I’m sad about who Bill Cosby really is, but we all have to deal with it. And I just want to know if he ever thought about his mother and what she would think when he was drugging one woman after another in order to have non-consensual sex with them. Here’s what Cosby infamously had to say about black kids committing petty crimes.
“Looking at the incarcerated, these are not political criminals. These are people going around stealing Coca Cola. People getting shot in the back of the head over a piece of pound cake! Then we all run out and are outraged, ‘The cops shouldn’t have shot him’ What the hell was he doing with the pound cake in his hand? (laughter and clapping). I wanted a piece of pound cake just as bad as anybody else (laughter). And I looked at it and I had no money. And something called parenting said if get caught with it you’re going to embarrass your mother. Not you’re going to get your butt kicked. No. You’re going to embarrass your mother. You’re going to embarrass your family.”
We can’t help asking, “What the hell was he doing with the Qualudes?”
“What the hell was he doing with the Qualudes?”
Umm, engaging in a little self-entitled hypocrisy?
Whoopi continues to go to the mat for him :/
Actually, she hasn’t. But why bother listening to what she’s said when joining a lynch mob is so much easier.
The “lynch mob” metaphor is awful unless describing a real lynch mob. It seems particularly inappropriate here.
I came around very slowly to believing Cosby’s accusers. I was also a huge fan of his comedy albums, but their humor was of its era and didn’t age as well as Pryor or Carlin at their best. I retained some fondness for him, however.
I didn’t want to believe what I do now, but my alternative is to believe that dozens of women have leveled these accusations, many of whom made great trouble for themselves for a number of years by doing so, and they’re all lying, even though the public evidence has become strong now.
Whoopi seems to be the only one around that was both in the biz and remembers 1968-1982.
Even I (always a bit of a prude and not the least interested in drugs) knew of women willing to fuck guys that could provide them with Quaaludes and/or cocaine. And those weren’t guys with star power or the ability to throw some cash into the bargain.
Like Whoopi, I don’t know if Cosby surreptitiously drugged and raped women. What I do know is that if all he wanted was extramarital sexual relations, there would have been no shortage of willing women and a lot of those women liked a drug enhancement. Youthful indiscretions that few of those women today would admit to and even fewer are proud of.
For someone who fits this profile, sex has nothing to do with it.
It’s about power and humiliation
Alleged profile.
At best, I’m indifferent to Cosby as a performer. And mostly find his “lectures” to black people unhelpful and at worst, offensive. Even if I were a huge fan, that would not stand in the way of my ability to consider facts that indicate he’s a rapist.
The allegations against Jeffrey Epstein by underage girls were far more consistent and far less contaminated by publicly available information to those making the accusations than what the Cosby accusers have presented. Had I been a prosecutor, judge, or juror in the Epstein case, he would have done serious time. All he got was a slap on the wrist for solicitation of underage girls and that was when the allegations were within the statute of limitations.
Like Bill Clinton, Bill Cosby had a huge investment in being seen as a good husband and family man and not a philanderer. That didn’t stop women (and others) from alleging that Clinton was a rapist. Were those allegations true? I don’t know, but I didn’t buy Paula Jones story at all. Like Cosby with one woman, Clinton paid her off to make her go away. Also note that the woman who claimed that Cosby is her father, refused to take a DNA test.
Not easy to tease apart allegations when so much money, fame, and power are involved.
Oh I’m pretty sure PJ and that rape accuser Juanita Brodderick (?) were both lying. At least as to the serious charges of hayrassmint and rape.
There were of course a wide variety of impropriety allegations against both Bill and Hill back in the 90s, including murder. The heyday of the GOP black ops machine.
But with Cosby we’re talking a lot of women describing the basic same m.o. And some good reasons, if the charges are true, for not pressing charges at the time. Similar to the Catholic priests sex abuse cases. And even if most cases fall away or fail, it still takes just one …
agree. there was the one long term relationship w Jennifer Flowers, but otherwise nothing, and considering the Rs left no stone unturned
and agree, multiple women have come forward re Cosby, all same mo as you note
Well, I was a huge Cosby fan. Not so much of the 1980s Cosby show – I liked it okay – but of his comedy records of the 1960s.
So I wanted the allegations to not be true. But comparing them to what was alleged against Clinton is apples/oranges. Anyone accusing Clinton of anything was automatically put on the right wing gravy train and would be fed all kinds of nasty stories about Clinton to help the accuser get over any guilt about his/her exaggerations or lies.
By contrast, Cosby accusers were treated like most accusers of powerful people – sure, they could get a one-time payment from National Enquirer or the like, but otherwise they would be subject to massive harassment and denial.
Where the comparison is apt is that both settled with an accuser to make make them go away and those settlements have been used by other accusers as evidence that their allegations are true and have merit. The MSM and right wing money trough concluded that it wasn’t a winner for the GOP to kept pounding on the matter after the Jones settlement, but that didn’t stop the winger hoi polloi from continuing to beat that drum among the faithful and anytime accusations of sexual impropriety are made against a GOP pol. They were prevalent in comments about the Hastert indictment.
Also apt is that both men had a lot invested in being perceived as a good family man and were willing to go to great lengths to maintain that reputation.
If Cosby in the past two decades were seen as a major rightwinger, the right wing would be on this issue like white on rice. This one isn’t even good enough for them to use to denounce liberal Hollywood.
Again all I’m saying is that the evidence that Cosby is a rapist is weak because it’s highly contaminated. Anyone with half a brain never confounded Cosby the man with his role as the Jell-O guy and Dr. Huxtable. He’d long been on the Playboy circuit for goodness sakes. However, philanderers, even mega-philanderers, aren’t synonymous with rapists.
How many women that were once groupies could today tell numerous — I got wasted, don’t remember anything after that, and suspect that X, Y, or Z had sex with me — stories? Legally, that’s rape. (Statutory rape if the girl was underage which some were.)
Yes he probably could have had the women the normal ways, but maybe he wanted to short-circuit the usual mentor/casting couch routine and get right down to business , or possibly he was into the kinky kind of unusual sex where the woman is unconscious/totally helpless.
Maybe the as yet unreleased full transcripts would explain. The lawyer for the victim involved in the case seems to hint at that.
Not discounting the possibility that Cosby is a sick puppy. Read through the transcript of his deposition that was released this week and seems to have put so many in a tizzy. I did. There’s no there, there.
Which lawyer and which alleged victim are you referring to?
Those were just excerpts . Case involves ex Temple Univ employee Andrea Constand. Her atty wants entire transcript and settlement agreement released publicly.
That case is done and the plaintiff and her attorney agreed to a settlement and the sealing of the documents. Why does this attorney now have any say in releasing those documents to the public?
Read the transcripts that have been released. The plaintiff’s attorney was much like a plaintiff’s attorney that questioned me as a witness for the defense in a civil trial. I had no vested interest in either party or side to the dispute and was a minor witness. I had testified as to the facts that I knew first hand; no embellishments and definitely no lies. The plaintiff’s attorney badgered me for over half an hour to find a way to challenge the veracity of my statements or admit to something that hadn’t happened or knowledge that I didn’t possess. Unless one has been there in a deposition or at trial, it’s not easy to appreciate how one’s words can be twisted by an adversary.
She apparently feels Cosby has violated one or more terms of the agreement.
Twisting words, words out of context — less likely if the entire transcript is released. If he’s not guilty as charged, he should want as full a record as possible released.
Okay. What was released last week was at the request of the AP.
Was the settlement based on Cosby having publicly defamed X or a combination of that along with admission of guilt wrt to the alleged sexual assault acquired from Cosby’s deposition?
Having read what was released, I seriously doubt that Cosby came close to such an admission. (Most of it was the two attorney’s sparring.) Another reason to doubt that is that such an admission would have caused the plaintiff’s attorney to proceed with the claims of the other women she had had deposed in the case.
While currently frustrating to the curious, the US Attorney had made the right call in keeping the details of Hastert’s “misconduct” under seal. There’s enough in the indictment that if there are other victims of Hastert’s misconduct, they will come forward with their story. But not enough that anyone could craft a similar story.
Find it difficult to accept that the PA DA wouldn’t have proceeded to indict Cosby if the few other women that he interviewed had offered similar enough stories to that of X. Once X filed her civil suit (and possibly before in the depositions X’s attorney arranged for the other women), the stories became variations of X’s. Are they true? Don’t know because they were contaminated by publicly available information from X.
If Cosby is a rapist, it ticks me off that the plaintiff’s attorneys screwed up the disclosures enough that a fair to all parties evaluation isn’t possible. Now that Cosby is an old man and his reputation has been trashed with allegations with no potential for criminal indictment, what’s the point of the continuing pursuits?
Any number of people stood up for Bill Cosby when this tsunami was still looking like any other wave, to be withstood and shrugged off. Then it began to focus and build and it was apparent that it was going to be quite a bit bigger than first thought. Still people stood by Cosby, convinced he was being railroaded by publicity seekers and glory hounds. During all this time, Cosby said practically nothing.
Cosby didn’t protest his innocence, but he didn’t admit any fault, either. Still people stood up for him, out of friendship, affinity, or loyalty or whatever. The entire time, Cosby knew the truth, and he knew that he had testified under oath to that truth – he is indeed a serial rapist.
So now, you’re a friend of Bill Cosby. You’ve publicly defended him, and merged your interests with his (for whatever reason, but let’s just say they’re honorable and noble). Bill Cosby has still said nothing.
Then the transcripts come out, and there it is in stark black-and-white: Yep, I was trying to score some ‘ludes so I could rape women and minimize their resistance. You might think at some point, knowing what he had said earlier, Cosby might have gotten in touch with the people who were standing up for him to say, “I appreciate your support probably more than I can ever tell you. But, uh, there’s something I need to say . . .”
No, he said nothing. How do his erstwhile friends and defenders feel, knowing that he hung them out to dry like that?
Read the transcript of his deposition. He didn’t say either “I was trying to score some ‘ludes” nor that “I could rape women.”
He didn’t say either “I was trying to score some ‘ludes”…”. Actually, the transcript reveals that Cosby admitted to have gotten seven Quaalude prescriptions.
That fact makes this a very damning part of the transcript:
Plaintiff’s Attorney- When you got the Quaaludes, was it in your mind that you were going to use these Quaaludes for young women that you wanted to have sex with?
Cosby- Yes.
Plaintiff’s Attorney- Did you ever give any of those young women the Quaaludes without their knowledge?
Cosby’s Attorney- Object to the question. Restrict it to the Jane Does, would you, please?
If Cosby had never given a woman Quaaludes without their knowledge, it seems likely that his attorney would have allowed him to answer that question, as he had allowed him to answer the preceding question.
At this point, I realize it’s going to be difficult to impossible to pin him with a rape charge. But I reject the supposition you make earlier in this thread that it’s plausible to believe that these dozens of women all wanted ‘ludes and sex with Cosby because “that’s what was going on in the ’60’s and ’70’s.”
Another thing that was going on at that time was that powerful men could commit reprehensible and nonconsensual sexual behavior because no-name women in that era would not be believed if they leveled an accusation. In fact, as shown in the case of the plaintiff here, even the National Enquirer would not print the story in 2005. That seems a more logical explanation for why Cosby was able to pile up such a large number of women who did not file charges at the time, but who have remarkably similar stories.
Cosby admits in the deposition here that it was “in his mind” to use his Quaaludes for a purpose that fits with the stories of his accusers.
Occam’s Razor is worth employing in this case.
Note that the documents that were released are motions by Plaintiff and Defendants attorneys and Court rulings. Some of those motions include excerpts from the Plaintiff and Defendant depositions.
What you’ve highlighted is an abstract of an abstract. Several times before this point, the Plaintiff and Defense counsels had tussled over the permissibility of questions beyond that of the “Jane Does” and Quaaludes. This motion was in part for the court to order further questioning of the Defendant on this question and compel his attorney to STFU.
See Page Seven of this Motion by Defendent’s Attorney:
The complete transcripts of the Plaintiff and Defendant depositions were submitted to and read by the Court. The Court ruled against the Plaintiff’s motion.
“Score” implies illegally obtained. Of course it’s also illegal to give or sell one’s prescription narcotics to others. Cosby’s attorney allowed him to admit that he obtained those prescriptions with the intent of giving them to women the wanted to have sex with and didn’t deny the allegation by two of the Jane Does that he gave them Quaaludes.
Cosby’s attorney was fine with a jump question phrased as “Did you ever give any of the “Jane Does” the Quaaludes without their knowledge” even if at that point it was repetitive.
No attorney ever wants a client to answer a “Did/have you ever” type question that speaks to the knowledge of unidentified persons. Only a fool would want an attorney that doesn’t object to such questioning. And the objection doesn’t imply any knowledge the attorney has that could be damaging to his/her client.
The National Enquirer was fully prepared to publish the Plaintiff’s story. They yanked it in favor of an exclusive interview with Cosby. It was that published interview that formed the basis of the Plaintiff’s defamation suit.
Ordinary women are always at a disadvantage in relation to men. The wealthier and/or more powerful the man, the greater the disadvantage. However, the law can only go so far in protecting women (and men) from abuse by men (and women) and seeking some sort of justice after the fact of abuse. In the past few decades, thanks mostly to feminists, we’ve gotten much better at charging and convicting those that have sexually abused and raped children, minors, and adults.
However, we’re not all that far removed from the case of the Scottsboro Boys as we saw with the Central Park Five. Duke Lacrosse team members. And the RS UVA rape story. Did Jameis Winston rape that young woman? Or was it consensual sex? We don’t know.
Occam’s Razor doesn’t work in this case because as I mentioned in another comment, the stories weren’t consistent before the Plaintiff’s filing and even after that they have varied considerably. At least two admit to knowingly accepting a Quaalude. (That wasn’t previously known to the other Jane Does and those that have since come forward.)
At this point, I’m not very willing to believe dozens of women were lying about their claimed encounters with Cosby. That is a big difference between the claims against Cosby and the notorious cases you mention, which all involve single women making claims of a single incident.
I’d be more willing to suspend my strong disbelief of Cosby if he allowed the release of the full deposition. Yes, the original settlement meant to suppress its release, but Cosby appears to have violated the terms of that suppression by calling all his accusers liars and worse. It’s reasonable to conclude even more incriminating information is held in the full findings in the 2005 civil case, at which point we’re likely to have an even more difficult time believing Cosby. I realize that continuing to seek suppression is the right thing for Cosby to do in terms of his civil defense, but it is at the heavy price of his prolonged unwillingness to be forthright before the public, a public which he is asking to find him innocent. And I hope you would agree that his attempt to maintain suppression by claiming that he is not a public figure is downright offensive.
For the most part, I’m not too interested in engaging a detailed legal examination of these claims. Those considerations are left to Cosby, his accusers and the civil and criminal courts. I concede that my feelings are negatively colored by my expectation that Cosby will probably avoid criminal punishment. At the very least, Cosby’s claimed moral superiority has been shown to be a despicable sham. His infidelities are hardly the least of his provable failings.
I have no need to give Cosby my not guilty judgment based on any sliver of reasonable doubt. None of us are serving on a jury; there’s no need to act as if we are.
Not being privy to the settlement agreement, we have no idea what the terms of it are.
That explains why these motions with portions of the depo transcript were released. Also, those Motions weren’t technically sealed — the interim seal expired two years after the order.
The ruling on the AP request to release documents is interesting. The Plaintiff’s latest motion to release the settlement agreement and Cosby’s deposition transcript should be interesting. The Judge basically laid the reasons why he would do so. However, the Court was never presented with the settlement agreement or asked to retain jurisdiction over the enforcement of the confidentiality portion of that agreement. Expect many more motions by both the Plaintiff and Defendant before this is concluded.
In the court of public opinion, would it be fair that Cosby’s depo is released but not that of the Plaintiff and “Jane Does?” Assuming that the settlement agreement doesn’t constrain the court, that could happen.
Having the luxury of not being a juror, I can say, “I don’t know” based on the current and selective public information. IOW an open mind. If numbers of those making the same or similar allegations were alone enough to persuade me, I would have agreed with the invasion of Iraq. John Dean, who should know a thing or two about lying, supported it because he couldn’t believe that any administration would lie about something of such monumental importance as war. People lie. Sometimes many people lie.
At least a near-confession. But I’d like to see the full transcripts before saying more than I’m inclined to believe the accusers who’ve gone public.
Sad case but all too frequent with these public moralizers who have secrets to hide but something guilt-based gnawing away inside compels them to speak on the topic.
Btw, for you youngsters out there, in the mid-60s there were few public people in the U.S. cooler than the young wisecracking Bill Cosby and his co-star Rbt Culp on the teevee show I Spy. World-touring tennis stars using that as cover for their actual jobs as CIA agents. I think it was the first time a black had at least co-star billing on a non-musical American television show.