Rape allegations mount against Bill Cosby #3

[Tulessa]

MJ, I wish I could thank that post twice....

 

[kimi_SFC]

MJ, I wish I could thank that post twice....

Agreed!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RANCH]

Without the benefit of rape kits and other circumstantial evidence, would you really rather such potential offenders go without prosecution or punishment? I wouldn't want to live in that world.

SBM

It looks like that's the way it works in the United States. Bill Cosby isn't being prosecuted. I guess he's being punished in the court of public opinion but I'm not sure how much that actually hurts him.

JMO.

 

[Slebby]

IT has happened to other celebrities.
I don't see why he should have to deny anything if he is innocent. That only has to do with what the public wants, not what they need or deserve.
His career is not done. Not at all. People are still going to the shows. And will continue to I bet.

Please furnish examples of celebrities who have had 35 (or more? What's the count to date?) rape accusations. Or something that even comes close?

I repeat. Please cite examples.

Of course he doesn't have to deny it. He can just keep,watching his career go up in smoke while he blusters on about his God-given gifts.

You're deluding yourself if you think he's going to have a career after this, some folks who held tickets purchased prior to the scandal hitting the news are still attending the shows, that is, the shows that haven't been cancelled. Many shows have been cancelled and after this tour sputters and dies, there are no promoters, no venues that are going to go out on a limb and book another BC show ever again.

IMHO


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Donjeta]

IT has happened to other celebrities.
I don't see why he should have to deny anything if he is innocent. That only has to do with what the public wants, not what they need or deserve.
His career is not done. Not at all. People are still going to the shows. And will continue to I bet.

Who? Who has it happened to? Which other completely innocent celebrities have been falsely accused of drugging, rape and sexual harassment by dozens of women?

 

[wendiesan]

BC had no problem hurting men younger than he was.

Tom Ley of Deadspin wrote about an incident that happened when Cosby had been invited to speak to 50 black Notre Dame graduates.

"What do you think of a 2.5 average?" Cosby asked.

"I think it's decent," replied Brown, who was recently drafted by pro football's Indianapolis Colts.

Cosby snarled back: "2.5 is OK if you have a mental disorder. You should be ashamed of yourself. You should have worked harder."

Tears streamed down the 290-lbs. Brown's face as he tried to defend himself: "I worked hard. I did my best..."

But Cosby cut him short. "You didn't do enough."

http://deadspin.com/bill-cosby-once-publicly-bullied-a-notre-dame-football-1661325778

An email from Jerry Barca to Deadspin supports the story and the aftermath. It is another piece of information that shows BC's toxicity, making it more believable (IMO) that he would be capable of drugging and raping young women. (Jerry Barca wrote Unbeatable: Notre Dame's 1988 Championship and the Last Great College Football Season.)

Saw your piece on Cosby and Dean Brown. Just wanted to send you a little more detail on Dean and the impact of Cosby words on him. It stayed with him for years.

You're right that Dean was a good guy. His nickname on campus was "Big Happy." He also had some serious difficulties growing up. He watched his mother coughing up blood as she had a stroke in front of him when he was 4. His dad had already left by then. She couldn't work for years and was left with a permanent limp. He had no money. He hustled food stamps at 10. He'd collect the food stamps from people in the neighborhood, buy 25 cents of candy, give the food stamp recipient back 75 cents of change, that money was then spent at the liquor store. Dean would resell the candy at school at a marked up price… And his favorite show growing up? Fat Albert. That isn't some nice revisionist detail. He actually wrote that on a media guide questionnaire before his junior year. He was also very candid in saying he benefitted the most of any of his teammates by being at Notre Dame. So he starts on a national title team and then he's set to graduate a year later, a pretty monumental deal for him and Cosby berates him. When I spoke to Dean in 2012 for my book he said this: "I went a lot of years feeling like I was a failure, one because I didn't think I played long enough in the pros," Brown said. "And, there were times that anytime I heard Bill Cosby's name — it wasn't a cringe, but it was a heavy uneasiness about what had transpired."

http://deadspin.com/the-nd-player-bill-cosby-berated-felt-like-a-failure-fo-1661591222

 

[BirdycatNY]

Wow, I don't understand this logic one bit. Historical sexual assault cases are prosecuted quite often, even though no rape kits were collected, and so forth. But this whole idea that more cases make a claim less credible is nothing short of ludicrous to me.

Imagine a case (and there have been many) where, say, a physician, a teacher, or a priest -- people who have some power, authority, wealth, or prestige -- is accused by several people of some sort of sexual abuse or misconduct years after the event. Do you honestly think that the police or prosecutors are going to think something like:

"Hm...well, too bad that there are so many people making allegations. If it was only one or two people, I think we'd take them seriously. But I can't believe that Father/Doctor/Celebrity X is the kind of guy to do something like this so many times. After all, there is no evidence of rapists or sexual abusers as being serial offenders."

You're moving the goalposts as well with discussing 'irrefutable evidence'. Historical cases are prosecuted successfully all the time, without the benefit of things like rape kits.

Well said, Montjoy and Donjeta.

But the thing is, as far as I'm aware none of the women who say they got raped are sheltered virginal nuns. It has been reported that many of them are married or in relationships. I am not aware of the personal lives of all of the accusers but the available evidence suggests that most if not all of them have probably had consensual sex with other people, sometimes more than a few other people. Did they blame all their sex partners for rape in the media? Not as far as I know. So why do they all single Bill Cosby out? What could be so damn traumatic and horrible about amicable sex with a mega rich comedian in a luxurious mansion or hotel room that your memory would twist it into a drugging and raping situation? ...JMO I find it very hard to believe that so many sexually repressed women are still having so traumatic second thoughts about their single consensual encounter with Cosby that they have to twist it into a rape in their minds to block out the detail that they consented...

It's also insulting to women and men who have been sexually assaulted /roofied to say "well, you must have misremembered it". So a survivor doesn't know the difference between consensual and non-consensual sex or their own body and that they were violated? One who is sexually assaulted/roofied doesn't forget the violation (but maybe suppresses it) and will be able to recollect certain facts, unfortunately those types of memories do not fade as much as one tries to forget/suppress it. Add the fact that this allegedly happened with BC, a celebrity...it may be difficult to forget. And if this is a "celebrity conspiracy" for money, couldn't these ladies have picked an easier target?

Jmo/

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Well said, Montjoy and Donjeta.



It's also insulting to women and men who have been sexually assaulted /roofied to say "well, you must have misremembered it". So a survivor doesn't know the difference between consensual and non-consensual sex or their own body and that they were violated? One who is sexually assaulted/roofied doesn't forget the violation (but maybe suppresses it) and will be able to recollect certain facts, unfortunately those types of memories do not fade as much as one tries to forget/suppress it. Add the fact that this allegedly happened with BC, a celebrity...it may be difficult to forget. And if this is a "celebrity conspiracy" for money, couldn't these ladies have picked an easier target?

Jmo/

The problem is that at this point there is no proof of the allegations. They are personal accounts decades old and with no other back up. The fact that more people say it does not make it more true if there is nothing to back up their claims against BC either.

If there are victims here that is horrible and reprehensible but at this point no one has been charged and no other evidence has been put forward.

 

[Donjeta]

The problem is that at this point there is no proof of the allegations. They are personal accounts decades old and with no other back up. The fact that more people say it does not make it more true if there is nothing to back up their claims against BC either.

If there are victims here that is horrible and reprehensible but at this point no one has been charged and no other evidence has been put forward.

If there are victims? That's progress, I think, because it allows for the possibility that there are victims without infallible proof.

JMO if it was true to begin with there's no need and no way to make it more true. More back up makes it more provable, but not more true. Truth is truth, whether there is back up or not.

Personally I consider personal accounts of similar incidents as back up of sorts. Of course witness A saying she was raped doesn't prove that witness B was raped but if witnesses C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z (we're running out of letters...) all share a similar story it's evidence of a pattern of behavior as far as I'm concerned. The chances of getting one liar are better than getting thirty something liars and not one truth teller among them.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

If there are victims? That's progress, I think, because it allows for the possibility that there are victims without infallible proof.

JMO if it was true to begin with there's no need and no way to make it more true. More back up makes it more provable, but not more true. Truth is truth, whether there is back up or not.

Personally I consider personal accounts of similar incidents as back up of sorts. Of course witness A saying she was raped doesn't prove that witness B was raped but if witnesses C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z (we're running out of letters...) all share a similar story it's evidence of a pattern of behavior as far as I'm concerned. The chances of getting one liar are better than getting thirty something liars and not one truth teller among them.

If they all shared their accounts to police and they matched up, that would be one thing, but in this instance we have accounts to the media. So it then impacts the integrity of the accounts.
If there were 35 police reports from the time of the events that would be one thing, but we have accounts decades later to the media. It makes a difference. At least to me.

 

[Donjeta]

If they all shared their accounts to police and they matched up, that would be one thing, but in this instance we have accounts to the media. So it then impacts the integrity of the accounts.
If there were 35 police reports from the time of the events that would be one thing, but we have accounts decades later to the media. It makes a difference. At least to me.

The media is certainly a factor to be reckoned with. Cosby's lawyers could always argue that the later accusers took their cues from the publicity generated by Constand's lawsuit and the latest wave of accusations. But it seems that most of them got the courage to come forward from the knowledge that they're not alone in this and that he's done it to other women.

I think some of them shared their stories with friends and relatives before the media storm so that's one form of checking it out. Yeah, I know, not signed sealed and delivered, the relatives could be lying too or remember things wrong.

You said Bill Cosby doesn't have to deny anything, and he doesn't. Maybe he's beyond caring for what mere mortals think about him or it's legal strategy. But it matters to me that he doesn't. Because for the most part there is no competing, alternative version of the events.

For the most part we don't know if he's saying he never met this woman, or that they had sex but it was consensual, or that they met and she's a crazed fangirl who imagined it or that he drugged her and had sex with her but she wanted it really or that he raped her but it was ok because he's Dr Cosby or that it's all true but what the heck, Camille didn't mind.

I think that in the absence of an alternative account they tend to fall back on the version they've got in the court. This is not the court but for many things, if anyone's not denying it it might as well be true.

Now maybe he's busy with his lawyers in the background but in the public eye it looks like he is not trying his damnedest to protest his innocence and salvage his reputation. A couple of halfhearted statements from his lawyers that didn't really deny much and Cosby's been trying to ignore it, intimidate reporters or make a joke out of it.

And I can't help wondering that if even Cosby himself who knows what happened and whether the ladies are lying or not is not going out of his way to prove these ladies are liars, then why should we bend over backwards to try achieve that? Maybe he knows it would be a waste of time because they're telling the truth or his lawyers are worried that he'd incriminate himself because they think he actually did it?

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

The media is certainly a factor to be reckoned with. Cosby's lawyers could always argue that the later accusers took their cues from the publicity generated by Constand's lawsuit and the latest wave of accusations. But it seems that most of them got the courage to come forward from the knowledge that they're not alone in this and that he's done it to other women.

I think some of them shared their stories with friends and relatives before the media storm so that's one form of checking it out. Yeah, I know, not signed sealed and delivered, the relatives could be lying too or remember things wrong.

You said Bill Cosby doesn't have to deny anything, and he doesn't. Maybe he's beyond caring for what mere mortals think about him or it's legal strategy. But it matters to me that he doesn't. Because for the most part there is no competing, alternative version of the events.

For the most part we don't know if he's saying he never met this woman, or that they had sex but it was consensual, or that they met and she's a crazed fangirl who imagined it or that he drugged her and had sex with her but she wanted it really or that he raped her but it was ok because he's Dr Cosby or that it's all true but what the heck, Camille didn't mind.

I think that in the absence of an alternative account they tend to fall back on the version they've got in the court. This is not the court but for many things, if anyone's not denying it it might as well be true.

Now maybe he's busy with his lawyers in the background but in the public eye it looks like he is not trying his damnedest to protest his innocence and salvage his reputation. A couple of halfhearted statements from his lawyers that didn't really deny much and Cosby's been trying to ignore it, intimidate reporters or make a joke out of it.

And I can't help wondering that if even Cosby himself who knows what happened and whether the ladies are lying or not is not going out of his way to prove these ladies are liars, then why should we bend over backwards to try achieve that? Maybe he knows it would be a waste of time because they're telling the truth or his lawyers are worried that he'd incriminate himself because they think he actually did it?

What would it matter if he came out and acknowledged this and claimed innocence? Nothing. People who have already made up their mond won't believe him and again if he is innocent he should not have to defend himself.
What the public wants really has no bearing on what is going on and what is his right and what is good for him.
I don't see why all the venom for someone who has not even been charged with anything.

 

[Donjeta]

What would it matter if he came out and acknowledged this and claimed innocence? Nothing.

That's your opinion but I happen to strongly disagree. He has all the contacts and the media savvy he needs, he's had all the chances in the world to present a powerful alternative story.

He could have sat down for a sympathetic interview about the perils of being a celebrity and how he's been extorted before and got many people on his side before they made up their minds. Sometimes it's all about presentation, and historically he's shown he's had the skillz to create a benevolent good guy image.


Suing the first few people who came forward for defamation (lots of impressive legalese for "nope, I wasn't there, wasn't there, don't know her, yeah I had sex with that crazy woman but it was consensual and not that good") would have gone a LONG way to casting doubt on the claims and establishing his version of the events in people's minds. All the stories about the allegations in the press would add the disclaimer, "Cosby is denying the allegations and is suing the accusers for defamation" and it would look a lot better than, "Cosby's representatives did not return our request for a comment". JMO.

And if his legal team did it quickly and ruthlessly enough it's quite likely imo that it would have discouraged new accusers from coming forward. Instead of 35 there'd be five or so, much easier to discount, he could have lived with that easily and gone on having shows and ghostwritten books and it would be no more than a footnote. After all, no one cared that much about 13 Jane Does in the noughties.

Especially if they're all telling lies in the hope of a payday I'm positive they'd have run away and picked some other target. There's little financial incentive in making up a story about a fake rape that's way past the SOL anyway but you can actually expect a negative effect on your finances if you know that his lawyers will swiftly descend upon you and hit you with a civil suit and you'll need to hire expensive lawyers of your own in order to avoid paying HIM all you haven't got.

Even better, he could have presented some actual evidence that the women are lying. In the response to Chloe Goins he said he had proof he wasn't even there. Not that we've seen the proof but a few instances of that sort of thing and he could have had the credibility of the accusers in absolute shreds in no time. It would have cast doubts on any future allegations in many people's minds by association.

People who have already made up their mond won't believe him and again if he is innocent he should not have to defend himself.

The more time that passes and he does nothing to fight the allegations the more difficult it might be to change people's minds but he's had lots of chances that he chose not to use. And I'm sure that there are many reasonable people who would be willing to consider his side of things even now if they just knew what the heck his side of things is. But as it is now, we have the women's version, and then we have nothing beyond silence and our own speculations of what his version possibly might be.

No, of course he doesn't have to defend himself. But it seems to be a fairly common human instinct to want to. People who are falsely accused of something quite often want to and demand to have their version out there.

What the public wants really has no bearing on what is going on and what is his right and what is good for him.

What is good for him?

I might be going out on a limb here but I think for the vast majority of innocent people it is not that good to be considered a serial rapist and usually it's better to avoid gaining such a reputation. His tour and tv projects have suffered serious setbacks, for one thing, and I'm sure his family suffers greatly for seeing the world destroy his reputation and his "legacy" over the allegations.


If there's something he or his legal team could have done to defend him and avoid that it's very hard for me to see why and how it would be better for him not to, unless it has something to do with avoiding incriminating himself.

I don't see why all the venom for someone who has not even been charged with anything.

Seriously? You don't see why people might not feel kindly about someone who seems very likely to be a serial rapist?

 

[808paradise]

http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat...lt_rape_drugs_feature_in_women_s_stories.html

The first two women on this list DID go to the police. In both cases they weren't believed. It appears to me that BC's status was a large part of the reason for that. Others have claimed to have told people only to be told that accusing BC wouldn't go well for them because of his fame and power. IIRC, at least one was told that by BC himself.

There is a very long history of the rich and famous getting away with all sorts of crimes because of who they are. Why is it so hard to believe that in this case??

Also, I would like to add that I was a HUGE BC fan. My Grandfather introduced me to his comedy when I was a child. I've seen him perform live. When these allegations first came to my attention I didn't want to believe them. It was very painful to read these things about one of my childhood heroes. However, after allegation after allegation I had to give up my childhood admiration and accept that BC was not the man I'd thought he was. It was a stunning blow.

 

[Donjeta]

The impression I got from the comments of the authorities was not so much that they didn't believe the women, just that they didn't think there was enough to prosecute.

About Lachele Covington: (she's not named here but seems to fit)

“I had a Cosby case," said Fairstein, explaining that the young woman's family went to the police station, where she was referred to the special victims squad. The New York Police Department worked directly with prosecutors, Fairstein said, and both she and a detective interviewed the woman to assess her credibility, to make sure the right person was accused, and to determine if a crime had occurred.

"She was a young woman who went to his townhouse in New York," Fairstein said. "She was as credible as any witness I’ve ever interviewed. She could tell you the sort of specifics that let you know she’d been there. She had full support of her family, and because she didn’t drink, she wasn’t drugged. She got out the moment the event turned sexual."

Although Fairstein and the NYPD believed that reprehensible conduct had occurred, they concluded that there was no evidence of a criminal violation because the woman stopped Cosby's act before it went further. They didn't press charges.

http://www.ibtimes.com/bill-cosby-s...sed-if-there-were-only-one-says-famed-1773606

About Constand:
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/11/19/showbiz/bill-cosby-rape-allegation-prosecutor/

A former prosecutor who declined to bring charges against Bill Cosby a decade ago said Wednesday that he wishes he could've nailed the comedian on an allegation that he drugged and molested a woman at his Pennsylvania home.

Bruce Castor also told CNN that he believed Cosby -- a beloved figure who, with his wit and boyish smile, has charmed audiences as a family-friendly stand-up comic, the voice of Fat Albert, the host of "Picture Pages" and the star of a wildly popular eponymous sitcom -- lied to authorities.

Castor, who was the district attorney for Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, when Constand came forward in 2005, now tells CNN he thought Constand was credible, and he thought Cosby was evasive in his interview with prosecutors.

 

[IzzyBlanche]

Who? Who has it happened to? Which other completely innocent celebrities have been falsely accused of drugging, rape and sexual harassment by dozens of women?

She's been asked this before, multiple times, and she has nothing.

No evidence. Irrefutable or otherwise.

Kind of ironic when one stops to think about it. From someone who refuses to "believe something just because someone said it. Because that doesn't make it true."

My quotes paraphrasing, not meant to be actual quotes.

 

[wendiesan]

Even back in the day of some of the alleged sexual assaults and alleged rapes by BC, the drugs were pretty easy to mask.
Now, a date rape drug like GBL come in flavors: lime, cinnamon, cherry. They can be nearly impossible to detect and the drug may not affect the victim for 30 - 45 minutes. Long enough for a predator to isolate her/him.

So it doesn't hurt to remind people about some recommendations of the Rape, Abuse and Incest National Netword regarding safety tips for safe drinking.

RAINN's top safety tips for safe drinking:

Don't leave your drink unattended while talking, dancing, using the ladie's room, or making a phone call.
At parties, don't drink from punch bowls or other large, common open containers.
If someone offers to get you a drink from the bar at the club or party, go with them to the bar to order it, watch it being poured, and carry it yourself.
Watch out for your friends, and vice versa. Always leave the party or bar together. If a friend seems out of it, is way too drunk for the amount of liquor she's had, or is acting out of character, get her to a safety place immediately.
If you think you or a friend has been drugged, call 911, and be explicit with doctors so they'll give you the right tests (you'll need a urine test and possibly others). The National Sexual Assault Hotline (800-656-HOPE) can often send an advocate to the hospital to help you through the whole process.

https://www.rainn.org/get-information/types-of-sexual-assault/drug-facilitated-assault

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

She's been asked this before, multiple times, and she has nothing.

No evidence. Irrefutable or otherwise.

Kind of ironic when one stops to think about it. From someone who refuses to "believe something just because someone said it. Because that doesn't make it true."

My quotes paraphrasing, not meant to be actual quotes.

I am not she. There is nothing more annoying than when people talk about you like you can not read what you are saying..

There are a bunch of celebrities over the years that have been accused of Sexual assault.
Maybe bot by 30 or so people but by multiple people.
What about the guy who plays ELMO. That was vindicated but not after people tore him apart and multiple people accused him.
How about Michael Jackson who when brought before court was vindicated but no one believed it.
What about John Travolta? Who was accused of sexual assault.
There are more.

All I am saying is that these people waited and waited until they lost their chance to prove it in court and that is something that weighs into the equation. They were not children.. They were grown people.

 

[Donjeta]

Is there something that says the allegations made against the Elmo performer were false and made up?

I was not familiar with the case and had to look it up and this is what I found:

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertai...eared-sexual-abuse-lawsuits-article-1.1767940

Kevin Clash, puppeteer who voiced Elmo, cleared of three sexual abuse lawsuits
The U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the suit against Clash, agreeing with a lower court that found the statute of limitations had run out on the young men who claimed Clash sexually abused them.

A clerk with Manhattan District court confirmed that three lawsuits filed against Clash were dismissed on grounds that the statute of limitations had run out.

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/01/showbiz/elmo-suits-dismissed/

If the case was dismissed because it's too old it has not necessarily been shown that it was all just a lie.

 

[Montjoy]

It seems that standards of 'irrefutable evidence' are very selectively applied by some. For instance:

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/search.php?searchid=2050860

Dylan said this happened and I believe her. She is even giving more detail now than she did then. She mentioned those trains so WA would KNOW she remembers everything.

Or this post, respectfully snipped and boldfaced by me:

I think it is shameful not to believe a victim. It was not like it is now with victims. They were pulled apart. I believe that mia is nutty..


There is no reason for Dylan to come forward now. She knows what happened to her. She is a victim and still is being treated like the bad guy which is shameful if you ask me... JMO

Not only was Woody Allen never charged, but he was investigated, and LE found no evidence to support an indictment.