Page 5 of 22 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 211
Thanks Tree137Thanks

Thread: Update On The Bill Cosby Rape Trial, Opening Monday

  1. #41
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    51,355
    Thanks
    29713

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by Isalexi View Post
    Oh yes all 50 women all got together during these three years to kibbutz . Yeah it's just a fun thing to be sexually assaulted and have men like you make excuses for the sexual predator
    I knew enough after the first 5 or so to have phonied up a credible accusation, assuming I had ever met him.

    The "entertainment news" broadcast every lurid detail of the complaints.

    I am not overly impressed with this investigation, and I expect to feel that way about the trial.

  2. #42
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    51,355
    Thanks
    29713

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by Isalexi View Post
    Ah..there it is blaming the victims. Yes I have heard the term innocent until proven guilty he but I also expressed my opinion about OJ Simpson . Of course that's all these women wanted was publicity. Nothing is as great as being a woman who's pussy was grabbed really great feeling. And then we wonder why women don't report sexual abuse?
    My opinion also is, O.J. is guilty. But that is because I find the defense strategy of blaming the LAPD for their alleged attempt to frame him is ludicrious.

    "Beyond a reasonable doubt" does not mean it is impossible O.J. was framed.

    Just that that is not a worry that would guide me in searching for the truth aka, handing down a verdict.

    99% sure is plenty good enough.

  3. #43
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    50,564
    Thanks
    23957

    From
    Vulcan
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeline View Post
    I am unsure this case should even proceed. "Beyond a reasonable doubt"?
    That is for the jury to determine.

    Quote Originally Posted by Madeline View Post
    IMO, we will never know what happened. And that should mean Cosby was dismissed at the preliminary hearing.
    It is the jury's task to determine what happened. You cannot get that at any preliminary hearing.
    Thanks from Madeline

  4. #44
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    50,564
    Thanks
    23957

    From
    Vulcan
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeline View Post
    The judge excluded all but 1 woman and the complaining witness because there is no basis for concluding that evidence -- the other 56 witnesses-- were reliable enough that it would be fair to allow the jury to hear them.

    56, out of 58, found to be unreliable.
    My understanding was that the prejudicial effect of multiple witnesses outweighed their probative value, hence the exclusions. Am I recalling incorrectly?
    Thanks from Madeline

  5. #45
    Veteran Member Isalexi's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    33,592
    Thanks
    20919

    From
    Maryland
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeline View Post
    McMartin Day Care case:

    48 children lied about satanic abuse in the 1980's, sending 11 adults to prison for a decade, after which calmer, more objective inquiry found nothing ever happened.

    One hysterical social worker and one ambitious DA ruined 100's of lives, for nothing.

    All the time the cases were in progrss, people asked how could any of this be true and not one shred of physical evidence ever found?

    The reply was, only a satan-worshipping, child hater would question whether the kids were lying. So the community slowly learned to keep quiet.

    No one should go to prison if the evidence against them is not beyond a reasonable doubt.
    When you compare children being led by adults, to adult women who were molested, I lose all respect for you. You continue to make excuses for one man and make all his victims liars. No wonder women don't report sexual abuse and it's because of women like yourself

  6. #46
    Veteran Member Isalexi's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    33,592
    Thanks
    20919

    From
    Maryland
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeline View Post
    My opinion also is, O.J. is guilty. But that is because I find the defense strategy of blaming the LAPD for their alleged attempt to frame him is ludicrious.

    "Beyond a reasonable doubt" does not mean it is impossible O.J. was framed.

    Just that that is not a worry that would guide me in searching for the truth aka, handing down a verdict.

    99% sure is plenty good enough.
    How can you say that? The jury found him not guilty! Aren't you the one that says innocent till proven guilty.well obviously he wasn't proven guilty.

  7. #47
    Veteran Member Isalexi's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    33,592
    Thanks
    20919

    From
    Maryland
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    My understanding was that the prejudicial effect of multiple witnesses outweighed their probative value, hence the exclusions. Am I recalling incorrectly?
    Not to mention the statute of limitations

  8. #48
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    50,564
    Thanks
    23957

    From
    Vulcan
    Quote Originally Posted by Isalexi View Post
    When you compare children being led by adults, to adult women who were molested, I lose all respect for you.
    How is that an unfair comparison, given the claim you made - i.e., that a conspiracy was not possible?
    Thanks from Madeline

  9. #49
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    50,564
    Thanks
    23957

    From
    Vulcan
    Quote Originally Posted by Isalexi View Post
    Not to mention the statute of limitations.
    The SOL (great acronym) prevents an action from being brought in court. It is not a rule of evidence that would prevent testimony.
    Thanks from Madeline

  10. #50
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    51,355
    Thanks
    29713

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    My understanding was that the prejudicial effect of multiple witnesses outweighed their probative value, hence the exclusions. Am I recalling incorrectly?
    His lawyers objected to the testimony about "prior bad acts," saying that in some cases the sex was consensual, while others involved former models and actresses falsely accusing Cosby to gain money or attention.

    His attorneys also argued that some the allegations were so vague — with some of the women unsure of when the alleged encounters even took place — that it would be impossible for Cosby to defend himself.
    Judge: Only 1 other Cosby accuser can testify at sex assault trial

    As you know, the rules of evidence exist primarily to aid in the search for truth by excluding evidence that jurisprudence has identified as unreliable. The Cosby case is in state court, in Pennsylvania. Not an expert of Pennsylvania rules of evidence, but the states (for the most part) model theirs on the federal rules.

    "Prior bad acts" are similar, usually criminal allegations, never charged and certainly not resulting in convictions. Like reputation evidence, this is considered to be prejudicial in that most juries would be inclined to believe that if he did it 56 other times, he did it this time as well.

    The problem is that the defendant has no opportunity to defend each of the other 56 other accusations, so basically he would be railroaded. The feds allow an exception for "signature" prior bad acts -- if Cosby had a very peculiar habit, never varied it and it was not only used during the 56 alleged assaults but also the 1 charged, that would be some reliable evidence that he is guilty..

    For example, if he liked to paint his victims' baby fingernails with red nail polish. If that detail had never been made public, and all 56 accusers included it in their complaints, as well as the case he is on trial for, that is somewhat more reliable evidence and as such "prior bad acts" evidence could come in. Still would be a judgment call by the judge, though.

    The general public has a few biases that really hamper a wealthy, famous person's right to get a fair trial. That such people are almost never found guilty, even though they actually are. That the previous law-abiding lives they led are immaterial, as they likely committed similar offenses and had them covered up. That the people who accuse them are noble, courageous, standing up for the little guy -- might or might not be true, but every DA involved in these prosecutions that I have followed was starstruck, wanting to be the David who killed Goliath.

    When a defendant, of any class, is charged with a crime that involves any sort of BDSM, the juries (and everyone else) has a tendency to be shocked that they are so deviant, it no longer matters whether they are guilty or not. It is the most prejudicial type of evidence that can be offered against any defendant, IMO, because Americans are so neurotic and Puritianical about sex.

    56 women tearfully recounting their "horrifying experiences" with Cosby and his "necrophilia without tears" kink is almost certainly going to make that jury hate Cosby enough to want to convict him, guilty or not, because what he wanted and did was just so wrong. But among BDSM play techniques, as long as the passive partner can be safely revived, this is fairly innocuous.

    My last DA, that bastard, had a plea deal on embezzlement charges against a local city official when the cops searched his computer and found "sado-masochistic porn" on it, all images of adults. He went to the judge to try and void the plea so he could take the defendant to trial and say "Not only did he steal! He is a pervert and likes to look at images like these!"

    That defendant was lucky the judge said no, because he would have been found guilty of shooting Lincoln by any local jury here. Even though, watching porn did not make him steal any more money. It was completely irrelevant.

    The public think the DAs are all good guys, in white hats, trying to fight crime. I'm sure most are decent people, but nobody doing any major felony prosecutions I ever met was less than a self-promoting, ambitious, sneaky, little creep. (I am a little biased, I admit.)

    To me, the heros in the courtroom are the defense lawyers.
    Last edited by Madeline; 8th June 2017 at 02:09 AM.
    Thanks from Ian Jeffrey

Page 5 of 22 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Judge says Cosby must stand trial
    By Friday13 in forum Current Events
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 7th July 2016, 04:07 PM
  2. Who is more perverted, Bill Cosby or Bill Clinton??
    By Wrangler in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 334
    Last Post: 2nd June 2016, 12:58 PM
  3. cosby to stand trial
    By the watchman in forum Current Events
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 24th May 2016, 11:05 PM
  4. Mass media accused in rape of Bill Cosby
    By timslash in forum Current Events
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 28th November 2014, 06:51 AM
  5. Zimmerman Trial Monday 7/8
    By Sassy in forum Current Events
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 10th July 2013, 01:02 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed