Bill Cosby stays mum on sexual assault allegations

[ClutchClark]

Sorry but criminal investigations "trump" non-disclosure agreements.

In other words, non-disclosure agreements cannot be enforced when the information was requested by an official investigation.

You really cannot be forced to testify, it happens everyday when some witness gets intimidated and will not testify.

The NDA is a contract, which if the person violates the settlement is void (even if it is law enforcement).

When criminal conduct may be exposed, the settlement (which is private) is often high enough that retrying the civil portion would lead to a considerable loss.

Sorry, not the same thing.

In this instance, we are not talking about a "witness". We are talking about the actual alleged victim of the crime. You are suggesting they cannot file a complaint for a crime allegedly committed themself. That victim would have every right to report a crime and to provide testimony in a criminal proceeding AND even, assuming they didn't for the sake of argument, the only risk would be to be forced to return the amount received by Cosby.

Oooh, now I see what you mean. The accused might be less interested in "Justice" than in cold hard cash.

Which then brings us back to the original motivation--could her accusation simply been about gaining cold hard cash in the first place?

Credibility issue keeps surfacing.

If you actually hear any of Cosby's alleged victims talk a lot of them day they aren't interested in cash. Barbara Bowman has kept quiet for 30 years after allegedly being threatened to keep quiet and hasn't spoken out publicly until now. She was allegedly raped when she was in her teens. Lodging a complaint is not synonymous with paying a library fine, which you seem to think it is. Do you think you walk into the police station take a number and join the "Rape queue"?. In fact, due to the statute of limitations, in Barbara Bowman's case he can't be charged for the crimes. So the accusers are speaking out, maybe Mr Cosby ought to be brave enough to speak out too about what what he's been accused of, instead of silently shaking his head in a radio interview. As I've said previously if he's done nothing then he's got absolutely nothing to worry about.

At first I went along with your naivety since you are young and are emotion driven rather than intellect driven, which is common in the young; however, now you are getting tedious.

Cosby has no need to say anything. In fact, his attorneys have most certainly counseled him to not say anything. Basically, because people like you will not be satisfied with anything he says if it falls short of a full confession.

There is no proof Barbara Bowman was threatened, she accepted an undisclosed sum to quiet her allegation. Had she been threatened she should have gone to the police or her attorney that handled her out-of-court settlement had a responsibility to go the police if he felt his client was being "coerced" into signing a contract. If you read a previous post of mine, there are some inconsistencies in her statement since she contends she was raped multiple times yet continued to choose to remain in the company of Cosby. This is not consistent behavior of an adult who is terrified of someone. It appears during the same time frame she suggests these multiple attacks were occurring, she was residing in a residence paid for by Cosby and was comfortable remaining in his daily company as he attempted to further her career. For some reason, at he time she had no motivation to report anything to the police and only decided to make unsubstantiated claims after he had evicted her.

These facts would create reasonable doubt in some peoples' minds and some people night actually think Cosby was what is called a Sugar Daddy.

I am not saying that was the case. I am simply saying that a man is innocent until proven guilty and there was insufficient evidence then and there is apparently insufficient evidence now. As for statute of limitations, those vary by State and "offense".

Go play with somebody else, I have work to do.

Edited November 17, 2014 by ClutchClark

[farang1979]

Sorry but criminal investigations "trump" non-disclosure agreements.

In other words, non-disclosure agreements cannot be enforced when the information was requested by an official investigation.

You really cannot be forced to testify, it happens everyday when some witness gets intimidated and will not testify.

The NDA is a contract, which if the person violates the settlement is void (even if it is law enforcement).

When criminal conduct may be exposed, the settlement (which is private) is often high enough that retrying the civil portion would lead to a considerable loss.

Sorry, not the same thing.

In this instance, we are not talking about a "witness". We are talking about the actual alleged victim of the crime. You are suggesting they cannot file a complaint for a crime allegedly committed themself. That victim would have every right to report a crime and to provide testimony in a criminal proceeding AND even, assuming they didn't for the sake of argument, the only risk would be to be forced to return the amount received by Cosby.

Oooh, now I see what you mean. The accused might be less interested in "Justice" than in cold hard cash.

Which then brings us back to the original motivation--could her accusation simply been about gaining cold hard cash in the first place?

Credibility issue keeps surfacing.

If you actually hear any of Cosby's alleged victims talk a lot of them day they aren't interested in cash. Barbara Bowman has kept quiet for 30 years after allegedly being threatened to keep quiet and hasn't spoken out publicly until now. She was allegedly raped when she was in her teens. Lodging a complaint is not synonymous with paying a library fine, which you seem to think it is. Do you think you walk into the police station take a number and join the "Rape queue"?. In fact, due to the statute of limitations, in Barbara Bowman's case he can't be charged for the crimes. So the accusers are speaking out, maybe Mr Cosby ought to be brave enough to speak out too about what what he's been accused of, instead of silently shaking his head in a radio interview. As I've said previously if he's done nothing then he's got absolutely nothing to worry about.

At first I went along with your naivety since you are young and are emotion driven rather than intellect driven, which is common in the young; however, now you are getting tedious.

Cosby has no need to say anything. In fact, his attorneys have most certainly counseled him to not say anything. Basically, because people like you will not be satisfied with anything he says if it falls short of a full confession.

There is no proof Barbara Bowman was threatened, she accepted an undisclosed sum to quiet her allegation. Had she been threatened she should have gone to the police or her attorney that handled her out-of-court settlement had a responsibility to go the police if he felt his client was being "coerced" into signing a contract. If you read a previous post of mine, there are some inconsistencies in her statement since she contends she was raped multiple times yet continued to choose to remain in the company of Cosby. This is not consistent behavior of an adult who is terrified of someone. It appears during the same time frame she suggests these multiple attacks were occurring, she was residing in a residence paid for by Cosby and was comfortable remaining in his daily company as he attempted to further her career. For some reason, at he time she had no motivation to report anything to the police and only decided to make unsubstantiated claims after he had evicted her.

These facts would create reasonable doubt in some peoples' minds and some people night actually think Cosby was what is called a Sugar Daddy.

I am not saying that was the case. I am simply saying that a man is innocent until proven guilty and there was insufficient evidence then and there is apparently insufficient evidence now. As for statute of limitations, those vary by State and "offense".

Go play with somebody else, I have work to do.

Your post made me laugh so thanks for that.

So not content with calling me a 'nutter', you now think that my age is something to do with the validity of my argument?

If that's the case then your senior years have muddled your judgement and perhaps, being roughly the same age as Cosby, you empathise with him. I didn't bring up the age thing though, you did.

Anyway, before this turns into a petty personal, mud-slinging match, let's get back to the matter in hand. You mention there that is only be interested in a 'confession'. Intriguing use of language. It seems Cosby paid out alot of money to women he didn't rape. But hang on, they were fame hungry girls desperate to get ahead. They deserve to be raped, right? WRONG. They took the pay off under threat or intimidation. They should just keep the money and shut the hell up, right? WRONG. You see, telling me to 'go play' is exactly the same treatment these girls were given. No rape here, run along now dear, Daddy's got a career to think of.

Edited November 17, 2014 by farang1979

[F430murci]

Former publicist Joan Tarshis came forward with claims that she had been drugged and raped twice by Bill Cosby in an article on the Hollywood Elsewhere website on Sunday.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/newly-emerged-bill-cosby-accuser-says-she-wants-people-to-%e2%80%98understand-that-hes-not-mr-clean%e2%80%99/ar-BBeePa0?ocid=iehp

[F430murci]

Private settlements tend to have clauses in them that prevent discussing ANYTHING about the case, so as soon as the case was settled - it would hinder any criminal investigation.

Sorry but criminal investigations "trump" non-disclosure agreements.

In other words, non-disclosure agreements cannot be enforced when the information was requested by an official investigation.

You really cannot be forced to testify, it happens everyday when some witness gets intimidated and will not testify.

The NDA is a contract, which if the person violates the settlement is void (even if it is law enforcement).

When criminal conduct may be exposed, the settlement (which is private) is often high enough that retrying the civil portion would lead to a considerable loss.

Not sure I agree with this and I am involved in multiple RICO actions with multiple FBI and AG investigations going on right now. I have settled with RICO Defendants in confidential settlements, but they cannot prohibit me or my client from speaking to law enforcement about a criminal investigation. That would be against public policy and a judge could certainly place someone in criminal contempt for refusing to testify against someone else.

Another issue is that a criminal prosecution is technically for the people and not for the benefit of the victim so the victim taking money to deprive the people of their right to prosecute criminally may be another way of looking at it.

Anyway, try and convince a judge that your civil settlement should be voided and you should get your money back because you committed a crime and the person you violated assisted authorities in prosecuting that crime. Good luck with the argument.

Edited November 17, 2014 by F430murci

[F430murci]

You really cannot be forced to testify, it happens everyday when some witness gets intimidated and will not testify.

The NDA is a contract, which if the person violates the settlement is void (even if it is law enforcement).

When criminal conduct may be exposed, the settlement (which is private) is often high enough that retrying the civil portion would lead to a considerable loss.

Sorry, not the same thing.

In this instance, we are not talking about a "witness". We are talking about the actual alleged victim of the crime. You are suggesting they cannot file a complaint for a crime allegedly committed themself. That victim would have every right to report a crime and to provide testimony in a criminal proceeding AND even, assuming they didn't for the sake of argument, the only risk would be to be forced to return the amount received by Cosby.

Oooh, now I see what you mean. The accused might be less interested in "Justice" than in cold hard cash.

Which then brings us back to the original motivation--could her accusation simply been about gaining cold hard cash in the first place?

Credibility issue keeps surfacing.

If you actually hear any of Cosby's alleged victims talk a lot of them day they aren't interested in cash. Barbara Bowman has kept quiet for 30 years after allegedly being threatened to keep quiet and hasn't spoken out publicly until now. She was allegedly raped when she was in her teens. Lodging a complaint is not synonymous with paying a library fine, which you seem to think it is. Do you think you walk into the police station take a number and join the "Rape queue"?. In fact, due to the statute of limitations, in Barbara Bowman's case he can't be charged for the crimes. So the accusers are speaking out, maybe Mr Cosby ought to be brave enough to speak out too about what what he's been accused of, instead of silently shaking his head in a radio interview. As I've said previously if he's done nothing then he's got absolutely nothing to worry about.

At first I went along with your naivety since you are young and are emotion driven rather than intellect driven, which is common in the young; however, now you are getting tedious.

Cosby has no need to say anything. In fact, his attorneys have most certainly counseled him to not say anything. Basically, because people like you will not be satisfied with anything he says if it falls short of a full confession.

There is no proof Barbara Bowman was threatened, she accepted an undisclosed sum to quiet her allegation. Had she been threatened she should have gone to the police or her attorney that handled her out-of-court settlement had a responsibility to go the police if he felt his client was being "coerced" into signing a contract. If you read a previous post of mine, there are some inconsistencies in her statement since she contends she was raped multiple times yet continued to choose to remain in the company of Cosby. This is not consistent behavior of an adult who is terrified of someone. It appears during the same time frame she suggests these multiple attacks were occurring, she was residing in a residence paid for by Cosby and was comfortable remaining in his daily company as he attempted to further her career. For some reason, at he time she had no motivation to report anything to the police and only decided to make unsubstantiated claims after he had evicted her.

These facts would create reasonable doubt in some peoples' minds and some people night actually think Cosby was what is called a Sugar Daddy.

I am not saying that was the case. I am simply saying that a man is innocent until proven guilty and there was insufficient evidence then and there is apparently insufficient evidence now. As for statute of limitations, those vary by State and "offense".

Go play with somebody else, I have work to do.

I am a firm believer where there is a lot of smoke, there is generally a fire. But you are correct, innocent until proven guilty, but that is only in the criminal sense, not a public opinion sense. Many guilty walk free because they were just not proven to be guilty.

[bkkcanuck8]

Not sure I agree with this and I am involved in multiple RICO actions with multiple FBI and AG investigations going on right now. I have settled with RICO Defendants in confidential settlements, but they cannot prohibit me or my client from speaking to law enforcement about a criminal investigation. That would be against public policy and a judge could certainly place someone in criminal contempt for refusing to testify against someone else.

Also, try and convince a judge that your civil settlement should be voided and you should get your money back because you committed a crime and the person you violated assisted authorities in prosecuting that crime. Good luck with the argument.

There is quite a difference between a defendant and someone that was the victim of a crime - especially when (as in rape crimes) only the perpetrator and victim that are witnesses to a crime. Even if police investigate the crime and forward it on -- who would prosecute? Include into that a settlement, which would automatically make it more problematic (no witnesses, standard financial settlement to raise doubt). Even without the settlement, prosecuting criminally is problematic because it is a he said / she said situation. Then bring in the fact that the defendant, who already has a likeability factor beyond most, has a high power defence team. Given that scenario it is very unlikely that sans settlement he would ever be found guilty, with a settlement there is almost no chance.

In that case about the only thing that a victim would likely get out of that would be a financial settlement with maybe an undocumented apology (but the settlement would say nothing about that). Why would any person risk a financial settlement to co-operate with prosecution when there will not likely be any criminal outcome even in the best of times.

It is incredibly difficult to get victims from prior cases (to show a pattern) who have settled to co-operate in these types of cases.

[F430murci]

Not sure I agree with this and I am involved in multiple RICO actions with multiple FBI and AG investigations going on right now. I have settled with RICO Defendants in confidential settlements, but they cannot prohibit me or my client from speaking to law enforcement about a criminal investigation. That would be against public policy and a judge could certainly place someone in criminal contempt for refusing to testify against someone else.

Also, try and convince a judge that your civil settlement should be voided and you should get your money back because you committed a crime and the person you violated assisted authorities in prosecuting that crime. Good luck with the argument.

There is quite a difference between a defendant and someone that was the victim of a crime - especially when (as in rape crimes) only the perpetrator and victim that are witnesses to a crime. Even if police investigate the crime and forward it on -- who would prosecute? Include into that a settlement, which would automatically make it more problematic (no witnesses, standard financial settlement to raise doubt). Even without the settlement, prosecuting criminally is problematic because it is a he said / she said situation. Then bring in the fact that the defendant, who already has a likeability factor beyond most, has a high power defence team. Given that scenario it is very unlikely that sans settlement he would ever be found guilty, with a settlement there is almost no chance.

In that case about the only thing that a victim would likely get out of that would be a financial settlement with maybe an undocumented apology (but the settlement would say nothing about that). Why would any person risk a financial settlement to co-operate with prosecution when there will not likely be any criminal outcome even in the best of times.

It is incredibly difficult to get victims from prior cases (to show a pattern) who have settled to co-operate in these types of cases.

It is incredibly difficult to get victims of sexual abuse cases to come forward and testify. Most do not want to re-live the incident and most know they will be put on trial themselves.

[Jingthing]

A little foreshadowing?

BTW, I love Bill Cosby and don't really want to believe these charges. I hope they aren't true but famous or beloved or not, he's not above the law.

[F430murci]

Not looking too good for the old boy . . . or should I say "alleged POS scum bag sexual predator."

---------

NEW YORK (AP) — The author of a new Bill Cosby biography is apologizing for not pursuing allegations that the comedian had drugged and sexually assaulted numerous women.

Mark Whitaker, whose "Cosby: His Life and Times" was published in September, tweeted Monday that he was wrong not to "aggressively" look into the charges and promised to address them "at the appropriate time."

. . .

Reports about Cosby have been public knowledge for years, but resurfaced last month after a video of comedian Hannibal Buress calling Cosby a rapist went viral. With several additional women accusing Cosby of assaulting them, projects on NBC and Netflix have been canceled, and TV Land decided not to air reruns of "The Cosby Show."

http://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/Cosby-author-sorry-for-omitting-assault-charges/ar-BBfOuEL?ocid=ansentap11

[bendejo]

Why would a guy like Cosby need to commit rape? he has all the money in the world and is famous. Supermodels would give it up to him, just to be around his fame and fortune. This story does not pass the smell test.

I think there's some sort of fetish involved. One aspiring actress said he gave her the line "I can help you with your career, come to my room and we'll talk about it." Well, she knew what that meant amd went to see him, obviously prepared to do the deed. Still, he slipped her the roofy (or whatever he used), when she came out of it she was laying in bed wearing her panties and a man's undershirt. My guess is there was some kind of role-play involved in these encounters. Maybe Fat Albert needs to be told what a naughty boy he is.

[F430murci]

Why would a guy like Cosby need to commit rape? he has all the money in the world and is famous. Supermodels would give it up to him, just to be around his fame and fortune. This story does not pass the smell test.

I think there's some sort of fetish involved. One aspiring actress said he gave her the line "I can help you with your career, come to my room and we'll talk about it." Well, she knew what that meant amd went to see him, obviously prepared to do the deed. Still, he slipped her the roofy (or whatever he used), when she came out of it she was laying in bed wearing her panties and a man's undershirt. My guess is there was some kind of role-play involved in these encounters. Maybe Fat Albert needs to be told what a naughty boy he is.

If this stuff is true, Someone needs to beat the ole boy POS rapist down. Lisa Bonnet refused to come to his defense. Tell you what, if he is guilty, which it seems he is, I will be happy to use him as punching bag for one of my workouts. People need to start standing up for the rights of women every where. I am happy to oblige for the workout on his ugly arse face.

[spidermike007]

Why would a guy like Cosby need to commit rape? he has all the money in the world and is famous. Supermodels would give it up to him, just to be around his fame and fortune. This story does not pass the smell test.

I think there's some sort of fetish involved. One aspiring actress said he gave her the line "I can help you with your career, come to my room and we'll talk about it." Well, she knew what that meant amd went to see him, obviously prepared to do the deed. Still, he slipped her the roofy (or whatever he used), when she came out of it she was laying in bed wearing her panties and a man's undershirt. My guess is there was some kind of role-play involved in these encounters. Maybe Fat Albert needs to be told what a naughty boy he is.

If this stuff is true, Someone needs to beat the ole boy POS rapist down. Lisa Bonnet refused to come to his defense. Tell you what, if he is guilty, which it seems he is, I will be happy to use him as punching bag for one of my workouts. People need to start standing up for the rights of women every where. I am happy to oblige for the workout on his ugly arse face.

It would be fun to witness watching that ugly cuss get his ass kicked. I would especially enjoy watching him get his ass kicked by the dozens of women he has supposedly raped. He is very obviously a pathologically defective man. Sorry, but when dozens come out and make statements against you, it is not a conspiracy. It is truth in action. Boycott Cosby for life. The poor man will have to live on the 250 million he already has.

[bendejo]

...

.Lisa Bonnet refused to come to his defense.

...

I was watching a movie with her in it back in those days (never saw the TV show).

My then girlfriend told me that he hated her, running around with rock musicians etc and tried to have her axed from the show. Refusing to come to his defense is letting him off easy.

I recall the woman who played the wife was pretty attractive, any word from her?

[F430murci]

More comes out.

----------

Cosby said he blocked 2005 tabloid story about sex-assault accuser.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/28/us-people-bill-cosby-idUSKCN0JC1QI20141128?feedType=RSS

[F430murci]

POS. This article is absolutely disturbing and explains why this POS was able to keep this stuff quiet for so many years.

________

Cosby Team’s Strategy: Hush Accusers, Insult Them, Blame the Media

. . .

As accusations of sexual assault continue to mount against Mr. Cosby — more than two dozen women have gone public, the latest last Monday — the question arises as to why these stories never sparked a widespread outcry before. While many of the women say they never filed police complaints or went public because they feared damaging their reputations or careers, the aggressive legal and media strategy mounted by Mr. Cosby and his team may also have played a significant role.

An examination of how the team has dealt with scandals over the past two decades and into this fall reveals an organized and expensive effort that involved quashing accusations as they emerged while raising questions about the accusers’ character and motives, both publicly and surreptitiously. And the team has never been shy about blasting the news media for engaging in a feeding frenzy even as the team made deals or slipped the news organizations information that would cast Mr. Cosby’s accusers in a negative light.