Serious question here, I understand your reason for being bothered by this but did he drug and rape these women or was it all an elaborate witch hunt and Cosby was the patsy?
Or is this a perversion of justice because he had NEW and these women signed it, and he already "won" in court only to lose again.
With Constand, the case was only possible because it fell narrowly within the statue of limitations and was soon to expire. It had been reviewed in the past and the DA hadn't filed charges, citing the lack of evidence and the fact that Cosby had settled with her out of court. Settlements happen all the time - it's the victim's way of saying they prefer money to justice.
The other women - and there's many - may well have all had sexual relationships with him. It's unknown with whom it was consensual and with whom it wasn't because they all claimed to be victims. However, none of them can explain why they didn't report it to the police at the time it happened. They say no one would've believed them. First of all, there's no way they can possibly know that, as it's pure speculation. But even if true, a paper trail would've existed which, taken in its entirety, would amount to a body of evidence establishing a pattern. There is no pattern, because there is no paper trail, no interviews, or arrest history, no affidavits, nothing. Why? The real reason is because they all were aspiring actresses and entertainers and traded sexual favors with Bill to move up in their industries. That has been established in a number of their cases; in the ones where it wasn't - because their careers went nowhere - they didn't report him, either, which is odd considering they didn't benefit from their acquaintance. More likely, they had consensual sex with him because he was a star and that was that. Before MeToo, that happened daily. It's not rape and it's not assault.
Did he ever assault and rape anyone? Sure, it's possible. But there's no proof, and that's not good enough to get a conviction. The burden of proof is meant to be high for a reason; you're not supposed to lock people up on hearsay or 30-50 year old unfounded recollections. The Constand case was a setup from the beginning, from her choice of lawyer (a celebrity ambulance chaser whose specialty is targeting famous men) to the fact that she made a fortune in a settlement and remained in social contact with Bill after the alleged assault. None of it added up in the first trial, which is why the jury threw it out. This second one was a show trial, plain and simple. If he'd been acquitted, all of social media would've erupted claiming money buys freedom and justice doesn't apply to women, etc. Same as they're doing with Kavanaugh, again with no proof.
