Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why The Pennsylvania Supreme Court Was Right To Toss Bill Cosby’s Tainted Conviction
The Federalist ^ | July 1, 2021 | Margot Cleveland

Posted on 07/01/2021 8:30:38 AM PDT by Kaslin

While Bill Cosby may have walked out of prison a free man yesterday, the courts saw to it that he endured two criminal trials and spent years in prison during his appeals.


On June 30, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court tossed the criminal sexual assault conviction against Bill Cosby, concluding that the 2005 decision by District Attorney Bruce Castor not to prosecute Cosby for the alleged sexual assault of Andrea Constand barred Pennsylvania from later charging Cosby with that crime.

Given the avalanche of allegations that the former actor and comedian drugged and then sexually assaulted scores of young women, Wednesday’s decision prompted outrage for many Americans. But, given the court’s ultimate ruling, Crosby was the one improperly crushed by the scales of justice.

In a methodical 79-page opinion released Wednesday, a four-justice majority of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court recounted the allegations underlying the criminal conviction of Cosby on three counts of aggravated indecent assault stemming from a January 2004 incident involving Constand.

Cosby and Constand first met two years prior when Constand, a former professional basketball player, served as a director of basketball operations at Temple University. The two became friendly and stayed that way even after Constand says she had rebuked two sexual overtures from Cosby. Then, in January 2004, Constand claimed that while visiting Cosby at his Cheltenham residence, he handed her three blue pills, calling them her “friends” that would “help take the edge off.”

Constand took the pills, after which she claimed she began experiencing double vision and slurred speech. Later, after Cosby helped her to a sofa, she maintains that she “felt weak and was unable to talk, and “started slipping out of consciousness. “Constand recounted that after coming to, but while unable to speak, Cosby sexually assaulted her,” the opinion notes.

After the incident, Constand says she continued to communicate with Cosby and told no one about the incident for about a year, when she finally told her mother. Soon after, Constand filed a police report with the Durham Regional Police Department. The case was transferred to Montgomery County, where investigating officers interviewed Cosby.

During questioning, Cosby admitted that, after Constand complained she couldn’t sleep, he gave her one-and-a-half Benadryl pills. Cosby also acknowledged fondling Constand, but he insisted that she had not resisted or asked him to stop.

Castor, then the district attorney for Montgomery County, reviewed the case and determined “there was insufficient credible and admissible evidence upon which any charge against Cosby related to the Constand incident could be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.” Caster would later explain that, after concluding he could not win a criminal conviction against Cosby, he contemplated an alternative approach to provide Constand some form of justice—in the form of money damages through a civil lawsuit.

Knowing that so long as the threat of criminal prosecution existed, the Fifth Amendment’s protection against self-incrimination would prevent Constand from forcing Cosby to testify during her civil case, Castor issued a press release stating that no charges would be brought. Thereafter, Cosby testified under oath in four depositions. During those depositions, he made several incriminating statements, namely that in the past he had provided Quaaludes to women with whom he wanted to have sexual relations. Cosby later paid Constand $3.38 million to settle her civil lawsuit.

The record related to Constand’s lawsuit against Cosby remained sealed until a federal judge ordered them released in 2015. After the record was made public, Castor’s successor, Risa Vetri Ferman, decided to reopen the case against Cosby. Later, Kevin Steele replaced Ferman as the D.A. and he then brought charges against Cosby related to the 2004 incident involving Costand.

At that point, Cosby filed a case against Pennsylvania seeking to stop the prosecution based on Castor’s previous decision not to bring criminal charges against him. The trial court, intermediate appellate court, and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court all rejected Cosby’s efforts to stop the criminal case. Thereafter, a jury trial commenced.

During the trial, the state introduced portions of Cosby’s deposition testimony from the civil case in which he admitted using Quaaludes during sexual liaisons with women in the past. Pennsylvania also sought to introduce testimony from other women who claimed that Cosby had sexually assaulted them in the past—too long ago for the state to initiate criminal cases—but the court only permitted one woman to testify at Cosby’s trial. Following the close of evidence, a jury deliberated for seven days but failed to reach a unanimous verdict, causing a mistrial.

The state retried Cosby. At the second trial, the judge permitted five women to testify that Cosby had sexually assaulted them after providing them alcohol, drugs, or both. Those incidents all occurred between 15 and 22 years before Cosby’s alleged assault of Costand. The second jury convicted Cosby on three counts of aggravated indecent assault.

The trial court then sentenced Cosby to a term of three to ten years in prison, and Cosby was denied bail pending appeal. He began serving that sentence in September 2018, but was released yesterday following the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s decision overturning his conviction.

The four-justice majority concluded that while Castor had not provided Cosby immunity from prosecution, the state had violated Cosby’s due process rights by charging him after the original district attorney committed not to prosecute Cosby in order to force him to testify in Constand’s civil case. The court held that “[i]n light of these circumstances, the subsequent decision by successor D.A.s to prosecute Cosby violated Cosby’s due process rights. No other conclusion comports with the principles of due process and fundamental fairness to which all aspects of our criminal justice system must adhere.”

While Cosby prevailed on appeal, one must wonder if the Pennsylvania courts nonetheless attempted to provide some semblance of justice for Costand and the other women accusing the disgraced star of sexual assault in their handling of the case.

When the new D.A. first filed charges against Cosby, his attorneys sought to prevent the criminal case from proceeding based on Castor’s decision in 2005 not to prosecute Cosby. Yet the Pennsylvania Supreme Court rejected those attempts, even though yesterday the high court relied on that same decision to toss Cosby’s conviction. But that decision came only after Cosby faced two trials and spent nearly three years in prison. Further, the courts all refused to allow Cosby to remain free on bail pending the appeal, ensuring that he spent that time in prison even though his conviction was overturned.

And then there is the way the prosecutors obtained the conviction in the first place: Following the first mistrial, at which the jury was hung, the trial court permitted the prosecutors to present testimony from five of Cosby’s other accusers. In the first trial, only one other woman was allowed to testify, and the jury in that case was unable to reach a unanimous verdict. Nothing changed between the trials to justify allowing five women to testify, instead of just the one.

On appeal, Cosby’s attorneys also challenged his conviction based on the trial court’s decision to admit this evidence of other crimes, but because the court concluded his conviction must be overturned based on Castor’s decision not to prosecute Cosby, the majority opinion did not address whether the trial court also erred in admitting this evidence. However, that did not stop the Pennsylvania Supreme Court from detailing exactly what the five witnesses testified Cosby did to them.

So, while Cosby may have walked out of prison a free man yesterday, the courts saw to it that he endured two criminal trials, at which multiple women testified that he sexually assaulted him—with much of that testimony likely inappropriately admitted—and then the courts allowed Cosby to waste away in prison for nearly three years while his appeal percolated.

Given the overwhelming number of women accusing the former star of sexual assault, America’s sympathies may not favor Cosby, but the Constitution does.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: andreaconstand; billcosby; crime; dueprocess; idiotpost; law; pasupremecourt; pennsylvania; rapist; rapistsympathizer; sexualassault
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-62 next last
To: conservative98

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0gaYyNk7QA

Bill Burr nailed it. There is an epidemic of gold digging whores in this country. It all comes down to money.


41 posted on 07/01/2021 10:26:25 AM PDT by DesertRhino (A coup government may not claim the protection of the same constitution it overthrew. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: DesertRhino

Oh yeah, Hannibal Burress mentioned he was a rapist in his stand up act!
He imitated Cosby saying “pull up your pants,” but then added “ but you’re a rapist though.” It took off after that.
Maybe you are correct! But he ( Cos) is still guilty.
I myself would not have gone anywhere near him, career or no career.


42 posted on 07/01/2021 10:28:36 AM PDT by ronniesgal (so I wonder what his FR handle is???? )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: DownInFlames

Should have looked it up first.

The Statute of Limitations on Sex Crimes in PA

Sex crimes have a different statute of limitations than most other crimes in the state. When a person is accused of raping someone over the age of 18 years old, the statute of limitations is 12 years after the crime was committed. Meanwhile, rape and sexual assault of a minor does not have a time limit, meaning a person could face charges at any time. It is for this reason the man in the most recent story still faced charges so long after the alleged offense.
———————
This should have never gone to trial under the rule of law. The alleged rape happened in 2004. She had until 2016 to seek justice. Was Cosby charged after 2016?


43 posted on 07/01/2021 10:32:11 AM PDT by DownInFlames (G)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

During the me too movement. And biden was even mixed up in it. Several women coming forward including pelosi saying he made her feel uncomfortable. He wouldn’t admit it or apologize. Said he was sorry they felt that way. But he didn’t kiss or sniff them. Pictures everywhere. What Cosby did was seriously messed up.


44 posted on 07/01/2021 10:32:29 AM PDT by glimmerman70
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Erik Latranyi

The corrupt Pa Supreme Court only ruled partially correctly !

There were other critical issues the Pa Supreme Court should have addressed but refused to !

The very serious issue of the prosecutor using ‘witnesses’ making claims about other events - events that happened 25-30 years prior - for which no police complaints were ever filed, nor any charges were ever laid should have been very firmly dealt with.

The two objecting Justices both referenced this issue but did not take a firmer stance because the other decision made the points ‘moot’.

The court also failed to address the very serious problem of the lack of a date for the alleged crime. The initial claimed date moved when Cosby was able to mount a defense against that date.

Since the ‘woman’ went over to Cosby’s house, late at night, to be wined and dined, while his wife was not present - she made her intentions very clear. She should have been able to provide an actual date for the crime and not a couple of seasons !

She was nothing but a grifter who extorted money.


45 posted on 07/01/2021 11:14:44 AM PDT by Pikachu_Dad ("the media are selling you a line of soap)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Vaduz
I have taken Benadryl.

You may be a bit drowsy but you are not doped by any means.

You can speak and have coherent conversations. You can even sign documents because you are not legally impaired. Technically you can be charged with a DUI if you take it and drive but so far no one has been.

She was not doped. Not with Benadryl.

46 posted on 07/01/2021 11:35:40 AM PDT by Harmless Teddy Bear (Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione. (I'm not interested in your dopey religious cult.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Harmless Teddy Bear

He admitted in the trial he used drugs to sleep with women aka rape no exception to that rule period.
Rape is rape no matter how one does it.


47 posted on 07/01/2021 11:50:44 AM PDT by Vaduz (women and children to be impacIQ of chimpsted the most.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Vaduz
If you give someone drugs and they take them willingly, that is not rape.

But my point was that Benadryl does not leave you impaired to the point you can not object to being felt up.

So her claim of rape is so much BS and she knew it. She continued to go out with him. You do not continue to see someone who raped you.

48 posted on 07/01/2021 12:02:59 PM PDT by Harmless Teddy Bear (Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione. (I'm not interested in your dopey religious cult.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Harmless Teddy Bear

Benadryl not the only thing he used some victims stated that when the came to they knew they were raped and the DID NOT take the drugs willingly he’s a flat out rapist 100% he need to be caged like an animal he is.
Covering up for him is BS and agreeing with his ways.


49 posted on 07/01/2021 12:11:26 PM PDT by Vaduz (women and children to be impacIQ of chimpsted the most.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: jz638
The process of navigating the justice system itself cannot be used as punishment

Agree. At least it should not. But it is.
50 posted on 07/01/2021 12:39:27 PM PDT by mmichaels1970
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: mware

That’s the best way to put it. I agree with you.


51 posted on 07/01/2021 1:23:38 PM PDT by dinodino ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Vaduz
You need to calm down.

some victims stated that when the came to they knew they were raped

And still hung out with him and went up to his room?

Those are not the actions of a rape victim. Those are the actions of willing participants.

Cosby is a sleeze.

But I am not convinced he is actually a rapist and there as been no hard evidence presented.

Covering up for him is BS and agreeing with his ways.

Who is covering up for him?

52 posted on 07/01/2021 1:24:52 PM PDT by Harmless Teddy Bear (Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione. (I'm not interested in your dopey religious cult.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Crappola.
This pervert like Weinstein drugged then sexually assaulted females like it was their right.
Released? He deserved to have a victims father or boy friend castrate the bastard.


53 posted on 07/01/2021 1:40:06 PM PDT by Joe Boucher (You Go Donald.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jz638

Exactly the point I was going to make. If they can do this to a rich and famous black man like Bill Cosby, what chance does someone who isn’t a rich, famous black man have in our system of justice?


54 posted on 07/01/2021 3:47:52 PM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
... had sexually assaulted them after providing them alcohol, drugs, or both.

HMMMmmm...

55 posted on 07/01/2021 6:28:42 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

candy is dandy,
but liquor is quicker.


56 posted on 07/01/2021 6:29:36 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DesertRhino
That is a huge swath of the 1970s and 80s.

BINGO!


57 posted on 07/01/2021 6:33:02 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: lightman
The “conviction” was the high water mark of the “Me, too” movement’s war on manhood.

The real target of the "Me, Too" movement was always Trump.

58 posted on 07/01/2021 6:35:22 PM PDT by dfwgator (Endut! Hoch Hech!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: DesertRhino

Well at least it wasn’t “Rape Rape”.


59 posted on 07/01/2021 6:36:09 PM PDT by dfwgator (Endut! Hoch Hech!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

He appears unhealthy..
will be 84 come July 12...

Money talks...his net worth is $400 million!!!!


60 posted on 07/01/2021 6:46:12 PM PDT by haircutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-62 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson