Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Ms. Toad

(33,915 posts)
25. Massive screw-up.
Wed Jun 30, 2021, 02:04 PM
Jun 2021

And other oddness that - had the PA Supreme Court chosen - could have led to a different outcome.

1st prosecutor decided there were enough holes in the case they coudn't prosecute. Rather than leave Constand without a remedy, the prosecutor publically announced a decision not to prosecute (which was also conveyed to counsel on both sides). The prosecutor's intent was to take away the threat of future criminal prosecution so that Cosby could be forced to testify in a civil trial under oath. (Had the threat of criminal prosecution still been real, Cosby could have refused to answer questions by asserting his 5th amendment right not to incriminate himself.)

Constand sued Cosby civilly - including forcing Cosby to testify under oath without the benefit of the 5th amendment protection against incrimination.

2nd prosecutor - after more women came forward said, "screw that" and prosecuted Cosby - using the deposition testimony given without the benefit of 5th amendment protections against incrimination. And the rest is history . . . until today.

Part of the court's reasoning:

For the reasons detailed below, we hold that, when a prosecutor makes an unconditional promise of non-prosecution, and when the defendant relies upon that guarantee to the detriment of his constitutional right not to testify, the principle of fundamental fairness that undergirds due process of law in our criminal justice system demands that the promise be enforced.

While the prosecutor’s discretion in charging decisions is undoubtedly vast, it is not exempt from basic principles of fundamental fairness, nor can it be wielded in a manner that violates a defendant’s rights. The foregoing precedents make clear that, at a minimum, when a defendant relies to his or her detriment upon the acts of a prosecutor, his or her due process rights are implicated.


Oddities the cour could have used had it desired a different outcome:

Cosby never attempted to assert his 5th Amendment right against incrimination - he (and apparently his counsel) just assumed it would have been pointless. Since he never attempted to invoke it, it is impossible to determine whether he WOULD have attepted to invoke it but for the bar - or would have chosen, instead, to speak freely. On at least one other occasion, in police presence, he spoke when it would have been smarter to exercise his right against self-incrimination.

Nothing appears in the formal record (prior to trial) supporting the existence of an unconditional promise. It's all press releases and phone conversations. So, while there is a written record of at least an initial decision not to prosecute, the fact that it was a permanent decision the prosecutor believed they were making on behalf of the Commonwealth is present only in the recollection of the prosecutor as testified to at hearings related to the trial.

That's what I've got on a quick skim.

Here's the decision in case anyone else prefers the original - rather than the digested for public consumption version: https://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/J-100-2020mo%20-%20104821740139246918.pdf?cb=1
I'm disgusted nt XanaDUer2 Jun 2021 #1
+1 nitpicker Jun 2021 #3
WTF? wryter2000 Jun 2021 #2
An agreement with a previous prosecutor that he wouldn't be charged is the reason. Drunken Irishman Jun 2021 #4
Why was this not raised during the original trial that he had an agreement with the madinmaryland Jun 2021 #19
It was raised. The trial judge Tomconroy Jun 2021 #21
It was Effete Snob Jun 2021 #27
Technicality in strategy. DAMN! lindysalsagal Jun 2021 #5
Wait... this says the PSC says Takket Jun 2021 #33
If The Reporting Is Accurate... ProfessorGAC Jun 2021 #6
I am wondering what the hell that previous prosecutor was trying to accomplish. lagomorph777 Jun 2021 #16
It allowed Constand to proceed with her civil claim against Cosby Effete Snob Jun 2021 #23
Thanks - that actually makes sense. lagomorph777 Jun 2021 #30
So, you would have decided the victim shouldn't get a civil judgment? Effete Snob Jun 2021 #26
I'd Need To See More Legal Opinions ProfessorGAC Jun 2021 #36
I don't understand your response Effete Snob Jun 2021 #38
Yes You Do ProfessorGAC Jun 2021 #40
Who did he bribe? greatauntoftriplets Jun 2021 #7
The prosecutor badly fouled up Sympthsical Jun 2021 #8
Typical incompetent Republican. Drunken Irishman Jun 2021 #9
This is everyone's shocked face n/t Sympthsical Jun 2021 #11
He not only got the time NJCher Jun 2021 #13
His wife compared his conviction to a lynching. She never left. NYC Liberal Jun 2021 #18
Nobody. Sounds like a previous prosecutor made a massive, massive mistake. bearsfootball516 Jun 2021 #10
A prosecutor who went on to become Trump's defense lawyer StarfishSaver Jun 2021 #12
The agreement was made Tomconroy Jun 2021 #22
Depends on your point of view fescuerescue Jun 2021 #28
well now that you look at it that way NJCher Jun 2021 #31
This is really the question of the day, isn't it? Dr. Strange Jun 2021 #35
Why? He had a case he could not win. former9thward Jun 2021 #37
Is it a tRump judge who made the ruling? MiniMe Jun 2021 #14
This was the PA Supreme Court Effete Snob Jun 2021 #24
There are surely other cases to move forward now though Johnny2X2X Jun 2021 #15
Another rapist walks... LizBeth Jun 2021 #17
This sucks. But at least he did some time, and the whole world knows he's guilty fishwax Jun 2021 #20
Massive screw-up. Ms. Toad Jun 2021 #25
Cosby already proclaiming it justice for black America n/m BradAllison Jun 2021 #29
Justice served $$$$$$$$$$ finally RANDYWILDMAN Jun 2021 #32
Great to be rich, isn't it? Takket Jun 2021 #34
Of course, once again, a Repuke is at the center of a perversion of justice. clementine613 Jun 2021 #39
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Court overturns Bill Cosb...»Reply #25