Nt

F*cking sick.

guilty is how our system works. Cosby was rich and famous and could have made many enemies over the years.

People are seeing dollar signs, I'm afraid.

how the fuck would YOU know that these 19 women are ALL lying to cash in? do tell.

I'm not saying if he did or didn't but if he did then some of them should've filed charges.

YOU don't have a clue.

Back in the sixties, seventies and eighties, we didn't have words for "date rape" and "sexual harasssment".

It was called "stupid shit that some men do that women have to put up with, because nobody in power will listen to their allegations."

It's still going on: Authorities who refuse to take women seriously who make these allegations and are called crazy or unstable.

Just because something can't be proven "beyond a shadow of a doubt" doesn't mean you aren't personally allowed to use your critical thinking skills. What if you were on a jury, how could you be an effective juror if you had to wait until everyone else thought things through?

http://mobile.philly.com/news/?wss=/philly/news&id=283221941

Wrong standard you're using there.
You might have heard it on a TV crime show.

I know from dealing with jury instructions for most of my adult life that courts always make the distinction between absolute certainty and reasonable doubt.

Broken-down retired court reporter here.
Who happened to go to law school and earn a J.D. at night because she thought it would help her job prospects. (Insert hysterical laugh here.)

Contrary to what is feared with any speculation whatsoever.

Don't worry, DU's not that powerful

stop people from forming opinions on the information out there about this. We don't fucking live in a courtroom.

so I'm inclined to wait and see what happens.

that ain't an open mind. You are forming opinions just as I and others are. don't paint it with a sanctimonious coating.

There are other options beyond "he's evillll!!!!" and "not proven in a court of law so it didn't happen".

If I tell you I was raped, beaten, will you withhold judgement because it was many years ago, there is no proof, no one ever went to court?

There is a range between saying someone is guilty without proof and not guilty until proven in court.

Don't get upset just because I won't say what you want me to we don't all have to agree.

LEGAL system is supposed to work. It has nothing to do with personal opinion.

It's also an illustration of how many allegations have to surface before they're taken seriously when it comes to an actor with a likeable onstage persona.

Some morons still aren't taking it seriously, as some responses to this thread are showing.

I think.

why would Lou Ferrigno's wife go after Bill Cosby, for example?) then we've all been snookered for decades, putting this guy on a pedestal, letting him make millions, well into old age. What a con.

Until then, let's keep giving him standing ovations and regurgitating nauseating dogma about being innocent until proven guilty.

Whatever happened to critical thinking skills and common sense?

[Img][/img]

The Proof Is In The Pudding!

Quaalude.

This is a mountain of evidence, on a jury I would still be looking to give him his full trial, but for conversation I would have to say that this guy looks like he is guilty as sin.

I would listen to all testimony before deciding innocence or guilt; conversely the legal requirements have nothing to do with my opinion.