Posted on 12/15/2014 3:03:08 PM PST by BunnySlippers
Camille didn't attack her husband's accusers, but said the media has been way to quick to pass judgment, saying, "A different man has been portrayed in the media over the last two months. It is the portrait of a man I do not know."
She then zeros in on the accusers saying, "It is also the portrait painted by individuals and organizations whom many in the media have given a pass."
Read more: http://www.tmz.com#ixzz3M0hqC4Jo
(Excerpt) Read more at tmz.com ...
To Eliminate the Stigma of Being Raped
March 4, 2004
http://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/story?id=132391&page=1#.T_C9N44gsSo
Bridget Kelly, 26, was kidnapped by a stranger, robbed, raped, shot repeatedly and left for dead. When she learned the rape was considered too shameful to mention in media accounts, she wanted to tell her whole story. So she enlisted the help of a newspaper columnist — her own father.
[...]
As he stood at her bedside, he told his daughter the man who had raped and shot her had been caught. Her attacker had come back to the scene to show friends what he had done. Police saw him in her stolen car and pursued him.
And Michael told Bridget his paper would cover the story of the attack. She wrote in his notebook, “Say rape?” Kelly said no. “The policy of our paper, and most organizations, was not to link the name of a victim with rape,” he told Gibson.
But that policy made no sense to Bridget, who, when she could talk, urged her dad to help change it. “I said, ‘Well, why is it more shameful to be a rape victim than a gunshot victim?’ “ she asked.
“At that time I was just thinking, ‘That’s kind of a significant detail to leave out!’ “ Bridget said. “I didn’t get why they wouldn’t report that. If you’re going to tell this story, tell the whole story.”
An Outpouring of Emotion
Bridget thought the greater stigma would be to have her name withheld — as if there were something to be ashamed of. So Michael Kelly set out to write Bridget’s “whole story.”
In his first columns about his daughter, his editors wouldn’t let him mention the rape, but after a month of discussion, they relented. “Now you don’t have to read between the lines and wonder,” he wrote. “My daughter was raped.”
Once those words appeared in print — once the story was in wide circulation — there was an outpouring of reaction.
“So many women who had survived rape then came forward,” said Michael. “It was almost as if they’d been waiting for someone to give them the OK to talk about it.”
[...]
[note: from other reports, the media still additionally self-censored their descriptions of the suspect and later convicted rapist in regards to his race, which is black]
I suppose you think Jerry Sandusky was framed too. He was convicted on many counts without a shred of evidence other than the testimony of the victims. Cosby’s situation is exactly like Sandusky’s in many ways. Go ahead and defend Jerry Sandusky here. Go ahead and call all of his victims liars and gold diggers. Say you would be perfectly fine with him inviting your adolescent family members over to his basement for sleepovers.
I hope they cash in on it big time. I hope they all pile on in the most aggressive way possible. I want to hear Cosby’s version more than anything here.
By the way, if you were in their shoes you’d be doing the same thing too.
I am not completely familiar with the Sandusky case, but I know there was at least one independent witness who saw him molesting a boy in the shower, and I 100% believe he was guilty.
Also, the witnesses against Sandusky testified under OATH and under CROSS EXAMINATION in a court of law.
Cosby’s accusers have only made their claims in the media, and almost zero scrutiny has been given to their claims.
Don’t get me wrong, it is totally possible that some or all of the allegations are true and Cosby is a monster. If and when that is PROVEN, I will celebrate when they slam the door of his prison cell shut behind him. Until then, these are only unproven claims.
I guess you believe Darren Wilson shot Mike Brown in cold blood, in the back, with his hands up, right? After all, multiple people made that claim, just like the in the accusations against Cosby.
>>>Not all these women are liberals. your argument fails and frankly, I get tired of your assumption that women who state they are raped are liars. You contribute to the problem you sad pathetic excuse for a man.<<<
a) Which conservative women have accused Cosby?
b) I don’t believe that all women who claim rape are liars. The vast majority are NOT liars. What I know is that is becoming increasingly common for women (and people in general) to make false claims for profit, publicity, revenge and other motives. It is the women who DO lie who “contribute to the problem” not honest men and women who acknowledge that such false accusers exist, instead of lynching every man on a mere accusation. You would have had the Duke lacrosse players in prison.
c) I didn’t say that any of these women are lying. I am saying that we don’t know if any or all of them are telling the truth as none have presented any corroborating evidence.
d) It is ironic that my response was in defense of a WOMAN (Camille Cosby) who is being accused of either being totally clueless or complicate in a string of rapes. Perhaps she is, but we don’t know either way at this point.
e) If and when these women put their hands on Bibles and swear under oath and are cross examined and stand up to it I will give their stories far more credibility. At this point they are totally unsubstantiated claims, and while I would not trust Cosby with my daughters or go into business with him right now, I don’t think it is fair to trash him...yet.
None of us “know” Bill Cosby. We know his work and that is all we know.
Some men, perhaps not a few, that defend Cosby are driven by their own compromised history. If Cosby is condemned, they may see themselves condemned as well. So be it. Let the light shine now where there is still hope of mercy, or hide in the darkness which will be judged without remedy.
Without a paddle
Yes, of course - I’d be lying to the press to slander a great entertainer and giving vent to greed by trying to steal money to which I’m not entitled.
By all means.
Of course you’re not familiar with the Sandusky case and I can see why you don’t want to be.
There was NO EVIDENCE provided by some of the victims other than their testimony. NONE. ZILCH. Even under cross-examination some of them admitted to initially denying what happened and some even wrote letters to Sandusky telling him he was like family. I suppose you would call them a liar for doing that.
Some of Cosby’s victims have already testified under oath in the one case he settled, too.
And none of the boys in the Sandusky had a taped confession or positive tests for drugs or alcohol that Sandusky gave them or DNA or fingerprints that you require to believe them.
Your standards seem to be different towards the women.
>>>And none of the boys in the Sandusky had a taped confession or positive tests for drugs or alcohol that Sandusky gave them or DNA or fingerprints that you require to believe them.
Your standards seem to be different towards the women.<<<
Wrong! As I already mentioned, Sandusky’s accusers (who I can confidently refer to as VICTIMS), went to the police who investigated their claims and found the credible. They again told their stories to the District Attorney, who believed them and presented the case to a Grand Jury. The Grand Jury also found those claims to be credible and indicted Sandusky.
The case was put to trial, where 8 victims testified, under oath, that he sexually abused them. The witnesses were cross examined by the defense.
After hearing the evidence, a jury of his peers UNANIMOUSLY found him GUILTY, beyond of reasonable doubt on 45 of the 48 charges against him.
THAT is the process by which we judge people to be rapists (or criminals in general). Claims made in the media, not under oath, with no cross examination (and little if any professional skepticism by the media) do not hold anywhere near the weight of the charges that stood up to the rigors of the judicial process.
I could go on ABC News, the View or MSNBC and falsely claim “Joesette Dupree drugged and sexually assaulted me!” Can you prove you didn’t?
Is it the responsibility of fair minded people to condemn you on my word alone, or to keep an open mind and wait for evidence of guilt or innocence?
“The first one to plead his cause seems right,
Until his neighbor comes and examines him.” - Proverbs 18:17
Again, Cosby could very well be guilty as sin, and if he is, he should rot in prison. I have just not seen evidence to make a determination either way, and I am not in the habit of condemning people with sufficient evidence.
According to God’s word it is the wicked, not the righteous who are quick to believe every accusation.
“An evildoer gives heed to false lips;
A liar listens eagerly to a spiteful tongue.” - Proverbs 17:4
Kinky!
bill cosby’s daughter evin cosby releases statement (in support of her father)
http://www.accesshollywood.com/bill-cosbys-daughter-evin-releases-statement-exclusive_article_101869
“THAT is the process by which we judge people to be criminals...”
Not always. Just as you think there are flaws in the women’s stories, there are flaws in this process, too. It’s not perfect. This process has convicted innocent people and not convicted guilty people. Go ahead and tell me OJ Simpson didn’t kill those 2 people.
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.