AFN: Judge Shred
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wanted to change his doohicky.
Member of The Bluetista Buyers Club
Posts: 18,221
|
Post by AFN: Judge Shred on Nov 23, 2014 3:42:54 GMT -5
He has been making quite a comeback lately. He had a few tours, a few specials, and his new sitcom on the way. So, it'd be the perfect time actually. But the one-two punch of the Hannibal Buress joke and the meme thing is really what opened it up. It's not really that 12 or so women just up and started accusing Cosby of rape. The discussion started without them and then they piled on. So I wouldn't say it's a calculated thing. That's still not to say Cosby's guilty but it is really tough to give him the benefit of the doubt right now. That wasn't the question I was answering. Though, it was "why would there be false accusations now", not "how did this all start".
|
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,126
Member is Online
|
Post by Mozenrath on Nov 23, 2014 3:46:36 GMT -5
It's worth noting that while people keep going to "innocent until proven guilty", we're not a judge, we're not a jury, we're not an executioner. People are under zero obligation to obtain a conviction to think "I don't trust that guy". It's also worth noting that, by that standard, the accusers are also worth the benefit of the doubt, or else you're assuming they, themselves, are guilty of a crime. It doesn't really work that way out of a courtroom.
I am not saying "You should just assume", but when you hear the accusations, you have a right to feel one way or another about it.
|
|
|
Post by Some Guy on Nov 23, 2014 3:59:07 GMT -5
I really question the validity of all the rapes occurring more than 20 years ago. Sorry, first person came out to write her memoirs, and several of these other allegations are from people who would like to be part of the pile (see Janice Dickinson). If they are true, then something should be done. But I find it very suspicious that these allegations are being done with cases where nothing can really be done other than who you believe and when money is involved, you always sadly have to be suspicious. Except that nobody is bringing it to a civil court and there is absolutely nothing to be done. The reason so many are likely coming out now is that they finally feel comfortable doing so, and even still people are victim blaming and so forth despite the overwhelming amount of women coming out against him. Hell, Michelle Hurd came out today and said he inappropriately touched her/she knew he drugged and sexually assaulted a female actress the night before shooting, and she never says shit to anyone. And honestly, look at the fact that NO ONE is coming out to defend him. There are a ton of comedians who have been chastised by him (Eddie Murphy for one) that probably would never bother to defend him. There was the story about him making a nice ND player cry for having a 2.5 GPA in college. Kenan called him a pervert 4 years ago before this became a story. So forth...it's pretty goddamn clear he has been doing this for a long, long time and I have absolutely no reason not to believe it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2014 4:04:49 GMT -5
You got no idea where i'm gonna stick this pudding pop
|
|
|
Post by SsnakeBite, the No1 Frenchman on Nov 23, 2014 6:18:13 GMT -5
Is there any actual evidence yet or are people still seriously going by the "he's been accused therefore he's guilty" anti-logic? Don't get me wrong, of course there should be an investigation, but I wish people wouldn't, you know, call someone a rapist without any actual proof. You know, due process, fair trial, innocent until proven guilty, all that stuff that shows we've evolved at least a teensy bit since witch-burnings? It's worth noting that while people keep going to "innocent until proven guilty", we're not a judge, we're not a jury, we're not an executioner. People are under zero obligation to obtain a conviction to think "I don't trust that guy". It's also worth noting that, by that standard, the accusers are also worth the benefit of the doubt, or else you're assuming they, themselves, are guilty of a crime. It doesn't really work that way out of a courtroom. I am not saying "You should just assume", but when you hear the accusations, you have a right to feel one way or another about it. And you also have the right to tell people to not assume things and maybe, you know, wait for proof before joyfully destroying someone's reputation? And no-one asking people to give the accused the benefit of the doubt is denying the accusers their benefit of the doubt. Those already acting like he's definitely guilty, accusing him without proof, on the other hand, are very much denying the accused their right to the benefit of the doubt. You'd think by now people would have realized that, but then again even today I see people claim that Jerry Lawler is a pedo because he was accused once, except the accuser ended up admitting she had lied, and people are also still making jokes about Michael Jackson being a pedo even though not only was he never proven guilty, even a cursory look at the case would show that the fact it even went to trial was a farce. And then over here there was the infamous Outreau trial where half a dozen innocent people were wrongly convicted of sexual abuse against children and spent several years in jail, one of them committing suicide, before they could get a retrial. So no, I don't think it's okay to accuse someone without evidence.
|
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,126
Member is Online
|
Post by Mozenrath on Nov 23, 2014 6:37:53 GMT -5
Is there any actual evidence yet or are people still seriously going by the "he's been accused therefore he's guilty" anti-logic? Don't get me wrong, of course there should be an investigation, but I wish people wouldn't, you know, call someone a rapist without any actual proof. You know, due process, fair trial, innocent until proven guilty, all that stuff that shows we've evolved at least a teensy bit since witch-burnings? It's worth noting that while people keep going to "innocent until proven guilty", we're not a judge, we're not a jury, we're not an executioner. People are under zero obligation to obtain a conviction to think "I don't trust that guy". It's also worth noting that, by that standard, the accusers are also worth the benefit of the doubt, or else you're assuming they, themselves, are guilty of a crime. It doesn't really work that way out of a courtroom. I am not saying "You should just assume", but when you hear the accusations, you have a right to feel one way or another about it. And you also have the right to tell people to not assume things and maybe, you know, wait for proof before joyfully destroying someone's reputation? And no-one asking people to give the accused the benefit of the doubt is denying the accusers their benefit of the doubt. Those already acting like he's definitely guilty, accusing him without proof, on the other hand, are very much denying the accused their right to the benefit of the doubt. You'd think by now people would have realized that, but then again even today I see people claim that Jerry Lawler is a pedo because he was accused once, except the accuser ended up admitting she had lied, and people are also still making jokes about Michael Jackson being a pedo even though not only was he never proven guilty, even a cursory look at the case would show that the fact it even went to trial was a farce. And then over here there was the infamous Outreau trial where half a dozen innocent people were wrongly convicted of sexual abuse against children and spent several years in jail, one of them committing suicide, before they could get a retrial. So no, I don't think it's okay to accuse someone without evidence. We didn't accuse him. Only 20+ women accused him of rape or impropriety, including at least one person who wasn't a no-name, with a LOT to stand to lose if they were full of shot. You're right, he isn't assuredly guilty, but you are fighting a losing battle if you think that people won't be suspicious of him. And as for joyfully destroying his life, what has anyone done, outside of his accusers? They made meme pictures, and passed along his in-hindsight extremely creepy Spanish Fly bit. That's frankly less abuse than the Kardashians get, almost. Whether people made those pictures or not, I doubt he wouldn't have lost some of the deals he's lost lately, after Hannibal Buress brought it back to public attention, and more accusers came forward. Do you honestly think Netflix and NBC would have gone forward with it, anyway, if it wasn't for those meddling image macros?
|
|
|
Post by Andrew is Good on Nov 23, 2014 8:05:23 GMT -5
So I read a lot about rape victims and such and how rape is a difficult crime to convict on. Aside from the hurtle every accuser goes through with the burden of proof (which is a good thing), they have extra ones like being accused of trying to get attention, some even brought up here in this thread where people talk about how they tried to be famous and didn't make it, so now's the time to cash in. On top of saying they asked for it, being shamed and not to come forward, thinking people won't believe you, which is the reason I'm thinking more people are coming forward because it's adding up now.
Rape isn't really taken seriously and that's another big issue. Is it possible that someone lied here and people can make false accusations? Yeah, people make false accusations with all sorts of crimes. With rape though, the victim has a harder time being believed. So like, if everyone is lying except for one person, that still makes him a rapist.
|
|
|
Post by Rolent Tex on Nov 23, 2014 8:48:45 GMT -5
What hurts my head is all these people saying its suspicious that some of these women waited so long to come forward. Look at the women involved. Aspiring actress. Playboy Bunny. Aspiring model/actress. Want your career to be torpedoed before it begins? Go ahead...say something. That's why it took so long. I could give a damn if it's true or not but on the other end of the spectrum their careers may have never amounted to s**t or they pissed it all away on drugs and booze and 30 to 40 years later their social security has run out and they need cash. Social security huh? I'm too lazy to look up the ages of all the accusers but I'm pretty sure the only person that would qualify for it is old man Cosby himself.
|
|
|
Post by Baldobomb-22-OH-MAN!!! on Nov 23, 2014 8:51:24 GMT -5
my last day at work before my vacation started I told my boss we should do a Cliff Huxtable Sweater day. I hadn't heard what happened when I said that, he just gave me this look. now I know why and I feel really shitty about it. this must be how British people felt when it turned out Jimmy Saville was a pedophile.
that said, I firmly believe it's wrong to convict someone based on popular consensus alone. this kind of thing can ruin an innocent person's life.
|
|
The Unconquered Sun
King Koopa
He has no pants! What a heathen!
Lord of Storms and Kittens!
Posts: 11,548
|
Post by The Unconquered Sun on Nov 23, 2014 9:32:08 GMT -5
I'll say 5 pages till this needs to be locked up. ...just like Bill.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2014 9:32:56 GMT -5
I'll say 5 pages till this needs to be locked up. ...just like Bill. It's been pretty civil so far... so I'd say maybe 8
|
|
|
Post by Tiger Millionaire on Nov 23, 2014 9:36:13 GMT -5
Must be one hell of a setup job going on.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Nov 23, 2014 9:41:55 GMT -5
Yeah, I think it's more likely Cosby did that shit. It's much more likely than thinking over a dozen women are in on some conspiracy to torpedo his image in the public eye. I definitely agree there as well.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Nov 23, 2014 9:44:31 GMT -5
It's worth noting that while people keep going to "innocent until proven guilty", we're not a judge, we're not a jury, we're not an executioner. People are under zero obligation to obtain a conviction to think "I don't trust that guy". It's also worth noting that, by that standard, the accusers are also worth the benefit of the doubt, or else you're assuming they, themselves, are guilty of a crime. It doesn't really work that way out of a courtroom. I am not saying "You should just assume", but when you hear the accusations, you have a right to feel one way or another about it. Absolutely; I personally was just saying that 'a buncha people are saying the same thing' doesn't a hundred percent make something true. Is it probable, even likely? As I mentioned before, the more that comes out, the worse it looks. I agree there.
|
|
mattperiolat
King Koopa
Thank you, Brodie... for everything.
Posts: 11,445
|
Post by mattperiolat on Nov 23, 2014 10:07:42 GMT -5
This is, beyond doubt, the single hardest thing for me to get my head around.
My ethics and own abuse experience dictate I give victims the benefit of the doubt. I need evidence to be convinced beyond that doubt however. Truth is I do not know which side to come down on yet. I am, for sure, listening.
As for Cosby, that is what makes this so hard. It is hard to picture an American lexicon without him, forget the Black American lexicon. I Spy, Fat Albert, The Cosby Show just skim the surface. To think that he could have been abusing people during this period and beyond it is not just chilling, it strains believability.
These are all just gut reactions. I'm smart enough to know that this is a time to listen and process. So, beyond this, I will maintain silence until I am off the fence.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2014 11:00:06 GMT -5
But the one-two punch of the Hannibal Buress joke and the meme thing is really what opened it up. It's not really that 12 or so women just up and started accusing Cosby of rape. The discussion started without them and then they piled on. So I wouldn't say it's a calculated thing. That's still not to say Cosby's guilty but it is really tough to give him the benefit of the doubt right now. That wasn't the question I was answering. Though, it was "why would there be false accusations now", not "how did this all start". I get that, I'm just saying I think the reason they're coming out now are less because of his upcoming special/sitcom and more because the conversation that Hannibal opened up that gave them the confidence to talk about it.
|
|
Juice
El Dandy
Wrong? Oh he can tell ya about being wrong.
I'm the one who raised you from perdition.
Posts: 8,172
|
Post by Juice on Nov 23, 2014 13:12:41 GMT -5
All I can say is that I feel like Michael Jacksons fans must have felt like during all of those accusations. Sucks to think of one of my icons being in a scandal like this. Hope it's a lot of untrue bullshit. But hope floats as well as shit.
|
|
Renslayer
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
every time i come around your city...
Posts: 16,625
Member is Online
|
Post by Renslayer on Nov 23, 2014 13:19:59 GMT -5
Bonet's account has since been deleted The account was a fake. She was never on Twitter
|
|
chazraps
Wade Wilson
Better have my money when I come-a collect!
Posts: 27,989
Member is Online
|
Post by chazraps on Nov 23, 2014 13:32:10 GMT -5
I really question the validity of all the rapes occurring more than 20 years ago. Sorry, first person came out to write her memoirs, and several of these other allegations are from people who would like to be part of the pile (see Janice Dickinson). If they are true, then something should be done. But I find it very suspicious that these allegations are being done with cases where nothing can really be done other than who you believe and when money is involved, you always sadly have to be suspicious. You mean 20 years ago when the public perception of rape was VASTLY different? Do you realize how grizzly of a crime rape is, and how survivors struggle with telling anybody, let alone going public with it? It's not like Cosby allegedly stole her car. It's rape. And this isn't something just coming out now. I'm pretty surprised by this thread how very few of you didn't know about these allegations.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2014 13:32:37 GMT -5
I figured as much
|
|