I was chatting with a divorce litigator and asked what she thought about the Bill Cosby situation.
“It will turn out to be all about getting cash from the old man,” she said. But what about the fact that the statute of limitations may have run? “These women are represented,” she continued. “People don’t hire lawyers and go to court unless they want cash.”
Is Cosby a rapist? “He would be if I were representing one of the women,” she responded. Can there be any doubt when there are more than 40 women complaining of at least one form of misconduct? “You’re talking about a guy who had sex with maybe two women a week for 30 years,” she replied. “That’s about 3000 women in a business relationship with Cosby but with no written contract so the terms weren’t precisely stated. That 40 out of 3000 [1.3%] ended up being upset with what they got in exchange for spreading their legs does not surprise me.”
Business relationship? “Let’s go through the three basic ways for a smart woman to make money with her body in this country,” the litigator responded. “She can go old-school with a quick marriage and divorce, getting extra cash by sobbing in court about how the rich middle-aged guy turned out to be a wife beater, child molester, yada yada yada. Doesn’t work with a guy like Cosby because he’s already married. She can give a rich guy a blow job, run to the bathroom, spit into a cervical cap, push it up her cooter, and either sell the abortion or collect a couple of million in child support. Didn’t work that well for anyone until around 1990 when the child support guidelines came in. Wouldn’t have worked with Cosby if he was smart and had a vasectomy. That leaves Way #3: hang out with a married or famous guy and get a continuing stream of cash, gifts, favors, etc. for not telling the wife or the public.”
Ah, leave it to a lawyer to give a non-responsive answer.
“…all about the cash…” if you start from the assumption that there was no rape that’s the conclusion (assuming the lawyer meant that as ‘frivolous greed’ rather than ‘just compensation for damages for rape’). If you don’t, then it’s all about a trial to determine liability. Probably most people in OJ Simpson wrongful death trial (to take the most famous one) were satisfied that the murdered victims families were looking for some sort of punishment and compensation.
“40 out of….3000 women in a business relationship with Cosby…” Another way to look at it – Cosby was a kind of guy who wanted to have sex with every woman he saw. Even if he saw these as business relationships… after a few women it can get very expensive – you’ve got to watch your costs. For most maybe he relied on charm and a nice dinner, for some he needed jewelry or expensive gifts, and is it that surprising that the 1.3% of women he simply drugged and raped, out of expediency and frugality perhaps?
There was news item about young women
doing porn for quick buck to be able to have plastic surgery.
So all a rich person has to do is finance a porn company
and/or plastic surgery center.
Moral of the story is if it is a contract then it is legal and not Rape.
I don’t like the term cooter. But this is what it means. noun
a North American river turtle with a dull brown shell and typically having yellow stripes on the head.
Your divorce stories make me glad I’m not a family law litigator. Would going through life that jaded be worth it?
SuperMike: According to the Boston sources whom we interview, a competent divorce litigator in Boston earns a minimum of $1 million per year. Is that sufficient compensation for a loss of illusions regarding human nature? Only you can decide!
Phil,
I don’t know if “Hi, I’m Mike and I ruin people’s lives for money, but at least it’s a lot of money” is how I want to explain what I do.
Most lawyers can at least tell themselves that they’re working in the interest of Justice in one way or another, but the more of your stuff I read, the more I wonder if that’s the case in many divorces.
I wonder if a woman illegally broke into a sperm bank, impregnated herself, got the name of the donor could collect just like the woman on the law professors blog. As she points out
But the courts don’t care about how the egg was actually fertilized: because at the end of the day, there’s a child now involved. And the concern, from a legal perspective, is whether or not the child will be adequately cared for, regardless of its conception.