Fat Albert and The Cosby Show.... It would be heartbreaking to see that wonderful legacy destroyed by unsubstantiated rumors.

Does it seem odd to you that nobody has come forward to state that they supplied opiates to Bill Cosby? If he was drugging all of this women over the decades, it would be necessary for him to have a supplier of drugs. I haven't heard a whisper of ANYBODY supplying Bill Cosby with drugs capable of knocking people out.

Secondly, if Bill Cosby was really giving opiates to multiple women over the decades, how come there wasn't a single documented visit to an emergency room? Opiates are EXTREMELY dangerous drugs and are a leading cause of death with 10's of thousands of victims every year. They are even more lethal when mixed with alcohol. It strikes me as more than a little odd that he could SAFELY knock out that many women without a single medical emergency, that doesn't seem possible. I have an uncle that died of an opiate overdose on the operating table and a brother who went to the emergency room due to a prescription opiate overdose. Both of these incidents involved professional md's not a comedian with a bottle of whiskey and pills.

hey BS Hole, are you going to continue to defend Cosby the rapist and attack his victims using your shitty and completly wrong logic even after the most recent evidence has been exposed?

 

[Brian Stirling]

That the Cos has admitted to plying women with drugs for sex and that women have been claiming for 50 years that the Cos drugged him for sex should cause any and all that defend him to go ... wait, what?

His pattern of behavior has not changed much in five decades and his admission fits the allegations to a tee. I was one of those that doubted the accusers at first, but as the numbers racked up and the similarity of his MO became apparent, I had to admit it was more likely than not that he was, and is, a serial rapist. The admission of his giving drugs for sex was, for me, the clincher.

The number of accusers is now around 50 but there are indications it is well into the hundreds. Cos may wind up being the most prolific serial rapist in our nations history AND he may never be prosecuted for it!


Brian

 

[IGBT]

he should just make an official apology like bill clinton and move on.