Ex-DA Bruce Castor Is All But Officially On The Bill Cosby Defense Team Now

Photo: Clem Murray/Getty Images
Photo: Clem Murray/Getty Images

Former prosecutor Bruce Castor—who declined to file criminal charges against Bill Cosby back in 2005—has filed his lawsuit against Andrea Constand, one of the first women to publicly say the comedian drugged, then sexually assaulted her.

In the lawsuit, announced last month but not filed until yesterday in the Philadelphia court of common pleas, Castor claims one count of civil conspiracy and one count of abuse of process. But the complaint is, mostly, Castor re-litigating the Cosby criminal case, saying over and over again that he couldn’t bring criminal charges because Constand was too inconsistent. He doesn’t address how another prosecutor was able to bring criminal charges against Cosby (the trial ended in a mistrial, and a new one is scheduled for April).

If you want a preview of what Cosby’s legal team will be telling jurors come April, just go ahead and read Castor’s complaint, which asserts this:

Regrettably, as this investigation unfolded, it became apparent that Ms. Constand, with the codefendants’ assistance, had made multiple irreconcilably inconsistent and far-reaching statements to various investigating authorities regarding many material aspects of her accusations against Cosby.


It then goes on to list bullet points of ways Castor believes that Constand was inconsistent. The suit goes over differences between police reports, the same ways Cosby’s defense lawyers did at trial. And in case that wasn’t enough, the lawsuit later includes a three-page, Excel-style chart of “inconsistencies.”

Illustration for article titled Ex-DA Bruce Castor Is All But Officially On The Bill Cosby Defense Team Now

His lawsuit does not address how Constand explained her prior inconsistencies on the stand, the many ways in which she has been consistent, and how one of the investigator officers vigorously defended Constand’s account under oath. He even says the civil deposition, which reignited anger at the lack of criminal charges and was used as evidence against Cosby last year, “made the Cosby prosecution that much weaker.”

The decision to not charge Cosby, the lawsuit says, was Castor acting in Constand’s best interest, “by making decisions that removed Cosby’s ability to assert the Fifth Amendment in the impending civil lawsuit.” He also makes sure to say that the settlement got Constand a lot of money, later referring to what she received from Cosby as her getting a handsome “profit.”


At one point, he adds that Constand’s legal team being upset at the decision to not prosecute Cosby somehow constitutes a “smear campaign” against him.

... Not satisfied with this multimillion dollar resolution, these defendants continued their smear campaign against Castor, all with the intent of getting Cosby convicted and Castor’s political career destroyed.

For example, defendant Troiani publically stated that she was “furious” with Castor for his refusal to prosecute Cosby, presumably because this Cosby litigation was going to propel Troiani and Kivitz into the spotlight.


The lawsuit uses the phrase “scheme and plot to harm Castor” several times, which builds to him finally addressing what this is supposed to be about. In late 2015, Constand filed a lawsuit against Castor, saying Castor had slandered her as part of his campaign for re-election to district attorney. A federal judge has allowed that lawsuit to proceed, but Castor is still claiming it’s a “legally flawed lawsuit” and a “sham” filed to “ensure the greatest harm to Castor’s chances at winning the election and his reputation.”

He goes to say that Constand and her lawyers are “embarking on a manifest abuse of the legal process.” A curious choice of words, considering what the women who came forward saying Cosby drugged and assaulted them said happened to them whenever they tried to speak out in the past.


I emailed all the lawyers listed on the complaint asking if they were going to comment. This post will be updated if they do. The full complaint is below, via Law.com.

Senior editor at Deadspin

Share This Story

Get our newsletter


Cherith Cutestory

I know normally this case would be laughed out of court. The ability to criticize elected officials is literally the point of the First Amendment. But he filed in state court and probably has a lot of friends on the bench. So, this could have some life in it.