Nolte: We’re All Safer When the Constitution Protects a Bill Cosby

[Superbadbrutha]

we all are safer because the PA Supreme Court upheld the Constitutional safe guards in this case.

This case, and there have been many others, is an example of what happens when someone is targeted and mob rule as opposed to the rule of law is followed.

So now you are ok with women being drugged and assaulted, as long as, the black guy is a boot lickin, Uncle Tom.

 

[SavannahMann]

Oh I thought he was prosecuted because he was drugging women and assaulting them. Would you have been ok with it if one of these women were your mother or sister.

There is a reason we don’t let family members or people who know either party on the Jury. Just so that particular question is moot.

But let’s talk about why Cosby is free. Yes. It was a technicality. But those have helped protect the Constitution for two centuries.

I honestly believe it is better for a thousand guilty men to go free than one innocent man go to prison.

 

[struth]

Oh, I agree, the thing is, in the book, Uncle Tom is the protagonist... but later black intellectuals saw him as the problem. People who are too subservient, too willing to please white folks. That's why it's become the angry epitatet it's become.

Sorry, man, the one thing I can see just from my lifetime, is white people don't make changes because you are nice to them. They make changes when you threaten to break their shit. This was the case in the 1960's, when my parents were terrified the riots would spread to our neighborhood. It was the case after Rodney King was beaten, and we got some reforms. And it was the case after the BLM riots.

Shouldn't be that way, but it is.

hahaha you obviously didn’t read the book…that is not what Uncle Tom did in the novel

poor uneducated

 

[struth]

So now you are ok with women being drugged and assaulted, as long as, the black guy is a boot lickin, Uncle Tom.

when did i say that?

I am not surprised you have a problem with uncle tom, the slave masters in the novel did too…because he wouldn’t submit like yourself

 

[JoeB131]

I don’t agree. I was raised in the ‘70’s and ‘80’s. I was raised to call all adults Sir or Ma’am. My Daddy would have torn the hide off me for disrespecting an adult. No matter the color. It never occurred to me to do so.

I was in the in the Army when the King Riots went alight. My folks were still in Los Angeles. As was my Brother and several other relatives.

I went home on Block Leave shortly afterwards. My Dad and I were drinking a beer in the back yard talking about it.

That's nice, but what does that have to do with anything I said?

My Dad pointed out that the Prosecutor blew the case. He was distracted by the misdirection of the defense on describing which blow was excessive. My Dad said they could have gotten a conviction by working it backwards from the lie in the reports.

I agree the prosecutor blew the case, when he moved the trial to Simi Valley were all the cops live. That and he thought that since he had the crime on videotape, it was a slam dunk. On top of that, he didn't put King on the stand, because at that point, he was still a bulked up ex-con who probably would have scared the white jurors.

But you know what, the Second Federal jury (which in my opinion was unconstitutional) only convicted two of the four cops and only then on minimal charges. And you have to wonder if they would have gotten a conviction with the threat of new riots and Sistah Souljah telling them to shoot white people for a change.

At the risk of having someone stamp my meal card "no dessert" at the Lib Canteen, you have to sympathize with these cops in that they were trying to subdue a drugged out, bulked up suspect without resorting to using their guns. They tried tasering him, tackling him and then hitting him to no effect. Now the cops just shoot suspects and say, "I was scared for my life".

I remembered something my Father told me much earlier. We were watching a movie about the Civil Rights movement. My Dad said that anyone who saw color first, was a fool.

We were all White. But I still believe as he taught me. It isn’t a Black Man. It’s a man who is Black. It isn’t a Hispanic Woman. It’s a woman who is Hispanic. And pick a race and my view is the same.

Again, nice sentiments.

The reality- color makes a big difference in this country, and anyone who pretends it doesn't is deluded.

 

[JoeB131]

hahaha you obviously didn’t read the book…that is not what Uncle Tom did in the novel

poor uneducated

Get back to me when you've mastered punctuation and capitalization. Although I'm amazed you finally figured contractions out after I mocked you about it.

 

[JoeB131]

There is a reason we don’t let family members or people who know either party on the Jury. Just so that particular question is moot.

But let’s talk about why Cosby is free. Yes. It was a technicality. But those have helped protect the Constitution for two centuries.

I honestly believe it is better for a thousand guilty men to go free than one innocent man go to prison.

Except... the technicality he was freed on had nothing to do with innocence.

The only reason why Cosby is free tonight is unlike most people of color caught up in the Criminal Justice system, he had the resources to fight back. There are a bunch of actually innocent people in prison tonight because their Public Defender stopped caring years ago.

 

[struth]

Get back to me when you've mastered punctuation and capitalization. Although I'm amazed you finally figured contractions out after I mocked you about it.

get back to me when you’ve actually read the book you are trying to refer to instead of simply parroting dembot cult lines

 

[JoeB131]

get back to me when you’ve actually read the book you are trying to refer to instead of simply parroting dembot cult lines

No need to read the book when a character has become a metaphor.

Everyone understands what an "Uncle Tom" is, despite the intent of Harriet Beecher Stowe, who was probably just as racist as the slave owners she wrote about.

 

[SavannahMann]

Except... the technicality he was freed on had nothing to do with innocence.

The only reason why Cosby is free tonight is unlike most people of color caught up in the Criminal Justice system, he had the resources to fight back. There are a bunch of actually innocent people in prison tonight because their Public Defender stopped caring years ago.

Most technicalities have nothing to do with innocence. The right to remain silent has nothing to do with innocence. It has to do with requiring the Prosecution to prove the case. To take anyone’s freedom you have to prove the case beyond a Reasonable Doubt. Not a preponderance of the evidence, not 50.1% of the evidence. But beyond a reasonable doubt.

The Founders wanted it to be hard to take a Man’s freedom or life. They considered this so important that more of the Bill of Rights is dedicated to that than any other cause. Freedom of expression and beliefs is one. Ownership of firearms is a single right. Think about it. The Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth amendments are all about what can’t be done to an accused.

Those technicalities almost all derive from those five enumerated rights.

Now, I’ll agree that the more money you have, the better your odds of a fair trial. And I’ll agree that Public Defenders are overworked and burned out. But that does not diminish the victory for fairness and the freedoms we enjoy that occurred with Cosby.

Let’s say I am an elected, or appointed person. I have the authority to make deals. I make one, and it turns out to be a bad deal for the public, or justice or whatever. It is too bad. The deal is done, and we’re stuck with it.

In Cosby’s case, they used victims to establish a pattern of behavior. Ok, but those victims were not part of the charges against him. They shouldn’t have been used. Also the information being used was already investigated, and rejected for prosecution, and the decision was made not to prosecute Cosby.

The decision was made because Cosby was arguing he couldn’t answer questions in a Civil Trial because it might tend to incriminate him. His Fifth Amendment Rights. The decision was made by the DA to try and bankrupt Cosby. To let the Victims of the crimes he could not prosecute because of insufficient evidence and the statute of limitations, suck every dollar out of Cosby. So he agreed not to hold Cosby accountable for his testimony in a civil trial.

This wasn’t done to protect Cosby. It was done to strip Cosby of his fifth amendment rights, the right against self incrimination, and to bankrupt him.

When the civil trial was over we ended up in the micro era of Me Too. Then the decision to protect Cosby as part of the effort to bankrupt him seemed bad. Like favoritism.

So the next DA went back on the deal. Our history is repeat with descendants ignoring deals made by our ancestors. Look at the history of the Native Americans. We will trade this land which will be yours, for all time, for peace. Well there is more of us now and we want that land, get lost or we’ll wipe you out. I personally consider those dishonorable events to be an abomination. I am disgusted by those historical events.

Once a deal is made, you’re stuck with it. The Columbia Record Club as one terrible example in my own past. You have to think carefully before you make that deal.

Once Cosby was stripped of his Fifth Amendment Rights, he was forced to admit he had used drugs to get women more compliant. Disgusting? You’re god damned right. But you can’t prosecute him for that, or with any evidence derived from that, because of the deal.

It has nothing to do with innocence. It has everything to do with the Founders intending it to be hard to strip someone of their freedom.

 

[struth]

No need to read the book when a character has become a metaphor.

Everyone understands what an "Uncle Tom" is, despite the intent of Harriet Beecher Stowe, who was probably just as racist as the slave owners she wrote about.

sure it’s a racist term uneducated dembot cultist use to try and attack african americans that leave the plantation and won’t submit to the boss man

 

[Superbadbrutha]

There is a reason we don’t let family members or people who know either party on the Jury. Just so that particular question is moot.

But let’s talk about why Cosby is free. Yes. It was a technicality. But those have helped protect the Constitution for two centuries.

I honestly believe it is better for a thousand guilty men to go free than one innocent man go to prison.

I agree, I am just tripping on the fact that these ass clowns try to act as if someone set up an innocent man. That cocksucka is far from innocent.

 

[Superbadbrutha]

when did i say that?

I am not surprised you have a problem with uncle tom, the slave masters in the novel did too…because he wouldn’t submit like yourself

You are one of these dumb ass that tries to act as if Cosby is just so innocent and was framed. Hell he admitted to doing it. As a DS Trump Humper all you do is submit yourself.

 

[JoeB131]

Most technicalities have nothing to do with innocence. The right to remain silent has nothing to do with innocence. It has to do with requiring the Prosecution to prove the case. To take anyone’s freedom you have to prove the case beyond a Reasonable Doubt. Not a preponderance of the evidence, not 50.1% of the evidence. But beyond a reasonable doubt.

Okay. Here's the thing. There is absolutely no doubt that Cosby drugged and molested dozens of women. I don't even think his wife believes him at this point.

The Founders wanted it to be hard to take a Man’s freedom or life. They considered this so important that more of the Bill of Rights is dedicated to that than any other cause. Freedom of expression and beliefs is one. Ownership of firearms is a single right. Think about it. The Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth amendments are all about what can’t be done to an accused.

Um, okay, it's nice a bunch of rich people a long time ago came up with rights for rich people, I guess. Real world, cops beat confessions out of suspects all the time. And sometimes they are even true.

The real spirit of those amendments we would provide someone with a GOOD lawyer the minute the cops pick him up for questioning.

Now, I’ll agree that the more money you have, the better your odds of a fair trial. And I’ll agree that Public Defenders are overworked and burned out. But that does not diminish the victory for fairness and the freedoms we enjoy that occurred with Cosby.

Not at all. There was no victory in a guy who did what he did getting out of prison because some lawyers bamboozled a judge. And frankly, I don't say this because I'm some "Hang Cosby" type of guy. I actually kind of like the guy. And frankly, putting a nearly blind octogenarian in prison does seem like cruel and unusual punishment.

Let’s say I am an elected, or appointed person. I have the authority to make deals. I make one, and it turns out to be a bad deal for the public, or justice or whatever. It is too bad. The deal is done, and we’re stuck with it.

In Cosby’s case, they used victims to establish a pattern of behavior. Ok, but those victims were not part of the charges against him. They shouldn’t have been used. Also the information being used was already investigated, and rejected for prosecution, and the decision was made not to prosecute Cosby.

Again, this sounds like a lot of weasel-wording to obscufate the fact that Cosby did exactly what he was accused of.

Once Cosby was stripped of his Fifth Amendment Rights, he was forced to admit he had used drugs to get women more compliant. Disgusting? You’re god damned right. But you can’t prosecute him for that, or with any evidence derived from that, because of the deal.

It has nothing to do with innocence. It has everything to do with the Founders intending it to be hard to strip someone of their freedom.

Except there was plenty of evidence against him outside of that deal...

I'm sorry, the bill of rights should be to protect the innocent, not be manipulated by the guilty.

 

[Flash]

The Negro was guilty by his own admission.

However, that admission was obtained under false pretenses and should have been thrown out.

In this case it was better for a guilty ass rapist Negro to go free than it would have been for the filthy government to get away with lying.

 

[JoeB131]

sure it’s a racist term uneducated dembot cultist use to try and attack african americans that leave the plantation and won’t submit to the boss man

Naw, man, it's how they describe those blacks who suck up to white people and give them a pass on the ongoing crime against humanity that started in 1619.

 

[struth]

Naw, man, it's how they describe those blacks who suck up to white people and give them a pass on the ongoing crime against humanity that started in 1619.

yeah, that’s apparently what your plantation master told you.

Uncle Tom in reality was hated by his ocerseers because he refused to bend to their will, and give up his faith

i can understand why you would think that’s a bad thing

 

[SavannahMann]

Okay. Here's the thing. There is absolutely no doubt that Cosby drugged and molested dozens of women. I don't even think his wife believes him at this point.



Um, okay, it's nice a bunch of rich people a long time ago came up with rights for rich people, I guess. Real world, cops beat confessions out of suspects all the time. And sometimes they are even true.

The real spirit of those amendments we would provide someone with a GOOD lawyer the minute the cops pick him up for questioning.



Not at all. There was no victory in a guy who did what he did getting out of prison because some lawyers bamboozled a judge. And frankly, I don't say this because I'm some "Hang Cosby" type of guy. I actually kind of like the guy. And frankly, putting a nearly blind octogenarian in prison does seem like cruel and unusual punishment.



Again, this sounds like a lot of weasel-wording to obscufate the fact that Cosby did exactly what he was accused of.



Except there was plenty of evidence against him outside of that deal...

I'm sorry, the bill of rights should be to protect the innocent, not be manipulated by the guilty.

The evidence outside was he said she said. It would be a coin toss to a jury. Most prosecutors don’t want a case that is a coin toss. They want evidence. DNA which was witchcraft during the OJ trial is pretty much required now. DNA was long gone. What you had was a woman saying he did this to me. A friend or family member saying she told me it happened at the time. Against the kind of lawyers that Cosby would employ? Maybe a win, maybe not. Take your chances and toss the coin.

The evidence that was more direct was a result in the deposition that he was required to provide.

Now, in any situation where I am on the record. Before Congress, Before any lawyer, or cop. Anything like that. I can say I refuse to answer that question. I can’t be forced to answer because the Fifth Amendment prohibits me from being required to offer testimony against myself.

I can be forced if I am presented with documentation that says I will not be prosecuted for anything I say. I lose my fifth amendment rights. But my rights are still protected. I can’t be forced to testify against myself. I can be forced to answer the questions truthfully. I can be penalized if I lie.

That is what happened to Cosby. He was forced to answer questions in the depositions for the Civil Case. To force him, the plaintiff’s lawyers thinking they were smart, and going to get paid, arranged the deal.

Take a moment, and consider that. It was the Victims Lawyers who pushed for this deal. They wanted the money.

Cosby’s lawyers would have loved it if the entire thing ended at the Deposition level, where the plaintiff couldn’t prove their case. A motion to dismiss and the judge signs it and it’s all done. Good for Cosby, and a major win for his lawyers. Cosby required to answer the questions was bad for their case.

When I was a boy, there was a saying. I’m not sure it’s still around. You can’t have your cake and eat it too. Once you eat the cake, it’s gone. You can’t have it anymore, you’ve eaten it.

The plaintiffs, the women who were abused, had their cake. They got their settlement in 2006. They got their cake. Now, they wanted to keep their cake, and eat it. They wanted justice. They wanted the criminal case.

Well their lawyers had made a deal. No prosecution for the deposition. It was the only reason they got the settlement. It was the only reason they got paid.

As for the rest. You’ve read enough of my posts to know that I always side with the Constitution. You know I always argue in defense of the rights of the citizenry. I always side with the Constitution. He’s guilty is not a motive for me. It’s not a reason to abandon my beliefs and determination to defend the Constitution.

The color doesn’t matter. The truth and what is right matters.

 

[JoeB131]

yeah, that’s apparently what your plantation master told you.

Uncle Tom in reality was hated by his ocerseers because he refused to bend to their will, and give up his faith

i can understand why you would think that’s a bad thing

Uh, he was a fictional character written by a white woman. What "reality".

He puts up with every indignity his white owners inflict on him. That's why it's an insult.

 

[JoeB131]

The evidence outside was he said she said. It would be a coin toss to a jury. Most prosecutors don’t want a case that is a coin toss. They want evidence. DNA which was witchcraft during the OJ trial is pretty much required now. DNA was long gone. What you had was a woman saying he did this to me. A friend or family member saying she told me it happened at the time. Against the kind of lawyers that Cosby would employ? Maybe a win, maybe not. Take your chances and toss the coin.

Naw, man, you had 60 women all saying he did shit like this.

As for the rest. You’ve read enough of my posts to know that I always side with the Constitution. You know I always argue in defense of the rights of the citizenry. I always side with the Constitution. He’s guilty is not a motive for me. It’s not a reason to abandon my beliefs and determination to defend the Constitution.

The constitution isn't a suicide pact. The bottom line is he raped all these women and he walked away from it because he was a rich celebrity who could pay a bunch of sleazy lawyers to trick a really stupid judge.