Back to Results

DOJ-OGR-00004843.jpg

Source: IMAGES  •  Size: 755.7 KB  •  OCR Confidence: 94.3%
View Original Image

Extracted Text (OCR)

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 310-1 Filed 07/02/21 Page 31 of 80 On May 24, 2016, following a preliminary hearing, all of Cosby’s charges were held for trial. Thereafter, Cosby filed a number of pretrial motions, including a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, a motion to dismiss the charges on due process grounds, and, most pertinent here, a “Motion to Suppress the Contents of his Deposition Testimony and Any Evidence Derived therefrom on the Basis that the District Attorney’s Promise not to Prosecute Him Induced Him to Waive his Fifth Amendment Right Against Self- Incrimination.” After holding a hearing on the suppression motion, at which no new testimony was taken, the trial court again concluded that former District Attorney Castor’s testimony was equivocal, credited the testimony of Constand’s attorneys, and found that no promise or agreement not to prosecute existed. Having so determined, the court discerned “no [c]onstitutional barrier to the use of [Cosby’s] civil deposition testimony” against him at trial, and it denied the suppression motion.'® Later, the Commonwealth would introduce portions of Cosby’s deposition testimony against Cosby, including his admissions to using Quaaludes during sexual encounters with women in the past. On September 6, 2016, the Commonwealth filed a “Motion to Introduce Evidence of Other Bad Acts of the Defendant,” which Cosby opposed by written response. The Commonwealth sought to introduce evidence and testimony from other women who alleged that Cosby had sexually assaulted them, instances that could not be prosecuted due to the lapse of applicable statutes of limitations. On February 24, 2017, the trial court granted the Commonwealth’s motion, but permitted only one of these alleged past victims to testify at Cosby’s trial. On December 30, 2016, Cosby filed a motion seeking a change in venue or venire. The trial court kept the case in Montgomery County, but agreed that the jury should be 18 T.C.O. at 72 (quoting Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order Sur Defendant’s Motion to Suppress Evidence Pursuant to Pa.R.Crim.P. 581(1), 12/5/2016, at 5). [J-100-2020] - 30 DOJ-OGR-00004843

Document Preview

DOJ-OGR-00004843.jpg

Click to view full size

Document Details

Filename DOJ-OGR-00004843.jpg
File Size 755.7 KB
OCR Confidence 94.3%
Has Readable Text Yes
Text Length 2,173 characters
Indexed 2026-02-03 16:53:38.228005