エピソード

  • The Feds Launch A Multi Agency Raid On The Facility Housing Diddy

    The Feds Launch A Multi Agency Raid On The Facility Housing Diddy
    2025/06/11
    On October 28, 2024, federal authorities conducted an interagency operation at the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) in Brooklyn, New York. The raid, involving the Bureau of Prisons, the Justice Department's Inspector General's office, and other law enforcement agencies, was aimed at improving safety and security within the facility. Officials emphasized that the raid was pre-planned and not in response to an immediate threat, reflecting broader concerns about the overall management of the detention center.

    The MDC has faced criticism due to reports of poor conditions, contraband smuggling, and violent incidents within the facility, some allegedly facilitated by staff members. Recently, nine inmates were charged in connection with various violent offenses, including stabbings and a murder-for-hire plot organized from inside the jail. Among the 1,200 inmates currently housed there is Sean "Diddy" Combs, who is awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. Combs' legal team has cited the jail’s conditions in appeals for bail, further highlighting the need for reform.


    In our second article..

    In the legal proceedings involving Sean "Diddy" Combs, his defense team sought a gag order to prevent prosecutors and potential witnesses from making public statements that could prejudice his right to a fair trial. The defense argued that the extensive media coverage and public commentary were undermining the impartiality of the judicial process.


    However, U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian denied this request, stating that there was no sufficient evidence to suggest that the alleged leaks had compromised the fairness of the proceedings. The judge emphasized the importance of transparency and the public's right to information, concluding that a gag order was not warranted at this stage.

    (commercial at 7:38)

    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com


    source:

    Diddy's New York jail is investigated by multiple federal agencies | Daily Mail Online


    Judge rejects Sean 'Diddy' Combs' proposal for gag order in sex trafficking case
    続きを読む 一部表示
    12 分
  • Diddy Continues To Push The Court To Exclude Portions Of Dawn Richard Testimony (6/11/25)

    Diddy Continues To Push The Court To Exclude Portions Of Dawn Richard Testimony (6/11/25)
    2025/06/11
    In this letter to Judge Subramanian, the defense opposes the government’s plan to introduce certain testimony from Dawn Richard. The defense argues that the government intends to elicit inadmissible and irrelevant testimony regarding alleged statements and purported threats made by Sean Combs and Bad Boy Records President Harve Pierre. They contend that such statements, along with Ms. Richard’s subjective understanding of them, fall outside the scope of permissible evidence and would unfairly prejudice the jury.

    The defense asserts that allowing this line of testimony would improperly introduce speculative and potentially inflammatory material that lacks proper evidentiary foundation. They request that the Court preclude the government from eliciting or offering this evidence through Ms. Richard, maintaining that it does not meet the standards for admissibility and risks distracting the jury from the core issues of the case.


    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com


    source:

    gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.398.0.pdf
    続きを読む 一部表示
    10 分
  • Diddy Blasts The Feds Request To Put Dr. Dawn Hughes Back On The Stand (Part 2) (6/11/25)

    Diddy Blasts The Feds Request To Put Dr. Dawn Hughes Back On The Stand (Part 2) (6/11/25)
    2025/06/11
    In this letter to Judge Subramanian in United States v. Combs, the defense opposes the government’s request to recall expert witness Dr. Dawn Hughes for a second appearance during its case-in-chief. The defense argues that it relied on the Court’s original framework—reinforced in both the opening jury instructions and pretrial rulings—that each witness would testify only once. They further contend that recalling Dr. Hughes after her cross-examination would be unfair and prejudicial, as the defense structured its questioning with the understanding that it would be their sole opportunity to challenge her testimony during the government’s presentation of its case.

    The letter also raises concern about the signal it would send to the jury, suggesting that the Court is endorsing the government’s effort to rehabilitate a witness whose methodology and credibility were already subjected to extensive scrutiny. The defense emphasizes that it cannot repeat its prior cross-examination, nor should it be expected to. They argue that such a move is highly irregular and risks altering the fairness of the proceedings. The letter urges the Court to deny the government’s request and preserve the integrity of its prior rulings regarding the scope and structure of Dr. Hughes’s testimony.


    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com



    source:

    gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.393.0.pdf
    続きを読む 一部表示
    15 分
  • Diddy Blasts The Feds Request To Put Dr. Dawn Hughes Back On The Stand (Part 1) (6/11/25)

    Diddy Blasts The Feds Request To Put Dr. Dawn Hughes Back On The Stand (Part 1) (6/11/25)
    2025/06/11
    In this letter to Judge Subramanian in United States v. Combs, the defense opposes the government’s request to recall expert witness Dr. Dawn Hughes for a second appearance during its case-in-chief. The defense argues that it relied on the Court’s original framework—reinforced in both the opening jury instructions and pretrial rulings—that each witness would testify only once. They further contend that recalling Dr. Hughes after her cross-examination would be unfair and prejudicial, as the defense structured its questioning with the understanding that it would be their sole opportunity to challenge her testimony during the government’s presentation of its case.

    The letter also raises concern about the signal it would send to the jury, suggesting that the Court is endorsing the government’s effort to rehabilitate a witness whose methodology and credibility were already subjected to extensive scrutiny. The defense emphasizes that it cannot repeat its prior cross-examination, nor should it be expected to. They argue that such a move is highly irregular and risks altering the fairness of the proceedings. The letter urges the Court to deny the government’s request and preserve the integrity of its prior rulings regarding the scope and structure of Dr. Hughes’s testimony.


    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com



    source:

    gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.393.0.pdf
    続きを読む 一部表示
    13 分
  • Diddy Continues His Quest To Have Evidence And Testimony By Victim 2 (Jane Doe) Excluded (6/11/25)

    Diddy Continues His Quest To Have Evidence And Testimony By Victim 2 (Jane Doe) Excluded (6/11/25)
    2025/06/11
    In this letter to Judge Subramanian regarding the United States v. Combs trial, the defense objects to several exhibits the government intends to introduce during Jane Doe’s testimony—specifically, text messages and Notes App entries Jane used as a diary during her relationship with Sean Combs. The defense argues that many of these notes fail to meet the admissibility standards under Rules 801(d)(1)(B) and 803(3) of the Federal Rules of Evidence. They contend that some notes should be excluded entirely because they were written after Jane read Cassie Ventura’s lawsuit and after the government began its investigation, thereby lacking the necessary contemporaneity required under Rule 801(d)(1)(B). The defense also asserts that many of the notes do not meet Rule 803(3)’s standards regarding statements of then-existing mental state and should not be used to improperly guide Jane’s direct testimony or bolster her credibility.


    Additionally, the defense objects to Exhibit C-251, arguing it contains inadmissible hearsay in the form of messages between Jane and Kristina Khorram from December 2023. They also raise a Rule 106 objection concerning the admission of certain text messages without fuller contextual information that could alter their meaning. Finally, the defense opposes the admission of Government Exhibit E-171 on both hearsay grounds and under Rule 403, asserting that its probative value is substantially outweighed by the risk of unfair prejudice. The letter urges the Court to prevent what the defense views as improper use of these materials to frame and improperly enhance Jane Doe’s testimony.


    to contact me:


    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com



    source:

    gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.401.0.pdf
    続きを読む 一部表示
    18 分
  • Diddy Trial: The Defense Continues It's Cross Examination Of Jane Doe (Victim 2) On Day 20 (Part 2) (6/11/25)

    Diddy Trial: The Defense Continues It's Cross Examination Of Jane Doe (Victim 2) On Day 20 (Part 2) (6/11/25)
    2025/06/11
    During the afternoon session on June 10th, 2025, at the federal trial of Sean “Diddy” Combs, the defense team continued its sustained cross-examination of Jane Doe Victim 2. The questioning remained sharply focused on attempting to undermine her credibility before the jury. Defense attorneys zeroed in on alleged inconsistencies between her in-court testimony and prior statements made to law enforcement and in civil litigation. They pressed her on precise dates, locations, and details of the alleged trafficking incidents she described, suggesting that elements of her narrative had shifted over time. The defense also highlighted text messages and communications that they argued were inconsistent with the portrayal of coercion and control presented by the government.

    Throughout the afternoon, Jane Doe 2 maintained her composure but showed visible signs of fatigue under the lengthy and at times repetitive questioning. The defense probed her connections to other accusers and her interactions with civil attorneys, implying possible coordination or financial motivation. Prosecutors objected at several points to the tone and scope of the questioning, but Judge Subramanian largely allowed the cross-examination to proceed. No new evidence was introduced; the session remained centered on testing the consistency and reliability of Jane Doe 2’s testimony. The court adjourned with the cross-examination still ongoing, setting the stage for its conclusion in the next session.


    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com



    source:

    June 10, 2025 - Day 20 of testimony in the Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs trial | CNN
    続きを読む 一部表示
    15 分
  • Mega Edition: The Feds Move To Exclude Testimony From Diddy's Expert Elie Aouen (6/11/25)

    Mega Edition: The Feds Move To Exclude Testimony From Diddy's Expert Elie Aouen (6/11/25)
    2025/06/11
    Federal prosecutors have filed a motion to exclude testimony from Dr. Elie Aoun, a forensic psychiatrist and assistant professor at Columbia University, whom Sean "Diddy" Combs' defense team intends to call as an expert witness. The defense aims to have Dr. Aoun testify regarding Combs' mental state during the period of the alleged offenses, suggesting that Combs may have had diminished mental capacity. However, the government argues that Dr. Aoun's proposed testimony is inadmissible under the Insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984 and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 12.2, which govern the introduction of expert testimony related to a defendant's mental condition. Prosecutors contend that Dr. Aoun's opinions lack a reliable scientific basis and appear to be speculative, rendering them unsuitable for presentation to the jury.

    Additionally, the government asserts that allowing Dr. Aoun's testimony would effectively permit the defense to introduce a mental health defense without adhering to the procedural requirements mandated by law. They argue that the defense has not provided sufficient notice or evidence to support such a defense, and that Dr. Aoun's testimony would serve as a substitute for calling actual witnesses, thereby circumventing the rules of evidence. The prosecution maintains that admitting this testimony could mislead the jury and prejudice the government's case, and therefore, they urge the court to preclude Dr. Aoun from testifying at trial.


    to contact me:


    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com


    source:

    gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.276.0_1.pdf
    続きを読む 一部表示
    31 分
  • Mega Edition: Diddy And The Gigantic Bail Package He Offered The Government (6/11/25)

    Mega Edition: Diddy And The Gigantic Bail Package He Offered The Government (6/11/25)
    2025/06/11
    In the case of United States v. Combs (24-cr-542), Sean "Diddy" Combs' legal team has filed a reply memorandum to bolster their renewed motion for bail. They argue that new evidence undermines the prosecution's case, including claims that video evidence from 2016 depicts consensual interaction, contrary to the government's allegations of abuse. The defense contends that these developments diminish the justification for Combs' continued detention.

    Additionally, the defense addresses concerns about potential witness tampering and flight risk. They propose stringent bail conditions, such as home confinement with electronic monitoring and a substantial financial bond, to mitigate these risks. Combs' attorneys emphasize his strong community ties and lack of prior criminal history as factors supporting his release pending trial.

    (commercial at 7:59)

    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com



    source:

    gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.80.0.pdf
    続きを読む 一部表示
    30 分