Why Bill Cosby was released from prison

[OlderAndWiser]

It is not my intention to defend the actions of a man who clearly is guilty of rape. However, he is not the only one guilty of misconduct in this affair.

If you only read media accounts of this story, you are missing most of the important facts. Below are the first two pages of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's decision, verbatim. If, after you read this, you don't agree that Cosby should have been released, tell me what you think should be done about the misconduct of the prosecutors.

(The entire opinion is 79 pages. If you want to read more of it, please do:

https://www.pacourts.us/Storage/media/pdfs/20210630/163038-june302021opinionwecht.pdf)

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
MIDDLE DISTRICT
BAER, C.J., SAYLOR, TODD, DONOHUE, DOUGHERTY, WECHT, MUNDY, JJ.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,
Appellee
v.
WILLIAM HENRY COSBY JR.,
Appellant
:
:
:
:
No. 39 MAP 2020
Appeal from the Order of Superior Court at No. 3314 EDA 2018 dated December 10, 2019 Affirming the Judgment of Sentence dated September 25, 2018 of the Montgomery Court of Common Pleas, Criminal Division, at No. CP46-CR-3932-2016

ARGUED: December 1, 2020

OPINION

JUSTICE WECHT DECIDED: June 30, 2021

In 2005, Montgomery County District Attorney Bruce Castor learned that Andrea
Constand had reported that William Cosby had sexually assaulted her in 2004 at his
Cheltenham residence. Along with his top deputy prosecutor and experienced detectives,
District Attorney Castor thoroughly investigated Constand’s claim. In evaluating the
likelihood of a successful prosecution of Cosby, the district attorney foresaw difficulties
with Constand’s credibility as a witness based, in part, upon her decision not to file a
complaint promptly. D.A. Castor further determined that a prosecution would be
frustrated because there was no corroborating forensic evidence and because testimony
from other potential claimants against Cosby likely was inadmissible under governing
laws of evidence. The collective weight of these considerations led D.A. Castor to
conclude that, unless Cosby confessed, “there was insufficient credible and admissible
evidence upon which any charge against Mr. Cosby related to the Constand incident
could be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Seeking “some measure of justice” for Constand, D.A. Castor decided that the
Commonwealth would decline to prosecute Cosby for the incident involving Constand,
thereby allowing Cosby to be forced to testify in a subsequent civil action, under penalty
of perjury, without the benefit of his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.

Unable to invoke any right not to testify in the civil proceedings, Cosby relied upon the
district attorney’s declination and proceeded to provide four sworn depositions. During
those depositions, Cosby made several incriminating statements.

D.A. Castor’s successors did not feel bound by his decision, and decided to
prosecute Cosby notwithstanding that prior undertaking. The fruits of Cosby’s reliance
upon D.A. Castor’s decisionCosby’s sworn inculpatory testimonywere then used by
D.A. Castor’s successors against Cosby at Cosby’s criminal trial. We granted allowance
of appeal to determine whether D.A. Castor’s decision not to prosecute Cosby in
exchange for his testimony must be enforced against the Commonwealth.

[tartaarsaus]

I read in Dutch news here that the Court didn’t say that the established guilt is contested but the process that is supposed to protect the rights of those accused was violated. Whilst it of course seems injustice to free a rapist for such things, I guess the broader implications is that the due process rights are integral to the protection of millions of people, which means they cannot be chipped away by prosecutors without consequence (such as said person being released).

[tartaarsaus]

I guess this ties in neatly that protection against criminals is only part of the job for the judicial branch. Protection against the government itself and arbitrary arrests is also a major part of it

[OlderAndWiser]

Bingo!

[msc545]

Seems like a due process violation.

[OlderAndWiser]

Raise your right hand and I'll swear you in. You are absolutely correct.

[msc545]

My hand is raised, thanks!

[msc545]

Thanks for MHO!

[Wade8888]

He is NOT guilty of rape. He IS guilty of being a dirt-bag.

When the women consent to taking a drug. That's THEIR fault.

When the women under the influence of the drug (willfully) make two unwise decisions in a row (first to take the drug, then to have sex with him) and then 20 years later change their minds about it, that DOESN'T make Cosby guilty of rape. It just makes him a pathetic dirty-bag that the only way eh could get consent was by drugging the women.

The women admitted they took the drugs willfully, and guess waht? For you christian apologists, the Book of Proverbs holds YOU guilty of what YOU do while under the influence of drugs or alchohol, including who YOU choose to have sex with.

Therefore Cosby is not a rapist and never should have done jail time and never should have been arrested nor even questioned in the first place.

He committed no crime.

I'll say that again.

He committed no crime. They never proved any crime was committed at all.

The only thing the Prosecution proved was one or more women WILLFULLY took drugs and then WILLFULLY had sex with him, and then changed their minds about it 20 years later. That's the only thing they ever proved.

[hellionthesagereborn]

Yeah, that was a screwed up situation. I listen to Viva Frei and Robert barnes to get legal breakdowns (since I am rather ignorant of the field) and they discussed this. Basically the prosecution lied and mislead Cosby which means that he who is almost certainly guilty of the crime gets to walk free because the prosecution violated due process. Pretty screwed up scenario but I honestly don't see how one could get around this (because either you let cosby get released or you endorse prosecution violating the law and due process which will completely undermine the trust in the justice system and due process.).

[OlderAndWiser]

Precisely!

[Pogi-Paddy-2]

Bill Cosby was released on a legal technicality by the prosecutor Bruce Castor (*) saying that Bill Cosby would not be prosecuted with the testimony from his civil trial. When Bill Cosby was put on trial, Bill Cosby's civil trial testimony was used against him in the criminal trial.

So that technicality was that Bill Cosby's testimony was used against him in the criminal trial. Here in lies the technicality that he was told that his testimony in the civil trial was used against him when he was guaranteed that he would not be prosecuted with his own testimony in a criminal trial.


(*) Bruce Castor was Donald Trump's defense lawyer during the first impeachment trial.

Don't get me wrong, I still believe that Bill Cosby is GUILTY OF DRUGGING WOMEN AND BEING A SEXUAL DEVIANT, and I am disgusted that he was released on a technicality.

BILL COSBY IS STILL GUILTY OF WHAT HE WAS CONVICTED OF, IT DOESN'T EXHONOURATE HIM OF HIS CONVICTION!

[OlderAndWiser]

I never suggested that he had been exonerated.

[msc545]

This is not a "technicality". This is literally a violation of the part of the Constitution concerning the right to due process. I think that is quite serious.

[Pogi-Paddy-2]

Semantics

[msc545]

Yes, the Constitution is comprised of words. Try reading it.

[BeenThereLovedIt]

I don't believe Cosby's team was ever able to provide any evidence whatsoever to support the claim that Cosby was offered (or accepted) immunity. It was an absurd claim that would have broken several precedents of the prosecutors office. The fact that several other appeals courts backed up that a made-up claim is not a fact until you got to the top. It's a scathing reminder to all of us that we really do live in two americas.

[OlderAndWiser]

What other court said that he had not been offered immunity? Do you really know that or is that something you are making up?

[BeenThereLovedIt]

I believe it was in the news, at least the independent media (the factual kind, not the psycho conspiracy kind). I will go look it up...

[BeenThereLovedIt]

Ok, so it looks like I was unaware of the additional detail that Castor announced that his office would not prosecute cosby. So yeah, legally speaking, cosby gets off scott-free. I've never agreed with the concept or use of plea deals. This is not even a very good example of why, but remains an example nontheless.

[Anonymous]

So, yes, he should technically be free. That's the fault of the legal system. He should still be locked up though. I have heard in the past that he sexually assaulted upwards of 50 women. He should still be in prison.

[OlderAndWiser]

Th problem is that NONE of those women reported him at the time it happened, there is absolutely no physical evidence of a sexual assault, and it is impossible to reconstruct events after 20 years. Suppose there is an allegation that he assaulted a woman and he couldn't have done it because he was somewhere else at the time it allegedly happened. Twenty years later, he won't remember where he was on a particular day, who was with him, etc. That is why there is a time limit on prosecution of most crimes.

That does not mean that he is innocent; I'm not saying that at all. I'm just explaining why the law is structured as it is.

[msc545]

It also seems statistically improbable that out of 50 women NONE reported it. Could it be that some of those allegations weren't true?

[Opinion Owner]

So many women don't report because they won't be believed, like you're currently proving. There is so many more reasons to not report than to give a false report

[msc545]

Yes, I have heard that before. So you are saying that accounts for all FIFTY women who didn't report? I doubt that.

[Opinion Owner]

I don't doubt it at all. Victims are rarely believed and because of that they rarely come forward.

[msc545]

Bullshit. The
"rarely believed" trope is simply a way of excusing less than credible complaints. A woman can ruin a man's life with a vague accusation, and many do just that.

[Opinion Owner]

Look at the American presidents. Look at Trump. He has joked about sexually assaulting women. He still became president. Don't try to sell me this bullshit about rape allegations ruining men's lives. And yes, I know I'm generalizing, but you are too.

[msc545]

It didn't ruin Trump but he seems to be coated with Teflon. What about all the men's lives it DID ruin?

[Opinion Owner]

What about the women's lives lost from sexual assault and not being believed? It effects women so much more. So few guilty men are ever convicted.

[msc545]

You have proof or is this just your opinion?

[Opinion Owner]

Women who have been raped will kill themselves. I have not heard any accounts of men who have been falsely convicted killing themselves, but if you have one please feel free to enlighten me. /Sarc

[msc545]

guardian.ng/.../

www.dailymail.co.uk/.../...rape-shares-ordeal.html

www.mirror.co.uk/.../man-cleared-rape-killed-himself-23514995

Want more asshole?

[hellionthesagereborn]

Actually statistical data does not back the claim that women don't report. Studies show that between 40% to 60% of rape/sexual assault allegations are false and they found the longer the duration of time between the incident and the accusation made the more likely it is that allegation is false. Take the Kavanaugh allegation, if you bother to break it down and look at the evidence it is provable that it never happened, yet once one allegation was made multiple other women came forward to claim Kavanaugh was guilty of rape. . . until they where threatened with a lawsuit at which point they admitted it was completely made up. Same thing happened to Ed Sheeren if I'm not mistaken (or some other musician), a woman claimed to have been raped by him and she got a lot of attention and then she was told she was going to be sued for lying and she immediatley recanted everything. This idea that women can never lie is not only provably false, its a dangerous thing to claim, imagine if we did the same with men and stated that they never lie? We would live in a very dangerous and unjust world.

[msc545]

Yes exactly. However, the Trope that women never lie and men are always perpetrators has a lot of Social Power unfortunately. women Canon do make outrageously improbable accusations and while those accusations usually don't ever wind up in court, they still ruin men's lives when they are convicted in the social media. I know that even in this case the women on here are outraged the Cosby got released from prison and are not outraged that the prosecutors essentially violated a very basic tenet of the Constitution.

[Opinion Owner]

How do you know that it is false? There could just not be evidence, and that doesn't mean it's false. There is always going to be a couple of bad people who do fake reports, but I believe the majority of reports are probably true.

[OlderAndWiser]

"There is so many more reasons to not report than to give a false report" I agree, but that doesn't mean that NO ONE ever makes false reports. When the alleged perpetrator is a celebrity like Bill Cosby or Jameis Winston, the possibility of a civil suit and forcing a settlement of $1,000,000+ is a strong reason to fabricate.

"How do you know that it is false?" What @msc545 said was "Could it be that some of those allegations weren't true?" You mischaracterizing what he said just so that you have a reason to attack him. That is rude.

[msc545]

We don't believe accusations without evidence in this country. Just because somebody says something doesn't make it true, and accusations of sexual assault by women are not an exception to that.

[hellionthesagereborn]

Because in these studies in order to avoid being accused of being to vague, they required that the woman recant her story and admit it was false, or in the court of law it was found to be false. That means that not only are these proven to be false, it means that many more are false that cannot be proven. The difference here is we have studies showing it but we have no studies suggesting that women just don't report being raped for no particular reason (as we absolutely take rape against women seriously (rapists are beaten and killed in prison)), the claims made of women being raped on college campuses where compared to the actual rape allegations made and where found to be entirely nonexistent, etc. etc. So again, this is something we know to be true rather then conjecture.

So you claim women don't report rape but you have no evidence of this what so ever, we do have evidence of women lying about it though. In fact the incredibly high rate of lying about it shows that women are NOT afraid of reporting rapes because they do so at a disproportionately higher rate then actual rapes occur. So again, we know that women report it and you have no data to back up the claim that most don't report. Further more the NCVS (national crime victimization survey) shows that rapes are reported (those who are raped surveyed match what data we have). We have no argument for why they wouldn't either, I mean why would we presume that most people who are robbed or mugged or assaulted just don't report the crime? Well, we don't presume that because their is no reason what so ever to not do that. Same goes for rape.

[Opinion Owner]

Have you seen the me too movement? The hashtag why I didn't report?

[OlderAndWiser]

The fact that you can provide potential explanations or justifications for women not reporting rape does not prove that it happens all the time.

The problem with this topic is that there are too many discussions in which perhaps one of the participants was raped and not believed, so she develops an agenda against all men ever accused of rape. That is not a logical reason to automatically believe every allegation.

Do you have evidence of how often rape is not reported? You have been asked that question several times and you have avoided answering.

If you were a victim of rape, please understand that this discussion is NOT about YOU and what happened in YOUR case. This discussion is about Cosby - who obviously is guilty in fact - but only because a prosecutor denied Cosby the rights that are guaranteed to ALL Americans.

[Anonymous]

Don't know if this makes a difference, but he is blind, be so since 2016 (currently age 83). Plus his income will decrease gradually as time passes, so his career is pretty much done. And finally, he will most likely be under house arrest for now, and will less likely there'll be a chance that he will attempt those acts again, so like I said, he's pretty much done.

Don't really care if I get blasted for these opinions, just saying it's no use hanging on to the undesirable outcome of the case.

[Opinion Owner]

*age 83

[OlderAndWiser]

No, he was ordered to be released and the Penn Supreme Court said the entire prosecution was illegal. He will not be under house arrest.

[Opinion Owner]

Oh okay, thanks for letting me know 👍

[Dragonpurple]

Well said, I usually take it a step further and say he did not rape anyone because he is not convict of it anymore, and OJ did not kill his wife either.

Unless someone has a conviction, to me they are innocent.

[Anpu23]

It's obvious that the prosecutors mishandled the case. He wasn't innocent, but shouldn't have been charged. Im just afraid that this is going to create laws that make factually incorrect defendants unable to build a robust defense.

[Olllllllllll]

100%

[dreamstar72]

Money, by saying oh the devil made me do, it I’m so sorry. Oh the pressure..

[OlderAndWiser]

Did you read my post?

[DWornock]

There is no reason to keep him in prison. When released, he is not going to commit any felonies and it just cost money to keep him in prison.

[OlderAndWiser]

That, alone, is an insufficient reason to release a convict from prison.

[Likes2drive]

It just seems like they never had any real hard evidence especially when they came forward so many years later, it was all their word against his , not saying he didn’t do it but they probably couldn’t prove it without a doubt

[Tstrbrainer]

Does supreme Court's decision include emojis? 🤔.

By the way, Supreme Court is in Washington right?

[OlderAndWiser]

Every state has a supreme court (in NY, it is called the Court of Appeals) that hears appeals from its state courts. The US Supreme Court is in Washington, D. C.

[Tstrbrainer]

I guess supreme Court of each state is bound by the US supreme Court, right?

[OlderAndWiser]

The US Supreme Court is the highest court with respect to the interpretation and implementation of the US Constitution and federal law. The state supreme courts are the highest courts with respect to the interpretation and implementation of the state constitutions and their state's laws.

[Tstrbrainer]

Okay. Got it. Thanks

[Anonymous]

Really older and wiser. You are very intelligent man. Lawyer I suppose. Never commenting to your. Real oppinion. Great dance

[OlderAndWiser]

Why anon?

[Opinion Owner]

Because I to am older and. Wiser

[OlderAndWiser]

I sense that you are correct!

[WowwGirl]

Lol🤣

[OlderAndWiser]

@WowwGirl Hey, you! Don't you need to be getting ready for something?

[WowwGirl]

I'm ready just scared now☺️

[WowwGirl]

You're there in heart sir

[OlderAndWiser]

@WowwGirl And you should be. It's a monumental undertaking, but I think you are ready to go to the moon and return safely!

[WowwGirl]

God willing 🌹 thank you

[WowwGirl]

See you there lol🤗

[OlderAndWiser]

@WowwGirl 10-4!!!

[Massageman]

This case is screwier than a three dollar bill. I'm sure there is plenty of blame for everyone concerned to have a heaping portion of it. Seems to be just another case where appeals are made for WHATEVER. REASON. no matter how arcane, to get someone off the hook. So many cases are just appeal after appeal after appeal after appeal after appeal until someone gets off. Why not let the prosecution have ten or twenty shots too? Seems only fair. sigh

[douride2]

I know why he was released. He is still a rapist though.

[SlightlyEccentric]

Oh you were there when it happened? Please tell us more.

[douride2]

@SlightlyEccentric Read the news he admitted to it.

[spartan55]

@SlightlyEccentric
Don't even start with that bullshit.

[Coll24]

judgmental much. Tou must have crystal ball my little gypsy

[Coll24]

This place is getting abit too much like youtube. Im starting to not like it here after oneday

[spartan55]

Don't let the door hit you in the ass.

[strateguy632]

oh please that rule is for ANYBODY in court, if he was innocent he could deny it.

[Neko911]

What exactly did cause him 2 b released... I'm 2 tired and lazy honestly 2 read and check

[SlightlyEccentric]

The prosecution lied to him saying they wouldn't charge him if they just told them what they wanted to hear. He did, then they charged him anyway. You can't do that in the legal system.

I know every woman who is shitting themselves over his release would be equally if not more pissed off if some prosecutor did the same thing to them for a crime that couldn't actually be proven happened or not.

They all need to remember it's guilty by evidence not guilty by popular consensus.

[broken_heart_at_48]

@SlightlyEccentric so you're saying the prosecuting attorney or team of attorneys can't lie to get a confession? Cause the police sure do along with all types of ways getting what they want from a suspect which I'm sure the prosecution is often guilty of it's just most defendants aren't able to afford a descent lawyer so the prosecution gets away with it. It's a shame it didn't work this time.

[Jamie05rhs]

You're also too tired and too lazy to spell out the words "to" and "too."

[Neko911]

@Jamie05rhs okay and?

[Jamie05rhs]

@Neko911 Just messing with you; sorry lol. 🤪

[Neko911]

@Jamie05rhs it's fine

[Jamie05rhs]

@Neko911 Thanks 😊

[Iron_Man]

He served his time he’s a free man. He is already an old man what are we gonna do have him die in prison he didn’t deserve that.

[Coll24]

How you know he's quilty. Seems like you want him tobe for some reason 🧤🐒

[OlderAndWiser]

I have no opinion on his guilt. I haven't reviewed the evidence.

[Anonymous]

I think he's a big ol pervert and he should get arrested again

[OlderAndWiser]

That would violate his Constitutional rights.

[Opinion Owner]

He doesn’t deserve rights!

[OlderAndWiser]

If your Constitutional rights depend on being the subject of favorable public opinion, then you have no guaranteed rights at all.

[SlightlyEccentric]

@Opinion Owner that's not for you to decide. Cause if you take away one person's right to a fair trial, then no one gets it, including you. I hope you never get accused of a crime that happened 30-40 years prior then some jerkoffs on the internet say you don't deserve your rights because you're already guilty in the eyes of public opinion.