Community Chat

[Mindy D]

---

@proudlyfromNJ wrote:

---

@BornToShop wrote:

Soooo....based on this, Harvey Weinstein will be next...

---

@BornToShop  Is his case now going to the Supreme Court?

---

@proudlyfromNJ @No, in this type of criminal case, only someone convicted could take his case there and since his conviction was overturned, Cosby can't take his case to any higher court. 

[proudlyfromNJ]

---

@Mindy D wrote:

---

@proudlyfromNJ wrote:

---

@BornToShop wrote:

Soooo....based on this, Harvey Weinstein will be next...

---

@BornToShop  Is his case now going to the Supreme Court?

---

@proudlyfromNJ @No, in this type of criminal case, only someone convicted could take his case there and since his conviction was overturned, Cosby can't take his case to any higher court. 

---

@Mindy D  I meant Harvey W. I know about BC.

[Mindy D]

---

@proudlyfromNJ wrote:

---

@Sooner wrote:

---

@MarkeieMark wrote:

This speaks volumes on how the weight of assault on women are really taken.

He's a monster.

---

@MarkeieMark Well, I remember a killer who walked away in a pair of ugly az shoes--because he was rich and famous.  

---

@Sooner  Who? I usually know all this stuff.

---

@proudlyfromNJ @This is a reference to a statement from OJ about his shoes. This killer in the Nicole Simpson case was determined by forensic evidence to have been wearing a specific shoe made by Bruno Magli. OJ remarked that he would never have worn such ugly as* shoes. After his trial, a photo of Simpson surfaced with him wearing a pair of these shoes while working on a broadcast from a sports event. 

[susielong1]

This is wrong for too many reasons to list, what is wrong with our justice system!!!

[Mindy D]

---

@gertrudecloset wrote:

---

@Mindy D wrote:

He's a dangerous man. He needs to be behind bars for the rest of his life. 

---

Not anymore he's not @Mindy D .  He's blind.  People know who and what he really is.  He has no credibility now as an entertainer.  Anyone who would take up with him at this stage in his life would be desperate, stupid or both.  He can't do jack.  He did it all and gets to sit back and think how he got away with it.

---

@gertrudecloset @I agree that his age, blindness and health would probably preclude his acting upon his desire. This would mean that he poses much less danger now. However, I do think that if he were given the opportunity to act and was able to do so he would. He's a very calculating man that has been enabled by so many.

[gertrudecloset]

---

@Stray wrote:

---

@gertrudecloset wrote:

---

@Stray wrote:

@gertrudecloset - I understand quite well ....I stated there was no written record as this wasn't a plea deal....certainly, he spoke in the presence of his attorneys & a prosecutor.  A transcriber is present if it were a pled out.   I did not follow the trial closely and was commenting on the decision which was correct, legally but there was sloppy case preparation which freed a guilty man.  Having worked with victims And being one myself many years ago, I'm outraged.  Justice was not served due to a technicality which is unconscionable.  The technicality was a violation of his fifth.  He believed he had an immunity deal and confessed; it didn't count for him but does for his many victims.  I wasn't there so I'm not debating the issue on a shopping board as they are still researching legal papers relative to the trial....

---

@Stray   It was a plea deal.  He sang in civil court so he didn't have to stand trial in criminal court.  That's a plea deal.  No matter how you slice it.  Plea = you give us something we'll give you something.  Period.  Period.

Visit this Article from the New York Times: (it's behind a paywall) but you may find it elsewhere.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which overturned Mr. Cosby's conviction, wrote that a “non-prosecution agreement” that had been struck with.......

No prosecution means no one would have appeared in court.  Which then means, there would have been no transcriber.  His Lawyers and the D.A. of PA struck the arrangement on his behalf.  Agreement = deal.

---

@gertrudecloset - 

in cases where deals are made to reduce the counts or not charge a suspect, it’s generally spelled out in excruciating detail on paper in a formal plea agreement with the terms often read in court. In other words, they make it crystal clear what the deal is to avoid ambiguity, challenges and further court proceedings.

Castor would have done better to stick to the norms that guide prosecutors rather than make an exception for Cosby, even if, as the attorney testified, it was to help his alleged victim get some redress. In the end, special justice was injustice.  

Cosby was a "special defendant" with powerful lawyers with the world watching EXCEPT for me.  This is a rare case and rare outcome.  The day poor people get the same treatment as the rich & famous, our system would be just.  This situation is "an agreement" & in violation of his fifth amendment rights against self incrimination when it was not honored.  Cosby was under the impression he had "blanket immunity".  Maybe the prosecutor was well meaning but this very rare situation backfired.  There are many faults with our justice system and until everyone is treated equally, it's deficient and justice is not always served and in this case it wasn't.   It's the only one we have and better than many other countries and it works but not always for the disadvantaged.  

The law is always debatable and I speak for victims not criminals.   I hope you never are one.  

---

@Stray he entered into an agreement which is what we call a plea deal.  That's it.  Me being a victim of a crime has nothing to do with Cosby's sentence.  A plea deal is a plea deal.  He was promised NO prosecution in a Criminal trial based on his testimony in the Civil trial.  That is as about as big of a plea as they come.

A plea bargain is an agreement between a defendant and a prosecutor, in which the defendant agrees to plead guilty or "no contest" (nolo contendere) in exchange for an agreement by the prosecutor to drop one or more charges, reduce a charge to a less serious offense, or recommend to the judge a specific sentence acceptable to the defense.

[gertrudecloset]

---

@wagirl wrote:

@gertrudecloset ---yes but... he got out on a legal technically not because he was innocent-----they didn't say he was innocent  and I fully believe --there are people working on this right now. 

---

@wagirl I never said he was innocent.  Go find the thread where I said the same thing you did.  What are you talking about?

[Johnnyeager]

He was able to have access to and ensnare many of the women due to his power, influence and importance in the entertainment industry. 

He doesn't have that anymore and likely never will again.

[gertrudecloset]

---

@lovesrecess wrote:

The “promise” given to Cosby was not in writing and was just given as a tactic to get him to confess he was guilty of the offenses. His attorney dropped the ball by not getting the agreement in writing and entered as part of a plea bargain which apparently was not what it was. Or perhaps this was the strategy in the first place. To have justice taken away for so many victims is hard to fathom. I can only imagine how they are feeling now. Cosby is one sick puppy.

---

It doesn't have to be in writing @lovesrecess .  An agreement is an agreement.  Do you honestly think those high paid lawyers of Cosby's would have allowed him to talk in 2005 incriminating himself if they thought for one minute he wasn't going to get something out of it?  C'mon.

The information he provided at a civil trial in 2005 (incriminating himself) is what they used to try him in the criminal case when they weren't supposed to (based on a plea agreement he made with the D.A. in the Civil trial. 

Your statement further indicates you don't trust that the highest Court in Pennsylvania knows what they are doing.  You would be wrong in that assumption.

[Porcelain]

---

@gertrudecloset wrote:

---

@lovesrecess wrote:

The “promise” given to Cosby was not in writing and was just given as a tactic to get him to confess he was guilty of the offenses. His attorney dropped the ball by not getting the agreement in writing and entered as part of a plea bargain which apparently was not what it was. Or perhaps this was the strategy in the first place. To have justice taken away for so many victims is hard to fathom. I can only imagine how they are feeling now. Cosby is one sick puppy.

---

It doesn't have to be in writing @lovesrecess .  An agreement is an agreement.  Do you honestly think those high paid lawyers of Cosby's would have allowed him to talk in 2005 incriminating himself if they thought for one minute he wasn't going to get something out of it?  C'mon.

The information he provided at a civil trial in 2005 (incriminating himself) is what they used to try him in the criminal case when they weren't supposed to (based on a plea agreement he made with the D.A. in the Civil trial. 

Your statement further indicates you don't trust that the highest Court in Pennsylvania knows what they are doing.  You would be wrong in that assumption.

---

If he knew he was incriminating himself by admitting to crimes, he could have asserted his 5th Amendment rights instead of speaking. That would have been the appropriate advice from his counsel.