No, just like with any issue- police brutality, killer pit bulls, etc- we are asking for solid evidence.
Something remembered from 30 years ago is worthless as evidence- no matter who remembers it- man or woman.
Its not misogyny if we doubt the source- even if that source is a woman. It’s misogyny if we doubt the source because it’s a woman.
That’s a good question actually. I’ve seen the term used both ways. In some cases, “sexual assault” means any violent sexual crime involving some type of physical contact, including, but not limited to, rape. In other contexts, “sexual assault” means groping/molestation where there is physical contact to sexual areas, but no penetration.
Terminology is a problem in general with respect to sexual crimes. I’ve done some reading on sex offender assessment, punishment, and treatment and the term “sexual predator” is one of the biggest weasel words and effectively has no meaning other than as a put-down word. To some writers, a “sexual predator” is one of the worst of the worst - e.g. the stereotypical dirty old man who loiters every day outside the local elementary school, jacking off under a trenchcoat while trying to decide which little boy to kidnap and sodomize this week. He is a sociopathic serial offender who commits the most horrific acts imaginable. Some other people define “sexual predator” as any person who, at any time in their life, ever committed a sexual crime in which the offender occupied a position of power or that involved a victim who lacked capacity to consent and/or resist. So the drunken executive who groped a secretary once on the outside of her clothing is a sexual predator, because he was the boss and she was the subordinate. And the 18 year old guy who did his 17 year old girlfriend in a jurisdiction where the age of consent was 18 - sexual predator, because a 17 year old was not legally able to consent. However, someone who committed “ordinary” date rape would not be a “sexual predator”.
And because he’s a dickhead, that justifies a public lynching?
I’m a civil practitioner, and he worse than any scumbag I’ve dealt with in a quarter century.
Lawyers are looked upon to explain court events to people and it is our job to protect the “presumption of innocence” in the public eye in casual conversation. Presumably, virtually everyone we deal with will one day get a jury summons. Also, repeating the allegations here has already raised threats from Dr. Cosby’s lawyer’s of a defamation suit. I think that is a malarkey threat because that would create the opportunity for the depositions of all the witnesses including Dr. Cosby. It is the last thing he would want.
A public scolding is not a public lynching. Lynching requires hanging the accused by the neck, from a tree with rope until he is physically dead.
If he’s worth a quarter of a billion dollars then he can live in a million dollar shack and live off the interest… FOREVER. Even at a rate of return of 1% he would be bringing in 2.5 million a year. That’s eating out at fancy restaurants everyday and traveling first class money.
Love the expression, I’m sure it will catch on. (If it hasn’t already.)
Could we unban Diogenes? What a loss.
I think one of Cosby’s victims committed suicide because of the rapes.
I’ve heard people say ‘they are false charges’ but come on. One rape accusation could be false (Tucker Carlson and his false charge comes to mind). Maybe 2. But when you get to 13+ women accusing you of rape, there is something there.
And some peopel say ‘the women just want his money’. Again, if that was true why isn’t every multi-millionaire accused of rape by 13+ women? Why hasn’t Bill Gates, Mitt Romney, Paul Allen, Steve Forbes, Carlos Slim, etc etc etc been accused of rape by over a dozen women.
Fuck Cosby. I’m just sad this came to light in the twilight years of his life and career and he really can’t be punished much (he is already rich and will probably be dead of old age before he sees a prison). He should’ve spent the last 50 years of his life in prison.
Yeah but when he did his comedy routines he wouldn’t even swear, I don’t think. He built this image of a wholesome trustworthy person. WHich is sad, because the most dangerous people know that is the image they have to invent.
As far as why didn’t these women come forward, several tried. Janice Dickenson tried to write about it in her biography. At least one victim tried to tell people. A mix of them being ridiculed and threats from Cosby’s attorneys shut them up. Seriously, if a woman said ‘Bill Cosby raped me’ who are people going to believe? Cosby worked hard to build an image as a good person. Throw in a ‘we will sue you for libel’ threat and I can see why these women didn’t come forward.
Bill, this doesn’t taste like vanilla pudding!
It depends. Legal definitions vary. For example Michigan does not have either sexual assault or rape defined as crimes. Michigan defines four levels of “Criminal Sexual Conduct” for what people would normally associate with rape/sexual assault. Colloquially is a whole different matter and other have already weighed in on that.
I’d like to think that some of us can sense a creep in some ways *without *needing to see a mountain of incontrovertible evidence. I somehow avoided ever watching The Cosby Show in the 80s, or ever listening to his comedy routines - just never got the appeal of a grown man trying to act “adorable”.
The presumption of innocence in an actual court proceeding is an important principle which citizens ought to understand and esteem, both for the cases they might someday be called upon as jurors, and to intelligently discuss court proceedings. It is a fine and unslimy thing for lawyers to assist in explaining and upholding this legal principle.
But Cosby is not in court. Apart from the suit already settled, his accusers have no hope of seeing him in either criminal or civil court. No principles of law are now at stake.
Do you think there’s any truth to all the allegations?
The latest accuser is Carla Ferrigno, the long time wife of Lou Ferrigno. The incident happened before she married Lou (according to Carla). She was able to flee after Bill grabbed her and forcefully kissed her, luckily.
Good thing for Cosby this happened before Lou married her. I bet he wouldn’t like Lou when he’s angry.
all he did was give those kids horse rides on that show of his because the pervert was
bumping them pretty hard…:eek:
What are the verb form and the actor noun form for “Criminal Sexual Conduct”? E.g. for “Sexual Assault”, the verb is “to sexually assault” and the actor is a “sexual assaulter”. For rape, the verb is “to rape” and the actor is a “rapist”.
So what about criminal sexual conduct? If a sexual assaulter sexually assaults a victim, Does a criminal sexual conductor criminally and sexually conduct a victim?
How many “rapists” offer their victims $500 (over $2,000 in today’s money) if they maintain good grades? And reward them with $10,000 ($40,000 in today’s money) for graduating from nursing school?
How many “rapists” find their victims voluntarily living with them for weeks afterward?
Apparently only one: Bill Cosby! :roll eyes:
And now we have Lou Ferrigno’s former Playboy Bunny wife chiming in about how Cosby tried to “sexually assault” her in 1967 (either at a party or in Cosby’s basement, depending on which media blurb you happen to read). It must have been horrific because while she feels lucky not to have actually been raped, she has still suffered “emotional harm all her life” due to Cosby’s assault. And she goes on to describe in detail the horrific assault she suffered – she says he “forcibly kissed her” or “forcibly tried to kiss her” while his wife was somewhere else either at the party or in another room, again depending on which scurrilous media account you read. She is now courageously coming forward to “put one more nail in the coffin who [sic] will keep [the 77-year-old] Cosby from ever doing this again”.
I believe the penthouse dweller/$10,000 grad bonus recipient was Jane Doe No. 10 in the list of women supposedly raped by Cosby.
These are very good examples of what causes me to doubt the veracity of these women’s claims. Accusations are being hurled twenty, thirty, even forty-five years after the event; exaggerated, inflammatory language is employed both by the media and the accusers whenever possible; some claim rape or assault when they were either complicit or at least acquiescent in whatever occurred, and some don’t appear even to know whether he had sex with them or not, and therefore how do we or they know what they did or didn’t say to Cosby to make him think they were either agreeable to having sex with him or not?
And why is it that almost all of these allegations are so old? Why haven’t more recent victims come forward? And why haven’t more recent potential victims come forward with tales of how Cosby drugged or tried to drug them into submission but failed? Surely his drugs first/rape second approach to sex with strangers must have misfired on occasion, so why nothing from any of them?
Frankly I’m beginning to suspect politics is at the base of all this. Not so much on the part of the women involved but on the part of Hannibal Burress for calling Cosby a rapist on stage, and the media for running with it as fast and hard as they can. Cosby has been very vocal lately about what he feels are negative, harmful behaviors that exist in the black community. He has been very, very critical of ebonics, the lack of fathers in the many black homes, and of the inclination among many young black students to scorn and bully other black students for “acting white” by trying to do well in school, and I imagine this has been anathema to people like Hannibal Buress and to those in the media.
As a result this factually very liberal man has ironically gained a reputation for being socially conservative and frankly I’m beginning to wonder if he’s not being persecuted more for his perceived conservatism and these inflammatory headlines and so-called rapes are merely stalking horses being employed in an attempt to destroy the credibility of a powerful voice for truth and reason on subjects the PC crowd for some unknown reason finds highly objectionable.