No. Statute of limitations has run out. He can't be tried. He did admit to several of the charges and there were settlements for those victims. This man has many sides to him.

I remember one of his victims coming forward in the 80's and he responded that he was helping out a drug addict by giving her drugs when she ran out of money and was having withdrawals.

Now the women are older and have nothing to lose and nothing to gain....they're believable.

There are also women coming forward to say they had a similiar experience only NOT with Bill Cosby. The lady on "The Talk" for instance. She said she just wanted to "forget about it" at the time....and shouldn't have taken any drugs from a guy she was hanging with, which made her feel responsible. No, I don't believe if your drugged, your body is up for grabs....but I can understand the guilt the victim would feel.

I'm not sure of all the pertinent details but there is one gal who was under age [15 yrs, I think] when she was supposedly attacked by him at the Playboy mansion. Her case does not have a limitation because of her age at the time of the assault. If he's found guilty...he will be eligible for sentencing.

Statute of limitations is different in every state. In Idaho the statute of limitations on rape for a child under the age of 16, is 5 years after they reach age 18.

Statutes of limitations do differ from place to place. Even if they are generally closed, I'd be willing to bet that a clever prosecutor in some federal or state jurisdiction will find grounds to bring an indictment on a charge that isn't barred by statute. The political capital and public goodwill that would result from doing that will have many scrambling to find some possibility.

I found the article....age 15 and it happened in California.

UnderCalifornia's Civil Procedure laws, the statute of limitations for childhood sex abuse generally tolls "within eight years of the date the plaintiff attains the age of majority," but can extend when the victim realizes she should have realized years later that she was injured by the abuse.

http://gawker.com/new-lawsuit-claims-bill-cosby-sexually-assaulted-a-fift-1665984551

While it's disappointing that his victims won't see justice via due process in the courts, at least because of his position in the public eye they are and will continue to see justice in another form. The loss of his career, the stripping of so many awards, the public humiliation, loss of relationships and his life's work down the drain. The nature of his crime(s) is all about power and making his victims feel helpless, so in many ways, I think it is actually a more powerful justice to see him tumble from the top down to nothing.

Lukkiirish--I agree. I often satisfying to see public shaming and disrespect in addition to any appropriate legal punishment. I think OJ Simpson experienced some of that before he was finally locked up.

This has to be a very difficult time for Cosby's wife and family.

you think his wife didn't know?

He was so popular for the long duration of his career, there was no need for him to drug women to get them to do what he wanted. Sex wasn't the end game in his dealings with women... it was power. Now, that power has been taken away. I wouldn't mind if he spent a little time in a cell. He was fortunate that all the ladies woke up.

Sylvia, I believe she and other family members have probably known for decades.

I sure hope the Higher power takes him to task...what he's done trying to get young men of color, to get educated and live the good life has been all washed down the drain...his own education means nothing...and all for a one night stand times ???

These assaults weren't one-night stands;

they were sexual assault, rape, drugging (as gale said, luckily all the women survived-as far as we know).

He did it, over & over, because he thinks he's above it all, cannot be touched, has the power of God.

That's what rape is about:

power.

A person who drugs someone & rapes that person is taking power.

taking away the victim's power to refuse,

taking away the victim's power to resist.

& men who are already powerful automatically take away the victim's ability to seek justice, because their credibility makes the victims sound like they're lying.

just remembered an incident that troubles me still;

I once dated a policeman.

One day a woman approached him when he & I were having lunch.

She had been seeing one of this guy's officers, let him move in with her, etc. They'd had a blow-up & he'd moved out.

& he'd taken all her money.

cleaned out her accounts. erased all the records, no paper or electronic trail.

It ran into many thousands of dollars.

This girl was flat broke & she came begging my "date" to intervene, to get her ex to return the money, she didn't want to file suit & embarrass anybody.

My "date" sounded sympathetic, made all the right noises, & when she left, he said,

"That money is *gone*.

He's not going to give it back, & if she sues she'll lose, because she was $cr*w!ng him."

I never heard another word about it.

The guy used his victim's trust to steal her money, & he knew that his position gave him credibility. If she'd said anything, the verdict would have been "woman scorned makes fool of herself".

I think the women who have come forward were in similar positions.

His crimes were about power and control and I'm sure his home life is about power and control as well. For people like him, public shaming and loosing all power is the worst punishment they can be given; stripping everything from them in such a public manner. This story has just kept running and won't seem to go away. I honestly believe being in a cell would have been easier, because then he wouldn't have had to face everyone on a daily basis. Also, he's probably been told by his legal team to keep his mouth shut, that's got to be pretty hard too especially when everyone is in your face throwing accusations. Because of the volume of women, he's basically seen as guilty without a trial. I'm sure he has a lot he would like to say.

I believe his wife knew or at the very least suspected something was up.

When predators are about their evil is felt by more women than just the victims. What amazes me are the women he worked closely with all those years and they are SHOCKED about all of this. The comment: "Maybe some of those 35 women are not being honest, but there have to be a number of them who are telling the truth." I think is an atrocity. He is GUILTY. He is EVIL. People really need to stop giving him a pass on this!!! Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely !! He is corrupt. He needs to go to jail, be divorced, and isolated for the rest of his life.

I think his wife talked herself into believing that he was "having affairs',

What I find interesting is that he was a popular actor. Couldn't he have had a number of women who were okay with having an affair? So, no one wanted to be with him unless they were drugged? Ot, he just liked the fact of being in control of those who would have said no?

I once saw a tv special about cosby, really a valentine about him, all these people praising him, & he was looking "modest" but smug, smilingly & faux-humbly accepting all the accolades.

Phylicia Rashad's turn came, & she stepped to the center of the stage & started talking about how wonderful he was, & I thought, "she's afraid of him".

something about her demeanor, submissive &..?..something else, I don't know what.

Maybe it was just fear.

But when she very humbly & submissively referred to "Mr Cosby", I thought, "yep. He's a big old giant narcissistic egomaniac, & she's afraid of him."

(Can you imagine working closely with *anybody* for years upon years, let alone someone with the reputation of Fat Albert & Dr Huxtable, & still calling him "Mr"?

not in this century).

Even when Rashad defended him later, when she lashed about "these women", I thought, "that's what people do when they're afraid the wrath of god will come down on them."

don't know if I was right.

feel very sure I was right.

edited to add:

Ellen, it wasn't about an affair.

Affairs make a person vulnerable, affairs give the other person power-

the power to turn you down,

the power to resist,

the power to embarrass you..

An unconscious woman who cannot say no, who cannot fight back, & who cannot say anything for fear of being ridiculed & accused of lying is absolutely the safest " thing" to use.

If Bill Cosby is prosecuted, they will also have to prosecute the nasty Hugh Hefner - he did the exact same thing to women.

Sylvia, I know. But that is how his wife rationalized it all these years!

Accusations don't automatically mean guilt. He's innocent until proven guilty. That doesn't mean I personally think he's innocent, but what I think doesn't really matter with regards to the law.

It's important to remember that it's not exactly unheard of to hear false accusations of rape. I'm not saying it's the case here, but it definitely happens. And it can absolutely ruin the life of the one who is accused, even if he or she found to be innocent later on.

Deciding someone is 100% guilty based on accusations is a dangerous game. Everyone has the right to a fair legal process, but it sounds like it's not going to trial. As others have said, his career is already destroyed so the damage is done.

I like what Jay Leno said:

In Iran, it takes 3 women to refute the statement of 1 man.

In the US, 30-some-odd women have refuted the statement of 1 man, & they're still not believed.

& no, the term isn't "innocent" until proven guilty.

An accused must be presumed innocent until found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt by a jury of his/her peers..

O J Simpson was acquited, but the families of Nicole Brown Simpson & Ron Goldman won a wrongful death civil suit.

edited to add:
No, the cases of these women won't go to trial; the statute of limitations has run out.

They haven't asked for money, & they've said they are going public to expose wrongdoing & to help other women.

This is the danger of putting a celebrity way up high on a pedestal. They aren't gods, just regular old people that are paid a lot of money and are public so we all know their faces(and THINK we know who they are). I mean really, did you all think he was REALLY Dr. Cliff Huxstable? Why do we insist on worshiping these people? I saw a lot of wild sh*t going on in the 1980's and 1990's!

sylvia, regarding your OJ Simpson comment, it's not unusual for a defendant to be found not guilty in a criminal action but lose a civil suit, because the standard of proof is different. How the trials are conducted is also different.

The criminal standard for guilty is "beyond a reasonable doubt". Meaning, based on the evidence, the innocence of the defendant is extremely unlikely. If you like percentages (that aren't used in this context), think of 90-95% likely.

In a civil action, the requirement is usually proof by the "preponderance of the evidence". More likely than not. If you like percentages, call it 51% or more likely.

Between the two, there's a wide range.

I agree that these actions are about power and control. As a male, I'm no less disgusted by these revelations than you women are. I hope he gets strung up by an appropriate body part and suffers humiliation and indignity for the rest of his life. That's not enough but it's all that can be expected.

Well, that's what I thought I said...

"innocent until proven guilty" sounds very tidy, but people who kill other people do get acquitted, & that does not make them innocent.

Exactly. You understand this, most people don't.

An acquittal is more a judgement of the prosecution than of the defendant. A acquittal in a criminal trial means that the prosecution didn't present convincing arguments and evidence to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The defendant is found to be "Not Guilty" of the criminal charge- meaning, the proof standard wasn't met . The judgement and outcome is NOT that the person has been found to be "Innocent".

She knew before she married him and after that he was a cheater but goes in to denial about the rest. Readhttp://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/07/12/cosby-s-wife-stands-by-her-rapist-husband-i-created-him-and-we-ll-fix-this.html

‘I Created Him…and We’ll Fix This’

Really? Being generous to Cosby, let's say he's guilty of at least a few of the accusations. How do you "fix" that? What's done is done.

I think the public is very forgiving. Maybe it can be "fixed"....I'll be curious to see how.

I remember being shocked when Trump was fooling around with Marla Maples. It was a HUGE scandal at the time...now Trumps' running for president. :0) Ya gotta smile.

You mean Tammy Wynette, right, Snidely? :-)

I don't think it will be "fixed", not in his life time anyways. His name is and always will be mud . The raping will ALWAYS be brought up whenever someone mentions his name, just like Madoff will always be connected to his ponzi scheme, or McVey is connected to the Oklahoma Bombings or even Bill Clinton with his lying and trist. Bill Cosby is the worst of the worst in that regard, he's the true meaning of the word coward. In the beginning, I felt sorry for his wife, but now I don't see her as another victim, I see her as an enabler and someone who just decided to turn the other way and ignore the issue. Seriously? Shame on her.

There is a huge difference between choosing to ignore a partner's philandering, and choosing to overlook rape.

I think Cosby has done both.

As for Bill Clinton, both his actions over so many years and his wife's reaction to them show a complete disregard of the need for honesty and ethical conduct. Any mentally flawed person in an elevated position (because of elected office or celebrity status) is similarly exercising control and power like a rapist when taking advantage of females who are obviously not their peers. They feel like they're invincible and entitled - it's the same as some types of workplace sexual harassment. The list of politicians who have acted this way is too long to list.

Whether you're talking about sexual activity with an intern young enough to be his daughter, or the succession of women constituting Bimbogate, Clinton was doing what he felt he could get away with, as prerogatives he felt came along with his status. Just as Cosby did with women looking to him for mentoring.

You're welcome to see it differently. There's not one right view.

I think Cosby has done both.

Obviously, and you know that wasn't my point. I stand by my view of there being a huge difference between overlooking Bill Clinton's philandering, and overlooking Bill Cosby's philandering and rapes.

what gyr_falcon said.

Bill Clinton did not drug any woman. The women were adults.

one was looking for a husband it didn't seem to matter to her

that he was someone else's husband.

Certainly not to defend Cosby or any of his actions whether real or alleged, but I do find it interesting how so many people here like to go after a guy and they're "guilty" of a crime, whether convicted or not, and at the same time, I remember people in this forum talking about a woman who was actually convicted of 4 felonies and say something like she was only prosecuted because she was a woman!!! So, not convicted = guilty and convicted = innocent. People are SO interesting!

Now for my position on Cosby: People like Cosby, and for that matter, Simpson too (who finally saw some, albeit limited justice), it's not public shame that affects them. They don't care about that. But take away the almighty dollar and THAT will affect them. Cosby is old now so he doesn't have that long to be affected by it. He'll likely pay settlements, but probably a pittance of what he has so in the end, he still won.

As for the original question, it's pretty simple IMO, no.