Maybe they can dig something up to circumvent it. Even if they have to charge him with a lesser crime.

It would be great if there were no statue of limitations on sexual assault. Sounds like the lawyers will pursue defamation and maybe a civil suit.

there could be some obscure law that was broken he can be charged with.

I agree, no statute of limitations on sexual assault.

that occurred that havent expired but they will have to be careful otherwise it could open them up to a potential lawsuit for harassment.

him with something

even if they can't charge him with sexual assault or rape.

I'm not a lawyer, but I hope they aren't.

It might however give them a crack into looking into his recent prescriptions and seeing if hes been abusing but he would probably only get a slap on the wrist for that.

Some statutes of limitations begin running when the injury occurs; others when the injury is discovered.

There may be multiple jurisdictions involved so it's probably going to be hard to pin down, but it's possible that charges can be brought regarding any victims who were unconscious at the time of the alleged rape.

http://www.latimes.com/local/crime/la-me-lapd-bill-cosby-20141205-story.html

There was a long discussion about it here on DU:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014958040

The first story says that they would open an investigation if necessary, and this OP is about how they have now done so, because it is found to be necessary.

Read the story. It's the same thing.

I'm sorry if English is not your first language, but my reading is correct. The LAPD has now, presently, and not 18 months ago, opened an investigation.

this makes it official that there is enough there there and history can record that the investigations were done and whatever was found was found.

It will be good to have lots of official information on record.

at the time, I think there is no statute of limitations.

but I suppose there could be some we don't know about.

True.

http://fox13now.com/2015/07/08/what-legal-consequences-could-bill-cosby-face-now/

But Chloe Goins said Cosby assaulted her in 2008. She came forward to Los Angeles police this year. Her attorney said he believes Goins may be the first accuser to have a case that still falls within the statute of limitations.

Goins said Cosby sexually assaulted her at the Playboy Mansion.

“She was drugged. She doesn’t know what happened. She blacked out and woke up finding Mr. Cosby over her as she was in a state of complete undress,” attorney Spencer Kuvin said in January.

On Wednesday, Kuvin said that he had been in touch with the state’s attorney and reminded that his client’s case falls within the statute of limitations in both criminal and civil court. He offered no further comment.

I hope they will pursue criminal charges now. Poor girl.

i loved cosby's comedy growing up, now i can not stand the look of him

imagine this rich successful guy,he would of had no trouble getting women to go out with him but evidently he needed the drugging and rape thing to flip his trigger

way past disgusting

i was listening to a laywer on cnn talk about cali law...evidently they can call every past accuser to testify against him even tho no legal charges were brought in those cases

due to lack of evidence and so have not heard that they have any.
Mind you its early and they could honestly have such evidence but I suspect if they had did that they would have charged him back in 2008 or atleast by 2009 but they didnt unless of course the evidence is something new like his admitting it happened in which case he might be toast.

Unless Cosby murdered someone, there is a statute of limitations on statutory rape.

All of these women, what 40 some by now, have been saying that he did this stuff. Lots of outrage but nothing done. NOW, once it's shown in his testimony, NOW they believe it?? All of these women didn't have enough credibility until this dirtbag admitted to it. Sad.

If we had to wait for all alleged perps to admit to criminal activity before believing their victims we'd never have a single criminal investigation.

"You seem to have 40 bicycles in your garage, and these people say they belong to them. Oh, you didn't steal them you say? Oh, ok! Let's go home everyone!"

(though he probably wont because of the statute of limitations on most of the cases) but on the other hand without a real confession or evidence its a freaking tough case to prove.

I guess I really meant that people were dubious of what the women were saying. One guy's word vs all of the women. I know the statue of limitations had run out on most of them, so I didn't expect any justice there. But SO many women were saying the same thing and yet still people were giving him the benefit of the doubt until it comes out that he admitted to it, so now they believe it's true.

while having sex but he wouldnt be the first idiot either male or female to use drugs when having sex and yes the drugs do have a history of people using them during sex because for some they claim it enhances their arousal.
Now if he had said he slipped the drugs in her drink without her consent before they had sex you would have an almost iron tight rape case (I only say almost because nothing is 100% when it involves a jury) there assuming the statute of limitations hasnt expired or if they find a case were the statute hasnt expired they might have been able to use that there.
Now what pisses me off (other than the thought of him probably getting away with this if he did it) is that he could have maybe been stopped if one of the first women had come forward but none of them did, yes I know that it would have been difficult for them to prove it but atleast there was a chance, now there is zero chance to hold him accountable in any court except that of public opinion unless a case appears with evidence to support it that hasnt passed the statute of limitation.

Barbara Bowman say on CNN that she went to the police, she told her agent and others and everyone brushed her off.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/11/13/bill-cosby-raped-me-why-did-it-take-30-years-for-people-to-believe-my-story/

"But I first told my agent, who did nothing. (Cosby sometimes came to her office to interview people for “The Cosby Show” and other acting jobs.) A girlfriend took me to a lawyer, but he accused me of making the story up. Their dismissive responses crushed any hope I had of getting help; I was convinced no one would listen to me. That feeling of futility is what ultimately kept me from going to the police. "

I can sympathize with her feelings about being afraid to go to the police though because she claims she felt like they wouldnt believe her because that is possible but its who she should have gone to in the first place rather than to her agent and then a lawyer because it tainted any potential case against Cosby not to mention it prevented the police from being able to gather evidence for which prosecute him with because before they can investigate and gather evidence they have to be told that a crime been committed, they arent psychic.

There are good reasons for statutes of limitations. Without them
courts would be clogged with vendetta suits brought years and
decades after the fact. Everyone with a grudge could have their day
in court, and because such long periods of time have elapsed, evidence
is difficult to gather and memories have distorted facts and circumstances.
It's very hard to find justice in such conditions. If someone's been chewing
on something for 30 years, do they remember it accurately? Or have their
emotions distorted the incident in their mind?

Don't believe me? Put something aside for 20 or 30 years, in a box, or in your
attic. A letter or an article from childhood will do. Then go look at it. Is it what
you remembered about the item yesterday? Same shape, color, circumstances,
conditions? Sometimes I can't even remember where I put things 6 months ago!

From a business standpoint, statutes of limitations limit liability for many of the
same distorting reasons, but also financial condition. Business can't hardly
make a cogent statement of financial condition if people are constantly bringing
suit. I don't like this at all. Products have impact on our lives sometimes 25 years later,
but no action can be brought for the limitations in law.

So like Mr. C or not, statutes of limitations do have good reasons for existing.