Stefon Diggs acquitted: Trial recap and analysis

Summary

---

The Stefon Diggs Trial: Acquittal Recap & Analysis

Podcast: The Stefon Diggs Trial: Commonwealth Confidential
Host: NBC10 Boston
Episode: Stefon Diggs Acquitted: Trial Recap and Analysis
Date: May 5, 2026

---

Overview

This episode provides a comprehensive recap and in-depth analysis of the high-profile trial of former New England Patriots wide receiver Stefon Diggs, who was acquitted of felony assault and battery charges against his former private chef, Mila Adams. Hosts J.C. Monahan and Glenn Jones, joined by legal analyst Michael Cohen and courtroom insider Sue O'Connell, dissect the rapid trial, verdict, courtroom dynamics, and what the outcome means for Diggs’ future—both personally and professionally.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Speed and Outcome of the Trial

• The entire trial, including deliberations, spanned just two business days, with the jury delivering two "not guilty" verdicts after only 90 minutes of deliberation.
  • "The speed of this is noteworthy. Start to finish in just two business days." – Eli Rosenberg (01:22)
  • Diggs did not address the media post-verdict, but visibly embraced his attorneys inside the court.

Notable Quote:

• Defense Lawyer (02:18): "He's emotional, but he's happy. He's happy that he's been vindicated."
• J.C. Monahan (02:03): "The jury in the Stefon Diggs trial returning two not guilty verdicts in his two day trial."

2. The Weakness of the Prosecution’s Case

• Prosecution relied on just two witnesses: Mila Adams (accuser) and the person she eventually reported to at a police station.
• Courtroom testimony revealed no documented or witnessed physical evidence of assault:
  • Prosecutor (02:40): "Did you notice bruising, developing redness, any kind of physical marks on Ms. Adams?"
    J.C. Monahan: "No."
  • No medical records, injury photos, or corroborating third-party evidence presented.
• Prosecution admitted difficulties with their own witness:
  • Michael Cohen (03:06): "Was Ms. Adams a perfect witness?"
    Glenn Jones: "No."

Notable Quote:

• Closing Argument, Defense Attorney (10:51): "You didn't see any injuries. You didn't see any photographs. You learned there were no medical records, no statements, no nothing... The Commonwealth case is nothing more than the words of Ms. Adams."

3. Performance & Impact of Key Witness: Mila Adams

• Adams, the sole eyewitness, was repeatedly admonished by the judge for evasion and combative behavior on the stand, risking having her testimony stricken.
  • Prosecutor (08:09): "Courtrooms function and especially trials unfold in a question and answer formally... if you continue to do so, your entire testimony may be stricken."
• Legal analysts cite this demeanor as damaging to her credibility with jurors and the press.
  • Sue O'Connell (09:32): "You could see the jury's faces... they were very stoic, but there’s that look of just like, come on, what are you doing?"

4. Critique of Prosecution Tactics and Case Handling

• Analysts and former law enforcement expressed surprise the case went this far:
  • Lack of thorough investigation by state police or a private investigator cited as a significant oversight.
  • Sue O'Connell (06:51): "If there was a conflict, use one of the other DA’s offices... hire a private investigator to investigate... there just wasn’t enough evidence here."
• Some felt DA was forced to proceed due to public pressure, celebrity status, and previous case bungles.

Notable Quote:

• Michael Cohen (05:51): "You have an accuser who stuck with her story... A DA who's vulnerable from a couple of cases already... He had to move forward to try and see what the jury said... It turns on credibility in this case. And she wasn’t ultimately found to be very credible at all."

5. Defense’s Strategy and Witnesses

• The defense called seven witnesses, all of whom were deemed professional, credible, and able to directly contradict the prosecution.
• Prosecution’s attempt to discredit them as Diggs’ employees failed to impress the jury.
  • Glenn Jones (11:28): "The ADA wanted the jury to dismiss those witnesses on credibility because all of them were on the payroll of Diggs. But it didn't work."
  • Michael Cohen (11:38): "Those witnesses appeared highly credible, professional... One of them even testified: I wouldn’t lie under oath simply because of some financial situation."

6. Money Allegations and Settlement Rumors

• Rumors of possible settlement negotiations (ranging from $19,000 to $5.5 million) were raised, but Diggs' lawyers firmly denied any such discussions.
  • Judge (05:00): "Diggs lawyers are very adamant on this one, saying there was never talks of a settlement."

7. Aftermath & Implications for Diggs’ NFL Career

• With the acquittal, the focus shifts to Diggs' future in football. Discussion with NBC Sports Boston’s Phil Perry explored possible career trajectories.
  • Perry believes Patriots unlikely to re-sign Diggs due to cap, age, and recent receiver signings.
  • Possible fits mentioned: teams with young quarterbacks in need of veteran receivers (e.g., Las Vegas Raiders).
  • Phil Perry (14:00): "It was about money. I think it was also about his age... adding Diggs back to the mix with those two new additions coming to Foxborough, to me, doesn’t make a lot of sense."

8. Broader Reflections: Athletes as Targets?

• Diggs' attorney asserted athletes are unfairly targeted due to money/status.
• Perry pushed back, emphasizing the difference between "not guilty" and "innocent" and expressing skepticism toward blanket claims of athlete victimization.
  • Phil Perry (16:52): "Stefon Diggs wasn’t proven innocent in this case. He was proven not guilty. So to make it seem as though clearly nothing happened here, that’s not what was proven in this case."

---

Memorable Quotes & Moments (with Timestamps)

• Defense Lawyer (02:18): "He's emotional, but he's happy. He's happy that he's been vindicated."
• Sue O'Connell (09:32): "I could see the jurors faces... that look of just like, come on, what are you doing?"
• Prosecutor admonishing Adams (08:09): "This is not an opportunity for you to interject your own narrative and evade responding to questions... your entire testimony may be stricken."
• Defense Attorney, closing argument (10:51): "The Commonwealth case is nothing more than the words of Ms. Adams."
• Phil Perry (16:52): "Stefon Diggs wasn’t proven innocent in this case. He was proven not guilty."

---

Important Segment Timestamps

• Announcement of verdict & reactions: 00:35–02:22
• Breakdown of prosecution and defense cases: 02:22–05:21
• Legal analysis (Michael Cohen & Sue O’Connell): 05:21–12:12
• Defense closing argument excerpt: 10:51
• NFL career discussion with Phil Perry: 13:29–17:22

---

Summary Takeaways

• The Stefon Diggs trial ended in swift acquittal, largely due to a lack of corroborating evidence and key missteps by the prosecution.
• The prosecution’s reliance on a single, problematic witness and absence of physical evidence or thorough investigation were heavily criticized by the legal panel.
• The defense’s calm, credible witnesses decisively swayed the jury.
• Acquittal may clear a path for Diggs’ return to the NFL, though age and roster realities dampen a Patriots reunion.
• The episode closes with nuanced debate over whether athletes are especially liable to legal targeting, reinforcing that "not guilty" is not synonymous with innocence.

---

Transcript

[Commercial Announcer]

Hataday presents in the red corner, the undisputed undefeated weed whacker guy. Champion of hurling grass and pollen everywhere. And in the blue corner, the challenger, extra strength Hataday eye drops that work all day to prevent the release of histamines that cause itchy allergy eyes. And the winner by knockout is Pataday Hataday. Bring it on.

[Prosecutor]

Will the jurors and the defendant remain standing.

[Defense Lawyer]

All others may be seated.

[Judge]

Madam 4 Lady. Has your jury agreed upon a verdict?

[J.C. Monahan]

Yes.

[Judge]

On count one, guilty or not guilty?

[J.C. Monahan]

Not guilty.

[Judge]

On count two, guilty or not guilty?

[J.C. Monahan]

Not guilty.

[Glenn Jones]

Relief for former patriot Stephon Diggs. A Norfolk county jury acquits him on felony assault charges against his former chef and lover.

[J.C. Monahan]

We'll bring you to the courtroom what was observed during the closing arguments and the verdict.

[Glenn Jones]

And we'll consider what's next for Diggs football career. Is a return to Oxborough on the horizon.

[J.C. Monahan]

Commonwealth Confidential the Stefan Diggs trial starts right now. Stefan Diggs found not guilty in a lightning fast trial. Good evening everyone. I'm J.C. monahan.

[Glenn Jones]

I'm Glenn Jones. A jury just acquitted the former Patriots star of assaulting his former live in cook. Eli Rosenberg joins us live outside Denham District Court. Eli, the speed of this is noteworthy. Start to finish in just two business days.

[Judge]

Yeah. And the verdict also very speedy deliberations about 90 minutes. Glenn. And after all was said and done, Stephon Diggs leaving the courthouse right here down these steps. He did not want his talk. His lawyers though had plenty to say this evening. What is your verdict? Guilty or not guilty?

[Defense Lawyer]

Not guilty.

[Judge]

It took about 90 minutes of deliberation. Charge of assault and battery, what is your verdict? Guilty or not guilty?

[J.C. Monahan]

Not guilty.

[Judge]

The jury in the Stephon Diggs trial returning two not guilty verdicts in his two day trial. How do you feel about that verdict? Diggs not talking as he left court. He did clutch his lawyers in the courtroom after the verdict was read.

[Defense Lawyer]

He's emotional, but he's happy. He's happy that he's been vindicated.

[Glenn Jones]

All rise.

[Judge]

Diggs was accused of assaulting and choking his former personal chef inside his Dedham home this past December. From the start, his lawyer lawyers denying it ever happened. Calling those who saw Mila Adams in the hours and days after the alleged attack to the stand, did you notice

[Prosecutor]

bruising, developing redness, any kind of physical marks on Ms. Adams?

[J.C. Monahan]

No.

[Prosecutor]

On December 4th, 5th, 6th, did you notice any of that?

[Commercial Announcer]

No.

[Prosecutor]

Did Ms. Adams ever tell you that she had been assaulted or strangled?

[Commercial Announcer]

No.

[Prosecutor]

Did she ever mention any kind of an attack?

[Judge]

No. And during closing arguments, prosecutors trying to stick to the facts.

[Michael Cohen]

Was Ms. Adams a perfect witness?

[Glenn Jones]

No.

[Michael Cohen]

She was argumentative, avoided, difficult. But does that mean you should throw away everything she says? She said?

[Glenn Jones]

No.

[Judge]

The jury did ask one question during deliberations about the elements that made up the crime. Returning shortly later with those two not guilty verdicts.

[Defense Lawyer]

We wanted this case to run its course and be completed. And there were a lot of missteps in this case. Whoever was listening saw it. This case never should have been brought. It was a waste of resources.

[Judge]

And a couple other notes from court today. First of all, the prosecutor left without talking. Second of all, did see the jurors leave court, asked if any of them wanted to talk. That jury was made up of five women and one man. They did not want to talk. And I also, Glenn reached out to the DA's office for comment about everything that we saw play out over the last two days and have not heard back.

[Glenn Jones]

Eli, Mila Adams, the accuser, was the only one to testify in both days of this trial. And on both days, the judge had to admonish her for going beyond what the question was asking her to answer. Was there ever a risk of that creating a mistrial of sorts, of.

[Judge]

And I talked to a lawyer in the courtroom and he said in all of his decades practicing law, he cannot remember a time when a judge and a witness interacted so many times. I did ask Diggs lawyers after the fact, hey, was there any talk of a mistrial? They said absolutely not. They said they had 100% conviction in this case. They really wanted to see it to the end. A decision that paid off with these two not guilty verdicts.

[J.C. Monahan]

Eli, there was so much talk about money during this case. What did Diggs lawyers have to say this afternoon about the potential that it was alluded to that he may have offered money as a settlement prior to the trial?

[Judge]

Yeah, JC A lot of talk of money during the two day trial and a wide range in money as well, from $19,000 yesterday to $5.5 million according to Diggs lawyers today after the fact. Diggs lawyers are very adamant on this one, saying there was never talks of a settlement.

[Glenn Jones]

Back to you, Eli Rosenberg, live for our south side Dedham District Court. Thank you.

[J.C. Monahan]

Joining us tonight for further discussion is NBC10 chief legal analyst Michael Cohen and of course, our courtroom insider, Sue o'. Connell. Welcome to both of you.

[Prosecutor]

Thank you.

[J.C. Monahan]

The question that I am hearing, and I think we all are during this whole trial, is how did we get this far? It was a Very quick trial with a very quick verdict. If it was so easy for the jury of six to come to this conclusion, and the fact that the prosecution had two witnesses, one the accuser and the person she reported to at a police station, how did we end up here, Michael?

[Michael Cohen]

Well, you have an accuser who stuck with her story despite having been attacked for it. You have a DA who's vulnerable from a couple of cases already that Karen Reid included, that have been bungled at times. And so I think facing the public under the circumstances, saying we're dropping a case against a star player, you didn't have a choice. The he. I think he had to move forward to try and see what the jury said. And that, that is part of the process, right, is to, to lay the facts out to a jury and see what they, what determination they make. And it turns on credibility in this case. And she wasn't ultimately found to be very credible at all.

[Glenn Jones]

And Sue, I found even myself while watching the first day of this trial wondering, why am I even watching a trial? And yesterday you brought up the same good point that Michael did, that if a DA is facing this kind of accusation against a celebrity, really, he's see it through. But you spoke to someone today who says there's another way to handle this.

[Sue O'Connell]

I spoke to a couple of people today who are former high level law enforcement folks and lawyers and whatnot. And each of them said they were waiting for the evidence to show up and when the patrolman was the test, testified and didn't have any evidence, didn't show any investigation, didn't say they he did anything except try to call Diggs and that was it. They wanted to know why the district attorney didn't have the state police do an investigation of some sort and if there was a conflict, use one of the other DA's offices with the state police or hire a private investigator to investigate. So they could either corroborate her story or say we can't corroborate her story. And then if the public says, why didn't you investigate this? They could say, we did. Case is open. If someone has new information, there just wasn't enough evidence here. So again, another waste of taxpayers, doll. People are saying from the district attorney of Norfolk county, when there was no evidence here at all that was presented.

[J.C. Monahan]

You know, we want to talk Mila Adams was the person who was accusing Stephan Diggs. If we can cue that up, just to give people a little idea of what she was like on the stand, because we've heard from Eli and you mentioned as well how combative they were. Can we play a little bit of that?

[Prosecutor]

Courtrooms function, and especially trials unfold in a question and answer formally. This is not an opportunity for you to interject your own narrative and evade responding to questions the court deems appropriate. And if you continue to do so, your entire testimony may be stricken.

[J.C. Monahan]

Okay, so that's how it ended. Before that, there was a lot of, you know, striking and combativeness to both of you. First of all, how do you handle. When that is your basically your one and only witness up there, how do you handle it? And then, sue, if you don't mind addressing what it was like in the, in the courtroom when you're hearing a witness like that.

[Michael Cohen]

Well, you've got to try and prepare them better. Not that they didn't. I don't blame the prosecutor in this case. I think you had a very bad witness who wanted a story to tell, whether in part was vengeance and character assassination, as I think part of that story ended up being. There's only so much you can do. You try the cases with the witnesses you have. I think Sue's point is right. They should have investigated it further when it got to the DA's office and really tried to find other witnesses. And in the absence of other witnesses, may have been wise to. To use their discretion and drop the case. But it would have come with at a price.

[Sue O'Connell]

And you could see the jury's faces. I could see the jurors faces just like, you know, they were very stoic. But there's this that look of just like, come on, what are you doing? Immediately after that, she avoided a question. Yes, again, so. And the press laughed a little bit because it was like she was staring at him. Right at us. And we sort of were just also exasperated. Like, didn't you just hear what the judge said? And so then you had the contrast of the defense's lawyers that come up who are her peers. Right. They are from her world. They are all young women who are in business with, working in this world, and they are professional and they are civilians. So they're giving testimony just like a regular person would. But they're answering the questions and they're following the directions and they are presenting themselves as young female professionals in this world who are answering these questions. And by contrast, that made Adams look even worse.

[Glenn Jones]

Let's talk about the corroboration piece of this, because the defense did call seven witnesses, as JC mentioned, the Commonwealth only called two. And in the closing arguments from the defense attorney, Andrew Kewal will play a bit of that for you in a moment. But he said there is no evidence here. They have nothing. And even on cross, these witnesses couldn't corroborate the story. Here's the defense attorney in closing.

[Prosecutor]

You didn't see any injuries. You didn't see any photographs. You learned there were no medical records, no statements, no nothing. Between December 2 and December 16, you have not been provided with a single shred of credible evidence to determine that any assault actually occurred in the house on that day. The Commonwealth case is nothing more than the words of Ms. Adams.

[Glenn Jones]

He's not wrong. But the ADA wanted the jury to dismiss those witnesses on credibility because all of them were on the payroll of Diggs. But it didn't work.

[Michael Cohen]

No, it didn't come across as effective at all. As sue points out, those witnesses appeared highly credible, professional, and they. One of them even testified. I wouldn't lie under oath simply because of some financial situation. They were terrific witnesses compared again, to the prosecution's witness, who was just horrible. So horrible that the prosecutor had to list how horrible she was in many ways during the opening of the close. It would have been enough to say she wasn't a perfect witness to then go into a litany of her abuses. Really sort of drove that home.

[J.C. Monahan]

Michael, sue, as always, thank you for your analysis inside and outside the courtroom.

[Glenn Jones]

Yeah, we really do appreciate it. Be sure to stick around because. Coming up, now that Diggs is a free agent, what's next for his playing career? Phil Perry from NBC Sports Boston joins us after the break to talk about Diggs NFL Future.

[Commercial Announcer]

Halliday presents in the red corner, the undisputed, undefeated weed whacker guy, champion of hurling grass and pollen everywhere. And in the blue corner, the challenger, Extra Strength Hannity. Eyedrops at work all day to to prevent the release of histamines that cause itchy allergy eyes. And the winner by knockout is Hatade. Bring it on.

[Defense Lawyer]

Our hope is that this is now behind him, that he will get signed by a team. Any team that signs him will be lucky to have him. And we are very pleased and happy that Stephon will continue on and play football in the National Football League.

[J.C. Monahan]

That was one of Stefan Diggs attorneys, Mitchell Shuster. After today's not guilty verdict in Diggs assault trial, Diggs now turning his attention from this case, undoubtedly to his football career.

[Glenn Jones]

Now, you might remember when Diggs was charged, the Patriots were preparing for the playoffs. Now he's a free agent. The team released him back in March. And many people feel it was a decision based on his salary, not necessarily because of this case.

[J.C. Monahan]

So now that he's been acquitted, could a return to the Pats happen? Who better to talk about this than our colleague at NBC Sports, Boston Patriots insider Phil Perry failed. The team supported Diggs when the allegations came out. Now that he's been acquitted, does it change anything? If it was about money, I wouldn't expect it would. But does it?

[Phil Perry]

I think it was about money. I think it was also about his age. He's going to turn 33 years old this season. And so I think when you look at the Patriots, I would never say never. I've come to learn that when it comes to this particular football team, but it would surprise me a great deal if they were to end up bringing him back. They just signed Romeo Dobbs from the Green Bay packers this past offseason. He does a lot of the same things Doug Diggs does. Excuse me, he's a little bit younger, very versatile. He should be sort of a dependable, security blanket type of player for Drake May, the same way Sifon Diggs was last season for the Patriots. We also guys believe. We believe that AJ Brown, the star receiver from the Philadelphia Eagles, will ultimately make his way to New England in a trade in early June. So adding Diggs back to the mix with those two new additions coming to Foxborough, to me, doesn't make a lot of sense.

[Glenn Jones]

Diggs has been in the league since 2015. He had a really good season last year, Phil. And when you listen to his defense team, they're suggesting the reluctance for him to be signed was a result of this case. Do you think the two are likely tied together?

[Phil Perry]

Well, listen, there's. There's a lot that you deal with when Stefon Diggs is part of your operation, and you just have to be okay with that. That's long been the case when he was a member of the Minnesota Vikings, when he was a member of the Buffalo Bills. And it was the case again when he was here in New England. We all know he missed some time during the early portion of the NFL calendar. He was videotaped on a boat with a suspicious bag of nobody really knows what pink substance, and he was handing it out to other others on the boat there. And he missed some time for that. And Mike Vrabel never really admonished him for that, but he said, we need to make good decisions on the field. And so I don't think this particular case was necessarily the reason he hasn't been signed yet. Again, he's going to be 33 years old. I think a lot of teams, they go into things like the draft and they say maybe the right receiver will fall to us and we can get the guy that we want at that position. If there are teams out there who didn't get that guy in the draft a couple of weeks ago, well, now they might be looking at Stefan Diggs, who did have 1,000 yards last season and did help Drake maybe take a big leap in his career. I'm looking at a team like Tom Brady's Las Vegas Raiders guys, they are very thin at the receiver position. Diggs has proven time and again that he can be great with young quarterbacks. They just drafted Fernando Mendoza with the number one overall pick in the draft. That could be a good landing spot for him. He's a one year guy. this stage of his career. One year, you end up moving on. He's not really a foundational piece that you're going to build around.

[J.C. Monahan]

I just want to ask a broader question because his lawyer afterwards, when he was talking outside the courthouse said professional athletes, ones where, you know their contract and they're a big deal, have targets on their back for trials like what we just went through, where basically people are just doing it for money. Just being in the sports world, would you agree that athletes in general are targets or have a target on the back?

[Phil Perry]

I think it's probably happened for a long time. And because the money has gotten to where it's gotten, you know, it doesn't surprise me that somebody has that opinion. I just, I watched that, you know, we would call that a post game interview in my world with his lawyer, and I thought he was way too strong. Stefan Diggs wasn't proof proven innocent in this case. He was proven not guilty. So to make it seem as though clearly nothing happened here, that's not what was proven in this case.

[J.C. Monahan]

I love it. Michael rubbing off on you.

[Defense Lawyer]

Pay attention.

[J.C. Monahan]

Not guilty and innocent, two different things.

[Glenn Jones]

Perry of NBC Sports Boston, thanks very much, Phil.