Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Nov 19, 2014 1:46:19 GMT -5
Virgil. There are so, so many little girls (& boys), tween teens and up who, out of fear/shame when being sexually abused, did not know how to mentally process what was happening to them at the time, let alone tell anyone. They become silenced little lambs over time, keeping their painful thoughts to themselves while protecting their abuser. But over time, the effects of sexual abuse or abuse of ANY kind begins to show up. There can be all sorts of life debilitating effects from abuse. Protecting an abuser, which most children and adults do, baffles most in the world, but for certain it is done all the time. Children head off to school jolly-like all the time, day after day as if all is well on the home front. When in fact, life at home is the exact opposite. Secrets of child sexual abuse is remained hushed for decades until that adult child begins to face the secrets of their past-- By the time that child realizes the cause and effect of the ill effects, most know- To share their deep secrets of sexual abuse will more than likely be in vain. I am not at all on jury duty when it comes to the allegations against Bill Cosby. I knew very few, if any, wouldn't believe one or one hundred women accusing him of sexual misconduct. Abusers protect their abusers all the time. Until-- Swamp. I do understand your take on the matter. I'll summarize my argument thusly: Even if we throw out the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, and Mr. Cosby's reputation and personage, is there any reason besides our willingness to believe these women are victims underpinning our viewpoint? I get the impression from some responses that people's mentality is: Rapists benefit from the presumption of innocence. This is a pervasive injustice. To counteract this injustice, to restore balance and tear down the barriers that prevent victims from coming forward, we must therefore occasionally start with the presumption of guilt. What I'm arguing in this thread is my misgivings about the above mentality, whether real or imagined. I certainly believe it's possible this woman is telling the truth about Mr. Cosby, but the mere possibility, unsubstantiated by evidence or documentation, oughtn't void our presumption of Mr. Cosby's innocence. We do him a disservice otherwise.
|
|
Wisconsin Beth
Distinguished Associate
No, we don't walk away. But when we're holding on to something precious, we run.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:59:36 GMT -5
Posts: 30,626
|
Post by Wisconsin Beth on Nov 19, 2014 8:47:38 GMT -5
What should happen to Bill Cosby now that more than a dozen women have accused him of sexual assault? In a better world—or a world where justice was more satisfying—these women’s stories would be investigated by the police and prosecuted in court. In that world, the allegations, if true, would lead to convictions, and Cosby would be headed to prison on sexual assault charges.
So why isn’t Cosby in handcuffs? Andrea Constand was a young Temple University employee when she went to Cosby for career advice in 2004. She tells the same story of pills and grogginess. Unlike the others, though, she took her case to Bruce Castor, then a Pennsylvania district attorney who declined to press charges and today explained why. “I didn’t say that he didn’t commit the crime. What I said was there was insufficient admissible and reliable evidence upon which to base a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt. That’s ‘prosecutors speak’ for ‘I think he did it but there's just not enough here to prosecute.’ ” Castor said he had every incentive to go forward—it would have been a career-making, front-page news story for him, after all. But after a year, “you lose the ability to test for blood or intoxicating agents.” These decades-old cases are virtually impossible to prosecute. Not only does the physical evidence no longer exist, but most states have statutes of limitation on sexual assault cases. We can debate about whether there should be statutes of limitation on sexual assault, given that women often feel too ashamed to come forward right away. But for the moment, that’s the law. So where does that leave us?excerpts from www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2014/11/18/bill_cosby_rape_allegations_cosby_can_t_be_prosecuted_or_jailed_but_he_should.htmlAdded 1 more paragraph, bolding mine.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,326
|
Post by swamp on Nov 19, 2014 8:48:50 GMT -5
He's not in handcuffs because the STatute of Limitations has run on most of the cases.
I also understand why the DA did what he did. He wouldn't get a conviction. Put your resources where you will get a conviction.
|
|
Wisconsin Beth
Distinguished Associate
No, we don't walk away. But when we're holding on to something precious, we run.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:59:36 GMT -5
Posts: 30,626
|
Post by Wisconsin Beth on Nov 19, 2014 8:50:18 GMT -5
I know, I'm not really arguing that. I know I can't copy and paste the whole thing in, so I was trying to be selective.
|
|
Waffle
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 12, 2011 11:31:54 GMT -5
Posts: 4,391
|
Post by Waffle on Nov 19, 2014 9:27:55 GMT -5
Well the latest is some other "supermodel" has come out to claim drug rape too. His new TV gig is on ice for now.
This can't end well for him either way.
1. He's innocent- he spends the rest of his life either defending himself or remaining silent, and is presumed guilty by many either way.
2. He's guilty- he spends the rest of his life either defending himself or remaining silent, and is presumed guilty by many either way.
Of course if he is guilty he deserves it. IF.
. . . Andrea Constand, 32, a former Temple University employee who claimed Cosby drugged and sexually assaulted her in his Philadelphia-area mansion in 2004. Constand's lawyers Dolores Troiani and Bebe Kivitz ended up with 13 witnesses, most referred to in court documents as "Jane Does," who came forward voluntarily with strikingly similar claims of drugging and or abuse by Cosby. . . 2006 People magazine article
Many of these accusations have been round for nearly a decade and yet many still think of Cosby as still having some sort of pristine image and reputation. It seems like it ended pretty well for him after that round of accusations - I didn't dig any deeper to see if there were any accusations prior to Constand's 2005 police report.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,866
|
Post by zibazinski on Nov 19, 2014 9:33:06 GMT -5
It ended up okay for Michael Jackson, too. Even though any RESPONSIBLE parent wouldn't have let their kid spend the night with him ever. It was a shakedown for money totally. Whether their kid or kids got molested or not, a good parent wouldn't have gone there to begin with. Bill Cosby? Maybe it's true, maybe it isn't? But you need evidence and it's too late for that. So it shows like a shakedown.
|
|
Waffle
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 12, 2011 11:31:54 GMT -5
Posts: 4,391
|
Post by Waffle on Nov 19, 2014 9:40:10 GMT -5
I see the Michael Jackson and Bill Cosby cases differently. Even before there were "official" accusations, there were rumours about Micheal Jackson and his unnatural fondness for young boys. But when this thread started a few days ago most people acted like they had never heard of any rape accusations against Bill Cosby, even though they had been reported previously, almost a decade ago.
In other words, when people hear the name Michael Jackson - great talent might be the first thing that comes to mind, but child molester is just as likely to be first and definitely will come to mind quickly. Up until a few days ago, suspected rapist was probably not even on the radar when Bill Cosby's name came up.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,866
|
Post by zibazinski on Nov 19, 2014 10:30:13 GMT -5
Rumors about Bill Cosby have also been around for years. I've heard this stuff before but I think he always just paid them off to make them shut up. Cheaper to do it than defend, I suppose. But I think he has had enough and if this costs hm, whch it already is, I'm thinking counter suits for defamation of character and loss of income. Of course the women suing don't have a pot to piss in which is why they're up to this to begin with.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Nov 19, 2014 10:38:35 GMT -5
Rape is a shitty crime. I can't really imagine what that must be like- what the emotions are, what the thought process is after the assault and deciding what to do about it-- especially in the 1960's, especially when your attacker is a wildly popular, uber-wealthy, beloved by all stand up comedian in the middle of the golden age of television entertainment. However, the problem is that an accusation of a crime requires evidence, and 30 some odd years later- there ain't none. That's why there's a statute of limitations.
If the accounts of these women are true, it's a rotten shame, but it's over now.
There's little hope of any monetary gain- lawsuits generally spin on until they're settled with no one admitting wrongdoing, and the lawyers walking away with all the money.
Now, in addition to being raped these women will always have questions swirling around them about their own motives, and character.
The older I get, the more I look back on some of the bullshit I've had to deal with in life, it is tempting to go back and dip into - to go dig up bones, to pick at the scabs. It's better if you don't.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Nov 19, 2014 10:41:04 GMT -5
He's not in handcuffs because the STatute of Limitations has run on most of the cases.
I also understand why the DA did what he did. He wouldn't get a conviction. Put your resources where you will get a conviction. I actually respect this kind of restraint- one wishes we'd have seen it in Florida in the failed attempt to prosecute George Zimmerman. Who knows what's cooking for Officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 2, 2024 23:16:11 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2014 12:37:16 GMT -5
Virgil Showlion "these women" are also known as witnesses. I find you are going to the other extreme and assuming that dozens of witnesses are lying. They said/he said is not quite the same as he said/she said.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Nov 19, 2014 17:30:34 GMT -5
Virgil Showlion "these women" are also known as witnesses. I find you are going to the other extreme and assuming that dozens of witnesses are lying. They said/he said is not quite the same as he said/she said. That has played on my thinking, laterbloomer, but we have to bear in mind that celebrities--particularly rich celebrities--are a magnet for these kinds of allegations. We also know that Mr. Cosby supposedly settled an abuse case out of court some years ago. It may have been a legitimate complaint or he might have settled for sake of preserving his reputation and moving on with his life, but either way it puts a rather large "blackmail me and you too can enjoy a million-dollar payday" sign on his back. A root of my skepticism is that winning money in a civil suit has nothing to do with the pursuit of justice as far as I'm concerned. If somebody assaults me and I don't forgive the act, my desire is justice. Punish the individual in accordance with the crime committed. Barring a conviction, I might sue to recoup the costs of any medical care, etc. But beyond this, suing the perpetrator for money (especially 30 years after the fact) is the manifestation of my greed. It's not about justice. It's about stuffing my pockets with money because our system of law permits it. I've said before that this perverse notion of "lawsuit = justice" is, in my observation, an American belief, and an aspect of US culture I don't tolerate well. It's difficult for me to watch an individual on TV reaping an obscene amount of money for "justice" without thinking who on Earth do you think you're kidding?, but even people right here on this board have affirmed their belief that a horrible crime (wrong) + obscene amount of money incommensurate with the monetary impact of the crime (wrong) = right. I'll never understand this line of reasoning. In the Cosby case in particular, it makes me less than sympathetic towards the putative victims. They did none of the things I consider to be important for sake of justice (e.g. coming forward immediately after the commission of the crime to speak the truth), and are only coming forward now in the hopes of reaping a windfall, which I don't consider justice regardless of whether their allegations have merit or not.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Nov 19, 2014 17:37:04 GMT -5
I'm not going to draw any conclusions until I see that one of these women has filed a civil suit. Then, I'll take a deeper look.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Nov 19, 2014 17:47:45 GMT -5
I'm not going to draw any conclusions until I see that one of these women has filed a civil suit. Then, I'll take a deeper look. That's fair enough.
|
|
ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ
Community Leader
♡ ♡ BᏋՆᎥᏋᏉᏋ ♡ ♡
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:51 GMT -5
Posts: 43,130
Location: Inside POM's Head
Favorite Drink: Chilled White Zin
|
Post by ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ on Nov 19, 2014 17:59:38 GMT -5
Rumors of Mr Cosby's sexual misconduct (for lack of better words) have been circulating for years.
One woman came forward recently, and that might be what's given a few more the strength to speak up as well.
Bill remains mute on any comment - which is his best option right now - denial will appear be defensive.
His TV special is scrapped, and some of his live performances have also been canceled - not by him.
Camille still stands beside him through this (publicly anyway), but I wonder just how much she really knows about whats true or not now. No doubt she's questioned/confronted him.
|
|
busymom
Distinguished Associate
Why is the rum always gone? Oh...that's why.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 21:09:36 GMT -5
Posts: 28,387
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"https://cdn.nickpic.host/images/IPauJ5.jpg","color":""}
Mini-Profile Name Color: 0D317F
Mini-Profile Text Color: 0D317F
|
Post by busymom on Nov 19, 2014 18:16:52 GMT -5
It wouldn't be the first time a woman "stood by her man". There have been too many examples in the last decade of wives who knew, or suspected their DH's were doing something they shouldn't, & either lived in denial, or just didn't care enough to intervene.
With so many accusations, I suspect where there's smoke, there's fire...
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 2, 2024 23:16:11 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2014 20:46:19 GMT -5
Virgil Showlion that lawsuit was settled several years ago. That is a long lag time for it to inspire people to go for their own pay day. And did you see Cosby's amended denial? Linkalso So you are talking 14 women that were awarded settlements and two celebrities that are willing to speak publicly and in detail about their accusations. I'm a big Cosby fan but this really concerns me.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 2, 2024 23:16:11 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2014 21:00:24 GMT -5
Virgil Showlion one of your big concerns is that people did not report it right away. Here is the story of one person that did come forward. But that does answer my question of why it has suddenly come up again.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Nov 19, 2014 21:50:30 GMT -5
Virgil Showlion one of your big concerns is that people did not report it right away. Here is the story of one person that did come forward. But that does answer my question of why it has suddenly come up again. When I say "coming forward immediately after the commission of the crime to speak the truth", I don't mean 20 years after the fact. I realize these allegations first surfaced in 2004. I'll tell you what: find me one of Mr. Cosby's alleged victims who isn't seeking a windfall in court and who doesn't intend to--a woman who doesn't want his money, but wants the truth to be made known for the truth's sake--and I'll switch sides on the issue.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 2, 2024 23:16:11 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2014 21:55:51 GMT -5
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Nov 19, 2014 21:56:22 GMT -5
Virgil Showlion that lawsuit was settled several years ago. That is a long lag time for it to inspire people to go for their own pay day. And did you see Cosby's amended denial? Linkalso So you are talking 14 women that were awarded settlements and two celebrities that are willing to speak publicly and in detail about their accusations. I'm a big Cosby fan but this really concerns me. The "denials do not refer to accuser Andrea Constand" sounds as though he violated a gag order.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Nov 19, 2014 22:03:10 GMT -5
It will take a few months, laterbloomer. I should have clarified that when I stated "doesn't intend to".
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 2, 2024 23:16:11 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2014 22:07:24 GMT -5
It will take a few months, laterbloomer. I should have clarified that when I stated "doesn't intend to". You are determined to believe the women are liars. Isn't there some kind of legal equivalent about not doubting a witness's credibility without reason? And in this case 16 witnesses have come forward. None of which have been discredited in any of the articles I have read. Bill Cosby has a much, if not more motivation to lie in this case yet you insist he be given the benefit of the doubt that you are refusing to give the witnesses. I brought you a witness that reported the crime immediately and is not filing a civil suit in over 20 years and you have found a new objection. These are the hoops that you (someone with no skin in the game so to speak) are making me (again someone with no skin in the game) jump through. Yet you claim not to understand why a young woman with very limitted resources and personal power would be reluctant to take on someone with both.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Nov 19, 2014 22:24:10 GMT -5
It will take a few months, laterbloomer. I should have clarified that when I stated "doesn't intend to". You are determined to believe the women are liars. Isn't there some kind of legal equivalent about not doubting a witness's credibility without reason? And in this case 16 witnesses have come forward. None of which have been discredited in any of the articles I have read. Bill Cosby has a much, if not more motivation to lie in this case yet you insist he be given the benefit of the doubt that you are refusing to give the witnesses. I brought you a witness that reported the crime immediately and is not filing a civil suit in over 20 years and you have found a new objection. These are the hoops that you (someone with no skin in the game so to speak) are making me (again someone with no skin in the game) jump through. Yet you claim not to understand why a young woman with very limitted resources and personal power would be reluctant to take on someone with both. I'm saying that if Ms. Bowman's intentions don't change before the current furor ends (likely in a few months) and she remains solely committed to the truth, I'll believe her. For what that's worth.
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Nov 19, 2014 23:01:41 GMT -5
|
|
Shooby
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2013 0:32:36 GMT -5
Posts: 14,782
Mini-Profile Name Color: 1cf04f
|
Post by Shooby on Nov 20, 2014 5:24:26 GMT -5
The black man strayed off of the white liberal plantation. Sooo he must be destroyed and Clarence Thomased or Herman Cained.
|
|
Shooby
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2013 0:32:36 GMT -5
Posts: 14,782
Mini-Profile Name Color: 1cf04f
|
Post by Shooby on Nov 20, 2014 5:30:33 GMT -5
What evidence is there that he " drugged" them?
|
|
Waffle
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 12, 2011 11:31:54 GMT -5
Posts: 4,391
|
Post by Waffle on Nov 20, 2014 6:06:15 GMT -5
What evidence is there that he " drugged" them? What evidence could there be?
|
|
Shooby
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2013 0:32:36 GMT -5
Posts: 14,782
Mini-Profile Name Color: 1cf04f
|
Post by Shooby on Nov 20, 2014 6:28:24 GMT -5
Here's what Bowman said from the link:
That fear, Bowman explains, was exploited by her assaulter. "[Bill Cosby] is a very, very scary man and very using of mind manipulation," she said. "He really zeroed in on my insecurities and my vulnerabilities as a young woman."
And, that is different than men saying "I love you" or telling you whatever BS they tell you to get you into bed?
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Nov 20, 2014 7:33:36 GMT -5
Here's what Bowman said from the link: That fear, Bowman explains, was exploited by her assaulter. "[Bill Cosby] is a very, very scary man and very using of mind manipulation," she said. "He really zeroed in on my insecurities and my vulnerabilities as a young woman." And, that is different than men saying "I love you" or telling you whatever BS they tell you to get you into bed? If he drugged her or forced himself on her, it's rape. One thing I don't quite understand is that she appears to be alleging more than one instance of rape. Hence the circumstances would have to be that she was raped, returned to working with Mr. Cosby in their common workplace, visited his apartment a second time, and was raped again...? If that's the case, I'm sorry but it's just plain stupid. I don't care how much you cry "mind control". I get the impression I'm missing something.
|
|