Jump to content

Bill Cosby conviction vacated, to be freed from prison


Gourmand

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Gourmand said:

 

We have 1000 lawyers on here, somebody translate this for us please (I went to a mid-level law school).  Sounds like they're just now realizing the differences between testimony in civil cases versus criminal cases?  Seems like something a room full of D.A.'s and Judges would know ahead of time?  

And this should be fully politicized by 8:00p this evening, I'm guessing.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i only practiced maritime law for a short time in middle school but I believe... DA didn't prosecute Cosby criminally so that his testimony could be compelled in a civil trial. Said testimony implicated him criminally. later DAs said "nah we're prosecuting him criminally"

anyways, fuck that guy

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Brothahorn said:
7 minutes ago, crash_davis said:
I usually like you but you are reaching at straws. He was released because seemingly the prosecution fucked up.

Bill had the money to hire enough lawyers or the right lawyer to keep fighting. Most of us would be proper fucked.

Lady Justice may be blind, but we all know women be shopping.  

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Lobo said:

We have 1000 lawyers on here, somebody translate this for us please (I went to a mid-level law school).  Sounds like they're just now realizing the differences between testimony in civil cases versus criminal cases?  Seems like something a room full of D.A.'s and Judges would know ahead of time?  

And this should be fully politicized by 8:00p this evening, I'm guessing.  

what we have here is a classic case of "fruit of the poisonous tree." i know this because because that lawyer guy said "fruit" in his statement, and i've heard them say that a bunch of times on all of the law & order: svu episodes that i watch, so.

Edited by shadow_operative
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

From my quick read, it appears that:

1 -- the DA entered into some sort of non-prosecution agreement so as to deprive Bill of his ability to invoke the 5th if he was subjected to deposition in a civil case (you can't invoke your right against self-incrimination if the state has agreed that you can't be incriminated).

2 -- during the depos, Bill did not invoke the 5th, and testified truthfully that he was super-rapey.

3 -- the prosecutor's office reneged on the original non-prosecution deal and used Bill's depo testimony against him to secure a conviction.

4 -- the court of appeals said "nope, a deal's a deal, and Bill detrimentally relied on that deal, so you can't use that testimony against him."

 

What I don't quite get is why there can't be a re-trial, just not using that testimony?  I'm guessing that they are invoking the full deal of "you said you wouldn't prosecute at all, so you don't get to prosecute at all."

 

But, in the "not so fast" department....as I understand, they have multiple other credible accusers in OTHER jurisdictions who are NOT subject to any such non-prosecution deal.  If I was Bill, I'd keep my lawyer on retainer.

thank you. so again, the prosecution fucked up. 

but agreed he will now have plenty of chances to defend himself against the many other women he abused. he may have won this battle, but he's going to lose the war. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, crash_davis said:

thank you. so again, the prosecution fucked up. 

but agreed he will now have plenty of chances to defend himself against the many other women he abused. he may have won this battle, but he's going to lose the war. 

Whatever, the case, I think we should all break out the jell-o pudding tonight to celebrate/mourn!

giphy.gif

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, crash_davis said:

what you don't see is the drugged out woman lying down out of frame.

Apparently it was well known in the entertainment and comedic circles going back decades.  Like Harvey W.   Comedy's dirty little secret.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Apparently it was well known in the entertainment and comedic circles going back decades.  Like Harvey W.   Comedy's dirty little secret.  

This is SO much more common than anyone would like to admit.

A rapey co-worker, a pedophile priest, all of those scenarios -- it's awful how often it's the case that when the dam breaks, it comes out that "oh yeah, everyone knew not to ever go into so-and-so's office alone," that sort of thing.  People being sexual abusers is one of those "open secrets" that culture has long allowed for.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

This is SO much more common than anyone would like to admit.

A rapey co-worker, a pedophile priest, all of those scenarios -- it's awful how often it's the case that when the dam breaks, it comes out that "oh yeah, everyone knew not to ever go into so-and-so's office alone," that sort of thing.  People being sexual abusers is one of those "open secrets" that culture has long allowed for.

casting couch

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

From my quick read, it appears that:

1 -- the DA entered into some sort of non-prosecution agreement so as to deprive Bill of his ability to invoke the 5th if he was subjected to deposition in a civil case (you can't invoke your right against self-incrimination if the state has agreed that you can't be incriminated).

2 -- during the depos, Bill did not invoke the 5th, and testified truthfully that he was super-rapey.

3 -- the prosecutor's office reneged on the original non-prosecution deal and used Bill's depo testimony against him to secure a conviction.

4 -- the court of appeals said "nope, a deal's a deal, and Bill detrimentally relied on that deal, so you can't use that testimony against him."

 

What I don't quite get is why there can't be a re-trial, just not using that testimony?  I'm guessing that they are invoking the full deal of "you said you wouldn't prosecute at all, so you don't get to prosecute at all."

 

But, in the "not so fast" department....as I understand, they have multiple other credible accusers in OTHER jurisdictions who are NOT subject to any such non-prosecution deal.  If I was Bill, I'd keep my lawyer on retainer.

The DA who prosecuted did so with a couple days to spare on the statute of limitations, so it looks like he wanted to charge Cosby but absent the depo testimony, just didn't have what he needed. So, he unseals the depo testimony at the 11th hour and proceeds. Looks like a Hail Mary play that would result in at least a perp walk and SOME jail time for Cosby regardless of the ultimate result.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

This is SO much more common than anyone would like to admit.

A rapey co-worker, a pedophile priest, all of those scenarios -- it's awful how often it's the case that when the dam breaks, it comes out that "oh yeah, everyone knew not to ever go into so-and-so's office alone," that sort of thing.  People being sexual abusers is one of those "open secrets" that culture has long allowed for.

 

1 minute ago, Pimphand said:

casting couch

on campus recruiting visits
greek life
this one time at band camp
closing deals at the scrip club

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can he be tried for a different rape in a different state, or was this the only one that could get around the statute of limitations? This is a shitty result, but it may have been impossible otherwise to prosecute. But it yet again adds to the number or reasons women hesitate to come forward, especially when the perpetrator is rich and famous.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude’s 83 and by the looks of him, dead within 5 years. His finally getting caught and jail time was barely “better late than never.” In other words, he’s lived his prime a free man. Hopefully some victims were satisfied with his conviction but I don’t see much justice in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Can he be tried for a different rape in a different state, or was this the only one that could get around the statute of limitations? This is a shitty result, but it may have been impossible otherwise to prosecute. But it yet again adds to the number or reasons women hesitate to come forward, especially when the perpetrator is rich and famous.

double jeopardy only applies to the same crime/victim. hopefully this will open the floodgates for all the other women abused by him.

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.

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.



×
×
  • Create New...