A forensic lab has provided the judge who oversaw Bill Cosby’s sexual assault conviction with 11 specific discoveries that show a tape recording of a telephone call between Cosby and the mother of his accuser was doctored.
Following up on an exclusive report by NNPA Newswire, Owen Forensic Services, LLC, filed a report this week that was given Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, Judge Steven T. O’Neill and made available to prosecutors, who have repeatedly refused to respond to requests for comment from NNPA Newswire.
Cosby is currently serving three to 10 years in a Pennsylvania prison following his conviction on three counts of aggravated indecent assault in a case involving former Temple University employee Andrea Constand.
Jennifer Owen, who has worked as a forensic recorded evidence media analyst since 1995, said the tape of the call between Cosby and Gianna Constand, the mother of Andrea Constand, was examined carefully and extensively by her firm at the request of Cosby’s attorneys, who made the request saw the NNPA report last month.
A confidential source inside the Montgomery County Courthouse tipped the NNPA last month to the problematic recording, which prosecutors used to help win a conviction against Cosby after a jury in 2017 couldn’t reach a verdict.
On the tape that was played in court before the jury, Cosby could be heard talking to Gianna Constand about the 2003 or 2004 incident between him and Andrea Constand.
“What did you give my daughter?” Gianna Constand is heard asking Cosby.
“What’s not on the tape are two [important] things,” the source told NNPA Newswire. “It was not what’s been reported that this is some angry person. [Gianna Constand] said, ‘Look Bill, I know my daughter, and something is wrong with my daughter. Bill, I have to tell you something, what did you give my daughter?’
“Mr. Cosby said to her — asked her point blank — ‘Are you accusing me of date rape?'” the source said. “Mr. Cosby was incredulous because he knew, and Gianna knew, that he and Andrea’s relationship was consensual. She said no, she wasn’t accusing him of date rape but then you get to see her real motivation, which was money, because she said to him, ‘Bill, things are tough, I don’t know how I’m going to make it’. And this is a married woman saying this. So, Mr. Cosby just goes on to apologize for having the relationship with her daughter and she told him that his apology was enough and that she didn’t want anything else.”
After Cosby was sentenced last month, District Attorney Kevin Steele mocked assertions that the tape was doctored, even boasting, “That’s all they got. … That’s a Hail Mary.”
However, Owen, who has performed worked for prosecutors, private investigators, law enforcement and the FBI, said a comprehensive examination proved Cosby’s claim about the tape as much more than a last-ditch effort.
“The purpose of this examination is to provide the background, technical considerations, and potential criteria upon which to conduct forensic authentic examinations of digital audio when its provenance and integrity is in question,” Owen said.
Included in her findings is an analysis of whether the recording as presented is consistent with the device used at the time the was altered or modified, she said.
“This is not a true representation of the original content of the full audio recording,” Owen said in presenting 10 other reasons for her conclusion, including:
• There are two significant acoustic breaks in the conversation.
• All the audio recordings in different formats (microcassette, audio cassette, CD and mp3) all have the same acoustic breaks.
• There is no dial tone present for the call placed to Mr. Cosby or an opening exchange between the person recording and Mr. Cosby. For example, a dial tone, hello, or asking for the person. Instead, the recording picks up mid conversation at 33.38. 5. Hang on a second (talking to daughter) 00:00:29.82380952 is the end of her first recording (a conversation with her daughter) and picks up mid-sentence with Bill at 00:00:33.83684807.
• There is no way of knowing how long the conversation took place prior to the start of the recording. It appears to be a three-second gap audibly and visually, but this is not accurate and cannot be relied upon.
• There are mechanical clicks present during the acoustic anomalies marked which is usually indicative of a pause or stop or over record.
• The recorder also has the function of voice activation that can temporarily stop recording when the pause button is activated.
• The recorder makes a significant beep audibly and visually on the waveform when pushing the stop button and then restarting the recording. Owen cites this as reason for her belief that the pause button was most likely used to create these acoustic anomalies that can be heard and are represented spectrographically.
• The pause signatures are similar, and both the test recording and original recording have audible mechanical clicks. Owen said her firm cannot replicate the original recording place, exact background noise, or phone which could account for some dissimilarities.
• The second audio break occurs on both the original mp3 recording and the prosecution clip. Second Audio Break 00:00:21.79875283 00:00:29.19349206 (prosecution clip)
• There are acoustic anomalies and discontinuities present audibly and visually in two areas of the recording.
• In both regions of interest, the conversation stops mid-sentence and picks up a few seconds later mid-sentence.
• This recording is not an “end to end” recording and does not represent the entire conversation.
“This is not a true representation of the original content or conversation. Without question this is not an authentic recording,” Owen said in her official findings the court received Thursday. “I make this conclusion with professional certainty. As the investigation continues I reserve the right to amend my report. I am ready, willing and able to testify to the foregoing conclusions.”