Legal | paulhunterjones

The news is breaking though it doesn’t come as a surprise. The legendary pop icon, world-renown Black comedian, and actor, Bill Cosby has been criminally charged with abusing, albeit years ago, a woman. Moments ago, I received an email alert from the New York Time reporting the filing of

people.com

of charges against Mr. Cosby. He was arraigned on the complaint this afternoon. At today’s court appearance the actor did not enter a plea. The Judge set bail at a million dollars. A preliminary hearing was set for January 14, 2016. And the battle begins.

According to Kevin Steel, the Montgomery County District Attorney-elect, his office charged Mr. Cosby with aggravated indecent assault as a felony. Andrea Constand, a longtime nemesis of Cosby’s, accused him of having drugged her and sexually abusing her in 2004. The alleged attack took place while she was visiting with Mr. Cosby in his home. Mr. Steele said that the investigations warranted a filing of charges and that the case against Mr. Cosby was strong. Though Mr. Steele made a point of saying that the victim and Mr. Cosby had been involved in a relationship, he neglected to say that she had sued Cosby in a civil action immediately after the alleged incident had occurred. Her civil action was settled upon confidential terms. Ms. Constand had to have received a substantial monetary settlement. The agreement settling the case contained a clause that prohibited the parties from discussing any aspect of the case. Ms. Constand’s prior civil case and the circumstances surrounding its settlement will play a huge part in Cosby’s defense of the charges.

Usually, prosecutors are reluctant to make out their case in the press, especially before the defendant is officially arraigned. Besides intending to embarrassment Mr. Cosby or, perhaps, attempting to bring him to the plea bargaining table, it made no sense for the Prosecutor’s office to have publicized so much of its case against Mr. Cosby. The release of the affidavit of probable cause, which reads like a stream of consciousness of wrongdoing on the part of Mr. Cosby, only served as voluntary discovery for Cosby’s defense attorneys. In general, the release of so much evidentiary information stimulates the imagination of a defense team.

It should not be overlooked either that a reasonable person cannot help but ask themselves why Ms. Constand, who was 30 years old when the incident occurred, waited almost 12 years to officially (criminally) accuse him of sexually abusing her. Was she previously prevented from filing a criminal case by the police or district attorney? If so, the State of Pennslyvania will have to explain why it now thinks that it can prove a case against Mr. Cosby when it didn’t think so in the past.The Prosecution has a bigger problem; the credibility of the star witness. A reasonable person cannot help but ask themselves why Ms. Constand, who was 30 years old when the incident occurred, waited 12 years to file charges against Cosby. Was she prevented from doing so by the police or district attorney? More importantly, did the fact that the relevant statute of limitation would have run in January 2016 have a bearing on the pre-arraignment tactics of the Prosecutor’s office?

The Cosby prosecutors have a bigger problem; the credibility of the star witness. A reasonable person cannot help but ask themselves why Ms. Constand, who was 30 years old when the incident occurred, waited 12 years to file charges against Cosby. This questions will beg other questions that eventually lead to the unraveling of the Prosecutors’ case. Was she prevented from doing so by the police or district attorney? I grew up with Bill Cosby being a large part of my family’s conversation. We religiously watched his movies and the Cosby Show. He served as a role model for me, a Black male.

I grew up with Bill Cosby being a large part of my family’s conversation. We religiously watched his movies and the Cosby Show. He served as a role model for me, a Black male.

inticeonline.com

In my opinion, Mr. Cosby was as a role model for many people, regardless of their race. It is fair to say that we were all disappointed to learn that he had been sexually abusing women during the prime of his career. The press has relentlessly followed the story of Mr. Cosby’s sexually escapades. I doubt that there is a person in America who has not heard or read something about the women’s accusations against Mr. Cosby for sexually abusing them. One of the best pieces that I have read on Mr. Cosby’s

One of the more informative pieces that I read on Mr. Cosby’s alleged sexual abuse of women appeared in The Cut on July 26, 2015. In the article, the authors, Noreen Malone and Amanda Demme presented an exposé of the stories of the 35 of Mr. Cosby’s victims. After reading the article, I had to conclude that my idol saw himself as an urban Mandingo. The article’s first narration of abuse was Ms. Constand’s.

It is likely that the women’s allegations, most at least, against the famed actor are true. Still, he is entitled to due process of law. He should demand nothing less. The notion that he should stand up and “do the right thing” and let himself be criminally prosecuted or civilly sued is absurd. None of the alleged women would take such a self-defeating position. And yes; I find it troublesome that the women claim to have been horribly abused come forth only now, years (and more years) after the abuse allegedly occurred. Why the delay if they were so aggrieved?

In my opinion, Mr. Steele and his staff will have a difficult time proving the charges against Mr. Cosby. The tremendous lapse of time will undoubtedly result in lost memories. Crucial facts will be blurred. Relevant intervening events that have occurred during the last 12 years will make the prosecution of the famous Mr. Cosby more challenging. The fact that the case was not first presented to the Grand Jury will severely limit the Prosecutor’s trial options and tactics. Lastly, the charges cannot be sustained without Ms. Constand testifying in support of the allegations. Impeaching her testimony will not present itself as a problem for Cosby’s defense team. In this respect, they must be careful not to over impeach her.

Back in July 2013, a jury rightfully acquitted George Zimmerman of killing an unarmed Trayvon Martin. At the time the charges were filed against Mr. Zimmerman, I took the unpopular position of arguing that the prosecution could not prove its case. From a technical point, the prosecution’s case was built on theories that inherently challenged the charges themselves. Like in the Zimmerman case, the Cosby prosecutors have brought charges that are based on investigations, events, and tactics that lend themselves to proving reasonable doubt. Cosby defense teams will have a relatively easing time in securing an acquittal for their client After he is acquitted of the charges, Mr. Cosby should sue Ms. Constand for the return of the money in paid her in settlement of her civil suit. That would be real justice!

The standard of proof for convicting Mr. Cosby under Pennsylvania law is beyond a reasonable doubt. I do not believe that he prosecution can prove beyond a reasonable doubt the allegations contained in the complaint. Mr. Steele’s failure to obtain a conviction against Mr. Cosby will ensure that he will not be reelected as District Attorney.

Brazil’s President Dilma Rousseff REUTERS/Adriano Machado

In September 2013, President Dilma Rousseff addressed the U.N. General Assembly. She delivered a fervent criticism of the U.S.’s NSA spying program. She scolded the U.S. for violating international law by indiscriminately spying on citizens and foreign governments. Anti-American members of the General Assembly wildly applauded her remarks. To stir up sentiment against the U.S., President Rousseff reminded the diplomats that in the 70s she served with the Brazilian guerrillas. When captured by the ruling military authorities, she was imprisoned and tortured. The diplomats understood the President’s implied David and Goliath analogy. President Rousseff went on to praise Latin America’s battle against authoritarianism and the disregard for the right to privacy. The Brazilian leader basked in her moment of fame. Those cheering Rousseff’s speech could never have imagined how her political fortunes would change over the next two years. At the time of her U.N. speech, she had to have known that the Brazilian economy was slowing down and that the Petrobras SA scandal was growing.

Like other developing countries, Brazil has its share of pressing social issues . Countless motions pictures have been made about the country’s sprawling favelas. Visitors to the country see poverty and blight while standing in the midst of glamour and glitz. It is common for brutal crimes to occur in crowded public places while onlookers look on with indifference. Demonstrators often take to the streets to complain about the country’s much neglected public transportation infrastructure. Local Brazilian politicians demand that their leaders address these issues and not grandstand on the international stage.

Upon taking office, President Rousseff promised to continue the policies and work of her predecessor, Luiz Inacio Lula. Brazil achieved real social and economic development under Lula’s stewardship. Millions of Brazilians entered the middle class. Quality education reached millions who had previously not had access to it. Businesses appreciated former President Lula’s policy of “spreading the wealth around.” In general, Brazilians believed that better times had finally arrived. Former President Lula’s endearing charm and genuine advocacy of the developing world pushed Brazil a to the forefront of international politics. Every politician knows that good times can turn into bad times with little warning.

Many commentators and economists questioned Lula’s reliance upon governmental subsidies to finance social problems. President Rousseff was not one of the skeptics. Influential economists warned that the economy would cool off, thus hindering the government’s ability to finance the promised social changes. Many Latin American countries turn to state-owned companies to financial social change. Unfortunately, using state-owned companies to subsidize social programs tends to sap the companies’ economic vitality and turn them into breeding grounds of corruption. Former President Lula ignored the dangers of using the country’s state-owned and run oil, company, Petrobras SA, as the government’s piggybank. Though President Rousseff graduated college with a degree in economics, she chose to disregard her education and, upon assuming the Presidency, continued to plunder Petrobras SA. to finance her socialist agenda. The scandals that have erupted around the state-owned company have paralyzed the country and dragged the economy further down. President Rousseff cannot escape the consequences of her connection to the Petrobras scandals; she served as Chairman of Petrobras SA under former President Lula. Regardless of her political connections, President Rousseff, in my opinion, lacked the experience or technical knowledge to run Petrobras SA as a real business.

According to Fortune’s (2014) Biggest Losers of the Global 500, Petrobras SA comes in at #3. The company’s debt of 125 billion is the highest among all international oil companies. Due to mismanagement, falling commodity prices and rampant corruption the company’s finances are a mess. Brazilians are waiting for someone to step up and sacrifice themselves to save Petrobras SA from itself. Most Brazilians believe that President Rousseff should be that person.

The never-ending arrests and reports of illegal activity at Petrobras SA are rattling the country to its political core. Recently, the police conducted a second mass arrest operation of those accused of corruption. A year ago police arrested 35 oil executives who had been charged with bribery, money laundering and other corruption-related charges. Newly installed Petrobras executives recently admitted that the company is facing uncertain times.

It is not difficult to imagine how the average Brazilian feels about the Petrobras SA mess; they have lost confidence in their government officials to faithfully execute the laws that they were elected to enforce. The extent of the corruption makes it impossible for President Rousseff to claim that she was not attuned to the culture of corruption at a company she chaired. I do not think she can function effectively as the country’s chief executive.

Concerning Brazil’s present-day problems, financial experts, political scientist and policy formulating economists debate how best to put the country back on track. The Petrobras scandal has caused a lack of confidence across the board. This, in turn, has led to a downturn in the economy.

Some experts argue that the economic problems that the country now face are largely independent of the Petrobras scandal. What all agree upon is that Brazil is caught in a pincer: the economy is in a full-blown recession and the Petrobras scandal keeps growing.

Pages: 1 2