WELL SHOW MORE OF THIS VIDEO
COMING UP IN A FEW MINUTES.
>>> WE WANT TO TURN TO BILL
COSBY RELEASED FROM A
PENNSYLVANIA PRISON YESTERDAY
NOW A FREE MAN AFTER THE STATE
SUPREME COURT REVERSED COSBYS
INDECENT ASSAULT CONVICTION.
THE COURT THREW OUT THE
CONVICTION SAYING PROSECUTORS
VIOLATED A DEAL MEANT TO SHIELD
HIM FROM PROSECUTION.
STEPHANIE GOSK HAS DETAILS.
>> Reporter: BILL COSBY IS A
FREE MAN, HIS CONVICTION TOSSED
OUT, HIS RECORD WIPED CLEAN, HE
CANNOT BE RETRIED.
HE APPEARED BRIEFLY BEFORE
REPORTERS OUTSIDE OF HIS HOME.
THE PENNSYLVANIA SUPREME COURT
RULED THAT THE DECISION TO
CHARGE COSBY WITH SEXUAL ASSAULT
IN 2015 WAS AN AFFRONT TO
FUNDAMENTAL FAIRNESS AND THE
PROSECUTION VIOLATED COSBYS DUE
PROCESS.
COSBY CALLING INTO A RADIO SHOW.
>> THIS IS FOR ALL THE PEOPLE
WHO HAVE BEEN IMPRISONED
WRONGFULLY, REGARDLESS OF RACE,
COLOR OR CREED.
BECAUSE I MET THEM IN THERE.
>> Reporter: THE 83-YEAR-OLD WAS
SERVING A 3 TO 10 YEAR SENTENCE
IN MAXIMUM SECURITY PRISON AFTER
A JURY FOUND HIM GUILTY IN 2018
OF SEXUALLY ASSAULTING ANDREA
CONSTAND.
AT THE TIME, COSBYS OTHER
ACCUSERS CELEBRATED THE ATTACK
OUTSIDE THE COURT.
>> I FEEL LIKE IM DREAMING.
CAN YOU PINCH ME.
>> Reporter: CONSTAND SAID COSBY
DRUGGED AND SEXUALLY ASSAULTED
HER IN HIS PENNSYLVANIA HOME IN
2004, COSBY SAID THE INTERACTION
WAS CONSENSUAL.
IN 2005 THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY AT
THE TIME, BRUCE CASTER, WHO
LATER WOULD GO ON TO BE ONE OF
PRESIDENT TRUMPS IMPEACHMENT
ATTORNEYS DID NOT BRING CHARGES.
HE TESTIFIED THERE WAS NOT
ENOUGH EVIDENCE BUT INSTEAD HE
MADE A VERBAL AGREEMENT NOT TO
PROSECUTE COSBY IF HE WOULD GIVE
A DEPOSITION IN CONSTANDS CIVIL
CASE.
THAT SAME DEPOSITION BECAME THE
BASIS FOR A NEW DA TO CHARGE HIM
TEN YEARS LATER, DAYS BEFORE THE
STA
STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS EXPIRED.
A SPOKESMAN FOR COSBY SAID THIS
IS JUSTICE AND JUSTICE FOR BLACK
AMERICA.
ONE OF THE PROSECUTORS FROM THE
TRIAL, FIRING BACK.
>> IM DISTURBED, IM DISTRESSED
THAT THEY ARE EXPLOITING OUR
THIRST FOR JUSTICE IN HIS NAME.
>> STEPHANIE GOSK REPORTING
THERE.
THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY WHO
BROUGHT THE CASE, KEANEVIN STEEL
SAID COSBY WAS FOUND GUILTY BY A
JURY AND WAS RELEASED BY A
PROCEDURAL ISSUE.
JOINING US IS THE ATTORNEY YOU
SAW IN THAT CASE, A PROSECUTOR
IN THE FIRST CASE AGAINST COSBY
AND DANNY CEVALLOS IS STILL WITH
US AS WELL.
TAKE ME BACK TO 2005 AND BRUCE
CASTER STRIKING THIS DEAL WITH
MR. COSBY, A VERBAL AGREEMENT HE
WOULD NOT PROSECUTE HIM IF HE
TESTIFIED IN THE CIVIL CASE.
IS THAT OUT OF THE ORDINARY?
IS THAT SOMETHING YOUVE SEEN
BEFORE AND SHOULD IT HAVE BEEN
GROUNDS FOR THE SUPREME COURT TO
OVERTURN COSBYS CONVICTION?
>> I HAVE TO SAY THAT I DO
RESPECT OUR SUPREME COURT, AND I
RESPECT THEIR FINDINGS.
BUT NOT ONLY IS IT UNSEEN AND
UNHEARD OF, BUT I WOULD ASSERT
AND ALLEGE THAT IT ACTUALLY
DIDNT HAPPEN.
YOU KNOW, I THINK ONE OF THE
THINGS THAT IS REALLY IMPORTANT
IS WHEN NONPROSECUTORIAL
AGREEMENTS ARE MADE, THEY ARE IN
WRITING, APPROVED BY THE COURT,
AND BRUCE CASTER, WHO HAD BEEN
THE DA FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS
KNEW THAT.
HAD ACTUALLY IMPLEMENTED THAT IN
PRIOR CASES.
SO ITS NOT LIKE THIS WAS
SOMETHING HE DID NOT KNOW.
SO, A VERBAL AGREEMENT LIKE THAT
NOT ONLY DOESNT HAPPEN, BUT I
THINK THE OTHER THING TO
EMPHASIZE IS THAT IF IT WERE TO
HAVE HAPPENED, IT WOULD HAVE
BEEN IN WRITING, IT WOULD HAVE
BEEN APPROVED BY THE COURT.
AND THERE ARE OTHER INDICIA THAT
IM HAPPY TO GO THROUGH THAT
KIND OF FIRM UP FOR ME AT LEAST
THE FACT THAT I DONT BELIEVE
THAT IT HAPPENED.
>> SO, YOU SAY YOU RESPECT THE
SUPREME COURT AND I RESPECT YOUR
STANCE ON THAT, BUT HOW CAN WE
RESPECT THE SUPREME COURT IF
YOURE SAYING IT ACTED ON
SOMETHING THAT MAYBE DIDNT EVEN
HAPPEN NUMBER ONE AND IF IT DID
HAPPEN, A VERBAL AGREEMENT IT
SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GROUNDS TO
OVERTURN THE CONVICTION?
>> MY BELIEF THEY ACCEPTED THE
TESTIMONY OF BRUCE CASTER.
WHEN I LOOK AT THE FACTS, KEEP
IN MIND I WAS THERE DURING THE
DAY AND A HALF HEARING WHERE WE
HAD BRUCE CASTER ON THE STAND
WHERE HE TESTIFIED AS TO THIS
ALLEGED PROMISE.
THE THINGS THAT HE STATED WERE
CONTRARY TO WHAT A LOT OF THE
OTHER EVIDENCE.
FOR EXAMPLE, HE TESTIFIED THAT
HE HAD INFORMED COSBYS ATTORNEY
AS WELL AS MS. CONSTANDS
ATTORNEYS THAT HE WAS MAKING
THIS PROMISE.
MS. CONSTANDS ATTORNEYS TOOK
THE STAND AND SAID THESE
PROMISES WERE NEVER MADE, IN
FACT, THEY HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF
IT.
NUMBER TWO HE RELEASED A PRESS
RELEASE MOMENTS AFTER DECLINING
CHARGES STATING THAT HE WOULD
REVISIT THE DECISION TO DECLINE
CHARGES SHOULD THE NEED ARISE.
AN INDIVIDUAL THAT MAKES A
PROMISE THAT HES NOT GOING TO
PROSECUTE SOMEONE DOES NOT MAKE
THAT KIND OF PRESS RELEASE.
I UNDERSTAND THE PRESS RELEASE
WAS SEEN AS SOMETHING DIFFERENT
BUT I THINK THE PLAIN LANGUAGE
OF WHAT HE STATED IS CLEAR.
I THINK IN ADDITION TO THAT, THE
FACT THAT BRUCE CASTER WAS ONLY
THE -- THE DA OF MONTGOMERY
COUNTY SPEAKS VOLUMES TO WHETHER
OR NOT HE COULD REALLY BIND
COSBY FOR OTHER TYPES OF
SELF-INCRIMINATING CRIMES.
WHAT I MEAN BY THAT IS THAT BILL
COSBY DIDNT MAKE ANY STATEMENTS
REGARDING ANY CRIME HE COMMITTED
IN MONTGOMERY COUNTY.
HIS INCRIMINATING STATEMENTS
WERE CRIMES HE COMMITTED AGAINST
WOMEN IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS
WHICH BRUCE CASTER WOULD HAVE
HAD NO AUTHORITY TO GIVE HIM
IMMUNITY.
SO WITH ALL THOSE THINGS SAID I
DONT BELIEVE THERE WAS A
PROMISE AND I DONT BELIEVE
THERE WAS DETRIMENTAL ALLIANCE.
>> MR. COSBY AND HIS SUPPORTERS
ARE TOUTING THIS AS AN
EXONERATION
EXONERATION, THAT JUSTICE HAS
BEEN CARRYIED OUT FOR HIM.
BUT DID THE SUPREME COURT SAY
ANYTHING ABOUT THE GUILTY ON HIS
CHARGES WHICH HE WAS CONVICTED?
IN OTHER WORDS WAS THERE A
STATEMENT THAT HE WAS GUILTY OF
THE THINGS HE WAS CONVICTED OF
DOING OR WAS IT A PROCEDURAL
MOTION?
>> THIS WAS ABOUT THE
TECHNICALITY, THE JURY OF HIS
PEERS OF HIS PEERS STATED THAT
HE WAS GUILTY.
AND WHILE THE GUILTY NO LONGER
STANDS, THE FACTUAL FINDING
BEHIND WHAT THE JURY SAID STILL
DOES.
THEY FOUND, AFTER ALL OF THE
TESTIMONY, AFTER ANDREA CONSTAND
TESTIFIED, THEY FOUND HE GAVE
HER A DRUG, RENDERED HER
INCAPABLE OF CONSENT AND THEN
SEXUALLY ASSAULTED HER.
>> DANNY, WHATS YOUR READ ABOUT
WHAT WE SAW YESTERDAY?
>> A LOT OF THINGS KRISTIN SAID
ARE SPOT ON.
BUT WEVE BEEN CALLING THIS AN
AGREEMENT AND I WOULD SAY IT
DOESNT RISE TO THE LEVEL OF AN
AGREEMENT.
AND THATS WHAT THE COURT
CONCLUDED BECAUSE IT USED A
PRINCIPLE FROM CONTRACT LAW THAT
HAPPENS WHEN YOU HAVE PARTIES
THAT THINK THERE IS A CONTRACT
BUT THE CONTRACT FAILS.
IN THIS CASE BRUCE CASTER DIDNT
FOLLOW THE RULES FOR OFFERING
IMMUNITY, SO IF THERE WAS NO
UNDERLYING CONTRACT SOMETIMES
COURTS WILL SAY WHEN ONE PARTY
MAKES A PROMISE TO ANOTHER PARTY
AND THAT SECOND PARTY RELIES, TO
HIS DETRIMENT, ON THAT
PROPROMISE AND IN THIS CASE
COSBY RELIED ON THE PROMISE AND
GAVE UP THE FIFTH AMENDMENT
RIGHT, SAT DOWN FOR A DEPOSITION
AND THAT LED TO HIS PROSECUTION.
THE COURT STRUGGLED WITH THE
REMEDY.
THE COURT CONSIDERED THE
POSSIBILITY THEY COULD VACATE
THE CONVICTION AND ALLOW ANOTHER
PROSECUTION.
INSTEAD THEY DID SOMETHING RARE.
WINNING ON APPEAL IS EXCEEDINGLY
RARE.
WINNING ON APPEAL AND THEN A BAR
TO REPROSECUTIONER IS RARER
STILL.
SO THIS IS SOMETHING WERE NOT
LIKELY TO SEE IN A HIGH PROFILE
CASE, AGAIN MAYBE IN OUR
LIFETIME.
BUT THE COURT CONCLUDED WHERE
THERE IS NO OTHER REMEDY OR IN
THEIR OPINION THERE WAS NO OTHER
REMEDY FOR THIS PROMISE BUT TO
ENFORCE IT, AND ENFORCING IT
MEANS BARRING FUTURE
PROSECUTION.
I UNDERSTAND KRISTINS
FRUSTRATION.
THESE WERE DECISIONS MADE LONG
BEFORE SHE THOUGHT ABOUT OR
HEARD ABOUT THE COSBY CRIMINAL
PROSECUTION, BEFORE IT WAS A
GLIMMER IN KEVIN STEELS EYE,
THE LATER DA, SO THIS WAS A
DECISION MADE NOT TO PROSECUTE
LONG AGO AND BOUND THE
PROSECUTION YEARS LATER.
NOT SURPRISED THAT THE TRIAL
COURT REFUSED TO DISMISS ON
THESE GROUNDS, TRIAL COURTS
WOULD RATHER THE APPEALS COURT
DEAL WITH IT AND THIS WAS ALWAYS
AN ISSUE ON APPEAL.
IT WAS AN ISSUE AT THE TRIAL
COURT, IT WAS PRESERVED AND MADE
ITS WAY TO APPEAL WHERE YOU SEE
THIS STUNNINGLY RARE OCCURRENCE
HERE.
>> BILL COSBY CONVICTED OF THREE
COUNTS OF AGGRAVATED ASSAULT
THIS MORNING IS A FREE MAN BASED