DOJ-OGR-00004840.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 310-1 Filed 07/02/21 Page 28 of 80 for the sexual assault crime in the Constand case.” N.T., 2/2/2016, at 224-25. He continued, “[s]o if they had evidence that some of these other women had been sexually assaulted at Cosby’s home in Cheltenham, then | thought they could go ahead with the prosecution of that other case with some other victim, so long as they realized they could not use the Constand deposition and anything derived therefrom.” /d. As noted, the trial court denied the motion, finding that then-D.A. Castor never, in fact, reached an agreement with Cosby, or even promised Cosby that the Commonwealth would not prosecute him for assaulting Constand. T.C.O. at 62. Instead, the trial court considered the interaction between the former district attorney and Cosby to be an incomplete and unauthorized contemplation of transactional immunity. The trial court found no authority for the “proposition that a prosecutor may unilaterally confer transactional immunity through a declaration as the sovereign.” /d. Rather, the court noted, such immunity can be conferred only upon strict compliance with Pennsylvania’s immunity statute, which is codified at 42 Pa.C.S. § 5947.4 Per the terms of the statute, ba The immunity statute provides, in relevant part: (a) General rule.--Immunity orders shall be available under this section in all proceedings before: (1) Courts. * * * (b) Request and issuance.--The Attorney General or a district attorney may request an immunity order from any judge of a designated court, and that judge shall issue such an order, when in the judgment of the Attorney General or district attorney: (1) the testimony or other information from a witness may be necessary to the public interest; and (2) a witness has refused or is likely to refuse to testify or provide other information on the basis of his privilege against self- incrimination. [J-100-2020] - 27 DOJ-OGR-00004840