TexasCHLforum.com

Will he able to remain free (out on bail) until sentencing?

How long until sentencing?

Once sentencing is invoked does he go immediately to jail?

Or, is there still a whole lotta legal tap dancing yet to be done while he continues to remain free?

Or, finally, will he ever serve a single day of prison time?

What say you?

Abraham wrote:Will he able to remain free (out on bail) until sentencing?

How long until sentencing?

Once sentencing is invoked does he go immediately to jail?

Or, is there still a whole lotta legal tap dancing yet to be done while he continues to remain free?

Or, finally, will he ever serve a single day of prison time?

What say you?

I would assume that he remains free on bail until his appeal. Just my thinking I'm not a lawyer though.

Allons,

I thought, since he was convicted, one has to wait in prison for ones appeal to be scheduled, but like you I have no clue either....but maybe those with enough bail money (given further bail time is granted) one CAN remain free until the new trial (appeal). Which may not be scheduled for years from now.

At 80, if he can remain free, he'll probably die well before his appeal is scheduled appeal trial begins essentially he'll be howling with laughter with his crimes going unpunished.

Abraham wrote:Allons,

I thought, since he was convicted, one has to wait in prison for ones appeal to be scheduled, but like you I have no clue either....but maybe those with enough bail money (given further bail time is granted) one CAN remain free until the new trial (appeal). Which may not be scheduled for years from now.

At 80, if he can remain free, he'll probably die well before his appeal is scheduled appeal trial begins essentially he'll be howling with laughter with his crimes going unpunished.

Only people with no money have to stay in prison to wait for their appeal. Unless the judge revokes bail at sentencing he will be able to stay free, I would assume.

Not being a lawyer either, but 60 women (could be even more afraid to step forward, admit crimes done to them) wait for justice.

Some system we have eh...?

How long ago did these assaults allegedly take place?

Chas.

Texas has far better sentencing procedures--usually right after the guilt stage or the next day.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:How long ago did these assaults allegedly take place?

Chas.

Not sure, I know their were a lot of women to come forward, however the limit to prosecute had already passed. I think these are the only ones that they could prosecute due to time limits.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:
How long ago did these assaults allegedly take place?

I don't know, but he was (I think) convicted for sexually (I'm not certain that's the precise wording) assaulting 3 women. Many women have come forward, but the statute of limitations has stopped them from pursuing any legal issue against him.

One woman apparently sued him for being drugged and assaulted, won the case and was awarded a large amount to which he publicly admitted to.

I use to be one of his biggest fans, loved his comedy records back when such things existed (without a bit of foul language in them) plus his t.v. show where he had a situation comedy/wonderful family. Just everything about him was lovable and good.

And, now we find he's among the monsters...

It is amazing today you don’t have to have any evidence just testimonies. No way to defend yourself when the testimonies are the only evidence. He said she said? No witnesses just one person’s story. I don’t know about Cosby, but I have seen it too many times in the last 10 years.

carlson1 wrote:It is amazing today you don’t have to have any evidence just testimonies. No way to defend yourself when the testimonies are the only evidence. I don’t know about Cosby, but I have seen it too many times in the last 10 years.

Unfortunately when It comes to these types of crimes you are guilty until proven innocent. All it takes is a testimony to convict you most of the time.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:How long ago did these assaults allegedly take place?

Chas.

2004!!!! This is absurd. There should a statue of limitation fnr this type of crime.
If their allegations were true they should have come forward years ago.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/26/us/bill- ... index.html

I found this summary of state statutes of limitations. I can’t vouch for its accuracy.

https://victimsofcrime.org/docs/DNA%20R ... f?sfvrsn=2

"No way to defend yourself when the testimonies are the only evidence."

Yeah, kinda like those poor priests molesting young boys, but were never caught in the act"

They shouldn't have even been criticized, never mind prosecuted.

carlson1 wrote:It is amazing today you don’t have to have any evidence just testimonies. No way to defend yourself when the testimonies are the only evidence. He said she said? No witnesses just one person’s story. I don’t know about Cosby, but I have seen it too many times in the last 10 years.

I read somewhere yesterday that they used his own deposition testimony that he had drugged a woman in order to have sex with her. He has admitted under oath that he got drugs in order to have sex with at el sat one woman, so he's also having to defend against his own testimony.