Rape allegations mount against Bill Cosby #2

[Donjeta]

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2...-laws-reveals-her-secret-on-dr-drew-show_news

 

[oceanblueeyes]

According to the Sexual Assault Awareness and Prevention Center, that's possible but does not apply in the majority of cases.

http://sapac.umich.edu/article/196

Thank you the correct information.

I don't know why some tend to believe that those who sexually abuse others were most often abused during childhood.

Of course some sex offenders do have childhood abuse in their history since sex offenders come from all walks of life. Just like some have dark hair, light hair or whatever so there is bound to be some who were abused as child since sex offenders are as individual as their victims. There are all kinds of sex offenders from all types of childhoods. Just like there are murderers from different walks of life and had many various types of backgrounds while growing up as a child.

But most cases the majority of childhood victims do not go on to be sexual victimizers. In fact most become overprotective parents if they have children. Or may be overprotective of close family member's children.

I don't think BC was sexually abused as a child. BC seems to think he is entitled to do as he wishes with women even if it means drugging them before he rapes them. That is more of a full blown narcissistic trait than one who was abused as a child. Imo, BC is one who really has thought about no one's feelings but his own during his adult life and everyone was there for the taking. He is like the typical rapist imo. He groomed a lot of them and then he let them know very clearly he could make or break their budding careers. He ruled by fear, power, and intimidation which is what a lot of rapists do.

Sexual coercion is a form of rape. The victims weren't only very young and vulnerable but he had to drug them to have non-consensual sex (an act of rape) with them. This shows he knew if they were in their right frame of mind they would not want to have sex with him and that is why he had to drug them and take what he wanted.

IMO

 

[wendiesan]

Absolutely, obe.

Although we tend to think of victims as young, IMO, some of these behaviours blend into the abuse (domestic or otherwise) of adults whether they are in straight or gay or other relationships.

Sexual coercion can be insidious, and, like some stages of domestic abuse, the person being victimized may not be aware that they are, in fact, being coerced.
A discussion of the range of behaviours covered by the term can be found at http://www.loveisrespect.org/what-sexual-coercion.
I particularly liked the list of the characteristics of consent.
eg. "It's not consent if you're afraid to say no." or "Consent is not a free pass."

 

[Crimson clover]

I've read...then pondered...most of the published reports about Cosby. Maybe he did. Maybe he didn't.
I've read...then pondered...the accuser's accounts.
Troubling the most...is the silence. Seems people are saying 'everybody' in the circles knew Cosby's deeds. Not a soul had the cojones to speak forward and make headline news?

Most importantly...the women. The accusers.
Way back when...why not be speak forward? Why not let the world know what you say Cosby did? Why suffer in silence...when 'EVERYBODY' knew his devilish ways? It may have broken the chain. A fellow sister might have escaped the torment.

I wish power to women, really. For all the right reasons.

 

[Nova]

Speaking of "power to women", I realize post-modernism holds that all truth/knowledge is subjective and I recognize the wisdom in the notion.

But when we are talking about physical assaults--especially if a victim has been drugged without her knowledge--I think we should be careful about calling the claims of rape victims "her truth" or "their truth". Calling the drugging and penetration of a woman "her truth" implies there is a "his truth" by which such actions are NOT criminal or even harmful--and that's a dangerous notion to pass around even by implication, I think. (This is not a response to any poster here, but to the words of some of the alleged victims.)

And while we're on the subject of sexual semantics, I think the concept of sexual coercion gets all too close to good, old-fashioned seduction. Yes, there are clear-cut cases where the power dynamic between one partner and another is simply too unequal to tell if consent is ever given willingly. But if women really want to construct an entire bureaucracy around consenting to physical contact, then who is buying Fifty Shades of Grey?

 

[Donjeta]

But if women really want to construct an entire bureaucracy around consenting to physical contact, then who is buying Fifty Shades of Grey?

I've no idea who's buying the badly written book but Fifty Shades of Grey goes beyond bureaucracy when it comes to consent, they had an entire legal document detailing which acts the participants consent to and which not.

Dave Chappelle had the audience laughing during his entire standup set at the Saenger Theater in New Orleans Friday. At the beginning of his set he mentioned comedian Hannibal Buress had opened for him the night before. "You know — the guy who accidentally killed Bill Cosby?" said Chappelle.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/dave-chappelle-jokes-bill-cosby-757465

 

[Donjeta]

http://www.delawareonline.com/story/pulpculture/2014/12/12/cosby-milk/20299655/

During the News Journal interview, Cosby was asked about the re-surfacing accusations against him and he responded that he cannot "cry over spilled milk."

Here is the entire exchange from the question and answer session, originally published on March 6.

Q: Not long after your NBC announcement and after the Woody Allen allegations resurfaced in the news, the allegations against you were also re-reported by a couple of publications. What do you think about that and do you think it's connected?

A: It will always be there. And because it will always be there, I can't cry over spilled milk. Can I be angry with myself over milk that I spilled? I can only be happy with the gift that I have, continue to give and move in the direction that is gift-giving to the people.

Q: And I assume by spilled milk you mean dealing with these allegations and not that you committed any of the acts?

A: This is the first time you have become as bright as I thought you were. [Laughs.] Exactly.

Q: For the record, you still deny all that, right?

A: It was done 10 to 11 years ago. The case was in an agreement. If it comes up and people view it like it was yesterday, I can't stop that.

The reporter keeps prompting but he did not say yes, he denies it... It's milk that HE spilled...

(I wonder if he had the threatening expression when he implied the reporter had been stupid so far in the interview...)

 

[Sonya610]

http://www.delawareonline.com/story/pulpculture/2014/12/12/cosby-milk/20299655/The reporter keeps prompting but he did not say yes, he denies it... It's milk that HE spilled...

(I wonder if he had the threatening expression when he implied the reporter had been stupid so far in the interview...)

"Can I be angry with myself over milk that I spilled? "

Uhhh....to me that is an admission. He says it a few times in different ways.

If someone asks/accuses you of a heinous act that you would NEVER do would you refer to it as milk that YOU spilled?

And then he goes ON TO SAY he has "given so much"?. WTF? That is a really twisted and egomaniacal.

He has been UNTOUCHABLE and that made him bolder and probably made him believe what he is doing is just fine because HE is doing it (and he gives so much to society). Let's all remember he schooled others (the black community in general) on their lack of morality and work ethic.

Scary stuff (and that is something I rarely ever say/think when discussing criminals/predators).

 

[Blondie in Spokane]

"Can I be angry with myself over milk that I spilled?"

What an egotistical a$$.......(IMO)

 

[nrdsb4]

Most importantly...the women. The accusers.
Way back when...why not be speak forward? Why not let the world know what you say Cosby did? Why suffer in silence...when 'EVERYBODY' knew his devilish ways? It may have broken the chain. A fellow sister might have escaped the torment.

I wish power to women, really. For all the right reasons.

Explanations have been given over and over for why the accusers didn't speak earlier:

BC was extremely revered; they knew he would deny it and they rightly assumed they would not be believed.

BC was extremely powerful; they knew he could destroy their careers. They were afraid to tell.

Many of them had mixed feelings; they, too, had revered him. They began to doubt themselves: did I do something wrong? Did I send out the wrong signals?

In those days, rape victims were so stigmatized; in court, their character would be assassinated, defense lawyers would insinuate that their manner of dress had invited the assault and therefore they were basically "asking for it." Their past sex lives would be trotted out for everyone, as if consenting with other men somehow eliminated the need for the accused to get consent. And on and on...

I don't see how there could be any confusion as to why these women didn't speak up earlier. "Acquaintance rape" or sexual assault continues to be difficult to get people to understand. Back in the 70's it was even more impossible.

 

[IzzyBlanche]

"Can I be angry with myself over milk that I spilled? "

Uhhh....to me that is an admission. He says it a few times in different ways.

If someone asks/accuses you of a heinous act that you would NEVER do would you refer to it as milk that YOU spilled?

And then he goes ON TO SAY he has "given so much"?. WTF? That is a really twisted and egomaniacal.

He has been UNTOUCHABLE and that made him bolder and probably made him believe what he is doing is just fine because HE is doing it (and he gives so much to society). Let's all remember he schooled others (the black community in general) on their lack of morality and work ethic.

Scary stuff (and that is something I rarely ever say/think when discussing criminals/predators).

I totally agree. Not only is he admitting it, he's not sorry (crying over) it.

What a despicable piece of work.

 

[Donjeta]

well I guess we now know why he was silent in the NPR interview. His lawyers told him to shut his trap and not incriminate himself further

 

[Donjeta]

This is from December 2 but I don't remember hearing of her.

http://www.etonline.com/news/154617_20th_bill_cosby_accuser_comes_forward/

Vancouver model Lisa Jones sat down for an exclusive interview with ET Canada.

"At one point he said, 'I'm Bill Cosby. You're not in the little leagues anymore you're sitting with Mr. Cosby. Do you understand that?'" Jones recalled.

"Why I'm here today is because out of nowhere he got up, started to walk past me, and crouched in front of my knees, grabbed my legs, and tried to pull them apart," Jones continued. "I just remember I was so shocked. And the first thing I did was push Mr. Cosby away and he kind of lost balance."

 

[IzzyBlanche]

I do. But it's getting difficult to keep track.

 

[Crimson clover]

Explanations have been given over and over for why the accusers didn't speak earlier:

BC was extremely revered; they knew he would deny it and they rightly assumed they would not be believed.

BC was extremely powerful; they knew he could destroy their careers. They were afraid to tell.
Many of them had mixed feelings; they, too, had revered him. They began to doubt themselves: did I do something wrong? Did I send out the wrong signals?

In those days, rape victims were so stigmatized; in court, their character would be assassinated, defense lawyers would insinuate that their manner of dress had invited the assault and therefore they were basically "asking for it." Their past sex lives would be trotted out for everyone, as if consenting with other men somehow eliminated the need for the accused to get consent. And on and on...

I don't see how there could be any confusion as to why these women didn't speak up earlier. "Acquaintance rape" or sexual assault continues to be difficult to get people to understand. Back in the 70's it was even more impossible.

Thank you.
No need for further explanations, nor the need to beat dead horses.
A question more of analytical thinking...Why the silence?

So...BBM...They were afraid to tell. Fear is an awful thing.

So...I have been drugged, sexually assaulted, either or both by Bill Cosby. I am confused, ashamed...in a fog. If I speak forward...I may lose my dream career, chastised by people (media/public). The risks are too great. So, I hush now.

I KNOW what Cosby is doing. I hear the 'talk'. I KNOW other women are falling prey. I'm sad and I'm sorry. But, I continue to hush.

I'm guessing maybe that's why the accuser's have been silent against this celebrity god...so revered and powerful?
That's where my confusion lies...with full understanding its an unpopular stance of opinion.
I can't fathom going thru my years...KNOWING my drug-pushing rapist was still circulating in action.

Suppose women are cut from different molds.
I wish power to fearless women.

 

[MsMarple]

I'm not sure BC's accusers would have fared much better if they had reported the crime or if rape kits had been available at the time, at least not as well as I thought before reading several depressing articles. I did some more research after following a link that IzzyBlanche posted in the last thread. DNA testing as “proof” of rape is only useful when they're actually tested after being collected. Currently there are approximately 400,000 untested kits sitting on shelves.

Here's a good article that summarizes problems women continue to face. It was published in June of this year. I'm including a few highlights but the whole article is worth reading:

Second, police departments have been found to destroy records and ignore or mishandle evidence, which leads not only to undercounting but dismissal of cases.
...
Fourth, people making complaints are often harassed out of pursing them. In 2012, the police department of Cranberry Township, Pennsylvania, near Pittsburgh, was held liable in a case in which police accused a reporting victim of lying during her interview, at one point telling her, “Your tears won’t save you now,” and failing to pursue the investigation.
...
In 1999, the Philadelphia Police Department improperly handled 2,300 out of 2,500 rape cases. As late as 2003, the unit investigating sex crimes was jokingly referred to as “the lying bi***es unit.”

http://www.thenation.com/article/180441/how-did-fbi-miss-over-1-million-rapes#

From a press release by Washington State Senator Maria Cantwell in 2002:

Because of the nature of sexual assault, victims often choose not to report their assault to law enforcement. Fear of repercussions by the assailant, fear of the intrusive nature of evidentiary collection and further legal investigation, and personal embarrassment are a few of the reasons victims do not report their assault. According to the National Center for Crime Victims, only 16 percent of sexual assaults are reported to police.

http://www.cantwell.senate.gov/news/record.cfm?id=243171&

My bolding.

If you Google “untested rape kits” the hits will give info on how individual states are responding to the backlog of rape kits.

It's neither surprising nor unbelievable that BC's alleged rape victims say that they were discouraged from pursuing charges nor is it unreasonable to consider that employees close to BC may have helped him keep these crimes under the radar. According to Frank Scotti's recent statements, at the very least it shows that BC preyed on young women and may even have committed statutory rape:

Scotti said Cosby also had an arrangement with a Manhattan modeling agency in which the owner would deliver young women to his dressing room. Some of the*aspiring models were as young as 16, Scotti said.

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertai...-paid-women-ex-nbc-employee-article-1.2020464

 

[BirdycatNY]

Thank you.
No need for further explanations, nor the need to beat dead horses.
A question more of analytical thinking...Why the silence?
...
I KNOW what Cosby is doing. I hear the 'talk'. I KNOW other women are falling prey. I'm sad and I'm sorry. But, I continue to hush.
...
Suppose women are cut from different molds.
I wish power to fearless women.

There's no definitive answer on why non-action happens imo, but it certainly isn't unique to alleged victims of BC or industry. Here is an article (on Jian Ghomeshi but maybe it will help give more perspective on "non-action" in sexual assault/rape cases).

I Knew About Jian Ghomeshi
So did a lot of people in our Toronto scene. We never said anything. Are we complicit in his alleged abuse?
http://www.slate.com/articles/doubl..._t_surprised_to_hear_them_does_that_make.html
By Carl Wilson
Nov. 3 2014 8:48 PM

From the article: "...As you follow all of this, you remember reading the words of Pope Francis when he held a special Mass at the Vatican this summer for visiting survivors of clerical sexual abuse: He spoke of “despicable actions, camouflaged by a complicity that cannot be explained...So what should you have done, back when there were only rumors and snaky vibes?... ”"

 

[XXXXXXXX]

Thank you.
No need for further explanations, nor the need to beat dead horses.
A question more of analytical thinking...Why the silence?

So...BBM...They were afraid to tell. Fear is an awful thing.

So...I have been drugged, sexually assaulted, either or both by Bill Cosby. I am confused, ashamed...in a fog. If I speak forward...I may lose my dream career, chastised by people (media/public). The risks are too great. So, I hush now.

I KNOW what Cosby is doing. I hear the 'talk'. I KNOW other women are falling prey. I'm sad and I'm sorry. But, I continue to hush.

I'm guessing maybe that's why the accuser's have been silent against this celebrity god...so revered and powerful?
That's where my confusion lies...with full understanding its an unpopular stance of opinion.
I can't fathom going thru my years...KNOWING my drug-pushing rapist was still circulating in action.

Suppose women are cut from different molds.
I wish power to fearless women.

And THAT attitude, in a nutshell, sums up WHY these women were ignored when they first attempted to speak when these incidents first happened. Thank you for proving a point I posted days ago.

 

[Crimson clover]

And THAT attitude, in a nutshell, sums up WHY these women were ignored when they first attempted to speak when these incidents first happened. Thank you for proving a point I posted days ago.

Your welcome.
Thank you for the un-biased, un-subjective response.

 

[wendiesan]

Speaking of "power to women", I realize post-modernism holds that all truth/knowledge is subjective and I recognize the wisdom in the notion. But when we are talking about physical assaults--especially if a victim has been drugged without her knowledge--I think we should be careful about calling the claims of rape victims "her truth" or "their truth". Calling the drugging and penetration of a woman "her truth" implies there is a "his truth" by which such actions are NOT criminal or even harmful--and that's a dangerous notion to pass around even by implication, I think. (This is not a response to any poster here, but to the words of some of the alleged victims.)

And while we're on the subject of sexual semantics, I think the concept of sexual coercion gets all too close to good, old-fashioned seduction. Yes, there are clear-cut cases where the power dynamic between one partner and another is simply too unequal to tell if consent is ever given willingly. But if women really want to construct an entire bureaucracy around consenting to physical contact, then who is buying Fifty Shades of Grey?

My bolds.
I'd like to respond to the phrase which I put in bold.

The explanation offered by the love is respect blog, is that sexual coercion happens when there is a lack of consent by the pursued party. For example, if a woman is told she can only prove her love for her boyfriend by acquiescing to his demands, that's coercion. If a woman is drugged to make her more malleable, that's coercion. If a man continues to harass a woman after she has refused him, that's coercion. According to the definition by the blog, sexual coercion is “the act of using pressure, alcohol or drugs, or force to have sexual contact with someone against his or her will”. http://www.loveisrespect.org/what-sexual-coercion

(FWIW, although I described a heterosexual relationship as an example in which a man is coercing a woman, the definitions/descriptions would hold true if applied to the reverse situation of a woman coercing a man. They would also apply or in a homosexual relationship in which one man is coercing another man, or a woman is coercing another woman.)

Good old fashioned seduction was considered a crime in many states. The following is a legal definition.

seduction n. the use of charm, salesmanship, promises, gifts and flattery to induce another person to have sexual intercourse outside marriage, without any use of force or intimidation. At one time seduction was a crime in many states, but if the seducee (usually female) is of the age of consent and is not drugged, intoxicated or otherwise unable to consent, seduction is no longer criminal. However, just as adultery lingers in the criminal codes of some states, so does seduction. (See: adultery, rape, date rape, breach of promise) Copyright © 1981-2005 by Gerald N. Hill and Kathleen T. Hill. All Right reserved.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/seduction

PS
JMO, but 50 Shades of Grey is a book about the erotic fantasy of submission. Psychology Today has an article that might provide some insights into the popular response to the book: Power Play: good girls' guide to power and dominance. (http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/power-play/201206/50-shades-grey)