Rape allegations mount against Bill Cosby #1

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
The one question I cannot understand is what do these women want? Money? To defame Cosby? What's the purpose? Which ones can we possibly believe?

They want him to stop raping women and they want people to know what a despicable human he is, I would imagine.
 
Just take a look at what Janice D does for publicity and you will understand

Despite the fact that Janice Dickinson loves self publicity, I believe her- you are free to believe whoever you choose.
 
The one question I cannot understand is what do these women want? Money? To defame Cosby? What's the purpose? Which ones can we possibly believe?

Maybe the fact that there is no obvious motive such as money to be had and many reasons not to come forward publicly, such as being deemed liars at best, is an indicator that they are all telling the truth.
 
"When asked by Newsweek why she didn’t come forward sooner, Green said, It never works out, unless you’re bleeding and there’s DNA and an eyewitness. I was 19 and he was the king of the world, so how was it going to work? I was a teenager. Nobody would’ve believed me.'"

Yep. As evinced by some of the posts here.

Link: http://www.theroot.com/articles/cul...y_timeline_of_sexual_assault_accusations.html

ETA: And please note why the gap between 2006 and now. As I said above, it took this long for the media to pay attention:

"February 2014

Shortly after several stories come to light about Woody Allen’s sexual history, Gawker publishes 'Who Wants to Remember Bill Cosby’s Multiple Sex-Assault Allegations?' The story reignites interest in the case of Constand and the 13 women who joined her civil suit."
 
Maybe the fact that there is no obvious motive such as money to be had and many reasons not to come forward publicly, such as being deemed liars at best, is an indicator that they are all telling the truth.

^^^ That!
 
Come on, the guy is 77, does he have a career? (or more to the point, does he need one?), all he has is a reputation, & if enough people believe these allegations, it's ruined. I don't think the truth will come out in court, but both Mr. Cosby & the women who have had 'encounters' with him know the truth, I'm sure there's enough pain to go around.

Well, he was working on a sitcom for NBC, and something for Netflix, both of which have been nixed as of today because of what's been alleged-and also a show coming up in Vegas, so I would say that, up until today, he DID have a career, even at the age of 77!
 
Medical malpractice can leave someone with expenses such as getting a specially designed van to move around, nursing care 24 hours a day, regular medical visits and other things that cost great expense. I'm not trivializing rape, I'm just not putting it in the same category as medical malpractice. Medical malpractice can leave someone with very serious lifetime disabilities and PTSD. It seems to me, that rape leaves victims with PTSD only, in cases where they aren't rendered physically disabled.

All society gets to see, especially in hush money cases, is what's reported in the news. So from the outside looking in people may be left with the opinion that the woman was a *advertiser censored* just looking to cash in. I'm not saying that's right, but giving the money away cuts that thought off at the knees. JMO

I imagine rape victims suffer plenty of financial losses as well. Psychological therapy is not cheap. Then there is the potential of lost wages due to debilitating depression that prevents one from getting out of bed in the morning, and the lost income due to not being able to advance in a career as someone without PTSD might.

To me these are very serious lifetime disabilities, albeit psychological rather than physical ones. But then our society has never treated victims of mental illness with the same compassion it (sometimes, anyway) treats victims of physical illness.

And I'm not sure why a rape victim who has received compensation for damages would give a hoot whether total strangers (i.e., the public) thinks she is a *advertiser censored* or not.

OT, not directed at you, Steely: I hate the word *advertiser censored*. I will accept it as a valid descriptor only when there is an equally denigrating term for a promiscuous man.
 
"EXCLUSIVE: 'I thought Cosby could kill me.' Lawyer who is FIFTH assault victim to speak out reveals she was so drugged up by comic she couldn't control her body, couldn't walk and thought she was dying"

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ouldn-t-walk-thought-dying.html#ixzz3JZA4KO7k

See--not directed at you, Blondie--this is why people are asking "Why are all these women coming out now?"

Tamara Green came forward publicly in 2005. But no one paid attention until now.

http://www.today.com/id/6945190/ns/today/t/second-cosby-accuser-why-she-came-forward/#.VG1wfTTF8nc
 
I imagine rape victims suffer plenty of financial losses as well. Psychological therapy is not cheap. Then there is the potential of lost wages due to debilitating depression that prevents one from getting out of bed in the morning, and the lost income due to not being able to advance in a career as someone without PTSD might.

To me these are very serious lifetime disabilities, albeit psychological rather than physical ones. But then our society has never treated victims of mental illness with the same compassion it (sometimes, anyway) treats victims of physical illness.

And I'm not sure why rape victim who has received compensation for damages would give a hoot whether total strangers (i.e., the public) thinks she is a *advertiser censored* or not.

OT, not directed at you, Steely: I hate the word *advertiser censored*. I will accept it as a valid descriptor only when there is an equally denigrating term for a promiscuous man.

You've made some very good points. I guess I was just saying that people think it's for the money and a way to make their point would be to give the money away, but I understand what you're saying and retract my earlier statement.

As to the word *advertiser censored* I agree. It's interesting how history has treated men and women. This is an approximation not a rule. Men seem to gage success on how pretty the woman they marry is. While women gage success on how rich the man they marry is. Women are also called *advertiser censored* for having multiple partners and looked down upon by other women, while guys give high fives for scoring with multiple women. A man in society is mocked if his wife makes more than he does. A woman who's successful can be accused of sleeping her way to the top, while men always work for their success. The gender role stereotypes are still very prevalent today. We still have far to go. JMO
 
Maybe the fact that there is no obvious motive such as money to be had and many reasons not to come forward publicly, such as being deemed liars at best, is an indicator that they are all telling the truth.

Do the tabloids pay for stories?
 
Yes they do, and that's why I find the women who agreed to testify anonymously and aren't selling stories to be very credible. JMO

Do you know how much they pay? It doesn't seems like it would be too much, but I really have no idea.
 
Some do, I think. But I doubt a retired lawyer who lives in the San Diego area has any need for money from tabloids.

Being a retired lawyer doesn't mean you have money. Most lawyers don't make much at all
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
127
Guests online
2,207
Total visitors
2,334

Forum statistics

Threads
602,335
Messages
18,139,208
Members
231,348
Latest member
luisgill
Back
Top