Thursday, December 4, 2014

Jameis Winston's Statement to Florida State Hearing




















Here are statements by accused and accuser in one post in a sexual assault case.   

I am often asked about analysis, "Yeah, it sounds good, but what do you do with a statement written by a lawyer?"

Remember:  We analyze the statement, not the person.

This question was raised this week at a training and Heather addressed it.  She said that she has found that even when an attorney writes the statement, the attorney himself, often 'leaks' out that he does not believe his own client, therefore, uses words such as "would" instead of "did not", as in:

"I would never rape her" avoiding writing "I did not rape her."

That's not the case here.  

Here, we have his statement (no matter who wrote it) and we have her statement in her own handwriting. 


It is rare that we find a case where an attorney, (assuming the attorney wrote the statement) believes his client "didn't do it."

Here is the statement of Jameis Winston denying rape.  It is a very strong denial. I do not believe that he wrote this statement without assistance, based upon the language (it covers a broad array of possible attendant crimes that a lawyer would know to address) employed.

If the lawyer wrote it, the lawyer believes Winston did not do it.  In many cases where readers have strongly thought that a lawyer wrote the statement, the statement itself avoided a direct denial.  This one does not.  I have added some underlining for emphasis.

There may be an element of dictation; that is, the lawyer took notes and wrote out, or "fleshed out" the statement to cover all potential allegations in a suit.

Note the reliable denial that exists within the statement.

So...

if a lawyer wrote it, we should find consistency IF the lawyer believes his client, right?

Yes.

Such consistency is in things like:

Note the pronoun "we" after the denial of "rape" in which the subject (statement) indicates 'unity' or 'cooperation', that is, consensual.  This is the perspective of the statement and we analyze it to see if it is consistent in language to the denial issued.

IF you believe an attorney wrote this statement, it is clear from the language that the lawyer believes his client did not rape.

Note the change in communicative language:  "said" versus "told" in asking and informing each other's names.  When they were talking, it was 'softer' language, which was appropriate for the setting.

He "asked" her name, she "said" her name was ______, but when it comes to him, he "told" her his name.  "Told" is stronger, more authoritative.

This is consistent with the context.  He is a "star" and more important (in his language).

There is some sensitivity in which I would like to ask questions, but the author of this statement is stating that "he didn't do it" in no uncertain sound, even while addressing other allegations that may arise, including drugs, alcohol, and even possible kidnapping charges.

Next up, we will look at her statement...there are some quotes from her below Winston's statement.

A copy of her statement follows with analysis.

Here, we have statements from both parties.  We should be able to discern the truth.

Jameis Winston's statement to Florida State hearing

The following is the statement Jameis Winston provided former Florida Supreme Court justice Major Harding as part of a Florida State State code of conduct hearing that concluded Tuesday. The statement was obtained by USA TODAY Sports, and the name of the woman who has accused Winston of sexually assaulting her has been redacted. It includes graphic sexual descriptions.

This statement contains my best recollection of my involvement with (NAME REDACTED). I apologize for the graphic nature of the matters I describe, but given the false accusations against me it is important to describe fully and accurately my interaction with (NAME REDACTED) to demonstrate that she willingly engaged in multiple consensual sexual acts with me with her full knowledge and consent. (NAME REDACTED) is lying about me. I have no choice but to tell the truth about her.
I did not rape or sexually assault (NAME REDACTED). 

This is a strong denial. 

I.  The pronoun "I"
II.  The past tense verb "did not"
III.  The allegation "rape or sexually assault"



I did not create a hostile, intimidating or offensive environment in the short period of time that we were together. 

please note that a "hostile, intimidating or offensive environment" is legal/civil language that a lawyer would be familiar with. 


(NAME REDACTED) had the capacity to consent to having sex with me and she repeatedly did so by her conduct and her verbal expressions

Please note that "capacity" is a legal term in which the person has the legal ability (not under guardianship, for example) and is legal speak.  


I never used physical violence, threats, or other coercive means towards (NAME REDACTED). Finally, I never endangered (NAME REDACTED) health, safety, or well-being.
In the late evening of December 6, 2012 or the early morning of December 7, 2012, Chris Casher, Ron Darby, and I arrived at Potbelly's. Many of my teammates were also at Potbelly's. At some point, I noticed an attractive girl dancing on the dance floor. A few teammates and I started dancing as well and I worked my way over to this girl and made small talk with her as we started dancing together. I asked her for her name and she asked me for mine. I told her my name. She said her name was "(NAME REDACTED)." To the best of my recollection, (NAME REDACTED) and I danced together for approximately 10 minutes. When we finished dancing, we continued to talk and I asked (NAME REDACTED) for her telephone number. It was loud in Potbelly's, so, rather than yelling her telephone number at me, (NAME REDACTED) took my cellular phone and entered her telephone number into my phone.
After (NAME REDACTED) entered her telephone number into my cell phone, we talked some more. I mentioned something about staying in touch or getting together later and then I went to mingle with my friends. Chris saw me talking to (NAME REDACTED) at the bar and told me he had already gotten (NAME REDACTED) number from (NAME REDACTED).

I did not buy (NAME REDACTED) a drink. I did not give (NAME REDACTED) a drink of any kind. I did not give her a shot of any kind. I did not give or offer to give any drugs to (NAME REDACTED).
Around the time Potbelly's was closing, Chris, Ron and I left Potbelly's and socialized in front of Potbelly's. Chris and I thought that (NAME REDACTED) was interested in both of us. I decided to send (NAME REDACTED) a text message letting her know that I was leaving and asking her whether she was ready to leave. Given our prior interaction and her response, I believe that it was clear to (NAME REDACTED) that my intent with the text was to find out whether she wanted to leave and go home with me. (NAME REDACTED) replied to my text saying in substance that she was ready to leave and was coming outside.
Chris, Ron and I were standing next to a taxi cab when (NAME REDACTED) came outside and voluntarily walked over to us. I do not recall exactly what was said, but we made it clear that we were leaving and (NAME REDACTED) made it clear that she wanted to leave with us. Since Potbelly's was closing, there were a bunch of students outside of Potbelly's, around the outside bar, and there were a bunch of taxicabs parked at the curb in front of Potbelly's.(NAME REDACTED) voluntarily left with us.

(NAME REDACTED) was not "taken," forced, or "coerced" into the taxicab. She was fully aware of what was happening; she voluntarily left Potbelly's in response to my text and she voluntarily got into the taxicab. If (NAME REDACTED) had protested, then I would have left her at Potbelly's. Additionally, if she had protested, the students and taxi cab drivers in front of Potbelly's would have heard her. (NAME REDACTED) was fully aware of her actions and she did not protest at all. (NAME REDACTED) left with us voluntarily.

If she did not want to have sex, he would have left her there.  
Note:  Does he allow for the possibility that she protested going with him?

Answer:   No.  This is not an embedded admission.  The subject appears to be answering specific charges, including her protest.  This is evident by the quotes:  "taken, forced, coerced"; as quotes are not sourced, it is presupposed that they are the specific words used, hence, the quotation marks. 

The taxi cab ride to my apartment took roughly five minutes. During the ride, everyone was cheerful and talking. We asked (NAME REDACTED) if she had any friends who might want to come to our place and join us. I recall that she was calling some friends to come to our apartment.

Chris and I lived together in an apartment on the first floor of the Legacy Suites. After we arrived, (NAME REDACTED), Chris, Ron, and I went into my apartment.

Almost immediately upon our arrival, (NAME REDACTED) and I went into my bedroom. We were standing facing each other, kissing and touching each other's bodies. I eventually asked (NAME REDACTED) if she would perform oral sex on me. She said that she would. The lights in my bedroom were on and (NAME REDACTED) willingly performed oral sex on me. While (NAME REDACTED) was performing oral sex, I was close enough to my dresser to reach over to it, open a drawer, and retrieve a condom.

Note the association of lights going "on" with positive sexual activity. 
We will now see if the lights go "off" for anyone....



(NAME REDACTED) and I also engaged in intense foreplay and heavy petting during the same period that she was performing oral sex. I was with her on the bed during foreplay and I may have ejaculated a small amount of semen onto her clothing. (NAME REDACTED) assisted me in putting on the condom. I stood on the floor with (NAME REDACTED) on the bed and we engaged in consensual sexual intercourse. After sometime in this position, we changed positions. I got on my bed on my back and (NAME REDACTED) got on top of me. (NAME REDACTED) conduct and other verbal expressions left no doubt that our sex was consensual.

I recall hearing Chris and Ron outside of my room. The door to my room was broken so the door could not close fully or be locked. At some point, Chris came into the room. (NAME REDACTED), who was still on top of me, saw Chris and told him to get out of the room.

Chris left voluntarily. Chris did not tell me to stop having sex with (NAME REDACTED). Chris did not do or say anything to try to persuade me to stop having sex with (NAME REDACTED). (NAME REDACTED) did not do or say anything to Chris to express or indicate that she was being forced to have sex with me. In fact, after Chris left the room, (NAME REDACTED) got up to close the door completely. I told her that the door was broken and did not close all of the way or lock. (NAME REDACTED) then turned the lights off and returned to me.

Lights going "off" in a statement is often associated with a negative sexual experience.  We are now looking to see if there is anything, in either statement, that is negative in sexuality. 

Thereafter, either Ron or Chris pushed the door open as a prank. (NAME REDACTED) asked me if there was any way we could have more privacy. I took her into my bathroom. While in the bathroom, we began to have consensual sex again and eventually concluded having sex. After we finished having sex, we stayed in the bathroom for a few minutes talking and she then indicated that she was ready to leave.

Note the inclusion of "we" after sex.

IF the alleged victim uses the word "we" after the alleged rape, she is deceptive.  



(NAME REDACTED) dressed herself. While she was dressing, I asked (NAME REDACTED) where she lived and she told me that her place was not far from mine. I also got dressed and we left my apartment and got on my scooter. (NAME REDACTED) sat behind me on the scooter and wrapped her arms around my waist. After a short ride, perhaps three to five minutes, we arrived at the curb in front of Salley Hall. When I stopped at the curb, (NAME REDACTED) got off the scooter, gave me a hug, and walked through the Salley Hall walkway to her dorm, Kellum Hall.

For the subject, there is no "leaving" her; only "we left" the apartment.  This may be associated with rushing.  Is there anything within the two statements that indicate that at this time, one of them wanted to get away from the other?

Other than asking Chris to leave the room, (NAME REDACTED) did not say or do anything to express or indicate that she was upset about anything that occurred before, during, or after consensual sexual activities. From the time I met (NAME REDACTED) at Potbelly's to the time that I dropped her off at her dormitory, (NAME REDACTED) was fully aware of her surroundings and in control of all of her faculties. She was responsive and communicative. She had a pleasant personality and was fun to be with. During our consensual sexual interactions, (NAME REDACTED) engaged in sexual talk and took other actions that made it clear that the sex was consensual and that she was enjoying having sex with me.

As to "enjoying" sex with him, the word "with" is used.  This is not to say that "we" enjoyed the sex, but is distancing language. The writer of the statement did not always "enjoy" having sex with her, but believes she enjoyed having sex with him. 

This may be the negative experience with the lights being "off" above.  

 If (NAME REDACTED) did not want to have oral sex or intercourse with me, she was fully capable of expressing it to me, the taxicab drivers, the numerous students outside of Potbelly's, Chris, and/or Ron. Had she done so, I would have stopped immediately.

There may have been something negative about oral sex.  He may not have been pleased with it, or she may not have been pleased performing it.  

Rape is a vicious crime. The only thing as vicious as rape is falsely accusing someone of rape. (NAME REDACTED) and her lawyers have falsely accused me, threatened to sue me, demanded $7,000,000 from me, engaged in a destructive media campaign against me, and manipulated this process to the point that my rights have and will continue to be severely compromised. (NAME REDACTED) and her lawyers' public campaign to vilify me guarantees that her false allegations will follow me for the rest of my life.

At some point they will be held accountable, so I have determined that it is in my best interests to exercise my right pursuant to Rule 6C2R-3.004 (6)(d)of the Florida State University Student Code of Conduct and answer questions when experienced lawyers and other experts can assist me in confronting (NAME REDACTED) false accusation and when (NAME REDACTED) is subject to the penalty of perjury and other claims for (NAME REDACTED) falsely accusing me of rape.

Next up:  the alleged victim's statement


Follow the pronouns of her statement. 

If the word "we" enters the statement after the rape, it is not rape, but consensual.  This is because the word "we", being instinctive, indicates unity and cooperation.  In rape, once the rape has occurred, the victim does not feel "unity or cooperation" with the rapist.  She feels disgust, fear, and negative feelings.  We find the word "with" between them.  

Here, note that after the alleged rape, the subject still uses the word "we" indicating that when thinking of him, after he "raped" her, there is still unity. 

"afterwards we went outside..."

She is deceptive. 

Note the sensitivity indicators within her statement in including her skips over time.  
Note the accused is a "guy" but his friend (of whom she did not have sex with)  is a "person" (gender neutral) .  Her sexual interest was in him, and not his friend. 

"I'm not 100% sure how everything in there happened" avoids giving a credible account. 
"Afterwards" shows she is skipping over this vague time in which she avoids giving an account. 

When it came time to end, he "asked" her where she lived and she "told" him.  "Told" can be one way while "I said..." is more conversational.  

At this point, she likely sensed his lack of further interest in her after having sex "with" her (distancing language).  This suggests, while taken as a whole, that she knew he was not interested in a relationship with her even though they had just been intimate.  I don't think there were a lot of words spoken at this point. 

Right at this point, he "left."  

He "left" her. 





Conclusion:

The statement written by the lawyer shows a reliable denial. 

The statement written by the accuser shows inconsistency with "rape" by employing the pronoun "we" about them after the alleged rape.  

Note also how it ends:

"left"

This is often the reason for a false rape allegation: being "left"

She may have felt dumped, used and did not like it and may be the reason for the false accusation. 

The word "left" indicates where her mind is...it is on him leaving her. 

We find this in false rape allegation statements and may be the cause for the accusation, even though money has entered the equation.  His behavior may be inappropriate to some, immoral to others,  and you may even be disgusted by his narcissistic like description, but when you take the two statements together:

there is no criminal activity.  

In this week's law enforcement seminar, these very points were discussed:
1.  Attorney writing a statement
2.  The word "we" after a rape
3.  The word "left" ending a false rape accusation 
4.  Reliable denial issued versus missing information in accuser

28 comments:

tania cadogan said...

You beat me to it Peter.

When i saw the statement , my initial thought was there is a strong reliable denial, closely followed by this reads a lot like lawyer speak.

It would be interesting to hear him speak with regard to the accusation directly rather than written or perhaps via his lawyer.

He covers every base which is why it made me think his lawyer had some input into it.

It will be interesting to read the complainants version of events.

Peter Hyatt said...

Hobs,

good points. Some timing!

Refresh the article. I just added a bit. I did not feel the need to fully analyze either, but what an example!

Peter

Peter Hyatt said...

Heather added that there is anger within his statement at things he has been specifically accused of.

Bottom line:

Reliable Denial on his part;

Deception on her part;

"we" in both statements, ended with him dumping her.

Behavior on both parts...well, for another day.

Peter

Anonymous said...

Off Topic: Sorry for the off topic. I just wanted to know if someone could refresh my memory on the SCAN rule for detecting deception that has to do with looking for statements with the word so, because, therefore in them, because I do not remember the exact rule or how to use it. Thank you in advance!

tania cadogan said...

I noticed in the 'victim's statement there is temporal lacuna between her having a shot and Monique leaving.

She then jumps to being in a taxi with some random guy and another person
Why does she not provide the gender of the other occupant in the taxi?
is this to withhold knowledge of who the person was?

WE went to an apartment.
The use of we indicates unity, shared co-operation and is unexpected in this type of allegation.
Expected would be he or they took me to an apartment.

I kept telling him to stop BUT he took all my clothes off
The word "but" should always be observed carefully, particularly observing the words that follow the word "but" in comparison to what preceded it. It can refute what preceded it, or can be used to compare, or even negate what preceded it.

he started having sex with me
Why having sex and not he started raping me?
When the room mate came in why did she not ask him for help?
Why did she not scream or shout for help whilst he was taking her clothes off.


Oh dear more unity and cooperation.
The expected would be he moved me/ took me to the bathroom as she is the unwilling victim, yet she tell us he moved US

We then have another temporal lacuna where she tells us she isn't 100% sure how everything in there happened.
If it was rape, her senses would have been heightened,
If she isn't 100% sure what happened, is there a percentage that she is sure about?
Afterwards is yet another temporal lacuna and now she is lying on his bed.
introduction of body posture into a statement indicates tension and sensitivity.
She was laid on his bed but she doesn't tell us where he was.

He put my clothes on
Put the clothes on whom>
On her or himself?
Better would be he re-dressed me but she doesn't say that so i can't assume.

And WE went outside and got on hos scooter
Oh dear, again the dreaded WE shows up indicating unity and shared co-operation.

He dropped me off at ???stadium and then left.
left indicates sensitivity 70% down to time constraints and 30% for other reasons.


This was consensual not rape.
We have indications of unity and shared co-operation, we have temporal lacuna and passivity
We don't see any fear or anger in her words, she makes no mention of asking for help from the room mates even if it was rebuffed.

He shows a reliable denial covering all bases, we have deception in her statement.

This leads me to wonder if she has a boyfriend and she made the claim to stop him thinking she was cheating?
She wouldn't be the first to fake rape to fool a boyfriend/husband/partner nor would she be the last.

Does she see a large check in the future perhaps?

tania cadogan said...

Hi Anon

Anonymous said...

Off Topic: Sorry for the off topic. I just wanted to know if someone could refresh my memory on the SCAN rule for detecting deception that has to do with looking for statements with the word so, because, therefore in them, because I do not remember the exact rule or how to use it. Thank you in advance!


The above words are used to explain why something happened.

It often crops up in a statement when the subject thinks they will be asked about something and so they preempt the question.

Eg. I went to the store because i had to buy some milk.

Jen Ow said...

Hi Anon 9:37

When someone explains WHY something happened, (so, therefore, because, etc.) rather than simply relaying the information, their focus is to persuade the listener, rather than convey information...therefore indicating the topic is sensitive to them.

Jen Ow said...

I'm a little bit blown away by this statement!

Whether written by the lawyer or not, it is a wonderful example of SA getting to the truth of the matter by applying the principles evenly and consistently.

The accusers statement, line by line, is basically ALL temporal lacuna. She presents the situation as if she didn't even know who Winston was, where she was, what happened, etc. She gives zero details about the sexual acts she was supposedly forced to perform. Her statement is overwhelmingly passive.

Most importantly she shows cooperation both DURING the sex, and after.

"He moved US to the bathroom". (During)

"WE went outside". (After)


Anonymous said...

Jen Ow and Tania,

Thank you for explaining the SCAN rule. I was wondering what if an individual has written something where 4 or 5 sentences (an entire paragraph) "explain" something and then the final sentence in the paragraph begins with "SO...." (the individual is using "so" to mean "therefore"). Several paragraphs are constructed this way with 4 or 5 sentences "explaining" and then the final sentence of the paragraph begins with "SO....". The individual was not responding to any questions when they wrote what they wrote, rather they just wrote what they wrote to "inform" people about something. My question is would the SCAN rule still apply if an individual is using so, therefore, or because after several sentences of "explaining" instead of in the middle of a single sentence? I am puzzled. Thanks for any insight!

Jen Ow said...

I'm not sure the context of what was written, but I would say the information is likely a VERY sensitive topic to the person writing, if they felt such a need to extensively explain something, even though they were not being directly questioned about it.

I would wonder if they are making an attempt to address something that they feel 'guilty' about, or that they believe their motives may be called into question? As Tania said, are they anticipating being asked why/how/when they did something, and are explaining as a preemptive move....or a way to get 'their side of the story' out there first?

I understand if you can't reveal more, but if you would like to post the statement, I would be interested to see it!

tania cadogan said...

Off Topic

Bill Cosby will be investigated by police for the first time over rape and drug allegations as one of his 20 accusers files a police report.

Two detectives met with Judy Huth who claims the revered entertainer drugged and raped her at Hugh Hefner's mansion in 1974 when she was 15.

Her accusation prompted Cosby's lawyers to file a law suit against Huth on Thursday, branding her a liar.

But on Friday afternoon, the now-55-year-old responded by filing a police report which will spark an LAPD investigation,TMZ reported.

Cosby calls her claims 'absolutely false' and in papers seen by MailOnline, the star claims Miss Hath's lawyer tried to extort him for $100,000 - and then raised the price to $250,000 as new women came forward to make similar claims.

Gloria Allred addressed reporters outside LAPD's West Bureau on Friday night with alleged victim Judith Huth to confirm that they had met with two detectives.

She urged other people who believe they were victims of sexual abuse to speak out regardless of when it happened and what evidence they have.

Allred added: 'I am honored to represent [Huth] and I am inspired by her courage.'

She refused to acknowledge Huth's separate civil case against Cosby, which was filed by a different lawyer.

In his court papers, Cosby says Miss Huth's lawyer approached his attorney Marty Singer last month and made 'ominous references to criminal penalties.'

The lawyer, Cosby claims, demanded cash in return for silence - upping the demands as more women came forward.

Cosby alleges that Miss Huth tried to sell the story to the media 10 years ago, but no-one would publish her claims.

The court papers state: 'Approximately 10 years ago, plaintiff Judith Huff unsuccessfully tried to get money from a tabloid by selling the same story about Bill Cosby that is the subject of this lawsuit.

'Knowing that since she disclosed her allegations to a media outlet 10 years ago, she cannot claim to have a repressed memory.'

The argument of a repressed memory would allow Miss Huth to file a civil lawsuit within three years of the time she remembered. However, if she recalled the incident a decade ago, her lawsuit is moot, Cosby's papers state.

Miss Huth filed her own suit on Tuesday, alleging she has suffered 'psychological injuries and illnesses' that she only connected to the assault within the last three years. The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages for sexual battery and emotional distress.

She claims she first met Cosby as a teenager with her 16-year-old friend as they wandered on to the set of his movie. He invited them to his L.A. Country tennis club the following Saturday, where they then followed him to a house where he 'served them alcohol beverages and played games of billiards' with Miss Huth, according to the lawsuit.

Miss Huth was required to drink a beer every time Cosby won a game, the lawsuit said.

Later, the girls followed Cosby to the Playboy Mansion, where the comedian told Huth and her friend to say they were 19 if anyone asked their ages, according to the papers.

At one point, Miss Huth emerged from a bathroom to find Cosby sitting on a bed. The lawsuit states he asked her to sit down next to him and attempted to 'put his hand down her pants'.

He then took her hand in his and performed a sexual act on himself 'without her consent', the lawsuit said.

tania cadogan said...

'This traumatic incident, at such a tender age, has caused psychological damage and mental anguish ... that has caused her significant problems through her life,' the lawsuit said.

However, Cosby claims that Miss Huth lied about playing a 'drinking game' with him where the pair drank three beers, as his lawyer says it well known that Cosby is a 'lifelong non-drinker'.

Cosby's papers state: 'The drinking age in California at the time was 21.'

The papers state that Miss Huth's lawyer did not even know if she was seeing a therapist, accusing her and her lawyer of 'engaging in a shakedown'

Cosby is now demanding that the lawsuit is dismissed and has requested 'monetary sanctions of not less than $33,295.'

Attorney Gloria Allred yesterday challenged Cosby to pay $100 million in damages to the women who claim he sexually assaulted them.

The lawyer introduced three alleged victims - two who have never spoken before - and as they broke down in tears, she told Cosby he could waive the statute of limitations so all the women accusing him of assault could have their day in court.

If not, she said, he could stump up $100 million - and the money would be handed out to the women by a committee of retired judges.

Speaking at her California law offices, Miss Allred said she had been forced to tell many women who had contacted her to report abuse at the hands of the comic legend that they were too late to file a lawsuit due to the statute of limitations.

However, she said: 'Today, I am here to propose two new solutions to this public dilemma and a away to determine if Bill Cosby is a saint of a sexual predator.'

She said that if Cosby is 'confident' he has done nothing wrong, he could waive the statute of limitations, adding: 'Then his alleged victims would have an opportunity to have their allegations dealt with on their merits.

'Bill Cosby would have an opportunity to address their allegations in a court of law and the victims and Mr Cosby would have an opportunity to have a judge and jury decide who should be believed.'

This would be similar, Miss Allred said, to the Catholic Church cases in California, which involved allegations of sexual abuse by priests. A law allowed victims to sue within a one year period.

Alternatively, Miss Allred said, if Cosby did not want to waive the statute of limitations, he could pour $100 million into a fund, adding that anyone who claims to be a victim could put their case in front of a panel of retired judges, who would act as arbitrators, who would then decided if their case had merit - and how much damages they would be awarded.

tania cadogan said...


Cosby has an estimated fortune of $400 million, according to Celebrity Net Worth. He has made his fortune through numerous endorsements including Jell-O, Coca-Cola and Ford - and dominating TV in the 1980s with The Cosby Show.

Cosby’s syndication deal in 1988 also earned him a fortune. Rights to air The Cosby Show for three years were sold to Fox for $550 million.

He currently lives with his wife of 51 years, Camille, in a compound in Shelburne Falls, Massachusetts, that includes two large farmhouses. They couple moved in in 1971 and also bought several acres around the town for conservation purposes.

However, Miss Allred said: 'It's time for justice and accountability and we challenge him to end this nightmare, both for him and the alleged victims by accepting either of the options that I proposed and we look forward to his response.'
Chelan Lasha, from California - now believed to be a 46-year-old Grandmother - told how Cosby attacked her when she was just 17 in 1986 when she was an aspiring model.

Weeping, she said her stepmother had sent pictures of her to the star and he called her at home in Las Vegas, inviting her to the Hilton Las Vegas, where he was performing and she had a job.

She then went up to Elvis Presley suite to meet him and after telling him she had a cold, he gave her a blue pill, which he said was an antihistimine, with a double shot of Amaretto.

She said: 'He was rubbing my neck and saying that he might have to have someone come in and give me stress therapy.'

She claimed he told her to change into a Hilton bathrobe and wet her hair to see the modelling scout.

Someone did briefly come up to the room, pertaining to be from the Ford Modelling Agency -telling her to she needed to lose 10 pounds - and taking some pictures.

Then, Chelan said, Cosby walked her to the bedroom and gave her another shot of Amaretto, which he claimed would help her cold.

'I laid down,' she said: 'He laid down next to me on the bed and began pinching my left nipple and humping my leg while he was grunting.

'I could not open my eyes. I couldn't move or say anything. I felt something warm on my legs. Then I blacked out.'

'Thirteen to sixteen hours later I woke up by hearing Mr Cosby clapping his hands and saying 'Daddy says wake up'. He gave me $1500. He said the money was to buy something nice for me and my grandmother and he also invited me to go to the Temptations show with my grandmother.

'My grandmother went but I did not go because I was too sick. Then he invited us to his show. My grandmother really want to go. I did not, but I went with her and heckled him. As a result, I was fired my from job.'

Chelan was joined by two other women, Helen Hayes, who claims Cosby fondled her breast after stalking her and her friends 'like a predator' after they met in the summer of 1973.

Beth Ferrier, meanwhile, who has already come forward, alleges that she had an affair with Cosby, which ended in him drugging and raping her - and leaving her to come to in her car in an alleyway.

She was Jane Doe 5 in the civil suit brought against Cosby by Andrea Costand, the first woman to allege he had attacked her, in 2005. Former basketball player Andrea ended up settling out of court

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2863072/Bill-Cosby-face-scale-LAPD-investigation-alleged-rape-victim-files-police-report.html

tania cadogan said...

Off Topic (again)

A former Playboy bunny today accuses embattled comedy legend Bill Cosby of drugging and raping her - and sexually assaulting 12 other Playboy bunnies.

P.J. Masten, from New Jersey, said she was in her 20s and working at Playboy's famous Chicago club in the late 1970s when she met the star, who then invited her out to lunch.

A dinner date soon followed, at the end of which, she claims she woke up naked and bruised in a bed after being drugged and attacked by Cosby, adding: 'There were bruise marks all over me. I knew I was raped.'

And in shocking claims, Masten - real name Patricia - told CNN: '(There are) 12 former bunnies that I know of that are ashamed to come forward, frightened to come forward, married with families (and) don't want to come forward. But they were also drugged and raped by Bill Cosby.'
P.J. Masten donned the famous bunny ears, tight-fitting corset and fluffy tail for her job as a waitress at the Chicago club.

She started working for Playboy in 1972 in her home state of New Jersey and went on to work in LA and Chicago for the organisation.

She said she first met Cosby in Chicago and he invited her to lunch, telling CNN how he jumped behind the counter to make hot dogs, saying: 'Everybody was in there laughing. It was a lot of fun.'

The next day, she said the comic called and asked her to dinner and told her to meet her at the Whitehall Hotel.

Going up to his room, she was greeted by four of his friends who were watching sports with the star, and smoking cigars and playing cards.

Cosby asked Masten if she wanted a cocktail before dinner and she drank a glass of Grand Marnier and ice he handed her.

'The next thing I knew, it was 4 o'clock in the morning,' she told CNN: 'I woke up in a bed naked, bruised. He was laying next to me, and I slithered out of the bed... I got myself together, I went downstairs, I got in a cab, and I went home.'

Asked if she knew what had happened, Masten said: 'There were bruise marks all over me. I knew I was raped.'

Masten said she told her supervisor at the Playboy club soon after the alleged assault, only to be told: 'You know that's Hef's best friend, right?', referring to Playboy founder Hugh Hefner.

Masten recalled: 'I said, 'Yes.' She said, 'Well, nobody is going to believe you. I suggest you keep your mouth shut'.'

The blonde said she's been in therapy for years - but said she had been prompted to come forward decades later by Judy Huth, who claims Cosby attacked her at the Playboy mansion in LA when she was just 15 in 1974.

Huth is suing the star for sexual assault - but Cosby is suing her, calling her claims 'absolutely false' and accusing her lawyer of extortion.










tania cadogan said...

However, Masten said: 'That was it for me. This man has to be held accountable. He's a serial rapist. He's been that way since the '60s.'

And she is convinced there are other Playboy bunnies with similar experiences of Cosby.

She said Cosby has come up at a recent reunion of Playboy bunnies, as well as in blogs and Facebook pages restricted to them.

The public allegations stirred up lots of private conversations, involving a number of women, Masten says.

'A couple of (them) private messaged me and said, 'He did me too. It happened to me, too',' she told CNN.

Cosby, now 77, is accused of attacking 20 women, and has so far remained silent amid the myriad of claims.

However, his lawyer Marty Singer launched legal action against Judy Huth this week, accusing her of making up claims of assault and demanding $33,295 in damages.

In another link between Playboy and Cosby, another accuser, Carla Ferrigno, says she was an 18-year-old Playboy bunny when she went with a male friend to Cosby's Beverly Hills home in 1967 and he kissed her roughly after her date left the room.

Meanwhile, Playboy playmate Victoria Valentino says a friend introduced her to Cosby hoping to help her get work on his show I Spy in the late 1960s. She alleges he gave her pills at dinner to 'cheer up', after which she felt 'stoned' as he took her to another place.

There, Valentino said Cosby pushed himself near her mouth, before turning her around and raping her.

Asked by CNN why she didn't speak out about the incident until recently, Valentino said, 'As a playmate, I thought, who would believe me?'

Attorney Gloria Allred has challenged Cosby to pay $100 million in damages to the women who claim he sexually assaulted them.

The lawyer this week introduced three alleged victims - two who have never spoken before - and as they broke down in tears, she told Cosby he could waive the statute of limitations so all the women accusing him of assault could have their day in court.

If not, she said, he could stump up $100 million - and the money would be handed out to the women by a committee of retired judges.

Speaking at her California law offices, Miss Allred said she had been forced to tell many women who had contacted her to report abuse at the hands of the comic legend that they were too late to file a lawsuit due to the statute of limitations.

However, she said: 'Today, I am here to propose two new solutions to this public dilemma and a away to determine if Bill Cosby is a saint of a sexual predator.'

She said that if Cosby is 'confident' he has done nothing wrong, he could waive the statute of limitations, adding: 'Then his alleged victims would have an opportunity to have their allegations dealt with on their merits.

tania cadogan said...

'Bill Cosby would have an opportunity to address there allegations in a court of law and the victims and Mr Cosby would have an opportunity to have a judge and jury decide who should be believed.'

Chelan Lasha, from California - now believed to be a 46-year-old Grandmother- claimed that Cosby attacked her when she was just 17 in 1986 when she was an aspiring model.

'I laid down,' she said: 'He laid down next to me on the bed and began pinching my left nipple and humping my leg while he was grunting.

'I could not open my eyes. I couldn't move or say anything. I felt something warm on my legs. Then I blacked out.'

'Thirteen to sixteen hours later I woke up by hearing Mr Cosby clapping his hands and saying 'Daddy says wake up'. He gave me $1500. He said the money was to buy something nice for me and my grandmother and he also invited me to go to the Temptations show with my grandmother.

'My grandmother went but I did not go because I was too sick. Then he invited us to his show. My grandmother really want to go. I did not, but I went with her and heckled him. As a result, I was fired from my job.'

Chelan was joined by two other women, Helen Hayes, who claims Cosby fondled her breast after stalking her and her friends 'like a predator' after they met in the summer of 1973.

Beth Ferrier, meanwhile, who has already come forward, alleges that she had an affair with Cosby, which ended in him drugging and raping her - and leaving her to come to in her car in an alleyway.

She was Jane Doe 5 in the civil suit brought against Cosby by Andrea Costand, the first woman to allege he had attacked her, in 2005. Former basketball player Andrea ended up settling out of court.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2862614/Bill-Cosby-accused-sexually-assaulting-TWELVE-Playboy-bunnies-club-hostess-claims-comic-drugged-raped-her.html

Buffalo Herder said...

LOL @ "do not believe he wrote it without assistance"

I doubt if ol' Crab Legs could even read it without assistance.

And I doubt anyone who stood up in the middle of the student union and repeatedly yelled "F*** her right in the p****!" would be too concerned about the delicate sensibilities of anyone reading his statement.

Back on topic, I remember Winston saying "I would never..." in regard to this case. Haven't been able to find it though.

Buffalo Herder said...

OT:

Playboy founder Hugh Hefner issued a statement on the scandal Saturday.

"Bill Cosby has been a good friend for many years and the mere thought of these allegations is truly saddening," he said. "I would never tolerate this kind of behavior, regardless of who was involved."

Skeptical said...

Willie Nelson wrote a song called "Mama Don't Let Your Babies Grow Up to Be Cowboys". I think he should write another one called Mama Don't Let Your Little Girls Grow Up to Be Stupid".

When we were little we were told not to talk to strangers, don't play in the street, look both ways before crossing the street, don't get in a car with a stranger, don't take candy from people you don't know. Are these rules obsolete?

Perhaps the rules just need to be updated.

Don't get so drunk you can't function Don't pick up strangers in bars
Don't accept rides from people you don't know
Don't down pills or medication when you don't know what's in it.
Don't go to men's hotel rooms unaccompanied. (This one is at least 50 years old. Google Natalie Wood and Kirk Douglas)

I am angry. Angry that women put themselves in vulnerable positions and abdicate the responsibility for their safety to someone else.

I am so tired of reading about women who leave bars with strange men and their bodies are later found in shallow graves in the woods.

I used to get so angry at Jane Velez-Mitchell. She used to go on about what she called the "war on women" and how it shouldn't be happening that women should be able to go out and do whatever they wanted whenever they wanted. Wishing for a perfect world never helped anyone. I kept waiting for her to give some advice to women that would work in the real world. She never did.

I hear the problem in these women's accusations. I am still waiting for one of them to say that they made a stupid decision and put themselves in a position for a predator like Bill Cosby to take advantage of the situation. If they can take responsibility for their behavior, then they can protect and take care of themselves.

Buckley said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Buckley said...

“This statement contains my best recollection of my involvement with (NAME REDACTED).”

Weaker than “This is my best recollection” due to “statement contains”; does “my best recollection” allow for another recollection. Weaker than “this is what happened.”

“I apologize for the graphic nature of the matters I describe, but given the false accusations against me it is important to describe fully and accurately my interaction with (NAME REDACTED) to demonstrate that she willingly engaged in multiple consensual sexual acts with me with her full knowledge and consent.”

A lot of qualifiers including “fully and accurately,” “willingly…consensual…consent” in the same sentence. Doesn’t the repetition make it sensitive and persuasive rather than a “what happened”?

“(NAME REDACTED) is lying about me. I have no choice but to tell the truth about her.
I did not rape or sexually assault (NAME REDACTED).”


Why the “truth about her” rather than the truth about “what happened”? He says he has “no choice” to tell us “about her,” then follows it with a statement about what he did not do.

“I did not create a hostile, intimidating or offensive environment in the short period of time that we were together.

(NAME REDACTED) had the capacity to consent to having sex with me and she repeatedly did so by her conduct and her verbal expressions.

I never used physical violence, threats, or other coercive means towards (NAME REDACTED). Finally, I never endangered (NAME REDACTED) health, safety, or well-being.”


If we note the “past tense verb denial above, we should note the “never”s here. Not a reliable denial.

Snip

”When we finished dancing, we continued to talk and I asked (NAME REDACTED) for her telephone number. It was loud in Potbelly's, so, rather than yelling her telephone number at me, (NAME REDACTED) took my cellular phone and entered her telephone number into my phone.”

Here, they “talk” but it comes time to communicate phone numbers, verbal expression changes from “talk” to “yelling.” Why the change in language? Why the need to explain why? These details and the details about Chris also getting her number seem unneeded. Is it possible Chris got the number and put it in Jameis’ phone?

“After (NAME REDACTED) entered her telephone number into my cell phone, we talked some more. I mentioned something about staying in touch or getting together later”

Back to “talking”…Jameis “mentioned.” It seems the noise level was only too loud for the phone exchange.

“and then I went to mingle with my friends. Chris saw me talking to (NAME REDACTED) at the bar and told me he had already gotten (NAME REDACTED) number from (NAME REDACTED).”

Again, why is this necessary?

“I did not buy (NAME REDACTED) a drink. I did not give (NAME REDACTED) a drink of any kind. I did not give her a shot of any kind. I did not give or offer to give any drugs to (NAME REDACTED).”

Back to reliable denials.

“Around the time Potbelly's was closing, Chris, Ron and I left Potbelly's and socialized in front of Potbelly's. Chris and I thought that (NAME REDACTED) was interested in both of us. I decided to send (NAME REDACTED) a text message letting her know that I was leaving and asking her whether she was ready to leave.”

He tells us he “decided to” not that he did.

“Given our prior interaction and her response, I believe that it was clear to (NAME REDACTED) that my intent with the text”

Not “my” text, though later he does use “my text”

Buckley said...

How many times does the statement tell us she voluntarily left with the group?

Chris, Ron and I were standing next to a taxi cab when (NAME REDACTED) came outside and voluntarily walked over to us. I do not recall exactly what was said, but we made it clear that we were leaving and

1. (NAME REDACTED) made it clear that she wanted to leave with us. Since Potbelly's was closing, there were a bunch of students outside of Potbelly's, around the outside bar, and there were a bunch of taxicabs parked at the curb in front of Potbelly's.

2. (NAME REDACTED) voluntarily left with us.

3. (NAME REDACTED) was not "taken," forced, or "coerced" into the taxicab. She was fully aware of what was happening;

4. she voluntarily left Potbelly's in response to my text and

5. she voluntarily got into the taxicab.
If (NAME REDACTED) had protested, then I would have left her at Potbelly's. Additionally, if she had protested, the students and taxi cab drivers in front of Potbelly's would have heard her. (NAME REDACTED) was fully aware of her actions and she did not protest at all.

6. (NAME REDACTED) left with us voluntarily.


Does repeating it six times make it sensitive?

Buckley said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Buckley said...

The taxi cab ride to my apartment took roughly five minutes. During the ride, everyone was cheerful and talking. We asked (NAME REDACTED) if she had any friends who might want to come to our place and join us. I recall that she was calling some friends to come to our apartment.

The calling of friends is weakened by “recall” and “was calling” rather than “she called some friends…”

Chris and I lived together in an apartment on the first floor of the Legacy Suites. After we arrived, (NAME REDACTED), Chris, Ron, and I went into my apartment.

Almost immediately upon our arrival, (NAME REDACTED) and I went into my bedroom. We were standing facing each other, kissing and touching each other's bodies. I eventually asked (NAME REDACTED) if she would perform oral sex on me. She said that she would. The lights in my bedroom were on and (NAME REDACTED) willingly performed oral sex on me. While (NAME REDACTED) was performing oral sex, I was close enough to my dresser to reach over to it, open a drawer, and retrieve a condom.


As they enter the room alone, there is tension noted in their “standing.” We also saw “standing,” indicating tension, by the taxi while waiting on the woman. Below we see “stood” which is a little different being in straight past tense, and used to contrast his position on the floor with hers on the bed.

Buckley said...

(NAME REDACTED) and I also engaged in intense foreplay and heavy petting during the same period that she was performing oral sex. I was with her on the bed during foreplay and I may have ejaculated a small amount of semen onto her clothing. (NAME REDACTED) assisted me in putting on the condom. I stood on the floor with (NAME REDACTED) on the bed and we engaged in consensual sexual intercourse. After sometime in this position, we changed positions. I got on my bed on my back and (NAME REDACTED) got on top of me. (NAME REDACTED) conduct and other verbal expressions left no doubt that our sex was consensual.

I recall hearing Chris and Ron outside of my room. The door to my room was broken so the door could not close fully or be locked. At some point, Chris came into the room. (NAME REDACTED), who was still on top of me, saw Chris and told him to get out of the room.

Chris left voluntarily. Chris did not tell me to stop having sex with (NAME REDACTED). Chris did not do or say anything to try to persuade me to stop having sex with (NAME REDACTED). (NAME REDACTED) did not do or say anything to Chris to express or indicate that she was being forced to have sex with me. In fact, after Chris left the room, (NAME REDACTED) got up to close the door completely. I told her that the door was broken and did not close all of the way or lock. (NAME REDACTED) then turned the lights off and returned to me.


He tells us about the door twice, once that it “could” not close (to explain why Chris came in) and once that it “did” not lock (what he “told” her.
Thereafter, either Ron or Chris pushed the door open as a prank. (NAME REDACTED) asked me if there was any way we could have more privacy. I took her into my bathroom. While in the bathroom, we began to have consensual sex again and eventually concluded having sex. After we finished having sex, we stayed in the bathroom for a few minutes talking and she then indicated that she was ready to leave.
(NAME REDACTED) dressed herself. While she was dressing, I asked (NAME REDACTED) where she lived and she told me that her place was not far from mine. I also got dressed and we left my apartment and got on my scooter. (NAME REDACTED) sat behind me on the scooter and wrapped her arms around my waist. After a short ride, perhaps three to five minutes, we arrived at the curb in front of Salley Hall. When I stopped at the curb, (NAME REDACTED) got off the scooter, gave me a hug, and walked through the Salley Hall walkway to her dorm, Kellum Hall.


“eventually”- He had trouble ejaculating. Did she feel frustration that he had trouble “finishing” or was that only him?

Change in language “place” to “dorm.” Why? What the first statement does accomplish is rebut the “victim” statement that she didn’t know where she had been taken when she says “not far from”. In places, the details are pretty helpful in that regard, just as her putting her number in his phone perfectly rebuts her claim she ended up in a cab with a “random guy.”


I don’t believe he physically coerced her or raped her against her will. I do question how drunk she was and if he was on some level wondering if he was having sex with a woman who was cognizant enough to consent. I’m not saying she was very drunk, but I’m not convinced she was as sober as the statement implies.

Matt Whan said...

What about the portion of his station prior to his describing the night of December 6, wherein he used "never" to express that he didn't use physical violence or threats, and again when he said he "never" to endangering her life, or safety. I understand that, "never" may only be appropriate when asked a direct question of "have you ever..." And the subject is entering into the speaker's language, but before and after his description of the event, the subject demonstrates the ability to distinguish between the two (never, unreliable vs. Did not, strong denial).

I hesitate to say anything because I am learning Statement Analysis from any source I can find, but thought I would ask why "never" was not underlined, as, to me at least, it shows a lack of conviction toward what the statement was trying to convey.

Am I making any sense?

Peter Hyatt said...

Matt Whan said...
What about the portion of his station prior to his describing the night of December 6, wherein he used "never" to express that he didn't use physical violence or threats, and again when he said he "never" to endangering her life, or safety. I understand that, "never" may only be appropriate when asked a direct question of "have you ever..." And the subject is entering into the speaker's language, but before and after his description of the event, the subject demonstrates the ability to distinguish between the two (never, unreliable vs. Did not, strong denial).

I hesitate to say anything because I am learning Statement Analysis from any source I can find, but thought I would ask why "never" was not underlined, as, to me at least, it shows a lack of conviction toward what the statement was trying to convey.

Am I making any sense?
June 2, 2015 at 1:02 PM

Matt,

to answer your question, "yes", you are making sense.

We look at the entire statement for the analysis. We deem "never" to be "unreliable"; that is, not something that strengthens his denial in any way. It doesn't weaken it, in the sense that it accompanies a reliable denial, and with the flow, it is appropriate.

"Never" by itself, is where we often find it ending up deceptive. When it is with a reliable denial, it is acceptable and it may be true, but by itself, we cannot conclude it to be reliable.

It is elsewhere in the statement that we have the reliable denial, supported around it.

I use "never" often, and am truthful, but we are going by statistics.

If we have a Reliable Denial, the "never" that appears later is more than likely going to end up truthful.

If we have no RD, but never, we are simply neutral on the statement.

If have only "never" in a denial, we cannot conclude truthfulness even though he may be, we cannot be certain enough to hang our hat on it.

It is something for you to continue to read up on. I wrote something recently about it, too.

your comment says, "I am thinking!" which is great.

Those who take the course come out of it with a good grip on "never" in analysis.

Matt Whan said...

Thank you for taking time to give me a personal response, Peter, I appreciate it