Posted on 12/05/2014 8:08:36 AM PST by SteveH
A woman suing Bill Cosby for sexual battery attempted to sell a story about the comedian to a tabloid a decade ago and tried to extort money in exchange for her silence, Cosby’s attorney said in a court filing Thursday.
Attorney Martin Singer wrote in the filing that the lawsuit by Judy Huth and her attorney followed a failed attempt to extort $250,000 from Cosby. In the filing, Cosby seeks more than $33,000 from Huth and her attorney.
The filing comes two days after Huth sued, claiming the comedian forced her to perform a sex act in 1974 when she was 15. The incident occurred in a bedroom of the Playboy Mansion after Cosby gave Huth and a 16-year-old friend alcohol, according to her lawsuit.
(Excerpt) Read more at pagesix.com ...
No, the point was that 'the left' helped him keep his deviancy from the public up until he dared speak up 'against' the President and the 'black' community. If he had been a professed conservative, he probably wouldn't even have made it in show business, and wouldn't have talent agents dropping off 15 year old girls at his mansion.
Let me tell you something , bucko. My sister was sexually harassed. She reported it to her bosses immediately, the guy was Black so they promoted him, she went through counseling, and she has moved on. That was probably ten years ago. If she brought up this stuff all over again knowing there would be no evidence to support her claims, I would STILL say you can’t hang a man over charges he has no way to defend himself against, and without evidence.
And that’s what this is about. If evidence is not needed, then ANYBODY is vulnerable. Only an idiot would fail to realize that.
If there was such a forest fire, as you say, why did NONE OF THEM say or do anything about it until 2005? Why did none of them take the responsible steps of having themselves examined and the evidence collected while it could be?
As to whether this is related to Cosby’s earlier criticism about Black culture, ask the supposed “comedian” who interrupted a comedy routine with an un-funny tirade about Bill Cosby not beinq able to tell Blacks to pull their pants up because he’s a rapist. Sounds to me like he made it crystal clear what the rape claims surfacing right now are supposed to do - discredit Cosby so he can’t comment on Black culture (right when we were about to see Blacks rob and kill on our TV’s). That’s not me bringing up the potential political motivations; that’s the source for all this coming up now, saying it straight-out in the non-comedy routine that the media propelled to national prominence immediately.
But for me this isn’t about Bill Cosby at all. I have no idea whether he’s a good guy or a jerk, or whether he’s a criminal. (I do know that at least 2 of these women have been caught in fraud.) This is really about “innocent until proven guilty” and the need for evidence. It’s also about the potential for false accusations. Think of Duke lacrosse, Tawana Brawley, the U Va frat rape allegation, and Lena Dunham, to just name a few visible hoaxes recently - all of them by women with a political agenda who were only found out as liars because their claims were for recent enough alleged events that the specifics could be checked out and found inaccurate.
Only one of these Cosby accusers filed a claim soon enouqh that any particulars could be checked out, and she reported the claim in a different country and in a different year than the alleged event. And the DA who checked it out didn’t press charges because there was no evidence.
You make an emotional argument about me “giving a free pass” to a rapist. I have no idea what Cosby is or isn’t, and it doesn’t really even matter to me. If you think he’s a rapist, then why don’t you report him to the cops and have them prosecute him and find him guilty? That’s the way we do it in this country. Or at least it USED to be how we did it.
I don’t know about everyone else, but I’m not defending Cosby, just questioning the timing.
It isn’t hard to believe that young aspiring actresses (and their parents) were willing to throw themselves at his feet and do anything to get a part. It isn’t hard to believe that he took advantage of the offer. It isn’t hard to believe that he had a particular sexual deviancy (young white females who he drugged) because it was a known fact that such drugs (quaaludes) were passed around in bowls like candy at the Hefner Mansion and clubs.
When human beings find a method that allows them to repeat questionable sexual activities, they tend to keep doing it.
The real question should be why did the ‘left’ suppress all this over the years, and just now decide to feign opposition?
THEY ALL KNEW.
I haven’t seen even ONE person on this forum defend Bill Cosby - including myself.
I HAVE seen a lot of people say that it’s “he said, she said”, and with no chance for physical evidence there is no way to know who is telling the truth.
What problem do you have with people saying that?
I seriously doubt that more than twenty women would conspire together - unknown to each other - to accuse an innocent man. It is much more likely that there is at least some substance to the accusations. IMHO the odds are that there are even more women with similar stories.
No argument with the first part, but Cosby did not speak out against Obama but rather made very public remarks in support of him.
No more true than with regard to morally-corrupt Hollywood. We all know stories about those who use their power and influence to take advantage of others sexually and otherwise. And with those around them covering up their behavior, it continues unabated until one unimaginable day when it all comes crashing down - the Day of Judgment.
No, this was worse. This was worse. And everybody knows it was worse. And I think that this second term is one where we are really going to see a man who gets it, knows it. And it's going to be better, period...
I am more than confident because he knows now who to say no to. He knows now who to say, I don't care what you say, this is going to happen. And I believe he is for the people.
Bill Cosby regarding Obama
April 2012
from: "bucko"
My apologies for the mistaken observation that your posts give the impression of someone who is primarily interested in defending Cosby.
Perhaps you could clarify something: one would think that a woman would naturally sympathize with women who claimed to have been sexually assaulted. Surely you understand better than most men the complex emotional dilemma that a young woman would face especially in an age when sexual-assault victims had a much more difficult time making their case. It was a time when victims faced the humility of being examined by male officers, and whose testimony was often not taken seriously.
Cosby was at the height of his career, and was viewed as virtually unchallengeable. Who would dare make such an accusation against Dr. Huxtable?
Surely you understand (better than us men) the tremendous emotional barriers to "going public" and facing the inevitable public ridicule, even after having suffered in silence all these years. For as you know, time does not heal all wounds.
It is by no means true that Cosby is left with no way to combat the accusations. If he was seriously interested in clearing his name, he could waive the statute of limitations and go to court to rebut the allegations. If I were him (and I am not), I would spare no cost - of my $400 million fortune - to clear my name. What is a few million in lawyer's fees to a man like Cosby?
I certainly agree that "Only the Lord knows" the full truth, but we are also instructed to use our God-given spiritual gift of discernment. And what is your discernment regarding the now more than twenty women of varying walks in life who are accusing Cosby of rape?
My view of these women is that if they wanted to be believed they should have had the evidence taken while it was there to be had. Bill Cosby was not Dr Huxtable at that time; he was a comedian friend of Hugh Hefner. Combine testimony from the people giving the alleged “knowing looks” with a blue stained dress and the jerk would be off the streets rather than out raping more women.
Why did NOT ONE of those 20+ women do that?
I’ll ask ya something else too. The earliest report was in 2000 from a starlet who wanted Cosby to help make her famous. Her claim to the police was that Cosby didn’t drug her and quit as soon as she told him to stop trying for first base. Yet decades before, he supposedly had this big “turn on” with drugging women and then doing non-evidence-producing sexual activity with them (having them touch him, digital penetration of them, etc Did any of them actually claim he had just plain old coitus, complete with semen?). What serial rapist DE-escalates over time? If it took raping a woman to turn on Cosby in 1965 then why are the first public allegations, decades later, basically that he was an average college-type guy who simply tried for first base and then stopped when resisted?
The claim of Cosby being this horrible monster only emerged in 2005, 6 months after he angered the NAACP and leftists by making the comments that this “comedian” referenced in his opening non-comedic salvo at Cosby a little over a month ago. So, what? He was a terrible monster over all these decades, brutalizing everybody in Hollywood, and then in 2000 he tamed down into trying first base and then stopping when told? The chronology just doesn’t make sense.
And what Cosby’s attorney said is true, if Huth tried to sell her story for money in 2005: She perjured herself by claiming she only just now discovered that she had been harmed. Do you believe that these delicate flowers should now have license to commit perjury because of the police reports they chose not to file when their allegations could have been proven or disproven by actual forensic evidence? If these women will lie to get their case into a civil court, why should we believe they’re not REALLLY lying to get a case into the civil court?
LOL, at least he has one cult worshiper, you are truly dedicated to the man.
It’s fun watching you rant and rage for the guy.
You never, EVER engage with reason, logic, and evidence.
Quite frankly, you act like a troll.
We post facts, you post long, long, long ramblings and narratives.
You may have the worst case of worship that we have ever seen here.
The guy is deluded.
It would almost be sweet justice for him to have everybody be as oblivious to the importance of evidence in his case as he is oblivious to the importance of evidence regarding Obama’s many crimes.
But it would be bad for the country to give up on the need for evidence. Even if it would feel good to see the guy have his clock cleaned.
Your “facts”: a bunch of women have accused Cosby.
Duh.
That’s the deepest you’re willing to go into “facts”.
If Huth tried to sell her story in 2005, then did she perjure herself when she said she had newly discovered that she was harmed?
So it took the "anti-Bill conspiracy" a whole SIX MONTHS to get their act together and organize the campaign against him? Probably innumerable meetings and sub-committees to decide upon the right strategy?
Everyone agrees that the MSM stopped protecting Cosby, but to claim that a conspiracy involving 20+ women is afoot is grasping at straws.
One allegation? Absolutely the accused is innocent until guilty. Two or three: yes, he deserves his day in court, yada yada. But there comes a point when the accusations begin to pile on, and 20+ is a huge red flag.
I repeat my question: what is your spiritual discernment telling you about Cosby? Can you seriously claim that in your heart of hearts you believe the man is innocent?
Innocent of rape? I have no way of knowing. I know that the stories don’t add up and that NOT ONE of these women reported anything when there was evidence to be gathered.
Do you believe they were all that stupid? Even if all they wanted was money, why wait 40 years before you try to extort money? Any one of those gals could have said to Cosby, “I have a blue dress that can land you in jail. You get me the stardom I want, or you’re toast.”
None of them even thought of the possibility of getting money out of this guy until decades later? This was their Willy Wonka ticket to paradise, on a golden platter. Not one of them realized what they had in the dog-eat-dog world of Hollywood - of Playboy where sex is your way to anywhere you want to go?
I don’t buy it. I would have to suspend all disbelief to believe that.
Cosby gave NBC a couple of TV hits, I Spy and The Cosby Show. He was also involved in PBS The Electric Street and a few movies as well as records (comedy and musical). For a while, he had a media corporation himself.
IMDB lists Cosby as “one of the world’s most respected and well-known entertainers and comedians.” It lists his credits as actor, writer, (musician), crew, producer, composer, soundtrack, and director. In addition Cosby is a stand up comedian and has several real and honorary degrees from well known universities.
So, the media would be attacking one of its own if the media published exposes harmful to Cosby.
Think about what Cosby must have done if allegations are true that he had access to date rape type drugs in 1965.
Rohypnol was apparently not manufactured until 1975, and even then not available in the US, even for veterinarians. What drug would have been available in 1965?
—There evidently was chloral hydrate, which is or was used in so-called “Mickey Finns.” Form is powder, usage includes dentistry and veterinary, production is relatively simple, side effects include nausea, and loss of memory. Availability dates from the mid-1800s.
Cosby’s behavior dating back to the mid 1960s seems to me as if it might have the hallmarks of enabled behavior. That is, the guy was not afraid of losing his job, his livelihood, his career, or his freedom, because he was somehow legally and financially protected by whoever signed off for his NBC checks (eg for I Spy).
If true, that makes the problem larger than Cosby himself. One would have to see where Cosby was in the NBC management food chain in the mid 1960s (starting in December of 1965, the date of the first alleged incident).
That should be a relatively small list.
It would be interesting to work outward from there, and see who else in NBC that guy had on his signoff list, and whether or not there is a history of sexual abuse complaints against them.
NB, rape is as much about power and anger as it is about sex, or so people say.
There must be some info out there on legal, PR, and physical cleanup crews who mop up situations after a big star goes on a rampage.
Back to timing, sometimes the behavior gets so bad (eg Phil Spector) that the result often seems nearly instantaneous. However, if the behavior hovers at borderline cover-uppable, then one might expect results to be delayed for years or decades, if ever.
What I am referring to is this:
Obama told the protesters "Stay the course".
Cosby told them to pull their pants up and quit acting like a bunch of hoodlums.
Ergo, Cosby spoke out 'against' what Obama said to them.
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.