1/ Circling back on the #Cosby opinion to focus on one problem: the remedy. So, why not suppress his deposition testimony & remand for retrial? Seems reasonable, and the concurring & dissenting opinion (CDO) pointed it out, but according to the majority...
2/ "Our disagreement with the CDO arises concerning its view that mere suppression of Cosby’s deposition testimony will remedy his constitutional harm and 'fully' restore him to where he stood before he detrimentally relied upon D.A. Castor’s inducement." pacourts.us/assets/opinion…
3/ "This perspective understates the gravity of Cosby’s harm in this case, and suppression alone is insufficient to provide a full remedy of the consequences of the due process violation."
4/ I note that the majority cites precisely zero cases for support and, generally speaking, its decision to dismiss outright rather than reverse for retrial is unusual.
5/ Sidebar: note my focus on remedy, which assumes there was a due process violation here. I may have more to say about that but I remain suspect. Quick analysis...
6/ If there was a due process violation here based on a press release assuring non-prosecution, then where does that leave prosecutorial and police assurances of non-prosecution made to the more routine defendant?
7/ I can't help but think of #BrendanDassey as an illustrative example. Across multiple interrogations, he was assured that officers would "go to bat for him" (among *many* other problematic statements). thefacultylounge.org/2018/06/reid-s…
8/ Yet those assurances were not construed as false promises of leniency. Hard to for me to see the difference. /end thefacultylounge.org/2018/06/reid-b…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
