• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Bill Cosby - Spanish Fly

Axulus

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2003
Messages
4,686
Location
Hallandale, FL
Basic Beliefs
Right leaning skeptic
Takes on a whole new level of creepiness:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAorIG6MZnc[/youtube]
 
Well, apparently he admitted it under oath 10 years ago. So that means he's in the clear... except for the whole doing it part and the defamation of character by accusing others of lying about him... after he admitted to it under oath. Even Lance Armstrong didn't have the gal to do that!
 
This means nothing. A person's sexual history shouldn't be able to be used against them in rape cases. Just because he admitted to giving qualudes to women in order to rape them in a few cases doesn't mean that the other women accusing him of doing the exact same thing over the same period as the incidents he admitted to aren't a bunch of lying feminazi bitches who are trying to defame an innocent man. :mad:
 
This means nothing. A person's sexual history shouldn't be able to be used against them in rape cases. Just because he admitted to giving qualudes to women in order to rape them in a few cases doesn't mean that the other women accusing him of doing the exact same thing over the same period as the incidents he admitted to aren't a bunch of lying feminazi bitches who are trying to defame an innocent man. :mad:

<snip>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I read the unsealed document yesterday. It was a complaint filed by the plaintiff's lawyer which quoted from the transcript of a deposition. It is no where near as damning as the headlines I've seen about it led me to believe. As I understand love in the 1970's: lots of chicks would sex a guy in exchange for some 'ludes and Cosby's few words on this topic in the document seemed to describe such a situation.
 
I read the unsealed document yesterday. It was a complaint filed by the plaintiff's lawyer which quoted from the transcript of a deposition. It is no where near as damning as the headlines I've seen about it led me to believe. As I understand love in the 1970's: lots of chicks would sex a guy in exchange for some 'ludes and Cosby's few words on this topic in the document seemed to describe such a situation.

Well, if this happens commonly and nine women consented to it and one didn't but you just roofied her because it's "the thing to do", you're still a rapist. It's not some kind of mitigating circumstance to how you raped that woman to talk about how lots of other women who weren't her didn't have a problem with it.

The complaintant from the 70s is part of the one out of ten.
 
NPR this morning ran a short piece on this, and repeated the perception that he admitted under oath in 2005 that he bought Quaaludes to secretly incapacitate women in order to rape them. That is just not there in the document I read, if there are others I would very much like to see them.

Furthermore, since the document is not an actual transcript, but a distillation of the plaintiff's attorney's version of the deposition framed by official complaint that Cosby's lawyers were obstructive, I fail to understand why we're even taking them seriously-- as though they represent an in-context admission of guilt.

I have no dog in this fight, to borrow a phrase, but how would a man go about proving that he didn't do what Cosby is being accused of?
The quantity of accusers does not prove any of their allegations. I look forward to the results of the LAPD's investigations, and will withhold my judgement until someone shows some evidence against him.
 
Back
Top Bottom