Prosecutor: ‘Castor is suing Constand more of less because he blames her for cooperating with police’

Thursday Judge Steven T. O’Neill heard arguments regarding bringing in the civil suits between former Montgomery County District Attorney Bruce Castor, who declined to prosecute Cosby in 2005 and Andrea Constand. Both individuals are suing each other in civil court seeking damages as a result of Castor’s decision not to prosecute Cosby.

“Mr. Castor’s suit against Constand and other parties is not related to this suit. Castor is suing Constand more or less because he blames her for cooperating with police. Her testimony has nothing to do with these lawsuits,” Assistant District Attorney Kristen Gibbens Feden said in court. “I do want to mention, briefly, that some of the contentions contained within counsel’s brief that we received very late last night are inaccurate. For example, ‘The DA’s office acknowledged in these filings and the success of the result of Ms. Constand’s civil claim relies on the outcome of this case.’”

Mesereau’s brief response, “I can understand why the prosecution does not want the Constand v. Castor case because in that lawsuit she [Constand] makes a statement that the prosecution doesn’t even agree with her.

This prosecutor in her opening statement last time talked about Constand’s inconsistencies. The fact that she [Feden] would make an assertion like that, that all of her [Constand] stories have been inconsistent is something we should be able to cross-examine her on,” Mesereau continued. “In Mr. Castor’s lawsuit, not only against Constand but her lawyers, he says that they formed a civil conspiracy to hurt him as he revealed that Constand made numerous inconsistent statements. He has charts of them show when she did meet Cosby, when the sexual contact occurred, contact after – so many contradictory statements on every element of this allegation.”

Mesereau shot down the prosecution’s claim that the civil suit should not be permitted into evidence, as it is not relevant to the criminal case.

“If you look at the two lawsuits, obviously she [Constand] wants a conviction in this case or she [Constand] could end up paying attorney fees, damages and other things to Castor. Obviously she [Constand] wants a conviction in this case. She [Constand] will be assisted greatly in her suit against Castor and his suit against her if there’s a conviction.

Otherwise they’ll say ‘we told you so, you contradicted yourself with statements with Canada and Montgomery County, etc.’.”

Constand moved to Canada following the alleged sexual assault in 2004 and reported the alleged incident to the Durham Police Department in Toronto, Canada for the first time one year later after speaking to her brother-in-law, Officer Stewart Parsons who is employed by the Durham Police Department.

Last year, Detective David Mason of the Durham County Intelligence Branch stated that while working a shift on January 13, 2005, a 911 call came in for a sex offence. Detective Mason testifiedthat Constand told him on a sworn statement that she was actively searching for attorneys who specialized in sexual assault lawsuits in Philadelphia and she was in the process of contacting them. On the contrary, Constand denied ever giving that statement until she was presented with a copy of it, then stating that she didn’t recall exactly what she said to police as it was over ten-years ago.

Mesereau ended his argument regarding Constand and Castor civil suit by telling the Court “Clearly there is an obvious, logical incentive that there is a financial gain if she wins this. She needs a conviction to avoid what could be a catastrophe in her suit with Castor. Her credibility is on the line for both cases.

Mr. Castor sued her for civil conspiracy and abuse of process.”

Assistant District Attorney Feden rebutted, “May I mention briefly that a jury conviction in this case means that the defendant drugged and assaulted Andrea,” before being cut off by Judge O’Neill who stated, “I know what a conviction means.”