Bill Cosby's Rape Conviction Overturned by State Supreme Court: To be Set Free

[CoffeeTiger 5,108]

https://apnews.com/article/bill-cosby-conviction-overturned-5c073fb64bc5df4d7b99ee7fadddbe5a

 

 In 2005 the PA DA decided not to prosecute Cosby for the rape of Andrea Constand because of a lack of evidence-->Then Because Cosby wasn't going to be criminally tried, he could not use his 5th amendment right, and was forced to testify in the civil trial involving Constand, in which Cosby admitted to the drugging and raping of her and other women.  In 2015, the new DA got the disposition of the civil trial where Cosby admitted to the crime and used that evidence against him to prosecute him, believing that the DA's verbal declaration not to criminally charge Cosby in 2005 was not legally binding. 

In short, the Supreme court says Cosby was forced to incriminate himself in the Civil trial based on the 2005 DA's decision not to prosecute, and that the State can't use what he said as evidence against him now because he was never afforded his 5th amendment right. 

[autigeremt 6,629]

Justice 🙄

[AUDub 11,148]

1 hour ago, autigeremt said:

Justice 🙄

Remember, if bad people don't have rights, you don't either. 

[DKW 86 7,424]

18 hours ago, AUDub said:

Remember, if bad people don't have rights, you don't either. 

Only mature people understand this. In the Age of American Immaturity, you cannot expect many to understand it. 
Was it an injustice? Oh hell yea.
Was it the right call? Unfortunately, yes.

[autigeremt 6,629]

On 6/30/2021 at 6:04 PM, AUDub said:

Remember, if bad people don't have rights, you don't either. 

Unfortunately this is true. 

[AU9377 4,931]

This is actually an example of the justice system working.  Regardless of what did or did not happen, what the DA did when he targeted Cosby and disregarded a prior agreement not to prosecute (reached in exchange for Cosby waiving his 5th Amendment rights in a civil suit) was as unethical as it gets.  If a defendant cannot rely on agreements made by the State, there will never be a reason to cooperate in any way.  The only real reason they got the conviction is the jury's reliance on those statements.

Is Cosby a creep?  Most likely, by any definition.  However, there is a statue of limitations for a reason and many of the allegations never came about until people started getting paid. In particular, Constand herself got paid $3.4 million.  The assault that she alleges took place in January.  Yet, months later she traveled across the country with her parents to meet Cosby, during which visit she called him a mentor. She even stayed at his apartment again and again after that assault.  I can see why the original DA refused to bring charges and made the agreement with Cosby in order to help Constand get that multi million dollar settlement.

Edited July 2, 2021 by AU9377

[AUDub 11,148]

7 hours ago, AU9377 said:

This is actually an example of the justice system working.  Regardless of what did or did not happen, what the DA did when he targeted Cosby and disregarded a prior agreement not to prosecute (reached in exchange for Cosby waiving his 5th Amendment rights in a civil suit) was as unethical as it gets.  If a defendant cannot rely on agreements made by the State, there will never be a reason to cooperate in any way.  The only real reason they got the conviction is the jury's reliance on those statements.

Is Cosby a creep?  Most likely, by any definition.  However, there is a statue of limitations for a reason and many of the allegations never came about until people started getting paid. In particular, Constand herself got paid $3.4 million.  The assault that she alleges took place in January.  Yet, months later she traveled across the country with her parents to meet Cosby, during which visit she called him a mentor. She even stayed at his apartment again and again after that assault.  I can see why the original DA refused to bring charges and made the agreement with Cosby in order to help Constand get that multi million dollar settlement.

Let's not beat around the bush here. Bill Cosby is very much a rapist. 

[AU9377 4,931]

11 hours ago, AUDub said:

Let's not beat around the bush here. Bill Cosby is very much a rapist. 

And had he been prosecuted without the use of information obtained as a result of his waiving his 5th amendment rights, there would have been no conviction. Constand made the choice in the civil trial that she would rather get a civil monetary verdict than have Cosby face criminal charges.  I would argue that it was actually a smart choice, given that she was able to get a large settlement.

[Handlemycandle 14]

On 7/2/2021 at 9:10 PM, AUDub said:

Let's not beat around the bush here. Bill Cosby is very much a rapist. 

I would agree that it would be a singularly unique situation to have that much smoke and find no fire.

But you have to be able to successfully legally prosecute it or due process is violated.  We can't have vigilante justice.

[AUDub 11,148]

1 hour ago, Handlemycandle said:

I would agree that it would be a singularly unique situation to have that much smoke and find no fire.

But you have to be able to successfully legally prosecute it or due process is violated.  We can't have vigilante justice.

He did what he was accused of. 

The entire reason his conviction was chucked out was because an overzealous DA used his own statements against him after the prior DA had a tacit agreement to not do that, very much a violation of his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.