Bill Cosby is Free!!

**blueridgemtnman** · 07-02-2021, 02:24 PM

Originally Posted by NCRAVEN

Looks to me like self-defense

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1...237056516.html

So, you think he should be not charged, based on that video? (remember, I'm not disagreeing w/you) Did you read the applicable laws regarding this and come to the conclusion, after reading it all and seeing the video, that he should not be charged?

**Greg** · 07-02-2021, 02:28 PM

Originally Posted by Terpsfan82

Understood. So basically he got off because of incompetence.

No, he got off because the DA didn't think he could win the case so he told Cosby's lawyers no charges would be brought. This opened the door for him to testify at his civil trial. The second DA used that testimony which wouldn't have happened if the first DA hadn't told his lawyers no charges were coming.

Using his civil testimony was a violation of his 5th amendment rights against self-incrimination. It should have never been allowed in his criminal trial which should have never happened once his civil testimony became public.

Cosby is a sexual creep, but as an American he has civil rights. If he loses his you have lost yours.

**blueridgemtnman** · 07-02-2021, 02:30 PM

Originally Posted by Greg

No, he got off because the DA didn't think he could win the case so he told Cosby's lawyers no charges would be brought. This opened the door for him to testify at his civil trial. The second DA used that testimony which wouldn't have happened if the first DA hadn't told his lawyers no charges were coming.

Using his civil testimony was a violation of his 5th amendment rights against self-incrimination. It should have never been allowed in his criminal trial which should have never happened once his civil testimony became public.

Cosby is a sexual creep, but as an American he has civil rights. If he loses his you have lost yours.

Well said. And where was the judge while all this was going on?

**NCRAVEN** · 07-02-2021, 02:38 PM

Originally Posted by blueridgemtnman

So, you think he should be not charged, based on that video? (remember, I'm not disagreeing w/you) Did you read the applicable laws regarding this and come to the conclusion, after reading it all and seeing the video, that he should not be charged?

I did read it, I don't see anything in there that says he wasn't with in his rights to defend himself.

We see the guy who was shot pointing the gun at him. I'd can't see any reason to think that's not justified.

**Terpsfan82** · 07-02-2021, 02:44 PM

Originally Posted by Greg

No, he got off because the DA didn't think he could win the case so he told Cosby's lawyers no charges would be brought. This opened the door for him to testify at his civil trial. The second DA used that testimony which wouldn't have happened if the first DA hadn't told his lawyers no charges were coming.

Using his civil testimony was a violation of his 5th amendment rights against self-incrimination. It should have never been allowed in his criminal trial which should have never happened once his civil testimony became public.

Cosby is a sexual creep, but as an American he has civil rights. If he loses his you have lost yours.

Agreed. Which shows incompetence on the part of the 2nd DA.

**blueridgemtnman** · 07-02-2021, 03:13 PM

Originally Posted by NCRAVEN

I did read it, I don't see anything in there that says he wasn't with in his rights to defend himself.

We see the guy who was shot pointing the gun at him. I'd can't see any reason to think that's not justified.

Check #4 under the Subchapter. When it is not allowed. Did the victim possibly think the shooter provoked the actions? When there are unanswered questions, they have a tough time presuming they know all the answers. I can virtually assure you this will be what a possible trial will hinge on. That right there. Think the kid in Wisconsin or maybe even George Zimmerman. I don't think, judging by the video, that he did provoke it, but we have no idea what happened before that. We just don't know.

**blueridgemtnman** · 07-02-2021, 03:19 PM

Originally Posted by NCRAVEN

I did read it, I don't see anything in there that says he wasn't with in his rights to defend himself.

We see the guy who was shot pointing the gun at him. I'd can't see any reason to think that's not justified.

Also remember, when self defense is claimed, the entire burden of proof usually shifts to the State to prove it wasn't self defense.

**blah3** · 07-02-2021, 03:36 PM

Originally Posted by Terpsfan82

Agreed. Which shows incompetence on the part of the 2nd DA.

No, it shows malicious prosecution.
You could say incompetence on the trial judge, cause this case should have been tossed right away, but I think there was some malicious intent with the judge too.

**blueridgemtnman** · 07-02-2021, 03:44 PM

Originally Posted by blah3

No, it shows malicious prosecution.
You could say incompetence on the trial judge, cause this case should have been tossed right away, but I think there was some malicious intent with the judge too.

I agree. You might go so far to say that they knew what they were doing and did it anyway, knowing full well that nothing would happen to them. I mean, they had to know.

**Terpsfan82** · 07-02-2021, 03:45 PM

Originally Posted by blah3

No, it shows malicious prosecution.
You could say incompetence on the trial judge, cause this case should have been tossed right away, but I think there was some malicious intent with the judge too.

Agreed

**BustOfPallas** · 07-03-2021, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by Terpsfan82

Agreed

Jesus Terp. Can't us see how these social justice movements are warping justice. Its not malicious. Its buckling to the mob. Meetoo = BLM...

Shoot first, ask questions later. "If I follow the law I'll get cancelled, harassed, be shunned...."

You, asked for it, you got it, Toyota...

**Ortizer** · 07-04-2021, 09:22 AM

Originally Posted by NCRAVEN

I did read it, I don't see anything in there that says he wasn't with in his rights to defend himself.

We see the guy who was shot pointing the gun at him. I'd can't see any reason to think that's not justified.

Generally speaking though, self defense is a legal defense in court though. They can still charge and go through the process. Not arguing I think the guy wasn't defending himself or anything, just that the process is playing out.

Sent from my LM-G820 using Tapatalk