Most recently Bill Cosby was trial for rape and the case ended up in a mistrial. I want to say first, I had my doubt that Bill Cosby was guilty of rape. I’m not here to dispute the women’s accuser story of rape, because it’s not the victim’s fault for the rape. There was just something about that case that put doubt in my mind. And I guess, the jury must had the same doubt; that is why the case became a mistrial.
First of all, why did the women wait so long to come forward? Second, the model, Janice, was the kind of person I had a hard time in believing because of her reputation. Third, Bill Cosby was America favorite TV’s dad. He rated number 1.
Now let look at why the jury couldn’t find him guilty of rape.
First of all, was the fake news media responsible of only giving the information they wanted? Thus leaving room for doubt to seeps in. Maybe that is why I had the doubt in Bill Cosby being guilty of rape.
Second, didn’t the Prosecuting Attorney had enough evidence to prove him guilty?
Finally, did the Defense Attorney actually do their job in defending Bill Cosby? If I was gambling man, I would say, that it may had been a combination of all 3 and the Defense Attorney actually did their job. If that is the case, it goes to show that if a person got money, they can get a good defense attorney and they will defend them. If they don’t have the money, they just get a court-appointed Attorney, and they get paid whether they defend their client or not.
Now that is a crying shame! If they want to get paid, they should do the job of defending their clients. Otherwise they shouldn’t get paid.
Let us look at 2 other past cases:
First, when O.J. Simpson was on trial for killing his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman. I don’t want to come across racist or even sexist because of this blog because I’m not. I actually believe that if O.J. was a poor black man, race would not been made as much as an issue as it was. Because O.J. had money and fame, he was able to afford a good defense team. If he was poor, he would just had a court-appointed Attorney and they wouldn’t really defend him and make race an issue. He would had been found guilty.
Now let us take a look at Michael Jackson’s child molestation case. First of all, I, myself felt that he was guilty of molesting those boys. Since he had money and fame, he was able to hire a good defense team. His defense team was then able to prove that the parents of those boys were just using the sons to get money out of Michael Jackson. Shortly after he was founded not-guilty, there was a headline that states, “If he was on trial in North Dakota he would had been found guilty.” That is only half right!
If he was poor, he would only had a Court Appointed Attorney and he would had serve time in prison and had to register as a sex offender.
It goes to show that if a person have money, they can get away with crime; but if they don’t have the money, they will end up in prison. I’m not saying that everyone in prison is innocent. I’m just saying that there is a high percentage of those in prisons who didn’t get proper representation by a decent attorney.
I used to be for the death penalty but now when I look at our legal system, I have to admit I’m not anymore. But that is whole different blog.
I don’t think that they should leave the option open for an abortion in case of rape. Especially when our legal system is the way it is. If the woman doesn’t want the baby, she could claim rape, and if the guy can’t afford a good defense Attorney, his life will be ruin. It would be a matter of he said/she said; and without a good defense attorney he couldn’t prove himself innocent. Then his life would be ruin. Not only would he goes to prison, he would have to register as a sex offender. I could go on with this but that is another blog altogether.
When we’re hire to do a job, the employers expect us to do the job we’re hired for, right. Well, it should be the same with the lawyers. When they are hired to do a case, they should do the work to prove without a doubt that their clients are innocent. It shouldn’t matter if their clients is rich or poor. But it seems that it does!
Court Appointed Attorney are lawyers because no one else will hire them.
When I was younger, my mother wanted me to be a lawyer for some reason that she never told me.
Those in Washington should make a law that the attorneys must actually defend their clients if they want to get paid. But that will never happen! A lot of our Career Politician were/are lawyers already and so they will not change anything that will affect them.
This is one of the reason that healthcare is so expensive. Doctors have to buy extra malpractice insurance just to protect themselves from malpractice lawsuits.
Something must be done to fix the legal system. Because there is no justice for all. When you are rich, you can afford a good defense attorney; but when you are poor, you get stuck with a court-appointed attorney. They don’t defend you properly. Remember, they get paid no matter what; so why bother doing the legwork. I think if they had to do the work if they want to get paid, that might lead to something better in the legal system.
Like I said earlier, I don’t want you to think that I’m accusing the women in the Bill Cosby case as lying. Rape is not something to lie about. It is not a joking matter. I could go on but that is different blog that I may or may not write.
The case was just a matter of those 3 things that I mentioned. Was the fake news media at fault, was the Prosecuting attorney at fault, or did the defense Attorney actually do their job. If Bill Cosby was poor, it would never had been a mistrial. He would had been found guilty.
Just like if O.J. Simpson was poor, race would never been an issue. He would had been founded guilty of murder. And Michael Jackson would had been found guilty of child molestation.
There are other cases but those are the 3 famous ones. So you can see, that there is no justice for all. There is only justice to those who can afford a good attorney. I could go on but there are other blogs that I can cover some of this in, in the future.