Bill Cosby Found Guilty of Sexual Assault After Years of Accusations

NORRISTOWN, Pa. — A jury found Bill Cosby guilty Thursday of drugging and sexually assaulting a woman at his home near here 14 years ago, capping the downfall of one of the world’s best-known entertainers, and offering a measure of satisfaction to the dozens of women who for years have accused him of similar assaults against them.

On the second day of its deliberations at the Montgomery County Courthouse in this town northwest of Philadelphia, the jury returned to convict Mr. Cosby of three counts of aggravated indecent assault against Andrea Constand, at the time a Temple University employee he had mentored.

The three counts — penetration with lack of consent, penetration while unconscious and penetration after administering an intoxicant — are felonies, each punishable by up to 10 years in state prison, though the sentences could be served concurrently.

It was the second time a jury had considered Mr. Cosby’s fate. His first trial last summer ended with a deadlocked jury after six days of deliberations.

Mr. Cosby sat back in his chair after the verdict was announced and quietly stared down. Several women who have accused Mr. Cosby of abusing them, and attended the trial each day, briefly cheered, then fell silent. Judge Steven T. O’Neill praised the jurors, calling it “an extraordinarily difficult case” and adding, “You have sacrificed much, but you have sacrificed in the service of justice.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/26/arts/television/bill-cosby-guilty-retrial.html

They're all crawling out of the woodwork. Hope he gets many years.

It's going to be appealed. They used 'prior bad acts', which is usually excluded. The last court excluded the evidence, and the result was drastically different.

I always thought he’d get away with it. We will see.

Mr nice guy turns out to be a nasty piece of work....who would have thought it?

Quill, what's a "Prior bad act" please ?

nicko wrote:Quill, what's a "Prior bad act" please ?

Good question, and keen mind for asking.  The court tries to draw a line around the scenario the prosecutor claims is a crime.  It doesn't allow the prosecutor to bring in evidence of any and all previous wrongdoing (bad acts), because then the issue would become the reputation and character of the accused (propensity) rather than the incident on which he or she is accused.  The court imposes a sharp focus, and requires the trial to be only and exclusively about the single alleged crime.

As with everything in law, there are exceptions (as law students we learned these exception by a mnemonic device: MIMIC - http://pub.testguru.com/so-called-mimic-exceptions.pdf) .  The court does allow prior incidents in to show motive, intent, lack of mistake, identity and common plan or scheme.  These are 'back doors' by which the prior bad acts might be allowed to be heard by the jury.  But any one of the exceptions must fit a need and be relevant.

I didn't attend the trial, but it's my understanding from what I read that the court allowed evidence of some 19 prior incidents, some of which may not have fit the exceptions with precision.  If the defense, on appeal, can show an appellate court that the effect of allowing in this evidence was to transform the trial into a judgment of reputation, and not specific crimes, then the verdict will be overturned.  Keep in mind, the defense has only to show one error, and the verdict will be overturned.  The prosecution gave the defense 19 chances...risky.

https://www.law.com/thelegalintelligencer/sites/thelegalintelligencer/2018/01/18/da-wants-19-cosby-accusers-to-testify-at-retrial/?slreturn=20180327114528

See also: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-bill-cosby-sexual-assault-case-jury-20160105-story.html

It goes without saying there is something very wrong with this man, it must be about control, generally anyone famous has no trouble attracting attention from the opposite sex, so why the need to drug and force a person into activities they don't want. Does it make someone more determined to have their way when the other person says no, indeed did this man give the women a chance to say yes or no?