Bill Cosby Sued for Sexually Assaulting 15-Year-Old Girl

Rolling Stone ^ | Dec. 3, 2014 | Daniel Kreps

[SteveH]

1. what buress actually said

OK, he said more and some of it was incidental. so what? are you arguing form over substance?

2. trauma of sexual assault

she did not list herself as a victim, because she did not make any such list. that is the job of the plaintiff’s attorney for the court deposition process. the term victim is possibly adversarial, but then the court system is an adversarial system to begin with. they could have said witness. perhaps they did, and it is the media that is using the term “victim list” because IIRC the court documents regarding the deposition are in fact all under seal. In any case, if her story is true, IMHO she is a victim because BC drugged her badly enough that she lost consciousness for a few hours and threw up after that. She was kept restrained at BC’s home for a few hours against her will (unlawful confinement?), BC exposed himself to her and attempted to make her give him a BJ (attempted rape?). She is fortunate that none of these evidently led to permanent physical harm which I imagine is what she actually means in this situation when she said she was not harmed. I also think she is being a bit understated. If it had happened to me (just saying), I think I would have been mentally traumatized for quite a while afterwards. I’m not sure what your point is. Are you saying that because the woman claims no permanent injury, that that somehow makes her less believable?

I know you are searching for internal inconsistencies in her story. Did you watch the video? You still think the woman lacks credibility? She seemed about as normal and composed as she could be under the circumstances to me, and all of your inconsistency theories seem more of a stretch to me than simply believing her. In contrast, BC now seems reduced to accepting out of court settlements and decisions prejudiced against him, and it seems as if more and more people are willing to stand up to him and the superficial scrutiny and harsh criticism of BC apologists with every passing week.

You prefer women always seek a man and dump their problems on their man instead of shouldering their own loads in life? You prefer women should live in fear of what people might think regarding who she talks with and who she visits 40 years from the time she talks and visits a person? That women always think the absolute worst in every man they meet? That women should not be free to stand up in public against sexual abusers if they have no blue dress DNA level evidence? That circumstantial evidence should always be barred from sexual abuse lawsuits? What an oddly inhibited and illogical world your ideal world would seem to be... IMHO... :-)

[SteveH]

there are apparently three classic primary types of one-on-one rape: anger rape, power rape, and sadistic rape. from wikipedia:

Power rape

For these rapists, rape becomes a way to compensate for their underlying feelings of inadequacy and feeds their issues of mastery, control, dominance, strength, intimidation, authority and capability. The intent of the power rapist is to assert their competency. The power rapist relies upon verbal threats, intimidation with a weapon, and only uses the amount of force necessary to subdue the victim.

The power rapists tends to have fantasies about sexual conquests and rape. They may believe that even though the victim initially resists them, that once they overpower their victim, the victim will eventually enjoy the rape. The rapist believes that the victim enjoyed what was done to them, and they may even ask the victim to meet them for a date later.

Because this is only a fantasy, the rapist does not feel reassured for long by either their own performance or the victim’s response. The rapist feels that they must find another victim, convinced that this victim will be “the right one”.

Hence, their offenses may become repetitive and compulsive. They may commit a series of rapes over a short period of time.