Mistrial paves path for retrial of legal contest
They almost surely will meet again in a court of law.
One more time, the former jock with the mound of curly hair is likely to sit across a courtroom from the lumbering and aging comedian who has made an elegant wooden cane his signature prop on the most dangerous stage of his storied career.
The mistrial declared Saturday set the scene for a courtroom rematch between Andrea Constand, a former women’s professional basketball player, and Bill Cosby, the comic who she says drugged and sexually assaulted her. Even though the machinations of a retrial would be handled by attorneys, the ultimate decision of the next panel of jurors will be, once again, heavily dependent on their assessment of Constand and Cosby.
As one of the jurors in the first trial said during jury selection in this case so bereft of physical evidence, the saga boils down to a matter of “he said, she said.”
It’s likely that Cosby’s defense team will try to block a new trial, but legal experts say they are unlikely to prevail. The retrial is expected to bear many similarities to the first trial, but there might be key differences that could affect the outcome.
The jury that said it was “hopelessly deadlocked” Saturday was selected in Pittsburgh, then bused to suburban Philadelphia and sequestered during 11 days of testimony and deliberations.
It’s possible the next jury could be selected in another county so as not to place too heavy of a burden on Allegheny County, where Pittsburgh is located, said Dennis McAndrews, a former Philadelphiaarea prosecutor.
The saturation coverage of Cosby’s mistrial is sure to complicate jury selection. Still, legal experts say, it won’t be impossible to find 12 people to sit in judgment of Cosby, who turns 80 next month.
Kevin Steele, the lead prosecutor, tends to be cautious in his public statements. But on Saturday, moments after the mistrial was declared, he gave an inkling of his confidence level going into Round 2. He told reporters that the last time he retried a case after a mistrial — in 1992 — he won a conviction.
Steele will have insights in the retrial that he did not have in the first trial: He and his key witnesses have now gotten a detailed view of the defense team’s strategy and its methods of handling cross-examinations.
“It’s obviously more difficult for the defense to find some new surprises,” McAndrews said. “They want the element of surprise.”