“This case will move forward,” Judge [Elizabth A.] McHugh told the crowded courtroom. Mr. Cosby, who sat flanked by his lawyers throughout the hearing, stood at the end and said, “Thank you.” The judge wished him luck....ADDED: I wasn't going to say anything about the interaction between this legal development and the current presidential contest, but I see that Glenn Reynolds found an elegant way to present it:
Since the charges were filed, Mr. Cosby’s lawyers have battled to have them thrown out. They argue that a former district attorney promised never to prosecute Mr. Cosby as a way to induce him to testify in a civil suit brought by Ms. Constand in 2005. That suit, in which Mr. Cosby spoke freely in deposition testimony, was settled confidentially in 2006.
MATT DRUDGE FINDS THE ANGLE, as only Matt Drudge can.Why, exactly, does this look like bad news for Hillary? Not because she may know Cosby, but because she's depending on a narrative about Bill Clinton that he merely engaged in "sexual transgressions" and "peccadilloes," and the Cosby trial will be an occasion for scoffing and sneering at the transgressions-and-peccadilloes attitude.
Meanwhile, Donald Trump has already showed his intention to connect the 2 Bills. From last January:
"The whole Cosby thing is a weird deal and he's got himself some big problems, and you'd almost have to ask Bill Clinton that," Trump told [radio host Howie] Carr.
Carr asked Trump what the difference between the two men would be.
"It would be a very interesting question to someday ask him," Trump said. "Certainly he has a lot of strong charges against him, and it's pretty bad stuff."
पोस्ट्स
५२ टिप्पण्या:
The judge wished him luck?
That was 2006. This is today.
See how justice works?
They argue that a former district attorney promised never to prosecute Mr. Cosby as a way to induce him to testify in a civil suit brought by Ms. Constand in 2005.
I'm not a lawyer, so can someone clue me in? What is the legal status of agreements like that? People plea bargain all the time. Are the agreements put in writing like a contract? Once agreed on, are they legally enforceable or do prosecutors adhere to them because if they don't they will lose their credibility and defense lawyers will stop agreeing to them?
These were hundreds of beautiful women who never felt a thing. He made them totally unconscious first before messing around with their beautiful bodies.
Cosby appreciated female beauty but he was too cheap to pay for it.
While Bill Clinton remains at large.
It looks like Cosby cut a deal better than Clinton's friend got for underage girls.
As Cosby's lawyer I would definitely appeal this prosecution as covered. But if there was not a disclosure pre-deal of all of the targeted women he may lose the Appeal. And poor Cosby could not remember their names...maybe their birthmarks and body shapes, but not their names.
Cosby is an old man and so his prosecution is also the punishment.
"What evil lurks in the hearts of men? Only The Shadow knows."
This is awful for all of us for whom Bill Cosby has been a hero through the years.
The guy whose face is partially obscured by the Coz, I think that's Chuck Schumer, which suggests to me that Hillary is just a face in the crowd at some bigwig Bill Cosby performance.
According to the WaPost, 58 women have come forward accusing Bill Cosby of rape since the 1960s..
The stories have a common thread. Young impressionable model/actress meets superstar Cosby; have drinks with him alone; wake-up naked feeling crummy or stoned in Cosby's bed (from drug,Cosby slipped in).
Now, we have some deposition testimony of the Coz, under penalty of perjury:
Q: Can you tell me ... what you recall of the night in which you gave the pills to Andrea?
A: Andrea came to the house. I called her. ... We talked about Temple University. We talked about her position. And then I went upstairs and I got three pills. I brought them down. They are the equivalent of one and a half. The reason why I gave them and offered them to Andrea, which she took after examining them, was because she was talking about stress.
___
Cosby describes a several-minute sexual encounter that followed.
Q: So, you’re not telling us that you verbally asked her for permission?
A: I didn’t say it verbally, I said. The action is my hand on her midriff, which is skin. I’m not lifting any clothing up. This is, I don’t remember fully what it is, but it’s there and I can feel. I got her skin and it’s just above the hand and it’s just above where you can go under the pants.
Q: Then what happens?
A: I don’t hear her say anything. And I don’t feel her say anything. And so I continue and I go into the area that is somewhere between permission and rejection. I am not stopped.
Are all these 58 women gold-digging liars out to make a buck? I doubt it.
The Coz lead a double-life. To the public: sweet, funny, G-rated black comedian, safely welcomed into our homes re television sit-coms.
In private: a sexual predator, who used knock-out drugs on vulnerable star-struck girls to have his way with them.
Will he be convicted for these 10-40 year old crimes? Maybe not. Justice is hard to come by in cases like these. Re-creating past events with no 3rd party witnesses is rough.
But can we convict him in the court of public opinion? I think so. 58 separate accusations all alleging the same pattern and practice cannot be ignored or dismissed as some conspiracy. He acts and looks guilty. He should be held to answer these charges.
"I started out as a child."
I used to buy my Dad Bill Cosby comedy records - for the man who doesn't want anything - and always loved that line.
Sorry. Don't care either way. My enjoyment of his comedy during my youth remains. It was never dependent upon his private life. So fry him if he's guilty, save him if he's not. I just hope they get the decision right. My only suspicion is that he has been targeted for his traditional messages.
Could this have precipitated Cosby's rape accusations?
"I know there are black people who don’t like what I’m saying. They say, “Bill Cosby is too elitist. Bill Cosby is too old and out of touch. He’s a millionaire. How does he know?" I didn't grow up with means. My mother was on what used to be called relief and I spent at least three Christmases with no Christmas tree and I wouldn’t let any of my friends in my house because they would see we had no presents. I had to go outside and lie and tell people about imaginary gifts and hope and pray no one was evil enough to say, months later, ‘OK man, where are all the toys you said you had?”
My critics were brought up with parents who spent time with them. Somebody spent time with them. That’s why they graduated from high school and college and graduate school. And for some reason they don’t want to see this happen for other people. They say, “Bill’s airing the dirty laundry.” Dirty Laundry? Your children aren’t dirty laundry, but they are going to jail. Let’s see what happens if we continue to keep quiet."
http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/race/2008/06/four-years-ago.html
@Dreams - I don't think it caused false allegations - but it probably ended the Hollywood Omerta which was suppressing or diverting them.
perhaps but hollywood has protected polanski, (melissa gilbert seems to have foundered on that) bryan singer, a host of others, with little upshot. we shall see the truth of the allegations,
"@Dreams - I don't think it caused false allegations - but it probably ended the Hollywood Omerta which was suppressing or diverting them."
Yeah, I agree.
Cosby drugged Hillary once, but only so he could slip away.
Standup comedian Bill Burress brought down Cosby out of envy for his popularity, particularly among whites, and for daring to tell Blacks to shape up.
This is peanuts next to taking 100 mil from the Lundin Group, who has been wiping out villages all over Africa to get at minerals.
What did Lundin Group get for it's 100 mil? Delay and whitewash of it's humanitarian abuses by the Clinton's state department.
Good work if you can get it.
What's up with the Trump claim that something was "fishy" in the suicide of Vince Foster?
Why would anyone consider Trump as any sort of voice of wisdom on Bill Clinton's scandals, when Trump is the guy who claimed that something very big would be coming out of his (Trump's) investigation of Barack Obama's birth certificate? How many times does a guy get a pass after repeatedly making wildly inaccurate allegations?
Excellent point about omerta.
How many more secret lives are there.
The claims by Elijah Wood for instance, imply a conspiracy on an enormous scale.
fwiw, vince foster was perhaps the most decent fellow from the arkansas circle, yet he perished out of guilt, and the whole camarilla carried on, neera tanden currently with the center for american progress got her start in the coverup,
Good for you Narciso!
Camarilla is a wonderful term that deserves to be added to English.
How many times does a guy get a pass after repeatedly making wildly inaccurate allegations?
At least as many times as the Republican Establishment fooled the Republican base with "Trust us, we'll do everything we promise next time".
By the way Chuckles...it is hard to believe someone is a republican when they constantly attack Republicans and constantly defend Democrats.
You are clearly a Moby.
Char Char Binks said Standup comedian Bill Burress brought down Cosby out of envy for his popularity, particularly among whites, and for daring to tell Blacks to shape up.
You're confusing two popular stand-ups. Hannibal Burress, a black comic from Chicago (with a partially Mitch Hedberg-inspired delivery) is the stand-up who told the Cosby joke that seemed to get this current media storm swirling.
Bill Burr is a popular white comic from Boston.
"Excellent point about omerta.
How many more secret lives are there.
The claims by Elijah Wood for instance, imply a conspiracy on an enormous scale."
They had better not venture off the reservation, the liberal reservation.
The claims by Elijah Wood for instance, imply a conspiracy on an enormous scale."
I don't believe these claims, which Wood has already recanted. There's nothing to stop people from identifying those responsible now that the issue's been raised. If there are that many victims someone would come forward. It's revealing all the allegations claim it happened to a friend.
I wasn't going to say anything about the interaction between this legal development and the current presidential contest,
I remember when Bill called it old news like two weeks after it came up, and I remember the NYT and the rest of the media falling over themselves to reinforce it. Of course that was old news, not like the Cosby allegations.
No one believed the Cosby allegations for years. Time passed, public affection for Cosby waned, our societal understanding of the prevalence of sexual assault shifted. Now the allegations are more than plausible. Will the same shift happen to Bill Clinton? Is society ready to believe the accusers? That is the link.
thanks well it's not just three parties so it's not a troika, or a triumvirate,
Gahrie said...
By the way Chuckles...it is hard to believe someone is a republican when they constantly attack Republicans and constantly defend Democrats.
You are clearly a Moby.
It was a very long time ago, that I got sick of trying to stake out serious positions for conservatives and Republicans, only to face jokes about the unserious charges that Obama was a Muslim born in Kenya. Or something.
My stock answer always was; Name a Republican leader who ever signed onto that nonsense. No serious Republican ever lent his name to that bullshit. And we could, with real credibility, turn to issues of the budget and the federal judiciary and voting law -- all the areas where we have to be cleaner than clean to advance our arguments in the face of claims that Republicans are racists -- and be able to be taken seriously. Because we weren't those unhinged nutballs claiming that there must be something fishy about Barack Obama's birth certificate.
Trump -- and whatever party he purports to represent -- can't stake out that high ground like we can. Because Trump was one of the most laughable of all the Birthers.
And now he's a Truther. And Vaxxer!
I am having trouble, Gahrie, gauging just how stupid you are. Are you a Birther? A Truther? A Vaxxer? Or are you someone who understands that those are all silly theories, but you tolerate them in Trump, for reasons that perhaps you alone can articulate?
And now, as a personal "fuck you" to you, let me repeat that I am not a Democrat, I've never been a Democrat and there are no Democrats who I plan to vote for. There are no Democrats whom I support. There's never been a time in the history of the Althouse blog, when I have ever advocated a single Democrat or pro-Democrat policy. I won't support Hillary Clinton and won't vote for her.
I have been consistently critical of Trump alone, at a personal level. That is all.
Cosby appreciated female beauty but he was too cheap to pay for it.
Nah. Some of the girls/women he was helping (career-wise and monetarily) admitted that having sex with him was on the table. What they didn't agree to, what they didn't expect was to be drugged and raped. Some people get off more on the absence of consent than the sex act itself. Cosby is one of them.
Chuck, have you read this article from Dennis Prager?
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/05/24/a_response_to_my_conservative_nevertrump_friends_130652.html
I'm not going to defend Cosby. I'm going to condemn the manner in which he's been brought to trial. Cosby, like all of us, has a right to refuse to offer testimony that can be used to incriminate him. That right does not exist in the context of a purely civil matter. In the civil case against Cosby, he refused to testify based on the reasonable belief his testimony could be used against him in a future criminal matter. It was only after he was assured that he would not be prosecuted that he agree to testify in the civil case.
Now, it appears the state is using Cosby's testimony against him. It's being used against him even if his words never are presented to a jury because of the publication of his testimony that the state was able to obtain additional evidence of Cosby's guilt. But for his testimony in the civil case there would be no criminal case.
The state has a sacred duty to protect Cosby's constitutional right against self-incrimination -- a duty that's higher than prosecuting even the most serious criminal offense. The state induced Cosby's testimony by promising criminal immunity. It should stay a mile away from violating that promise.
Chuck: "It was a very long time ago, that I got sick of trying to stake out serious positions for conservatives and Republicans, only to face jokes about the unserious charges that Obama was a Muslim born in Kenya. Or something."
100% moby.
Possibly 101%.
Why?
Because that's what the dems are willing to pay.
I am having trouble, Gahrie, gauging just how stupid you are. Are you a Birther? A Truther? A Vaxxer? Or are you someone who understands that those are all silly theories, but you tolerate them in Trump, for reasons that perhaps you alone can articulate?
So, in addition to being a Moby, you apparently have poor reading skills or a poor memory. (or perhaps you are more than one person?)
I'm the guy taking shit for comparing Trump to Hitler. His rise to power by demagoguery and an angry populace frightens me. I would have much preferred to a Cruz/Carly ticket, but the establishment types you pretend to be hated Cruz more than Trump, so here we are.
I simple understand that while Trump may be a disaster...Hillary will. Frankly, I live in California, so I'm planning on writing my own name in anyway.
let me repeat that I am not a Democrat,
It is just a coincidence that you are always defending them and attacking Republicans...right?
For the sake of an argument, I'll assume you really are the Establishment lackey you pretend to be......what you and your masters still don't understand is that you created Trump with exactly the attitude you bring to this blog.
@ Danno,
We appreciate your attempt to speak to chuck as if he was someone who is acting in good faith. Chuck is not acting in good faith. The #nevertrump movement is conceptually at it's core bad faith by definition.
No true conservative can be #nevertrump at this point. It is all mobys, paid shills, and lawyer consultant class republicans who are parasites on the political system and prefer losing to the democrats.
By the way...who was the first truther?...something a true Republican would know and mention.
Phil Berg, although there was an earlier fellow who pestered mccain on behalf of the keyes campaign,
Those weren't peccadilloes Hillary---they were pecker dillows. You should know the difference.
Subtlety, thy name is not Drudge!
Cosby has a clear parallel to Bill Clinton, as (from what I could tell) the best argument against believing Broaddrick was that her alleged rape took place in 1978 and she didn't come forward until the '90s, so if she was really raped then why did she wait so long to report? (Mind you, the feminist left cannot reconcile this with their usual stance that delay in reporting does not mean anything) Also, Broaddrick's story is one person's word against the other. Now with the Cosby example, which featured both those things (one word against the other, and a long delay in the victim coming forward) a lot of people are going to start wondering why everyone was so quick to dismiss Broaddrick's story. At the very least, it deserves more scrutiny now.
I'd also like to see the Marc Rich pardon back in the news. How is Sanders not bringing that up? It fits his theme perfectly (and Hillary should be forced to denounce it publicly).
It's exceedingly difficult to explain why Cosby warrants prosecution if Clinton does not.
Excellent point about omerta.
How many more secret lives are there.
The claims by Elijah Wood for instance, imply a conspiracy on an enormous scale.
Didn't Robert Downey Jr make some really bad accusations as well a few years ago about similar things? Thought he referenced a well-known female actress specifically.
Cosby has a clear parallel to Bill Clinton, as (from what I could tell) the best argument against believing Broaddrick was that her alleged rape took place in 1978 and she didn't come forward until the '90s, so if she was really raped then why did she wait so long to report? (Mind you, the feminist left cannot reconcile this with their usual stance that delay in reporting does not mean anything) Also, Broaddrick's story is one person's word against the other. Now with the Cosby example, which featured both those things (one word against the other, and a long delay in the victim coming forward) a lot of people are going to start wondering why everyone was so quick to dismiss Broaddrick's story. At the very least, it deserves more scrutiny now.
Broadrick told several people when it happened. Going to the police might have been rough since it was the then-AG that did it.
I'd also like to see the Marc Rich pardon back in the news. How is Sanders not bringing that up? It fits his theme perfectly (and Hillary should be forced to denounce it publicly).
He would...if he wanted to win. As I've always said, Bern has literally zero desire to win. He'd freak out if he somehow won.
Gahrie said...
...
...
It is just a coincidence that you are always defending them and attacking Republicans...right?
It isn't a coincidence, because it never happened. Where have I ever defended Democrats? And where have I ever attacked Republicans? Let's leave out Donald Trump, whom I have attacked on a nearly-daily basis. Trump doesn't count as a Republican. Which Republicans have I attacked? Which Democrats have I defended? When? What did I write?
And I don't care who was the first Truther. If the Hillary '08 campaign started it, I at least give Mrs. Clinton the scant credit for not getting involved personally. I don't think she's ever said anything about Obama's birth certificate other than that the claim that he was not an American is ridiculous.
Compare to Trump; doing countless interviews on the subject. Claiming that he had sent his own investigators to Honolulu and that they were uncovering a blockbuster of a story. Claiming that there was something big, and teasing the nation about it and then coming up with nothing. And worst of all; demanding Obama's collegiate transcripts and all manner of history, and then not even supplying copies of the tax returns he has already filed. It's all bullshit at the level of a schoolyard, with Trump.
Danno --
Yes I did read that column by Dennis Prager. I agree with 99% of it, and as I have stated on this blog's comments pages many times, I expect to vote for Trump as the Republican nominee in November, with no acceptable third-party candidate.
So your linking me to Dennis Prager was mostly a waste.
You might ask about my 1% disagreement with Prager. It's easy; while I will hold my nose and vote for Trump, I won't stop criticizing Trump. I don't want to be part of Trump's world, and I don't want Trump in the world of Republican politics. I think Trump is bad for the Party, and in fact he's bad for the country. (But Hillary would be worse.) Prager goes on at length about the conservative thinkers he likes and admires. I feel the same way about all of them. I suppose I just agree with them more than Prager does. I just want my position to be clear -- that Donald Trump was a lousy candidate in a winnable year for Republicans -- if and when Trump gets schlonged in the general election. I don't know what will happen, but that is what I think is quite likely.
Where have I ever defended Democrats?
If the Hillary '08 campaign started it, I at least give Mrs. Clinton the scant credit for not getting involved personally
So that is what counts as "defending" the Democrats?!? Giving Mrs. Clinton "scant credit" for merely being not so colossally stupid as Donald Trump's birther campaign?!?
The dumbest and least-effective argument I have ever heard in defense of Trump's Birtherism is the line, "Did you know it started as a rumor spread by the Hillary campaign in early 2008?"
Shame on those campaign operatives. More so, shame on anybody who took it seriously. Most of all, shame on Trump who dwelt on it for weeks and months when every serious person on all sides of the political divide rightly dismissed it.
I can't remember which mag it was in, but one of the publicized Cosby accounts (written by alleged victim) read very weak.
Made me think there is at least some (maybe miniscule) mix of true abuse and fabrication.
"The dumbest and least-effective argument I have ever heard in defense of Trump's Birtherism is the line, "Did you know it started as a rumor spread by the Hillary campaign in early 2008?""
There is no good defense to Trump's birtherism. Birtherism was a good way to separate normal Obama critics from the "off the deep end" types, and Trump was clearly willing to exploit the latter. If there's a conspiracy theory he hasn't embraced, give him time.
Well, the difference is that Bill Clinton was never accused of doping a woman before harrassing, molesting or raping her, as far as the testimony in the Starr Report tells. He just went ahead while they were fully conscious.
Who does that make the "better" rapist, Clinton or Cosby?
@Unknown
Thanks. I meant Hannibal Burress.
"But can we convict him in the court of public opinion? I think so. 58 separate accusations all alleging the same pattern and practice cannot be ignored or dismissed as some conspiracy."
So 58 is sufficient. How about 51? Or 16? What is the magic number? And what is the over/under on Bill Clinton?
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा