• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Good news for Bill Cosby

Brickjectivity

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
It's explained in the video. The DA told him what he would say in a civil trial could not be used in the criminal trial, and it was. The video's less than 3 minutes long.
...and that DA and the judge did not get into trouble for their deception. That means they can do the same thing with no penalty times infinity.
 

pearl

Well-Known Member
I wonder if another trial is pursued. In the first trial there was only one woman accuser, but there are several that came forward, will they now bring charges all witness. But I think there is a matter of statutes of limitation that may applicable.
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
...and that DA and the judge did not get into trouble for their deception. That means they can do the same thing with no penalty times infinity.
If I'm not mistaken, I believe that DA was the same attorney who attempted to defend Trump, rather poorly, during the 2nd impeachment trial.
 

Watchmen

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
It's explained in the video. The DA told him what he would say in a civil trial could not be used in the criminal trial, and it was. The video's less than 3 minutes long.
And how is that a “technicality”? Pretty sure there were also other reasons the court vacated the conviction.
 

Saint Frankenstein

Here for the ride
Premium Member
And how is that a “technicality”? Pretty sure there were also other reasons the court vacated the conviction.
Nope, that's the reason.

"Why did the court overturn the conviction?
Because prosecutors violated Mr. Cosby’s rights by reneging on an apparent promise not to charge him, the court majority ruled.

In 2005, Bruce L. Castor Jr., who was then the district attorney in Montgomery County, Pa., outside Philadelphia, issued a news release saying that he had declined to charge Mr. Cosby over the matter. Mr. Cosby then sat for depositions in a separate lawsuit filed against him by Ms. Constand, which he paid her $3.38 million to settle in 2006.

ADVERTISEMENT

Continue reading the main story

But a subsequent district attorney reversed Mr. Castor’s decision and charged the entertainer with assaulting Ms. Constand after all. In the trial, prosecutors used what Mr. Cosby had said in the deposition — his admission that in decades past, he had given quaaludes to women in an effort to have sex with them — as evidence against him.

“We hold that, when a prosecutor makes an unconditional promise of non-prosecution, and when the defendant relies upon that guarantee to the detriment of his constitutional right not to testify, the principle of fundamental fairness that undergirds due process of law in our criminal justice system demands that the promise be enforced,” wrote Justice David Norman Wecht."
Bill Cosby’s Release From Prison, Explained
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
I wonder if another trial is pursued. In the first trial there was only one woman accuser, but there are several that came forward, will they now bring charges all witness. But I think there is a matter of statutes of limitation that may applicable.
That ought to motivate women to speak up right away or concede.
 

Watchmen

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Nope, that's the reason.

"Why did the court overturn the conviction?
Because prosecutors violated Mr. Cosby’s rights by reneging on an apparent promise not to charge him, the court majority ruled.

In 2005, Bruce L. Castor Jr., who was then the district attorney in Montgomery County, Pa., outside Philadelphia, issued a news release saying that he had declined to charge Mr. Cosby over the matter. Mr. Cosby then sat for depositions in a separate lawsuit filed against him by Ms. Constand, which he paid her $3.38 million to settle in 2006.

ADVERTISEMENT

Continue reading the main story

But a subsequent district attorney reversed Mr. Castor’s decision and charged the entertainer with assaulting Ms. Constand after all. In the trial, prosecutors used what Mr. Cosby had said in the deposition — his admission that in decades past, he had given quaaludes to women in an effort to have sex with them — as evidence against him.

“We hold that, when a prosecutor makes an unconditional promise of non-prosecution, and when the defendant relies upon that guarantee to the detriment of his constitutional right not to testify, the principle of fundamental fairness that undergirds due process of law in our criminal justice system demands that the promise be enforced,” wrote Justice David Norman Wecht."
Bill Cosby’s Release From Prison, Explained
It was one reason.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Givin his age and mangled reputation, I think Cosby will stay a straight shooter from this point on.

I don't think he's a danger to women anymore.
 
Top