Based on what?
Bill Cosby admitted in 2005 that he got quaaludes with the intent of giving them to young women
- Thread starter Booker T Garvey
- Start date
Based on what?
A lot of the women came forward a long time ago. Some of the women have receipts of sharing their story with friends/relatives/coworkers/bosses in the 1980s or 1990s, two of them reported their cases to District Attorneys more than a decade ago, I think a dozen testified in a deposition ten years ago.
Universally they were pretty much told they had no chance and would only be hurting themselves.
The problem is the same problem there always is in rape cases against wealthy men. Date rape wasn't even a thing until recently (a lot of these rapes happened before the term "date rape" was even used in courts), since they were drugged their accounts of what happened are difficult, it's difficult to prove anything because Cosby is admitting he gave the drugs and admitting he had sex (so what physical evidence can you give?), the lawyers he can afford are WAY better than the lawyers you can afford, and they're going to destroy your life and your reputation to save his ass.
You watch the same story every time, even with obvious ones like R. Kelly that everyone knows is guilty as hell.
Devilinurear
Veteran
I am curious when you make statements like these is it because you don't know, you can't articulate your reasoning or you like leaving people in suspense like a drama queen.
mastermind
Rest In Power Kobe
you see, he was trying to buy NBC in 1993...
Corny Batman
Caped Crusader
He's free on a technicality and TLR is having a big party.
I have a theory. The TLR incels support guys like him and R. Kelly because they're excited at the prospect of taking some p*ssy. They won't do it themselves but they'll stan a celebrity who does because they see it as a victory in their perceived war against women.
If you're mad at this post, are you an incel? Because if not, I wasn't talking about you.
I have a theory. The TLR incels support guys like him and R. Kelly because they're excited at the prospect of taking some p*ssy. They won't do it themselves but they'll stan a celebrity who does because they see it as a victory in their perceived war against women.
If you're mad at this post, are you an incel? Because if not, I wasn't talking about you.
i wont say all of them are thinking like that but man the past year has told me we got a long way to go because there are a-lot of thick/sick minded individuals and yea they all in TLR celebrating.
i had a half sec of joy seeing a black man buck the system but then i thought about the injustice for everyone effected. and those joyful to see a black man buck the system and some way need to keep it internalized tbh and also lets be real you have to be an EXCEPTIONAL black man to even have a sniff at the opportunity so it really aint nothing to get excited about in 2021
Corny Batman
Caped Crusader
Let's see if TLR bans me for this post:
It’s fukked up that the media refused to report that Cosby had a deal with the prosecutor and his conviction was highly questionable from a legal standpoint.
I have been taking an informal poll and no one in my circle had any knowledge of the deal between Cosby and the prosecutor. The only thing we knew was he paid off the alleged victim.
That’s a damn shame and a major hit on the media’s already precarious position. fukk man, none of us have the time or energy to investigate these stories for ourselves. We have to depend on the media and they let us down yet again.
I have been taking an informal poll and no one in my circle had any knowledge of the deal between Cosby and the prosecutor. The only thing we knew was he paid off the alleged victim.
That’s a damn shame and a major hit on the media’s already precarious position. fukk man, none of us have the time or energy to investigate these stories for ourselves. We have to depend on the media and they let us down yet again.
Um, that shyt was widely reported, I read it in many stories. The question wasn't whether Cosby and the prosecutor had a verbal deal, the question was whether that deal was legal and binding, especially on other prosecutors. This was already discussed widely long before the case, but what the pennsylvania D.A. decided ended up different than what the pennsylvania supreme court decided, which happens and is literally the reason to have a supreme court.
People gotta actually read news stories if they want to know the news. If they only read headlines or only watch the TV they're only going to get the most superficial summaries. They want the media to pick and choose and highlight the details they think are important, but then they get upset if the media picks and chooses certain details. Just accept that you gotta read the in-depth stories if you want the whole story.
I don’t know a single person who knew about it and I’m a lawyer and most of the people I speak with regularly are lawyers. You’re exaggerating. @Robbie3000 had no reason to know about this. There was nothing widely reported about it. You just said the media picks and chooses what it wants to highlight and the inference was that it chose not to highlight this point. In other words, they chose not to widely report this fact. The most commonly accepted understanding of widely reported is that it’s an integral part of the story that is spread to the masses. If everyone was surprised about it, including a large percentage of the media - then no it wasn’t. It might have been mentioned in a lot of what you read as a caveat but it was by no means widely reported. There’s no reason to start being all pedantic and telling people to go read articles. Anyone with google can go search the articles from 2018 when he was sentenced from CNN, BBC, Huffingtonpsot, etc., and none of them mention this fact.
It was widely reported at the time. It wasn't "highlighted" in terms of being in the lead because the prosecutors weren't deeming it binding and because Cosby's lawyers weren't driving home the point in Cosby's defense.
In this age the "integral part of the story that is spread to the masses" is so superficial as to hardly be meaningful. Something is "widely reported" when most news outlets have mentioned it at some time. All the major outlets mentioned the deal and the fact that the previous prosecutor considered it binding but the current prosecutor did not. I can't help it that people today don't even want to read all the news from any single outlet and can only be trusted to read a few headlines or watch some tv.
I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't mentioned that much in the articles where he was sentenced because it would have been a non-issue at that point - by the time he was sentenced they wouldn't be talking about prosecutorial decisions around bringing charges anymore. It was mentioned in the articles where he was charged and while he was being tried. Do you want receipts?
Corny Batman
Caped Crusader
Cosby is a scumbag, but the agreement was widely reported before the first trial.
Will 'deal' with prosecutor sink Cosby case? - CNN
Bill Cosby case: Judge says prosecution can go forward - CNN
NPR Cookie Consent and Choices
Former DA says he believes Bill Cosby can't be prosecuted
Will 'deal' with prosecutor sink Cosby case? - CNN
Bill Cosby case: Judge says prosecution can go forward - CNN
NPR Cookie Consent and Choices
Former DA says he believes Bill Cosby can't be prosecuted
Jesus H. Christ
I died for your sins
Facts. The guy is a piece of shyt but it is what it is, as far as legal terms, deals., etc
Everyone is too busy outrage over Cosby's actions (as they should
). However, why is the media & Twitter verse not focused on why Cosby got this deal in first place? Why does the legal system allow shady people to get off this easy? In particular those with paper and power.