We've Got Hollywood Covered

Bill Cosby Retrial Jury Has a Question About Its Questions

Judge assures jurors in Cosby retrial that they are asking things properly

Don’t worry, the jury deciding the verdict in Bill Cosby’s retrial is asking its questions correctly, according to Judge Steven T. O’Neill.

Jurors in Cosby’s retrial, who went into deliberations on Wednesday, followed up their first couple of questions with a handful of new queries later in the day, including the matter of whether or not they’re asking what they’re asking in the right way..

Replied Judge O’Neill, yes, yes they are.

Judge O’Neill granted the jury’s request to have sections of Bill Cosby’s interview with a police detective read to them again.

O’Neill also granted their request to re-hear part of defense witness Marguerite Jackson’s testimony. Jackson, who worked with Cosby accuser Andrea Constand at Temple University, testified during the trial that Constand once said that she, Constand, could benefit financially by falsely accusing a high-profile person of assaulting her.

The jury planned to re-hear the deposition and testimony material after their dinner on an already late evening.

Earlier Wednesday, about two hours into jury deliberations, the jury’s first question for the court arose, and it was one the court could not answer: “What is the legal definition of consent?”

Cosby is being re-tried on three counts of aggravated indecent assault, stemming from former Temple University employee Constand’s accusation that the comedian molested her in 2004 at his home outside of Philadelphia.

Cosby’s initial trial in the matter ended in a mistrial in July 2017 after the jury was unable to reach a verdict following five days of deliberations.

During the retrial, Cosby’s defense team painted Constand, who settled a civil suit against Cosby for $3.38 million dollars more than a decade ago, as a “con artist” and “pathological liar.”

During closing arguments Tuesday, Cosby himself received a tongue-lashing from prosecutor Kristen Feden, after he appeared to be laughing and smiling while the prosecution made its argument.

Feden interrupted herself to exclaim, “He’s laughing like it’s funny! But there’s absolutely nothing funny about stripping a woman of her capacity to consent.”