Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: Angel Eyes on June 30, 2021, 01:11:24 PM
-
His sexual assault conviction was overturned by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court:
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/bill-cosby-to-be-released-from-prison-after-pennsylvania-court-overturns-sex-assault-conviction/
Not many details yet.
-
Spending money on lawyers paid off.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/Z14nVIW.png)
-
My understanding is a prosecutor told him there would be no criminal charges if he agreed to testify in a civil suit against him. He did, and that testimony was used in his criminal trial. So the case was thrown out.
-
Not saying he isn't a perv and a predator but I've always been a little skeptical about the timing of all the allegations and his prosecution.
None of it started until he started criticizing "ghetto culture", generational welfare and the epidemic of absent black fathers.
Once he left the plantation he was fair game.
-
Not saying he isn't a perv and a predator but I've always been a little skeptical about the timing of all the allegations and his prosecution.
None of it started until he started criticizing "ghetto culture", generational welfare and the epidemic of absent black fathers.
Once he left the plantation he was fair game.
Quite a few people brought this up at the time. Libs will keep the wagons circled around someone until they start talking off script which is far far worse in their minds than any crimes they were committing.
-
My understanding is a prosecutor told him there would be no criminal charges if he agreed to testify in a civil suit against him. He did, and that testimony was used in his criminal trial. So the case was thrown out.
That's what I read. The County Prosecutor told him things he said in the deposition in a civil trial would not be used for criminal prosecution. A new County Prosecutor came onboard and violated that agreement. The PA Supreme Court said he should have never been prosecuted and released him and said he can't be tried again on those charges.
He is a scum bag but violating his constitutional rights by using his statements to criminally charge him after say they wouldn't is just wrong.
I wonder how long it will be before he sues Montgomery County PA, an hour or so?
bob
-
That's what I read. The County Prosecutor told him things he said in the deposition in a civil trial would not be used for criminal prosecution. A new County Prosecutor came onboard and violated that agreement. The PA Supreme Court said he should have never been prosecuted and released him and said he can't be tried again on those charges.
He is a scum bag but violating his constitutional rights by using his statements to criminally charge him after say they wouldn't is just wrong.
I wonder how long it will be before he sues Montgomery County PA, an hour or so?
bob
This is how I look at it.
Too many of these gov prosecutors want to go woke, screw the constitution and rights to a fair trial. This is also why I believe Chauvin will likely be free at some point as well.
I'm fine with guilty people going free under circumstances like this.
-
"″[Cosby] was found guilty by a jury and now goes free on a procedural issue that is irrelevant to the facts of the crime,” District Attorney Kevin Steele"
OK... Cosby is scum, but what transpired is FAR more than just a "procedure issue."
-
The county prosecutor who violated the original agreement ought to serve the same length of time behind bars - under the same conditions - as Cosby did.
-
Why did it take this long to come out?
Why didn't his defense raise this at trial and have it be inadmissible then?
-
I regard this as Cosby getting off on a technicality. It's a BIG technicality, and (unfortunately) it is the right call from a legal perspective, but it doesn't mean that he's not a rapist.
As for why his lawyers didn't raise this before -- obviously, he hired the wrong lawyers. Will Shakespeare had it right: "First, kill all the lawyers."
-
Why did it take this long to come out?
Why didn't his defense raise this at trial and have it be inadmissible then?
I think they did and the judge ruled against them.
-
Did the prior deposition testimony play a factor in the case against him?
(https://i.imgur.com/lmPoPFF.jpg?1)
-
What about the rights of his victims?
Because a prosecutor screwed up, he goes free.
-
WLJ REMARKED,
"Quite a few people brought this up at the time. Libs will keep the wagons circled around someone until they start talking off script which is far far worse in their minds than any crimes they were committing."
Quoted for truth.
HankB said,
"The county prosecutor who violated the original agreement ought to serve the same length of time behind bars - under the same conditions - as Cosby did."
Quoted for truth.
" ' [Cosby] was found guilty by a jury and now goes free on a procedural issue that is irrelevant to the facts of the crime,' District Attorney Kevin Steele said."
I thought you legally expert prosecutor guys were aware of that possibility and were supposed to take care that no such procedural issues occur. You get pissantly specific and technical and by the book when it suits you, but boy, let a guy get off "on a technicality" and you're all butt hurt.
Boo-effing-hoo.
Pb asked,
"What about the rights of his victims?
Because a prosecutor screwed up, he goes free."
You're confusing Justice with the Legal System.
Terry, 230RN
-
When WE screw up, it's a horrific crime. When the prosecutor screws up, it's a "technicality."
-
He was the guy who had the disco biscuits.
TANSTAAFL
-
(https://i.imgflip.com/47gf62.jpg)
-
(https://i.imgflip.com/47gf62.jpg)
Oof, and eww..
-
The prosecutor didn't screw up.
That prosecutor's actions are in the same league as those of the DA who went after the Duke University lacrosse players some years ago.
-
I hope it revives #metoo because a few prominent people with more credible allegations have ducked the deal. Burn all the witches this time, I love it when they eat themselves [popcorn] [popcorn] [popcorn] >:D
-
The prosecutor didn't screw up.
That prosecutor's actions are in the same league as those of the DA who went after the Duke University lacrosse players some years ago.
The lacrosse players were innocent. Cosby is probably guilty.
-
The lacrosse players were innocent. Cosby is probably guilty.
True. Nonetheless, when the government makes a deal, the government should honor the deal. If the government can't live with the consequences that brings with it, then they shouldn't agree to the deal.
Prosecutorial misconduct is prosecutorial misconduct, regardless of whether the victim is innocent or guilty.
-
True. Nonetheless, when the government makes a deal, the government should honor the deal. If the government can't live with the consequences that brings with it, then they shouldn't agree to the deal.
Prosecutorial misconduct is prosecutorial misconduct, regardless of whether the victim is innocent or guilty.
There is plenty of that with innocent people that doesn't get addressed.
Is there link that sanely explains what went on with this agreement? I was curious how much that agreement affected the later trial as far as using his testimony against him.
-
Looks like Cosby is quite the racist judging from the photos.
2 or 3 remind me of Rachel Dolezal
‘I’m No Longer Afraid’: 35 Women Tell Their Stories About Being Assaulted by Bill Cosby, and the Culture That Wouldn’t Listen
https://www.thecut.com/2015/07/bill-cosbys-accusers-speak-out.html
-
The lacrosse players were innocent. Cosby is probably guilty.
The suspect's guilt or innocence doesn't matter in case of prosecutorial misconduct.
-
So... Some of the "victims" went back for seconds?
Cosby had the party favors and the influence. Period. They used him just as much as he used them.
-
So... Some of the "victims" went back for seconds?
Cosby had the party favors and the influence. Period. They used him just as much as he used them.
It was the same with Weinstein (sp?), but I am sure there were some real victims that were greatly affected by it.
-
Pb remarked,
"The lacrosse players were innocent. Cosby is probably guilty."
That doesn't matter any more. The Court has thrown out this verdict based on the chicanery of the prosecution. And also barred re-prosecution on that matter. Without actual knowledge, I strongly suspect that the Court was pretty pissed off.
Coincidentally, the movie "Call Northside 777" is on the air right now, starring James Stewart. This also involves chicanery by the prosecutors to obtain a 99 year murder conviction of an actually innocent person.
Based on a true life incident.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Call_Northside_777
"In actuality, innocence was determined not as claimed in the film but when it was found out that the prosecution had suppressed the fact that the main witness had initially declared that she could not identify the two men involved in the police shooting.[2] "
Underscore mine.
See Wiki for "real life" details.
Terry, 230RN
-
Steve Lehto - Why Bill Cosby's Conviction Was Thrown Out
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trS2ZqdW4mw
He confirmed that the prior deposition/testimony was presented at trial.
-
Yeah, 16:44, just as presented herein. :rolleyes:
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJvijmbWOvk
The Cosby Rebuttal
The Rageaholic
Not safe for work due to a lot of cussing, but he goes through all the questionable issues around the original trial. The DA, the judge, the witnesses, the accusers, the trial, etc. Pretty interesting. Makes a pretty good case this whole thing was a set up. I did not know the judge on the trial was the one who ran against the previous DA on the promise he would prosecute Cosby.
-
I had forgot about the previous hung jury, and everyone knows what I think about hung juries: If a prosecutor can't bring a strong enough case to convince 100% of the jury, then they shouldn't go to trial. If a jury can't decide, that is prima facie ipso facto no shitto automatically not "beyond a reasonable doubt," case dismissed, and a retrial should not be allowed.
This, absent any evidence of jury tampering and the like. But if the case has proceeded normally, a hung jury should be a matter of "Bye-bye, Prisoner. Enjoy your freedom. Catch you the next time around," and a gavel bang.
Terry, 230RN
REF (Related to the Phil Spector case):
"Prove the case or the accused walks" should go for hung juries, too. In general, Mr. Prosecutor, if you have not proven your case to all the jurors the first time around, there should be an automatic presumption of reasonable doubt attached to the case. (Obviously, at least one juror had reasonable doubt.)
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJvijmbWOvk
The Cosby Rebuttal
The Rageaholic
Not safe for work due to a lot of cussing, but he goes through all the questionable issues around the original trial. The DA, the judge, the witnesses, the accusers, the trial, etc. Pretty interesting. Makes a pretty good case this whole thing was a set up. I did not know the judge on the trial was the one who ran against the previous DA on the promise he would prosecute Cosby.
Speaking only for myself, I'm not even going to watch. Cosby now has zero credibility. He wasn't released because he was not guilty, he was released on a very technical technicality. He should just STFU and thank whatever god he worships that he's back at home.
-
He's as innocent as OJ.
-
The kinds of shows that Cosby was on are not the types of shows that interest me.
-
He's as innocent as OJ.
Snort!
-
He's as innocent as OJ.
The condom didn't fit.
-
Back in the dark ages, when I was in college, there was a frat that was rumored to have some rather interesting toga parties. And lots of women were reportedly very eager to be invited.
Don't think "animal house."
Instead, think Fellini's Satyricon...
-
Speaking only for myself, I'm not even going to watch. Cosby now has zero credibility. He wasn't released because he was not guilty, he was released on a very technical technicality. He should just STFU and thank whatever god he worships that he's back at home.
I was not intending to claim Cosby was innocent of any wrongdoing. The video just talks about all the injustice done to bring the case to trial and get the conviction. The "technicality" they used to get him released was just one thing among many they could have appealed for. The judge was partial, the witnesses were unreliable, the accusers were unreliable, etc, etc. Supposedly the statute of limitations had run out. The testimony he gave in a deposition prior to the trial was forced on the idea that he was not under prosecution and could not claim 5th amendment protections. That testimony was allowed at trial so his 5th amendment rights were violated. The legal system should not be perverted just because they "know" someone is guilty.
-
If it were a simple technicality, as in an oversight or error or loophole, I would be pissed that the guilty guy got away. This seems like much more than a technicality. This was manipulation of the legal system by the prosecutors. This, to me, falls well into "better 100 guilty men go free" territory.
-
If it were a simple technicality, as in an oversight or error or loophole, I would be pissed that the guilty guy got away. This seems like much more than a technicality. This was manipulation of the legal system by the prosecutors. This, to me, falls well into "better 100 guilty men go free" territory.
I agree. The use of the deposition testimony was totally improper, and overturning the verdict was the right decision.
By "on a technicality," I just meant that his release does not in any way indicate that he didn't rape all those women (or at least some of them). This was not a case of the heroic lawyers succeeding in getting an innocent man released from prison.
-
I can agree with that for the most part.
The only part of the prosecution I am still suspicious about is how many and what the woman expected when they got into it. I am confident Gloria Allred dug up a bunch of false accusers to make the case look better in the public eye. None of that means Cosby didn't do it even if only to a few of them.
-
If he drugged even one of the women (and he has admitted to having drugged more than one), he's a rapist.
My analysis ends there.