The Latest: Judge orders house arrest for Bill Cosby

[DonViejo]

4:30 p.m.

A judge is confining Bill Cosby to his suburban Philadelphia home until the comedian is sentenced on sexual assault charges.

Cosby must also wear a GPS monitoring device under the order issued Friday by Judge Steven O’Neill.

The judge had suggested Thursday after Cosby was convicted of three counts of aggravated indecent assault that he would be allowed to move around Montgomery County, where his home is located.

The modified order says can leave his house only to meet with his lawyers or to get medical treatment but must get permission before doing so.

O’Neill said he issued Friday’s order to “clarify” the restrictions.

Cosby remains free on $1 million bail after his conviction on charges that he drugged and molest a woman in 2004. He maintains his innocence.

https://apnews.com/5fae93c1c43c4cd69c0be7a798fc999a?utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=AP

[oberliner]

1. Shouldn't he be in jail?

He was found guilty.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

2. He hasn't been sentenced, yet.

He's out on bail until then.

[oberliner]

3. Don't they usually keep convicted rapists in custody until sentencing?

Seems unusual for him to be out on bail.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

4. It does, indeed...

Money changes everything, sadly.

[jberryhill]

5. Who is the "they" in that question?

Montgomery County? The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania? The country as a whole? This particular judge?


There’s a set of criteria - such as risk to the community, flight risk, etc. that determine whether a convict remains bailed pending sentencing. It’s not simply the whim of the judge.

The next question is going to be whether to keep the status quo pending appeal. So if this one bothers you, then buckle up for that one.

[oberliner]

6. Isn't a convicted rapist usually kept in custody?

Is this not unusual?

[jberryhill]

7. Not sure how you are measuring "usual"

Do you mean “usual among all convicted rapists”?

Or do you mean usual among a subset of convicted rapists who are severely visually impaired 80 year olds?

Whether anyone convicted of anything stays out pending sentencing is determined by rules in which a set of factors is applied.

Take two convicted rapists:

(A) rapist A is a 25 year old who has been convicted of abducting random women at knifepoint at gas stations late at night, lives within 1 mile of five gas stations, and has relatives, a bank account and owns property in a country with no extradition treaty. His bond is secured by a $100,000 condo, and he has no wife or children.

(B) rapist B is an 80 year old legally blind man, who cannot care for himself and who has been convicted of drugging and raping women whose acquaintance he has made through his considerable influence in the entertainment industry, in circumstances where he would persuade them to come to him for advice or assistance in furthering their careers, wherein he would drug them and rape them. He lives in a home which is well separated from others and cannot get out on his own, so anyone who assisted him in flight would also become a felon. His bond is secured by $5M in assets, and he has heirs here.

Okay, now, answer these questions about rapist A and rapist B:

1. Is there a distinction between the likelihood that A or B would, if put on monitored and limited release, commit the same or similar acts while on release?

2. Is there a distinction between the likelihood that A or B would flee?

Now, does “money” play a role in applying those measures? Sure. People with less property, money, and family depending on it, are considered to have that much less to lose by fleeing.

But you can turn the question around by “do they usually allow African American men out pending sentencing?”

Are you saying the judge just simply thought “He’s got money, so it’s okay”?

They are the same rules applied to everyone.

[oberliner]

8. You obviously know much more about this topic than I do

I was just wondering if this was unusual or not, generally speaking.

[jberryhill]

11. It's an individualized determination

The “usual” circumstances are that a convicted rapist presents an ongoing danger to the community and more of a flight risk.

So “usually”, no, they aren’t out pending appeal.

Are some allowed out with monitoring, restrictions on movement, etc.? Yes, sometimes.

So, no, the class of “convicted rapists” are not “usually” allowed out pending sentencing or appeal.

But that decision is based on factors which are intended to apply equally to the circumstances at hand.

The bigger mistake would be not to let him out if it can be shown that recluse, elderly wealthy blind white men are allowed out pending sentencing. Without doing the numbers, I’d guess they “usually” are.

There was a hearing, arguments made, factors evaluated, and a decision rendered on the subject.

Is there some subjectivity? Sure. In any juridical determination with room for subjectivity there is a potential for bias, corruption, etc. But the degree to which many at DU believe that all our institutions are wholly corrupt makes it seem as if there is an effort to erode confidence in them.

Put simply, I don’t think the judge’s ruling here is unusual.

[panader0]

9. I always enjoy reading, and learning from your legal expertise.

[jberryhill]

13. I love this diagram

That is a proportional flow diagram of the (generalized) criminal justice system.

What “usually” happens with most crimes for which an arrest is made, is that someone is caught and pleads guilty.

[Takket]

10. I was wondering the same thing...

I always thought once found guilt a criminal was “remanded to custody” until the formal sentencing. Convicted criminals should not be enjoying the comfort of their homes!!!!

[jes06c]

12. I wonder if he's going to call the cop who attaches the GPS device to him an "asshole"