General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsCosby Conviction overturned because of Trump Lawyer
Link to tweet
?s=20
Remember Bruce Castor, the lawyer mocked for his performance during Trump's second impeachment?
His promise not to prosecute Bill Cosby, made back in 2005 when he was a DA, is why a court just overturned Cosby's sexual assault conviction.
https://pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/J-100-2020mo%20-%20104821740139246918.pdf?cb=1
Walleye
(31,046 posts)RockRaven
(14,998 posts)Walleye
(31,046 posts)blueinredohio
(6,797 posts)Lawyers and cops lie to people all the time.
former9thward
(32,077 posts)It is illegal for lawyers to lie.
RANDYWILDMAN
(2,675 posts)and most of us are not in it !
I hope in my heart and soul that all the Cosby victims get the justice they need and deserve
I hope in my heart and soul that all the Trump victims get the justice they need and deserve (not gonna hold my breath on this one though )
luv2fly
(2,475 posts)Of course then the orange turd would have to stand next to a black man, we all know the optics of that aren't good for his base.
underpants
(182,878 posts)NH Ethylene
(30,817 posts)Cosby gave sworn depositions in a civil case, based upon Castor's decision not to prosecute. At the time he didn't think there was any way to win a criminal conviction for that case.
"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."
https://www.wgal.com/article/bill-cosby-sex-assault-conviction-overturned-pennsylvania/36890511#
So his release from prison was the legally correct decision. Prosecutors can't make a promise, extract your incriminating testimony given due to that promise, and then use that information to prosecute you a few years later.
uponit7771
(90,364 posts)NH Ethylene
(30,817 posts)I am surprised that it was allowed in!
Johnny2X2X
(19,114 posts)Trump only hires people who will make a mockery of America. This guy fits the type.
lame54
(35,321 posts)uponit7771
(90,364 posts)Submariner
(12,509 posts)UTUSN
(70,740 posts)* Can the current ruling be appealed?
* Can appeal be based on incompetent or corrupt prosecution?
* What grounds for the past deal?
* What did the past prosecutor get, prosecutorially speaking, get in the deal?
ripcord
(5,537 posts)When they decided to prosecute even though a deal was in place they used that deposition against him and violated his right to avoid self incrimination, we might not like it but it was the correct decision
Deminpenn
(15,290 posts)nt
UTUSN
(70,740 posts)Zeitghost
(3,868 posts)If you believe the original prosecutor's claim that there was not enough evidence to prosecute, then yes, it was the right decision. I tend to think that was true because the prosecutor who did try him didn't feel they could build a winning case without using Cosby's testimony in the civil suit which eventually poisoned the case.
Etherealoc1
(256 posts)There is no doubt that Cosby was guilty.
DA originally agreed not to prosecute.
Think of a plea deal and then reneg
years after on the deal.
Zeitghost
(3,868 posts)You can't compel someone to testify against themselves by removing the threat of prosecution and then prosecute them based on that testimony.