Transcript
Deborah Roberts (0:00)
This is Deborah Roberts. We hope you were just as interested as we were in Bad the Case Against Diddy. Sean Combs trial is set to get underway very soon and Brian Buckmire will be in the courtroom following it all, the prosecution, the defense and anything unexpected. Bad Rap will be covering the trial with new episodes twice a week over in the Bad Rap feed. If you want to keep up on what's sure to be a dramatic trial, follow Bad the Case Against Diddy on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music or wherever you listen to your podcasts. We've also put a link to the show in today's episode description. And now here's a preview from Brian.
Brian Buckmire (0:43)
There are research firms, there are consulting firms, and then there's Forrester. Forrester combines research based insights with hands on guidance that's focused on your needs and goals. Whether you're looking to align your organization or transform your business through generative AI, Forrester is on your side and by your side. Meet Today's forester@forrester.com It's getting close. The start of this trial against Sean Combs, aka Puff Daddy, aka P. Diddy, aka Diddy. Jury selection is right around the corner May 5th. That will be a crucial time for both sides to select people who will ultimately decide Sean Combs fate. Diddy has been unwavering in denying all of these allegations and he's entered a plea of not guilty. And as we get closer and closer to this trial, I thought it'd be smart to take a step back and look at some of the issues that are likely to be argued in this case. This is Bad Rap, the case against Diddy. I'm your host, Brian Buchmire, an ABC News legal contributor and practicing attorney. If you missed our first six episodes charting Diddy's rise and fall, please go back and listen to those as we wait for jury selection. I want to catch up on a few things I'll be watching in the lead up to the trial, things that the government and the defense are arguing should be in bounds or should be out of bounds in terms of what the jury will or will not hear. I'm going to talk to you about three issues that the judge, Judge Arun Subramanian, is deciding on or has decided on, anonymous witnesses, video of Diddy attacking Cassie at the Intercontinental Hotel in Los Angeles, and the admissibility of Cassie's memoir, First Witness Anonymity when it comes to witness anonymity, what you're talking about is two competing issues. Because Sean Combs, love him or hate him, Believe him to be guilty or not does have the constitutional right, as we all do, to face his accuser. But the accuser also has some protections as well. And we've seen a lot of this in more recent cases, especially high profile cases involving sexual assault and rape, where an individual or an alleged victim having their name or their likeness out there in the public can be very damaging to them, their health, their mental health, or their finances. And so, in these competing interests of the right to face your accuser and the privacy rights of an alleged victim, the judge will carve out some sort of compromise to afford both their rights as much as possible. It's probably best to understand that there are a number of alleged victims here, and the government has articulated them by saying There is victim 1, 2, 3 all the way up until 7. And there could be more. We know that according to them, there are victims that are alleging issues with forced labor. There are victims alleging sex trafficking and sexual assault and rape. But then the question becomes, who are these victims? Are we going to know who they are, what their names are? And from our understanding of both this federal indictment as well as Cassie Ventura's lawsuit, there's a very strong assumption that victim one is Cassie Ventura. Cassie Ventura is Diddy's ex girlfriend of over 10 years. She's expected, as I said, to testify using her own name. And both sides appear to be in agreeance with that. Victim two is extremely different from victim one in terms of the agreements that they've made. The government and the defense seem to agree that Victim 2 will testify under an anonymous name or a pseudonym as it applies to victim three and four. The government's motion has been granted, meaning victims three and four, as they are designated by the government, will be allowed to use a pseudonym when they testify. There's some information that we do know about the alleged victims, though. Some have been in romantic relationship with Combs in the past. And as they are set to testify and ultimately do testify, we might learn more about them outside of their actual names. The probably bigger issue when it comes to anonymity is not the what, but the how do you protect someone's anonymity while also providing a person the opportunity to face their accuser? I've seen a number of things happen. I've seen large black sheets put in front of the witness box and they. They testify behind those sheets where the public in the courtroom or the jurors cannot see who they are, even the defense. But they know who these people are. Just that it's not made public. I'VE also seen a situation where everyone in the courtroom, or at least the people who are there as the public, are kicked out as that witness testifies, so that only the government or prosecution, the defense and the jury are aware of their identity. What the judge will decide is yet to be known. Victim anonymity, as much as it is protected by the court or it is attempted to be protected by the court, doesn't always work. The courts are made of human beings who do good things, do bad things, and also make mistakes. So is it possible that we might learn the name of some of these alleged victims throughout the course of the trial? May they choose to actually release her name when they're done testifying? Or if Sean Combs is found guilty, sure. Only time can tell. Up next, the defense tried to keep out that explosive video of Diddy beating Cassie, trying to keep it out of the court. But the judge said it's fair game. More after the break.
