• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Bill Cosby trial

mgidm86 said:
....
One thing I'm concerned about with this Cosby thing is that people are applying today's social standards to things that happened decades ago (other accusers). That seems tricky in a trial like this. It seems people can't imagine doing drugs and having sex, and that a woman might choose to do so. Our standards have changed.
....
Click to expand...

What? You believe Cosby?

1/ Constand first reported the 2004 assault to authorities in 2005, long before any of the other Cosby cases came to light. Prosecutors declined to file charges, but she filed a civil suit and reached a private settlement soon after. Unsealed testimony from that suit helped initiate the criminal charges against Cosby now.

2/ She is a lesbian. It's exceedingly unlikely that she would impulsively make herself cheerfully available to a man 34 years older.

To most minds -- maybe not yours or Cosby's -- "doing drugs and having sex" is not quite the same thing as being given drugs and assaulted while comatose.
 
I'm pretty sure that social standards haven't changed that much. It wasn't socially acceptable to drug women in the 70s, 80s, or 90s. At least when I dating during those years.
 
Yeggster said:
Is that kind of info ever released?
Click to expand...

Sure. Jurors are generally free to talk about their experiences, but they don't have to. After some high-profile cases, jurors have appeared on TV news shows. In this particular case, the judge asked jurors to be restrained, knowing that a new jury will be selected for a new trial, and the jurors' names have not been released, but they're not under a gag order.
 
Bob001 said:
Sure. Jurors are generally free to talk about their experiences, but they don't have to. After some high-profile cases, jurors have appeared on TV news shows. In this particular case, the judge asked jurors to be restrained, knowing that a new jury will be selected for a new trial, and the jurors' names have not been released, but they're not under a gag order.
Click to expand...

I believe they cannot talk about the deliberations though. The actual deliberations are private. I recently read somewhere (I am trying to remember where) what a judge said to the jurors just before dismissing them. One of the things was that they could not speak about the deliberations or how they voted. Of course this might be different from state to state, I really don't know.
 
In New Zealand the names can never be published, but a jury member in the David Bain case was interviewed on camera later, but not named. Many people would recognise her, she had a strong Canadian accent.
 
Him doing the Fat Albert "Hey Hey Hey" as he walked out was an odd choice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom