I was simply replying to your question why I assumed the women the NBC Fixer mentioned had consensual sex. It’s just common sense that given the numbers he mentioned it must of been.
I have no idea if one of the reported accusers got raped or not. That requires a determination of the evidence and circumstances by trial and jury. Given the number of years that have passed it’s impossible to prove. The press is doing a splendid job of digging up dirt on a guy that used his celebrity status to get laid. That behavior is not all that unusual for actors and musicians.
Otherwise I’m not sure much is being accomplished other than destroying a man’s reputation and making money for the news organizations.
I remember the media portraying the accused in a most negative light and whipping the public into an angry frenzy, despite their being no physical evidence that any of it ever occurred. Not all that dissimilar from what is going on now.
From everything I’ve read, it remains a possibility. I don’t have the god-like vision necessary to call it a reasonable certainty because I don’t know any of them, nor what they did on any specific day. I know what they want me to believe, but that’s it.
It’s not really that strange. It would seem the opposition needs reminding on a regular basis that there are very few here saying Cosby is innocent. The ones that are “defending” him are really just calling out the prevailing mob mentality that is brewing. They are also trying to remind these folks that leveling a charge as serious as rape against someone should have some physical evidence attached.
What we have now is accounts of the people involved themselves, who came forward on their own, available for us to read independently of how any one particular story may paint events. That’s a pretty significant point of dissimilarity.
There are some, and there are some who say “the jury’s out” so to speak. We (the people you’re calling “the opposition”) don’t need to be reminded of this because it is precisely our position that the jury’s not out, that for non-legal purposes the information we have is sufficient for reasonable certainty, and people who are withholding judgment are therefore basically apologizing for a rapist, whether they think he’s innocent or just don’t know.
A mob mentality involves people thinking things because the mob thinks it. There’s nothing like that happening here. For that to be happening you’d have to be able to point to people who don’t give an account as to why they think what they think, instead just going along with what a bunch of other people think.
This is patently false. For example, I know of a man who many years ago raped his own sister, repeatedly over the course of years. I knew this about him before he even owned up to it and apologized. Nobody ever needed any physical evidence to be reasonably certain this had happened. The testimony of just one person was perfectly sufficient.
Not sufficient for a courtroom conviction, but sufficient for reasonable acceptance by people to whom she revealed the ordeal.
Apparently this is a side-note to many. That’s fucking bullshit, IMHO.
He drugged and raped women. Not a woman. Women. So…lemme understand the thrust of many arguments here.
If someone is sexually abused or assaulted and does not immediately contact law enforcement and press charges, is it proposed that it just didn’t happen? Or it wasn’t rape, yes? Is that what the argument is?
I’ve no idea how many Dopers are interested in or willing to out themselves in this regard.
I am.
Between the autumn of 1977 and March of 1979 I was sexually abused at least once a month by a teacher in my High School. I never called the police. That does not mean I was not abused. I know what was done, I know where and by whom.
Millions may read the accounts of the rapes by Bill Cosby. Many may dismiss them as some perverse golddigging, media whoredom, what have you.
Pity that the truth is that women were drugged and raped by Bill Cosby. The intervening years of silence do exactly nothing to negate those facts. Equating silence with lies is a travesty of the highest regard.
Ummmm was it not Starving Artist that invented the Paper Towel Roll defense, whereby a 60 year old man is not capable of raping a kid because he, Starving Artist, can’t quite fuck a paper towel roll while standing up? Let’s maybe not listen to anything they have to say when it comes to rape, will be better for all involved.
This isn’t a stranger’s word for this. This is many unrelated strangers’ words for this (should that be “these are”?). It’s not “he said, she said”. It’s 'he said, she said, she said, she said, she said, she said, she said she said, she said, she said, she said, she said, she said, she said, she said, she said…".
Right.
I get that the pushback on internet lynchings. I sympathize. But at this moment, hanging your hat on this controversy probably isn’t going to serve you very well. It’s really really hard to see how Cosby isn’t, at the very least, a hardcore creep who is a complete shit to women. Defending him makes you look about as good as those who defended Paterno (wasn’t Starving Artist one of those?).
Or maybe it’s just a bunch of golddiggers looking to cash in years or decades later. That’s the plausible interpretation.
WTF what? You’re not seeing any of that in this thread? Do you have all those people on ignore or something? If you’re not seeing, I doubt I could point it out to you.
A finder of fact in a court of law is permitted to judge the credibility of an accuser—not just for rape, but certainly in rape cases—and on the basis of no other evidence, determine that the case had been proved beyond a reasonable doubt and convict.
If he had any shred of decency, he would tell the truth about what happened. This would certainly be counter to the recommendations of his lawyers, but in my view it’s the only possible moral course of action in such a circumstance.
Because I’m not interested in wasting time on disingenuous attempts at gotchas. Everyone here knows what’s going on. But if anyone really wants to get in the mud with the kind of crap some folks on here have been spouting, try SA. That’s always good for enlightenment. Beyond that, yanno, the whole first page was a wealth of “they did it for money,” or attention, or to bring down the great and powerful Cos. Whatever.
He could do that. It wouldn’t be an unreasonable thing for an innocent and rich guy to do.
He could issue a statement denying everything in a believable way.
He could issue a statement admitting some wrong doing but refuting anything untrue.
He could admit guilt and sincerely apologize. If he was honest and sincere, I would guess he could keep a lot of his supporters. Maybe leave some money for anti-rape organizations. Ones focusing on education young men on boundaries would be a good fit for him.