Bill Cosby Sex Assault Conviction Overturned

@metal-brain said
We agree for once.

We should be asking why the court allowed Cosby to be railroaded despite a promise not to prosecute. Would that have happened to a Kennedy? I doubt it.

How was Cosby railroaded?
60 victims came forward and there's gotta be a few hundred more that didn't after 50 years of his shennanigans, how was he railroaded?

The post that was quoted here has been removed

are you privy to a definition I am not aware of?

"Exoneration occurs when the conviction for a crime is reversed, either through demonstration of innocence, a flaw in the conviction, or otherwise."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exoneration

@mott-the-hoople said
are you privy to a definition I am not aware of?

"Exoneration occurs when the conviction for a crime is reversed, either through demonstration of innocence, a flaw in the conviction, or otherwise."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exoneration

Cosby was not "exonerated".

@no1marauder said
If you think the right not to incriminate yourself is a minor "technicality", that's true. However, here's the first three paragraphs of the majority decision:

"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 p ...[text shortened]... ds due process of law in our criminal justice system demands that the promise be enforced."

p. 52

When all is said and done, a rapist and sexual predator is at large. I appreciate that procedures must be followed, but in this case justice was not seen to have been rendered.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Cosby had at least 50 women come forward accusing him of rape, and admitted to using Quaaludes on two separate occasions. He's quite possibly far worse than most rapists.

@dood111 said
How was Cosby railroaded?
60 victims came forward and there's gotta be a few hundred more that didn't after 50 years of his shennanigans, how was he railroaded?

I didn't say he was innocent. That has nothing to do with it.

The prosecutor in the civil case promised he would not be prosecuted in return for his testimony so Cosby would not plead the 5th. Then during the criminal trial that agreement was not honored by allowing his testimony during the civil trial to be used as evidence to prosecute him.

The legal process was not respected. Had the prosecutor not offered the deal Cosby would have taken the 5th and there would have been no testimony to be used as evidence. Cosby took the deal and they used his testimony as evidence anyway.

The PA supreme court made the right decision, not because Cosby was necessarily innocent, but because allowing that reneging to continue would have resulted in the railroading of countless other defendants, many that may be innocent.

To prevent many innocent people from being unjustly convicted in the future one possibly guilty person has to have his conviction overturned. That is why it was the right decision. If you want to blame someone for it blame the prosecutor from the civil case for offering the deal, but keep in mind that if he had not offered the deal Cosby would have taken the 5th and there would have been no evidence from testimony.

Even if we assume he was guilty Cosby would have likely gotten away with it anyway. If they had enough evidence the criminal trial would have taken place before the civil trial. It didn't, so they didn't have enough evidence.

Understand?

@metal-brain said
I didn't say he was innocent. That has nothing to do with it.

The prosecutor in the civil case promised he would not be prosecuted in return for his testimony so Cosby would not plead the 5th. Then during the criminal trial that agreement was not honored by allowing his testimony during the civil trial to be used as evidence to prosecute him.

The legal process was n ...[text shortened]... e taken place before the civil trial. It didn't, so they didn't have enough evidence.

Understand?

when did prosecutor "agreements" become legally binding?

@mott-the-hoople said
when did prosecutor "agreements" become legally binding?

When were they not legally binding?

@mott-the-hoople said
when did prosecutor "agreements" become legally binding?

All the time:

"More than 97 percent of federal criminal convictions are obtained through plea bargains, and the states are not far behind at 94 percent."

https://www.cato.org/commentary/prisons-are-packed-because-prosecutors-are-coercing-plea-deals-yes-its-totally-legal

@mott-the-hoople said
are you privy to a definition I am not aware of?

"Exoneration occurs when the conviction for a crime is reversed, either through demonstration of innocence, a flaw in the conviction, or otherwise."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exoneration

So when was Trump convicted?

I remember plenty of fools in here screaming, "Exonerated!!!" when Barr came out with his summary of lies.

@no1marauder said
All the time:

"More than 97 percent of federal criminal convictions are obtained through plea bargains, and the states are not far behind at 94 percent."

https://www.cato.org/commentary/prisons-are-packed-because-prosecutors-are-coercing-plea-deals-yes-its-totally-legal

Is the plea bargain typically in writing? One show I watched on the matter seemed to imply that they typically are in writing.