[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by Rosebud1949

This is why Women DO NOT REPORT THESE CRIMES.... no one EVER believes them how ever much evidence there is..... Are 50 + women really wrong about this predator.. I do not think so. Shame on the "old boy network".. Blame the victim.

And THIS exaggeration is one of the reasons why we have a problem with this discussion. What you so strongly assert in capital letters is simply not true:

1. Women do report these crimes. You are only aware of the Cosby case because women reported the crimes. You are also aware of the multiple cases at Fox because women reported the crimes. Perhaps not all women report the crimes and that needs to be improved but women DO report these crimes.

2. Many people do believe the women, no matter how little evidence there is. The default is to believe the women, even when there is no evidence. But you cannot, in this country, take away someone's freedom on just the word of another; to get a conviction at trial you need evidence regardless of how much you believe the women.

3. Other than Cosby, in this case few are saying that 50+ women are wrong. The ruling that released him did not say that 50+ women are wrong.

4. Good ole boy network? The court ruled against the prosecutor; you would think that the prosecutor would be part of any good ole boy network.

5. Where in any of this was any victim blamed? Where? The court ruled against the District Attorney, the prosecutor, and the process that convicted Cosby, not the evidence and not the victims.

In order to move forward in this case and in our national conversation, we need to stop the exaggeration and deal with the facts.

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by lawgolfer

The OP, and most replies, miss the point of the court's decision and the reversal of Cosby's conviction.

The decision had nothing to do with Cosby's guilt or innocence. It had to do with prosecutorial misconduct. The District Attorney then in office, made a promise to Cosby that his testimony would not be used against him if he testified at a deposition in a civil case and did not invoke his 5th Amendment privilege. Years later, a new District Attorney breached the promise of his predecessor and prosecuted Cosby using his deposition testimony to convict him.

There are so many things wrong with the conduct of the new District Attorney that I wonder if he ever studied legal ethics in law school and marvel that he has not faced disciplinary action by the Bar. Our legal system, for all its faults, cannot exist when public officials break promises, whether they or their predecessor made the promise. This extends to the lowest level of prosecutorial authority. For example, if the lowest ranking Deputy in the office made such a promise to a suspect, the highest ranking Deputy could not say the promise should not have been made and then breach the promise, once the suspect has testified. The political and social winds may change, but a prosecutor's word must not. Today, no self-respecting prosecutor would even consider making such a promise to a suspect in a sexual assault case. However, one was made to Cosby, and was, subsequently, broken.

This extends throughout the criminal justice system and is not confined to the prosecutors. For example, a police officer cannot tell a suspect that if he confesses he will not be prosecuted, and, later, have that promise breached. For those of you who watch TV and read police procedural novels, do not be confused by lies the police are allowed to make--i.e."we found your fingerprints on the body"; "your buddy has set you up to take the rap" etc, which induce the suspect to then confess.

I proudly served as both an Assistant United States Attorney and as a Deputy District Attorney and spent 40 years before the bar. When this story first broke four years ago, I was shocked to hear that such a promise was made to Cosby by the District Attorney and more shocked to hear the current District Attorney was breaking his predecessor's promise. Anyone with even a smattering of experience in the criminal justice system, whether as an attorney, judge, or police officer, knew the prosecution was on shaky ground.

You are missing the point that a lot of women were mentioned in this civil case confession and not just the one whose criminal case Bill Cosby in which was found guilty. Where are their due process considerations? This just looks like lawyers spinning legal technicalities to get their client free any way they can. Where is the concern for equity towards Cosby's many victims? The lawyer messed up so the victims/survivors pay the consequences. Fairness to ALL parties should be a primary consideration not just that of the already justly convicted. Cosby got his days in court. Those other survivors/victims of his actions not so much. Jurisdiction: Equity | Federal Judicial Center

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

You are missing the point that a lot of women were mentioned in this civil case confession and not just the one whose criminal case Bill Cosby in which was found guilty. Where are their due process considerations? This just looks like lawyers spinning legal technicalities to get their client free any way they can. Where is the concern for equity towards Cosby's many victims? The lawyer messed up so the victims/survivors pay the consequences. Fairness to ALL parties should be a primary consideration not just that of the already justly convicted. Cosby got his days in court. Those other survivors/victims of his actions not so much.

It is sad that he got off but blame the the DA for stupidity.

Wish these women would have come forward in a much more timely manner.

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by Stu from NYC

It is sad that he got off but blame the the DA for stupidity.

Wish these women would have come forward in a much more timely manner.

Hopefully, stupidity was the only thing involved. I don't understand why a criminal prosecutor would be making any promises related to a civil court case, where millions of dollars are at stake.

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by Stu from NYC

It is sad that he got off but blame the the DA for stupidity.

Wish these women would have come forward in a much more timely manner.

This does have a lot of do with whom they were accusing of such actions. Bill Cosby was beloved by many and seems to hide his dark side extremely well. He still denies any wrongdoing even though he confessed to it in a civil deposition. Bill Cosby freed from prison as sex conviction is overturned | WGN-TV

In May, Cosby was denied parole after refusing to participate in sex offender programs behind bars. He has long said he would resist the treatment programs and refuse to acknowledge wrongdoing even if it means serving the full 10-year sentence.

Prosecutors said Cosby repeatedly used his fame and “family man” persona to manipulate young women, holding himself out as a mentor before betraying them.

[Sherry8bal]

Simple - M O N E Y T A L K S

[retiredguy123]

The prosecutor, Bruce Castor, who promised not to prosecute Cosby, is now trying to explain his decision. He needs to stop talking and go away. His promise allowed a woman to get millions of dollars from Cosby, but gave him immunity from prosecution, and provided no value to the state, for whom he works. His job is to prosecute criminals, not to assist civil plaintiffs in a lawsuit by giving immunity. What a terrible decision. My opinion.

[lawgolfer]

The concerns about other victims is understandable. As to any particular victim, most states provide for a civil settlement agreed to by the perpetrator, victim, and prosecutor to be made which then bars a criminal prosecution. These can by criticized as "the rich buying their way out of trouble"; however, they can be useful as a way of compensating a victim and lessening the harm done to him or her. I agreed to several of these while a deputy district attorney, of course, always with the approval of my superiors.

For those critical of the result in the Cosby case, they should consider whether they really want a legal system where a prosecutor can make a promise to a suspect, on which the suspect then relies, and which the prosecutor could then break. Can you imagine a system where a defendant agrees to plead guilty based on a prosecutor's promise that he would recommend a sentence of 10 years only to have the prosecutor, at sentencing, ask the judge for a sentence of 20 years, saying that he made a mistake in promising to only ask for 10 years?

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by lawgolfer

The concerns about other victims is understandable. As to any particular victim, most states provide for a civil settlement agreed to by the perpetrator, victim, and prosecutor to be made which then bars a criminal prosecution. These can by criticized as "the rich buying their way out of trouble"; however, they can be useful as a way of compensating a victim and lessening the harm done to him or her. I agreed to several of these while a deputy district attorney, of course, always with the approval of my superiors.

For those critical of the result in the Cosby case, they should consider whether they really want a legal system where a prosecutor can make a promise to a suspect, on which the suspect then relies, and which the prosecutor could then break. Can you imagine a system where a defendant agrees to plead guilty based on a prosecutor's promise that he would recommend a sentence of 10 years only to have the prosecutor, at sentencing, ask the judge for a sentence of 20 years, saying that he made a mistake in promising to only ask for 10 years?

Thanks for the explanation. But, according to Bruce Casper, he made no settlement agreement with either Cosby or the victim. He just promised not to prosecute Cosby, so he could not refuse to testify in the civil case. And, apparently, he did not get approval from his superiors.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

Thanks for the explanation. But, according to Bruce Casper, he made no settlement agreement with either Cosby or the victim. He just promised not to prosecute Cosby, so he could not refuse to testify in the civil case. And, apparently, he did not get approval from his superiors.

??? He didn't make an agreement he just made a promise? The promise IS the agreement and the basis for releasing Cosby. If that is the argument he is trying to make then it just proves his incompetence.

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

??? He didn't make an agreement he just made a promise? The promise IS the agreement and the basis for releasing Cosby. If that is the argument he is trying to make then it just proves his incompetence.

And it looks like it was just a promise made verbally and not written down anywhere. Bill Cosby released from prison after Pa. Supreme Court overturns sexual assault conviction

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

??? He didn't make an agreement he just made a promise? The promise IS the agreement and the basis for releasing Cosby. If that is the argument he is trying to make then it just proves his incompetence.

In his interview, Casper said that he made a promise, not an agreement, or a settlement. Apparently, the only reason for the promise was so Cosby could not claim the fifth amendment and refuse to testify in the civil case.

[manaboutown]

Hey, hey, hey! Looks like Gloria Allred is going after (prison nickname "OG" for "original gangster") Bill. Go get him, Gloria! Bill Cosby accusers''' attorney Gloria Allred says she'''ll proceed with civil suit against him | Fox News

[Topspinmo]

Originally Posted by blueash

No one has written as to why Cosby was freed and protected from further prosecutions for his druggings and sexual assaults. He was facing civil suits from his victims. The statute of limitations was nearing its limit. The local prosecutor told Cosby that they would NOT use anything he said in the civil suit to prosecute him. So Cosby told the truth, or some of the truth, in his civil suit including that he had given drugs to women to lower their resistance to sex with him.

The prosecutor then used that testimony to indict and try Cosby. The court ruled that the promise of the prosecutor to not use his civil court testimony was binding, like a promise of immunity. It then vacated his conviction as it depended on prohibited information. Yes money talks and it buys good lawyers too. But the rule of law is important and the court seems to have gotten this one right even though it allows a likely guilty man to walk.

Those prosecutors must of graduated from same school of law OJ’s prosecutors did? University of incompetent law school for prosecutors.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

And it looks like it was just a promise made verbally and not written down anywhere. Bill Cosby released from prison after Pa. Supreme Court overturns sexual assault conviction

According to what I have read, the promise and the position was documented well by the stenographer during Castor's testimony in the civil case. He explained why he was the only one who could have made that call and why he made that call.