The NY Times reports that Cosby and his team have been attacking his accusers for decades – so he not only assaulted women, he also did what he could to damage them afterwards.
That too is a familiar pattern. Bill Clinton did it, Woody Allen did it, Michael Shermer did it. It’s interesting how conscienceless you have to be to do that – to harm someone and then when she tries to report the harm, try to damage her so badly that she will stop trying to report the harm.
In 2005, when Tamara Green told the “Today” show and The Philadelphia Inquirer that Bill Cosby drugged and sexually assaulted her in the early 1970s, one of Mr. Cosby’s lawyers publicly branded the allegations “absolutely false,” while his aides approached another newspaper with “damaging information” about her, according to court documents.
Nice guy.
As accusations of sexual assault continue to mount against Mr. Cosby — more than two dozen women have gone public, the latest last Monday — the question arises as to why these stories never sparked a widespread outcry before. While many of the women say they never filed police complaints or went public because they feared damaging their reputations or careers, the aggressive legal and media strategy mounted by Mr. Cosby and his team may also have played a significant role.
Nice, nice, nice guy.
An examination of how the team has dealt with scandals over the past two decades and into this fall reveals an organized and expensive effort that involved quashing accusations as they emerged while raising questions about the accusers’ character and motives, both publicly and surreptitiously. And the team has never been shy about blasting the news media for engaging in a feeding frenzy even as the team made deals or slipped the news organizations information that would cast Mr. Cosby’s accusers in a negative light.
But there can be a downside.
But casting doubt on or aiming vitriol at the accusers can have consequences.
In 2005, when Mr. Cosby’s team denied Tamara Green’s accusations that he had drugged and sexually assaulted her in Los Angeles in the early 1970s, she did not pursue legal action. But this month she was ready to fight back. Mr. Cosby’s team had greeted her renewed claim of sexual assault by saying it was “a 10-year discredited accusation that proved to be nothing at the time, and is still nothing.” On Dec. 10, Ms. Green filed a defamation suit against Mr. Cosby, saying the denials basically branded her a liar.
“I want it put to a jury,” Ms. Green said earlier this month. “I want it ended, finally. I want my name restored.”
But but but Bill Cosby is such a nice guy.
Mr. Cosby’s team had greeted her renewed claim of sexual assault by saying it was “a 10-year discredited accusation that proved to be nothing at the time, and is still nothing.”
Note they say “discredited” not “untrue”
It’s ironic to see Marty Singer accusing someone else of being a shakedown artist.
A couple of years ago he was sued for extortion and other claims arising out of a demand letter he sent to an opposing party. The whole story is here but the short version is: Singer sends his client’s business partner a letter attaching a draft complaint which he threatens to file. He writes “I have deliberately left blank spaces in portions of the Complaint dealing with your using company resources to arrange sexual liaisons with older men such as `Uncle Jerry,’ Judge [name redacted] a/k/a `Dad’ (see enclosed photo), and many others. When the Complaint is filed with the Los Angeles Superior Court, there will be no blanks in the pleading.”
In other words, settle with us or we’ll reveal all this dirt publicly, including dirt on a sitting judge.
Sadly, this appears to be legalized extortion in California, as the Court of Appeal held that it was protected pre-litigation activity.
It would seem that Singer has no moral objection to shakedown artists, he just doesn’t want them intruding on his turf.
Marcus @1, the content is more relevant that the verbiage.
Note what they also say: “proved to be nothing”.
(Since the accusation is a serious one, the only way it can be “proved to be nothing” is if it’s untrue)
Apparently, all that is necessary to swat away unpleasant accusations is to discredit the accuser. Thus, the accusation is equally discredited.
Now, can anyone show me WHERE these allegations were “PROVED to be nothing”? And by WHOSE standard of evidence?
Yup, he’s a nice guy indeed. I can tell – i have seen him on the TV. And you can’t fake that on TV.
It is important not to jump to conclusions. But in the Cosby case the number of accusers is in the double digits, they are telling a consistent story and there is no other agenda that might explain the circumstances.
There are people who pop up from time to time and make false claims. But they are pretty rare and they tend to make rather different types of claims. They involve multiple celebrities, not just one. I am having a hard time seeing how Prince Harry is very likely to choose Alan Dershowitz as a carousing partner, or vice versa. They go to the press before the police and they ask for money.
Not seeing any of the type of behavior that makes me suspicious of the accusers in the Cosby cases. Using this type of legal thuggery makes me suspicious of Cosby though.
I am also rather contemptuous of the type of lawyer who does this type of thing. There is a line between being an advocate and an accomplice which these lawyers have crossed.
Phillip @6,
Morally, maybe. Ethically, less-so.
(Legally? Well, if they’re incompetent then perhaps)
After reading additional information in the Epstein case, the claims are rather more credible than they appeared at first.
The allegation of abuse is against one man, Epstein who allegedly ‘lent’ her to his friends and paid her to have sex with them, knowing she was 17. The lawsuit is against the US govt and seems fairly reasonable in the circumstances. Epstein certainly knew all the men involved very well and pled guilty to prostituting one of the women.
Unfortunately the press are reporting the new case as if the activity was the same as that alleged in the rape cases. Which makes a nonsense of the story.