Bill Cosby’s case ended in mistrial because of two juror holdouts


As we discussed over the weekend, Bill Cosby’s sexual assault case ended in mistrial. All we knew at the time was that the jury was deadlocked and they couldn’t come to a unanimous decision on the three charges in fifty-plus hours of deliberation. Since then, people have wondered about the breakdown in the jury room, and just how many jurors really thought Cosby was not-guilty. Cosby’s lawyer Angela Agrusa told the Hollywood Reporter a few days ago that “I heard it was a split, I don’t believe it was a single holdout.” Well, she was wrong. There were two holdouts, according to one juror’s anonymous interview:

Nearly every juror — 10 out of 12 — believed Bill Cosby was guilty of two counts of sex assault, a juror has revealed to ABC News. The juror, who spoke to the network on condition of anonymity, revealed that ten out of the 12 jurors agreed he was guilty on two sex assault counts — for digitally penetrating accuser Andrea Constand without her consent, and for giving her drugs without her knowledge in order to prevent her from resisting.

But the weakest charge turned out to be a third sex assault count, which required proof that Constand was unconscious or unaware during the attack. Only one juror believed Cosby was guilty of that count, the report said. Surprisingly, the jurors began their deliberations with a non-binding poll, just to see where they stood before digging into the case — and they all voted that the comedian was not guilty of all three counts of aggravated indecent assault, the juror said.

But as they deliberated, nearly every juror shifted over to the conviction side. The deadlock became intractable about 30 hours into the 52 hours of deliberations, the juror — who asked not to be identified — told the network.

“There was no budging” after the first deadlock, the juror said. “And there was none from there on out.”

On Sunday, The Post revealed that Cosby had boasted during deliberations “All I need is one” holdout to hang the jury.

[From Page Six]

The most startling thing to me is that their first vote was all not-guilty. WTF?? There’s a larger conversation to be had about consent, about believing women when they tell their stories, about how the justice system doesn’t work for sexual assault victims. But there’s also a conversation to be had about how people just want to willfully ignore Bill Cosby’s own admissions of all of the sh-t he’s done in the past. He’s said, in depositions, that he drugged women without their consent. He’s said that he doesn’t believe in consent. How is it that no one wants to believe him?


Photos courtesy of BACKGRID.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

33 Responses to “Bill Cosby’s case ended in mistrial because of two juror holdouts”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. CityGirl says:

    I am so disgusted

  2. sophia petrillo says:

    It’s not that they don’t believe him, it’s that they agree with him.

    • Nancy says:

      Could be. Some people still have the mindset if the woman knew she was partying with a married celebrity, she was asking for or expecting something. And…to some, they look at an old man who doesn’t resemble who he was then, and to some, he will always be Cliff Huxtable. It truly is an atrocity of justice.

  3. QQ says:

    I’ll bet my bank Balance that these were men?

    • Ash says:

      You read my mind.

    • SusanneToo says:

      Maybe. Maybe not. Look how many moronic women support rapist/assaulter/pervert trump.

    • K says:

      Sadly, you only need to read some of the comments about Trump, and actually about Johnny Depp. Internalised misogyny is incredibly powerful.

      • Tia says:

        Some women want to believe it’s the woman’s fault / she must have known etc. because they believe they would never do the same / are smarter than that / fill in the blank – which means sexual assault can never happen to them.

        It’s a comforting lie (there are foolproof ways to make sure sexual assaults don’t happen to you) that does a lot of damage.

  4. Cupcake says:

    This is sad news. At least he will be forever remembered as one of the most prolific serial rapists of our time, regardless of whatever legal consequences he will face.

  5. Deanne says:

    Another not guilty verdict for a murdering cop and a mistrial for a serial rapist. Does the justice system even work any more? Has it ever? Oh and WTF, they ALL voted not guilty in the non-binding first vote? I’d love to know the sex of the holdouts. I’m going to guess they were male.

  6. Jamie42 says:

    The fact that they flipped to “guilty” when they actually discussed the evidence is encouraging to me. It suggests that whatever bias they brought into the deliberations, they were (except for two) able to set it aside when they started to talk about the circumstances of the case. And apparently they wanted to hear a lot of it read back to them again; so this jury at least really tried to take these charges seriously, whatever the outcome; and 10 of them came to an understanding of what sexual assault is.
    As for Cosby, he and his legacy are ruined, even if he doesn’t get a conviction.

    • KBeth says:

      You make an excellent point, I agree.

    • lucy2 says:

      Good point, and I agree, I do appreciate them trying and doing their job. I wish the outcome had been different, but I think 10/12 made the right decision.

  7. Grant says:

    Devil’s advocate for a moment. The burden of proof in a criminal trial is beyond a reasonable doubt. This is the absolute highest burden in the legal system–higher than what the state must prove to take someone’s children away, even. The jury was not tasked with determining whether or not Cosby had ever raped, fondled, drugged, etc. women. They were tasked with determining, in this specific instance, whether or not Cosby did those things to Ms. Constand.

    That being said, I think that Cosby is a rapist and misogynist and I hope that he’s found guilty and tarred and feathered when the state retries this case.

    • Kate says:

      Unfortunately, a lot of people don’t have a full understanding of what “reasonable doubt” means. A lot of times jurors get hung up on this because they wrongly think that the case must be proven with absolute or mathematical certainly, but that’s not exactly what it means. Reasonable doubt does not involve proof to absolute certainty but it does mean that after hearing the facts, any reasonable person would have no doubt as to the Defendant’s guilt. A lot of times you hear jurors say, “Oh, yes, we absolutely knew that he was guilty, but the prosecutor didn’t prove the case beyond ALL doubt.” REASONABLE doubt does not equal ALL doubt.

  8. LMAO says:

    I’ve come to the conclusion that our culture is so twisted that there is at least 1 person on every jury that wants to support a celebrity and get them off no matter what they did and no matter how compelling the evidence is.

    • Kimble says:

      Same with cops. Every thread is littered with apologists who watch different videos than the rest of us. Usually older white women.

      • LMAO says:

        OK, BUT for the record….I wasn’t intending to make it a “racially sympathetic juror” post as we don’t know which jurors hung the jury in this instance. My comment was firmly founded in the cult of celebrity in the USA.

  9. Incredulous says:

    It is also possible the hold outs did not want to convict a black man. I was on a jury with two hold outs for that exact reason (the victim from Pakistan) and nothing and no-one could budge them because “I don’t want people to think I’m racist”.

    • K says:

      In fairness, people of colour are infinitely more likely to be charged, and then infinitely more likely to be convicted, and then infinitely more likely to be sentenced harshly, than white defendants. There’s an awful lot of evidence on that one. So the sort of thing you encountered, while it does exist, has to be weighed against the instinctive racism inherent in our cultures, IMO.

  10. Ana says:

    Unfortunately, no justice system is perfect and the “jury of peers” system has a lot of flaws. Not everyone reaches a decision based on the evidence. I’ve heard people that don’t want to convict rapists like Cosby (you know, the type that for some misguided reason not everyone can agree it was rape) because they don’t want to “ruin their lives” for a “mistake” they made. You’re leaving decisions like this in the hands of people that aren’t necessarily educated (and I mean that in a cultural way, not academic), or think they know everything because they watch CSI, or have their own prejudgment and experiences that influence their views of the world.

    Reading all the people that supported Cosby in social media, it’s clear that their reasons to do so is: they think women want to take advantage of his money, they admire him as a celebrity or they admire him as a black man. I have no doubts that any or all of those influenced those two holdout jurors.

  11. Madpoe says:

    Two jurors: tweedle dee and tweedle dum or Burt & Ernie.
    Taking bets.

  12. Jo says:

    Men? Druggies? Druggie men?