We’ll probably never know why the U.S. Supreme Court decided not to review the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s decision to free Bill Cosby earlier this week. It was always a longshot. The nation’s highest court doesn’t hear 95 percent of the cases that come its way according to
Thank you for explaining this injustice so thoroughly. We must change our victim blaming laws - which do not protect us. Whether or not a crime has been committed has solely to do with the behavior of the offender, not the the "words and actions" of the victim #CodifyConsent
One of the Supreme Court Justices, I believe it was Justice Dougherty, made it clear in his rebuttal of the PA Supreme Court's decision, that for a prosecutor to provide immunity would be unconstitutional. Only judges can provide immunity. Governors and the US President can provide pardons. For a prosecutor to provide immunity would give them pardoning authority.
While a prosecutor can determine not to prosecute at a given time, if later evidence is discovered, they, or their replacement, has the absolute right to proceed with the case. And in the statement Castor gave the press, he clearly said that the Commonwealth of PA retains the right to pursue the case in the future.
When the case was tried in civil court, the judge at the time could have given Cosby immunity, not Bruce Castor. The judge would have determined whether his testimony would have incriminated him and whether it was in the best interest of justice to provide him with the ability to speak with impunity. The judge did not do so. Issuance of immunity would have been included in the court record.
Any comments Castor made or did not make regarding immunity was and is irrelevant. He had no authority to make them. And the attorneys for Cosby would have or should have known this.
Castor could not have issued Cosby immunity. The Supreme Court of the Commonwealth of PA did so. The Supreme Court of the US ratified their so-doing against the rule of law.
As to why society has been subjected to this grotesque dysfunction..... What can we expect when rapists make determinations regarding other rapists?
Brilliant
Thank you for explaining this injustice so thoroughly. We must change our victim blaming laws - which do not protect us. Whether or not a crime has been committed has solely to do with the behavior of the offender, not the the "words and actions" of the victim #CodifyConsent
One of the Supreme Court Justices, I believe it was Justice Dougherty, made it clear in his rebuttal of the PA Supreme Court's decision, that for a prosecutor to provide immunity would be unconstitutional. Only judges can provide immunity. Governors and the US President can provide pardons. For a prosecutor to provide immunity would give them pardoning authority.
While a prosecutor can determine not to prosecute at a given time, if later evidence is discovered, they, or their replacement, has the absolute right to proceed with the case. And in the statement Castor gave the press, he clearly said that the Commonwealth of PA retains the right to pursue the case in the future.
When the case was tried in civil court, the judge at the time could have given Cosby immunity, not Bruce Castor. The judge would have determined whether his testimony would have incriminated him and whether it was in the best interest of justice to provide him with the ability to speak with impunity. The judge did not do so. Issuance of immunity would have been included in the court record.
Any comments Castor made or did not make regarding immunity was and is irrelevant. He had no authority to make them. And the attorneys for Cosby would have or should have known this.
Castor could not have issued Cosby immunity. The Supreme Court of the Commonwealth of PA did so. The Supreme Court of the US ratified their so-doing against the rule of law.
As to why society has been subjected to this grotesque dysfunction..... What can we expect when rapists make determinations regarding other rapists?