many if not most of the current witnesses publicly or privately arrayed against cosby have stated upfront that they are not interested in money.
so out of the current women coming forward, it seems at least so far that only about 4 are interested in money.
when i consider lawsuits being filed, i consider all the potential angles. a lawsuit is a big thing. they are filed in civil courts of unlimited jurisdiction in terms of renumeration for damages. if you file, and you lie, you could imho open yourself to a countersuit in unlimited jurisdiction in which you could essentially lose your home, your savings, your car, and the shirt off of your back, especially when facing a deep pockets opposing party such as Cosby.
the court system is to some degree familiar with the predicament of young women who have for whatever reasons not had the foresight to take rape kit evidence, etc. the court juries rely on circumstantial evidence in those cases. i get the impression that direct evidence is not strictly needed to convict or find liable. in civil court, a preponderance of circumstantial evidence will do. there are two types of courts and two types of evidence. and sometimes there are situations (not just limited to rape) in which direct evidence was for whatever reason not gathered. people on fr perhaps need to realize how the courts work. they seem to tend to conflate civil with criminal courts, and direct evidence with circumstantial evidence. it makes for very bombastic sweeping and overly simplified arguments, but not reasonable arguments.
IMHO, IANAL