Jump to content

Conviction of Bill Cosby Vacated by PA Supreme Court, ordered released

b_m_b_m_b_m
 Share

Recommended Posts

SaysWho?

SaysWho?

Posted
Posted

From an AP article:

 

"He was charged in late 2015, when a prosecutor armed with newly unsealed evidence — Cosby’s damaging deposition from her lawsuit — arrested him days before the 12-year statute of limitations expired.

 

The trial judge had allowed just one other accuser to testify at Cosby’s first trial, when the jury deadlocked. However, he then allowed five other accusers to testify at the retrial about their experiences with Cosby in the 1980s.

 

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court said that testimony tainted the trial, even though a lower appeals court had found it appropriate to show a signature pattern of drugging and molesting women."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

The level of prosecutorial incompetence is staggering.


This sort of behavior is the rule, not the exception. It just doesn’t typically happen to rich guys.

 

Getting sweet heart deals that we never learn about because they get off is what usually happens to rich guys

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Commissar SFLUFAN

Commissar SFLUFAN

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, sblfilms said:


This sort of behavior is the rule, not the exception. It just doesn’t typically happen to rich guys.

 

Getting sweet heart deals that we never learn about because they get off is what usually happens to rich guys

 

I'm more referring to the DAs who decided to proceed with the prosecution in the full knowledge that this agreement existed and would be practically a "slam dunk" to overturn on appeal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

 

I'm more referring to the DAs who decided to proceed with the prosecution in the full knowledge that this agreement existed and would be practically a "slam dunk" to overturn on appeal.


I know, what I’m saying is that DAs break deals all the time, it just usually isn’t in blockbuster cases with rich perps! Poor people get lied into implicating themselves in crimes by not just the police, but prosecutors too. But they do t have the high priced legal representation to fight it in the post conviction time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Commissar SFLUFAN

Commissar SFLUFAN

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

I know, what I’m saying is that DAs break deals all the time, it just usually isn’t in blockbuster cases with rich perps! Poor people get lied into implicating themselves in crimes by not just the police, but prosecutors too. But they do t have the high priced legal representation to fight it in the post conviction time.

 

Oh gotcha!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CitizenVectron

CitizenVectron

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

 

 

 

When I worked in a grocery store as a teen, management instituted a new "productivity" tracking system whereby they wanted us to mark down how many "units" we put on shelves while stocking. Units were a single item from a box. So, naturally, those of us who were smart took the lightest and most unit-heavy items out to pad our numbers. Sure, stocking 8 boxes of pickle jars might take longer and be more work, but I got twice as many points by taking out a giant, light box of keenex with dozens of individual items.

 

When you reward just arresting and jailing in high numbers (current US justice system), then of course that's what cops are going to do (and all the way up). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Commissar SFLUFAN

Commissar SFLUFAN

Posted
Posted

Even if the original DA had no unilateral statutory authority to make the immunity deal without the consent of a judge (a deal that the subsequent DA reneged upon), Cosby and his legal team reasonably relied on that assurance to waive his Fifth Amendment rights.  It was this waiver that led to the self-incrimination that resulted in his conviction.  The immunity deal existed in a "de facto" sense if not an explicitly "de jure" one due to the lack of statutory authority on the part of the DA to make the deal.

 

The PA Supreme Court appears to have taken the "least harm" route in its decision by recognizing the existence of the immunity deal despite its apparent statutory exclusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BuckFly

BuckFly

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

Even if the original DA had no unilateral statutory authority to make the immunity deal without the consent of a judge (a deal that the subsequent DA reneged upon), Cosby and his legal team reasonably relied on that assurance to waive his Fifth Amendment rights.  It was this waiver that led to the self-incrimination that resulted in his conviction.  The immunity deal existed in a "de facto" sense if not an explicitly "de jure" one due to the lack of statutory authority on the part of the DA to make the deal.

 

The PA Supreme Court appears to have taken the "least harm" route in its decision by recognizing the existence of the immunity deal despite its apparent statutory exclusion.

 

 

Yeah, Wade.  This is what I was going to say, too.

 

I believe it is even stated as much above in the PASC's decision that regardless of what his attorneys should or should not have known on the matter ("(and in some instances upon the advice of counsel)").  He surrendered his 5th Amendment rights based upon a misunderstanding in the chain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Commissar SFLUFAN

Commissar SFLUFAN

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, BuckFly said:

Yeah, Wade.  This is what I was going to say, too.

 

I believe it is even stated as much above in the PASC's decision that regardless of what his attorneys should or should not have known on the matter.  He surrendered his 5th Amendment rights based upon a misunderstanding in the chain.

 

There is practically no case whatsoever without his waiver of his Fifth Amendment rights.  He simply wouldn't have testified and self-incriminated at all if he wasn't granted the immunity so the entirety of the conviction rests on essentially coerced testimony.

 

EVERYTHING about this case utterly stinks to high heaven and represents a really public low point for the American justice system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BuckFly

BuckFly

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

 

There is practically no case whatsoever without his waiver of his Fifth Amendment rights.  He simply wouldn't have testified and self-incriminated at all if he wasn't granted the immunity so the entirety of the conviction rests on essentially coerced testimony.

 

 

So, in a nut shell..."HEY, HEY, HEY, special drinks are coming girls' way!"

 

Do I think he should be behind bars?  Yes.

 

Based on the above, do I think this is the right decision?  Yes.

 

But I am like that.  Regardless of using the city where I come from as a crutch I was OK with the OJ decision (I was in my 20s then).

 

I absolutely think he did it, but I absolutely could understand jurors finding "reasonable doubt".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kal-El814

Kal-El814

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

Why would his lawyers let him take the stand and answer questions without anything in writing--not just a press release--to guarantee his immunity? 

 

An awful lot of people are much worse at their jobs than we can comfortably admit.

 

This is why I refuse to believe that anyone who says, “America should be run like a business,” has worked anywhere with actual accountability. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
b_m_b_m_b_m

b_m_b_m_b_m

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 minute ago, Kal-El814 said:

 

An awful lot of people are much worse at their jobs than we can comfortably admit.

 

This is why I refuse to believe that anyone who says, “America should be run like a business,” has worked anywhere with actual accountability. 

Yeah. You'd just figure that with Cosby's resources he would be able to have a defense that at least has a little competency. I mean, ever single corporate lawyer I've had the "pleasure" to work with was very careful with what was in writing (as you ever should be at work) so you'd think that would be lawyer 101 or some shit

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Commissar SFLUFAN

Commissar SFLUFAN

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

Why would his lawyers let him take the stand and answer questions without anything in writing--not just a press release--to guarantee his immunity? 

 

14 minutes ago, Kal-El814 said:

 

An awful lot of people are much worse at their jobs than we can comfortably admit.

 

This is why I refuse to believe that anyone who says, “America should be run like a business,” has worked anywhere with actual accountability. 

 

 

This is what Castor (the DA who entered into the oral immunity agreement which he had no statutory authority to unilaterally do) testified during Cosby's pre-trial hearing:

 

Quote

Castor admitted the only place the matter was put in writing was in the 2005 press release announcing his decision not to prosecute.

 

He acknowledged that he didn’t draw up a formal immunity agreement filed with a judge because, he said, Cosby was afraid that would make him look bad. Also, Castor said, “It was unnecessary because I concluded there was no way the case would get any better.” And he said Cosby’s lawyers did not insist on such a document.

 

Castor said Tuesday that he believed Constand’s story but that proving it would have been problematic because of serious flaws in the case, including what he called her inconsistencies and continued contact with Cosby. In deciding not to bring charges, he said, he meant to protect Cosby from prosecution “for all time.”

 

And he suggested that Cosby and his then-lawyer understood it that way too, because Cosby later agreed to testify without invoking his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination in a lawsuit brought against him by Constand.

 

“Cosby would’ve had to have been nuts to say those things if there was any chance he could’ve been prosecuted,” Castor said, referring to the damaging testimony unsealed last summer.

 

Note: Cosby's lawyer who represented him during the negotiations with Castor is very much deceased.


Cosby's attorneys rolled the dice that the oral "immunity agreement" would hold up -- which turned out to be a bad gamble until a few hours ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Commissar SFLUFAN

Commissar SFLUFAN

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Captain Pickle said:

Dean of the waht now? 
 

this planet!


Howard University is a "historically black university" in Washington, DC

 

howard_social.png

Howard University Home | Excellence in Truth and Service

HOME.HOWARD.EDU
Howard University prepares diverse, talented and ambitious students to learn, lead and embody excellence in truth and service.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...