They shouldn't have used statements he said in a civil trial against him.
Due process.So basically not playing by the rules is why he is free.
This is no overturning of the conviction on the merits.
That technically was the only “evidence” they had. Hearsay is not evidence.
Double jeopardy is kind of a big “rule”. As in it’s basically a pillar in the foundation of our legal system.
The case never should’ve gone to court. The prosecutor cut a deal for no jail time. So he confessed to whatever. Saves time, money, and avoids prison. People will say anything to avoid prison. Then they tried him again and used that confession as evidence.
Can’t do that.
People will say anything to avoid prison. Then they tried him again and used that confession as evidence.
He never admitted to anything wrong. The prosecutor or DA during that time, Castor, found there wasn't going to be enough evidence (and the victim's story was flimsy) to bring to trial. His only way to bring her any sort of justice was to decide NOT to prosecute so that she could sue him civilly. This would open up Cosby to a mandatory deposition. if they decided to prosecute, then Cosby pleads the 5th and they get nothing from him. that promise of 'immunity' allowed the 5th to go away and he could do the deposition. There was never any back door or full written agreement to this between Castor/Cosby; that's why the current prosecutor thought he could use the deposition. The Supreme Court says other wise. Cosby believed Castor's word otherwise he never would have done the deposition.
10+ years later, they decide to (wrongly in my opinion) open that deposition up to the public and then the courts using that deposition (now deemed wrongly) in the newer trials. The prosecutors did a bait and switch on Cosby and that is why he is free today. that's why it's not a 'technicality'; it was a major breech of law, morals and ethics. The defense fought for this from the beginning but they kept getting the shaft from the judge. All in all, this case never should have went to trial from the very start.
It's a very interesting case. You should read up on it from the beginning.
Good synopsis. The prosecutor should be disbarred. These people abuse power endlessly. Bankrupting innocent people. Their careers rely on convictions, not truth.
shareAgree. I would add the judge to that disbarment too; or whatever punishment a judge should receive. He had no business presiding over that case.
shareHe never confessed to rape.
shareNO HE DIDNT...BUT HE SURE DID A LOT OF RAPING THOUGH.
shareExcept there was no evidence. Those women knowingly took Qualuudes.
share60 PLUS WOMEN KNOWLINGLY TOOK QUALUUDES,PARTICPATED IN SEX WITH COSBY AND THEN CRYED RAPE?....OVER 60?...NOT ONE DROP OF TRUTH TO ONE WORD FROM ANY OF THEM?...LMAO.
shareHollywood is a shady place. Back in 70s/80s, it was the "in" thing for both sexes to party, take Qualuudes and then fck. Some women dig that.
shareOVER 60 WOMEN SAY IT WAS NOT CONSENSUAL.
sharehttps://abcnews.go.com/US/bill-cosby-accuser-admits-concocting-story-memoir/story?id=54417214
LOL
THAT IS ONE...OUT OF OVER 60.
shareBut that's the thing. you keep saying over 60. But there has been barely any investigation of whether those stories are true or not. And I don't recall if every one of those 60 was an actual rape. Some of them, from my memory, were 'he bumped against me at a party and I didn't like it'. But those stories never made the news.
shareLook pops, the matter is rather simple: Innocent until proven guilty.
The keyword here is PROVEN.
Accusations are not PROOF.
Until then I'd be careful with being so "brave" and accuse someone of rape from the shadows of anonymity.
HE IS INNOCENT BY THE COURT'S RULES...HE IS A DEAD TO RIGHTS GUILTY RAPIST EVERYWHERE ELSE.
shareAlot of them took Qualuudes to have sex with Cosby so they can have movie roles and "make it big" in Hollywood. When that didn't happen, it's now "RAPE".
shareOK...LET'S SAY I AGREE WITH "A LOT OF THEM"...THAT LEAVES SOME OF THEM WHO WERE ACTUALLY RAPED.
shareMost of the accusers say that he offered them a drink and then they blacked out. So prove that they knew they were taking the qualuudes. You are so sure he's innocent. Prove that they all knew. If they all wanted to "make it big" as you put it, why are there a number of Jane Doe accusers who have not gone public? Why do you find it easier to believe one man over all these women. Even one who was in a consensual relationship with Cosby who told her friend that one night he had drugged her and had sex with her while she was unconscious. She was concerned because she had no issues having consensual sex with him. So why?
Some of these allegations go back to the 60s and some were reported in the 80s. So how is it that every single one of them is lying?
Double jeopardy applies to stacking criminal cases not mixing civilian cases. He got off because he originally only wanted to testify in the civil case in exchange for immunity from criminal prosecution and the courts accepterd it. :(
shareIs being freed due to the government’s violation of Constitutional protections in the Bill or Rights really getting off on a “technicality?”
shareYes.
shareNot when no rape ever occurred.
According to the deposition, it was all consensual. He even provided the drugs that SHE requested. Here, read the whole thing for yourself:
https://www.scribd.com/doc/270731388/Bill-Cosby-Deposition-Transcript
He helped pay for her education and got her foot in the door for her career and tried to help her get started in Hollywood, which fell through horribly, so much so that her mother never liked Cosby and when her Hollywood upstart didn't happen she opted to call their sexual encounters "rape".
It was all BS, which is why even she filed for injunctions to try to have parts of the deposition blocked from the records because it made her look like a serious gold digger.
He's a pervert and shouldn't have been fooling around with white women. He's lucky it's not 1910.
shareNo arguments here.
shareWell then mission accomplished. Tarnishing his reputation was always the goal to end his career of standup and public speaking. This was a political witch hunt.
Never in history has a case like this been brought to court after 25 years. No evidence. A bunch of hearsay. It’s laughably absurd.
Cosby has a long track record of telling the black community to step up and take responsibility for their actions as no one else will do it for them. This goes directly against the Democrat media/party slave masters who want blacks kept in the inner city plantations. It was always political witch hunt.
Is that the same democratic party that nominated and got elected a black president?
shareYes. Exactly the same one. Obama was loyal, so he was fine. Cosby said the wrong thing so he had to be destroyed.
That's the dumbest thing I've read this month.
shareObama said the right shit, Cosby didn't. Thus not only did he lose the special treatment that rich and famous people seem to often get, he was targeted for destruction.
Behavior that was normal, ie trading favors and drugs for sex, just a few years ago, were lied about, so that handing a woman drugs for her to take willingly and get high, was spun as "drugging" them, leading naive people to believe he "gave" them drugs without their knowledge or consent.
By "naive" I mean people that still give the press any credibility at all.
You trying to dismiss this as "dumb" is just you admitting that you can't refute ANY of it factually.
The PA Supreme Court emphatically ruled the prosecution was “an affront to fundamental fairness” and “antithetical to... the integrity and functionality of the criminal justice system.” That’s not what people think of when they hear the term “technicality.” This was not Cosby getting off the hook on some procedural snafu. The Court is flatly saying the whole basis for his prosecution was a manifest violation of American civil liberties.
shareIndeed. I'm surprised the case even went on. How did that even happen???
shareMedia influence.
EVERYONE in the Leftist media came forward to slander and defame him and so the court moved forward based on the kangaroo court of public opinion.
There were ZERO facts related to any kind of alleged sexual assault.
Yep. I'm not aware of any tangible and concrete evidence that says Bill Cosby did this. It's silly they let 5 unrelated accusers testify in the 2nd trial where the alleged incident took place decades ago. How are they supposed to investigate claims made 30 years ago? That never should've been allowed. The judge had a clear bias and wanted a conviction.
shareWrong. The case was overturned because of the actions of an unethical prosecutor.
shareBeing railroaded by a corrupt unethical judge is a pretty big technicality. You're thinking a technicality is like a form unsigned or misplaced. LOL So dishonest, just like that pathetic excuse for a judge.
share100% agree. A corrupt and possibly racist judge with an agenda. Even one of the jurors made a comment something along the lines of "Let's get this over with and convict him already". Why wasn't that juror removed?
This was a clear violation of his due process rights which we are all entitled too. There is a reason why the first DA (Bruce Castor) made a promise not to prosecute Cosby criminally back in 2005 because the evidence was non-existent. That is not a "technicality". The "evidence" was scant at best and that's why Castor made the promise, so they can take their chances in civil court instead. No way can you properly investigate claims made from decades ago; that's why we have statue of limitations.