Cosby sentencing hearing
Bill Cosby, who was convicted of three counts of indecent sexual assault during a second trial earlier this year, has been sentenced to up to 10 years in a Pennsylvania prison. The three counts were merged for sentencing under Pennsylvania law, and the judge sentenced him in accordance with the guidelines, which called for at least 22-36 months. The judge denied the defense request for house arrest, and denied Cosby a bond. Cosby was led from the courtroom in handcuffs and processed into custody.
Cosby, known as America’s dad for his reign as the patriarch of the fictional Cosby he portrayed on a top-rated sitcom in the 1980’s, will surely appeal. There are a couple of substantial issues to be hashed out on appeal. First is the trial judge’s decision to allow the statements Cosby made in the civil case to be presented in the criminal trial. Cosby claimed he had only agreed to testify in the civil case pursuant to an agreement that the state would not prosecute, essentially that he was immune from prosecution. Cosby’s wife has recently indicated she wants to address a possible dispute the judge had with the former prosecutor that allegedly made the immunity agreement with Cosby. Also, among other things, Cosby will challenge the court’s decision to allow five other alleged victims to testify in this case. During his first trial, only one other accuser testified, and the trial ended with a mistrial due to a hung jury. While the decision to allow similar fact evidence before the jury is generally left to the discretion of the trial judge, his change of heart to allow four more accusers will certainly be scrutinized. It appears Cosby will have to remain behind bars unless he scores on his appeal.
Bill Cosby was found guilty of all three counts of aggravated indecent assault in a Pennsylvania courtroom this afternoon. The charges stem from accusations that he drugged and sexually assaulted a woman at his home. He faces up to 10 years in prison on each count. After the verdict, the prosecutor asked that his bond be revoked pending sentencing, and Cosby audibly called him an “Asshole” in court. The judge declined, leaving the same bond in place. Sentencing will probably not be for a few weeks, and Cosby will need to undergo an assessment to see if he must register as a violent sexual predator. He will certainly appeal, and will probably try to secure a bond while the appeal is ongoing, as well.
This brings to close a saga that began with the accusation 13 years ago. The prosecutor at the time initially did not prosecute, and Cosby claimed that he had an immunity agreement in place before he testified at the deposition in the related civil suit: which he ended up settling for $3.4 million dollars. Later, after publicity, a new prosecutor was elected who then filed on criminal charges, and no immunity agreement was ever produced, so the court allowed him to proceed and to introduce the deposition testimony by Cosby. The first trial ended in a mistrial. This trial included additional evidence, included testimony from five other women that claim Cosby drugged them and took advantage of them, and also from a woman who claimed that the accuser told her that she was going to make up an accusation to try to cash in. His new attorney, Tom Meserau, tried a different, more aggressive approach with the accuser. The jurors must not have been persuaded as they found him guilty as charged.
Not only does it firmly bring down the comedian formerly referred to as America’s Dad, it makes the ‘special sauce’ episode of the Cosby Show really creepy in hindsight… Also, when you get found guilty of sexual assault, it’s not the prosecutor who is an ‘asshole’.
Closing arguments are scheduled today in Bill Cosby’s second trial on charges of drugging and sexually abusing a woman, Andrew Costand. The case previously went to trial last year, and ended in a hung jury. This time around, there was some additional evidence that went in front of the jury. The prosecutors were permitted to introduce the testimony of several other women, including supermodel Janice Dickinson, who allege that Cosby also drugged and assaulted them in a similar manner: in the first trial, they were only permitted to introduce the testimony of one women, who did not testify in this case. That’s huge for the effect on the impression of Cosby’s character. However, the Defense was permitted to introduce the testimony of a co-worker of the accuser, who claims that Constand had confided that she had a plan to accuse Cosby in order to cash in, and that she ultimately received a settlement of $3.4 million. That evidence was not heard at the first trial, either.
Closing arguments should conclude today, though jury deliberations may continue beyond this evening. The tenor of this trial was very different, as Cosby’s new attorney Tom Mesereau pointedly attacked the accuser and her financial interest in the claims. They also introduced evidence from Cosby’s private plane suggesting he was not even in Philadelphia at the time she alleges the attack to have occurred. The case will soon be in the hands of the jury- Cosby faces several years in prison for the three counts, of he could walk free. This is the only case of the multiple accusations against him for which the statute of limitations has not expired. The last jury deliberated over the course of six days, so it may be a while before there is a verdict.
Famed comedian Bill Cosby goes back on trial this week for charges that he drugged and sexually assaulted a woman several years ago. Since the charges were filed, dozens of other woman have come forward to allege that Cosby had similar conduct with them. The case went to trial 10 months ago, and ended with a hung jury. Even though Cosby’s attorneys managed to avoid a conviction at that trial, Cosby now has a new legal team lead by Tom Mesereau, who has handled such high-profile clients as Michael Jackson.
The trial will be quite different this time, as the new attorneys seem more aggressive, and the evidence has substantially changed. For the first trial, the court allowed one other accuser to testify about her experience with Cosby. This time around, the court has permitted up to five other accusers to testify. Last time around, the attorneys were able to cast enough doubt on the “similar fact evidence” witness that the jurors later said they completely disregarded her. It will be very difficult for them to disregard five, or to demonstrate that they are financially motivated. One of the possible witnesses is model Janice Dickinson, who has sued Cosby for defamation for attacking her claims. It’s unclear why the judge decided that five other people can testify in this trial when they couldn’t in the last one, but it appears to make the situation far more grave for Cosby.
Generally, a retrial favors the prosecution… and probably more so when the judge permits a substantial amount of evidence that was previously excluded. We will find out the final outcome when the trial concludes, probably not for about a month.
Elwood “Drunk Lives Matter” Gutshall
Elwood Gutshall III was pulled over and arrested for drunk driving, wearing a St. Patrick’s Day t-shirt, even though it was a couples days past the holiday. His oh-so-clever shirt read “Drunk Lives Matter”. He blew .217, more than two and a half times the limit in Pennsylvania, and will go to court next month to answer his charge.
Ironically, it’s the three-year anniversary of a similar story we ran, where an alleged drunk driver was busted while wearing a shirt that says, “Drunk as Sh**”.
Believe it or not, neither of these busts occurred in Florida!
Crystal Sweigart, who has been charged with running a prostitution ring in Mount Joy, Pennsylvania, has a rather novel defense to the prostitution charges. She admits that she was giving unlicensed massages (which is a crime, itself), but says that the sexual contact that occurred afterward was merely fun between friends after work. She said, “Anything that happened when the massage stopped becomes two consenting adults having fun,” Sweigart said. “What I’m complaining about is (police) labeling it as [prostitution].”
Legally that would be a defense to the prostitution charge. However, the fact that the patrons gave her additional money when the sex acts occurred belies the fact that it was merely fun. It sounds like sexual contact in exchange for money. She admits that it’s incriminating: “Did I refuse the money? No,” Sweigart said. “Should I have or would it have looked better on me if I didn’t? Probably.” Two men have also been charged for patronizing prostitutes. Beware the happy ending…