DOJ-OGR-00004839.jpg
891 KB
Extraction Summary
8
People
3
Organizations
1
Locations
4
Events
3
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal exhibit / court opinion excerpt
File Size:
891 KB
Summary
This document is an excerpt from a legal filing (Document 310-1) in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on July 2, 2021. However, the text itself is an excerpt from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court opinion ([J-100-2020]) regarding *Commonwealth v. Cosby*, discussing the non-prosecution agreement and civil depositions of Bill Cosby. The defense in the Maxwell case likely submitted this to argue legal precedent regarding Non-Prosecution Agreements (NPAs) and Fifth Amendment rights, drawing parallels between the Cosby and Epstein/Maxwell situations.
People (8)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ms. Constand | Plaintiff/Victim |
Filed civil suit against Cosby; agreed not to initiate criminal case in settlement.
|
| Mr. Schmitt | Attorney |
Retained civil counsel; testified regarding negotiations and reliance on Castor's word.
|
| Patrick O’Conner | Attorney |
Retained as civil counsel by Mr. Schmitt; objected to questions during depositions.
|
| Bill Cosby | Defendant |
Referred to as [Cosby]; sat for depositions; did not invoke Fifth Amendment.
|
| Mr. Castor | District Attorney (Former) |
Issued press release; decided not to prosecute Cosby to remove Fifth Amendment privilege.
|
| Mr. Phillips | Attorney |
Provided assurances regarding Castor's actions.
|
| D.A. Ferman | District Attorney |
Recipient of email from Castor regarding prosecution possibilities.
|
| Jane Doe witnesses | Witnesses |
Made allegations against Cosby; discussed during negotiations with National Enquirer.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| National Enquirer |
Involved in written negotiations with Mr. Schmitt.
|
|
| District Attorney’s office |
Re-opened the case in 2015.
|
|
| Commonwealth |
Referring to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
|
Timeline (4 events)
2015
March 8, 2005
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Jurisdiction where prosecution was discussed.
|
Relationships (3)
Testified on Cosby's behalf regarding strategy for depositions.
Email correspondence regarding prosecution strategy.
Plaintiff in civil suit against Cosby.
Key Quotes (3)
"he “absolutely” intended to remove “for all time” the possibility of prosecution, because “the ability to take the Fifth Amendment is also for all time removed.”"Source
DOJ-OGR-00004839.jpg
Quote #1
"Mr. Schmitt testified that [Cosby] did not invoke the Fifth Amendment in those depositions and that he would not have let him sit for the depositions if he knew the criminal case could be reopened."Source
DOJ-OGR-00004839.jpg
Quote #2
"binding of the Commonwealth not to prosecute Cosby was not for any crime in Montgomery County for all time."Source
DOJ-OGR-00004839.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,706 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 310-1 Filed 07/02/21 Page 27 of 80
On March 8, 2005, Ms. Constand filed her civil suit and Mr. Schmitt retained
Patrick O’Conner, Esq., as civil counsel. Mr. Schmitt participated in the civil
case. [Cosby] sat for four days of depositions. Mr. Schmitt testified that
[Cosby] did not invoke the Fifth Amendment in those depositions and that
he would not have let him sit for the depositions if he knew the criminal case
could be reopened.
Patrick O’Conner, Esq., as civil counsel. Mr. Schmitt participated in the civil
case. [Cosby] sat for four days of depositions. Mr. Schmitt testified that
[Cosby] did not invoke the Fifth Amendment in those depositions and that
he would not have let him sit for the depositions if he knew the criminal case
could be reopened.
He testified that generally he does try to get agreements on [Cosby’s] behalf
in writing. During this time period, Mr. Schmitt was involved in written
negotiations with the National Enquirer. He testified that he relied on the
press release, Mr. Castor’s word and Mr. Phillips’ assurances that what Mr.
Castor did was sufficient. Mr. Schmitt did not personally speak to Mr. Castor
or get the assurance in writing. During the depositions, Mr. O’Conner
objected to numerous questions. At the time of the depositions, Mr. Schmitt,
through his negotiations with the National Enquirer, learned that there were
Jane Doe witnesses making allegations against [Cosby]. [Cosby] did not
assert a Fifth Amendment privilege when asked about these other women.
Mr. Schmitt testified that he had not formed an opinion as to whether Mr.
Castor’s press release would cover that testimony.
in writing. During this time period, Mr. Schmitt was involved in written
negotiations with the National Enquirer. He testified that he relied on the
press release, Mr. Castor’s word and Mr. Phillips’ assurances that what Mr.
Castor did was sufficient. Mr. Schmitt did not personally speak to Mr. Castor
or get the assurance in writing. During the depositions, Mr. O’Conner
objected to numerous questions. At the time of the depositions, Mr. Schmitt,
through his negotiations with the National Enquirer, learned that there were
Jane Doe witnesses making allegations against [Cosby]. [Cosby] did not
assert a Fifth Amendment privilege when asked about these other women.
Mr. Schmitt testified that he had not formed an opinion as to whether Mr.
Castor’s press release would cover that testimony.
Mr. Schmitt testified that during negotiations of the settlement agreement
there were references to a criminal case. The settlement agreement
indicated that Ms. Constand would not initiate a criminal case against Mr.
Cosby. Mr. Schmitt did not come forward when he learned the District
Attorney’s office re-opened the case in 2015.
there were references to a criminal case. The settlement agreement
indicated that Ms. Constand would not initiate a criminal case against Mr.
Cosby. Mr. Schmitt did not come forward when he learned the District
Attorney’s office re-opened the case in 2015.
T.C.O. at 47-61 (cleaned up).
Notably, when District Attorney Castor decided not to prosecute Cosby, he
“absolutely” intended to remove “for all time” the possibility of prosecution, because “the
ability to take the Fifth Amendment is also for all time removed.” N.T., 2/2/2016, at 67.
The trial court sought clarification from Mr. Castor about his statement in his second email
to D.A. Ferman that he still believed that a prosecution was permissible as long as
Cosby’s depositions were not used in such proceedings. Former D.A. Castor explained
to the court that he meant that a prosecution may be available only if other victims were
discovered, with charges related only to those victims, and without the use of Cosby’s
depositions in the Constand matter. Specifically, former D.A. Castor stated that what he
was “trying to convey to Mrs. Ferman [was that his] binding of the Commonwealth not to
prosecute Cosby was not for any crime in Montgomery County for all time. It was only
“absolutely” intended to remove “for all time” the possibility of prosecution, because “the
ability to take the Fifth Amendment is also for all time removed.” N.T., 2/2/2016, at 67.
The trial court sought clarification from Mr. Castor about his statement in his second email
to D.A. Ferman that he still believed that a prosecution was permissible as long as
Cosby’s depositions were not used in such proceedings. Former D.A. Castor explained
to the court that he meant that a prosecution may be available only if other victims were
discovered, with charges related only to those victims, and without the use of Cosby’s
depositions in the Constand matter. Specifically, former D.A. Castor stated that what he
was “trying to convey to Mrs. Ferman [was that his] binding of the Commonwealth not to
prosecute Cosby was not for any crime in Montgomery County for all time. It was only
[J-100-2020] - 26
DOJ-OGR-00004839
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document