Question for the board regarding Bill Cosby. Is

#1,027
#1,027
Rasputin_Vol said:
He really doesn't believe that. He's smarter than that.
Click to expand...

This thing going on in the media is lynch mob mentality. It has nothing to do with justice. I don't believe most things that are reported anymore. There is always an angle or a hidden agenda.
 
#1,028
#1,028
Sandvol said:
No it isn't. A deposition is for the attorneys. Depositions aren't presented to the jury. There is no oath taking in a deposition. Both sets of attorneys are present and some questions are asked. A judge and a jury hear testimony and see evidence and they make a finding of facts and render a verdict. A witness can say one thing in a deposition and turn around and say something else at trial. A lawyer can bring up inconsistencies in statements made in depositions and at trial but you can't be charged with perjury based on depositions.
Click to expand...


Good Lord

You can absolutely be charged for perjury for lying during a deposition. People are put under oath for depositions all the time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#1,030
#1,030
Rasputin_Vol said:
At the moment, I think we can all agree that he wasn't a good husband and cheated on his wife with several of these women. So in that sense, I agree that it doesn't look good.

But it is a far cry to go and call him a rapist just based on he said/she said allegations and no physical evidence from ANY of the multiple people that are making these claims. Bill Clinton didn't even have a quarter of the women that Cosby has had accuse him of rape or some other affair and you at least had a stained blue dress (granted, it was consensual) and at least an eyewitness to the injuries to Juanita Brodderick after the fact. Not only do we not have diddly-squat that comes to that level of evidence, but we see that the majority of these women have no case and haven't even accused of raping or drugging them.

So he admitted to giving women Quaaludes... again, that is a far cry from saying that he surreptitiously slipped them a drug to take advantage of them (which is the narrative or image that the media wants to paint). In reality, the most likely scenario is that he had the Quaaludes and gave them to the women who willingly took them knowing full well what they were.

Lets pull back on the reins just a bit before we though an innocent man under the bus without any evidence.
Click to expand...

Only you could think 9-11 was an American/Israeli conspiracy with absolutely no evidence to your credit but think that 20+ women accusing a beloved comedian of rape is a conspiracy because it has no evidence, in your opinion.

It takes some kind of special to think the way you do. I do not envy you, friend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#1,031
#1,031
Sandvol said:
No it isn't. A deposition is for the attorneys. Depositions aren't presented to the jury. There is no oath taking in a deposition. Both sets of attorneys are present and some questions are asked. A judge and a jury hear testimony and see evidence and they make a finding of facts and render a verdict. A witness can say one thing in a deposition and turn around and say something else at trial. A lawyer can bring up inconsistencies in statements made in depositions and at trial but you can't be charged with perjury based on depositions.
Click to expand...

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. None. Zero. Zilch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#1,033
#1,033
GAVol said:
Good Lord

You can absolutely be charged for perjury for lying during a deposition. People are put under oath for depositions all the time.
Click to expand...

Depositions are lawyer information gatherings. I've never seen anyone put under oath at a deposition.
 
#1,035
#1,035
Sandvol said:
No it isn't. A deposition is for the attorneys. Depositions aren't presented to the jury. There is no oath taking in a deposition. Both sets of attorneys are present and some questions are asked. A judge and a jury hear testimony and see evidence and they make a finding of facts and render a verdict. A witness can say one thing in a deposition and turn around and say something else at trial. A lawyer can bring up inconsistencies in statements made in depositions and at trial but you can't be charged with perjury based on depositions.
Click to expand...

WUT? :eek:hmy:
 
#1,039
#1,039
ClearwaterVol said:
I've taken hundreds of depositions in several states and in both Federal and State Courts and I never not seen a deponent put under oath.
Click to expand...

Ok, I'll assume you're telling the truth but I've only been to a few and never seen anyone put under oath.
 
#1,041
#1,041
It will be interesting to see if this trial proceeds what Constand will say under oath and what evidence they have other than the vague Constand civil deposition. The only facts that are out there are they had sex, she says he drugged her, there is no proof, and there is the civil deposition. Not much of a case.
 
#1,042
#1,042
Sandvol said:
Have you ever listened to one of his speeches to young people? Very conservative. And, I know he campaigned for Obama in 2008 and was dismayed by that, but I never saw him campaigning for anyone else.
Click to expand...

Of course, because if you don't see him doing something, then you don't believe he did it.

I don't give a #### what he says to young people, if he supports and votes for progressive/liberal candidates, he's not conservative. It's not a hard concept junior.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#1,045
#1,045
VolsSportsFan said:
Not shocking at all you completely miss his point.
Click to expand...

I understand the point that GaVol was making. I just don't agree with the fact that just because you have a long line of people coming out and saying that something happened (without any evidence), that it doesn't mean that we should just convict someone in a criminal case or the court of public opinion based off of just he said/she said.
 
#1,046
#1,046
Sandvol said:
Here's an actual copy of the deposition in the Constand case. There was no swearing in oath and the only party deposed was Cosby.

Cosby Depo
Click to expand...

Please stop arguing with me on this stuff. That is not a deposition. That is a Motion and Memorandum of Law and it contains excerpts from Cosby's deposition. It wouldn't contain the swearing in because that is not relevant to the proceeding and it is assumed by all parties and the court.

Even if it was Cosby's deposition transcript it would be separate from Constand's deposition transcript. They are not generally, though they can be, taken on the same day. In this case, I would imagine the plaintiff's counsel would want a full day to question Cosby.

Depositions are not informal. They can be entered into evidence at trial for a variety of reasons or they can simply be used to show that the witness was inconsistent in his/her testimony. T
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,047
#1,047
VolsSportsFan said:
Of course, because if you don't see him doing something, then you don't believe he did it.

I don't give a #### what he says to young people, if he supports and votes for progressive/liberal candidates, he's not conservative. It's not a hard concept junior.
Click to expand...

He could be a one issue voter. He's conservative in what he says.
 
#1,048
#1,048
ClearwaterVol said:
Please stop arguing with me on this stuff. That is not a deposition. That is a Motion and Memorandum of Law and it contains excerpts from Cosby's deposition. It wouldn't contain the swearing in because that is not relevant to the proceeding and it is assumed by all parties and the court.

Even if it was Cosby's deposition transcript it would be separate from Constand's deposition transcript. They are not generally, though they can be, taken on the same day. In this case, I would imagine the plaintiff's counsel would want a full day to question Cosby.

Depositions are not informal. They can be entered into evidence at trial for a variety of reasons or they can simply be used to show that the witness was inconsistent in his/her testimony. T
Click to expand...

Will you come back here and eat your crow if/when Cosby is exonerated in this trial?

I mean really, at this point, the train is already rolling down the ridge and the brakes are gone... there's no stopping it at this point.

Will you come back and eat your crow?
 
#1,049
#1,049
Rasputin_Vol said:
I understand the point that GaVol was making. I just don't agree with the fact that just because you have a long line of people coming out and saying that something happened (without any evidence), that it doesn't mean that we should just convict someone in a criminal case or the court of public opinion based off of just he said/she said.
Click to expand...

A conviction is much harder to come by than a judgment. A conviction (criminal charge) requires evidence showing guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Really tough in old rape cases that have no physical evidence.

A judgment in civil court is much easier. The burden of proof on the plaintiff is simply a preponderance of the evidence which means that the scales only have to tip slightly. More likely than not. Judgments are much easier to get because of the lower burden. Remember Goldman got a wrongful death judgment against OJ after he was acquitted on the murder charge.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top