Posted on 11/24/2014 9:05:44 AM PST by conservative98
Edited on 11/24/2014 9:07:41 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
Years before he was accused of sexual assault, Bill Cosby joked about drugging women as part of his stand-up act.
On his 1969 stand-up comedy album
(Excerpt) Read more at pagesix.com ...
The seventeen independent accounts reveal a pattern here. Where there's smoke, one usually finds fire.
The only evidence to support the rape claims is “she said” - and what she says is that she can’t remember but believes it happened. There is no forensic evidence. Most of the claims are of events so long ago that there’s no way to verify even the background facts such as where Cosby or the alleged victim were at the time of the alleged attacks.
And the stories came forward only AFTER Cosby irritated Hollywood and leftists by saying that Blacks cannot blame whites for their own rotten “culture” and criminality. In all but 2 instances DECADES after the alleged rapes occurred.
I don’t know what happened. What I do know is that there is no actual evidence and yet people are acting as if the verdict is certain - one way or another.
Seems to me like we’re not really all that interested in evidence either - just like the Ferguson “protesters”. And maybe THAT is the real crux of the matter. Maybe we’re all very ready to scream “Crucify him!” even when we don’t know what really happened, and have no way of knowing what really happened.
The Court of Public Opinion is much different than the Court of Law.
Nope. I am not in denial and I will believe 16 women over Cosby, rapist
Hmmmm ....
Johnny and Susie meet at a bar, get skunk-drunk, stagger off to a nearby no-tell motel, rent a room, and engage in sexual intercourse.
Your comments, please.
Did any of them have a rape kit done? If not, why not? How many of them reported rape to the police? Why did they or didn’t they report to the police? How many have named the people who can corroborate their whereabouts and the details of the story? How many of these claims have been subjected to cross-examination, witnesses, forensic analysis, etc?
I don’t know what happened. What I do know is that it is “he said/she said”. And I know that even if a dozen Bob and Mayella Ewells stand up and cry “Rape”, without evidence it doesn’t necessarily mean that Tom Robinson raped Mayella Ewell. Maybe he did. Maybe not. That’s all we can really say, because those who could have presented evidence chose not to at the time, and now the evidence is gone. All that’s left are accusations. Take them for what they’re worth.
Another thing I know is that if “he said/she said” 30-40 years after the alleged crime is enough to convict a person in the court of public opinion - absent any evidence - then we can be absolutely sure this will be the means of disposing of politically uncomfortable people. Just like if rioting means that a police officer can be put behind bars even though all the evidence says he’s innocent, then we can count on riots. And in BOTH instances it will be because we had an epistemology that places no importance on actual EVIDENCE.
And that bodes badly for our country.
They’re both guilty of raping the other, since neither could give legal consent.
But neither of them can remember it so unless somebody catches them in the act they’re off scott-free.
Unless, of course, they consented before they got drunk.
BINGO, in my opinion. That is exactly what it's about.
It means that neither can legally give consent since both were mentally impaired. It’s really not that difficult to grasp.
Didja hear about the guy who didn’t know whether he was coming or going? Some joker put Spanish Fly in his Milk of Magnesia.
1) Obviously intoxicated
2) Engaged in sexual intercourse.
Do I understand correctly that in your opinion(s), both of them should be arrested for the felony crime of rape, tried, convicted, and sentenced to lengthy prison terms?
Yes, as a matter of fact, that joke was going around back in the 50s.
No, you do not understand correctly. Never did I offer any opinion on arrest, trial, conviction, sentencing, or prison.
I think she is someone who credits the collective testimony of 17 women, rather than those who attack the victims.
So ... what is your opinion on "arrest, trial, conviction, sentencing, or prison" in the case of poor, drunk (Johnny|Susie) subjected to non-consenting sexual intercourse by (Susie|Johnny)?
That would depend on the singular facts and circumstances of the case.
Sounds like you’re older than dirt. I am too.
One consolation: We’ve had the joy and privilege of living in the United States during some of her glory years; the latter 50 years of the 20th Century.
We were just wondering if anyone remembered “I Spy” here at home.
That article kinda reminds me of a “Criminal Minds” I saw once! A little creepy.
I don’t believe so, because consent may have been given before they were intoxicated. Neither one may be able to tell when they consented or when they were intoxicated by legal definition, and there would be no way to prove it. So it’s probably a moot point.
Furthermore, I don’t know if rape can be prosecuted if nobody is willing to claim they were raped, unless it’s statutory rape. But I’m not sure of the laws on that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.