It was billed as the trial of the century–Bill Cosby, a national treasure and pioneer for black Americans, on trial for sexual assault. Most people expected a guilty verdict, convinced that Cosby was overwhelmingly guilty of sexually assaulting former Temple University basketball staffer Andrea Constand. But in the end, there was no verdict at all.

After a week of deliberations, the jury could not come to a unanimous verdict and the judge was forced to declare a mistrial. Montgomery County District Attorney Kevin R. Steele immediately vowed to retry Cosby, but the lack of verdict still left some legal experts surprised. Here are several key factors that could have led to a hung jury.

Andrea Constand’s Credibility

Cosby’s defense team, led by Brian J. McMonagle, argued that Constand was not a viable witness due to several inconsistencies in her statements made to police. Philadelphia defense lawyer Alan J. Tauber analyzed the case and noted several highly contradictory statements in Constand’s 2005 police statement. At the time, Constand claimed that she had never been alone with Cosby before the assault, she denied having contact afterwards, and she said the assault occurred in March of 2004. Tauber called those statements “demonstrably false“–the alleged assault actually occurred in January of 2004 and she called him over 50 times afterwards–and said they likely swayed the jury.

While Constand’s conflicting testimony doesn’t mean that she is a liar, it did allow for the defense to poke holes in her credibility. Therefore, a handful of jurors may not have felt comfortable convicting Cosby based off her testimony.

Trouble With Defining Consent

This case was never about whether or not the two ever had sexual relations with one another. Cosby’s defense was that he’d had consensual sex with Constand in January 2004. He also admitted to giving her pills before they had sex, but said they were Benadryl, not Quaaludes. However, no forensics, no toxicology report, and no physical evidence of any kind were presented in the trial to corroborate either story. But since many of the key facts in the case are undisputed, Above the Law argues that it’s not a case of “he said, she said.” The real question, it contends, is “what defines consent?”

Jurors in the case clearly grappled with determining whether or not Constand consented to the sexual interaction. They even asked the court to define “reasonable doubt” and clarify what “without her knowledge” means in reference to one of the counts. Some jurors may have believed that the encounter was consensual since Constand took the pills voluntarily. The defense also argued that Cosby assumed that he had achieved “mutually informed consent.”

Lack of Other Accusers

A total of 60 women have accused Cosby of sexually assaulting them, but jurors were only allowed to hear from one other accuser during the trial. The prosecution wanted 13 accusers to testify at trial, but the judge granted only one, a woman who accused Cosby of drugging and assaulting her in 1996.

It could be more advantageous for prosecutors to appeal to the judge to allow the thirteen women to testify, rather than go straight to a retrial. The additional testimony could potentially help erase reasonable doubt in the eyes of the jury and trigger a different strategy from the defense.

James Levinson

James Levinson is an Editorial intern at Law Street Media and a native of the greater New York City Region. He is currently a rising junior at George Washington University where he is pursuing a B.A in Political Communications and Economics. Contact James at staff@LawStreetMedia.com

The post Bill Cosby Mistrial: What Kept the Jury Deadlocked? appeared first on Law Street.

A South Carolina judge declared a mistrial Monday after jurors said they couldn’t reach a unanimous decision in the case of a white former police officer charged with killing an unarmed black man, Walter Scott.

The 53-year-old father of four had been stopped by North Charleston police officer Michael Slager because of a broken taillight in April 2015. According to Slager, a scuffle erupted and Scott took his stun gun. Scott then attempted to flee, and Slager shot him multiple times in the back while he was running away. He died on scene.

Feidin Santana, an eyewitness to the shooting, captured a video of the encounter with a cellphone and the footage soon went viral.

That THIS could not be declared “murder” in America should tell you EVERYTHING about our justice system. #WalterScott.

Just horrendous. pic.twitter.com/2mPnMXh84b

— Shaun King (@ShaunKing) December 5, 2016

Slager was charged with murder and released on a $500,000 bond in January 2016. He was later indicted on separate charges by a federal grand jury for deprivation of rights under the color of the law, use of a weapon during the commission of a violent crime, and obstruction of justice.

Slager’s attorney argued that his client didn’t know whether Scott was armed or not and that he had acted out of fear for his own life. He said:

The officer never had a chance to pat him down for weapons, nor did he know the whereabouts of the passenger in the vehicle Scott was operating without a registration or insurance. Scott ran from a very minor traffic stop, and Slager had no knowledge why.

However, the cellphone video showed that Slager dropped a black object on the ground before firing. After shooting Scott, Slager is then seen picking up the object and placing it next to the lifeless body.

On Friday, the jury in the case said it hadn’t been able to reach a verdict, but the judge ordered them to keep deliberating until Monday. One juror in the case said he couldn’t make the decision to convict Michael Slager. Reportedly, he was the only member of the jury “having issues” and he wrote in a letter to the court, “I cannot and will not change my mind.” By Monday, the judge declared a mistrial.

The news left many people feeling hopeless.

My God #WalterScott. Feeling numb all over. It’s the ton of bricks one feels on their heart & head knowing we have been here before!

— Nina Turner (@ninaturner) December 5, 2016

#MichaelSlager killed a man who was no threat and ran from him, planted a Taser, LIED on the stand and still wasn’t convicted #WalterScott

— Scooby (@TheRealistDom) December 5, 2016

there are no words. #WalterScott‘s life mattered. if seeing him shot in the back wasn’t enough for a conviction how can we ever get justice?

— Franchesca Ramsey (@chescaleigh) December 5, 2016

Outrage erupted in North Charleston after the killing of Walter Scott, but residents’ anger intensified even more due to the racial imbalance clearly evident in the police force. Even though only 37 percent of the population is white, 80 percent of police officers are white.

Slager has reportedly been emotional and regretful during the trial.

“Going back 18 months later and looking at everything, things could have been different” he said. “My family has been destroyed by this. The Scott family has been destroyed by this. It’s horrible.”

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Mistrial Declared in Case Against Officer Who Killed Walter Scott appeared first on Law Street.

The trial of the first officer charged in the death of Freddie Gray has officially ended in indecision–a hung jury caused the judge to declare it a mistrial. The prosecutors have said they plan on retrying Officer William G. Porter, and given that there are five more officers to be tried after Porter, this saga is far from over.

Freddie Gray died while in police custody last April. He was arrested for possessing an illegal switchblade, and then while being transported via police van, fell into a coma and later passed away. It was later determined that his neck was broken while riding in the police van–while his ankles and wrists were restrained, he wasn’t strapped in. An autopsy determined his neck broke when he slammed into part of the van at some point during the ride. After Gray’s death, protests erupted in Baltimore, as well as in solidarity in other American cities.

Porter was the first of six officers to be tried for Gray’s death; according to the New York Times, he:

Was charged with manslaughter, assault and reckless endangerment and misconduct in office; the state accused him of ‘callous indifference’ to Mr. Gray’s life for failing to call a medic after Mr. Gray asked for one, and for not buckling Mr. Gray into a police transport van, where he suffered a fatal injury to his spinal cord.

The jury deliberated three days, on a trial that began on December 2, but couldn’t come to a unanimous decision on any of the charges, which is required for conviction. According to Kalani Gordon, of the Baltimore Sun, there were multiple points of contention for the jury that kept them from coming to a final decision. Those included:

• Disagreements from expert witnesses about when Gray’s injury occurred;
• The rule that arrestees being transported must be seat-belted had recently been changed and the officers may not have known about the change;
• Disagreements in witness testimony over whether Porter knew Gray was badly hurt;
• Conflicting arguments from the Prosecution and Defense over the responsibilities of police officers;
• Maryland laws about manslaughter and depraved-heart murder are vague.

So, while Porter wasn’t found guilty, he wasn’t found not guilty either. The prosecutors will have to try again–we’ll have to see if this time they are successful.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Freddie Gray: First Officer’s Case Ends in Mistrial appeared first on Law Street.