# Bill Cosby Conviction Overturned: No retrial **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [June 30, 2021, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-cosby-conviction-overturned-no-retrial/945342 "2021-06-30T17:18:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2021, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-cosby-conviction-overturned-no-retrial/945342/81 "2021-06-30T20:05:34Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > I might seem to be nitpicking, but to me, “innocent” is a moral judgment, not a legal one, and its use to describe a serial rapist is reprehensible. You’re missing the point. “Guilty” and “Innocent” both have very specific, defined legal meanings, which don’t _necessarily_ have anything to do with whether a defendant committed the crime in question. You’re arguing something different than @Northern_Piper- it’s like saying “It’s blue!” , and @Northern_Piper saying “Blue means a range of 450-495 nanometers. Since it’s 440 nanometers, it’s actually Indigo”, and you saying “Well, it looks blue!” In this case, Cosby is legally innocent, because as has already been said, the process that had found him guilty was proven to be flawed. Did he do it? Almost certainly. Is he guilty in the legal sense? No. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2021, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-cosby-conviction-overturned-no-retrial/945342/82 "2021-06-30T20:20:18Z")
> [@John\_Bredin](#): > > If one State’s Attorney or District Attorney promises her neighbor, cousin, or old school pal she won’t prosecute him, should the successor SA or DA be bound by that? If, in return for the promise, the Defendant gave testimony he did not have to give, then yes. It is not so much the promise here, it is the _deal._ A promise of immunity from prosecution in return for testimony is a critical part of American jurisprudence. You catch a small fish, and make a deal so he rolls over on the big fish so that big fish can be convicted. Then you can’t go back and prosecute the small fish. > [@John\_Bredin](#): > > That said, inducing someone to testify by promising you won’t charge them but then charging them and using the testimony criminally _ **is** _ improper but IMO the remedy should be suppressing the induced testimony rather than dismissing the criminal case altogether. Once the cat is out of the bag… ---
**Author:** ![Love\_Rhombus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/love_rhombus/32/10694_2.png) [@Love\_Rhombus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Love_Rhombus)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2021, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-cosby-conviction-overturned-no-retrial/945342/83 "2021-06-30T20:24:37Z")
Yes. [Bill Cosby Set Free Due to Deal Made With Trump Impeachment Lawyer](https://www.businessinsider.com/bill-cosby-set-free-deal-made-trump-impeachment-lawyer-2021-6) ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2021, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-cosby-conviction-overturned-no-retrial/945342/84 "2021-06-30T20:27:39Z")
> [@Odesio](#): > > > [@Miller](#): > > > > Yes, that’s the technicality he was released under. > > > > > Are you under the impression that “technicality” is a synonym for “triviality?” > > It’s most often how I hear it used, yes. With an added dose of illegitimacy ---
**Author:** ![Love\_Rhombus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/love_rhombus/32/10694_2.png) [@Love\_Rhombus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Love_Rhombus)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2021, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-cosby-conviction-overturned-no-retrial/945342/85 "2021-06-30T20:30:04Z")
Intellectually I agree. Emotionally…Well, they tend toward hoping something deeply unpleasant happening to him. ---
**Author:** ![cochrane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cochrane/32/10441_2.png) [@cochrane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cochrane)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2021, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-cosby-conviction-overturned-no-retrial/945342/86 "2021-06-30T20:30:11Z")
> [@Paul\_was\_in\_Saudi](#): > > [-=Linky=-](https://abcnews.go.com/US/bill-cosby-released-prison-conviction-vacated/story?id=78582000) > > The guy is 80 something years old, legally blind and broke. Cosby’s current net worth is $400 million. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2021, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-cosby-conviction-overturned-no-retrial/945342/87 "2021-06-30T20:31:09Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > I might seem to be nitpicking, but to me, “innocent” is a moral judgment, not a legal one, Not according to the Constittution of Canada, at least; “innocent” is a legal term: > [@](#): > > **Proceedings in criminal and penal matters** > > **11** Any person charged with an offence has the right > > **(d)** to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal; ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2021, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-cosby-conviction-overturned-no-retrial/945342/88 "2021-06-30T20:31:47Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > So what term do you think would be more appropriate? Acquitted. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2021, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-cosby-conviction-overturned-no-retrial/945342/89 "2021-06-30T20:39:00Z")
Innocent is _also_ a legal term. It has more definitions than just the one provided in your constitution. > [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > Acquitted. Nope. Implies that he didn’t actually rape anyone. ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2021, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-cosby-conviction-overturned-no-retrial/945342/90 "2021-06-30T20:40:09Z")
He wasn’t acquitted, was he? Is that the same thing as having your conviction overturned? I thought acquitted was something done by a jury (or a judge, in the case of no jury). ---
**Author:** ![ISiddiqui](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/97f17d/32.png) [@ISiddiqui](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ISiddiqui)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2021, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-cosby-conviction-overturned-no-retrial/945342/91 "2021-06-30T20:45:37Z")
> [@flurb](#): > > “Got off on a technicality” is a pretty consistently used as a trope in fiction for a failed juditical system justifying vigilante justice. To be fair… that sounds exactly the case here. I do agree that a lot of people use it as a synonym for a trivial procedural rule. However, in this case, the prosecutors completely failed here and “failed judicial system” is not a bad way to describe it. The issue, of course, and you already seen it happening is people saying this vindicates Cosby and all the accusations are lies. The ‘got off on a technicality’ does have the effect of pushing back on that narrative even though it wasn’t some trivial procedural rule that Cosby ‘took advantage of’ ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2021, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-cosby-conviction-overturned-no-retrial/945342/92 "2021-06-30T21:03:31Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > “innocent” is a moral judgment Sure, let’s talk morality. Is it moral for a state prosecutor, charged to prosecute fairly and impartially, to go back on the committment that office had previously made? Is it moral for that prosecutor to go back on that committment, contrary to state law? Is it moral for that prosecutor to institute charges, relying on evidence that would not exist, but for the commitment previously made by that office? Is it moral for that prosecutor to prosecute, using evidence that would not exist if the accused had been able to rely on the protections of the federal and state constitutions, but couldn’t because of the commitment given by the office? Is it moral for a prosecutor to use the power of the state to get a conviction in spite of all these constitutional and legal protections for every accused person, designed to protect us from state power? Is all that moral? ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2021, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-cosby-conviction-overturned-no-retrial/945342/93 "2021-06-30T21:06:37Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > Is all that moral? No, none of that is moral. How is that relevant to anything that’s been posted in this thread? ---
**Author:** ![Falchion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a88e57/32.png) [@Falchion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Falchion)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2021, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-cosby-conviction-overturned-no-retrial/945342/94 "2021-06-30T21:21:15Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > Thanks for your reply on the Federal/State law issue above. > The majority discussion seems to be mostly predicated on the US Constitution, though as I am familiar with that and not the Pennsylvania constitution, I cannot say with certainty either way. > In the opinion (linked below) the certainly discuss the Federal Constitution and SCOTUS jurisprudence in some detail. I read through the court’s opinion (but only once), and I’m not seeing a real federal issue. The Fifth Amendment issue is clearly federal, but it’s not controversial. A witness can be given immunity from prosecution which, in turn, prevents him from invoking the Fifth Amendment in a civil (or some criminal) context. But no one is contesting that. The question is when does a state prosecutor effectively provide that immunity, and that seems to be based on state law: some statute, some contract principles, some equity. There’s reference to due process, but it doesn’t strike me as really being a constitutional case. ---
**Author:** ![Telemark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/telemark/32/372_2.png) [@Telemark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telemark)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2021, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-cosby-conviction-overturned-no-retrial/945342/95 "2021-06-30T21:22:39Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Nope. Implies that he didn’t actually rape anyone. It doesn’t imply that, even if in this case it’s not accurate. The conviction was overturned on appeal. The case relied on fruit from the poison tree and as such, could not be allowed to stand. “Got off on a technicality” is generally used when someone thinks that despite obvious evidence, someone is free because of a minor, petty mistake that had no bearing on the case. It isn’t typically used (or at least shouldn’t be used) when there are basic, fundamental flaws in the prosecutions case. Literally, it is true; all reasons are technicalities. But that’s not how it is used in practice. On the other hand, Crosby is scum and I wouldn’t be opposed to prosecuting him on other crimes if there is unrelated evidence and/or testimony. ---
**Author:** ![flurb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/51bf81/32.png) [@flurb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flurb)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2021, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-cosby-conviction-overturned-no-retrial/945342/96 "2021-06-30T21:24:31Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > With an added dose of illegitimacy Yeah, “he got off on a technicality” is what the loose cannon cop mutters disgustedly in a Reagan-era vigilante flick after the namby-pamby ACLU lawyer uses a bunch of legal mumbo-jumbo to spring the child murderer from prison, forcing him to take the law into his own hands. ---
**Author:** ![Folacin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/folacin/32/3195_2.png) [@Folacin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Folacin)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2021, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-cosby-conviction-overturned-no-retrial/945342/97 "2021-06-30T21:33:35Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > With an added dose of illegitimacy Yeah. Somewhere there is an article about someone interviewing Justice William Douglas (in my memory William Buckley but that is likely wrong) and the interviewer said something about someone getting let off on a technicality. Douglas corrected him saying it wasn’t a technicality, it was the Constitution. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Bredin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/96bed5/32.png) [@John\_Bredin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Bredin)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2021, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-cosby-conviction-overturned-no-retrial/945342/98 "2021-06-30T21:34:37Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > Is it moral for a state prosecutor, charged to prosecute fairly and impartially, to go back on the committment that office had previously made? Would it be moral for a prosecutor to adhere to a unilateral commitment by a predecessor if it was given in violation of that very duty to prosecute fairly and impartially? > [@](#): > > Is it moral for that prosecutor to go back on that committment, contrary to state law? Was it against state law until the Pennsylvania Supreme Court said it was? > [@](#): > > Is it moral for that prosecutor to institute charges, relying on evidence that would not exist, but for the commitment previously made by that office? No, but is it moral to dismiss a criminal case altogether and prevent any chance of conviction on _any_ evidence, when a more tailored and balanced remedy would be to exclude from the trial the particular evidence that would not exist? > [@](#): > > Is it moral for a prosecutor to use the power of the state to get a conviction in spite of all these constitutional and legal protections for every accused person, designed to protect us from state power? Would it be moral for a prosecutor to dispense immunity from the power of the state not pursuant to constitutional protections for every accused person, nor in adherence to an agreement with respect to those protections where each side gives up some things and gains others, but to make a unilateral gift of immunity for his own idiosyncratic and possibly self-serving reasons? ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2021, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-cosby-conviction-overturned-no-retrial/945342/99 "2021-06-30T21:39:45Z")
The fact that the term is over used in bad action movies doesn’t mean it’s not an accurate term to describe this situation. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2021, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-cosby-conviction-overturned-no-retrial/945342/100 "2021-06-30T22:01:16Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > I might seem to be nitpicking, but to me, “innocent” is a moral judgment, not a legal one, and its use to describe a serial rapist is reprehensible. It is legally correct. “Not guilty” is a finding by a jury, because a jury cannot find a person innocent; innocent is the state of all people until a jury finds them guilty. “Not guilty” means a person remains innocent. > [@wolfpup](#): > > I might seem to be nitpicking, but to me, “innocent” is a moral judgment, not a legal one, and its use to describe a serial rapist is reprehensible. Everyone else was using “innocent” in the sense of law, not as a moral judgment. Your own country’s Constitution says that you are “presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law,” and that is clearly not in a “moral” sense. You surely knew that. The presumption of innocence, in the legal sense, is a bedrock legal concept in American law, affirmed and reaffirmed in many court rulings. You are aware of the concept of the presumption of innocence, and how that differs from the other definitions of “innocent” in English, and not one single person in the thread was implying Bill Cosby is morally innocent. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-cosby-conviction-overturned-no-retrial/945342.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-cosby-conviction-overturned-no-retrial/945342.md?page=6)