Cosby Allegations

Status
Not open for further replies.
What did you guys think when Anita Hill (one woman...not 21) accused Clarence Thomas (not of drugging and raping her but of being lewd) and it caused Congressional hearings?

I still believe there is something to it when 21 woman make accusations.
 
Originally Posted By: jimbrewer
That's interesting. If a woman isn't willing to prove rape in a court of law, then her allegations must be dismissed. Any woman who would sue in a court of law for money damages for rape is an immoral moneygrubber.

Unsubstantiated lawsuits being settled by celebrities for the long bucks is TV stuff not real life. If he paid her it's because he had to. If he agreed in writing that he could not publicly dispute her allegations it's because he had to.



Perhaps, but your criminal standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. The standard for a civil suit is much less. I have to say I am troubled when someone will pursue the civil suit, but not the criminal. If you are saying someone is a criminal, then you should be willing to submit your accusation to the scrutiny of a criminal trial.

And I have a close family member who successfully got her rapist convicted. If these criminal acts are taking place, then victims must display the courage to go after the offenders.

It can be done.

This particular woman won her case in the 1970's. So don't tell me how "hard" it was. It could be done, and done successfully.

As an Army officer, I saw it both ways. I saw false accusations with zero supporting evidence and valid accusations with ample supporting evidence. The false accusations were often a female soldier upset with some fellow GI who didn't respond to her advances, so she concocted a story to punish him.

Made me sick as the false accusations made it harder on those who did have legitimate complaints.
 
Originally Posted By: pbm
What did you guys think when Anita Hill (one woman...not 21) accused Clarence Thomas (not of drugging and raping her but of being lewd) and it caused Congressional hearings?

I still believe there is something to it when 21 woman make accusations.


Right. Desiring relations with comatose women is a reasonably unusual perversion on top of being a sexual assault, of course. And they are similar accusations, over decades. When 12 women who don't know each other with ages thirty years apart are lined up to say the same thing about you from 1965 onward, you aren't settling the case because its the expedient thing to do.---well, it is, but you don't have much choice.

I figured Hill was telling the truth, because if she were making it up it would have been a lot more sensational. If you recall, it was pretty low-grade sexual harassment stuff. Nothing at all like the accusations against Cosby. As I recall, it was smart remarks about public hairs on coke cans and such. When the allegations came out, Ms. Hill was the victim of a vicious smear campaign. There wasn't much compunction about that. After a few years the polls about her believeability flip-flopped in her favor.

I sort of liked Cosby in the 1960s. I never could understand the appeal of his stupid 1980s sitcom though. Here is Some Cosby from 1969: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nx6KAd_Su3I
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Clevy

I'm sure Bill Cosby isn't an angel but I seriously doubt he's a rapist. He didn't have to rape any woman...


People who are celebrities have vices and issues just like everyone else. The thing with them is exactly as is said above. If he has a "need" that couldn't be satisfied normally, and he had to extract his will by overcoming victims, that's a serious allegation and one that could or could not be true. But for it to to only come out in quantity now, after SO much time, to me is dubious.

So the victims really do need to show some aged proof that they had issues and were involved with him and had some issues. Even if he wasn't mentioned by name, I would expect that there would be records for the hospital, "day after" prescriptions, mental care, etc. that some of them would have been intelligent enough to retain given the conditions and situation...
 
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
Originally Posted By: PandaBear

Yes they could, but like the priest molestation cases we've seen in the past, it is sometimes impossible to accuse those in power or influence until they fell, or have enough momentum (many other accusations).


A lot of that is false accusation to cash in as well. I am NOT saying it hasn't happened because it has, and has been proved legit, but come on now. Anyone with 1/2 a brain knows a lot of those claims were for the $$$.

Real victims should be furious with the ones who are just in it to try and grab some money. It makes it harder to believe the real folks because you don't know who is telling the truth and who is a greedy scum bag that would send someone to jail for a vile crime they didn't do.


I do remember one guy went back to the priest whom he claimed have molested him when he was a kid, and shot him.

Is this a better way to prove that he was indeed molested and he isn't in it for the money?

I don't have an answer. What I do know is for a lot of people and organization, they'd rather not take the chance of hiring a possible molester (especially on air), and a lot of the accused, they'd rather pay the accusers to go away. There's a huge gray area hard to prove which side between guilty with jail time and blackmailing someone just for money.
 
If someone believe that 20-30 or 40 or more people accuse Cosby of a crime then it must be some true. Google McMartin preschool trial in the mid 80's, DA claimed that upward 360 children had been sexual abused, but in the end no conviction of any accused person because there wasn't any concrete evidence.

Wikipedia has very good summary of the case:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMartin_preschool_trial

I was reading LA Times at that time daily, I didn't believe that they tried to destroy those people who ran the preschool without concrete evidence of any crime.

I'm now like to see some evidences before I can say a person commits the crime(s) he/she accused of.

No evidence = no crime. He said she said is not an evidence.
 
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
I'm now like to see some evidences before I can say a person commits the crime(s) he/she accused of.

No evidence = no crime. He said she said is not an evidence.


Exactly! I think that was the point of the o/p. I would whole heartily agree with others that rape is a terrible and despicable crime, but so is being crucified and punished for a crime that hasn't been proven!
 
Originally Posted By: PandaBear
...I do remember one guy went back to the priest whom he claimed have molested him when he was a kid, and shot him...

One upside to this whole ordeal is that no one has yet to accurately accuse Cosby of being a gay pedophile like those masquerading in black robes.
 
Originally Posted By: PandaBear
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
Originally Posted By: PandaBear

Yes they could, but like the priest molestation cases we've seen in the past, it is sometimes impossible to accuse those in power or influence until they fell, or have enough momentum (many other accusations).


A lot of that is false accusation to cash in as well. I am NOT saying it hasn't happened because it has, and has been proved legit, but come on now. Anyone with 1/2 a brain knows a lot of those claims were for the $$$.

Real victims should be furious with the ones who are just in it to try and grab some money. It makes it harder to believe the real folks because you don't know who is telling the truth and who is a greedy scum bag that would send someone to jail for a vile crime they didn't do.


I do remember one guy went back to the priest whom he claimed have molested him when he was a kid, and shot him.

Is this a better way to prove that he was indeed molested and he isn't in it for the money?

I don't have an answer. What I do know is for a lot of people and organization, they'd rather not take the chance of hiring a possible molester (especially on air), and a lot of the accused, they'd rather pay the accusers to go away. There's a huge gray area hard to prove which side between guilty with jail time and blackmailing someone just for money.


The problem for me is accusation does not equal guilt. It is also common for people to lie to get in on a cash grab or lie to further their own desires( custody, divorce, etc... ). Makes it almost impossible without real proof( DNA, video, ,etc... )to know who is telling the truth and who isn't. Personally, I need actual proof before I will say someone is guilty of such a despicable thing as rape/molestation. Too many people just believe the accuser all the time. That is not how our legal system works nor is it how an intelligent person should act. JMHO.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: oldmaninsc
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
I'm now like to see some evidences before I can say a person commits the crime(s) he/she accused of.

No evidence = no crime. He said she said is not an evidence.


Exactly! I think that was the point of the o/p. I would whole heartily agree with others that rape is a terrible and despicable crime, but so is being crucified and punished for a crime that hasn't been proven!


You are correct. I am the OP and my point is and was until such time as we have actual proof he did these things Cosby deserves the benefit of the doubt.
 
Originally Posted By: pbm
What did you guys think when Anita Hill (one woman...not 21) accused Clarence Thomas (not of drugging and raping her but of being lewd) and it caused Congressional hearings?

I still believe there is something to it when 21 woman make accusations.

I didn't know that was a thing. Now the Family Guy spoof of Peter making the accusations and then yelling 'bababooey! bababooey!' into the mic as he's dragged off makes more sense.
edit: now with video! work/children warning, it's not bad, but be careful https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GipZ0cC7IE8
 
Originally Posted By: greenjp
Yet another one. You guys still so adamant?

http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2014/12/bill-cosby-beverly-johnson-story


In all seriousness. Are there any of the following because I don't see mention of it in the article...

1 - Police reports on the alleged assault of this woman, by Cosby, at his house on the date she claims it occurred?

2 - Hospital records showing this woman was assaulted or drugged on or around the time of this alleged assault by Cosby at his house( pictures, x-rays, detailed reports indicting injury consistent with being grabbed and dragged from a house, blood work showing she was drugged and what drugs they were, etc... )?

3 - How about a witness and/or video backing up her claims? Where was the staff and did they see/hear anything. What does the Cabbie say about how Cosby was acting and how this woman was acting? Has anyone even tried to find the Cabbie to see if this even happened? Did a neighbor see him holding her in the street and then throw her into a cab? Anything?

4 - Is there ANYTHING in the way of proof to back this up or is it just her word and these unsubstantiated claims?

My 1st thought after reading that is how did the staff at Cosby's house, who had just served them dinner by her account of things so they were there, not hear the commotion( like her yelling expletives at him or her being forcibly dragged down the stairs and dragged out of the house )and come to see what was going on? Why didn't they call the Police to help her if she was in trouble or to defend him if they felt she was out of control? Are we to believe/assume that they were in on it too? Seriously now because I read it that other people were there and to let what she describes happen and not help means you are part of it.

If you think the staff was in it with Cosby, or looking the other way for him at the least, why didn't the Cabbie call the Police or take her to a Hospital. I mean she says she was violently dragged from the house, Cosby stood in the middle of the street holding her while angrily flagging down a cab, and then when one stopped he threw her in it, slammed the door and walked off without a word( and I assume without prepaying ). She then says she managed to tell the Cabbie her address before she blacked out in the cab. Ok, if it happened like that why didn't the Cabbie call the Police or take her to the ER? Someone is violently thrust into your cab, who then blacks out, and you do nothing? I doubt that. Or are we to believe Cosby has Cabbies helping him assault and rape women too?

I won't even talk about how she is an actress/model who hasn't done anything meaningful in years and is now older so demand for her is low at best so one could say this is just an attention getter. I mean she is now featured in an article in a well known publication and thus is back in the spotlight. I won't say that though.

I am sorry. If someone drugs you and assaults you, or worse rapes you, and you wait years or even decades to say something don't expect me to just believe you without proof. Only say something after others come out and there is talk of $100 Million and you really better have solid, concrete proof.

Did that happen at Cosby's house to that woman? I have no idea. I can only go by what she said happened, what evidence there is to back her claims up( none that I am aware of ), and other mitigating factors such as these people coming out of the woodwork years and decades later only after someone else says something and a big pay day( or attention )is talked of.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: greenjp
Yet another one. You guys still so adamant?

http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2014/12/bill-cosby-beverly-johnson-story


It's that pesky "Innocent until proven guilty." segment of the law.

https://screen.yahoo.com/histories-several-cosby-accusers-cast-112311533.html

The Daily Caller has learned that a number of women who have accused comedian Bill Cosby of sexual assault either have factual contradictions in their accounts, or have personal histories that cast doubt on their claims. Five of Cosby’s recent accusers, including multiple women currently or previously represented by prominent feminist attorney Gloria Allred, have engaged in statements and behavior that warrant increased scrutiny of their public accusations against Cosby. Cosby attorney Marty Singer told The Daily Caller in a statement, “There is virtually no standard by which the media are holding Mr Cosby’s accusers. Anyone and everyone who wants to file a suit or get on television can be guaranteed fawning coverage. The very same media have demonstrated an unconscionable disinterest in the veracity of his accusers and their motives.”
 
Last edited:
We cannot start convicting folks in the court of Public Opinion.

We have a legal system for that.

Celebrities with deep pockets are arguably the best targets...
 
Originally Posted By: pbm
I still think there is something to these claims.
I just can't imagine so many unrelated woman lying.



Looks like I may have been right afterall....
 
Originally Posted By: pbm
Originally Posted By: pbm
I still think there is something to these claims.
I just can't imagine so many unrelated woman lying.



Looks like I may have been right afterall....


Cosby in a stand-up routine made jokes about drugging women. One written account by an alleged victim stated that she would have willingly slept with him, but that he drugged her anyway. Her belief is that he enjoys raping women and I believe that.

So why are so many people willing to believe him instead of her and her and her x18? Do you not understand the power dynamic at work?
 
Originally Posted By: Joshua_Skinner

Cosby in a stand-up routine made jokes about drugging women. One written account by an alleged victim stated that she would have willingly slept with him, but that he drugged her anyway. Her belief is that he enjoys raping women and I believe that.

So why are so many people willing to believe him instead of her and her and her x18? Do you not understand the power dynamic at work?


Here’s a transcript of a portion of Cosby’s SpanishFly stand up routine from 1969, about the time Cosby was well into his crazy perverted habits:

"Guys stand around talking about Spanish Fly … You know anything about Spanish Fly? No, tell me about it. Well, there’s this girl—Crazy Mary—you put some in her drink, man … ahhhhhh … yeah, Spanish … Oh, that’s really groovy man. Spanish Fly is groovy. Yeah boy. From then on, man, any time you see a girl: Wish you had some Spanish Fly boy. Go to a party, see five girls standing alone—boy, if I had a whole jug of Spanish Fly I’d light that corner up over there."

How does a guy go from that lifestyle, hangin' out with Hefner, partying it up, to being Mr. Morals? America's Dad? Wise and wonderful? Should have seen that coming. (Its the same reason we don't make Tim Allen a Moral Saint, since we know he started his adult life as a drug dealer.)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top