Bill Cosby Rape Allegations

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by Ducay

I don't think anyone would put their money on Cosby being wholly innocent. I think we're just arguing people shouldn't be convinced of guilt based on media or claims alone.

Kane is a great example of how everyone had written him off as guilty, but in fact, it was a false claim. Not saying Cosby's case is the same, but we need the legal system to work through it.

Everyone had written him off as guilty eh? Thats a gross exaggeration. These debates are more effective if people don't argue on the extremes

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Everyone had written him off as guilty eh? Thats a gross exaggeration. These debates are more effective if people don't argue on the extremes

I'm not sure Ducay is debating. In the past few days he has stated he is simply taking a contrarian position but it looks a lot like trolling to me.

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

I'm not sure Ducay is debating. In the past few days he has stated he is simply taking a contrarian position but it looks a lot like trolling to me.

I said I was arguing the contrary here because the media often condemns people before they are tried. Zamler agreed and provided a solid example of why our legal system is setup this way.

Like I said, I'd bet Cosby is guilty on one of the charges, but condemning him before trial is often the media's fault for ratings. More of a societal thing than anything

[JiriHrdina]

Again the media can't condemn him. To do so would have serious consequences. Do you have examples where the mainstream media has stated he is guilty?

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Again the media can't condemn him. To do so would have serious consequences. Do you have examples where the mainstream media has stated he is guilty?

Again, you're trying to take what I say literally to prove a point.

Of course no media has specifically said he is guilty.

Of course not "everyone" thought Kane was guilty.

But the way the media portrays him, discusses him, makes SNL skits about him raping girls, all creates the belief of purported guilt in the minds of many. This is the problem with the media.

[JiriHrdina]

OK so some examples please. Easy to take the contrary view - but harder when pressed for actual examples.
SNL is not the media.

[simmonjam1]

Reading Kane and Cosby in the same post; my mind automatically reads Crosby.

[AcGold]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

OK so some examples please. Easy to take the contrary view - but harder when pressed for actual examples.
SNL is not the media.

Now you're being obtuse. Cosbys name has been dragged through the mud, the least complimentary photos of him plastered everywhere, constantly talking about him in a negative light. The news will talk about the subject and not mention innocent before being guilty.

You denying the clear media bias towards sensationalism is silly, he's been portrayed as guilty from the start even if they didn't outright say it. Plastering disheveled photos of him with rape? beside it for months is pretty obvious that media outlets love a celebrity scandal and will do everything within their legal limits to get people's attention.

[JiriHrdina]

Should be easy to provide examples then of a clear bias instead of your own interpretation of things.
Fire away.
The media doesn't mention "innocent before being guilty" because it is assumed people know that. When was the last time you heard them report on a murder case and say "but remember folks - innocent before being proven guilty"? What they must do is ensure when they refer to the acts - they are alleged acts. I would challenge you to find a single example where a media outlet reported that he did something outright.

So again - provide some examples if that is that rampant.

[monkeyman]

Originally Posted by AcGold

Now you're being obtuse. Cosbys name has been dragged through the mud, the least complimentary photos of him plastered everywhere, constantly talking about him in a negative light. The news will talk about the subject and not mention innocent before being guilty.

You denying the clear media bias towards sensationalism is silly, he's been portrayed as guilty from the start even if they didn't outright say it. Plastering disheveled photos of him with rape? beside it for months is pretty obvious that media outlets love a celebrity scandal and will do everything within their legal limits to get people's attention.

I think whenever you're being accused by >50 women of drugging and raping them your name is going to be dragged through the mud. Unless you believe these accusations are unfounded then the media has an right/obligation to report it.
Let's be honest here, Cosby was alleged to have done these things for years and the only reason they didn't come to light were because of his fame, power, celebrity and money. For years Cosby hid behind his all-american father persona perpetuated by the same media you now accuse of dragging him though the mud. and for years people were afraid to pursue justice because of it. In this case in particular, it took media attention to break down that wall/persona for many of these women to finally come forward and the only way that many are going to receive any kind of justice.

[RougeUnderoos]

The media loves sensationalism for sure. Know what else they used to love? Bill Cosby. For 50 years this guy was golden. He was called "America's Dad"! The media loved him! What's not to love? Well, turns out there's something not to love.

More than 50 people have accused him of drugging and raping them, and he's getting some bad press. Are we supposed to feel bad for him? Where's the justice for Bill?

Oh boo hoo they published a picture of a dishevelled Bill Cosby. That poor man.

I have to wonder though if the crimes he's accused of were of a different nature if people would be willing to question if he's actually guilty. Let's say that instead of drugging and raping, Bill had been accused of stealing cars.

50 people say Bill Cosby stole their car over the years. 50 people who don't know each other, have never met, live in different places...

"I met Bill Cosby in Denver in 1979. We went out a couple times and he stole my car. I never saw him again."

"I worked for Bill in the 60's. He was a nice guy, until he stole my car".

"I was a bit player on an episode of the Cosby show. Bill asked me to meet him at a New York hotel for some acting tips. When I arrived, he ran out of the room and stole my car."

Rinse and repeat another 47 times. 50 people say Bill Cosby stole their car. Bill says "yeah, okay I admit I learned how to steal cars, but....".

Would people still be saying "oh well we don't know that he stole those cars. The media shouldn't print pictures of him next to cars saying 'car stealer?' next to them. They should say he's innocent until proven guilty every time! And pick a more flattering picture my god he looks like a car thief in that photo!"

Of course they wouldn't, because that's just silly. If 50 different people accuse one person of committing the same crime, we don't worry about how they look in the paper. But in this case, some people think old Bill is getting the shaft.

[simmonjam1]

All one has to do is Google Cosby with anyone of Nancy Grace, Gloria Allred or Dr. Phil and you can watch the sensationalism behind them all.

[Locke]

Wow. Slow clap for Ducay. You got them all to bite on your...oh yeah, you havent actually made a point.

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by Locke

Wow. Slow clap for Ducay. You got them all to bite on your...oh yeah, you havent actually made a point.

Keep baiting by saying I was trolling when clearly I wasn't. AcGold, Zamler are all making the same point.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Ducay

Keep baiting by saying I was trolling when clearly I wasn't. AcGold, Zamler are all making the same point.

....I believe I mentioned that there was no point. What was it? Could you clearly and succinctly present said mythical point?

- Let bygones be bygones?

- Innocent until proven guilty?

- Victim testimony is irrelevant?

- Rape is okay?

[Daradon]

Yeah, I don't remember everyone saying Kane was guilty. I remember it being split pretty evenly. Maybe a hair for the accuser.

I only posted once I believe, cause I knew it would devolve into silliness from the extremes, which it did. But I think a lot of people had a wait and see attitude. I know that was my position.

What's with you going all internet police on us lately on multiple threads on this forum, Ducay? Maybe it's time to take a little break. It doesn't sound like your having fun anyway.

[V]

Oh, he's having a blast. He's so edgy.

[afc wimbledon]

I profoundly believe in the judicial test of innocent until proven guilty in court.

Outside of court it doesn't apply, I get to decide for myself, Cosby a dirty scumbag rapist who I wouldn't let within a mile of my daughter, fifty accusers all telling the same tale plus Cosby himself admitting to the essential details is plenty of evidence for anyone with half a brain.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

I profoundly believe in the judicial test of innocent until proven guilty in court.

Outside of court it doesn't apply, I get to decide for myself, Cosby a dirty scumbag rapist who I wouldn't let within a mile of my daughter, fifty accusers all telling the same tale plus Cosby himself admitting to the essential details is plenty of evidence for anyone with half a brain.

No way man, you're totally wrong! And you're reprehensible for even thinking that way!

/Ducay

[justafan]

I have to point out that the Kane thread went off a bit crazy. I said, from the beginning, I hoped it wasn't true. By the end of that thread the debate was all about how women take advantage of men for money and I got called a feminazi! (I had to look that one up.)I liked Cosby, but I think doesn't look good for him.