Just like Dottie Sandusky didn't know what Jerry was up to. Why do these women stand by their perverted men?
Money...brain washed....scared if the felons ever get out
Just like Dottie Sandusky didn't know what Jerry was up to. Why do these women stand by their perverted men?
Just like Dottie Sandusky didn't know what Jerry was up to. Why do these women stand by their perverted men?
Money, fame, lack of self worth, money, fame, intimidation by spouse, money, fame, lack of self confidence, money, fame, money, fame.
Just like Dottie Sandusky didn't know what Jerry was up to. Why do these women stand by their perverted men?
I think that both Camille and Dottie's reactions to their situations are rather extreme, to the point of blaming their husbands' victims. If they are really being honest and believe their husbands are innocent, that is rather frightening, IMO, in light of all of the evidence.
It could also be they knew and went along with what their husbands were doing so they could keep living the dream and they are not being honest now because they are attempting to protect themselves financially.
It is very hard to say, but IMO, they should be directing all of their rage at their husbands because if they really knew nothing, then they were lied to, defrauded and used and they never had an authentic marriage.
Well we have a month of when sentencing is, but no actual date, unless someone can find it!
Extra security measures to be taken at Bill Cosby sentencing for his own protection
http://metro.co.uk/2018/05/06/extra...ken-bill-cosby-sentencing-protection-7524833/
Security is going to be all over Bill Cosbys sentencing for his sexual assault case, according to reports.
Just last month the 80-year-old was found guilty of three counts of aggravated indecent assault, and is set for being sentenced in July.
I have NEVER been a "stand by your man" type of woman. So maybe I don't understand.
However, I WOULD 100% support my man if I KNEW he was innocent and being falsely accused.
No doubt, no question mark, 100% knew he was innocent... would be great if he had GPS alibi!
I have children and my children have always come before my husband.
So, if I believed he was capable of anything like this I'd be GONE.
Even if I was supporting him I'd never do so publicly to keep my children out of it.
For me, Bill Cosby's own words are enough.
He admitted that he drugged women to have sex with them.
Nothing beyond THAT would matter to ME if he was my husband.
Multiple affairs would be bad enough but admitting he DRUGGED them?
No way. Done, finished, moving out and filing for divorce that day. :gaah:
I'm guessing they appeal and the sentencing is postponed. Maybe I'm wrong though...
Even though he's a gifted entertainer, Cosby may have an inferiority complex about his scholastic abilities. That could explain his past compulsion to obtain honorary degree after honorary degree, and dress up in sacred scholarly robes to give profound <cough> speeches at graduation ceremonies.
Anyhow, Cosby once publicly humiliated a Notre Dame football player at his graduation. "The great" Cosby was definitely more of a narcissistic bully than scholar:
https://deadspin.com/bill-cosby-once-publicly-bullied-a-notre-dame-football-1661325778
https://deadspin.com/the-nd-player-bill-cosby-berated-felt-like-a-failure-fo-1661591222[/QUOT]
He certainly honed the art of publicly portraying himself as being a superior person, educationally, morally, etc. Bill Cosby is a total fraud, IMO. Anyone who knew the truth about Cosby's lack of true educational achievements, and this would include his wife, saw his mask come off when he publicly humiliated that young football player. ETA: And even those of us who didn't the truth about his phony degrees were horrified by Cosby when he humiliated the football player. That's when I took a step back and said "whoa" about Bill Cosby.
He maybe ‘let out of jail until all appeals are processed’ like it has been done in a few other cases recently. How long do appeals process take? Years for some, so fBC may not outlive the appeal process.
Here's something that just dawned on me: Tom Mesereau's main defense tactic was to present Andrea Constand as a con artist who targeted Cosby in a sexual assault scam. If that's true, why did she continue to keep in touch with him afterwards, exchanging presents with him, and other odd behavior. Even if Andrea was somehow aware that this was fairly common behavior of "acquaintance sexual assault" victims, wouldn't she have toned it down, and added in more of what's generally perceived as "proper" behavior for victims? That would cover all of her bases, making for a much easier case. After all, if Andrea was running a scam, she would be in control of creating a favorable narrative for herself. What do you think?
Yeah, no. Shes no con artist. Speaking from experience (not w/Cosby, obvs!), her behavior might seem contrary to those who are uninformed about victim responses to experiences like acquaintance sexual assault. But it isnt. It was proven in court, imo, because Cosby was convicted. The defenses attempt to discredit and dehumanize Constand ... failed.
I imagine she was overwhelmed with conflicting feelings and emotions and misplaced feelings of guilt and shame. IMO. I feel enormous empathy for her and respect her steadfast courage.
There was no conniving on her part. Blame Cosby. He was a conniving. Now, hes also a convicted rapist.
A Pennsylvania judge on Friday released the names of the jurors who convicted Bill Cosby of sexual assault last month, saying he had waited more than three weeks after the verdict to do so because he wanted to give the jurors a cooling off period to return to their lives without being bothered by the media.
Bill Cosby Trial Judge Releases Names of Jurors Who Convicted Him
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/18/arts/television/bill-cosby-trial-jurors-named.html
Hope they are safe.
Jurors names should be kept secret unless they sign a release of info paper. That is JMO. The defense team already knows them. I too hope all jurors are safe and not harassed in anyway.
But in a written order, the judge said he was bound by a 2007 Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling that the media has a constitutional right to the jurors names, as had been argued by lawyers for 13 media organizations, including The New York Times.
I know, I read that, but I still do not like it.From the article.