Cosby’s lawyers’ strategy seems to be to poke holes in Andrea Constand‘s story, mostly regarding discrepancy between dates on which she claims the assault took place.
Attorney Angela Agrusa cross-examined Constand on Wednesday, pointing out she initially told police the assault had happened on March 16, 2004.
But later she corrected herself, saying it had happened between late January and early February. Agrusa said:
“During the very time you told the police you were drugged and unconscious you were on the phone with a period of time making multiple phone calls.”
And more directly:
“You changed your story.”
Constand kept her cool on the stand, explaining simply that her report took place months after the fact, all the way in January of 2005.
She had previously testified that she had been hesitant to go to the police because she was afraid “that Mr. Cosby would retaliate and try to hurt me.” After several months, she hadn’t remembered when the date of the alleged attack had taken place and had gotten it wrong the first time when speaking to police.
As for why she never told police she’d had previous meetings alone with Cosby?
“I was never asked.”
Agrusa also asked about why Constand’s mother, Gianna, had purchased a recording device to record phone calls with Cosby. Gianna is expected to testify as well.
The defense’s implication seemed to be that Constand had plotted to fabricate her story for monetary gain — since she won a financial settlement in a civil suit.
As of now, it’s unclear if the defense has any more questions for Constand, but we’d have to guess her slight confusion was not the smoking gun the defense was looking for.
[Image via Carrie Devorah/WENN.]