Bill Cosby

[BoSoxGal]

First, we do not know that they are victims. Second, if they went to the police, why did nothing happen? Cosby was never that important or powerful that if he committed a crime that could be prosecuted, he would be exempt from the law. He was never the most powerful man in the world. He never had that kind of influence that if he committed crimes that were reported to the police, where there was credible evidence, that the police would over look it. Such an assertion is ludicrous.

NO, YOU are ludicrous in that you don't understand how many rapes of all kinds by all kinds of rapists don't get reported or when reported, don't get tried.

THAT is no basis whatsoever as to the credibility of the victims, it's just proof of how little the system cares about rape victims and I'm telling you that from inside the system, someone who actually knows the stats, etc.

I'm sorry, but you are just a stupid ****.

Another one blaming the system for not up holding the law, why am I not surprised ? If a person wants justice, and they can prove their case, then the law will assist them in anyway possible. The main thing is to report it, and not be afraid to do so. And if one is afraid, then they can take measures to secure any evidence that will be needed at a later date, once the fear has passed. No evidence, then as everyone knows there is no case. If the law could convict without evidence, and do it on hearsay, then we would be back to cave man days, and that ain't happening.

You are confusing actual testimony with hearsay. Hearsay is relating a third party story that you, yourself, were not actually privy too. When you stand before the court and relate an event that you actually wittinessed, than you are considered a witness and yes, it is considered testimony.

Shit-house lawyers abound in this thread.

Provide the physical evidence to support the accusation. A defendant deserves as much

I'm not sure where you actually live, but if it is in a country (like the US) with a common-law based system of criminal justice, then physical evidence is far from necessary to gain a conviction - in fact, it's not in existence in many, many convictions.

 

[Pop23]

First, we do not know that they are victims. Second, if they went to the police, why did nothing happen? Cosby was never that important or powerful that if he committed a crime that could be prosecuted, he would be exempt from the law. He was never the most powerful man in the world. He never had that kind of influence that if he committed crimes that were reported to the police, where there was credible evidence, that the police would over look it. Such an assertion is ludicrous.

NO, YOU are ludicrous in that you don't understand how many rapes of all kinds by all kinds of rapists don't get reported or when reported, don't get tried.

THAT is no basis whatsoever as to the credibility of the victims, it's just proof of how little the system cares about rape victims and I'm telling you that from inside the system, someone who actually knows the stats, etc.

I'm sorry, but you are just a stupid ****.

Another one blaming the system for not up holding the law, why am I not surprised ? If a person wants justice, and they can prove their case, then the law will assist them in anyway possible. The main thing is to report it, and not be afraid to do so. And if one is afraid, then they can take measures to secure any evidence that will be needed at a later date, once the fear has passed. No evidence, then as everyone knows there is no case. If the law could convict without evidence, and do it on hearsay, then we would be back to cave man days, and that ain't happening.

You are confusing actual testimony with hearsay. Hearsay is relating a third party story that you, yourself, were not actually privy too. When you stand before the court and relate an event that you actually wittinessed, than you are considered a witness and yes, it is considered testimony.

Shit-house lawyers abound in this thread.

Provide the physical evidence to support the accusation. A defendant deserves as much

I'm not sure where you actually live, but if it is in a country (like the US) with a common-law based system of criminal justice, then physical evidence is far from necessary to gain a conviction - in fact, it's not in existence in many, many convictions.

Agreed, but conviction in these cases are extremely tough especially when the testimony is years old. In this case it's decades old.

I think you will agree

Now, again I will ask what the importance is of a statute of limitations in our criminal law system?

 

[BoSoxGal]

I don't think 19 is a big deal, one nighters, short term relationships, whatever. Especially for men, this is not unusual.

I saw one women on CNN today. He didn't rape her. She says he stood behind her and pressed up against her and had an orgasm. This is 25+ years ago. Is this a sexual assault? Is it a crime? Or is it just bad behavior: she went to his hotel room or dressing room alone with him and he was a creep, but is it a sexual assault and a big enough deal to bring up 25 years later?

YES YOU STUPID TWAT!!!!!!!

 

[Esmeralda]

First, we do not know that they are victims. Second, if they went to the police, why did nothing happen? Cosby was never that important or powerful that if he committed a crime that could be prosecuted, he would be exempt from the law. He was never the most powerful man in the world. He never had that kind of influence that if he committed crimes that were reported to the police, where there was credible evidence, that the police would over look it. Such an assertion is ludicrous.

NO, YOU are ludicrous in that you don't understand how many rapes of all kinds by all kinds of rapists don't get reported or when reported, don't get tried.

THAT is no basis whatsoever as to the credibility of the victims, it's just proof of how little the system cares about rape victims and I'm telling you that from inside the system, someone who actually knows the stats, etc.

I'm sorry, but you are just a stupid ****.

Another one blaming the system for not up holding the law, why am I not surprised ? If a person wants justice, and they can prove their case, then the law will assist them in anyway possible. The main thing is to report it, and not be afraid to do so. And if one is afraid, then they can take measures to secure any evidence that will be needed at a later date, once the fear has passed. No evidence, then as everyone knows there is no case. If the law could convict without evidence, and do it on hearsay, then we would be back to cave man days, and that ain't happening.

You are confusing actual testimony with hearsay. Hearsay is relating a third party story that you, yourself, were not actually privy too. When you stand before the court and relate an event that you actually wittinessed, than you are considered a witness and yes, it is considered testimony.

Shit-house lawyers abound in this thread.

I agree with your last statement, but I strongly, completely, believe that only a 'shit house' lawyer would believe it is acceptable to try, convict and sentence someone based on media stories. If there is anything to this, it should be adjudicated in court, not in the media.

 

[Esmeralda]

I don't think 19 is a big deal, one nighters, short term relationships, whatever. Especially for men, this is not unusual.

I saw one women on CNN today. He didn't rape her. She says he stood behind her and pressed up against her and had an orgasm. This is 25+ years ago. Is this a sexual assault? Is it a crime? Or is it just bad behavior: she went to his hotel room or dressing room alone with him and he was a creep, but is it a sexual assault and a big enough deal to bring up 25 years later?

YES YOU STUPID TWAT!!!!!!!

It's a criminal offense then?

 

[Esmeralda]

You do not know that - you can't.

Testimony is actually considered evidence, by the way.

Not unverifiable testimony. It is weak evidence unless there is verifiable evidence to back it up.

You could not be a stupider bitch, truly. What the fuck do you base your legal opinion on, lady? The shows you watch on TV????

I'm a prosecutor and former/future defense attorney; I actually know the criminal law from inside the the courtroom and out, and I've been studying criminal law for years, both historical and what happens in criminal courts all over the country today.

Rape trials are almost always HE SAID, SHE SAID. There is not DNA evidence in every case - or even in many cases.

CSI is a TV show; in the real world, getting DNA tests results from the state crime lab takes MONTHS, not the minutes/days it does on CSI.

Sorry to burst your bubble and prove to you that TV IS NOT REAL.

Ok, a criminal law attorney

Please explain why our criminal justice system has within it a Statute of limitations.

Thanks in advance.

your question is easily answered by citing the fact that the finest criminal legal system in the world, Great Britain has no statute of limitation for rape.

That's a deflection, not an answer.

Are you a criminal law attorney?

She's pretending to be.

 

[Godboy]

Not unverifiable testimony. It is weak evidence unless there is verifiable evidence to back it up.

You could not be a stupider bitch, truly. What the fuck do you base your legal opinion on, lady? The shows you watch on TV????

I'm a prosecutor and former/future defense attorney; I actually know the criminal law from inside the the courtroom and out, and I've been studying criminal law for years, both historical and what happens in criminal courts all over the country today.

Rape trials are almost always HE SAID, SHE SAID. There is not DNA evidence in every case - or even in many cases.

CSI is a TV show; in the real world, getting DNA tests results from the state crime lab takes MONTHS, not the minutes/days it does on CSI.

Sorry to burst your bubble and prove to you that TV IS NOT REAL.

Ok, a criminal law attorney

Please explain why our criminal justice system has within it a Statute of limitations.

Thanks in advance.

your question is easily answered by citing the fact that the finest criminal legal system in the world, Great Britain has no statute of limitation for rape.

That's a deflection, not an answer.

Are you a criminal law attorney?

She's pretending to be.

Still holding strong eh? Admitting you were wrong is apparently beyond your skill set. You understand that your integrity will now pay the price for it, right?

 

[BoSoxGal]

First, we do not know that they are victims. Second, if they went to the police, why did nothing happen? Cosby was never that important or powerful that if he committed a crime that could be prosecuted, he would be exempt from the law. He was never the most powerful man in the world. He never had that kind of influence that if he committed crimes that were reported to the police, where there was credible evidence, that the police would over look it. Such an assertion is ludicrous.

NO, YOU are ludicrous in that you don't understand how many rapes of all kinds by all kinds of rapists don't get reported or when reported, don't get tried.

THAT is no basis whatsoever as to the credibility of the victims, it's just proof of how little the system cares about rape victims and I'm telling you that from inside the system, someone who actually knows the stats, etc.

I'm sorry, but you are just a stupid ****.

Another one blaming the system for not up holding the law, why am I not surprised ? If a person wants justice, and they can prove their case, then the law will assist them in anyway possible. The main thing is to report it, and not be afraid to do so. And if one is afraid, then they can take measures to secure any evidence that will be needed at a later date, once the fear has passed. No evidence, then as everyone knows there is no case. If the law could convict without evidence, and do it on hearsay, then we would be back to cave man days, and that ain't happening.

You are confusing actual testimony with hearsay. Hearsay is relating a third party story that you, yourself, were not actually privy too. When you stand before the court and relate an event that you actually wittinessed, than you are considered a witness and yes, it is considered testimony.

Shit-house lawyers abound in this thread.

I agree with your last statement, but I strongly, completely, believe that only a 'shit house' lawyer would believe it is acceptable to try, convict and sentence someone based on media stories. If there is anything to this, it should be adjudicated in court, not in the media.

My GOD but you are dense, woman.

He can't be tried in court because it's too late.

The evidence of the victim's allegations would often be THE ONLY EVIDENCE if it went to court. In a rape charge, I doubt he would testify as he'd be committing perjury if he said he didn't rape and if his lawyer knows he did, he can't knowingly suborn perjury.

We, those of us seeing the evidence and weighing its credibility, are many of us American citizens and thus more likely than not fit for jury duty.

In the absence of a statute of limitations, then the only reason Cosby isn't suing for defamation is that he knows a civil jury would likely disbelieve his innocence. The burden there is preponderance of the evidence - not beyond a reasonable doubt.

He doesn't go to prison for being a rapist, ever. But it's fair if the American public who have held him beloved decide to believe, to a preponderance of the evidence, that he is a scumbag serial rapist.

 

[emilynghiem]

Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. His rep is in ruins now anyway even if found innocent. Those women and that comedian that got the ball rolling saw to that.

I am guessing his lawyers advised him to say NOTHING.
if he denies things, and one of those women claims it slanders them as liars,
that could open up a new incident where legal action and court proceedings could follow.

So he was likely told NOT to say anything to avoid triggering any legal action.

If all the other actions passed the statute of limitations, all it takes is a slander or libel charge
and things could escalate.

I really feel for his wife and anyone who tried to help him. It feels horrible to feel like you enabled someone to hurt others.
Maybe if he came out with his issues, he could pave the way for others to get help instead of hiding their problems.

 

[BoSoxGal]

Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. His rep is in ruins now anyway even if found innocent. Those women and that comedian that got the ball rolling saw to that.

I am guessing his lawyers advised him to say NOTHING.
if he denies things, and one of those women claims it slanders them as liars,
that could open up a new incident where legal action and court proceedings could follow.

So he was likely told NOT to say anything to avoid triggering any legal action.

If all the other actions passed the statute of limitations, all it takes is a slander or libel charge
and things could escalate.

I really feel for his wife and anyone who tried to help him. It feels horrible to feel like you enabled someone to hurt others.
Maybe if he came out with his issues, he could pave the way for others to get help instead of hiding their problems.

Committing serial sexual assault over a 50 year period of time is hardly equivalent to having 'issues'. How insulting that is to rape victims.

Serial rapists are psychopaths. Psychopaths are particularly good at playing the emotions of other people, to include making them laugh.

 

[beagle9]

Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. His rep is in ruins now anyway even if found innocent. Those women and that comedian that got the ball rolling saw to that.

I am guessing his lawyers advised him to say NOTHING.
if he denies things, and one of those women claims it slanders them as liars,
that could open up a new incident where legal action and court proceedings could follow.

So he was likely told NOT to say anything to avoid triggering any legal action.

If all the other actions passed the statute of limitations, all it takes is a slander or libel charge
and things could escalate.

I really feel for his wife and anyone who tried to help him. It feels horrible to feel like you enabled someone to hurt others.
Maybe if he came out with his issues, he could pave the way for others to get help instead of hiding their problems.

Committing serial sexual assault over a 50 year period of time is hardly equivalent to having 'issues'. How insulting that is to rape victims.

Serial rapists are psychopaths. Psychopaths are particularly good at playing the emotions of other people, to include making them laugh.

You say these things as if you already know his guilt, and you say them as if there true without a doubt, but you don't know do you ?..

 

[emilynghiem]

Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. His rep is in ruins now anyway even if found innocent. Those women and that comedian that got the ball rolling saw to that.

I am guessing his lawyers advised him to say NOTHING.
if he denies things, and one of those women claims it slanders them as liars,
that could open up a new incident where legal action and court proceedings could follow.

So he was likely told NOT to say anything to avoid triggering any legal action.

If all the other actions passed the statute of limitations, all it takes is a slander or libel charge
and things could escalate.

I really feel for his wife and anyone who tried to help him. It feels horrible to feel like you enabled someone to hurt others.
Maybe if he came out with his issues, he could pave the way for others to get help instead of hiding their problems.

Committing serial sexual assault over a 50 year period of time is hardly equivalent to having 'issues'. How insulting that is to rape victims.

Serial rapists are psychopaths. Psychopaths are particularly good at playing the emotions of other people, to include making them laugh.

Dear bigskygal
I have no idea how big or how widespread these complaints are.
they range from harassment to attempted assaults to rape.
so they are moer than just rape.

What I mean by issues is that whatever he has,
if he has a criminal predatory addiction or illness,
that needs to be diagnosed treated and cured like any disease.

I have no idea what he or Clinton or whoever has.
So i left it open and just called all the problems internally or externally as "issues" to cover the
entire range, from the cause to the consequences, and any aftermath as well.

how the media handles it is going to determine if this is used to get more people to
come out and get help, or if more people keep blaming victims and enabling and hiding problems.

those are issues too, not just the rape but the entire rape culture

so I was trying to be more comprehensive and cover the whole picture
I wasn't trying to downplay the rape and certainly not insult or demean any victims

if we are going to solve this problem then in cases where people really do have a sickness
it needs to be diagnosed early and treated just like cancer
before it becomes dangerous and deadly

if we keep stigmatizing it as having no cure people won't get help for it

I know of people who have been cured of sexual addiction and criminal sickness
some are only in remission and know they aren't fully cured, but they have enough control to stay away
and not put anyone in danger, others claim to be completely cured, and others are in denial about it.

how are we going to help more men and more people who know such men
come out of the closet and get help before it's too late and someone gets raped or killed

those are issues, too
i'm looking at prevention also, what are we going to do to stop this early on before rape happens to someone else

 

[I.P.Freely]

Not unverifiable testimony. It is weak evidence unless there is verifiable evidence to back it up.

You could not be a stupider bitch, truly. What the fuck do you base your legal opinion on, lady? The shows you watch on TV????

I'm a prosecutor and former/future defense attorney; I actually know the criminal law from inside the the courtroom and out, and I've been studying criminal law for years, both historical and what happens in criminal courts all over the country today.

Rape trials are almost always HE SAID, SHE SAID. There is not DNA evidence in every case - or even in many cases.

CSI is a TV show; in the real world, getting DNA tests results from the state crime lab takes MONTHS, not the minutes/days it does on CSI.

Sorry to burst your bubble and prove to you that TV IS NOT REAL.

Ok, a criminal law attorney

Please explain why our criminal justice system has within it a Statute of limitations.

Thanks in advance.

your question is easily answered by citing the fact that the finest criminal legal system in the world, Great Britain has no statute of limitation for rape.

That's a deflection, not an answer.

Are you a criminal law attorney?

She's pretending to be.

Twerp the question was asked of me, please try and keep up.

 

[I.P.Freely]

Gal this may interest you, Clifford was the "go too" celebrity PR consultant if you were caught with your pants down.
BBC News - Max Clifford jailed for eight years for sex assaults

 

[Pop23]

Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. His rep is in ruins now anyway even if found innocent. Those women and that comedian that got the ball rolling saw to that.

I am guessing his lawyers advised him to say NOTHING.
if he denies things, and one of those women claims it slanders them as liars,
that could open up a new incident where legal action and court proceedings could follow.

So he was likely told NOT to say anything to avoid triggering any legal action.

If all the other actions passed the statute of limitations, all it takes is a slander or libel charge
and things could escalate.

I really feel for his wife and anyone who tried to help him. It feels horrible to feel like you enabled someone to hurt others.
Maybe if he came out with his issues, he could pave the way for others to get help instead of hiding their problems.

Committing serial sexual assault over a 50 year period of time is hardly equivalent to having 'issues'. How insulting that is to rape victims.

Serial rapists are psychopaths. Psychopaths are particularly good at playing the emotions of other people, to include making them laugh.

So all comedians are psycopaths because they are playing emotions?

Actresses are trained to play emotions. Right?

Attorneys addressing jury's are renowned for playing emotions?

Same could be said of false accusers. And yes, many false accusers are also psycopaths.

See, Kangeroo courts are fun!

Now, back to the question as to why our criminal justice system has a statute of limitation?

Please?

 

[Sarah G]

Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. His rep is in ruins now anyway even if found innocent. Those women and that comedian that got the ball rolling saw to that.

I am guessing his lawyers advised him to say NOTHING.
if he denies things, and one of those women claims it slanders them as liars,
that could open up a new incident where legal action and court proceedings could follow.

So he was likely told NOT to say anything to avoid triggering any legal action.

If all the other actions passed the statute of limitations, all it takes is a slander or libel charge
and things could escalate.

I really feel for his wife and anyone who tried to help him. It feels horrible to feel like you enabled someone to hurt others.
Maybe if he came out with his issues, he could pave the way for others to get help instead of hiding their problems.

Committing serial sexual assault over a 50 year period of time is hardly equivalent to having 'issues'. How insulting that is to rape victims.

Serial rapists are psychopaths. Psychopaths are particularly good at playing the emotions of other people, to include making them laugh.

So all comedians are psycopaths because they are playing emotions?

Same could be said of false accusers. And yes, many false accusers are also psycopaths.

See, Kangeroo courts are fun!

Now, back to the question as to why our criminal justice system has a statute of limitation?

Please?

Not ALL but a lot of them are really nutty:

Comedians score high on psychotic traits

Perhaps the reason comedians make us laugh is because they show high levels of psychotic traits, suggests new research from the University of Oxford in the UK.

They also score high on introverted and extroverted personality traits, say the researchers.

Writing in the latest online issue of the British Journal of Psychiatry, the researchers explain how the popular belief that creativity is linked to madness has led to many studies, yet despite comedy being a prime example of creativity, little research has been done specifically on comedy and humor.

Co-author Gordon Claridge, Emeritus Professor of Abnormal Psychology at Oxford's department of Experimental Psychology, describes what they found:

"The creative elements needed to produce humour are strikingly similar to those characterising the cognitive style of people with psychosis - both schizophrenia and bipolar disorder."

But while schizophrenic psychosis itself can be detrimental to humor, its lesser form can help people "think outside the box" and associate ideas in odd or unusual ways, he explains, and adds:

"Equally, manic thinking, which is common in people with bipolar disorder, may help people combine ideas to form new, original and humorous connections."

Comedians score high on psychotic traits - Medical News Today

 

[Pop23]

Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. His rep is in ruins now anyway even if found innocent. Those women and that comedian that got the ball rolling saw to that.

I am guessing his lawyers advised him to say NOTHING.
if he denies things, and one of those women claims it slanders them as liars,
that could open up a new incident where legal action and court proceedings could follow.

So he was likely told NOT to say anything to avoid triggering any legal action.

If all the other actions passed the statute of limitations, all it takes is a slander or libel charge
and things could escalate.

I really feel for his wife and anyone who tried to help him. It feels horrible to feel like you enabled someone to hurt others.
Maybe if he came out with his issues, he could pave the way for others to get help instead of hiding their problems.

Committing serial sexual assault over a 50 year period of time is hardly equivalent to having 'issues'. How insulting that is to rape victims.

Serial rapists are psychopaths. Psychopaths are particularly good at playing the emotions of other people, to include making them laugh.

So all comedians are psycopaths because they are playing emotions?

Same could be said of false accusers. And yes, many false accusers are also psycopaths.

See, Kangeroo courts are fun!

Now, back to the question as to why our criminal justice system has a statute of limitation?

Please?

Not ALL but a lot of them are really nutty:

Comedians score high on psychotic traits

Perhaps the reason comedians make us laugh is because they show high levels of psychotic traits, suggests new research from the University of Oxford in the UK.

They also score high on introverted and extroverted personality traits, say the researchers.

Writing in the latest online issue of the British Journal of Psychiatry, the researchers explain how the popular belief that creativity is linked to madness has led to many studies, yet despite comedy being a prime example of creativity, little research has been done specifically on comedy and humor.

Co-author Gordon Claridge, Emeritus Professor of Abnormal Psychology at Oxford's department of Experimental Psychology, describes what they found:

"The creative elements needed to produce humour are strikingly similar to those characterising the cognitive style of people with psychosis - both schizophrenia and bipolar disorder."

But while schizophrenic psychosis itself can be detrimental to humor, its lesser form can help people "think outside the box" and associate ideas in odd or unusual ways, he explains, and adds:

"Equally, manic thinking, which is common in people with bipolar disorder, may help people combine ideas to form new, original and humorous connections."

Comedians score high on psychotic traits - Medical News Today

Cool article (no really, I mean that)

Where do those that have been found to falsely accuse fall on that scale?

 

[Sarah G]

Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. His rep is in ruins now anyway even if found innocent. Those women and that comedian that got the ball rolling saw to that.

I am guessing his lawyers advised him to say NOTHING.
if he denies things, and one of those women claims it slanders them as liars,
that could open up a new incident where legal action and court proceedings could follow.

So he was likely told NOT to say anything to avoid triggering any legal action.

If all the other actions passed the statute of limitations, all it takes is a slander or libel charge
and things could escalate.

I really feel for his wife and anyone who tried to help him. It feels horrible to feel like you enabled someone to hurt others.
Maybe if he came out with his issues, he could pave the way for others to get help instead of hiding their problems.

Committing serial sexual assault over a 50 year period of time is hardly equivalent to having 'issues'. How insulting that is to rape victims.

Serial rapists are psychopaths. Psychopaths are particularly good at playing the emotions of other people, to include making them laugh.

So all comedians are psycopaths because they are playing emotions?

Same could be said of false accusers. And yes, many false accusers are also psycopaths.

See, Kangeroo courts are fun!

Now, back to the question as to why our criminal justice system has a statute of limitation?

Please?

Not ALL but a lot of them are really nutty:

Comedians score high on psychotic traits

Perhaps the reason comedians make us laugh is because they show high levels of psychotic traits, suggests new research from the University of Oxford in the UK.

They also score high on introverted and extroverted personality traits, say the researchers.

Writing in the latest online issue of the British Journal of Psychiatry, the researchers explain how the popular belief that creativity is linked to madness has led to many studies, yet despite comedy being a prime example of creativity, little research has been done specifically on comedy and humor.

Co-author Gordon Claridge, Emeritus Professor of Abnormal Psychology at Oxford's department of Experimental Psychology, describes what they found:

"The creative elements needed to produce humour are strikingly similar to those characterising the cognitive style of people with psychosis - both schizophrenia and bipolar disorder."

But while schizophrenic psychosis itself can be detrimental to humor, its lesser form can help people "think outside the box" and associate ideas in odd or unusual ways, he explains, and adds:

"Equally, manic thinking, which is common in people with bipolar disorder, may help people combine ideas to form new, original and humorous connections."

Comedians score high on psychotic traits - Medical News Today

Cool article (no really, I mean that)

Where do those that have been found to falsely accuse fall on that scale?

They don't fall anywhere Pop, they're just plain ole victims.

 

[Pop23]

I am guessing his lawyers advised him to say NOTHING.
if he denies things, and one of those women claims it slanders them as liars,
that could open up a new incident where legal action and court proceedings could follow.

So he was likely told NOT to say anything to avoid triggering any legal action.

If all the other actions passed the statute of limitations, all it takes is a slander or libel charge
and things could escalate.

I really feel for his wife and anyone who tried to help him. It feels horrible to feel like you enabled someone to hurt others.
Maybe if he came out with his issues, he could pave the way for others to get help instead of hiding their problems.

Committing serial sexual assault over a 50 year period of time is hardly equivalent to having 'issues'. How insulting that is to rape victims.

Serial rapists are psychopaths. Psychopaths are particularly good at playing the emotions of other people, to include making them laugh.

So all comedians are psycopaths because they are playing emotions?

Same could be said of false accusers. And yes, many false accusers are also psycopaths.

See, Kangeroo courts are fun!

Now, back to the question as to why our criminal justice system has a statute of limitation?

Please?

Not ALL but a lot of them are really nutty:

Comedians score high on psychotic traits

Perhaps the reason comedians make us laugh is because they show high levels of psychotic traits, suggests new research from the University of Oxford in the UK.

They also score high on introverted and extroverted personality traits, say the researchers.

Writing in the latest online issue of the British Journal of Psychiatry, the researchers explain how the popular belief that creativity is linked to madness has led to many studies, yet despite comedy being a prime example of creativity, little research has been done specifically on comedy and humor.

Co-author Gordon Claridge, Emeritus Professor of Abnormal Psychology at Oxford's department of Experimental Psychology, describes what they found:

"The creative elements needed to produce humour are strikingly similar to those characterising the cognitive style of people with psychosis - both schizophrenia and bipolar disorder."

But while schizophrenic psychosis itself can be detrimental to humor, its lesser form can help people "think outside the box" and associate ideas in odd or unusual ways, he explains, and adds:

"Equally, manic thinking, which is common in people with bipolar disorder, may help people combine ideas to form new, original and humorous connections."

Comedians score high on psychotic traits - Medical News Today

Cool article (no really, I mean that)

Where do those that have been found to falsely accuse fall on that scale?

They don't fall anywhere Pop, they're just plain ole victims.

Wouldn't a false accusser HAVE a victim, not be a victim?

 

[Desperado]

I don't care who accuses whom of what. Those women need to PROVE it. Kinda hard to do so many years later, ain't it.

I can see your point but did you ask the same question when Catholic priests were accused of sex crimes that happened 25 or 30 years ago?