Comedian and former TV superstar Bill Cosby is due back in court on Tuesday, for proceedings in one of the only sexual assault cases against him that hasn’t passed the statute of limitations. He is accused of drugging and sexually assaulting about 60 women over the past 50 years, but many of the women revealed what happened well after the fact, and prosecutors were unable to purse charges. The Andrea Constand case took place in 2004 in Pennsylvania, where the statute of limitations is 12 years, meaning January 2016 was the deadline for pressing charges. In December of last year, Pennsylvania prosecutor Kevin Steele did so.

Andrea Constand was an operations manager and coach for the women’s basketball team at Temple University, Bill Cosby’s alma mater. As in the other alleged assault cases, he invited her over to his house, gave her some pills to make her relaxed, and then  assaulted her. Cosby has denied any wrongdoing.

Two months ago the judge in the case rejected Cosby’s request to have the criminal charges dismissed. On Tuesday he is due back in court for a pretrial hearing, and his lawyers want the judge to dismiss two pieces of key evidence: Cosby’s deposition from 2005, and a recording of a phone call between Cosby and Andrea Constand’s mother from the same year.

HAPPENING TODAY: Bill Cosby is back in Montgomery Co. court for evidence hearing. Could learn trial date @CBS21NEWS pic.twitter.com/W38d3F05wP

— Sara Small (@SaraSmallTV) September 6, 2016

The Constand case is in part based on Cosby’s 2005 deposition. Cosby talked about having extramarital affairs that he claimed were consensual, despite admitting to drugging the women. According to his defense team, he only talked freely about that because then district attorney Bruce Castor promised to not bring a criminal case against Cosby. But Castor said he made the promise so that Cosby couldn’t use the Fifth Amendment to avoid the questions.

Andrea Constand’s mother Gianna was recording when Cosby phoned her in her home in Canada in 2005, without Cosby’s knowledge. According to Canadian law it is legal to record a call with only one party’s consent, but Cosby’s lawyers want the court to apply the Pennsylvania law to the case, which would require both parties’ consent.

However, prosecutor Kevin Steele claimed that Cosby either knew or suspected what was happening, based on comments Cosby made on the call, and the fact that he claimed to have that information in his 2005 deposition.

Cosby is currently free on a $1 million bail but could face up to ten years in prison if found guilty.

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 Bill Cosby Back in Court For Andrea Constand Sexual Assault Case appeared first on Law Street.

Bill Cosby’s fall from grace has taken a new incriminating turn. Recently released court documents reveal the comedic icon formally admitting to drugging women in the past. Unsealed testimony from a 2005 civil suit may finally end the plausible deniability routine that the now-disgraced comedian has used since accusations from over 30 women surfaced. As the evidence and claims against Bill Cosby mount, statute of limitation laws protect him from facing criminal charges in most cases. In light of this, it is important to ask why these statutes exist in the first place and whether they should apply to sexual assault cases.

Recently unsealed testimony from a previous civil lawsuit against Cosby, obtained by the Associated Press, shows the comedic icon admitting under oath to obtaining Quaaludes. He admits to giving the drugs to at least one woman and “other people” with the intent to have sex with them. The 2005 civil case was filed by Temple University employee Andrea Constand, who accused Cosby of sexually assaulting her in 2004. Cosby was not charged with a crime due to a lack of physical evidence, so Constad had to resort to suing him as a means of seeking justice.

According to the unsealed documents, Cosby was asked, “When you got the Quaaludes, was it in your mind that you were going to use these Quaaludes for young women that you wanted to have sex with?” to which Cosby answered “Yes.” He was then asked if he gave women the sedatives without their knowledge, but his lawyers objected before he could respond. Cosby’s lawyers later said that the women knew that he had given them Quaaludes.

Despite the growing number of accusations against him, Cosby has never actually been charged with a crime. This is primarily because most of the alleged crimes took place decades ago, leaving him legally free of charges due to state statute of limitation laws. A statute of limitation is a law that prohibits a prosecutor from charging someone with a crime after a specified period of time has passed. Proponents believe that these laws are to ensure that convictions are based only on valid evidence. Because evidence weakens over time, successfully convicting a defendant years after the fact is typically more difficult. These laws are meant to increase the validity of assault accusations in order to prevent fraudulent claims, and thus prevent an error that might convict an innocent person. Sexual assault cases typically begin with the victim describing what happened to authorities and creating material evidence vital to back up the victim’s accusations.

As of last November, 34 states and Washington, DC have statute of limitation laws for rape or sexual assault charges, ranging anywhere from three to 30 years. For example, charges must be filed within fifteen years of the crime in Georgia, five years in Connecticut, and just three years in Minnesota.

While making a case with deteriorated evidence is challenging, completely disallowing a victim’s ability to seek justice simply because evidence may have deteriorated does not seem fair. Improvements in technology are also slowing down that process, making evidence that was once unreliable much more useful. With more efficient DNA testing, authorities can now test decades old rape kits for DNA samples that previously could not be tested. A rape kit involves a medical inspection of a sexual assault victim and is a very useful means of preserving physical DNA evidence. Improved DNA science has started to give law enforcement agencies the ability to identify rapists dating back several decades.

One case that points to the unfairness of statute of limitation laws is the case of Charles Steele, a man who raped at least four Cleveland women in the mid-90s. The cases went unsolved for 20 years because police never tested the victims’ rape kits for DNA. Evidence collected from the bodies of each victim in 1993 and 1994 remained in storage until Cleveland police tested the kits 2011, leading them to Charles Steele who was already serving a lengthy prison sentence for a different rape. In 2014, Steele received an extended sentence for a minimum of 65 years in prison nearly two decades after the rape occurred. However, one of the indictments against Steele was thrown out due to Ohio’s 20-year statute of limitation law. The crime occurred on March 5th, 1993, but the indictment was issued March 6th, 2013–passing the 20-year limit by just one day. Cases like these are perfect examples of how a victim could be blatantly denied justice because the clock ran out.

As the Cosby controversy and other high profile cases gain public attention, many people are starting to question the validity of these laws. Wendy Davis, a state senator and former Democratic nominee for governor in Texas, proposed the elimination of the statute of limitations for rape and sexual battery cases last year. Davis’ efforts in Texas are one example of the growing opposition to these laws. Lise Lotte Lublin, one of Cosby’s accusers, recently testified at a Nevada Assembly hearing in support of a bill that would eliminate the statute of limitations for rape in the state. Nevada currently has a four-year statute of limitation for rape cases, which precludes Cosby from being charged for Lublin’s rape.

Because of statute of limitation laws, many of Cosby’s alleged victims may never get a chance at justice. Potentially allowing criminals to walk free simply because a certain time period passed, does not make the crime any less vile. Statute of limitation laws were initially created for justice, but now ironically serve as a barricade to it.

Kwame Apea

Kwame Apea is a member of the University of Maryland Class of 2016 and a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Kwame at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Bill Cosby Rape Allegations Continue: Should We Have Statutes of Limitations for Sexual Assault? appeared first on Law Street.

During this past year the media has paid close attention to Bill Cosby due to the many sexual assault allegations against him. There have been women stepping forward, some named and some anonymous, with similar stories that Cosby drugged and raped them. New York Magazine just recognized these women with its powerful new cover.

35 women of the 46 who have publicly come forward against Bill Cosby on New York Magazine Cover! Powerful Journalism! pic.twitter.com/yQaUEswsix

— John Robbie (@702JohnRobbie) July 27, 2015

Nearly 60 years after Cosby’s first alleged assault, 35 women have come together on the cover of New York Magazine to have their voices heard. The magazine photographed and interviewed the women who have accused the 78-year-old comedian of sexually assaulting them. The story features a combination of videos, photos, and individual testimonies. The list includes supermodels, actresses, playboy bunnies, waitresses, and journalists alongside many other women.

Beverly Johnson, one of 35 women interviewed, on allegedly being assaulted by Bill Cosby: http://t.co/T3DGgjNWI4 pic.twitter.com/ABg3ilTShS

— New York Magazine (@NYMag) July 27, 2015

“I felt ashamed. I was embarrassed to be me.” Listen on Instagram: http://t.co/y8zR8jXEuL pic.twitter.com/VNQySdNUoV

— New York Magazine (@NYMag) July 27, 2015

People have constantly questioned if these allegations were true due to some of the women waiting decades to speak out about it, but many claimed they did not speak out because of the fear that no one would believe them. Barbara Bowman, who accused Cosby of assaulting her from 1985 to 1987, said in an interview:

I could have walked down any street of Manhattan at any time and said, ‘I’m being raped and drugged by Bill Cosby,’ but who the hell would have believed me? Nobody, nobody.

Cosby has denied all the sexual allegations despite revealing in a 2005 court deposition that he gave quaaludes to young women with whom he wanted to have sexual relations. The case was filed by Andrea Constand, a former basketball player and administrator at his alma mater, Temple University, who claimed Cosby drugged and raped her in his Pennsylvania home. Constand was the first person to file a lawsuit against Cosby. After the deposition from that case became public three weeks ago, Spelman College ended its long term relationship with Cosby, along with Temple University, and the University of Massachusetts. “The William and Camille Olivia Hanks Cosby Endowed Professorship at Spelman College has been discontinued,” Spelman’s communications office said in a statement Saturday.

Due to statutes of limitation, civil suits and criminal charges must be filed within a specific time period. If they are not filed within this period, then they can’t move forward, no matter how much evidence is presented. Because most of these allegations describe an assault that took place in 2004 or earlier the statutes of limitation for these cases have seemingly passed and Cosby cannot be charged or sued. However, several of the women have filed a defamation suit against Cosby, claiming that he damaged their reputations by accusing them of lying in their accusations against him. Although there a few cases within the statutes of limitation, the amount of time that has passed and lack of physical evidence would make it extremely difficult for him to be prosecuted.

Despite the legal complications, this magazine cover is still incredibly important. So far, there have been a total of 46 women who claimed that Cosby sexually assaulted them, and 35 have stepped up to be on the magazine. On the cover there is a 36th chair left open for the women who have not yet come forward. The cover has been described as brave, powerful, and brilliant. New York Magazine is giving powerful and recognition to the voices of the women who have stepped forward, and all those who were victimized by Cosby.

Taelor Bentley

Taelor is a member of the Hampton University Class of 2017 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Taelor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Bill Cosby’s Accusers Come Together On The Cover of New York Magazine appeared first on Law Street.

Federal Drug Enforcement Agents (DEA) made unannounced visits on Sunday to multiple National Football League teams as part of a continuing investigation. Agents investigated the San Francisco 49ers, Tampa Bay Buccaneers, and Seattle Seahawks. This investigation was fueled by  a class action lawsuit brought against the NFL last summer.

In May 2014, the NFL painkiller lawsuit was brought by approximately 1,300 former players claiming in essence that the team doctors “intentionally, recklessly and negligently created and maintained a culture of drug misuse, substituting players’ health for profit.” Specifically, the plaintiffs claim that since 1969, team doctors have been supplying medications in ways that constituted a dangerous misuse, and that the doctors fraudulently concealed the dangers and side effects from players in order to keep them on the field. They believe that the NFL placed priority of profit before the health of the players. Plaintiffs claim that they have sustained severe injuries from this medical misfeasance, including but not limited to heart attacks, kidney failures, and addiction. The NFL has requested that the federal judge dismiss the suit.

Among other defenses, the NFL is likely to assert that the plaintiffs are barred by the statute of limitations, which is a legal device to ensure that claims are brought in an efficient matter. Specifically, these statutes set the maximum period in which a plaintiff can wait before filing a lawsuit. If the lawsuit is not brought within the time frame then the right to make a claim on that matter is lost. In some instances, however, a statute of limitations can be extended, or tolled, based on a delay in discovery of the injury. This would enable the plaintiff to have an extended period beyond the statute of limitations to bring such action upon the defendants once injury is discovered, and to prevent unjust enrichment.

In California, the statute of limitations for a personal injury suit is two years. In other words, from the time the cause of action occurred–in this case the date of injury–the plaintiffs’ have two years to bring forth a lawsuit. The NFL will likely argue that the statute of limitations has expired, and bar Plaintiffs from bringing the lawsuit. Specifically, it would argue that some of the specific actions brought within the complaint date back to 1969, which far exceeds the statute of limitations.

Under the delayed discovery rule, the statute of limitations deadline is tolled and time does not start to run until the Plaintiffs’ discover, or by the exercise of reasonable diligence should have discovered, the injuries or harm and that it was caused by the wrongdoing of the defendants. The plaintiffs’ have argued just that. In their amended complaint, they claim that the statute of limitations should be tolled, on grounds that they had not discovered, and had no good reason to know of their injuries until recently. Specifically, they argue that league doctors did not reveal the names of medications, and there were poor records regarding dispensing medication. Thus, such acts constituted concealment, which ultimately caused the plaintiffs’ injuries.

The NFL is clearly under a lot of heat at the moment. It still has the NFL Concussion Litigation going on, and the DEA’s visits last Sunday only added fuel to the fire with the current lawsuit. This case is still being heard in the northern district of California on the ruling of NFL’s motion to dismiss, but my gut tells me that there will be no dismissal. If that is the case, it will be interesting to see how the statute of limitations arguments play out, and more importantly, what actions are implemented within the NFL.

Melissa Klafter

Melissa Klafter has a JD from St. John’s University School of Law and plans to pursue a career in Personal Injury Law. You can find her binge-watching her favorite TV shows, rooting for the Wisconsin Badgers, and playing with her kitty, Phoebe. Contact Melissa at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post NFL Painkiller Class Action Lawsuit is a Toss Up Between League and Players appeared first on Law Street.