Bill Cosby is a big old rapist (on the loose)

  On 7/1/2021 at 3:40 PM, J3FF3R00 said:

 I have to say, after watching the Leaving Neverland doc (and the Oprah interview with the survivors), I 100% believe he is a straight up monster. 

leaving neverland is probably the dumbest "documentary" i've ever seen. far dumber than ancient aliens imo. zero evidence provided by the alleged victims, zero substance. if it convinced you of jackson's guilt, there's nothing i can do for you. 

  On 7/1/2021 at 3:51 PM, brian trageskin said:

leaving neverland is probably the dumbest "documentary" i've ever seen. far dumber than ancient aliens imo. zero evidence provided by the alleged victims, zero substance. if it convinced you of jackson's guilt, there's nothing i can do for you. 

It actually didn’t convince me of his guilt. I think I always believed he was a  but I was avoiding hearing the details because I didn’t want to lose all of the admiration I once had for him. Since watching the doc, I don’t think it’s really changed anything but it’s helped me accept what I was already fearing to be the truth. 
That James Safechuck dude in the doc (the one who MJ “married” in a mock wedding ceremony) is straight up traumatized. 
I also understand how the legal system works, re: evidence, etc. I just know I would never let my kids sleep in a bed with an adult male celebrity that I didn’t know personally, especially one who’s identity was basically a regressive childhood fantasy. That is not normal and screams 

  On 7/1/2021 at 4:04 PM, J3FF3R00 said:

I think I always believed he was a  but I was avoiding hearing the details because I didn’t want to lose all of the admiration I once had for him. Since watching the doc, I don’t think it’s really changed anything but it’s helped me accept what I was already fearing to be the truth. 

confirmation bias

  On 7/1/2021 at 4:04 PM, J3FF3R00 said:

That James Safechuck dude in the doc (the one who MJ “married” in a mock wedding ceremony) is straight up traumatized. 

how do you know? can you read people's mind? 

  On 7/1/2021 at 4:04 PM, J3FF3R00 said:

I also understand how the legal system works, re: evidence, etc.

if you do, why are you convinced of someone's guilt when there is zero evidence out there? in the absence of evidence, there's no way for you to know if the person's guilty. deciding that they're guilty anyway is being plain irrational. 

  On 7/1/2021 at 2:55 PM, Rubin Farr said:

They could have released him during COVID to house arrest, but he has made no efforts to reform, do therapy for sexual predators, engage in any accountability or make the slightest effort to address his victims’ suffering, remember he was doing this vile shit for half a century, more than some lifetimes. I wanted to hear he died as well, let him burn in Hell next to Jacko.

At his age, that doesn't surprise me. Why even bother with therapy? He comes from a different day and age where stuff he did might have been close to the norm, tbh. I see this more as a societal/generational issue, than something which is purely in the hands of some individual.

As far is I'm concerned, the question shouldn't be why he's free again. Or why he hasn't shown remorse. But the question should be why he wasn't put behind bars way earlier. Because guys doing stuff like that should be caught way sooner. Being resentful about Cosby is a waste of energy, as far as I'm concerned. Or about Jacko. Which is a completely different story, imo. Everything surrounding Jacko is wacko. Not just the man himself. I'm not going to bother to burn my fingers on that one.

  On 7/1/2021 at 4:25 PM, brian trageskin said:

confirmation bias

how do you know? can you read people's mind? 

if you do, why are you convinced of someone's guilt when there is zero evidence out there? in the absence of evidence, there's no way for you to know if the person's guilty. deciding that they're guilty anyway is being plain irrational. 

Cool post. Would read again. 

  On 7/1/2021 at 3:38 PM, brian trageskin said:

you can facepalm me all you want rubin, it doesn't change a thing to the fact that i'm right. there is no evidence that jackson ever assaulted a child. whether you like it or not.

the jacko case is frustrating and muddied in every way over the years. what makes it all even muddier is he paid 10s of millions of dollars to families to settle things and keep it all out of court. right? 

the guy had a bizarre life and was a super talented pop genius and should've had some therapy at a young age before he became addicted to crippling amounts of medications. apparently he was taking 40mg of xanax every other day or every day or something. you don't do that if you're a healthy individual w/a sound mind. 2mg of xanax is enough to make the average person sleep for 12 hours. 

  On 7/1/2021 at 4:37 PM, ignatius said:

the jacko case is frustrating and muddied in every way over the years. what makes it all even muddier is he paid 10s of millions of dollars to families to settle things and keep it all out of court. right? 

i can't remember the details and can't be bothered checking but paying millions of dollars to families doesn't prove anything. this type of lawsuit is really bad for business. paying to make the thing go away is cheap and it's the smartest decision you can make to protect your business. the only downside is it makes you look guilty.

Cosby was jailed simply for vengeance/punishment. I cannot be convinced that he was criminal threat at his age and physical state, people just wanted him locked up as "payback" for things he did years ago, which of course goes against the current prevailing lib narrative of the injustices of our penal system, how it *shouldn't* treat prison as punishment, but rather as rehabilitation etc etc. I understand he refused any counseling but that was *after* he was going to prison for the rest of his life. What about a deal where he was under house arrest and given sexual predator counseling or whatever. He might have been more accepting. 

  On 7/1/2021 at 4:37 PM, ignatius said:

the jacko case is frustrating and muddied in every way over the years. what makes it all even muddier is he paid 10s of millions of dollars to families to settle things and keep it all out of court. right? 

the guy had a bizarre life and was a super talented pop genius and should've had some therapy at a young age before he became addicted to crippling amounts of medications. apparently he was taking 40mg of xanax every other day or every day or something. you don't do that if you're a healthy individual w/a sound mind. 2mg of xanax is enough to make the average person sleep for 12 hours. 

Expand  

Yes, we can play armchair lawyers forever and no one will know how fucked up Jacko’s inner circle was, but even if you put aside the alleged victims, for monetary gain or whatever, someone like Sheryl Crow, who was on that tour, really had no reason to lie, and she’s seen some shady shit from the Jacko crew:

https://www.nme.com/news/music/sheryl-crow-saw-really-strange-things-time-michael-jacksons-backing-singer-2539429

https://www.insider.com/sheryl-crow-speaks-out-about-sexual-harassment-michael-jacksons-manager-2021-6

  On 7/1/2021 at 5:00 PM, Rubin Farr said:

Yes, we can play armchair lawyers forever and no one will know how fucked up Jacko’s inner circle was, but even if you put aside the alleged victims, for monetary gain or whatever, someone like Sheryl Crow, who was on that tour, really had no reason to lie, and she’s seen some shady shit from the Jacko crew:

https://www.nme.com/news/music/sheryl-crow-saw-really-strange-things-time-michael-jacksons-backing-singer-2539429

https://www.insider.com/sheryl-crow-speaks-out-about-sexual-harassment-michael-jacksons-manager-2021-6

Expand  

i hear ya.. she doesn't really say much though just that she has questions about the strange things she saw but gives no context for what 'strange' means. did he have weird behaviors and routines that involved self sodomizing with bananas or was he sucking the blood of children before every set? 

it's all fodder now though. .i mean.. media distorts.. embellishes etc.. various narratives exist.  to quote recently dead rumsfeld.. "We don't know what we don't know" 

  On 7/1/2021 at 4:49 PM, dr lopez said:

Cosby was jailed simply for vengeance/punishment. I cannot be convinced that he was criminal threat at his age and physical state, people just wanted him locked up as "payback" for things he did years ago, which of course goes against the current prevailing lib narrative of the injustices of our penal system, how it *shouldn't* treat prison as punishment, but rather as rehabilitation etc etc. I understand he refused any counseling but that was *after* he was going to prison for the rest of his life. What about a deal where he was under house arrest and given sexual predator counseling or whatever. He might have been more accepting. 

Expand  

er.. i mean.. prosecuting people for things they did when they were younger so long as the statute of limitations of those crimes haven't been reached is how the legal system works. saying "oh he's old let's not hold him accountable" is not acceptable to me. it's not like he had a bunch of unpaid parking tickets. he drugged and raped women. i'm not worried about his feelings and what he's willing to accept as a deal. 

  On 7/1/2021 at 4:29 PM, Satans Little Helper said:

  On 7/1/2021 at 2:55 PM, Rubin Farr said:

At his age, that doesn't surprise me. Why even bother with therapy? He comes from a different day and age where stuff he did might have been close to the norm, tbh. I see this more as a societal/generational issue, than something which is purely in the hands of some individual.

Expand  

During what day and age was it ok to drug and rape women?

It’s never even been somewhat common, let alone “close to the norm”.

critics are raving, bill cosby comeback tour "not to be slept on"

  On 7/1/2021 at 3:22 PM, brian trageskin said:

there is absolutely zero evidence that jacko ever assaulted anyone. people need to stop believing this myth. 

what about the evidence, though

https://www.npr.org/2019/03/05/699995484/michael-jackson-a-quarter-century-of-sexual-abuse-allegations

lol why have you got ziptie guy as your avatar. I'm chortling irl.

what a photo. that's the senate chamber

  On 7/1/2021 at 6:04 PM, very honest said:

what about the evidence, though

https://www.npr.org/2019/03/05/699995484/michael-jackson-a-quarter-century-of-sexual-abuse-allegations

what evidence? 

i mean solid/hard evidence of guilt. i'll help you: there is none. 

  On 7/1/2021 at 5:26 PM, ignatius said:

er.. i mean.. prosecuting people for things they did when they were younger so long as the statute of limitations of those crimes haven't been reached is how the legal system works. saying "oh he's old let's not hold him accountable" is not acceptable to me. it's not like he had a bunch of unpaid parking tickets. he drugged and raped women. i'm not worried about his feelings and what he's willing to accept as a deal. 

I didn't say he shouldn't be prosecuted or charged, I'm saying the 10 or so years he got as an 80 year old was essentially a cruel death sentence, based on our completely outdated and problematic understanding of prison as "punishment" and "revenge" for crimes committed decades ago, rather than the plethora of other options for punitive house arrest, criminal rehabilitation, counseling, etc. The crime and the person is largely irrelevant. I agree his alleged crimes are disgusting and horrific. I just do not enjoy the discourse from relatively progressive camps who generally argue for lighter prison sentences, and a defunding of our disastrous incarceration industry (which I agree with) then suddenly ignoring their own narratives and foaming at the mouth about an 83 yr old half blind guy getting released from prison. Honestly what danger does this man pose? None... so then it's *just* about some sort of confused punitive equivocation? 

  On 7/1/2021 at 6:23 PM, dr lopez said:

I didn't say he shouldn't be prosecuted or charged, I'm saying the 10 or so years he got as an 80 year old was essentially a cruel death sentence, based on our completely outdated and problematic understanding of prison as "punishment" and "revenge" for crimes committed decades ago, rather than the plethora of other options for punitive house arrest, criminal rehabilitation, counseling, etc. The crime and the person is largely irrelevant. I agree his alleged crimes are disgusting and horrific. I just do not enjoy the discourse from relatively progressive camps who generally argue for lighter prison sentences, and a defunding of our disastrous incarceration industry (which I agree with) then suddenly ignoring their own narratives and foaming at the mouth about an 83 yr old half blind guy getting released from prison. Honestly what danger does this man pose? None... so then it's *just* about some sort of confused punitive equivocation? 

Expand  

perhaps.. but i've not heard a chorus of liberals reacting but i'm not paying attention i guess. the courts did what they did w/regards to sentencing based on guidelines for the crimes he was convicted of. i'm sure the judge considered his age, the crimes etc when sentencing was handed down. 

i don't know how his cases factors in to the larger issues w/the criminal justice system regarding punitive vs rehabilitative sentencing.. or what prison he was in and what it was like there. old people who committed horrible crimes are often sentenced to what is a life sentence. how that should be handled is for legal minds and not a chorus of liberals on twitter or whatever. 

i'm all for reform and rehabilitation but not sure what the ideal solution is in this situation. to me his sentenced seemed fair but i don't have a law degree or knowledge of precedents 

  On 7/1/2021 at 6:18 PM, brian trageskin said:

what evidence? 

i mean solid/hard evidence of guilt. i'll help you: there is none. 

evidence is not proof. they are different things. testimony is evidence

proof generally takes the form of a careful argument connecting multiple pieces of evidence

maybe check out prosecutor's closing arguments from when he was indicted if you are looking for a proof

  On 7/1/2021 at 6:33 PM, very honest said:

evidence is not proof. they are different things. testimony is evidence

oh ok. i meant irrefutable proof then. i guess

  On 7/1/2021 at 6:33 PM, very honest said:

maybe check out prosecutor's closing arguments from when he was indicted if you are looking for a proof

can't be bothered doing this myself. show me the proof. 

lol

  On 7/1/2021 at 5:31 PM, rhmilo said:

During what day and age was it ok to drug and rape women?

It’s never even been somewhat common, let alone “close to the norm”.

Not saying it was OK.

About commonality:

  Quote

Methaqualone became increasingly popular as a recreational drug and club drug in the late 1960s and 1970s, known variously as "ludes" or "disco biscuits" due to its widespread use during the popularity of disco in the 1970s, or "sopers" (also "soaps") in the United States and "mandrakes" and "mandies" in the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand. The substance was sold both as a free base and as salt (hydrochloride).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methaqualone

  Quote

The full transcript of his deposition was also released to the media by a court reporting service. In his testimony, Cosby admitted to casual sex, involving the recreational use of the sedative methaqualone (Quaalude), with a series of young women, and acknowledged that his dispensing the prescription drug was illegal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Cosby#Sexual_assault_cases

Don't think I've said anything silly, tbh. It was a popular recreational drug. If I remember correctly, he had multiple contacts with a lot of these women. Again, not saying it was OK. But I do think, you could argue the use of these drugs weren't out of the ordinary at that point in time. Even if the circumstances in which Cosby did were highly suspect. To say the least. (I don't have the facts, so I won't bother with pretending to know more)

Is this a discussion about having a discussion? Or are we going to split hairs about something we probably largely agree on?

  On 7/1/2021 at 6:52 PM, very honest said:

lol

lol, i'm being serious btw. i'm confident there's nothing remotely resembling irrefutable proof of jackson's guilt out there but i'm happy to be proven wrong. i really can't be bothered looking for info and i'm not the one claiming something happened, i don't have to do anything lol  

  On 7/1/2021 at 6:18 PM, brian trageskin said:

what evidence? 

i mean solid/hard evidence of guilt. i'll help you: there is none. 

this isn't a court of law and we're not jurors. if that was the situation, you could have a point that what evidence there is isn't enough to establish guilt and legally he remains innocent. but remaining legally innocent doesn't tell you everything in the end about whether he did or didn't actually commit the deed, it just says there isn't enough evidence of the deed to meet the high bar required to prove guilt. we're speculating, and insofar as speculation goes, the probability remains high given the total picture of things that he was a wrong'un (and also a hugely talented pop genius). if he really was innocent he could've made his life a lot easier but not doing any of the weird shit he did.

btw I did a round of jury duty recently so I'm a legal expert now. free consultations for WATMMers facing anything upto aggravated assault, PM me.

  On 7/1/2021 at 6:23 PM, dr lopez said:

I didn't say he shouldn't be prosecuted or charged, I'm saying the 10 or so years he got as an 80 year old was essentially a cruel death sentence, based on our completely outdated and problematic understanding of prison as "punishment" and "revenge" for crimes committed decades ago, rather than the plethora of other options for punitive house arrest, criminal rehabilitation, counseling, etc. The crime and the person is largely irrelevant. I agree his alleged crimes are disgusting and horrific. I just do not enjoy the discourse from relatively progressive camps who generally argue for lighter prison sentences, and a defunding of our disastrous incarceration industry (which I agree with) then suddenly ignoring their own narratives and foaming at the mouth about an 83 yr old half blind guy getting released from prison. Honestly what danger does this man pose? None... so then it's *just* about some sort of confused punitive equivocation? 

Expand  

I was in disagreement with your earlier post but when you put it this way, I can see your point. seems that the problem is that there isn't enough agreement/acceptance of what a new US justice system that features more progressive correction practices would look like. it just defaults to "can't let this guy get away with this shit, throw him in the slammer". without universal reform to at least try to arrive all together at a better system, the law will continue being applied unevenly by the various states/DAs and being influenced by the optics, which I agree happened here. the foaming at the mouth from twitter types is probably a case of people being blinded by their excessive metoo hardons and breaking their own internal logic.