The jury awarded $19.25 million in compensatory damages and $40 million in punitive damages.
Motsinger testified that Cosby gave her "a pill that had left her incapacitated." Cosby did not testify.
24 మార్చి, 2026
"This is not about providing deterrence. A blind 88-year-old man can’t leave his house."
Said the lawyer for Bill Cosby, arguing against punitive damages, in "Bill Cosby Loses Sex Assault Lawsuit and Faces a $59 Million Judgment
A California jury found that Mr. Cosby had abused Donna Motsinger in 1972 after inviting her to attend one of his comedy shows" (NYT).
పోస్ట్లు
42 కామెంట్లు:
Cosby might have been "Ground Zero" for MeToo & Believe All Women. Over time we learned to Believe Credible Women. Sometimes.
As long as she wasn't named Juanita Broadrick.
I think Bill Cosby drugged and raped dozens of women. That being said bringing something that occurred more than 50 years ago to trial is inherently procedurally unfair. And awarding $60 million in damages is more than an order of magnitude beyond what could possibly be a just level of damages.
The left cancelled Cosby circa 2004 after he started to call out black parents for violence, bad language, and their failures:
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna5345290
As with Cesar Chavez and Bill Clinton, he was a lefty icon before he became a pariah.
As with Harvey Weinstein and Senator Stewart Smalley, he was a creative genius before he was ejected.
The left is consistent in vomiting out their icons. Build 'em up and then tear 'em down. It gives pathological activists something to act upon and feel they are progressing while they chase their tails. (Consider TDS in this context.)
It's easy to imagine a man doing something much worse. What would that be worth. Can they award infinite dollars times 10?
bagoh20 said...
"It's easy to imagine a man doing something much worse. What would that be worth. Can they award infinite dollars times 10?"
My price for being drugged and anally violated is $5m. Any takers?
I thought he was dead. But no, he's 88 - wow. Good for him. Money not much use for him now, so no big loss.
Now that he's blind, has he stopped looking for the real rapist?
There used to be a concept known of "statute of limitations". anyone heard of it recently? What happened to it?
It's more than she'd get as a streetwalker.
Have to keep #MeToo going somehow......
Good.
Did the defense lawyer try convincing the jury that the drugging part was act of compassion, because I would.
All of the statues were toppled because of #meetoo
Nice things we cant have anymore greg
<She alleged in her lawsuit that Cosby invited her to one of his stand-up comedy shows and after picking her up to drive her to the gig he gave her a pill that she thought was aspirin, according to the court papers.
"Next thing she knew, she was going in and out of consciousness," her legal action said, according to the Los Angeles Times. "The last thing Ms Motsinger recalls were flashes of light."
The filing said she woke up at home naked except for her underwear and "she knew she had been drugged and raped by Bill Cosby".
How did this even get to trial - it took place in 1972 (apparently statutes of limitations are no longer a thing?), the woman apparently was never tested for drugs or for rape, she has no recollection of what happened, and cannot even say with any certainty that she was raped - how is one supposed to defend themselves against this kind of claim?
Not saying that Cosby didn't do it, but how could she possibly have met the preponderance of evidence standard?
Rape or rape-rape? Binary orifices matter. And the third... why not. It's there.
One night, Motsinger accepted Cosby’s invitation to go with him to his show at the Circle Star Theater in nearby San Carlos. Cosby picked her up at her home in a limousine, according to her complaint, and, on the way to the venue, gave her the wine and a pill that she thought was aspirin.
“Next thing she knew, she was going in and out of consciousness while two men attending to Mr. Cosby were putting her in the limousine,” the complaint said. “The last thing Ms. Motsinger recalls were flashes of light,” before waking up in her house in nothing but underwear. (LA Times, yesterday).
So how can she be sure that it was Cosby, and not the limo driver or one of the two other men, who removed her clothing? How can Cosby possibly identify these two witnesses to potentially testify on his behalf? Are they even alive at this point, 54 years later? Would they remember anything (particularly if no rape or other particularly memorable thing actually occurred)?
Ah, here is the Statute of Limitations issue: Motsinger filed her suit half a century after the sexual assault — far beyond statutes of limitations in place for such cases. But the #MeToo movement helped usher in a raft of legislation across the country, including in California, that gave victims an opportunity to sue their alleged abusers for crimes committed decades earlier. One such California law allowed Motsinger to file suit against Cosby and, on Monday, win.
California's new law , the Sexual Abuse and Cover-Up Accountability Act, set a three-year "lookback window" (Jan 1, 2023 – Dec 31, 2026) that permitted plaintiffs to file suit for sexual assault claims that were previously barred by the statute of limitations (apparently no matter how long ago they had been barred). Of course, if they really believed these kind of cases should not be subject to a statute of limitations, they could have simply eliminated it. That they created this specific window (much like NY did in the E. Jean Carroll case) suggests that it was designed to allow cases against specific defendants rather than it being a good idea in general.
Why can’t he leave his house?
He's blind and old and his reputation is in tatters. Enough a!ready. Plus most of his money will go to the lawyers defending and prosecuting him. Any left over will go to the Home Care agency. Overall this is one of those rare cases where the punishment meets or exceeds the crime.
Another issue I have: it reminds me of the recent Pelicot scandal in France, where a husband repeatedly drugged his wife and invited friends to have sex with her unconscious body. I'd like a pharmacologist to opine on just what pill(s) these could be. Not in the asking for a friend sense. A pill that renders someone unconscious for hours and is safe, with no after-effects and looks like aspirin, strikes me as a bad plot device in a cheap novel.
Isn’t this the guy who used to run a gynecology practice from the basement of his house?
What pill was round and white like aspirin but only one would knock you out like that? Can you confuse "Rorer" with "Bayer"? They were popular then, but I doubt only one alone would knock someone out like that, so I'm thinking it had to be something stronger. Maybe it's the "with wine" part that mattered most. How far was the drive? Long enough for multiple drinks?
If it was on the way to the venue, did he go and perform? And she was passed out through the whole thing?
it reminds me of the recent Pelicot scandal in France
I read her book. I think it was Ambien. He ground it up and put it in her food and drinks.
Even though it was her book and she convinced me he had done these things to her, I found her unlikable. She's now not speaking with her daughter because her daughter accused the father of molesting her and mom doesn't want to admit that was possible or doesn't want to share the public's attention.
The left is consistent in vomiting out their icons.
Your complaint is that the left is not sufficiently protective of its rapists?
@Earnest Prole: No, the left fixates on creating icons from average people with average flaws. The notion of an icon is broken from the start. In making sloppy saviors from humans they set themselves up humiliation.
Like the death penalty, it is not just deterring Cosby, but a warning to others that might try to do what Cosby did.
I am with the others who have mentioned the problems with trying a 54 year old case for which there is not only no physical evidence and no witnesses but for which even the alleged victim concedes that she doesn't know what happened.
I'd feel uncomfortable if the alleged event had happened in January 2026, though not as uncomfortable.
I think Dr Cosby is paying the price for his statements about blacks need to pull their pants up etc.
John Henry
Why does nobody but me call Bill Cosby Doctor Cosby?
He has an earned doctorate in education just like Doctor Jill. Temple University, I think.
John Henry
the left fixates on creating icons from average people with average flaws
You can call Bill Cosby and Bill Clinton many things but average is not one of them.
I don't how you could prove this happened. What evidence could there be?
Believe NO women, ever.
bagoh20 said...
"It's easy to imagine a man doing something much worse. What would that be worth. Can they award infinite dollars times 10?"
Ask Alex Jones.
$19.25 million compensatory? “Left her incapacitated.” What? For life? Or did Cosby desecrate a sacred golden vagina here. I’ve got no quarrel with the punitives, but aren’t compensatory damages supposed to be based on reasonableness and reality?
This is what the jury system looks like.
"Pour encourager les autres."
tommyesq said...
"California's new law , the Sexual Abuse and Cover-Up Accountability Act, set a three-year "lookback window" (Jan 1, 2023 – Dec 31, 2026) that permitted plaintiffs to file suit for sexual assault claims that were previously barred by the statute of limitations (apparently no matter how long ago they had been barred). Of course, if they really believed these kind of cases should not be subject to a statute of limitations, they could have simply eliminated it. That they created this specific window (much like NY did in the E. Jean Carroll case) suggests that it was designed to allow cases against specific defendants rather than it being a good idea in general."
I'm no lawyer, but how is this not an ex post facto law?
She alleged in her lawsuit that Cosby invited her to one of his stand-up comedy shows and after picking her up to drive her to the gig he gave her a pill that she thought was aspirin, according to the court papers.
Why did she take an aspirin from him?
54 years ago, so this in 1972, and her story is "he just up and offered me an aspirin, so I popped it in my mouth and chugged down the wine to cover it"?
To me, this sounds like she's lying. That he told her it was a drug, and she took it willingly. Was LSD popular in 1972?
I mean:
1: No one takes just one aspirin for anything
2: Did she ask him for an aspirin? Or did he just randomly pull an aspirin out of his pocket and say "you look like you have a headache, why don't you take this aspirin?"
3: Did she ever go into how it came about that he offered this to her, and how it came about that she took it?
I call bullshit
What are Cosby's grounds of appeal?
Aren't civil suits about compensation for injuries? Does deterrence really enter into it? If so, to what extent?
hombre,
I have profound quarrels with *any* punitive damages whatsoever. If the state is going to *punish* someone, it should have file a criminal case and meet the higher standards for conviction there. (Yes, that means that I think the British cases that helped to make punitive damages a little more permissible were mistakes.)
That doesn't appear to be a remedy or justice, it's tortuous and cruel.
కామెంట్ను పోస్ట్ చేయండి
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.