My view of these women is that if they wanted to be believed they should have had the evidence taken while it was there to be had. Bill Cosby was not Dr Huxtable at that time; he was a comedian friend of Hugh Hefner. Combine testimony from the people giving the alleged “knowing looks” with a blue stained dress and the jerk would be off the streets rather than out raping more women.
Why did NOT ONE of those 20+ women do that?
I’ll ask ya something else too. The earliest report was in 2000 from a starlet who wanted Cosby to help make her famous. Her claim to the police was that Cosby didn’t drug her and quit as soon as she told him to stop trying for first base. Yet decades before, he supposedly had this big “turn on” with drugging women and then doing non-evidence-producing sexual activity with them (having them touch him, digital penetration of them, etc Did any of them actually claim he had just plain old coitus, complete with semen?). What serial rapist DE-escalates over time? If it took raping a woman to turn on Cosby in 1965 then why are the first public allegations, decades later, basically that he was an average college-type guy who simply tried for first base and then stopped when resisted?
The claim of Cosby being this horrible monster only emerged in 2005, 6 months after he angered the NAACP and leftists by making the comments that this “comedian” referenced in his opening non-comedic salvo at Cosby a little over a month ago. So, what? He was a terrible monster over all these decades, brutalizing everybody in Hollywood, and then in 2000 he tamed down into trying first base and then stopping when told? The chronology just doesn’t make sense.
And what Cosby’s attorney said is true, if Huth tried to sell her story for money in 2005: She perjured herself by claiming she only just now discovered that she had been harmed. Do you believe that these delicate flowers should now have license to commit perjury because of the police reports they chose not to file when their allegations could have been proven or disproven by actual forensic evidence? If these women will lie to get their case into a civil court, why should we believe they’re not REALLLY lying to get a case into the civil court?
LOL, at least he has one cult worshiper, you are truly dedicated to the man.
It’s fun watching you rant and rage for the guy.
So it took the "anti-Bill conspiracy" a whole SIX MONTHS to get their act together and organize the campaign against him? Probably innumerable meetings and sub-committees to decide upon the right strategy?
Everyone agrees that the MSM stopped protecting Cosby, but to claim that a conspiracy involving 20+ women is afoot is grasping at straws.
One allegation? Absolutely the accused is innocent until guilty. Two or three: yes, he deserves his day in court, yada yada. But there comes a point when the accusations begin to pile on, and 20+ is a huge red flag.
I repeat my question: what is your spiritual discernment telling you about Cosby? Can you seriously claim that in your heart of hearts you believe the man is innocent?