[Serious] PSA: Rape Apologetics

[Rev. Rye]

It's like this, Huggy. He admitted to drugging them and screwing them. The legal system screwed up, it's true. He's guilty of rape, he admitted it himself. Getting out of prison because due process wasn't followed does not make him innocent. If you don't want to understand and admit that, all hope is lost on you.

Just so everyone's clear, not only does Cosby have 5 dozen women accusing him of sexual assault, but the guy admitted to drugging women with sedatives to make them more pliable for sex in a sworn deposition in 2005. And the only reasons he's not still in jail are because said deposition was given under the condition that its contents not be used in a criminal trial. While the cops are permitted to lie to perps about most anything, the sole exception is that they can't lie about or renege on promises of immunity. That shit can be, has been, and just was used to overturn convictions. That said, evidently, even Cosby's legal team didn't know this at the time. I'm sure any or all of the other 59 women who've accused him would love to be able to do their own cases, but the only reason they don't do so is because the law won't allow them to do so.

I know the court of public opinion can be utterly barbaric. I haven't witnessed an actual lynching, but everything I've read about it tells me it's disgusting on every level. I've mentioned multiple times another incident (the Brooke Hart case), one where the victims were A) White, and B) likely guilty of the crime they were accused of, and how, even divorced from the racial aspects and the fact that many were accused, but innocent, the court of public opinion can still be utterly vile. Even these days, where the worst outcome that befalls many people is making them be the object of Twitter's latest 2-minutes' hate, it can strike me as, at my most cynical, a form of McCarthyism with varying degrees of flesh-world impotence and a possible hope of being as effective as Stalinism. But, when the victim is a man who's been accused of drugging and sexually assaulting dozens of women, and has actually admitted to such?

---

LFC's question was regarding the accusers who waited past the statute of limitations... On what evidence am I to base my determination of guilt or innocence?

On their testimonies, on the cumulative effect of dozens of said testimonies (some going back from even before shit hit the fan in 2014), on the fact that Cosby has admitted he drugged women for sex (which A: squares with many of said women's testimonies, and B: is rape), and on the fact that you have both a functioning brain (though this may be up for debate, I admit) and enough investment in the case that you're still going on about it over the course of several years.