Bill Cosby’s lawyer: My client gave women Quaaludes, but he still had ‘consent’

Bill Cosby

The Bill Cosby story keeps reaching new heights of entitlement. A few weeks ago, Cosby’s released 2005 deposition revealed how he admitted drugging women for sex. His drug of choice was (is?) Quaaludes, but he tried to backtrack and say it was only Benadryl. Cosby maintained that he bedded all 50 of his alleged victims through sophisticated “seduction” methods. Plus however many women haven’t come forward, I guess. Cosby wants us to believe that his smooth moves were enough to get these women interested, and Quaaluudes simply set the mood. He still insists he never “engaged in any non-consensual sex.”

“Quaaludes were a highly popular recreational drug in the 1970s, labeled in slang as ‘disco biscuits’ and known for their capacity to increase sexual arousal,” wrote Patrick O’Connor, one of Cosby’s attorneys, in the motion filed Tuesday.

“There are countless tales of celebrities, music stars, and wealthy socialites in the 1970s willingly using Quaaludes for recreational purposes and during consensual sex,” he wrote.

“Yet upon the unsealing of those excerpts, the media immediately pounced, inaccurately labeling the released testimony as defendant’s “confession” of “drugging” women and assaulting them,” he wrote.

“Reading the media accounts, one would conclude the defendant has admitted to rape,” he wrote. “And yet defendant admitted to nothing more than being one of the many people who introduced Quaaludes into their consensual sex life in the 1970s.”

[From People]

This shouldn’t be surprising, but it still throws me for a loop. Cosby will never admit that what he did to these women was wrong. He drugged and raped women for decades. Cosby’s victims all describe being rendered motionless and powerless to resist his advances. Yet Bill and deluded Camille want us all to believe America’s former favorite TV dad was simply a ladies’ man. He got around. NO one could resist him. Especially because they were drugged and couldn’t defend themselves. Nice try, Cosby attorneys.

Bill Cosby

Bill Cosby

Photos courtesy of WENN

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

98 Responses to “Bill Cosby’s lawyer: My client gave women Quaaludes, but he still had ‘consent’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Dibba says:

    Don’t pee on my leg and tell me it’s raining

  2. Lucy2 says:

    But many of these women said they were drugged without their knowledge. They were offered a drink and accepted, and then lights out.
    Regardless, once someone has been drugged, they are no longer able to give consent. He’s a serial rapist who has preyed on trusting young women for decades. No matter what he or his attorneys try to say, it always comes back to that.
    Larry Wilmore has been eviscerating him on his show. It’s glorious.

    • Nic919 says:

      Larry Wilmore was great on Monday. And the excerpts he used from the Cosby show itself showing drugging Sondra was freaky.

    • Alyce says:

      There is this YouTube video called “Tea Consent” that I think should be required viewing for everyone. Brilliantly illustrates how consent actually works. (Aka. Drugging a woman into a temporary coma is not consent).

    • Rachel says:

      Another of his attorneys was on GMA this morning. I listened very closely to what she had to say and how she answered questions. She was very careful to never actually deny that Cosby had ever slipped drugs to a non-consenting party or that he had sex with someone unable to give consent because of those drugs. When asked point blank, she said “my client denies…” but she never says “my client never.” It’s all about wording. The attorney quoted above did the exact same thing. He doesn’t deny that Cosby gave drugs to non-consenting women or had sex with women who were unable to consent. He doesn’t address that at all. He only points out that *lots* of people used Quaaludes, and his client was just one of them. I wonder how long it takes them to carefully craft these responses, so they’re not actually lying.

      • Carol says:

        @Rachel – that’s the attorney’s job – to word things so they aren’t “lying.” I’m sure they do it all the time so it’s probably not as difficult to them as one might think. I’m guessing here since I’m not an attorney but have lots of attorney friends – they are all wordsmiths.

      • Rachel says:

        I am an attorney. That’s why I was listening so intently. But they elevate it to an art form. Which is why he hired them.

      • Tania says:

        His attorneys must feel like a$$holes.

    • Megan says:

      I can’t even imagine the combination of bribes, coercion and threats that went into silencing these women for so long. I hope someone is able to bring a civil suit to court so they all have the chance to testify to his crimes. It isn’t the justice they deserve, but at least the full truth will be known.

  3. K says:

    Well I know when I’m knocked out im super coherent and give legal Concent to all kinds of things. It totally works that is why you can operate heavy machinery on pain pills.

    Just stop talking Cosby team, you’re a disgusting rapist we all know it. It’s over!

  4. tracking says:

    He’s cornered now. He’s got to know no one believes him. Will be interesting to see what happens next. Sad for those women who had to wait so very long to be believed.

    • Pandy says:

      I’m picturing him saying “disco biscuits” in his Jello chocolate pudding voice …

  5. GoodNamesAllTaken says:

    I think that’s what he believes, at least on the surface and possibly underneath. That he did nothing wrong, they really “wanted it” and “asked for it.” Maybe that’s what every rapist thinks.

    • littlemissnaughty says:

      I would argue that most rapists actually don’t care at all but they know that that is the one thing they cannot say. “She wanted it” is the only possible answer then. Cosby and every other sex offender probably don’t really think much of women in general so why care? They’re power hungry control freaks with a side of sociopath.

    • Kiddo says:

      He PLIED women with drugs, while he didn’t partake. What a piece of shit hypocrite:
      “People knew what Michael Jackson was doing, people knew what Whitney Houston was doing, and then they became addicts. Michael should have been kept in rehab. Where was the family? Why weren’t they making sure Whitney and Michael got help? Michael, well, why is it that his family stood by and allowed him to have a Dr. Feelgood when they knew Michael had sleep, drug and other problems? Why didn’t Whitney’s family take the crack pipe away from her? These people had more than enough money to do what was right. Everyone looks to protect their own interest — but not the person, which in Michael’s case, he was a company unto himself.”….“Everybody knows about sex. Not too many people know about algebra. Let’s think about love. Let’s think about where you can get it, but not sex. You’re too young for sex.” He spoke out against drugs and alcohol: “There are still old people who drink, do drugs—who will stop and take the time to tell you don’t be like them. Have you heard them? Pay attention to them.”___Bill Cosby.

      • Mrs. Darcy says:

        Plus most of the women’s stories that I have read were drugged completely without consent or knowledge. He’s full of it, and his lawyers are disgusting.

    • FLORC says:

      It takes blame off of them in a way. Without the ability to say no they can never say no.
      And by all his victims accounts he never asked for permission to do what he did.
      Anyone has the right to change their minds. Maybe something was happening you’re not comfortable with. You have the right to say no and they have to stop. Even IF they said yes his actions prevented them from having free will enough to say no.

    • Artemis says:

      Actually GoodNames makes a good point. Lots of rapist are deniers and think their victim(s) enjoyed it. They actually give totally different accounts of how the rape happened. The ones who do admit they raped, sometimes express guilt and shame but a lot of them also say they thought the victim liked it at some level or wanted it. I found this article to be very eye-opening:
      “Convicted Rapists’ Perceptions of Self and Victim: Role Taking and Emotions” (Diana Scully)

      Bill Cosby stays trash though. Why are they still speaking? It’s done, over. He should crawl away and never return.

      • Size Does Matter says:

        I just read Jon Krakauer’s book Missoula, about college acquaintance rape and drinking and how the authorities generally responded. Highly disturbing and triggery. Some of the guys were not prosecuted, even though the women were basically unconscious from drinking, because the guys claimed the woman was “moaning,” which indicates “enjoyment.” Just disgusting.

    • Cindy says:

      Yes, that’s it. He does not believe he’s done a thing wrong and he will never concede guilt. Never ever. BUT, a comedian much less powerful had the balls to say something, so his legacy is ruined. He will die a nasty, bitter, shamed old man. Good luck with that Cosby.

      PS maybe you can get Whoopie to empty your bedpans?

    • Ankhel says:

      I think Cosby liked to tell himself that as long as they did not protest or fight, it wasn’t rape, and that taking drugs before sex was normal for women.

      This logic doesn’t stand up to scrutiny of course – Cosby knew that drugs were bad, he wouldn’t do them himself, and he tricked women into taking them. They didn’t resist being taken because they couldn’t.

      Cosby is a smart man, he knew this. It was easier to be stupid on purpose though, to entertain a fantasy where no woman could resist him! This is why he didn’t forcefully rape Beverly Johnson – she was sufficiently conscious to accuse him, which ruined his fantasy! It was only enough to save her, not his next victims. He knew the truth, but he didn’t stop!

  6. Ann says:

    R.A.P.I.S.T. L.I.A.R.

  7. JudyK says:

    Oh, enough…what B.S.

  8. INeedANap says:

    In his head, he probably believes his own bull. And that’s the scariest part, and why we need to educate our young people about consent.

  9. BlueNailsBetty says:

    What a liar. If Bill was so smooth and seductive, why bother with drugs? Wouldn’t he have wanted the women to remember his prowess in bed?

    I’ve said it before……..Bill has deep seated issues and his need to screw semi-comatose women speaks to a terrifyingly depraved mental state. It is one step above necrophilia.

  10. Izzy says:

    Oh Lord. Please, team Cosby, just SHUT UP NOW. You are making the rest of us sick.

    Oh, and in case it’s not clear, “Cos,” you have my consent to quote me to your lawyer. That is the ONLY thing you have my consent for. Ever.

    Do you GET how it works now?

  11. NewWester says:

    This is far from over, Bill and Hugh Hefner have been friends for years, who knows what may have happened at the Playboy mansion? Hollywood is a small community there might be many people who knew and helped “clean up” after Bill Cosby.

    • Joan says:

      *sigh* Sadly, you are likely absolutely correct on this one, NewWester. I had no idea Cosby was chummy with Hefner. Lovely combo!!

      Corey Feldman has been voicing for years about the child abuse he suffered at the hands of Hollywood moguls. This stuff happened before him and keeps on happening, yet it’s “cleaned up” too. Sexual abuse, casting couch stuff, is still prominent.

    • Pinky says:

      Not only that, but Cosby probably learned this trick from Hef himself. I think a bunch of men were into this type of “induced consent” back then. Didn’t that one Playmate–Kendra or Holly, whichever one wrote the book–say that Hef called Quaaludes “leg spreaders” and offered them to any/every girl he met (and wanted to bed) whenever he went to the club or they came to the mansion? People are right when they say that the ’70s was a much different time. For instance, back then there was no such terminology as “date rape.” Didn’t exist. Men got away with so much bad behavior where sex and power politics/dynamics are concerned. But that’s why (historically) there was/is a Women’s Movement. That’s why feminism was/is important. It’s not just about equal pay. It’s about so much more. So to all those non-feminists out there, think of the Cosbys and Duggars when you’re spewing your Quiverfull-like nonsensical non-rock-the-boatload submissive tantrums.

      • frisbeejada says:

        This. 100% This, no make that 1000000000000000000000000% this.

      • Kiddo says:

        But didn’t his rapes continue WAY past the 70s?

      • FingerBinger says:

        Holly Madison said Hefner called them thigh openers.

      • frisbeejada says:

        Judging from the cases in the UK dating back to the 70’s the attitudes and objectification of young women in the Entertainment Industry was overt to the point of normalisation. We have had a lot of cases that have been prosecuted successfully 25 years after the events (thankfully we have no Statute of Limitations on sex crimes). ‘Sexploitation’ – as it’s been called over here – has no doubt existed before the 70’s but as Pinky pointed out this was the decade that the woman’s movement became far more active – perhaps because it was so desperately needed? Yes it has continued just as Cosby continued as Kiddo rightly pointed out. These cases like the Duggars are still happening and will continue to happen whilst society accepts inequality as the ‘norm’ and men like Cosby with putrid attitudes towards women flourish. Sites like this and social media have been fantastic in providing a platform for protest while cases like Cosby demonstrate that feminism and the fight for equality is still crucial if we are to protect our young women from these abominations.

      • Pinky says:

        @Kiddo Yes, Cosby’s behavior continued through the decades. My point was that it began during a time this was “socially acceptable,” at least in that society didn’t criminalize, frown upon, or prosecute it the way it does now. Cosby didn’t change his attitude or ways to keep up with the times. And it has and will cost him.

  12. Rice says:

    I’m a child of the ’80’s. Therefore, “The Cosby Show” was a BFD in my life. I wanted Cliff Huxtable as a dad because my own was a none factor in my childhood and beyond. Thank goodness I had my uncles and other upstanding males around. Anyway, this whole thing is a mess, a vomit-inducing, smells-like-rotten-sh*t mess. I’m not sure if some people realise just how disgusting and criminal Bill’s acts were towards these women. When the stories first started popping up, I’m ashamed to say that I ignored them because I thought they simply weren’t true. One of America’s favourite dads is nothing but a vile, nasty, perverted creature? No way. But it’s all true and now I wish these women could get some kind of closure, even if he isn’t punished in a court of law.

  13. cannibell says:

    Narcissistic Personality Disorder much, BC? You’re the only one who believes your lies anymore.

  14. Kiddo says:

    Lawyers be lawyering.

    So although Mr. Cosby did not directly confess to rape, he confessed to being a long term distributor of illegal illicit drugs, after long term grooming and pursuit of women, and NEVER once indulged in these ‘disco biscuits’ himself, with these ‘objects’ of pursuit. Can Mr Lawyer explain how Mr Cosby was able to recruit only women who used illegal drugs prior to these ‘affairs’? Please Mr Lawyer, do prove that ALL of these women were prior users of Quaaludes. Also, please enter ONE witness who can testify that Cosby, seeing these drugs as harmless sexual aids, TOOK Quaaludes with his partners, since it was ‘the 70s’. If use was considered benign and harmless, why was Mr Cosby not using them as well? Because they have an incapacitating, mind-altering effect?

    • I Choose Me says:

      Nailed it again Kiddo.

      I heart you and shall heretofore refer to you as The Scribe.

    • Pinky says:

      I think the difference is that he was offering the women Quaaludes AND alcohol at once. That’s where the comatose response comes into play. Most of the women willingly took the pill, not knowing what it was (or with him often lying about what it was or its affects). I think that’s where you can “nail” the Cos, so to speak. If he lied to these women and told them the pill was anything other than Quaaludes, then that points to his guilt (or guilty conscience) and an acknowledgement that he was covering something up. That’s the only way to “prove” that he knowingly incapacitated them for the purposes of sex. Otherwise, he deniability for the time is, unfortunately, somewhat plausible.

  15. Marigold says:

    Is understanding consent on par with rocket science now? Certain drugs are known to incapacitate a person. Quaaludes (especially when mixed with alcohol) fall amongst those drugs. Consent under those circumstances cannot be obtained-PARTICULARLY when the person given the drug wakes up and says “I did not consent.” And even if someone says “I’m taking this Quaalude and then you can have sex with me,” they then lose the ability to withdraw consent. This is not complicated. It’s certainly not rocket science. But I suppose if you’re a rapist, none of it matters.

    • Miss Jupitero says:

      “They then lose the ability to withdraw consent. ”

      No. You always have the right to withdraw consent, to change your mind, to decide you don’t like where things are going etc. and to back out. For any reason at all.

      “I thought this was going to be fun, but it’s not” is always valid.

      The only polite response is for the other person to stop, back off, and maybe offer a cup of tea or a quiet ride home.

      • doofus says:

        I might be wrong, but I think what Marigold meant was that, after taking a Quaalude, one can PHYSICALLY lose the ability to withdraw consent as that person is incapacitated…

        …and NOT saying that, once you give consent, you’re not “allowed” to withdraw it.

    • piecesofme says:

      Miss jupitero, I think Marigold meant they literally cannot withdraw their consent, because they have been rendered unconscious or incoherent.

      That is one of the true horrors…. Even if anyone had originally consented to any sexual activity (and from the deposition it certainly seems doubtful) they were physically unable to vocalize their objections to further contact. Cosby and others operate in some fantasy world where not saying no means yes, even when the other is quite literally incapable of speech. And a world where it is a viable seduction technique to deliberately incapacitate a person to get tacit consent. Ugh….

  16. Jayna says:

    He will never admit to doing what his victims have said, giving it to them by slipping it in a drink or pretending it’s some other kind of pill (like for a headache, etc) to get them to take it so he can render them incapacitated so he can rape them. HIs lawyer thinks the world is stupid.

  17. Cynthia says:

    I just want to hear what Phylicia Rashad has to say. More importantly Lisa Bonet?

    • stinky says:

      P.R. spoke some of her predictable smug truths a while back… she HAS been heard from on this but not much. I doubt she’ll expound on it further at this point. … I never could stand her sanctimony – As for L.B., I remember her conspicuous departure from the show cuz she was the ONLY reason I ever even watched. She had natural charisma. Her silence speaks volumes, does it not?

  18. FLORC says:

    This BS from Cosby’s lawyers/team is a peek inside what a trial would be like. Why at times prosecution won’t want to pursue a trial. It’s very damaging to the victim. Every move, every choice. It gets twisted to blame the victim or diminish fault of the attacker.

    • Kiddo says:

      It’s easy to release a statement to the press in generalities, but proving this is another story.
      If EVERYONE was doing Quaaludes, because ‘it was the 70s’, then how do they explain Cosby’s avoidance, when he specifically procured these drugs for illegal use, in sexual interactions? No where has Cosby stated that he took the drugs with these women to ‘party’. SO obviously SOMEONE in the 70s, including THEIR client, didn’t do drugs.

      The upside is that Cosby has pay the mouthpiece to put out these pretzel logic defenses. The downside is we have to hear about them.

      • PhenomenalWoman says:

        I read in the deposition that he did take them at times and that they were like “having a drink.” Also, he never admitted he got them for illegal use; he supposedly got them for back pain (or some other BS excuse), but THEN gave them to the ladies he wanted to seduce because it was known to be a “party” drug.

        The fact of the matter is that Cosby and his attorneys have been very careful about what has been said. They can run legal circles with the argument, which is apparently what they intend to do.

        I just wish these ladies would get justice in some way. It is obviously not forthcoming from Cosby.

      • Kiddo says:

        He admitted he got them for illegal use, when he confessed that he gave them to people they weren’t prescribed for. It IS ILLEGAL to give prescribed drugs to any individual other than the person on the script. Cosby is not a doctor. Further, his prescription for back pain was obviously fraudulent, in overstatement, if there were enough pills that he was able to routinely give them away and not require them for personal use in treating pain. Cosby giving a subjective experience on use of the drug as the equivalent of a ‘drink’, does not negate the experience of others as ‘being knocked unconscious’. His subjective narrative is not a scientific study on a cross section of side effects on the population. Women and men’s bodies react very differently to pharmaceuticals, which is a well known fact, and why pharmaceutical trials now include more women to determine the differential before hitting the market, instead of discovering problems subsequently.

        Have any of the women stated that THEY witnessed Cosby taking the drugs?

      • Kitten says:

        Yeah it’s easy for him to say that he took a pill as well, after the fact.

      • PhenomenalWoman says:

        The legal standard is not what you are describing, though. They would have to prove that he obtained the prescription illegally. We are all speculating as to how he got them. However, according to the deposition transcript, the pills were legally obtained due to back pain. I DO agree that it is illegal to dispense drugs to other people if you are not a doctor. (But they are two separate crimes – obtaining and dispensing.)

        Also, I’m not arguing with you. I am adding my thoughts and opinions – just like you are. He CLAIMS he took the pills and the effect for him was like “having a drink.” He says that to negate the implication that he gave the women pills to “knock them out” and therefore, render them incapable of giving consent.

        All that to say – as I said above – that the wording and so-called admissions he made were very carefully thought out (probably by his attorneys). Therefore, it would be difficult to prove his intent (to rape). What he said, however, goes against what a lot of the women said, i.e. that he didn’t ask them if they wanted a pill, he slipped it in their drink. So they couldn’t even consent to taking the drug.

      • Kiddo says:

        Kitten. He’s proven himself to be a liar. An admitted one. He lied about the level of back pain in seeking the amount of pills he got from doctors. He admits to lying about the situation with these women to his wife. So since Cosby is an admitted liar, where do we draw the line on lies? He’s somehow Mr honest when it comes to consent, while 40-something other witnesses are not telling the truth?

        PhenomenalWoman, I wasn’t directing any outrage at you. So that you know. I get the careful wording. I just think it can be picked apart. If you have so many pills prescribed that you can hoard them to dispense to people who do not require them for medical purpose, you are at the least, dishonestly filling a prescription for other intent. Additionally, was there testimony that any of these women actually said, “Hey Bill, got any ludes?”. If not, how accepted and commonplace was this activity? And how many of these women were actively LOOKING for some kind of altered state, without Cosby’s insistence? Further, how do we even know if what he was passing on was even Quaaludes?
        Maybe he was dispensing roofies, after all.

      • FLORC says:

        Sometimes you don’t need to prove anything. You only have to plant a seed of doubt. It happened so long ago he can claim anything.
        Ugh. These ladies might never get a confession or apology from Cosby, but maybe all this damage to him is worth something. At least he can’t do this to anyone else. Too many eyes on him. And they were able to tell their story. It’s out there. So, that’s something.

      • Lucrezia says:

        Are you 100% sure that’s what he said PhenomenalWoman? I’ll happily admit I haven’t read the full 1,000 page depo, but I’m worried you’ve misread/misinterpreted because it “he did take them at times, it was like having a drink” sounds awfully like a mangled version of the following excerpt (which doesn’t say he took them himself):

        “Q: Why didn’t you ever take the quaaludes?

        A: Because I used them.

        Q: For what?

        A: The same as a person would say, “Have a drink.”

        See what I mean? If you can give a quote/source where he says he took them himself, I’ll believe you, but I need a cite.

        Edit to add: When asking for a citation, I guess I should provide one myself. NYTimes excerpts:

      • Kiddo says:

        Lucrezia, if that is the only statement he made, he ‘used them’ to ply the victims as others would with drinks. He used them as a tool, he didn’t say he used them therapeutically or as a social/sexual un-inhibitor, for himself.

      • Kitten says:

        Assuming there isn’t any additional info that can be provided to elucidate or elaborate on what Lucrezia posted above and if we’re taking just that portion of the court transcripts, it makes it sound like Cosby side-stepped the question in a way. It sounded like he was saying that he had them to use as an “offering”, like a bottle of Cognac that you would keep in your liquor cabinet for when guests come over. He doesn’t say anything here about having a legal prescription to use them for himself.

        BTW, ‘ludes are known to cause erectile dysfunction so that potential side effect probably didn’t fit into Cosby’s plan.

      • Lucrezia says:

        @Kiddo, exactly. But it’s really easy to see how it could get misread/misinterpret (if that’s what’s happened). I definitely agree with PW in one sense: he was wording things carefully to avoid certain implications. But I think that he admitted the Quaaludes in the depo because this was the Constand case, and he was claiming to have only given Constand Benadryl. Admitting “consensual” Quaaludes in the 70’s isn’t entirely damaging, because it implies that he’d also admit it if Constand’s pills (in 2004/2005) were Quaaludes. (Does that make sense? I think he was admitting a slightly bad thing, from many years ago, so that his overall story sounded more trustworthy.)

      • Lucrezia says:

        There was more stuff in the NYT. (The Q/A stuff in quotations is the NYT block-quoting from the depo. The “Mr. Cosby” paragraphs is the NYT paraphrasing, so up for argument if anyone can find an actual quote.)

        Mr. Cosby acknowledges in the deposition that he secured seven prescriptions for Quaaludes in the 1970s over a period of two to three years from a Los Angeles doctor. He says that, while he told the doctor he had a sore back, he imagined that the doctor understood that he was not using them to treat his pain.

        “Q. You testified that he knew you were not going to take them. And I’d like to — explain your answer. How did he know that, or why do you say he knew that?

        A. What was happening at that time was that that was — Quaaludes happen to be the drug that kids, young people were using to party with and there were times when I wanted to have them just in case.”

        Mr. Cosby says he never took the Quaaludes himself because they made him sleepy and because he was using them in his efforts to have sex with women. He also says that, with the exception of one glass of beer, he stopped drinking alcohol when he was 16.

        “Q. Why didn’t you ever take the Quaaludes?

        A. Because I used them.

        Q. For what?

        A. The same as a person would say have a drink.”


      • Kiddo says:



  19. BNA FN says:

    Only Whoopi and Bill believe this nonsense the Cosby team is putting out. I’m seconding the phrase, @Dibba: “don’t piss on my legs and tell me it’s raining”. The sad thing these women may never get a penny for all their emotional sufferings. I bet BC would rather pay millions of dollars to his lawyers than to give anything to these women.

    Btw, he did send his daughter to federal prison for extortion. He’s
    a evil man, with “integrity”.

  20. Meatball says:

    These attacks happened after the 70’s as well, so the fact that the drugs were popular then makes no difference. Why not partake if it was just to have a good time? If you already have consent the there is no reason to skip it into drinks. He is such a disgusting person.

  21. Sam says:

    Here’s the thing: A lot of the women who came forward said that Cosby never offered them any drugs – he gave them a drink that, the implication is fairly clear – had drugs in it. Sure, some of them were directly offered pills (Janice Dickinson said he offered her a pill for menstrual pain, but lied about what it was). But how does the lawyer explain the ones who were offered drinks? If Ludes were so accepted and prevalent (and I’m not saying they weren’t), then how does he explain why some of the women were not offered any actual pills but ingested them through liquid? None of this adds up.

    And Bill could help the situation by simply going away. He’s rich and he’ll likely stay rich. He could leave the country and spend out his remaining life living quietly in some remote area. But he insists on sticking around. Which is like sticking it to the victims even more.

  22. NGBoston says:

    A true sign of a narcissictic liar is to
    continue attemtping to justify their actions.

    I think Cosby’s Legal Team needs to be clearly identified in detail, then avoided like the plague and exposed to all the villification they deserve.

    We already know what Bill is–but by them continuing to respond and try to defend him is completely bogus.

    • Kiddo says:

      He WANTS this. Cosby wants the last word, like he wanted the last word before he knocked his victims out.

      • Kitten says:


      • BNA FN says:

        @Kiddo, Like he wanted the last word when he was being interviewed by AP. when they asked for a comment to the news that were out there he refused to give a comment but then demanded that they “scuttle” his none answer. BC is a control freak. He has to control everyone.

      • Kiddo says:

        BNA FN, exactly.

      • Izzy says:

        What he doesn’t understand is that, when you are a celebrity, when you have attained the level of public awareness he has – and this is BEFORE this firestorm happened, you DON’T get the last word. The last word on you comes long after your death. It’s called your legacy. Every celebrity with a long career has one. It’s simply a matter of how the story ends. In this case, Bill Cosby will be remembered long after he’s gone as a serial rapist. This is NEVER going away now.

  23. kri says:

    So disgusting. My older sister is a psychiatrist, and we were talking about the similarities of Narc. Personality Disorder, serial rapists, and Cosby. Predators dehumanize their victims ( like calling them “objects of pursuit) , they truly believe that the victims really do want it, even when they are drugged, tied down, held down by their attacker. Of course I am not saying Cosby is a serial killer, but he is a serial rapist. He’s a classic predator. I can’t even be coherent in this post because Im so horrified. And all I can think about is who knew, and who aided and abetted him. Studios had to know, agents knew, and the equally gross Camille knew. This is a nightmare. I hope the victims get some peace from finally being heard.

  24. Kiddo says:

    “He still insists he never “engaged in any non-consensual sex.”

    He consented to raping these women, they didn’t. I guess technically what he’s saying is true.

  25. Dibba says:

    can someone explain to me why he wasn’t prosecuted at the time for admitting these crimes?

    • Lucrezia says:

      We all know he’s a drugging rapist, but all he actually admitted to in this 2005 deposition was supplying Quaaludes to consensual women in the 70’s.

      While supplying prescription drugs is a crime, statute of limitations would’ve expired.

  26. MrsBPitt says:

    Have any of his adult daughters spoken out on any of this? For or against their Father? I would like to hear what they think of all this….

    • Kiddo says:

      I think one daughter said something a little while back, in defense of him, but I couldn’t give you specifics. A search might yield some results.

      • Vampi says: of them did. I remember it was all about what a wonderful father he was and such an asset to the community, this is all lies, trying to bring down a black man, the women just want money…, yeah. But…this was before the depo was released. It’s crickets now. As it should be. Defending him is no longer an option if you have a working brain. Ugh.

  27. Carol says:

    oh please. That’s the lamest excuse – ” Quaaludes were a highly popular recreational drug in the 1970s.” They may have been true but not everyone was taking Quaaludes. Plus, I thought if you were too incapacitated to consent to sex, as these women claimed to be, it’s considered rape.

  28. Militaryspouseanddaugther says:

    He is a disgusting pig who should still be castrated and if all the civil lawsuits clean out his fortune, then that is just desserts. No matter how money is given to the victims who came forward(a lot more are rumored to have not) it wont erase the emotional and mental anguish he inflicted on these women, but people like this should not get away with it, no matter how long the sexual assault occurred.

  29. Vampi says:

    Really Bill? REALLY?
    WAKE UP Cosby lawyers!
    You can’t un-ring a bell. Your client RAPED countless women and the public is despensing justice since the law never did. Liars. We don’t want to hear it. His own words sunk him. He’s vile, evil, and a danger to society. Moral father figure my ASS!
    I’m SO non-violent but if I EVER saw Bill Cosby in passing, old man or not, I’d wind up and CLOCK him a good one in the mouth and then kick him hard in the nuts. Vile rapist. *spits*

  30. Giddy says:

    Cosby is narcissistic to an incredible degree, using a deposition to basically brag about his sexual technique and prowess. The truth is a foreign country to him; he can’t admit that if he had been so alluring he wouldn’t have to drug women. He is definitely a predator and obviously delights in it. I hope that he is ruined professionally. I hope that he is unable to enter any club, restaurant, or public place without people turning away in disgust. I hope he is never again invited on Fallon, any other late night shows. I hope he ends his days in forced isolation and considerably poorer after paying civil damages to his many victims. Most of all I hope his victims have peace and the knowledge that their strength brought this disgusting man down.

  31. Abogada says:

    Benadryl? Really expect us to believe that, Bill?

  32. wow says:

    Aye aye aye, would someone please make it stop! The excuses some people (including his lawyer) make for this a-hole. Ugh!

  33. Sean says:

    Why are there no PR people screaming “JUST SHUT THE FUCK UP EVERYONE! Say nothing to anyone about any of this for years. Live your lives, and let people forget. They have short attention spans”

  34. Tania says:

    I think it’s so disturbing that he continues to insist he did not rape these women when all the evidence points to the contrary. The man has destroyed lives I am sure with what he has done. And to think he had all that financial success that he did not deserve because he is a criminal and should be behind bars. I hope these women come together and sue him in civil court.

  35. delorb says:

    I’m wondering who is buying the tickets to his performances these days? Is it the same crowd that paid to see Charlie Sheen ramble? It would seem that he believes his own press releases. He doesn’t think that this is making him look worse. If anything, he probably thinks he’s made his case.

  36. Vampi says:

    Unfortunately…the women have NO recourse….unless there’s one that falls within the statute. *please, please, please*
    Either way. The women can’t get their lives back. The shame they needlessly felt but could not help feeling. I know how this goes. I wish I didn’t. Those poor women had to watch as his star rose, while they were hidden as if in shame. No. No more shame Mr. Creep Cosby. You groomed women and then are all, “what? Me?” yeah..YOU…you unapologist rapist. YOU. *I need a break…I’m literally crying from anger here*

  37. Me too says:

    I guess I am confused by this. Excluding those that were ‘slipped drugs’, if you willingly take a sexually arousing drug and have sex with someone, that is rape? So, if I were to take ecstacy at a rave and got super horny, and had sex with someone due to the effect of the drug, that is rape? Does it work both ways? Can I take advantage of a rolling horny guy and be called a rapist the following day? Is it only women that can play the victim card on this situation?

    • Kiddo says:

      If you intentionally knock the guy out and have sex with his unconscious body, sans consent, then you are a rapist.