Your theory only works if, they took the drug willingly knowing that sex was next.. They took the drugs based on "trust" due to having personal issues at that time, making mention of that, at that time and being told "here is 3 herbal pills that will help you". I call that bullshit, blatant lie, as they were not herbal pills. So in reading up it's evident that these girls did not willingly take drugs for sex. They trusted a "mentor" apparently, that wanted to help their career, apparently when they were anxious, having period pains, situations that they chose to declare through trust and then took the drugs.
Cosby studied up on at least one girl before inviting her, had his staff look into her background.
Cosby quizzed (as he did his audience) another two girls about their past, finding out if they were vulnerable, weak.
Cosby had this addiction / belief it seems, to blame all parents for the actions of their children. If they were wearing an orange suit, it was the parents fault of their up-bringing of that child, whether that child was black or white.
Cosby had this Godly like belief that everyone that has had hardship, or pain of any description or bad childhood, should excel, make something of themselves, become someone in their own right. There was no excuse, after all, he was 9 when he had to work. He had to work, because his Father was a drunk and left for the Navy and he was left to bring up the brothers one sleeping in his bed, whilst his Mother Anna cleaned for a living. But she read to the boys every night, taught them the importance of education but Cosby, quit education only to revisit it and get a degree whilst in the Navy. "You don't do things wrong as it will embarrass your Mother". He is quoted as stating, in one of his shows.
The "children" yep, I'll state that, predominately that he attacked one way or the other, groped, interfered with, made them do things to him, had sex with (some), were all aspiring young girls, with dreams, goals, hopes, belief just like he had. Something was taken away from him, poverty, no Father, his childhood. But he made it. And he preached and preached and preached everywhere he went, for children to "make it". So perhaps he took away something, from these girls deliberately, to test their ability to later "make it" most became "someone" in the World after his rapes or in-appropriate touching. My question therefore is did he take to take, or did he think he was God.
It wasn't about black or white when it came down to education. That was strong on every level to "every" child.
It wasn't about black or white when it came down to "being someone" that was strong on every level to "every" child.
But to do so, he revelled in those that told stories of abuse, molestation, thinking of committing suicide, turning to God and coming out of it. He had these girls tell these stories live. He quizzed them and bought it out of them, where they were telling half the story. At the end, he would preach and tell them God may have been by your side, but it was "you" that did it.
There seems to be this guy who thinks he's God, can do what he wants, but also preach and make the World a better place, bring the lower class into believing they should at least be middle, bring the aspiring young writers, actresses and even young show hosts, to believe they can be someone and if the miss quote him he gets angry/ got angry, and told them straight out that they are not seeing it properly, themselves and miss quoting him.
I'm now starting to wonder if he had this distaste for "wanna bees" so took. Believing that by doing so to these people, they would rise so high to become someone, therefore, what he did had good in it.
He even kicked out a caretaker after 19 years as he heard, she practiced witch craft. What, was he afraid of a witch ?
No pun intended.
Power. The whole things is about power. After all the public saw him as a "King". Power. Preaching to audiences. In one incident he preached to a crowd of parents who where there to congratulation some form of success of their children and he preached. The journalist wrote how wrong that was. His come back was, not all parents in that audience were parents of the children, so it was aimed at those parents that aren't educating their children and making them believe, you are wrong.
He got very angry over her column.. Very angry.
He's hiding something from his childhood in my opinion. To go to those that have been abused and make them speak publically at becoming someone instead of a drug addict one would have to believe that you, too have lived something within your life that was so bad that you didn't like it and became someone. To then go on and do things to young women and take from them. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.