Jill Scott Admits She Was Wrong About Bill Cosby, But Her Reasoning Is Still Completely Nonsensical

Back in December 2014, Jill Scott came out in support of Bill Cosby after a wave of sexual abuse allegations against the comedian made headlines. Her reasoning was, basically, that she knew him, thought she knew that he would never do something so horrible, and wanted proof before she would believe the claims. Well, now that the Associated Press has obtained documents from a 2005 deposition that show Cosby admitted to possessing Quaaludes to give to women he wanted to have sex with and that he gave the drugs to at least one woman, Scott has changed her tune. On June 6, Jill Scott tweeted that she was wrong about Cosby, and I — and I assume the many, many other people who believed (or gave the benefit of the doubt to) the many, many alleged victims — still can't believe that her reasoning was, and continues to be, so nonsensical.

As for Cosby's reaction to the documents being released, his rep told ABC News, "The only reason Mr. Cosby settled was because it would have been embarrassing in those days to put all those women on the stand and his family had no clue. That would have been very hurtful."

The first time Scott spoke out, she made it clear that she wouldn't believe the allegations against Cosby unless there was proof. It makes sense to crave proof in a scenario like this, but when so many women had come forward with similar stories about the comedian, it was odd that she would doubt all of the women against the words of one man. Sure, nothing was proven, but how can you doubt that many people with that many stories that all fit together so well?

Well, now that there is some evidence from court documents — Cosby was asked in the 2005 deposition, "When you got the Quaaludes, was it in your mind that you were going to use these Quaaludes for young women that you wanted to have sex with," to which he responded, "Yes" — Scott has taken this as proof and tweeted the following:

By her logic, shouldn't the information we know about Cosby only confirm that he obtained Quaaludes and gave them to one woman? Does she believe the other aspects of the women's stories now? Not that that matters because, clearly, what we do have proof of is already horrible, I'm just curious about the thought process here.

Scott went on to explain why it was so hard for her to believe the 77-year-old would do such a thing:

I completely understand feeling worried about the legal system and it's interaction with black men, but this is not jumping on a bandwagon. It wasn't like everyone was like, "Wouldn't it be cool if we took down Bill Cosby who made great strides for black people in entertainment?" It was very obviously hard for people to accept that Cosby would do these things, which is why the 2005 case that this deposition is pulled from didn't get as much publicity as the accusations are today, but it became very hard to deny that something was up when over 30 women had come forward. As for "proof will always matter more than public opinion." Again, this wasn't the public randomly feeling this need to destroy Cosby; the public heard the women's stories and then decided what to think.

I can't even say I'm glad Scott came around, because that shouldn't have been a question in the first place.

Cosby's lawyer released a statement in regards to the allegations of sexual abuse against Cosby in November 2014. It reads,

Over the last several weeks, decade-old, discredited allegations against Mr. Cosby have resurfaced. The fact that they are being repeated does not make them true. Mr. Cosby does not intend to dignify these allegations with any comment. He would like to thank all his fans for the outpouring of support and assure them that, at age 77, he is doing his best work. There will be no further statement from Mr. Cosby or any of his representatives.