Boston Globe commentary about Bill Cosby

[Maxirad]

Check out this video.

 

[otjm]

Check out this video.

While it is an interesting video, and I have heard some of the same matters in other publications concerning the testimony (changed, inconsistent, and in some circumstances, outrageous), the commentator somewhat overstates some issues, such as whether or not law has been changed by this case (to wit: spousal testimony). What a trial judge decides does not change the law. If the law changes, that would be done by a Court of Appeals (or equivalent) and the issue would be further subject to appeal to the state Supreme Court.

Over all, it appears that Mr. Crosby and his wife may have had what is often referred to as an “open marriage”, not something the Church would ever approve of. And before we all castigate him and/or his wife, we need to tend to our own sinfulness.

Having said that, there have been allegations which might be cast as “sharks smelling blood in the water”. Pick a number and put enough zeros behind it, and some attorney will likely take a run at it. By no means do I make light of it, but for example, while most of the cases against priest abusers were substantiated, there have been a few cases which were based on someone seeing $$$$ and making phony charges.

From all the information swirling around this case, it appears that Mr. Crosby was less that exemplary as a married man. And much which has come out over time concerning the various charges by various women does not appear to rise to the level of criminal conduct, as adultery has pretty much been done away with as a criminal charge. But as to whether or not there was non-consensual adultery, the cases seem to be weaker and weaker, relying on unproven trauma to shore up changes in testimony and prior statements.

Again, what we see, pro and con concerning the charges are what gets published in one media form or another, and we rely on the veracity of those reporting - we don’t have trial transcripts or other evidence.

It may be that none of the women will ever get a verdict in their favor; and some of the cases may be settled outside the court system for less than what they potentially might have achieved in a trial; none of that proves anyone’s facts. There comes a point where it is cheaper to settle even if totally innocent than pay attorney fees through trial and possible appeal.

And the bottom line is his reputation is in shreds, truth or not about the contact being non-consensual.

 

[IWantGod]

Did you look at the last word in my original post, MaryT777?

In any case, I sure hope the Cos is innocent of the criminal charges against him. Morally, however, the Cos has been guilty of adultery.

I’m not judging. If i make it to heaven it won’t be on merit i assure you.

But please answers this question. Why do great men have such ugly and shocking sins?

 

[Viki63]

I’m not judging. If i make it to heaven it won’t be on merit i assure you.

But please answers this question. Why do great men have such ugly and shocking sins?

Thinking of people like past presidents who committed adultery, and even some pastors, I think it might be because they are powerful, and tend to think they’re above morals that apply to little people.

.

 

[otjm]

I’m not judging. If i make it to heaven it won’t be on merit i assure you.

But please answers this question. Why do great men have such ugly and shocking sins?

Probably for the same reasons that other men have such ugly and shocking sins. There is no sin but that it has something attractive; if a sin was not attractive in some way, no one would sin.

Adultery is not solely the province of the rich and/or famous by any stretch of the imagination. If the rich and/or the famous commit adultery and are found out, they usually have a wide public persona. Someone who is not in that category who does the same does not have the wide persona, so most people don’t know about it - or care.