If You Think Cosby Did It, c00ns Come Here And Defend This (women's Backgrounds)

[Rarebird77]

So I'm reading more of the Constands woman's case. Interesting stuff. .. the deposition is really interesting too.


1. Andrea Constand

Andrea Constand was the director of basketball operations for the women's basketball team at Temple University, Cosby's alma mater, when she says he sexually assaulted her. Constand filed the lawsuit against the then-67-year-old Cosby in 2005, one year after the alleged abuse occurred, according to ABC News. According to the lawsuit, Constand said Cosby tried to mentor her, and she visited him at his Pennsylvania home in January 2004 to discuss career advice. Constand said Cosby gave her "herbal" pills for her anxiety, and then "touched her breasts and vaginal area, rubbed his penis against her hand and digitally penetrated her." Constand eventually settled the case out of court, and Cosby did not admit wrongdoing. A deposition in her case was made public for the first time in July, in which Cosby admitted to giving prescription drugs to women he wanted to have sex with. On December 30, 2015, Constand's allegations led to the first criminal charges against Cosby. He was charged in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, with aggravated indecent sexual assault. Read more about the criminal case here.

Bill Cosby Accusers List: Names, Photos & Stories of His 55 Alleged Victims

 

[Professor Emeritus]

I'm still waiting for ANY of Cosby's defenders to address this exchange:

“Did he know when he gave you those prescriptions that you had no intention of taking them?” a lawyer asked Cosby in the 2005 deposition.

“Yes,” the entertainer replied.

“Did you believe at that time that it was illegal for you to dispense those drugs?”

“Yes,” Cosby answered.

"When you got the Quaaludes, was it in your mind that you were going to use these Quaaludes for young women that you wanted to have sex with?" Troiani asked.

"Yes," Cosby replied.

"Did you ever give any of those young women the Quaaludes without their knowledge?" Troiani asked.

Cosby's attorney objected and told him not to answer the question.

First off, Cosby is just confessing to a bunch of illegal shyt like its nothing.

Second, if the answer to that final question was clearly "no", then why the hell did his attorney immediately object and tell Cosby not to answer it?



Bill Cosby was getting Quaaludes over and over for 30+ years (established fact), illegally from a gynecologist (established fact), when he didn't intend them for his own use (established fact), and then gave them repeatedly to a large variety of different women (established fact).

And his attorney refused to let him answer a question about whether he was giving it to women without their knowledge.

There are over 50 witnesses testifying that Cosby took advantage of them, his own assistant has testified that Cosby was doing shady shyt with women (he had to guard the door so the woman didn't try to get out), Cosby has 30 years of reciepts for sedatives that he never took himself, and his own testimony in the civil case basically indicted himself.

Even the doctor that was giving the Quaaludes to Cosby almost beat the shyt out of him for how he took advantage of one of the doctor's female friends:

“In her presence, Amar confronted Cosby, almost coming to blows,” the attorney recounts. “He warned Cosby never to do anything like that again to Green.”

Once again, an exchange that I have never, ever heard any Cosby defender address.

You have two options.

Either Bill Cosby really liked fukking women who were incapacitated with Quaaludes.


Or Bill Cosby had the craziest stream of luck meeting dozens of women from the 1960s to the 2000s who just happened to like taking Quaaludes before sex, only they just happened not to have any on their own. Good thing he kept a supply at hand for just such an occasion!

Which of those two options is it?


And the fact that they're stooping to trying to trash the witnesses is proof of how bad they have it. Typical White priviledge move that you see in every rape or murder case where a man in power is involved - Michael Brown, Daniel Holtzclaw, etc. - you bring up the criminal record and shady past of the victims and imply that even if they did anything, they probably deserved it. Someone even brought up that one woman has nudes - as if anyone with nudes out is giving all men of the world permission to have sex with her on sight.

If this was anyone with less power than Cosby, he'd be in the slammer. How the hell do you expect to get a date rape case with more evidence than this?

 

[Mr swag]

Man, you going really hard for Cosby, lol! Was he you tv father since you didn't have one at home. Christ why are you so attached to defending him? At this point it's pathetic.

I have never watch one Cosby show. How are you deflecting and name calling?

 

[yungblkboy8264]

Liquor's sole purpose wasn't to knock someone out. My point was there were drugs used to incapacitate someone and they was commonplace in the '70s; certainly weren't vilified like they are now. Coke spoons were fashion accessories

You're talking about law as if everyone followed down to the letter; as if the nightlife didn't revolve around bucking that system. This is how people acted back then, for better and worse. Bill himself glorified it in his standup because that was life then. It was ACCEPTABLE, no social stigma whatsoever. I don't condone it, but to look at '70s Bill Cosby with 2015 lenses is hypocritical at best and extremely naive at worst. Taboo has changed, people see now how stupid it is to fukk on Quaaludes or Spanish Fly, which wasn't legal to begin with but... :shrug: the shyt STILL happened regardless of what the LAW was in most states.

That is my point.

And your point made no sense at all. With that same logic, condemning slavery is hypocritical and naive because "that was life back then". Have a seat, rape apologist/woman hater.

 

[yungblkboy8264]

I'm still waiting for ANY of Cosby's defenders to address this exchange:



First off, Cosby is just confessing to a bunch of illegal shyt like its nothing.

Second, if the answer to that final question was clearly "no", then why the hell did his attorney immediately object and tell Cosby not to answer it?



Bill Cosby was getting Quaaludes over and over for 30+ years (established fact), illegally from a gynecologist (established fact), when he didn't intend them for his own use (established fact), and then gave them repeatedly to a large variety of different women (established fact).

And his attorney refused to let him answer a question about whether he was giving it to women without their knowledge.

There are over 50 witnesses testifying that Cosby took advantage of them, his own assistant has testified that Cosby was doing shady shyt with women (he had to guard the door so the woman didn't try to get out), Cosby has 30 years of reciepts for sedatives that he never took himself, and his own testimony in the civil case basically indicted himself.

Even the doctor that was giving the Quaaludes to Cosby almost beat the shyt out of him for how he took advantage of one of the doctor's female friends:



Once again, an exchange that I have never, ever heard any Cosby defender address.

You have two options.

Either Bill Cosby really liked fukking women who were incapacitated with Quaaludes.


Or Bill Cosby had the craziest stream of luck meeting dozens of women from the 1960s to the 2000s who just happened to like taking Quaaludes before sex, only they just happened not to have any on their own. Good thing he kept a supply at hand for just such an occasion!

Which of those two options is it?


And the fact that they're stooping to trying to trash the witnesses is proof of how bad they have it. Typical White priviledge move that you see in every rape or murder case where a man in power is involved - Michael Brown, Daniel Holtzclaw, etc. - you bring up the criminal record and shady past of the victims and imply that even if they did anything, they probably deserved it. Someone even brought up that one woman has nudes - as if anyone with nudes out is giving all men of the world permission to have sex with her on sight.

If this was anyone with less power than Cosby, he'd be in the slammer. How the hell do you expect to get a date rape case with more evidence than this?

He admitted to all that shyt because back in the 60's and 70's, it was considered the woman's fault for "getting herself raped". WIth him being from that era, it causes him to halfway think what he did is ok. Along with the fact that he is a sociopath.

 

[BlackExcellence]

I have never watch one Cosby show. How are you deflecting and name calling?

Deflecting from what? I'm not name calling. You're truly pathetic going this far to defend Cosby.

 

[AquaCityBoy]

And the fact that they're stooping to trying to trash the witnesses is proof of how bad they have it. Typical White priviledge move that you see in every rape or murder case where a man in power is involved - Michael Brown, Daniel Holtzclaw, etc. - you bring up the criminal record and shady past of the victims and imply that even if they did anything, they probably deserved it. Someone even brought up that one woman has nudes - as if anyone with nudes out is giving all men of the world permission to have sex with her on sight.

This needs to be quoted for emphasis. Like I said before, all these attempts to slam these women's characters to defend Cosby is pure white supremacist logic.

Like @No_bammer_weed said, some of these dudes wanna be CACs so bad that they'll say the same type of shyt white people say about us about another group (women).

 

[Mr swag]

Deflecting from what? I'm not name calling. You're truly pathetic going this far to defend Cosby.

 

[Stone Cold]

bump

 

[SATAN]

That's what he gets for PAWGing