Cosby

My Recent Posts

I just wanted to throw this out there.  No one here is discussing it.  What do you think about Cosby? Guilty? Innocent? Reasonable doubt?

I truly hope he is not guilty.  Not found not guilty but truly not guilty.  

He is a great comedian, someone I grew up watching as a kid.  His TV series taught us something about morals.  Loved his movies.  He is a very likable person.  So was OJ, but I believe he was guilty.

Some say he must be guilty because of all the women coming forward.  Piling on means nothing to me.  All you have to do is say something happened and there will be someone there to confirm it, real or not.  There are crazy women who lie and exaggerate.  Not all women, but I have known too many.  Some are looking for fame; for money; some are just a woman scorn; some are just plain crazy.   

Someone close to me was charged with rape and every crime short of murder.  His career was nearly destroyed.   There was never any question about it.  The girl never made an accusation.  The police never even investigated.  A former roommate was even accused of impregnating a woman without having sex.  I've had a woman claim I did something I didn't do.  Fortunately, I had a witness to it all.  

Cosby is a famous man.  I can imagine that many women have thrown themselves at him.  I can imagine that he has taken advantage of his celebrity.  I can even imagine that he has grabbed a few.  Many he even used pills to put them in the mood.  What's the difference between that and alcohol?  Yeah, if he slipped it in their drink or gave them something to knock them out, it was wrong, but that is not what I hear.  There seems to be some consent on some level.  And, apparently, there was a prior relationship.  There seems to be an opportunity for confusion.  I don't see why she should be traumatized by it all, but I don't know the details.

I'm not making excuses for him.  If he is guilty, he should be strung up by his testicles.  I don't buy the argument that we should automatically believe the accuser or give more credibility to the accuser.  If his guilt cannot be positively proved, he should be acquitted.

The jury has been going at it a couple of days.  It is likely good news for Cosby.  My guess is that it will end in an acquittal.

Comments

S.R. Morris Added Jun 14, 2017 - 8:23am
Clearly guilty.  There was court testimony leaked where he admitted to drugging one under age girl. 
Utpal Patel Added Jun 14, 2017 - 9:10am
The Cosby story was discussed ad nauseam (were you living in a cave) and there is no question in my mind of his guilt.
 
http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/07/us/bill-cosby-quaaludes-sexual-assault-allegations/index.html
Leroy Added Jun 14, 2017 - 10:38am
SR, I have read where he admitted giving them to one or two women but they accepted them.  Many have claimed he drugged them, but it has not been proved.  I don't buy the idea that the number of accusers equal guilty.
Leroy Added Jun 14, 2017 - 10:39am
Sorry, Utpal, I missed the discussion on WB.  There was some a long time back that I read, but nothing recently.  I think there are many questions about his guilty.  It is unfortunately difficult to prove.
New Honesty Added Jun 14, 2017 - 7:41pm
I feel like the discussion of legal matters is something only a court should deal with. I think it is an ugly thing that legal matters of clebrities are dragged out in public. Guilty or not, they are humans too. I wouldn't want to discuss such a matter as I think it is borderline-irreverent.
Patrick Writes Added Jun 14, 2017 - 8:17pm
My understanding is he's never denied it. Even when asked specifically about it (when this was all breaking a few years ago), responded "we don't talk about that". 
Leroy Added Jun 14, 2017 - 9:26pm
NH, I think it is an interesting study in psychology.  Some think he must be guilty because of all the women who have come forward.  There have been too many instances of people corroborating stories who weren't true.  I could tell you a story about myself that started out as a joke.  There are probably a dozen people that claim to have been a witness.  It simply did happen.  It's a false memory.  What started out as a joke some 40 years early about a real jewelry thief that shared the same last name as a man I know, ended up as accusations against him as being the thief.  His only crime was sharing the same last name, but any number of people tried to claim it was true.   Are all these women liars?  I am open to the possibility. 
 
Even if he is guilty, he can still be acquitted.  You are right; it is a matter of law.  I still find it interesting that people can't separate out what can be proved from what they believe.
 
Perhaps I am guilty of what I want to happen.  Even though OJ was acquitted, he was convicted in the court of public opinion.  A piece of me died.  I still have visions of him running through the airport leaping over suitcases and dodging people to get to his destination.  I can relate.  I still say sometimes, "I had to do an OJ through the airport to make it."  Today, it might take on the connotation of slash and dash.
Leroy Added Jun 14, 2017 - 9:37pm
Patrick, he has never denied giving women pills but he claims it was consensual.  He MAY have drugged other women, but the trial is not about them.  He's accused of giving this woman Benedryl.  It's not exactly a psychotic drug, although it might make some people drowsy or cause confusion.
 
The jury had a question about "without her knowledge".  They wanted to know exactly what that meant.  I get the impression that they are considering that she knew about the pills but didn't anticipate what effect it might have.  It all comes down to his intent.  It's hard to prove what his intent might have been.
Micahel Dolan Added Jun 15, 2017 - 11:15am
The man is a low-life dirt bag-but he will walk away free and Cosby will be honored by the NAACP America has fallen----
Michael B. Added Jun 15, 2017 - 11:20am
Personally, I like to believe that a person is innocent until proven guilty, but celebrities and other people with money and power often think (rightfully so, for the most part) that they are either above the law and/or operate under a different set of rules. Also, when someone does bad things and gets away with it, they often get bolder; the more they get away with, especially over a long period of time, the worse they get. I haven't been following the Cosby case, but the OJ case was a different story. I remember when the verdict was about to be read; I was at work, and several people were eagerly huddled around a radio waiting for the news. A female co-worker asked me what I thought it was going to be, and I said he would walk. Stunned, she bet me lunch that he would be found guilty; about an hour and a half later, I enjoyed a free lunch at Baja Fresh thanks to her, lol.
 
The next year, I asked the junior partner at the law firm I worked at what he thought of the OJ case. He replied that OJ was guilty as hell, but the prosecution bungled it from start to finish, from the way they approached jury selection to the way the defense was able to put the LAPD on trial rather than OJ. The judge in the case, Lance Ito, allowed the whole thing to be a media circus (as far as I know, it's up to the judge whether or not to allow trials to be filmed).
The Objective Observer Added Jun 15, 2017 - 11:25am
Innocent until proven guilty. Do I hope that he is guilty? No. I would hope that nobody would do what he is accused of doing. Do I think that he is likely guilty? Yes. I'm not sure you give rape date drugs to people to "put them in the mood". I don't believe this just because there are lots of women coming forward saying this but some of his own statements have been pretty damning.
The Objective Observer Added Jun 15, 2017 - 11:26am
Oh, one last thing, do I think that he will be found guilty? Probably not. We don't put famous people in jail in this country.
wsucram15 Added Jun 15, 2017 - 11:34am
Leroy.. 
I always liked Cosby, this is a terrible story.  Like OJ..it is public opinion that has a great deal to do with this, unfortunately.
This really depends on the status of the jury.  While personal bias cant really play a part, knowledge does.  You want to feel that person is innocent or guilty..but you might know better based on experience. This is the most overlooked part of a criminal trial by people because its not the spectator sport portion.  Its the part where skill and knowledge come in.
Reasonable doubt is the defendants best friend...just ask OJ (this man and his dream team showed the world how to beat the system live on camera).  He killed those two people, he damn near admitted it in one of his books. He cant be charged again and its why the Goldmans won their lawsuit.  (the shoes Marsha Clark overlooked and lower bar in civil court).
If this were one instance of accused rape I could see that squeaking by on reasonable doubt...but not with the evidence against him in all of the cases and the amount of evidence against him. Now Benadryl puts my BF out cold.  IDK why..but it does.  The prosecution should provide reasons for that.  Also intent to rape if she had a kit done, is incidental. I dont know if she did, I have tried not to follow this case at all. But I do not know what has been provided to the jury as evidence and rape is a particularly violent crime.   Men dont see it that way, women understand it more.  Depends on % of women on jury.  Voir Dire in this case as prosecution I would want more women. Defense more men, unless homosexual.  Its super important,in all criminal cases.
He had sex with her while unconscious, allegedly.  It would be my thinking of the why he did this while women were unconscious, because there is less chance of signs of force in vagina during intercourse.  Im sure he carried lube...not to be gross but if you are going to rape unconscious women then you have prepared yourself.   If she had a rape kit done..there would be proof if not its her word against Dr Huxtable...you know? 
wsucram15 Added Jun 15, 2017 - 11:38am
But let me add, there is a HUGE difference between benadryl and Quaaludes.   That one he better have a medical license for...
Michael B. Added Jun 15, 2017 - 11:43am
I still remember the case of Andrew Luster, an heir to the Max Factor fortune who lived around Santa Barbara who was convicted of not only drugging and raping women, but filming it as well. He was a spoiled rich kid, and according to one of his surfing friends, "His only concerns in life was where he was going to surf, and what he was going to eat that day." I'm vaguely familiar with the spots that Luster would frequent, and although most of the women involved were a bunch of would-be gold-digging whores, Luster clearly went too far. He gained national attention when he was tracked down in Mexico and snagged by Dog the Bounty Hunter, and was sentenced to over 100 years in prison, but the last I heard, he had his sentence reduced to 50 years. Additionally, civil suits and legal fees have pretty much busted his ass, and I see similar trouble for Mr. Cosby.
wsucram15 Added Jun 15, 2017 - 12:07pm
Michael..in a civil case if this girl wins you are right.  The problem I am having with the entire case, which again I have tried VERY hard NOT to follow is that this happened so long ago.  I know women are afraid, actually terrified in some cases, but why now? 
There are 60 women involved but only 2 allowed to testify by the judge, due to similarity in circumstances.  It will depend if the jury believes them or not.  Also Cosby is 79 years old..I just dont see him doing jail time. I would be very surprised.  At the end of the day, this is a financial case, good golly miss molly.
I remember something about the Max factor guy. Did not know his name though.  Michael..most women are seeking out financial stability, (which they can do fine on their own), and security.  But as you said..he went too far, even for women who thought they might get their hands on the pot of gold.  Who knew?
Leroy Added Jun 15, 2017 - 12:23pm
Micahel, I suppose we have to entrust it to a jury.  Unfortunately, we will never know all the facts.
Leroy Added Jun 15, 2017 - 12:26pm
Michael, I think you pretty much nailed it.  The same for athletes.  I knew a college wrestler.  He resembled a neanderthal.  His favorite sport was picking fights, and he fought dirty.  He was into the drug culture.  He was picked up by the college police numerous times.  Nothing was ever done about his brutish behavior.  He's a doctor today.
Leroy Added Jun 15, 2017 - 12:31pm
Thanks for your incite, WSU.  I am not sure how much of the other cases were brought into it and if it would have much bearing on this case.  Sure, it could establish a pattern of behavior, but it would seem that each case would have to be proved.
 
The women at the center of it all may have failed to disclose prior intimacy.  As a juror, that might be considered a key piece of evidence.  Also, I am unclear if it was penetrative sex or whether she was digitally raped.
Leroy Added Jun 15, 2017 - 12:38pm
The jury is deadlocked.  It can't reach a unanimous decision on any of the charges.  The judge has ordered them to continue deliberation.  Now it is a matter how much one or two jurors are willing to hold out before they say, "Let's hang him and go home," or the others give in to get it over with.
Leroy Added Jun 15, 2017 - 12:41pm
I served on a jury before.  We let a guilty man go because the judge was late for his grandson's baseball game.
 
We came to a decision but the judge told us it had to be all or nothing.  He gave us a little more time.  We decided with the plaintiff, but the judge lost patience.  The guilty party thanked us.
Michael B. Added Jun 15, 2017 - 12:44pm
Yeah, I knew a couple of jocks that were cool, but most of them were a bunch of fucking assholes who usually got away with just about everything. There's a high school in a hoity-toity ZIP code in a well-to-do town not far from me, and jocks from that school are almost routinely charged with various assault, sexual assault, and drug-related activities, but nobody ever seems to be convicted of them. Having wealthy parents rocks!
Jeff Jackson Added Jun 15, 2017 - 2:02pm
Interesting question Leroy. Cosby need not be tried in the court of public opinion, that is for the jury. I don't know how good is lawyer is, and that will make a big difference, see the O.J. Simpson (as referenced) case for an example. Most all of this occurred some time ago, and so it will likely boil down to who is the most believable. I am not convinced either way, but the man deserves a fair trial no matter what. As for your neanderthal friend, I sincerely believe that any fight I win was a fair fight. I never start them, I was taught not to, and I'm not much in terms of physical stature. By the way, if you go down, I'm not letting you get back up. Some of the government officials see it the same way, that anytime they win, it was fair, so I adopted the same philosophy.  Whatever I did to win, in the end, I won. The lawyers are the same way, but the prosecutors have to comply with standards, and rightfully so, otherwise they lose on appeal.
wsucram15 Added Jun 15, 2017 - 2:16pm
If the jury is hung..then the defense will move to mistrial. It will be up to the state to decide if they want to prosecute again.
Leroy Added Jun 15, 2017 - 5:28pm
"Most all of this occurred some time ago, and so it will likely boil down to who is the most believable."
 
I think you are exactly right.  I imagine Cosby will be given a benefit of a doubt.  If I were a jury, I would probably consider how much harm she suffered.  From what I read a few minutes ago, there was no penetration.  My gosh, maybe he shouldn't have done it but to serve maybe ten years over mixed signals for getting a little feel, sounds like overkill.  I'm not saying he hasn't done worse to other women, but this trial isn't about them.  It was refused years ago for lack of evidence.  Is it any better today?  As you said, it's whoever is the most believable, and I believe the benefit of doubt will go to Cosby.
 
"As for your neanderthal friend, I sincerely believe that any fight I win was a fair fight."
 
Maybe you are right.  I have never believed in fighting wars with one arm tied behind your back while the enemy fights dirty.  You should always fight to win or not fight at all.  One case in particular, this guy picks up a concrete block as a weapon.  You would think a wrestler would have a little more pride.
 
"The lawyers are the same way, but the prosecutors have to comply with standards, and rightfully so, otherwise they lose on appeal."
 
I might disagree a little on lawyers.  It's not so much about winning as it is about making money, and they look out for the other side too.  They are a pretty thick group.  Never, ever believe that a lawyer is on your side.
John Minehan Added Jun 15, 2017 - 6:45pm
"I feel like the discussion of legal matters is something only a court should deal with."
 
I agree. 
 
Really the right way to go before a verdict.
 
Good point to make.
Leroy Added Jun 17, 2017 - 12:34pm
Mistrial
 
Jeff Michka Added Jun 18, 2017 - 12:39pm
Bet you'll feel differently when you learn Cosby is in favor of the Paris accords and believes in climate change.  The increase in warmth and humidity has almost ruined his stash of Quaalades.
Leroy Added Jun 18, 2017 - 1:00pm
What's next?  Perhaps a retrial.  The prosecutor has to try again to avoid losing face.  He ran on bringing Cosby to justice.  All Cosby has to do it establish reasonable doubt in the mind of one juror.  The only way the prosecutor can be successful is if a judge favorable the supposed victim.  That will lead to an appeal.  It's a lost cause for the prosecution and a waste of taxpayers' money.  The case is just too old and based on he said, she said.
 
What about civil cases?  The victim has already settled with Cosby in a civil case.  Perhaps others are willing to file claims based on even older cases.  About the only thing there is defamation.  If he called them a liar or a slut or something, it might get to court.  It appears most rely on implications that he called them a liar by denying it.  I am unclear on the statue of limitations, but I have heard it is two years.  Will they win?  No.  But, they will likely reach a settlement, if it gets by the judge.  When someone sues you, they generally hire a lawyer based on a contingency.  The lawyer has to get something to make money.  The lawyer will just keep hounding forever and ever with court proceedings.  Lawyers are tightly networked.   It's all about making money for each other.  Ultimately, there will be a settlement, if it gets past the judge.  There really is no justice in this case.  The defendant is assumed guilty, although it is rarely the case.  Unless there is a criminal conviction, the civil cases will have low value.  Worst case, he buys them off for a million a piece.  Most likely, the settlement will be in the tens of thousands.  It's all downhill for Cosby now.  He's over the hump.
John Minehan Added Jun 18, 2017 - 1:59pm
Bill Cosby had a major impact as a performer.
 
He and Bob Newhart basically revived observational comedy, storytelling, which, in the early 1960s had given way to more punch-line oriented comedy in the style of Milton Berle and Henny Youngman.
 
I Spy gave an African American performer a serious and important role on a popular drama series.  It let a lot of White people see People of Color as capable and professional and made Cosby's character of Alexander Scott, the more thoughtful and professional of the two US Intelligence Operatives, an iconic figure of 1960s popular culture, as recognized by his winning a Best Actor Emmy three years in a row.
 
His two years on his own sit-com The Bill Cosby Show in 1969-71, made a very positive impression on viewers with his work as the idealistic . . . but practical and effective teacher and coach, Chet Kinkaid. 
 
In the 1980s, he enjoyed vast success with The Cosby Show, becoming something of a national symbol of "Family Values." 
 
Cosby was involved in writing and creating many of the shows he worked on.  Cosby has a doctorate in education from UMass and gave a lot of time and effort to improving education.  His son was murdered.  In short, his life has been part of the fabric of most American's lives for most of 60 years.
 
This must have been a difficult case to prosecute for everyone involved.  I'm not sure I could separate Alexander Scott or Chet Kinkaid from the man being tried.  Those were roles played by an actor, but those were also well played roles in works that made you think and laugh. 
 
Profoundly unfortunate events.      
 
Michael B. Added Jun 18, 2017 - 2:18pm
"Lawyers are tightly networked.   It's all about making money for each other."
 

You got that right! I worked at a law firm that specialized in medical malpractice defense for about a year as a file clerk and general go-fer, and it was an interesting experience. The lawyers often teamed up with other ones and shared resources, facilities, etc. As part of my job, I had to read the materials in order to properly file them, and one of the first things I discovered was that in many cases, the settlements boiled down to a straight-up business decision; it was cheaper to pay a relatively small chunk of money than to have the case dragged out for years and years. Often the doctors (who are just as human as anyone else, and also make their share of mistakes) would be forced to settle by the insurance companies, who would threaten them by jacking up their premiums and/or pulling their insurance entirely, which all doctors must have in order to practice. The statement was usually something to the effect of, "Without admitting guilt or fault of any kind, we choose to settle this matter with payment to so-and-so of $50,000, etc, etc."
 
My favorite documents to read were the so-called "character summaries"; any time the lawyers talked to anybody for any case-related reason, they would write brief reports that usually started with a physical description of the person, then their manners and mannerisms and how they conducted themselves, followed by whether or not that person would be favorably or unfavorably viewed by a jury. This is one I remember, the subject being a chiropractor who was later criminally charged for various frauds:
 
"Joe Blow is 45 years old, about 5'8", and weighs upwards of 400 lbs. He has black hair, brown eyes, has a scraggly beard and a Fu Manchu-like mustache, and it was very obvious from the beginning of the interview that neither his clothes nor himself had been washed for several days. He wore a very loud Hawaiian print shirt, bright yellow shorts, and a pair of purple flip-flops. He brought sandwiches with him, which he ate in a sloppy and stumblebum-like way throughout the session. As if his appearance and his odor wasn't bad enough, he loudly belched and passed gas numerous times. He was a very argumentative and combative person, and chose to dispute every question with lengthy diatribes which were very loud and hostile. I felt he was going to physically attack me several times. It is certain that this man will not make a favorable impression on a jury, or anyone else in their right mind for that matter, and recommend that we proceed with further actions against him."
Leroy Added Jun 18, 2017 - 3:30pm
Thanks for the great summary, John.
Leroy Added Jun 18, 2017 - 3:47pm
Michael, lawyers hate guys like me.  The feeling is mutual.  I have no use for them, but, sometimes they are a necessary evil. 
 
The last time I was up for jury duty, there were 15 cases going to trial.  For the first 12 jury selections, the judge drew my name out of the hat.  It defied all odds.  It became a joke each time he pulled my name out of the hat.  Sometimes, I think he did it on purpose and didn't actually draw my name.  Before the judge could get my name out, the defense would yell, "Strike!".  I thought I had escaped jury duty.  But, no, for three cases, no one showed up for jury selection and the judge assigned me.  Only one went to trial.  And, I have been on the receiving end.  It was a frivolous case.  The plaintiffs couldn't prove a damn thing.  The plaintiff's lawyer called my lawyer and told him it was time to mediate.  I refused because I knew I could defeat it.  Nevertheless, I was forced to mediate.  That was the only way the other lawyers could make money.  Lawyers, being officers of the court, are above the law.  They can lie, and no one will call them on it.  As a lawyer friend once told me, in a court of law, police are the first to lie, followed closely by lawyers.  There is a lot of truth to that.  
Michael B. Added Jun 18, 2017 - 4:52pm
Every other year I get picked for jury duty, which I find kind of odd, because I know people that have never had to do it, or have done it very infrequently. Usually I kind of look forward to it, as I don't have to go to work and it's a good time to catch up on my reading. The closest I came to actually being on a jury was about four or five years ago. The trial was for an extraordinarily ugly and frog-looking scumbag originally from somewhere in South Asia who thought he set up a date with a 13 year old girl in some Internet chat room, but when he showed up for his "date", he was instead met by some local police officers who set up a sting. I said that on one hand, I was generally supportive of law enforcement but sometimes concerned with their tactics, but on the other hand I know that there's no shortage of slimy creeps like the defendant; the guy oozed perviness, and I'm sure he is guilty as charged. I was given the "thumbs down" by both the prosecution and defense, inadvertently finding a sure-fire way to get out of jury duty, lol.
Leroy Added Jun 18, 2017 - 6:09pm
It's been over ten years for me.  Kind of hard to do it when you are not in the country.  The last time I went, one guy had a sure-fire way to get out of jury duty.  He dressed himself up in a Conferate Flag.  The judge was black.  He called him to the front and made him come within inches of him and looked him up and down.  I think he was hoping he could get the guy to say something nasty to him.  In the end, he said, "Your're excused."
Michael B. Added Jun 18, 2017 - 6:28pm
Where I'm at, that guy would have been arrested and charged with contempt of court, which is their SOP for people who pull such stunts. The last time I was on jury duty, a bitchy female judge spoke to us (at the start of each day, a judge from the court gives some kind of brief pep talk to the prospective jurors, usually thanking the people for their time and reminding them of their civic duties) and said that she just read on the Internet the latest ploys for avoiding jury duty and said further that she knew most of the stories and tricks used to shirk it.
Leroy Added Jun 21, 2017 - 12:14pm
Remember the wave of Childcare abuse that sweeped the nation.  It is one reason why I doubt all the Cosby accusers.  Here's an article about a Texas couple exonerated 25 years later.
Leroy Added Jun 21, 2017 - 10:43pm
One of the jurors was interviewed about the Cosby trial.  I found this comment interesting:
 
"The jurors initially voted overwhelmingly, in a non-binding poll, to find the entertainer not guilty on all three counts of aggravated indecent assault, the juror told ABC News on Monday."
 
The jurors ultimately turned towards guilty.  In the final count, on one of three charges, it was 11 to 1 to acquit.  For the other two, it was 10 to 2 to find Cosby guilty.  I don't quite understand, but it was said early that if not find guilty of all three, it would be grounds for a retrial.
 
So, given that this is a true account, the jurors went from overwhelmingly in favor for acquittal to overwhelmingly in favor of guilty, on at least two of the charges.  They probably just wanted to get the hell out of there before Father's day.
 
They never considered all the other women.
 
I'd say the prosecution will have a difficult time with a retrial.  It would be interesting to know who the two holdouts were.
 
 
Leroy Added Jul 6, 2017 - 6:32pm
The Cosby Trial Redux begins November 6th.  No doubt they are playing against the Christmas season, figuring the jurors will convict so they can go home.
 
But, it's pretty much the definition of insanity.  They are doing the same thing but expect different results.  I just don't see a conviction, even if he was guilty.  They simply can't prove it.

Recent Articles by Writers Leroy follows.