CELEBRITY

SHOULD A CRIMINAL OFFENSE HAVE AN EXPIRY DATE?

Hello beautiful people,

It’s been a while I wrote to you and I profoundly apologize for that. My daily life has been crazy lately and I have struggled immensely to find a balance between my work and blog and I really hope my newly adopted schedule would work in the blog’s favor.

Be it as it may, I wholeheartedly miss writing and a lot of drama has gone on lately in Nigeria let alone the world that it killed me knowing I was indisposed to write about them. Hopefully, all that is in the past now and I would be spot on henceforth with giving my analysis and opinion to the happenings in our society – which brings me to the most recent development in the world today;  BILL COSBY!

Screenshot_2016-05-25-03-12-51-1

THIS JUST IN: Wlliam Henry “Bill” Cosby Jr has been ordered by a judge to stand trial for a crime he allegedly committed over FIFTY years ago in 1965.

You read that right! The earliest date claimed by Kristina Ruehli for being drugged and assaulted by Cosby in his Beverly Hills home was on December 1965. Although the incident happened in 1965, Ruehli didn’t come forward to speak about it until FORTY YEARS later in 2005.

This begs me to ask the question “are they really going to send a man to jail for a crime he did or did not commit FIFTY YEARS ago?”

Let me break it down into both scenarios

Let’s assume he actually committed the alleged crimes, why did it take the women FIFTY years to come forward and speak up? Could it be because it actually didn’t happen? Or maybe they took a bribe from the accused to keep their mouth shut?

If the latter is the case, isn’t that grounds for dismissing the case or at least bringing up another charge entirely on the accuser?

Or is it possible that they have been plotting their revenge for FIVE DECADES and now that he is all grey and wrinkly, they believe there isn’t a more suitable time to strike?

Let’s move over to the other side of the page and assume he DID NOT commit these crimes and all of these women are just seeking to cash out and make the best out of this situation.

Of course there must have been some kind of interaction between them and Cosby. So let’s say he invited them over to his house after a night at the club and he put himself in a very awkward situation that if the lady yelled “RAPE”, even the best lawyers couldn’t cut him loose from that one.

So they decide to siphon money from him until when they felt it was time to finish him off and send him to jail.

Whatever the case may be, it still does not justify and I certainly cannot fathom the fact that it took all of these women at least A DECADE before they spoke up. Bear in mind that there are over FIFTY (50) accusers; i.e.: women who are claiming to have been raped by Cosby.

Yet out of all the “59 women” not even one of them came forward at the time of the incident with valuable and admissible proof. Rather, they all collectively waited until all of the evidence had been destroyed and decades had passed before they eventually “collectively” came forward with mere accusation and finger pointing.

And the mind blowing part is that the court of law is actually considering sending a SEVENTY-SEVEN YEAR OLD MAN to prison for THIRTY YEARS? Worst of all, for a crime he allegedly committed as far as FIFTY YEARS ago?

Am I the only one that thinks this is HIGHLY absurd?

Not only do I think it is absurd but I am of the opinion that there should be a certain duration during which you can report a crime. After which if you choose not to report the crime then it can be said that THERE WAS NO CRIME!

However, my rule doesn’t stand for people under duress or people who have been threatened by the perpetrator not to report the case. The truth of the matter is NONE of these women has said that Cosby threatened to hurt them if they told anyone about the rape incident.

Or if any of the women (even one) had reported the case at the time it occurred and let’s say Cosby had been on the run or maybe she didn’t have enough evidence to take him to court then that would be a different story altogether BUT as it stands, NONE OF THE ACCUSERS reported the crime as soon as it happened and I cannot help but wonder WHY?

Some might say it is insensitive to say that there should be given duration to report a time before it becomes null and void but to them I say it wouldn’t be the first insensitive law to be passed. So is the DOUBLE JEOPARDY law which is a procedural defense that forbids a defendant from being tried again on the same charges in the same case following a legitimate acquittal or conviction.

In layman terms, if a man serves a sentence for murdering a person and it is discovered that the convicted person was innocent, even if the real culprit is arrested, under the law of double jeopardy, it is IMPOSSIBLE to try the actual culprit to court.

As a matter of fact, if the real culprit goes as far as confessing to the murder, he/she cannot be tried and is free to walk without any hassle because someone else has been convicted for that same crime.

Now as unjust as that sounds, THAT IS THE LAW!

So I say again that there should be some kind of law that requires the reporting of a crime within a given period of time otherwise, the perpetrator would be free to walk after that given period of time.

This, I believe would encourage victims to come forward and report whatever crime they have witnessed or endured so as to prevent the perpetrator from getting away with it for so long that he/she would probably forget they even committed the crime.

Do you agree that there should be an expiry date for crime?

Feel free to share your comments, opinion and suggestions.

Please subscribe to the blog’s YouTube Channel; A Loco Viva Voce (click the link to subscribe) and also subscribe to the BBM Channel by scanning the BBM Channel Barcode on the sidebar or add Channel Pin and LIKE the A Loco Viva Voce Facebook Page also on the sidebar.

For instant email updates on recent posts, click the “Follow” icon on the side bar or follow on Twitter @alocovivavoce or Instagram @alocovivavoce.

PS: Words are an expression of opinion; WRITING is SPEAKING!

-OUR

Categories: CELEBRITY, POSTS

2 replies »

  1. Welcome back.

    I have some concerns about prosecuting people several decades after they have allegedly commited a crime. I am not the person I was even 1 decade ago. I think if the purpose of prison is for rehabilitation, then how do we know for sure that the person hasnt turned their life around. And where do we draw the line. I have heard so much disgusting things that apparently Jimmy Saville did to little kids. He has been stripped of his many titles and achievements posthumously and he cant even defend himself.

    Even if all these accusations are correct, I cant help but ask is justice what they seek or is it revenge?

    Having said that, I have never been a victim of the crimes that these ppl claim to have been victims of. If Inwas, would I really wanna be deprived of an opportunity to have my day in court? To confront my abuser? I honestly dont know. And for that reason, I dont want to blame these ppl.

    I dont know what the answer is but I do think, the system has to be impartial and decide on a course of action that seems to be the most optimal. Clearly, someone will be unhappy with that option whatever it iS.

    Like

    • Apparently, there is a law that forbids the prosecution of someone after a given period of time. It’s called the statues of limitation law. I really wonder why it isn’t being applied in Cosby’s case.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s