What is going on with bill Cosby??

The part that gets Me... He still claims He's innocent but anyone who has paid attention knows what He said in the deposition.

Must be nice to be able to make a deal to tell the truth as long as You don't get charged for what You are admitting to. Nope no privilege there.

a reply to: ConcernedCanadian

Aye and Jimmy Savile was just a DJ.

Cosby is a well known wrong'yin, but choose to believe as you wish.

a reply to: andy06shake

May I? How kind.

originally posted by: ATruGod
Must be nice to be able to make a deal to tell the truth as long as You don't get charged for what You are admitting to. Nope no privilege there.

There's no privilege there. Deals are made all of the time. What's appalling is letting Prosecutors over charge people to force them into a plea bargain. The problem is our legal system. There was no special deal made to get him out of prison. All that happened was that the Prosecutor was called out on a violation. The only advantage Cosby had was the ability to push this violation through the legal system, because he could afford to do so. Many people plead to a lesser charge because they can't afford to fight the made up ones. That's the problem here, not Cosby. One question. The deal came about because of a CIVIL trial. Why is a CRIMINAL prosecutor making deals over a CIVIL trial? Shades of OJ here.

Nobody's saying if the Prosecutor will be held accountable for his misconduct. I'd say no, after all it is Philadelphia. Philadelphia, where a 75 year old woman has her house taken and sold by the Government because her 22 year old Grandson was selling weed from her front porch while she was in the hospital.

a reply to: ConcernedCanadian

Danka.

And If you must, as you are perfectly free to express your views and opinions.

So it is Money not RACE?

a reply to: musicismagic

So a negro gets out because of money? So it is WEALTH privilege not WHITE privilege.

originally posted by: Kazber

Im sorry. I dont know what the heck is going on. I just keep hearing his name and a whole bunch of information that makes no sense at all. Please ATS help me understand what is going on.

What is going on with bill Cosby??

"Bill Cosby accuser Andrea Constand speaks out after his conviction is tossed: ‘Disappointing’ | Fox News" www.foxnews.com...

I hate to say it, but Cosby was railroaded.

When Andrea Constand filed her police complaint against Cosby, the DA didn't think he would be able to get a conviction. Rape cases, especially ones like this one, are hard to prove.

So, Andrea Constand filed a civil suit against Cosby. The DA, by assuring Cosby and his attorneys that he wasn't going to prosecute Cosby, deprived Cosby of his 5th Amendment right against self incrimination. Since there was no criminal charges hanging over his head, Cosby was forced to "tell the truth" under oath, and his crimes were revealed.

Down the line, a new DA said, "Wha? Why we no prosecute him when he confessed in court?" So he filed charges against Cosby and his testimony, given without the benefit of 5th Amendment protection, was used against him.

On appeal, the court agreed that Cosby was denied his 5th Amendment protection against self incrimination, and now he's home. Justice worked, in the long run.

It's good thing, even though Cosby is guilty.

People are whining about "special deals" for Cosby, then this pops up.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Hilarious.

Real quick
Bill cosby was accused of sexual assault.
The prosecutor didn’t think he could win the case.
So he made a deal with Cosby.
Cosby would give a deposition in a civil case in exchange for not being prosecuted
The prosecutor then failed to file it correctly with the court
A new prosecutor was elected
The new guy thinks he isn’t bound by the agreement because it wasn’t filed correctly
He prosecutes Cosby and gets a conviction
The appeals court rules the prosecution was invalid because of the previous agreement
Cosby didn’t fail to file the agreement correctly and relied on it to give up his rights
If the first prosecutor had not made the agreement public, Cosby would still be in jail.
None of this means he isn’t guilty.
a reply to: Kazber

A serious question:- First my problem, I must be suffering with sudden amnesia, question, I thought Cosby was tried for murder? Was there not something about a pair of incriminating gloves etc.? Or am I going senile.

a reply to: crayzeed

That was OJ.

God I'm having fun with this. There's a site that is all about police and judicial misconduct. Strangely they have been silent about this.

originally posted by: JIMC5499
a reply to: crayzeed

That was OJ.

God I'm having fun with this. There's a site that is all about police and judicial misconduct. Strangely they have been silent about this.

Oh yeah, thanks for putting me straight, I thought I was losing my marbles.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Kazber

He's getting out of Jail on what appears to be a technicality or mistake on the DA part.

A beast is a beast, is a beast.

Should not be any sorts of deals in place or made that retarded prosecution.

Should not be any sort of deals made period with rapists imho.

Hmmm....
The law???

Something about 60 accusers and letting some defame him during his trial (vs. present material facts as a witness of the crime alleged)

Oh and a prior agreement to waive prosecution to prevent him from invoking 5A during the civil suit.

Can't let bad cases make bad case law. Seems like prosecutorial misconduct. Can't just go all willy-nilly to get the bad guy. Isn't that what they've been preaching about policing?

Anyone imprisoned as the result of a "movement" should have their convictions seriously scrutinized.

a reply to: shooterbrody

In this instance the decision seems to have come from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

Overturning his 2018 conviction on the 3 charges of aggravated indecent assault.

"The court said that a prosecutor's decision not to charge Cosby, 83, in an earlier case opened the door for him to speak freely in a lawsuit against him, thinking he would not incriminate himself criminally. A second prosecutor later used the lawsuit testimony in a criminal trial, and that testimony was key in his conviction years later."

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: shooterbrody

In this instance the decision seems to have come from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

Overturning his 2018 conviction on the 3 charges of aggravated indecent assault.

"The court said that a prosecutor's decision not to charge Cosby, 83, in an earlier case opened the door for him to speak freely in a lawsuit against him, thinking he would not incriminate himself criminally. A second prosecutor later used the lawsuit testimony in a criminal trial, and that testimony was key in his conviction years later."

My state SC!

Ultimately this is the reason to avoid a rush to prosecution or other misconduct. Just like the Chauvin trial, it is very possible any number of technicalities and false statements (ie: from the juror who had BLM connections, Maxine Waters, etc) will overturn his conviction as well

I think they made the right call, in the interest of not corrupting the justice system and setting bad precedents. But its always a shame when someone walks especially when they had admitted guilt in the case at hand. The litany of accusers, true Gloria Allred fashion, never adds credibility and always detracts from it so you would have expected those types to have learned their lesson by now

a reply to: JBurns

Can some other poor sod that he's tampered with in the past not come forward and Cosby be charged with there rape and/or aggravated assault?

I get where you are coming from as to not corrupting the justice system and setting anymore bad precedents all the same.

But its beginning to look like he's been given a get out of rape free card never mind jail.

a reply to: andy06shake

I believe the SC barred further prosecution of Ms. Costand's case, which is a shame because they could have still got the conviction without the witnesses and even without Cosby's own testimony. There were some weak points in the case, and its a problem with all sexual assault cases when you don't get the DNA to use, but I respect the prosecutors for going ahead with it and at least ensuring she would be successful in civil court. It isn't justice but it at least sets the record straight and makes sure she is justly compensated even though it won't undo what he did

The other victims' cases could absolutely still be prosecuted, but I believe only Murder and associated crimes are without a statute of limitations in my state. Sexual assault, not 100% certain, but It seems they may be beyond that 5 year point. Another shame, really. I prefer when there is no statute of limitations on prosecutions felonies, as many states have.

The clock basically starts from the minute the offense is committed, so lets say the 5 year period starts the minute the sexual assault occurs. The state has only 5 years to bring formal criminal charges against the accused. It is considered a "complete defense" that such time period has elapsed

I would like to see all violent crimes without a statute of limitations, not just Murder and its various analogs

It is a little like Miranda v Arizona. Ernesto Miranda, the whole reason behind the "Miranda warning" we had to read folks, confessed to armed robbery, kidnapping and rape but his conviction was tossed because the state supreme court found investigators didn't properly advise him of his rights against self incrimination. Fortunately, despite his overturned conviction, the state was able to re-file charges and were still able to get a conviction without his confession

*This is also not considering whether offenses occurred in other states during this time, or whether any federal laws were violated (kidnapping, etc)

originally posted by: Kazber
My phone keeps freezing.
Bill cosby is let out of jail after serving 3 years of a 23 year sentence. Becuase he took a plee deal and should have never been on trial on the frist place.

On September 25, 2018, he was sentenced to three to ten years in state prison and a $25,000 fine plus court costs of both trials.

There is 59 other accusers so maybe one will step forward but even so will likely land in another civil case and will be a settlement behind closed doors. These high profile sex scandals are often cover for something more criminal OR scorned women wanting a piece of the (Cosby) pie. Simple logic says not all 60 women could be scorned gold diggers. Hollywood is evil and corrupt beyond belief.

a reply to: JBurns

I don't necessarily disagree.

We don't have any official statute of limitations for criminal cases in the UK JBurns.

And our beasts still manage to be released, sometimes after serving only half there sentence, which for the likes of rape can be around only 4 years.

Our respective legal systems seem to leave a lot to be desired imho.