Bill Cosby and the justice system

[geekette]

I gave you a fact. You responded with a sarcastic remark. If you are going to be sarcastic at least know what you are talking about. As I said, A WOMENS SEXUAL HISTORY IS NOT PERMISSIBLE IN MOST JURISDICTIONS.

Do you think that every claim of rape by a women must be taken at face value? What if there is no physical evidence of rape? What if there are no corroborating witnesses? Do you believe that consensual sex is even possible or does it turn on the whim of the woman. How does a defendant prove that sex was consensual? Must there be a written statement of consent prior to the act? Do you honestly believe that woman never lie about sex?

I wasn't talking about Court of Law, I'm talking about before it ever gets to court, as we know that most rape cases never get that far. Inadmissable in court means nothing to the woman being blamed for her own attack in the police station or hospital. I do not believe that cops do not grill the women about their sexual history and what they were wearing and why they were there, etc.

There aren't a lot of women ok with being dragged thru the mud in order to try for a conviction because those convictions are very rare.

I sure never said anything like your second paragraph but I damned sure think that there should be as many measures in place to protect the victim as there are protect the accused. Why isn't the victim also presumed innocent before being found guilty? Why is that reserved only for the accused?

I would say that most consensual sex does not involve drugging the female. Very clever way of erasing her memory.

 

[geekette]

Wow, indeed. Of course, anything's possible.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloria_Allred

To illustrate how well known Gloria is, simply look to popular culture references:

Sorry, I don't watch a lot of tv and don't generally follow justice system all star matches. Not sure why it's such a big deal that I've never heard of her before.

 

[Beefnot]

Sorry, I don't watch a lot of tv and don't generally follow justice system all star matches. Not sure why it's such a big deal that I've never heard of her before.

It wasn't a big deal per se, I think we were just responding to the force with which you didn't recognize her and your comment "I would bet most people in the country also had never heard of her."

Why isn't the victim also presumed innocent before being found guilty? Why is that reserved only for the accused?

One can only be found guilty if they are charged and prosecuted for a crime. In order for the victim to presumed to be truthful, that by necessity requires a presumption of guilt for the accused. Our system of justice is philsophically biased in favor of the notion that a system which presumes the accused is guilty unless they can prove their innocence is not a just system at all.

I have found that in many cases it is only certain crimes for which folks desire to suspend the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, the two most common being rape and any crime against one's person or family.

 

[ampaholic]

I wasn't talking about Court of Law, I'm talking about before it ever gets to court, as we know that most rape cases never get that far. Inadmissable in court means nothing to the woman being blamed for her own attack in the police station or hospital. I do not believe that cops do not grill the women about their sexual history and what they were wearing and why they were there, etc.

There aren't a lot of women ok with being dragged thru the mud in order to try for a conviction because those convictions are very rare.

I sure never said anything like your second paragraph but I damned sure think that there should be as many measures in place to protect the victim as there are protect the accused. Why isn't the victim also presumed innocent before being found guilty? Why is that reserved only for the accused?

I would say that most consensual sex does not involve drugging the female. Very clever way of erasing her memory.

When a "person" is murdered the cops are no longer able to take their witness statement - so they use forensics to find out who might have wanted them dead, What were they "up to" that brought them into contact with this person, When contact was in initiated and where the events leading up to the crime occurred - all so they can ferret out the WHY - knowing the WHY is the best way to find the WHO.

When a "person" is assaulted, often times that person is the best witness as to the Who, What, When, Where, and Why - so of course the cops are going to try and garner that information from the witness - rather than use expensive forensics.

When a cop asks "what were you doing at the time?" it might be an effort to fill in the What or the Why - they might ask the same question of a murder victim IF THEY COULD

Don't say that cops are "dragging the victim through the mud" when they might well just be trying to gather information needed to solve the crime.

As the criminologist saw goes "Forensics don't lie - people do"

 

[ampaholic]

One can only be found guilty if they are charged and prosecuted for a crime. In order for the victim to presumed to be truthful, that by necessity requires a presumption of guilt for the accused. Our system of justice is philsophically biased in favor of the notion that a system which presumes the accused is guilty unless they can prove their innocence is not a just system at all.

I have found that in many cases it is only certain crimes for which folks desire to suspend the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, the two most common being rape and any crime against one's person or family.

+1 our justice system isn't perfect - but it's sure better than some out there!

 

[Pompey Family]

I do not believe that cops do not grill the women about their sexual history and what they were wearing and why they were there, etc.

I can assure you we don't grill rape victims about their sex lives. We may ask them what they were wearing or why they were in a particular location but that isn't asked in a judgemental or accusatory manner but rather to establish the facts and assist in identifying further avenues of investigation. A victim's sexual history bears no relevance to her rape allegation except when the accused is a current or former sexual partner and consequently doesn't come into the equation when investigating the complaint.

 

[DavidnRobin]

Last night's episode of HBO's 'The Newsroom' dealt with this topic - discusses much of what has been covered on this subject in a very compelling manner.

Going to miss 'The Newsroom' - one of the most intelligent fictional dramas on TV.

 

[geekette]

It wasn't a big deal per se, I think we were just responding to the force with which you didn't recognize her and your comment "I would bet most people in the country also had never heard of her."

Force? Try bewilderment. I don't follow California lawyers nor any others. No force from me. Just not a name I'd ever heard before and then pounded for it which was seriously bewildering. Probably there are plenty of "famous people" I've never heard of.

My point was, why would I conjure up a "me too" claim? Do all these people that know this lawyer think she is a scummy lawyer that will get them money for a fake story? If they believe her to be ethical, why would they bring a made up story to her?

One can only be found guilty if they are charged and prosecuted for a crime. In order for the victim to presumed to be truthful, that by necessity requires a presumption of guilt for the accused. ...

I misspoke. I meant victim "guilty of lying" since there is a lot that flying around this thread. Slopshod journalism in Rolling Stone also led to many thinking "Jackie" lied based on "inconsistencies." There's one right here in this thread stating She Lied while I don't believe that has been proven.

Several posts about 9 out of 10 women lying about rape. With crap like this stacked against us, why would we come forward in a timely manner? My mother never did, never even told my father (she unburdened herself to me after he died). Lead perpetrator was from a prominent family, she would never have been believed. Obviously a pretty girl with big boobs is promiscuous and trying to "trap" the son ... and that's where she left it. Police wanted to protect the wealthy family and the way to do that was shut up the victim and they succeeded.

 

[davidvel]

Folks - read the article I posted above and then come back and tells what you think. This is not about Gloria Allerd and one victim - it involves many victims over many, many years. If you don't like this media outlet, choose one that you do - they all have the same reports.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat...lt_rape_drugs_feature_in_women_s_stories.html

After finally reading all of the allegations, I think/believe:

• Most of the women had consensual relationships with Cosby at the time of the alleged acts
  
• Many of these events as alleged took place almost 40 years ago, with lots of drug and alcohol involved according to the accusers
  
• Some of the stories are vague, and many don’t have specific recollections of what happened
  
• Nearly all of the allegations are date-rape scenarios, with the only “evidence” being the recollections/allegations of the two sides, making it very difficult for either side to "prove" they are right
  
• Cosby most likely assaulted a number of women, many more than these accusers
  
• Cosby most likely didn’t assault all of these accusers

Of course, these thoughts stem only from reading the allegations of one side. Reading the details of the allegations, the circumstances, the time frames, and the players, emphasizes the importance of the OP’s original remarks even more.

 

[Pompey Family]

Several posts about 9 out of 10 women lying about rape. With crap like this stacked against us, why would we come forward in a timely manner?

Rather than question the statistics question why those who have been raped do not come forward, particularly those subjected to domestic rape.

If only I could show you the evidence that has resulted in me concluding the 9 out of 10 statistic, whether that be CCTV, mobile phone, text, conflicting alibi etc. most rape allegations aren't reported to the police by the victim, it's usually to a partner, friend or parent who in turn contact the police. Cue a very reluctant complainant who will usually remain very uncooperative.

Fortunately it's relatively easy to identify a genuine rape victim, it's quite difficult to fake such raw emotion that such a horrific crime elicits.

The problem remains that rape is such an emotive subject with many 'interest groups' with a loud voice that frequently seek to silence those who dare to suggest that false rape allegations make up a substantial number of reported complaints.

 

[Bill4728]

After finally reading all of the allegations, I think/believe:

• Most of the women had consensual relationships with Cosby at the time of the alleged acts
  
• Many of these events as alleged took place almost 40 years ago, with lots of drug and alcohol involved according to the accusers
  
• Some of the stories are vague, and many don’t have specific recollections of what happened
  
• Nearly all of the allegations are date-rape scenarios, with the only “evidence” being the recollections/allegations of the two sides, making it very difficult for either side to "prove" they are right
  
• Cosby most likely assaulted a number of women, many more than these accusers
  
• Cosby most likely didn’t assault all of these accusers

Of course, these thoughts stem only from reading the allegations of one side. Reading the details of the allegations, the circumstances, the time frames, and the players, emphasizes the importance of the OP’s original remarks even more.

That what I'm thinking also.


Cosby most likely assaulted a number of women, Cosby most likely didn’t assault all of these accusers.

 

[Brett]

Cosby most likely assaulted a number of women, Cosby most likely didn’t assault all of these accusers.

true - but why did he use "date rape" drugs

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/09/health/when-rapists-weapon-is-a-drug.html?ref=science

 

[ampaholic]

true - but why did he use "date rape" drugs

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/09/health/when-rapists-weapon-is-a-drug.html?ref=science

Talk about shoddy reporting - your referenced article only accuses Andrew Luster of using "date rape" drugs - since he was convicted. Painting Bill Cosby with Luster's brush is about as yellow as a journalist can get.

While some of Cosby's accusers have mentioned they "thought" he must have used a date rape drug - no one has proven any such thing.

Marijuana, alcohol, cocaine and other "recreational" drugs are also quite capable of causing blackouts - perhaps "party hard" was part of the problem.

 

[pgnewarkboy]

I wasn't talking about Court of Law, I'm talking about before it ever gets to court, as we know that most rape cases never get that far. Inadmissable in court means nothing to the woman being blamed for her own attack in the police station or hospital. I do not believe that cops do not grill the women about their sexual history and what they were wearing and why they were there, etc.

There aren't a lot of women ok with being dragged thru the mud in order to try for a conviction because those convictions are very rare.

I sure never said anything like your second paragraph but I damned sure think that there should be as many measures in place to protect the victim as there are protect the accused. Why isn't the victim also presumed innocent before being found guilty? Why is that reserved only for the accused?

I would say that most consensual sex does not involve drugging the female. Very clever way of erasing her memory.

In your view, what kind of questions should the police be allowed to ask a person claiming rape?

In your view, What kind of evidence does the prosecution in a rape case need to produce to get a conviction?

 

[ace2000]

In your view, what kind of questions should the police be allowed to ask a person claiming rape?

In your view, What kind of evidence does the prosecution in a rape case need to produce to get a conviction?

Great questions pgnewarkboy.

No reason to limit those questions to geekette though. I'd love to hear Denise's response (and some of the other vocal individuals on this thread). I think if you want to make headway on this discussion and actually sway some opinions these need to clarified.

Much of the discussion has not been about the guilt of Cosby or not, it has been the big picture. Perhaps one or two thought he was innocent in this thread, but the overwhelming number here feel he probably did at least some of these things he's accused of.

 

[laura1957]

Sorry, I don't watch a lot of tv and don't generally follow justice system all star matches. Not sure why it's such a big deal that I've never heard of her before.

You arent the only one - I never heard of her either

 

[DeniseM]

Great questions pgnewarkboy.

No reason to limit those questions to geekette though. I'd love to hear Denise's response

I did not make any comments on this point at all, and I don't have an opinion on it.

My focus on this thread was people who posted that they hadn't read any of the accusations against Cosby, but doubted their authenticity.

What? You haven't read it - but you don't believe it? Seriously?

 

[ampaholic]

In your view, what kind of questions should the police be allowed to ask a person claiming rape?

In your view, What kind of evidence does the prosecution in a rape case need to produce to get a conviction?

The very notion of "limiting" the questions police can ask in the investigation of a crime is odd - why would you not want the detectives on the case to know the whole story?

As to evidence - wouldn't you say the prosecutor should try to present enough of and the right kind of evidence to get a conviction from a jury?

 

[easyrider]

true - but why did he use "date rape" drugs

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/09/health/when-rapists-weapon-is-a-drug.html?ref=science

Talk about shoddy reporting - your referenced article only accuses Andrew Luster of using "date rape" drugs - since he was convicted. Painting Bill Cosby with Luster's brush is about as yellow as a journalist can get.

While some of Cosby's accusers have mentioned they "thought" he must have used a date rape drug - no one has proven any such thing.

Marijuana, alcohol, cocaine and other "recreational" drugs are also quite capable of causing blackouts - perhaps "party hard" was part of the problem.

Back in the day it was common for people to use barbiturates recreationally. A dose of seconal ( reds) and a couple of drinks would be all that it takes to be zoned out. These were not really date rape drugs but most of the barbs when mixed with alchol would have the same effects. PCP ( angel dust) was also big back then and this drug could immobilize anyone as it is animal tranquilizer.

I would also point out that some people were having sex all the time in the 60's and 70's. Back in those days a playboy bunny would be a sex object likely having sex. If a woman was hanging out in the playboy grotto back then it was to party. Getting a fake ID was pretty easy to do back then as well. The 15 year old would have to have fake id to work at playboy. Because of this her claim will likely fall short even if true, imo.

Bill

 

[DeniseM]

The 15 year old didn't work there - according to her claims, she met Cosby somewhere else, and Cosby took her there.

I don't know if it's true or not - but there was no claim that she worked at the club.

 

[ottawasquaw]

Back in the day it was common for people to use barbiturates recreationally. A dose of seconal ( reds) and a couple of drinks would be all that it takes to be zoned out. These were not really date rape drugs but most of the barbs when mixed with alchol would have the same effects. PCP ( angel dust) was also big back then and this drug could immobilize anyone as it is animal tranquilizer.

Sure, but isn't it odd that the accusations are directed at one individual. I agree with you that "everyone" was doing it, but are we hearing "everyone" making accusations?

 

[pgnewarkboy]

The very notion of "limiting" the questions police can ask in the investigation of a crime is odd - why would you not want the detectives on the case to know the whole story?

As to evidence - wouldn't you say the prosecutor should try to present enough of and the right kind of evidence to get a conviction from a jury?

One or more posters have objected to the way they believe the police and the court system questions alleged rape victims. My questions were to find out what they thought would be appropriate.

 

[SueDonJ]

Back in the day it was common for people to use barbiturates recreationally. A dose of seconal ( reds) and a couple of drinks would be all that it takes to be zoned out. These were not really date rape drugs but most of the barbs when mixed with alchol would have the same effects. PCP ( angel dust) was also big back then and this drug could immobilize anyone as it is animal tranquilizer.

I would also point out that some people were having sex all the time in the 60's and 70's. Back in those days a playboy bunny would be a sex object likely having sex. If a woman was hanging out in the playboy grotto back then it was to party. Getting a fake ID was pretty easy to do back then as well. The 15 year old would have to have fake id to work at playboy. Because of this her claim will likely fall short even if true, imo.

Bill

Like I said before, I don't know how much of what's been alleged is true but I think there is enough of a developed pattern to surmise that Cosby is probably guilty of some of the charges.

But about what you say above - there's a difference between someone voluntarily taking drugs, and someone being slipped a drug in his/her drink or some other way. When it's alleged that "date rape drugs" have been used, the allegation usually means that the person suffering the effects of such drugs had no intent to use them.

Also, regardless of whether a "blackout" is caused by drugs voluntarily taken or unknowingly given, "rape" is considered to fit the legal definition if the victim is not able to give consent for the sexual act. Victims in a blackout state cannot give consent. There was a time (which meshes with some of the allegations against Cosby) when the legal definition didn't include this but it's because of what commonly happened during that time that the legal definition was amended. The amendment wouldn't have occurred if it wasn't widely accepted then and now that an alleged victim's drug use and blackouts caused by it are NOT in and of themselves a defense against a charge of rape.

 

[SueDonJ]

One or more posters have objected to the way they believe the police and the court system questions alleged rape victims. My questions were to find out what they thought would be appropriate.

"Did you consent to the sexual acts you're alleging happened?" If the answer is "no" that's all the police should need in order to file a complaint. If the AG's office has no reason to disbelieve it at face value, that should be enough for an indictment. During a trial the defense shouldn't be able to ask anything related to the victim's sexual history, or, submit anything implying that a victim's inherent or perceived sexuality is a factor. BUT any past false rape claims should be admissible. That's what I think, even realizing that what I want to take place stretches a bit the normal parameters for delineating "legitimate" Court items.

(Of course in this specific Cosby-related discussion the alleged victims are all women. But it's interesting to me that in the overall discussion here most are still assuming that rape victims are women. In fact, rape is a crime perpetrated against homosexual men by homosexual men in significant numbers, most significantly with date rape incidents. One reason complaints are not lodged in equal numbers as the incidents is the same as that found with female victims - that promiscuous people are still wrongly seen as "asking for it." No reason to say this other than, I find it interesting.)

 

[vacationhopeful]

Okay ...

I am of the generation of most of these ladies. I was single and had some fun. I was NOT a party girl or club dancer or groupie --- but I was around some of the scenes and many of the people the next day.

My take: 3-4 drinks into any person, some weed, some blow, and a few pills .... and then remember, WHAT you did 12-18 hours earlier??? And with whom? Or remember, who your friends were hanging with or who left when?

And 35 or 40 years later .... even my best memories are a bit faded as are most of my worst times .... AND I had some really bad years involving cops (jerks) and judges (bigger jerks) where I was a domestic violence victim ....

I am so thankful cell phones weigh 15+ pounds and did not have cameras. And no pictures could be uploaded to the internet.