Prosecutor who DID charge Cosby stands by it and says he hopes his release won't stop victims coming forward - as the comedian's rep claims it 'sets a precedent' for Harvey Weinstein and other #MeToo villains

Kevin Steele charged Cosby at the dawn of the #MeToo era, two weeks before the statute of limitations in Pennsylvania would have rendered the case expired

The prosecutor who charged Bill Cosby in 2015 said on Wednesday that he hoped his release wouldn't deter other victims of sexual assault from coming forward, as the disgraced media's rep said it sets a precedent for other #MeToo villains hoping to be freed.

Cosby was let go on Wednesday and had his conviction overturned on the basis that in 2005, Montgomery County Prosecutor Bruce Castor told him he wouldn't be charged for sexually assaulting Andrea Constand in 2004.

Ten years after Castor made the promise, Kevin Steele - who had taken over - charged Cosby at the dawn of the #MeToo era, two weeks before the statute of limitations in Pennsylvania would have rendered the case expired.

On Wednesday night, Steele stood by the decision and released a statement to say the PA Supreme Court hadn't found Cosby innocent based on the evidence of the case, but had let him go on a technicality.

'He was found guilty by a jury and now goes free on a procedural issue that is irrelevant to the facts of the crime.

'I want to commend Cosby's victim Andrea Constand for her bravery in coming forward and remaining steadfast throughout this long ordeal, as well as all of the other women who have shared similar experiences.

'My hope is that this decision will not dampen the reporting of sexual assaults by victims. Prosecutors in my office will continue to follow the evidence wherever and to whomever it leads.

Bill Cosby is shown outside his home in Pennsylvania on Wednesday with his long-serving rep, Andrew Wyatt, after being freed

Harvey Weinstein's reps praised the Cosby result and now may use it in their own appeal. Like Cosby, Weinstein was jailed after multiple women testified against him who had nothing to do with the specific charges but who claimed he'd assaulted them on other occasions

THE 5 WHO TESTIFIED AGAINST COSBY

Chelan Lasha

Lasha testified about 1986 incident with Cosby when she was 17.

She said he'd invited her to his room at the Las Vegas Hilton and told her he'd help her with her career.

Janice Baker-Kinney

Janice Baker Kinney

Testified about a 1982 incident with Cosby in Reno.

She said she was given pills, they played backgammon and she passed out then woke up the next day undressed, next to Cosby in bed

Janice Dickinson

Dickinson testified that Cosby assaulted her in 1982 in Lake Tahoe.

She said: 'His robe opened...he smelled like cigar and espresso and his body odor. Here was America’s Dad on top of me. A happily married man with five children, on top of me.'

Lise-Lotte Lublin

She was 27 at the time.

Lise-Lottw Lublin

She testified that Cosby gave her two drinks in his hotel room in Las Vegas in 1989. She said she remembers him stroking her hair but then she passed out.

Heidi Thomas

Thomas testified that she met Cosby in 1984 and that after taking one sip of wine he'd given her, she passed out.

She said she woke up in his bed in a hotel room in Reno and that she was drowsy for days afterwards.

At least 60 women have testified against Cosby in total either in civil lawsuits or interviews

'We still believe that no one is above the law-including those who are rich, famous and powerful,' he said.

Cosby's team however say the release sets a precedent for others who hope to be freed.

One of their arguments for his release was the five women other accusers who testified at the trial.

Five women told the jury about how Cosby had 'assaulted' them in the 1980s.

It had nothing to do with Constand's claims but the prosecution was allowed to introduce their testimony as evidence of Cosby's character.

They were there to demonstrate a pattern of behavior.

In their 79-page ruling, the PA Supreme Court does not address that issue.

They stayed well clear of it and instead focused only on Castor.

But Cosby's rep, Andrew Wyatt, said on Thursday morning the very fact it was under review brings hope to others, namely Harvey Weinstein.

Other 'bad act' witnesses were used at Weinstein's New York City trial to paint a similar picture.

He has always said it was unfair.

Speaking outside Cosby's home on Thursday morning, Wyatt told reporters: 'It's a major issue. What we have always said is how can you bring women in from 30 years ago who had nothing to do with the trial to say something happened.

'We were not allowed to examine them on the witness stand. This sets a precedent for so many cases. Even Harvey Weinstein now are using our same strategy.

'They say look the people who testified had nothing to do with the accusers.

'Mr. Cosby's case sets a precedent for the country.

'It's going to be talked about. It changes case law.'

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court, in their ruling, specifically said they would not rule on the issue.

'At Cosby’s trial, the trial court permitted the Commonwealth to call five witnesses who testified that Cosby had engaged in similar sexually abusive patterns with each of them.

'We granted allowance of appeal here as well to consider the admissibility of that prior bad act evidence pursuant to Pa.R.E. 404.

'However, because our decision on the Castor declination issue disposes of this appeal, we do not address the Rule 404 claim.'

Later in the opinion, they said: 'Accordingly, we do not address Cosby's other claim.'

Five women testified at Cosby's trial about how he had allegedly sexually assaulted and raped them in the 1980s.

Their claims were outside of the statute of limitations but helped paint a picture of Cosby's character.

THE INFORMAL 'DEAL' THAT SET COSBY FREE

Former Montgomery County DA Bruce Castor

The Supreme Court did not rule on whether or not the testimony of five women who were 'bad act' witnesses contributed to Cosby's fate, or whether or not their testimony was fair. Instead, they looked only at the comment made by Montgomery County Prosecutor Bruce Castor, and found that it was the reason Cosby should go free.

In 2005, Cosby had been reported to Castor's office by the police in Pennsylvania after Andrea Constand reported the alleged assault.

It became public knowledge.

After pursuing an investigation, Castor's office released a press release saying he would not be charging Cosby because of a lack of evidence.

That press release is the 'deal' Cosby thinks he made. There was no formal definition in it about how long it would last or if future prosecutors were bound by it.

This is part of the release:

'Montgomery County District Attorney Bruce L. Castor, Jr. has announced that a joint investigation... into allegations against actor and comic Bill Cosby is concluded.

This is the 2005 release by Castor's office which Cosby thought was an 'immunity deal'

'The detectives could find no instance in Mr. Cosby’s past where anyone complained to law enforcement of conduct, which would constitute a criminal offense.

'After reviewing the above and consulting with County and Cheltenham detectives, the District Attorney finds insufficient, credible, and admissible evidence exists upon which any charge against Mr. Cosby could be sustained beyond a reasonable doubt.

'In making this finding, the District Attorney has analyzed the facts in relation to the elements of any applicable offenses, including whether Mr. Cosby possessed the requisite criminal intent.

'After this analysis, the District Attorney concludes that a conviction under the circumstances of this case would be unattainable.

'As such, District Attorney Castor declines to authorize the filing of criminal charges in connection with this matter. Because a civil action with a much lower standard for proof is possible, the District Attorney renders no opinion concerning the credibility of any party involved so as to not contribute to the publicity and taint prospective jurors.

'The District Attorney does not intend to expound publicly on the details of his decision for fear that his opinions and analysis might be given undue weight by jurors in any contemplated civil action. District Attorney Castor cautions all parties to this matter that he will reconsider this decision should the need arise.

'Much exists in this investigation that could be used (by others) to portray persons on both sides of the issue in a less than flattering light. The District Attorney encourages the parties to resolve their dispute from this point forward with a minimum of rhetoric.

In emails years later, Castor said that he made the deal with Cosby to get Constand a settlement.

In one, which is included in the Supreme Court decision, he says: 'The attached is the written determination that we would not prosecute Cosby. That was what the lawyers for wanted and I agreed.

'The reason I agreed and the plaintiff’s lawyers wanted it in writing is so that Cosby could not take the 5th Amendment to avoid being deposed or testifying. A sound strategy to employ.'

The Supreme Court ruled that the prosecutor - far from trying to let Cosby off the hook - performed a legal 'bait and switch' and lulled him into making incriminating statements.

'The moment that Cosby was charged criminally, he was harmed: all that he had forfeited earlier, and the consequences of that forfeiture in the civil case, were for naught. This was, as the CDO itself characterizes it, an unconstitutional 'coercive bait-and-switch'.