Bill Cosby

[the]

I don't the believe the accusers.

 

[Barnabas]

If these women are lying I hope they realize the amount of pain false rap allegations cause to the accused. They destroy lives.

 

[Eventhorizon]

Scary. Because no one knows for sure who is telling the truth here but regardless people are picking sides in accordance to what they want to believe.
Humans are just plain fing scary.

 

[La Sagna]

These women have nothing to gain from coming forward. They are all successful women and they didn't have to come forward with their stories. If anything they know that they can look bad because they didn't come forward earlier. It is also not the first time that Bill Cosby has been accused of this type of behaviour. There is way too much smoke for there not to be fire somewhere. The court of public opinion is just how people feel about somebody and they can chose to feel anyway they want according to what they hear, it's not like the person goes to jail if they are 'believed' to be guilty, they just have to suffer embarrassment and probably harm to their career. Famous people use public opinion to their advantage so if it turns against them when they have done something questionable then its par for the course. The stories are completely believable, particularly that they didn't come forward all this time, because it's Bill Cosby, they knew that he had much more power than them and who would believe them over Bill Cosby? These ladies may be guilty of something, but I don't think it's falsely accusing Bill Cosby, more that if they had been more courageous when it happened they may have been able to stop him from doing it to others.

 

[Eventhorizon]

These women have nothing to gain from coming forward. They are all successful women and they didn't have to come forward with their stories. If anything they know that they can look bad because they didn't come forward earlier. It is also not the first time that Bill Cosby has been accused of this type of behaviour. There is way too much smoke for there not to be fire somewhere. The court of public opinion is just how people feel about somebody and they can chose to feel anyway they want according to what they hear, it's not like the person goes to jail if they are 'believed' to be guilty, they just have to suffer embarrassment and probably harm to their career. Famous people use public opinion to their advantage so if it turns against them when they have done something questionable then its par for the course. The stories are completely believable, particularly that they didn't come forward all this time, because it's Bill Cosby, they knew that he had much more power than them and who would believe them over Bill Cosby? These ladies may be guilty of something, but I don't think it's falsely accusing Bill Cosby, more that if they had been more courageous when it happened they may have been able to stop him from doing it to others.

Speculation and opinion.
I say I do not k iw either way. Perhaps he is guilty perhaps not.
It is the responsibility of the accusers to prove guilty ot of the accused to prove innocence.
The more I hear of people talk about this the more firm my stance that humans want blood for bloods sake.

 

[La Sagna]

It is the responsibility of the accusers to prove guilty ot of the accused to prove innocence.

That is true in court but people make judgement calls about others all the time, often with much less information. People can share their stories and others can shape their opinions according to what they've heard. Obviously you wouldn't want that in a judicial system, but public opinion is just that, an opinion.

 

[Eventhorizon]

That is true in court but people make judgement calls about others all the time, often with much less information. People can share their stories and others can shape their opinions according to what they've heard. Obviously you wouldn't want that in a judicial system, but public opinion is just that, an opinion.

Bill Cosby is of no concern to me. I do not know him. I simply think it odd and scary that people who have never even met him can come to judgments concerning him.

 

[La Sagna]

Bill Cosby is of no concern to me. I do not know him. I simply think it odd and scary that people who have never even met him can come to judgments concerning him.

You're surprised, really? Don't people make value judgements on celebrities all the time? They'll decide they don't like somebody simply because of their appearance or some trivial thing they did, or they'll come to the defence of a celebrity that has been actually found guilty of something, just because they like their work or think they're cute. People make value judgements about politicians, about people who belong to certain groups or have certain careers, I think this is the way most people behave naturally. I would be surprised if you had never made any value judgements on somebody you had never met.

 

[cvp12gh5]

My first thought was to doubt the allegations. I couldn't imagine that so many women would have kept quiet for so long. But then it dawned on me that most, if not all, of these incidents happened decades ago. It was a different time and sexual assaults were not taken as seriously as they are today. Any woman coming forward at that time would have been made to feel as if it were her own fault, she wanted it, or that it wasn't as serious as she imagined. In other words, victim shaming and gaslighting. The women that did try to come forward when it happened were silenced by lawyers and their agents. The newspapers were silenced by Cosby with money and the promise of exclusive interviews. There wasn't a safe space for these victims to talk about what they went through without the fear of being stigmatized.

Today, attitudes towards sexual assaults have shifted dramatically. There is still victim shaming going on, but nothing like what went down in the past. We live in a time where women feel more comfortable coming forward and speaking about these sexual crimes committed against them. They have nothing to gain financially by telling their stories, but they have everything to gain in terms of self-respect and the right to be heard and believed. And hearing all of these other women step forward is giving them strength; they will not be threatened into silence this time. They finally have validation. It may have been long overdue, but I am glad they finally spoke.

And yes, we do not have all of the information yet, and all we have is our opinions, but my opinion is that he is guilty. He is a serial rapist and he should be put in jail for his crimes.

As for his comedy, I was never a fan. [MENTION=4115]Lark[/MENTION], like you, I watched The Cosby's on t.v. because that's what was on, but I never got his stand up. Or more like I got it, I just never thought it was funny. Hell, if he ever wanted to rape me, he wouldn't even need drugs. All he would have to do is sit me on a couch and do one of his routines. I would be out cold in minutes.

But yeah, hearing some of these accounts makes your skin crawl. Maybe they are all lying but I highly doubt it.

 

[Barnabas]

That is true in court but people make judgement calls about others all the time, often with much less information. People can share their stories and others can shape their opinions according to what they've heard. Obviously you wouldn't want that in a judicial system, but public opinion is just that, an opinion.

Because when the stakes are as high as this those simple judgement calls based on only what we see can have disasterous results. Sometimes the court of public opion can literally hang people.

 

[bionic]

And yes, we do not have all of the information yet, and all we have is our opinions, but my opinion is that he is guilty. He is a serial rapist and he should be put in jail for his crimes.

But yeah, hearing some of these accounts makes your skin crawl. Maybe they are all lying but I highly doubt it.

What I find scary is how people can feel so apathetic about this. That is what sickens me most. It's countless.... 17 + women... coming out and talking about their experiences in graphic detail. Women who are accomplished, have nothing to gain, etc. I'm sure they're sick of being shushed and threatened all these years by Crosby. I've even read that he paid a lot of these women and threatened their careers. He's even tried to get a lot of journalists and radio hosts fired many times in the past. This is nothing knew so I don't get why people are in such shock. What gives?

 

[sprinkles]

My getting upset about this wouldn't do a damn thing except ruin my day. It is highly unlikely that he will go to prison at this juncture so I really have no reason whatsoever to get myself tied up in this.

 

[Eventhorizon]

You're surprised, really? Don't people make value judgements on celebrities all the time? They'll decide they don't like somebody simply because of their appearance or some trivial thing they did, or they'll come to the defence of a celebrity that has been actually found guilty of something, just because they like their work or think they're cute. People make value judgements about politicians, about people who belong to certain groups or have certain careers, I think this is the way most people behave naturally. I would be surprised if you had never made any value judgements on somebody you had never met.

I never said I was surprised. I have been alive too long for that. I suppose I wanted to believe there are types out there that can rise above this sort of gossip where a person is condemned on heresay and conjecture alone.
Being constantly disappointed with humanity is nothing new to me. Sometimes I suppose I simply let that show.

 

[sassafras]

Growing up, I vaguely remember my parents watching the Cosby show, but I can't say I grew up with Cosby's comedy or that he had any profound influence on my life, so to me, this isn't going to have any kind of personal impact.

I know that it's not easy for victims to come forward; women are usually regarded with suspicion when it comes to allegations of sexual assault, especially when it comes to allegations against celebrities/people in power (like the recent scandals against the Canadian MPs and John Gomeshi case) but even in the light of this, there's just something about this whole case that rubs me the wrong way. I don't know what it is.

I will wait and see.

 

[cvp12gh5]

Now it's time for the tasteless but smirk-worthy Cosby jokes, pics, gifs.

 

[Nixie]

I never cared for Cosby's humor but remember watching the Cosby Show (mainly cause back then, tv channels were much more limited).

I think that it can be easy for someone with wealth to find themselves bored with life because everything they desire is easily obtained and therefore becoming deviant. So could Cosby's kink have been drugging and raping women? Maybe....

It is also well known that wealth breeds leeches who look to partake in the excess....toss in celebrityhood which breeds another type of groupie. When the wealthy pay they can afford the best drugs and all the booze you want. So could there be women around Cosby who were there to be ornaments and hangerons? Sure. Was sex likely with the partying and such? Probably.

However, the scandelous nature of the accusations make it a great car wreck for everyone to rubber neck at. If what I read was correct, the original "scandel" broke in 2005 and this is just a rehashing of that incident plus other women jumping in to say it happened to them too (but they never said anything). The "that isn't fair" bell went off in my head and makes me have some serious doubts about the veracity. I mean lets say some chick meets Cosby in his hollywood heyday, drinking, maybe drugs...and she has sex with Cosby. Fastforward 20 years and life hasn't been great and all of a sudden there is some sensational story being rehashed and now your memory of that drunken night becomes more rape like. Total conjecture on my part. But if we are willing to conjecture about Cosby, we should also be willing to conjecture about these women and their motives.

Personally I find Janice Dickenson to be a twat and unbelievable....but then I always thought she came across as a money grubbing twat whenever I read something about her.

 

[sprinkles]

I never cared for Cosby's humor but remember watching the Cosby Show (mainly cause back then, tv channels were much more limited).

I think that it can be easy for someone with wealth to find themselves bored with life because everything they desire is easily obtained and therefore becoming deviant. So could Cosby's kink have been drugging and raping women? Maybe....

It is also well known that wealth breeds leeches who look to partake in the excess....toss in celebrityhood which breeds another type of groupie. When the wealthy pay they can afford the best drugs and all the booze you want. So could there be women around Cosby who were there to be ornaments and hangerons? Sure. Was sex likely with the partying and such? Probably.

However, the scandelous nature of the accusations make it a great car wreck for everyone to rubber neck at. If what I read was correct, the original "scandel" broke in 2005 and this is just a rehashing of that incident plus other women jumping in to say it happened to them too (but they never said anything). The "that isn't fair" bell went off in my head and makes me have some serious doubts about the veracity. I mean lets say some chick meets Cosby in his hollywood heyday, drinking, maybe drugs...and she has sex with Cosby. Fastforward 20 years and life hasn't been great and all of a sudden there is some sensational story being rehashed and now your memory of that drunken night becomes more rape like. Total conjecture on my part. But if we are willing to conjecture about Cosby, we should also be willing to conjecture about these women and their motives.

Personally I find Janice Dickenson to be a twat and unbelievable....but then I always thought she came across as a money grubbing twat whenever I read something about her.

Actually it started in the 90's with Autumn Jackson who went to jail for trying to extort Cosby for $40 million, and threatening to sell a story to tabloids if she wasn't paid off.

 

[Gaze]

I do not agree with the argument that accusers should automatically be believed until proven otherwise. People try to extort money from public figures all the time. We live in a world where many people unashamedly think, "I should have what you have and if I don't, it's my right to get it from you in some way." Any accuser should not be able to simply make an accusation without proof. Otherwise, anyone can walk around accusing anyone of anything and causing people to lose jobs and livelihood, even if the accusations are fake. It should not be legal to accuse someone if you can't prove the accusations true. Also, I'm tired of everyone calling any criticism of the accusers victim blaming. Someone is not a victim unless they are a victim. Some of these accusers are not real victims but opportunists and should not be seen in the same category as those who are true victims of a crime. I think it takes away from the legitimacy of the real victim's right's stories when false accusations are thrown out casually and lumped in with real victim's stories. The main goal of the fake accuser is to get attention and make a buck. Believing everyone who cries wolf is not good for fair. From a few of the stories I've heard, some of these women were not raped or unknowingly drugged but consciously engaged in intimacy with Cosby to further their careers and perhaps later regretted it and felt ashamed about what they did, and may simply be using the real victim's stories of assault and rape to get sympathy or make a payday. False accusers should be prosecuted. The argument that you should believe all accusations are true until there is proof that they aren't is problematic. You can destroy someone's life significantly with faulty sexual assault accusations for the rest of their life in ways very few can undo. Blind acceptance of what everyone who claims to be a victim is saying is wrong. You don't know if they are being truthful or just exploitative. False accusers can also make people question the truthfulness of real victim's experiences. So, no, outright acceptance of any accuser who says they're a victim is problematic. It just makes it easier for other false accusers to make money from the sympathy of the public who wants to support the real victims of a crime. It also makes people more wary in the future of believing any accuser because people get tired of having their sympathy abused. After a while, this may lead to the public to more easily dismiss real accusations as false in the future. Not everyone who is an accuser is a victim, and that's the problem with public opinion being the judge, jury, and execution in these sensationalized cases.

 

[Dave Fallon]

I do not agree with the argument that accusers should automatically be believed until proven otherwise. People try to extort money from public figures all the time. We live in a world where many people unashamedly think, "I should have what you have and if I don't, it's my right to get it from you in some way." Any accuser should not be able to simply make an accusation without proof. Otherwise, anyone can walk around accusing anyone of anything and causing people to lose jobs and livelihood, even if the accusations are fake. It should not be legal to accuse someone if you can't prove the accusations true. Also, I'm tired of everyone calling any criticism of the accusers victim blaming. Someone is not a victim unless they are a victim. Some of these accusers are not real victims but opportunists and should not be seen in the same category as those who are true victims of a crime.

It is possible they are all lying to get money somehow. But the recurring theme here is we don't know. If you don't know they are lying, you have to give equal credibility to the idea that they are not lying. Lying under oath or committing other fraudulent acts is a crime, and as [MENTION=6917]sprinkles[/MENTION] pointed out, one person has already gone to jail. If extortion is what these individuals are doing, then they take that risk upon themselves that they may be prosecuted. But that is the same situation as Cosby is in. If he's (or anyone is) accusing the alleged victims of fraud, then that person has a duty to prove it. They are innocent until proven guilty, as so many of pointed out on this thread.

I think it takes away from the legitimacy of the real victim's right's stories when false accusations are thrown out casually and lumped in with the genuine harm done to real victims, when the only goal of the fake accuser is to get attention and make a buck. Believing everyone who cries wolf is not good for fair. From a few of the stories I've heard, some of these women were not raped or drugged but knowingly engaged in intimacy with Cosby to further their careers and perhaps later regretted it, and may simply be using the real victim's stories of assault and rape to get sympathy or make a payday.

I agree with you 100%: people who make false claims do the most harm to others who have valid claims but will be looked on with scrutiny afterwards. But we don't know, do we? And this is where "victim blaming" comes in. The thread started with questions about Cosby, but it is the accusers who are under the most scrutiny here. I agree the two are linked, but if they are indeed lying...

These people should be prosecuted.

Right. But they are not being prosecuted. Has Cosby filed defamation suit? Has he attempted to clear his name? I know his lawyer has maintained his innocence, but I haven't heard that he's striking back against these current claims in any meaningful way. If he isn't openly accusing these women of fraud, why are we?

The argument that you should believe accusations are true until there is proof that they aren't is problematic. You can destroy someone's life significantly with faulty sexual assault accusations for the rest of their life in ways very few can undo. Blind acceptance of what everyone who claims to be a victim is saying is wrong. You don't know if they are being truthful or just exploitative. False accusers can also make people question the truthfulness of real victim's experiences. So, no, outright support of any accuser who says they're a victim is not fair.

But then is outright skepticism fair either? As you mentioned, people who falsely accuse do more damage to those who rightfully accuse, and maybe that is what happened here. The individuals coming out now are under scrutiny for their claims, their motives are cast as fraud for money, their statements are branded suspect until proven. What happens when someone who has a legitimate complaint sees this and considers coming forward? Is it a greater ill that the charges be considered honestly or that everyone from now on be branded a liar until they can prove otherwise when they come forward?

It just makes it easier for other false accusers to make money from the sympathy of the public who wants to support the real victims of a crime. It also makes people more wary in the future of believing any accuser because people get tired of having their sympathy abused. After a while, this may lead to the public to more easily dismiss real accusations as false in the future. Not everyone who is an accuser is a victim, and that's the problem with public opinion being the judge, jury, and execution in these sensationalized cases.

Right. And this is ample evidence to support what you are saying: "this may lead to the public to more easily dismiss real accusations as false in the future". We are the public. I just don't want us to more easily dismiss accusations as false when we don't know that.

I don't want to accuse anyone here, though, of outright victim blaming, certainly not [MENTION=1669]pics[/MENTION] (in whom I have a tremendous amount of respect)! I just have two points:

1. We are not on a jury and this isn't a trial, but since the media has lost its integrity we should probably attempt to fill it in with our own
2. We don't know what happened, and so what should our integrity do but to discuss the facts and the accusations as they are being made

Again, this thread was really started to ask about Cosby, but it seems there are a lot of posts that only mention Cosby in passing as they move forward to scrutinize the alleged victims. When Cosby's lawyer moves forward with litigation against the accusers for lying, then I think we can take up that question, but until he does the only person openly being accused is Cosby. To that, I saw this quote from an article in Vulture:

L.A. Police Chief Charlie Beck told reporters Thursday that his department would investigate any reports of abuse — even ones outside the statue of limitations. So far, the department has no ongoing investigations tied to Cosby.

So there it is. If the alleged victims have a case, the police will investigate no matter the statute of limitations. They just have to make a report. If Cosby has a case, then the investigation should show the wrongs and any fraudulent accusers will face the consequences. If he does not, or if the investigation shows he may have acted improperly or criminally, then he will face the consequences, even if that is just a public shaming and the utter destruction of his career and legacy.

 

[Gaze]

It is possible they are all lying to get money somehow. But the recurring theme here is we don't know. If you don't know they are lying, you have to give equal credibility to the idea that they are not lying. Lying under oath or committing other fraudulent acts is a crime, and as @sprinkles pointed out, one person has already gone to jail. If extortion is what these individuals are doing, then they take that risk upon themselves that they may be prosecuted. But that is the same situation as Cosby is in. If he's (or anyone is) accusing the alleged victims of fraud, then that person has a duty to prove it. They are innocent until proven guilty, as so many of pointed out on this thread.



I agree with you 100%: people who make false claims do the most harm to others who have valid claims but will be looked on with scrutiny afterwards. But we don't know, do we? And this is where "victim blaming" comes in. The thread started with questions about Cosby, but it is the accusers who are under the most scrutiny here. I agree the two are linked, but if they are indeed lying...



Right. But they are not being prosecuted. Has Cosby filed defamation suit? Has he attempted to clear his name? I know his lawyer has maintained his innocence, but I haven't heard that he's striking back against these current claims in any meaningful way. If he isn't openly accusing these women of fraud, why are we?



But then is outright skepticism fair either? As you mentioned, people who falsely accuse do more damage to those who rightfully accuse, and maybe that is what happened here. The individuals coming out now are under scrutiny for their claims, their motives are cast as fraud for money, their statements are branded suspect until proven. What happens when someone who has a legitimate complaint sees this and considers coming forward? Is it a greater ill that the charges be considered honestly or that everyone from now on be branded a liar until they can prove otherwise when they come forward?



Right. And this is ample evidence to support what you are saying: "this may lead to the public to more easily dismiss real accusations as false in the future". We are the public. I just don't want us to more easily dismiss accusations as false when we don't know that.

I don't want to accuse anyone here, though, of outright victim blaming, certainly not @pics (in whom I have a tremendous amount of respect)! I just have two points:

1. We are not on a jury and this isn't a trial, but since the media has lost its integrity we should probably attempt to fill it in with our own
2. We don't know what happened, and so what should our integrity do but to discuss the facts and the accusations as they are being made

Again, this thread was really started to ask about Cosby, but it seems there are a lot of posts that only mention Cosby in passing as they move forward to scrutinize the alleged victims. When Cosby's lawyer moves forward with litigation against the accusers for lying, then I think we can take up that question, but until he does the only person openly being accused is Cosby. To that, I saw this quote from an article in Vulture:



So there it is. If the alleged victims have a case, the police will investigate no matter the statute of limitations. They just have to make a report. If Cosby has a case, then the investigation should show the wrongs and any fraudulent accusers will face the consequences. If he does not, or if the investigation shows he may have acted improperly or criminally, then he will face the consequences, even if that is just a public shaming and the utter destruction of his career and legacy.

I think my main point was, whether or not Cosby files a complaint, there is a problem with blind acceptance of all accusers statements as true. Since we only have the stories or words of the accusers to deal with, of course more attention will be given to their testimony. Since Cosby hasn't spoken, we can't analyze what he feels, thinks, or has said. So, naturally, since the ratio of accusers to Cosby at least 20:1, it would be likely that we would spend more time on them since their accusations and past stories are the only thing the media is promoting as the main topic of discussion. You can't really give equal weight to anything when both sides are not equally presented. Clearly, the media favors those the accuser's stories over those who say they've known Cosby and never experienced what others have. So, we are simply buying into the media's need to create a huge story without no verified facts. Until charges are filed, all we have is hearsay. And it seems everyone who does not agree with the testimony of all the facts is seen as some kind of Cosby supporter, which is nonsensical. In a court of law, you can't convict someone based on feeling or opinion, whether or not you believe they committed the crime. Again, the word victim blaming is being overused. It should only be used when the victim is actually being blamed for a crime committed against them. As I mentioned earlier, every accuser is not a victim so criticisms of accusers is not victim blaming. Questioning whether someone who is making a serious accusation about sexual abuse is being truthful is fair. If not, anyone can use any situation and claim to be a victim, gain support and belief, and use that to manipulate the public for some other benefit. The point is, there should be fair criticism on both sides. When Cosby finally makes a statement and/or is charged, then we can judge his words and actions. You don't have to be pro or anti Cosby to be for the truth.