In a general statement to the press at large, Camille said she believes her husband pretty much really is Cliff Huxtable and we shouldn't believe the alleged victims because, according to her, they haven't been "vetted." It goes downhill from there: She throws in the University of Virginia rape case, too.
Camille's statement reads in its entirety:
"I met my husband, Bill Cosby, in 1963, and we were married in 1964. The man I met, and fell in love with, and whom I continue to love, is the man you all knew through his work. He is a kind man, a generous man, a funny man, and a wonderful husband, father and friend. He is the man you thought you knew.
"A different man has been portrayed in the media over the last two months. It is the portrait of a man I do not know. It is also a portrait painted by individuals and organizations whom many in the media have given a pass. There appears to be no vetting of my husband's accusers before stories are published or aired. An accusation is published, and immediately goes viral.
"We all followed the story of the article in the Rolling Stone [sic] concerning allegations of rape at the University of Virginia. The story was heart-breaking, but ultimately appears to be proven untrue. Many in the media were quick to link that story to stories about my husband — until that story unwound.
"None of us will ever want to be in the position of attacking a victim. But the question should be asked — who is the victim?"
There are two major problems with Camille's statement.
1. She implies the victims are not worthy of being believed. By saying the alleged victims have been "given a pass" and complaining that the women have not been vetted, she is saying their stories are not worth being heard — that there is a certain type of woman who isn't credible unless there is an impartial witness and DNA evidence. But around two dozen women have come forward since 2004 with pretty much the same story, the latest being Beverly Johnson — an icon with a sterling reputation, not that it should matter.
2. Her statement about the UVA rape case is inaccurate. Those rape accusations were not proven false by any stretch of the imagination. All that was proven by the fallout of Rolling Stone's coverage is that the reporter and their editorial team need a refresher course in investigative journalism. The truth of what happened to "Jackie" that night still remains unproven one way or the other, both legally and in the court of opinion. Poor reportage does not disprove a criminal accusation.
So, what's the takeaway here? Camille is either in complete denial à la Dottie Sandusky, the wife of convicted Penn State child molester, Jerry Sandusky, and as such, is a victim of a different sort, or she's actually pretty upset that she's been married to an alleged rapist for 50 years and is trying to save face and the family's reputation. Of course, unless Cosby is convicted in a court of law, it does need to be said that there is a chance, however miniscule, that she is correct and he's not the monster he is being made out to be.
And you'll see personalized content just for you whenever you click the My Feed .
SheKnows is making some changes!