So where do we go from here?
Message Board Archives
B-News: Cosby Mis-trial
2017-06-17 10:24:21
2017-06-17 10:29:19
In reply to ProWI
Lucky S.O.B.
2017-06-17 10:36:19
In reply to black
Justice.
2017-06-17 10:51:18
lucky
2017-06-17 10:53:33
In reply to ProWI
Justice delayed. Case will be retried.
2017-06-17 10:56:45
2017-06-17 11:36:23
Commonplace potting and debauchery lifestyle of time past being prosecuted using today's 'standards'/.
Women coming forward 30 yrs later, looking angelic in white ( what else ) , who lived the life back in the day to
its fullest.....now crying abuse.
Pure bullshyt and hypocrisy. I heard an intervies with a rock star from back in those days,....cant remember his name,
and was not paying attention until he mentioned qualludes, and that it was commonplace to pass them around back in the days. ANd he said this with a nostalgic, warm tone, to definitely suggest that it was no biggie back then.
So the question is why is Cosby being hounded for commonplace behavior?...Why is he different from the others who indulged?
I say that it is this sick society's way of bringing him back to the plantation...you been running long enough boy...get back where you belong.
2017-06-17 11:39:19
In reply to johndom90
Pure nonsense.
You totally skipped the accusers and their tale and went straight to the prosecution of the case.
2017-06-17 12:00:17
In reply to black
Why u don't go back to your thread and look for the facting truth ???
2017-06-17 12:02:08
In reply to johndom90
and that it was commonplace to pass them around back in the days.
Back in which days? The 70s?
2017-06-17 12:05:29
In reply to johndom90
Why u don't go back to your thread and look for the facting truth ???
Why so hostile bro? I'm debating just like everyone else.
How come you didn't attack the others? Something against black?
2017-06-17 12:35:42
Women coming forward 30 yrs later, looking angelic in white ( what else ) , who lived the life back in the day to
its fullest.....now crying abuse.
its fullest.....now crying abuse.
In reply to black
Maybe u missed the above!
Last I checked 2017 minus 30 = 1977....the 70's.
jeezus peesuz..
2017-06-17 12:48:23
In reply to black
Their tales would've been more credible 25, 30 year ago but to suddenly remember the dirty details in today politically correct environment, is a bit too rich.
Judging yerteryear's behavior by today's standards. That's too much.
Sounds and looks like a take down, a might scam at work to redistribute the money of an old black man.
As this article asks, why no media investigation of the accusers?
2017-06-17 12:53:23
In reply to johndom90
Maybe u missed the above!
Last I checked 2017 minus 30 = 1977....the 70's.
jeezus peesuz..
Last I checked 2017 minus 30 = 1977....the 70's.
jeezus peesuz..
Many victims of sexual assault don't report it and are less likely to report it, if the person committing the act is very powerful. These women came forward after one of them was brave enough to step up.
Trump was empowered by his power and influence to assault unsuspecting women.
2017-06-17 12:55:29
In reply to ProWI
How come you weren't singing the same tune when women accused Trump.
2017-06-17 13:02:46
In reply to black
How come you weren't singing the same tune when women accused Trump.
Big difference.
ProWI is invoking the rule of proximity. Big difference in standards between 1977 and the 2000s.
2017-06-17 13:03:49
In reply to black
What did I say about Trump and his women?
You are the one with the selective and convenient memory now trying to make an argument.
AlI I have ever said about Trump in relationship to women is that he's "a pussy grabber" Why? Because that came from the horse's mouth itself.
Go wheel and come again. If you want to pin me with an argument, you better have concrete facts.
2017-06-17 13:26:37
But wait. Isn't this case about an incident that happened in 2004? so what's all this about 30 years?
2017-06-17 13:27:37
In reply to johndom90
I say that it is this sick society's way of bringing him back to the plantation...you been running long enough boy...get back where you belong.
Wow!!! How long it took you to figure that out?
2017-06-17 13:52:09
In reply to johndom90
Last I checked 2017 minus 30 = 1977....the 70's.
Huh?
2017-06-17 13:53:02
In reply to Kay
Are u echoing my statement or just being assinine?
2017-06-17 13:54:21
In reply to Priapus
When one is busy slips happen.
2017-06-17 14:12:07
In reply to johndom90
you already spoke the truth, no need to keep repeating yourself.
2017-06-17 14:18:16
In reply to black
black johndom90 playing checkers.
Watch chess now.
2017-06-17 14:23:04
In reply to johndom90
Your quotes:
Women coming forward 30 yrs later, looking angelic in white ( what else ) , who lived the life back in the day to
Last I checked 2017 minus 30 = 1977....the 70's.
Constand Case
The charges are based on Constand's statement to police of unwanted sexual contact, though not intercourse, in early 2004 that had been first reported to the Durham Regional Police Service near Constand's home in southern Ontario, Canada on January 13, 2005;[89] the report was forwarded to authorities in Pennsylvania.[70] On February 17, 2005, the then-district attorney, Bruce Castor, had released a statement that charges would not be laid at that time.
1. This is not a woman coming forward 30 years later. She came forward 1 year later.
2. 2004 is not the 1970s.
Any other excuses?
2017-06-17 14:23:59
In reply to Priapus
Huh?
Excuse his bad math
Search
Live Scores
- no matches