Bill Cosby’s Sex Assault Conviction Overturned by Court

[John Thomas8]

As reported by USAToday:

https://www.usnews.com/news/entertainme ... d-by-court

PHILADELPHIA (AP) — Pennsylvania’s highest court overturned Bill Cosby’s sex assault conviction Wednesday after finding an agreement with a previous prosecutor prevented him from being charged in the case.

Sigh. Justice is very hard to come across in this country.

[Slim Cognito]

[bob]

SCOPA's 79-page ruling.

The crux of the claim is that the DA had said Crosby wouldn't be prosecuted, which was a move intended to prevent Cosby from asserting his Fifth Amendment privilege during a civil deposition. The DA's successors then initiated criminal proceedings based on his otherwise compelled deposition testimony.

[Phoenix520]

Is this considered a technicality?
He did confess, after all.

[RTH10260]

SCOPA's 79-page ruling.

The crux of the claim is that the DA had said Crosby wouldn't be prosecuted, which was a move intended to prevent Cosby from asserting his Fifth Amendment privilege during a civil deposition. The DA's successors then initiated criminal proceedings based on his otherwise compelled deposition testimony.

Why did the criminal prosecution get started anyhow?

[bob]

Is this considered a technicality?

"Is the U.S. Constitution a technicality?" will be response from the criminal-defense bar.

He did confess, after all.

In that he was circumvented from asserting his Fifth Amendment privilege not to confess.

[LM K]

Cosby is leaving prison today.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/bill-cosby-re ... d=78582000

[Phoenix520]

I’m glad it took this long to sort it out. Justice, IMHIANALO, has been served.

[neeneko]

Since when do DAs operate under 'our word is our bond' legality? How often does 'I pinky swear to not prosecute but you have to confess' work?

[bob]

[neeneko]

So I am trying to understand : is the problem the prosecution, or the admission of the deposition?

If it is only the later, is this done or could there be a new trial?

[bob]

So I am trying to understand : is the problem the prosecution, or the admission of the deposition?

Short answer: both.

The deposition should not have been admitted. And the deposition also served as a basis for/led to other evidence.

The prosecution (essentially) promised both non-prosecution and essentially immunity (for criminal proceedings). Neither was honored.

If it is only the later, is this done or could there be a new trial?

A majority of the judges agreed no retrial; a minority would have permitted a retrial.

[Sunrise]

He’s already served two years of a three to ten year sentence, so he’s lost that many years of his freedom. That’s the good part. Now I wonder if he’ll win a huge amount of money for being unjustly prosecuted in the first place.

[neeneko]

He’s already served two years of a three to ten year sentence, so he’s lost that many years of his freedom. That’s the good part. Now I wonder if he’ll win a huge amount of money for being unjustly prosecuted in the first place.

In all honesty, I don't even really care what happens to him. The thing I worry about is that he is already an MRA darling, and his complete refusal to show any remorse and now overturned conviction feeds into the narrative that his original actions were reasonable and ethical.

[LM K]

He’s already served two years of a three to ten year sentence, so he’s lost that many years of his freedom. That’s the good part. Now I wonder if he’ll win a huge amount of money for being unjustly prosecuted in the first place.

I'm not sure Cosby will want to pursue financial compensation. He might just want this over with and his name, and thus crimes*, out of the media.

*I understand that the Pennsylvania ruling wipes out claims that Cosby is guilty of the accused crimes. But we all know, from his own words and a plethora of witnesses, that he's guilty as fuck.

[LM K]

He’s already served two years of a three to ten year sentence, so he’s lost that many years of his freedom. That’s the good part. Now I wonder if he’ll win a huge amount of money for being unjustly prosecuted in the first place.

In all honesty, I don't even really care what happens to him. The thing I worry about is that he is already an MRA darling, and his complete refusal to show any remorse and now overturned conviction feeds into the narrative that his original actions were reasonable and ethical.

The court of public opinion has ruled that Cosby is guilty. The court of public opinion won't change it's mind.

[bob]

He’s already served two years of a three to ten year sentence, so he’s lost that many years of his freedom. That’s the good part. Now I wonder if he’ll win a huge amount of money for being unjustly prosecuted in the first place.

I'm not sure Cosby will want to pursue financial compensation. He might just want this over with and his name, and thus crimes*, out of the media.

Too also: His prosecution wasn't really "unjust." As you noted, there's no real dispute that he committed these acts.

And the admission of this evidence was hotly contested in the trial court, but the judge ruled it was admissible. A prosecutor making an argument that initially swayed a judge but was overturned on appeal is hardly rare; some errors, despite being big ones, are merely errors.

That nonetheless have consequences, for sure.

[Jim]

The court of public opinion has ruled that Cosby is guilty. The court of public opinion won't change it's mind.

Not to disagree, but we'll see. If he starts touring again, well...

[noblepa]

The court of public opinion has ruled that Cosby is guilty. The court of public opinion won't change it's mind.

Not to disagree, but we'll see. If he starts touring again, well...

Its always risky making predictions about the egos of famous people, but I suspect that he will go quietly into retirement. I don't think he will seek financial compensation from the state.

As I understand it, he is very well set financially, so he doesn't need to money. He's 84 years old.

If he begins touring or acting again, or if he sues the state, it will only re-ignite the outrage held by many at his sexual predation.

At this point, he has little to gain, and a lot to lose, or at least a lot of trouble to endure that he can minimize by simply spending time with his family.

But, like I said, celebrity egos can cause people to do a lot of things that are detrimental to their own well-being.

[Suranis]

I doubt his old mates will have much to do with him. Predators don't tend to hang around their old mates that have been caught and exposed. They don't like the reflected sunlight. Meeting their boy could draw attention to them.

From my understanding he wasn't exactly a hit comedian anymore and even in his prime his movie career was laughably bad. He might try a comeback tour, but if he does it will flop, and that will be it.

[neeneko]

The court of public opinion has ruled that Cosby is guilty. The court of public opinion won't change it's mind.

Eh, like so many things, there are now two courts of public opinion. One ruled he was guilty, the other ruled that he was persecuted. Courts have now agreed with the latter.

[Kendra]

So, I've been busy working at work today, but did he drive home in a white vehicle and did that bring back memories of the infamous Bronco ride?

[Kendra]

The court ruling on Cosby resulted from a 2005 agreement Cosby struck with then-prosecutor Bruce Castor. Castor declined to prosecute Cosby in exchange for his testimony during a civil trial.

In 2021, Castor represented Trump during his second Senate impeachment trial.

[Maybenaut]

Is this considered a technicality?

"Is the U.S. Constitution a technicality?" will be response from the criminal-defense bar.

He did confess, after all.

In that he was circumvented from asserting his Fifth Amendment privilege not to confess.

That’s exactly how this member of the defense bar would respond.

I personally don’t think there’s any such thing as a “technicality” or “loophole” in the law. The law is the law. It allows what it allows and prohibits what it prohibits.

And one of the things the law prohibits (in the form of the due process and self-incrimination clauses of the Fifth Amendment), is going back on a promise of immunity and using a person’s immunized statements against them.

[Phoenix520]

I do understand that we have rights, including the right not to fess up.
But he did. We know he did the things the women accused him of because he fessed up.

Poor Mr. Cosby. Someone lied to him to get him to do what they wanted.

Or did they? Is every DA bound by the previous DA’s promises?