judge declares mistrial in cosby case

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: WoodcarverA mistrial is not proof that the system works. We don't know if he drugged those women or not.

Then a mistrial does mean the system is working, as we would need to know he did, beyond a reasonable doubt. If you don't know, how can you say guilty?

A mistrial means that the jury could not agree. It says nothing about the validity of the evidence.

No, you said it. You said we have no idea. If we have no idea then it seems the system is working as intended.

Yea. As people who have not seen the evidence, we have no idea

originally posted by: Robert Reynolds
He's already been found guilty by the media, why did we even need one of these 'proper' trials?

And thats at the core of it.

OJ, tried for murdering a white woman.

Michael Jackson, tried for raping little boys.

Bill Cosby, tried for raping women.

Show trials in the main stream, fostering a racist sentiment, not because these guys were guilty or not, but sensationalized because they were black.

(imo)

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: TinySickTears

It is BS. A trial based on hear say without any forensics is not a trial, its a witch-hunt.

Sorry out there in lala land, as much as y'all like to see another wealthy black man brought down, the jury became locked over the fact there is none but accusations to go on.

In this case the system worked.

Blah wah...

(backs slowly away)

A mistrial is not proof that the system works. We don't know if he drugged those women or not.

And why would it matter if he is black or not? Sounds like you are calling anyone who believes he did it a racist. That seems a bit biased to me.

Like the whole US of White America isn't biased... lulz

A mistrial is not proof that the system works. We don't know if he drugged those women or not.

Nice dodge.

Damn!!!! So you think all white Americans are racist?

Racism like every other ism is used to divide and rule the populace.

Race, religion, politics, wealth, class, all established and fostered by the, wait for it... Establishment.

only if you are easily manipulated. I'm not. But you clearly called all white people racist.

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: Robert Reynolds
He's already been found guilty by the media, why did we even need one of these 'proper' trials?

And thats at the core of it.

OJ, tried for murdering a white woman.

Michael Jackson, tried for raping little boys.

Bill Cosby, tried for raping women.

Show trials in the main stream, fostering a racist sentiment, not because these guys were guilty or not, but sensationalized because they were black.

(imo)

OJ all but admitted he did it in his book when he was safe from double jeopardy.

Jackson admitted to improper conduct with children. Bathing and sleeping with them.

Cosby? At least some of the jury thought he was guilty.

a reply to: TinySickTears

cause the system has no faults right? works every time right?

No, it doesn't.

Consider the Rodney King verdict... caught on tape cops beating senseless a 'motorist'.

Evidence was actual tape of the assault , and they walked.

Consider half a dozen other rogue police cases, murder even also caught on tape. No charges, no trial, not guilty...

In Justice, the MSM and court of public opinion.

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: Robert Reynolds
He's already been found guilty by the media, why did we even need one of these 'proper' trials?

And thats at the core of it.

OJ, tried for murdering a white woman.

Michael Jackson, tried for raping little boys.

Bill Cosby, tried for raping women.

Show trials in the main stream, fostering a racist sentiment, not because these guys were guilty or not, but sensationalized because they were black.

(imo)

OJ was on trial for killing his wife. Why is it relevant to you that she was white? You show your bias without hesitation.

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: WoodcarverA mistrial is not proof that the system works. We don't know if he drugged those women or not.

Then a mistrial does mean the system is working, as we would need to know he did, beyond a reasonable doubt. If you don't know, how can you say guilty?

A mistrial means that the jury could not agree. It says nothing about the validity of the evidence.

No, you said it. You said we have no idea. If we have no idea then it seems the system is working as intended.

Yea. As people who have not seen the evidence, we have no idea

What evidence exactly?

If you don't know the evidence then why are you claiming the verdict was bought and paid for and not the right one?

a reply to: Woodcarver

OJ all but admitted he did it in his book when he was safe from double jeopardy.

I already said, "doesn't matter if they are found guilty or not", its the sensational coverage of those cases that fosters racism, as intended.

a reply to: intrptr

I would take OJ out of that. There was ample evidence for that one and Jurors even talked about how they should have gone guilty. He was found NG to avoid rioting, it was a racist miscarriage of justice.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: intrptr

I would take OJ out of that. There was ample evidence for that one and Jurors even talked about how they should have gone guilty. He was found NG to avoid rioting, it was a racist miscarriage of justice.

I just watched the entire OJ: Made in America series (again) yesterday. In episode 5 the old lady juror quite clearly stated that 90 percent of the jurors came wth not guilty as payback for Rodney King verdict.

One juror even stood in the docket with fist raised in 'Back Power' salute ala Olympics.

Edit: IMO, I think OJ was guilty too, thats not the point.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: TinySickTears

cause the system has no faults right? works every time right?

No, it doesn't.

Consider the Rodney King verdict... caught on tape cops beating senseless a 'motorist'.

Evidence was actual tape of the assault , and they walked.

Consider half a dozen other rogue police cases, murder even also caught on tape. No charges, no trial, not guilty...

In Justice, the MSM and court of public opinion.

Rodney king was a habitual drunk driver and an addict of several substances. He led police on a very long pursuit that included several cruisers and a helicoptor. When they finally stopped him he resisted arrest and would not lay down for officers to cuff him. The cops were originally aquitted because of these facts. After the riots, the citizenry made it known that they would not accept this verdict. He won a 3.8million dollar settlement. He was then arrested several more times for dui, and ultimately drowned in his pool because he was too #ed up to stay awake.

In the aftermath of the original verdict. Black people started riots that killed 55 people and injured another 2000.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: WoodcarverA mistrial is not proof that the system works. We don't know if he drugged those women or not.

Then a mistrial does mean the system is working, as we would need to know he did, beyond a reasonable doubt. If you don't know, how can you say guilty?

A mistrial means that the jury could not agree. It says nothing about the validity of the evidence.

No, you said it. You said we have no idea. If we have no idea then it seems the system is working as intended.

Yea. As people who have not seen the evidence, we have no idea

What evidence exactly?

If you don't know the evidence then why are you claiming the verdict was bought and paid for and not the right one?

I don't, but if 30 women all have the same story, i tend to believe them. And then a mistrial. Which usually means there are jurors who are hold outs. They won't convict for personal reasons. Maybe race bias like in the OJ case where several jurors stated they wanted revenge for rodney king.

a reply to: intrptr

Merely pointing out OJ is an outlier from the other cases where we have black people who there is not much evidence but convicted in the public media. OJ is not that case, OJ did it, tons of evidence.

a reply to: Woodcarver

This trial is not 30 women, it's 1 woman, so what evidence are you talking about?

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: intrptr

I would take OJ out of that. There was ample evidence for that one and Jurors even talked about how they should have gone guilty. He was found NG to avoid rioting, it was a racist miscarriage of justice.

I just watched the entire OJ: Made in America series (again) yesterday. In episode 5 the old lady juror quite clearly stated that 90 percent of the jurors came wth not guilty as payback for Rodney King verdict.

One juror even stood in the docket with fist raised in 'Back Power' salute ala Olympics.

Edit: IMO, I think OJ was guilty too, thats not the point.

It is the point. We know that black jurors have a bias towards not convicting black defendants.

a reply to: Woodcarver

OJ was on trial for killing his wife. Why is it relevant to you that she was white? You show your bias without hesitation.

Your kidding right? The oldest deepest southern white meme is about 'black men raping our white women'.

Carry on...

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Woodcarver

This trial is not 30 women, it's 1 woman, so what evidence are you talking about?

The other 29 women that should have been in the case.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Woodcarver

OJ was on trial for killing his wife. Why is it relevant to you that she was white? You show your bias without hesitation.

Your kidding right? The oldest deepest southern white meme is about 'black men raping our white women'.

Carry on...

He got off because black jurors wouldn't convict him. This had nothing to do with black men raping white women. Why would you even bring that up. Besides, this happened in LA, not in alabama.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: intrptr

Merely pointing out OJ is an outlier from the other cases where we have black people who there is not much evidence but convicted in the public media. OJ is not that case, OJ did it, tons of evidence.

"Evidence" the defense claim was planted by racist LA PD.

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: intrptr

Merely pointing out OJ is an outlier from the other cases where we have black people who there is not much evidence but convicted in the public media. OJ is not that case, OJ did it, tons of evidence.

"Evidence" the defense claim was planted by racist LA PD.

of course the defense claims that the evidence was planted by racists. That is always the claim from the defense. And yet he still got off, and the jurors admitted that it was their bias towards a rich Black man.