Please, duhvert more. Its entertaining when you have no argument left to make.
Evidence isn't hearsay or he said/she said and its especially not evidence for proving rape. Are you honestly going to stand by your fast and loose argument? Because that's all I've been saying.
damn, I thought you had nothing left, so I was just playing along :\ (now read on, because you will discover moments in which I agree with your complaints. but, you must read on)
He said/she said is, obviously evidence--and you know that as much as I know that. that is called testimony. It is entered into a court of trial as evidence, and, typically, a jury considers this testimony in the framework of a criminal trial.
You are arguing that there is a gulf of distance between what they are saying now, verses what they say in court.
You are, in effect, arguing that there is a fundamental change in the validity of words, completely dependent on the setting in which those words are spoken.
Legally, I would say that you are correct. Fundamentally, I would say that you are very wrong about this point, because you are. They are evidence either way. The are official, they are lawful, only after being sworn in as testimony.
Now, do I have a problem with these public trials that are seemingly set up to damn the accused beyond a sense of reasonable prosecution before a trial can even happen? Yes, I am. I think it's sick.
In a vacuum, in a world in which all of this started 2 weeks ago for Cosby, I would agree with you.
...but this isn't the case. This did not start 2 weeks ago. It started 50+ years ago. Even so, is there and will there be an even greater rush to judgement and public damning of Cosby, before he has had his fair trial? Sure, and I'm not happy with that. But it is also fair to say, and I would hope that a rational individual such as yourself would admit, that there is a dearth of fairness towards how his accusers' words have been treated these last 50 years--recall that Cosby has admitted to sex with nearly all of them, just that he has a different perspective on how things went down.
Now, why was NBC so quick to drop him from his upcoming project? Rash decision, judgement before trial? Maybe.....maybe not. Do be aware that Cosby, from 1982-1995, was the single most powerful TV personality on the planet. Dude actually bid to
purchase NBC in ~1988. Consider that long before then, and at that time, and well after, his publicists and lawyers, and his NBC handlers, were still fielding these allegations and doing their absolute best to bury these stories. Many times through payouts.
Why is NBC so quick to drop this legendary executive talent? Surely, he has years of goodwill accumulated with them, that NBC would support him amidst such public shaming, such outlandish allegations against a great man?
Or well, you know...they could be sick of covering his shit and would rather let him burn on his own and on his own dime.
Facebook
Twitter