Posted on 10/11/2015 9:41:32 AM PDT by WhiskeyX
Bill Cosby testified under oath for about seven hours on Friday in response to a civil suit brought by a woman who accuses the veteran comedian of sexually abusing her when she was 15, a lawyer for the plaintiff said on Saturday.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
“So to them cry drugs and rape and rage decades later, connected with a hungry lawyer, millions of dollars and the needs of the democrat party to shut him up, spells massive bullsh!t to me.”
There you go again with pretending Bill Crosby is an innocent man falsely accused of being a rapist because his politics are supportive of conservative Republicans; despite the fact he is none of those.
Bill Cosby is not innocent of the accusations of his being a rapist, because he confessed under oath that he used drugs to sexually molest Andrea Constand.
Bill Cosby is not a Republican or a conservative supportive of Republican and conservative principles. See:
http://newsone.com/2264658/bill-cosby-cnn-republicans/
Many have never stepped foot in the Playboy Mansion.
Not quite. They both took drugs and had sex. That's hardly "confessing to sexual molestation," let alone rape.
I never said he was.
Your need to misrepresent the issues is indicative of your own heavy bias in this matter.
They all deserved it. The man couldn’t help himself because the women were too enticing. So he slipped them a mickey, and hey, they were asking for it, dontcha know.
__________________________________________________
Get serious, this wasn't a friends house it was the Playboy mansion. Everybody knows what happens there. this did happen like 45 years ago, there is just no way to know what happened. I'm not saying it didn't happen just like the little girl, well 45 years ago she was a little girl, anyway I'm not saying it didn't happen the way she said but if I was on a jury there is no way in the world I could convict someone based on an accusation that happened 45 years ago when the complaint is that she had sex without giving permission in the Playboy mansion.
get real.
Your best post ever.
“Not quite. They both took drugs and had sex. That’s hardly “confessing to sexual molestation,” let alone rape
No, that is an entirely false statement. Bill Cosby invited her under false pretenses of a longstanding non-sexual friendship involving their mutual interests in the Temple University sports activities, drugged Andrea Constand with an overdose of Benadryl used as a date rape drug by misrepresenting the purpose of the pills, remained free of the Benadryl himself, and then sexually molested her without engaging in coitus.
When confronted with the accusation of the non-consensual sexual molestation of Andrea Constand while she was drugged and helpless to resist, Bill Cosby handled the accusation by telling the police investigators he knew the sexual encounter was consensual due to his extensive past experience as a Lothario. Unfortunately for Bill Cosby’s lies, he wasn’t aware that Andrea Constand was a homosexual and Lesbian with no interest in heterosexual relations with men until the police informed him. See for one example:
Cosby Accuser Is Gay, Breaks Silence in Court Motion Refuting His Self-Described Romantic Skills
Jeremy Stahl
In the latest motion, Constand accused Cosby himself of violating the confidentiality terms of their undisclosed 2006 settlement. His lawyers had recently described Cosby’s admitted use of Quaaludes in sexual encounters as merely taking part in the consensual 1970s “disco biscuits” party scene. Constand’s motion mocked this idea.
“As defendant admits in his deposition, despite his talent for interpreting female reactions to him, he did not realize Plaintiff was gay until the police told him.”
[....]
Constand, who filed the 2005 civil suit after Pennsylvania prosecutors declined to take up the case accusing Cosby of drugging and then raping her in 2004, has remained largely on the sidelines even as 35 women came forward this week to tell their stories of Cosby’s alleged assaults in a widely praised New York magazine cover story.
[....]
The court documents were referencing a recently revealed deposition by Cosby in which he described himself as a lothario and said that he could “read” that the encounter with Constand was consensual.
[....]
“Plaintiff sits quietly listening to descriptions fed to the media of celebrity parties and ‘disco biscuits,’ knowing that she never attended a celebrity party or requested to take a disco biscuit (or even heard of that term for that matter),” Constand’s lawyer Dolores Troiani wrote.
Also see:
The Former Basketball Player Who Brought Down Bill Cosby
Diana Moskovitz
Filed to: Bill Cosby
11/26/14 1:58pm
Constand went to Cosby’s home for dinner parties, or sometimes for dinner just between the two of them. They would talk about basketball, her career, other job opportunities, even her spiritual beliefs. In court filings, both sides agree to that. Then, in January 2004, Cosby invited Constand, 30, over to his Cheltenham home. He told her he wanted to “offer her assistance in her pursuit of a different career,” according to her lawsuit. She got there about 9 p.m.
What happened next, according to Constant, is outlined in her suit: Constand told Cosby she “was feeling stressed about making her career decision.” He offered her three blue pills, calling them herbal medication, and said they would help her relax. When Constand asked if she needed to take all three, Cosby said yes. She took them and started to shake; she felt dizzy and weak. Her limbs went slack and she felt barely conscious.
When Plaintiff advised Defendant she did not feel well, Defendant led Plaintiff to a sofa, because she could not walk on her own, where he laid her down, under the guise of “helping” her.
Subsequently, Defendant positioned himself behind Plaintiff on the sofa, touched her breasts and vaginal area, rubbed his penis against her hand, and digitally penetrated her.
Plaintiff remained in a semi-conscious state throughout the time of this ordeal.
At no time was Plaintiff capable of consent after the pills affected her, and at no time did she consent to Defendant’s acts.
She woke up sometime after 4 a.m. feeling raw, her clothes strewn everywhere. Cosby greeted her in his bathrobe. Four months later, according to the Daily News, she quit her job at Temple, moved back to Canada, and began studying to become a massage therapist. A year later, on Jan. 13, 2005, she went to the police. During the case, Constand’s lawyer, Dolores Troiani, went on MSNBC’s Abrams Report and explained the year’s delay in telling law enforcement.
Because she had to deal with this. She had to find some closure. And it was haunting her, as it does haunt every victim of a sexual assault. This is permanent injury to anyone who has suffered something such as this and you can’t do it alone. You need to have therapy; you need to talk about it. And what happened was that she was having nightmares. She was experiencing many difficulties in trying to—in her mental focus and she finally came forward to her mother and immediately went to the police, not weeks later ... She was in school. There was constant talk about consent and touching. And all of that triggered in her, her understanding that she had to come forward and she had to seek help.
http://deadspin.com/the-former-basketball-player-who-brought-down-bill-cosb-1661203971
Where I wrote:
“Bill Cosby is not a Republican or a conservative supportive of Republican and conservative principles.”
Your response in part included the phrase:
“the needs of the democrat party to shut him up,....”
So, your phrase indicated the “democrat party” needed to shutup Bill Cosby, which implies Bill Cosby’s remarks were conservative enough to be supportive of the Republican Party and conservatives.
“I never said he was.”
Others in this thread did so, and your observation the Democrats needed to shutup Bill Cosby and his remarks supporting those conservative viewpoints about familial responsibility in the Black community certainly implies you believe the sexual assault accusations are politically motivated because of Cosby’s remarks being supportive of conservative and Republican viewpoints.
Cosby came out against black thug life. If you want to call that supporting the Republicans, I can’t stop you. Also, your complete, uncritical acceptance of one side of the testimony pretty much shows you’ve made up your mind.
What is concerning, from the conservative viewpoint, is your willingness to simply do away with the need for a trial or a defense, and simply accept sheer numbers of accusers in this day and age of coordinated, paid, and planned mob rule, as not only proof of guilt, but the enabling of the moral condemnation of anyone who disagrees with you as supporting rape.
Personally, I find you to be an unconscionable tool of those who would continue to force blacks to live on the destructive Democrat plantation. Because it’s clear such people heartily approve of your star-chamber level of arrogance.
Cowgirl is right, many of these accusations against Cosby did not happen in the Playboy Mansion, but we were only talking about one incident, the one that did happen in the Playboy Mansion.
I looks like Cosby is a slime ball but accusations that come from 45 years ago need to be taken with a lump of salt. None of us know exactly what happened 45 years ago. It does appear that some of these women are trying to get in on the gold digging action. It may be they didn’t mind what happened to them back in the day but now that there is a chance of money they are going for it. I’m not making an accusation but we don’t know and never will know all the facts from something that happened 45 years ago.
“Cosby came out against black thug life. If you want to call that supporting the Republicans, I can’t stop you.”
You are disregarding how I already reported Bill Cosby is not supporting the Republicans with his comments about the “black thug life” you wrote. Instead, it is comments from Rush Limbaugh and others about Bill Cosby’s criticism of Black criminal conduct and the Black community criticism of Bill Cosby equating his comments to White racism which did so. You simply echoed Rush Limbaugh’s comments that Liberals are out to destroy Bill Cosby because of his criticisms of the Black community, which they equate to what they call White and Republican racism.
“Also, your complete, uncritical acceptance of one side of the testimony pretty much shows you’ve made up your mind.”
Now you are accusing me of an “uncritical acceptance of one side of the testimony” which is totally false. It was because that I was open minded about his alleged guilt or innocence and was critical of both points of view that the cocktail waitresses who knew Bill Cosby at the Playboy mansion and were familiar with his bad behavior there brought to my attention evidence of Bill Cosby’s already well known sexual assaults upon women. The weight of the evidence against Bill Cosby became overwhelming after Bill Cosby not only confirmed giving Benadryl to Andrea Constand after she already said he told her they were herbal remedies for stress, he also admitted to drugging women with what Cosby and his lawyers described as: “Cosby’s admitted use of Quaaludes in sexual encounters as merely taking part in the consensual 1970s “disco biscuits” party scene.” The evidence was overwhelming because it confirmed the accusations from years and decades earlier, including the complaints I heard from the cocktail waitresses decades earlier in the 1970s. Bill Cosby’s protestations of innocence have not only been outweighed by the sheer quantity of complaints against him, they have also been qualitatively outweighed by his own admissions of illegal drugging of the women accusing him and by his own boasting to police describing himself as a Lothario. In other words, Bill Cosby’s own testimony to police describes himself as “a man whose chief interest is seducing women” and uses illegal drugs to do so. So, the preponderance of the evidence, quantitatively and qualitatively, suggests an overwhelming likelihood of Bill Cosby’s guilt in some, most, or all the cases in which women have accused him of sexual assaults no matter how critical you can be against his accusers.
“What is concerning, from the conservative viewpoint, is your willingness to simply do away with the need for a trial or a defense, and simply accept sheer numbers of accusers in this day and age of coordinated, paid, and planned mob rule, as not only proof of guilt, but the enabling of the moral condemnation of anyone who disagrees with you as supporting rape.”
You have that entirely backwards, because you are describing your own behavior. Your accusation is itself your own “uncritical acceptance” of Bill Cosby’s self serving denials of his sex and drugging crimes as you argue to deny his accusers the right to exercise their 1st Amendment right to free speech and their own right to a fair trial in defense of their reputations and personal safety. Some of the women accusing Bill Cosby of these alleged crimes were denied a right to secure justice in a court of law before the expiration of the statute of limitations. Most of these women who tried to take their complaints to trial and were refused were subjected to retaliation that was ruinous to their lives in addition to what they say they suffered as a consequences of the sexual assaults, yet your “uncritical acceptance” of this deprivation of a trial and justice for these women is absent the concern of a conservative who cherishes personal liberty and a right to self defense against criminal acts. The women who rightfully anticipated their complaints and right to trial would be denied and their personal lives ruined by Bill Cosby, his lawyers, Phillip-Morris, and the MSM were denied access to a trial, yet you appear to demonstrate an “uncritic4al acceptance” of that denial of justice for these women. Then there is your “uncritical acceptance” of the way Andrea Constand was denied a trial for her criminal complaint against Bill Cosby, and then you make an extremely one-sided criticism of her for even attempting to take her complaint against Bill Cosby to a civil court trial. You certainly demonstrate a lot of hostility against anyone who dares to take a complaint against Bill Cosby to trial in any court.
Then there is your demonstrated hostility towards the women who dare to exercise their 1st Amendment right to free speech when they do so to accuse Bill Cosby of sex crimes. You seem to believe the expiration of the statute of limitations is somehow supposed to strip these women of their right to free speech when used to accuse their alleged assailant. Unfortunately for you, these women have not forfeited their 1st Amendment right of free speech cherished by conservatives. If any of these women have used their 1st Amendment right of free speech to falsely defame and slander Bill Cosby, then Bill Cosby has every right to take his own complaint to trial in a court of law to obtain a remedy for such illegal conduct. If any of these women have used their 1st Amendment right of free speech to truthfully accuse Bill Cosby of sexual crimes, then Bill Cosby has every right to take his own complaint to trial in a court of law to obtain a remedy for such lawful conduct. So far, Bill Cosby has leveraged his wealth, his relationship with the rich and powerful, his relationship with Phillip Morris, and his relationship with the MSM and the National Enquirer to mostly suppress going to trial before a jury. Bill Cosby also has the right and the power to waive his immunity from trial due to the expiration of the statute of limitations, but he refuses to do so and face his accusers in a court of law. Yet, you deny the right of a trial by jury and the right of free speech to the women who did not pursue a complaint against Bill Cosby previously because of the severe repercussions to themselves and their family members rightfully anticipated in any attempts to do so.
“Personally, I find you to be an unconscionable tool of those who would continue to force blacks to live on the destructive Democrat plantation. Because it’s clear such people heartily approve of your star-chamber level of arrogance.”
Again, you are simply describing yourself. In the event some or all of the accusations against Bill Cosby happen to be truthful, then he would be a major figure in the very kind of Black criminal behavior he criticized, and the criticism the Black community claimed was racist. In the event all of the accusations of sex crimes against Bill Cosby happen to be false, then you and Bill Cosby are still denying the entire public, including the Black community, the opportunity for the accusations to be taken to trial where Bill Cosby can be found innocent of the accusations in front of his accusers and the rest of the world. Given all of the exorbitant efforts Bill Cosby has undertaken to avoid trial, intimidate the plaintiffs, and avoid going to trial; such efforts by Bill Cosby tends to shift the preponderance of the evidence just that much further against Bill Cosby in the courts of law as well as the court of public opinion, and he knows it.
Sorry, I’m not interested in falsifying your book. My points still stand, despite your wall of text and the sheer number if inconsistencies you loaded it with. You’ve just fine with words what the Democrat machine has done with women against Cosby, and its just as fraudulent.
The bottom line is that illegal recreational drugs like qaaludes and others were extremely popular in the 70s for sex. The fact that they were illegal and admittedly used by Cosby and his lovers simply does not - in any way - establish, price or even suggest rape. The women were passed out for the same reason they would be if they drank too much. They were adults, they freely made their choices for drugs and sex, and now they have dollar signs in their eyes, led, guided and organized by political operatives and attorneys for the Democrat party. Absolutely everything points to that simple, ordinary, and repeated millions of times with Hollywood stars since Hollywood started conclusion. Only today, feminism demands these women be treated add sanctified nuns, and treats anyone who rejects that fraud as a rapist themselves - as you are doing.
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.