Ryan Smith (4:34)

Why?

Stephen A. Smith (4:37)

That's what I'm saying. I'm not talking about children. Anybody that's underaged, I got that part. But let me also make this claim. If you were underage 20 years ago, but now you're making a claim like a previous case against Diddy or against Jay Z, you shouldn't be a Jane Doe then, just because it happened to you when you were a child. I understand the child part, but ultimately you have become an adult. And once you're an adult, I'm not. I'm saying that should be the case. Am I missing something? Is it just me? How are you a Jane Doe or a John Doe as an adult? Something wrong with our legal system. And, you know, one of these days. See, these are the kind of stuff that I like to get into. I want to get into stuff like this in terms of our legal system. I want to get into divorce cases and alimony and palimony and the legitimacy of that. I want to get into child support. How much should you have to give up? How much should you be allowed to get? Et cetera, et cetera, male or female? No gender bias here. I'm just talking about our legal system. Because I got a lot of problems with the legal system. This is one of them. I can't wait to talk to my next guest about this. I need explanations. You get to accuse somebody and never have to identify yourself. Or even if you have to identify yourself later, I don't give a damn about that. I give a damn about why do we know about Jay Z allegations. Allegations against Jay Z, allegations against P. Diddy, but we don't know the names specifically who's accusing them. Something wrong with that? That's not America, y'all. Or at least it shouldn't be America. Now, before I get to my next guest, I know what some of y'all are thinking, especially in the case of Diddy. I mean, one could argue he has a history of witness intimidation, if not straight violence, based on what we saw him do to Cassie Ventura. History of intimidation and violence against those who attempt to go after him. Had a producer here wrote to me, there are legal and practical safety reasons people identify as a John or a Jane Doe. I get that. I got my producers in my head. They all worry. I ain't scared because I'm not making an accusation against a Jane or a John Doe. I'm simply saying the accused gets put on front street. Well, what happens if a Jane or John Doe is found to be less than honest and forthcoming? Do we get to know their names then? If you rake somebody through the codes, you see, I'm a semi public figure. My producers ain't they behind the camera. If somebody gonna sue, somebody is a member of this team, who you think gonna receive the lawsuit? And you get to sit up there and impugn my name, my integrity, but I don't get to know who you are. There's something wrong with that picture. I'm not talking about the Jane or the John Doe. I'm talking about the system. A system that potentially allows the accusers to live in darkness, draped in confidentiality. But the accused, without knowing their guilt or innocence, is put on front straight. Of course, there's cases where that's justified, and we always learn that. But there are some cases where it's not. Jay Z came out from day one and said, I am innocent. There is no truth to these allegations whatsoever. The case was ultimately dropped. But that was after his name was raked through the coals. That was after his name was draped in mud. That was after his business lost about $20 million in business. And now he has to sue the attorney for the accuser to get some sense of retribution and justice. That's my Opinion, I'm entitled to it. Not as much, however, as my next guest, who's a sports anchor. He's an attorney, and he's a legal analyst extraordinaire. Anything that I need to be set straight about in regard to these legal matters, I assure you he's more than qualified to do just that. And he won't hesitate to do so. I'm talking about a man that has been on this show on several occasions, very, very popular with my audience. He is back to talk to me about this stuff right now. The one and only Ryan Smith, my colleague at ABC and ESPN legal analyst extraordinaire, is here with us right now. What's going on, Ryan? How are you?

Ryan Smith (10:30)

What's going on, man? I'm good. How you doing?

Stephen A. Smith (10:33)

Listen, man, I just finished going off about this, and. And I want you to educate me about something before we even get into the particulars about Diddy, Jay Z, and what have you. I have a problem. I understand. I truly understand that there are certain cases where the Jane or the John does are necessary. What I was. What I was sounding off about was so Jay Z could be out there on Front street with the accusation the case could ultimately get dropped. Yet and still Jay Z could talk about how his name was smeared, having proclaimed his innocence the whole time, how he lost $20 million in business, and we know all about him, but we don't know anything about those accusing him. I have a problem with that in our system. Should I?

Ryan Smith (11:17)

Yes and no. And I know that may not be the answer you want to hear, but. But here's the situation. I get where you're coming from. You're saying anybody who has the wherewithal, money, attention, fame, they are subject to people just coming and saying, hey, you did something to me. Whether that's true or not, not saying anything about the accusations here, and I can come after you and I can drag your name through the mud and I can force a settlement. Yes, we should be concerned about that. But you got to think of it in terms of the way our system is built. I want to say first, so everybody knows anyone in this country can file a lawsuit against anyone else. But our court systems are supposed to have a process in place to make sure that those lawsuits don't go too far. They're frivolous. I think what we're all concerned about when you talk about people filing these suits is Stephen A. I want you to think of the power dynamic. Let's say there's someone out there who has been assaulted in some way. And let's say that person has been assaulted by someone rich, famous and powerful. The ways in which they try to bring that suit, people might think, well, just file something. You can file a lawsuit, you can do whatever you want, but think about how their name might be drugged to the mud. Think about, in the same way that the famous person might have lawyers and other people to guard them, their popularity might not change the other person, their life changes fundamentally. And if that accuser, if what happened to them actually happened, they've been victimized in some way, they get victimized all over again. Not just in one hearing, not just in one deposition, but but over months, if not years. And they become the public face of people coming at them all because in this fact scenario I'm building, something happened to them that was horrible and unimaginable. So we want to protect against those kinds of scenarios for people in that power dynamic. And I think it's hard for people to conceptualize how hard it can be for somebody who has been attacked or if something bad has happened to them, how hard it can be not only to go through the incident, but also to relive it in the court process. So that's what we're trying to protect against. But on the other side, we want to also make sure we're not getting frivolous lawsuits for people who haven't suffered something. So it's a tough needle to thread, but that's the problem with trying to protect identities versus not.

Stephen A. Smith (13:31)

And to me, the needle, threading it being tough is completely understandable, particularly when it comes to children, underaged individuals, they're totally worth it. But when I think about adults, there's a reason why we separate adults from children. You could commit a crime as a child, you're not going to be held to the same level of accountability in most instances as you would be if you were a full fledged adult. And so I'm thinking the Jane Doe, the John Doe, while totally justifiable, particularly piggybacking off your explanation of it all, it's still should rub us all the wrong way that even adults get to disguise their name and conceal their name while accusations are made that could cost somebody their livelihoods. I'm not even talking about billions. I'm talking about sometimes when it comes to jail. And that's what I wanted to say about that. Ryan, what's your response to that?

Ryan Smith (14:28)

Yeah, I hear you. If the accusations are not true, and we want to know that, people would not do that. But Steve and I, we live in the real world, people sometimes bring up things that aren't true. And also, can I just give you also this perspective sometimes? And I know people are going to say, I can't believe you're saying this, but look, sometimes people suffer trauma and they don't really process that trauma until later and until they feel comfortable. And then even if they've processed that trauma, they don't feel comfortable putting themselves out there in a court process situation until they feel the time is right. And then we want to protect those people because they've suffered that trauma. So I think that's why I say it's a tough needle to thread. It's such an amorphous thing like what someone has gone through, what they might remember, what they might have experienced. And I think that's why we have those Jane does and John does situations. Just in terms of the theory of it, we want to make sure people are safe, feel safe in coming forward and bringing claims against other people, even though they might be afraid of what might happen to them.

Stephen A. Smith (15:31)

Give me your reaction to Diddy's lawyers attempts to keep Tony Busby, the Houston based attorney, away from this trial.

Ryan Smith (15:38)

Yeah, this is a really interesting one. Essentially what they're saying is he didn't file the necessary paperwork and he's not approved to practice in the Southern District of New York where he's bringing a lot of different cases. Now, just as a sort of overview on this thing, there's a concept called pro hoc viche. What that means is you're from another district, you want to practice in this new district and on this occasion, that's kind of the Latin words for pro hog viche. On this occasion you're allowed to do it. So what Diddy's lawyers were saying is, look, he didn't file the necessary paperwork yet he filed all these cases. He's not admitted to practice. He can't do this kind of thing in the courtroom because he didn't do the necessary things it took to actually participate in this case in this way in the Southern District of New York. Now Tony Busby is basically saying to this, not true, I'm admitted in the State Bar in New York. Just a sidelight here. You could be admitted in the State Bar of New York but still have to do paperwork to get into the Southern district. So those are two, those two things can be true there. But at the same time, what Diddy's lawyers are really concerned about is the way Busby has been acting. In their mind they believe that he does things like, for example, say things in the media that in some ways can prejudice their client, that can make their client look bad with his upcoming criminal trial coming up in his civil suits. And they make the argument of, hey, the guy has not filed what he needed to to be in this district. He has previously been admonished and ruled against in terms of being in this district because he didn't do it in another case. And now we can't let him come in and do it on these cases because look at how he's acting in our minds. Look at how he's putting stuff out there in the media. He doesn't know the standard that we have here and therefore he needs to be excluded. So I think it's going to be a little bit of an interesting fight. And then on the Busby side, you have to wonder, if he's filing all these cases, why didn't he do the necessary things to be able to practice in the Southern District of New York?

Stephen A. Smith (17:27)

That's a good point. No question about it. Busby appeared on this show, by the way. I don't know if you knew that. He appeared on this show a few weeks after Combs was arrested last year, claiming to have dozens of victims of various allegations against Combs. He also accused Jay Z at the time in the suit. Are actually in a suit that was dismissed now, Jay Z suing him, as you well know. What impact, if any, would that have on Diddy Cone's federal trial, in your estimation?

Ryan Smith (17:50)

You mean Jay Z, sue and Busby?

Stephen A. Smith (17:53)

Yes. Yes.

Ryan Smith (17:55)

The big thing can be if. If in some way he's admonished, it makes him look bad in some ways in the public perception aspect. But the cases themselves, we got the criminal trial and likely the civil cases after that. That's the way we usually have it. And that's the way it looks like it's going to play out here in terms of Busby and Jay Z's interaction affecting Sean Combs criminal trial, I don't think there will be a lot of effect there. From what I'm seeing in some of the complaints that have been filed by. From what I'm seeing in some of the documents that have been filed by Combs lawyers, Busby's clients, these civil clients aren't going to have a whole lot of interaction with the criminal trial, at least at this point, could change. But what happens to the lawyer doesn't necessarily affect what happens in another criminal trial. I think for Tony Busby, the concern is if my name is being out there, put out there in a way that makes you makes me look ineffective, makes me look like I shouldn't be practicing in this particular jurisdiction, and in a sense, makes me look like I'm not doing the right thing. And Busby's point in all this is, hey, this is because I'm effective. These other sides, they're coming after me because I've got these people with real claims. And so they're throwing everything against the wall and seeing what can stick. And in his mind, he's saying, it's just a paperwork error that can be rectified. I should be able to manage these cases.

Stephen A. Smith (19:12)

Meanwhile, another alleged victim, because I can't forget this, a male escort filed a suit this week against Diddy Combs, alleging sexual assault. What impact will these lawsuits or news of them had on Diddy's upcoming trial?

Ryan Smith (19:25)

All of this, Stephen A. Reminds me of what we saw, you and I, when they first announced the charges against Sean Combs. And what the prosecutor at that time said is, and I'm paraphrasing here, this isn't the end of this. We're still looking into all sorts of claims. We're still investigating all of this. And you think about how any of this came to be the stuff involving Cassie, the initial video that we all saw. I think in cases like these, what you have is on the criminal side, they are always keeping an eye on what is going on outside of that. They want to see, hey, is there anything there on the outside? Some of these civil cases, maybe they want to see, does any of this in any way interact with what we're trying to do criminally now, I'm not saying it will. We don't know that for sure. The case is coming up. But at the same time, you have to wonder with the cases continuing to arise, and we've seen this in other aspects separate from Sean Combs case. Sometimes when you have civil cases that continue to arise, prosecutors in a criminal case will say, let me take a look at that. Let me keep an eye on that to see if there's anything going on there that might affect what we're doing here.

Stephen A. Smith (20:34)

Last couple of questions before I let you go. Ryan Smith, really appreciate your time. How much more trouble is Diddy in right now in your estimation, compared to when he was first arrested and indicted on these charges?

Ryan Smith (20:48)

You're talking about criminally or civilly?

Stephen A. Smith (20:50)

Criminal, Criminally. And I'm just wondering if this, like, we, we keep hearing different things come out about him week after week after week. So I'm wondering if in your eyes, things have gotten worse or Things the same as they once were months ago.

Ryan Smith (21:05)

I think from the outside looking in, it appears like it's gotten worse. From the prosecutor's perspective, I think it's largely the same. And the reason why is when you talk about the Southern district of New York and the case they're bringing, this is a, this is a district with an extremely high win rate. I mean, when they, when you see them in front of the microphones announcing the charges, announcing what they have, they have got the meat of their case together. This isn't like, hey, I'm going to come out there. We're filing this case. Hopefully it goes well. This is, we got them. We feel confident in that. We got them and we're pursuing this case. Everything else after that becomes about compiling evidence, fine tuning your case, getting ready for the trial. So outside looking in, I think it's gotten, it seems to have gotten worse for Diddy. The court of public opinion is against him, but in a trial, we're not supposed to really be thinking about that. So much for the prosecutors. They're looking at this like, no, we knew a lot of this already. We have now fine tuned or we're going to continue to fine tune our case and anything else we're building on top of that is great. But when we file the charges, when we put this out there, when we began this criminal case, our case was strong enough. That's what I think they're probably thinking at this point.

Stephen A. Smith (22:18)

Very last question for you, Jay Z. His issue was civil. That's been dropped. Now he's going after Busby. So I don't think we need to be concerned about him being in any kind of trouble based off of how things have panned out in his situation. Diddy, we talk about this all the time. But you know what we haven't said, said we haven't heard enough of Ryan. How much time is Diddy potentially looking at in jail if found guilty of these charges?

Ryan Smith (22:48)

Life in prison. Life in prison. And this is, this is serious. You know, I think a lot of times when people think of criminal charges, they think, well, life, it means a lot less. Could be a lot less. Absolutely. But I just want to say that when you have a case involving a high profile person like Sean Combs, it's not even so much about could it be less. And when you talk about federal cases, usually whatever those charges are, those, that time will stick in many, many cases. I think what you've got here is a situation where prosecutors know this is high profile. They know they want to Win. But they also are trying to send a message. They're trying to send a message, just like they did in the Weinstein case and other cases like it, that the powerful will not be able to take advantage of the people without power, especially in the entertainment industry. So when you look at a case like this, we just talk about what he could face. But this is, this is about as serious as it gets for a criminal charge against any entertainer we have ever seen. Because of the stakes for the prosecutor's office and because he's facing all this time, life in prison. I mean, that is, that is as serious as it gets.

Stephen A. Smith (24:02)

What about his lawyer? One of his lawyers backing out of the case, recusing himself from the case, didn't give reasons why, but he backed out. What about that?

Ryan Smith (24:12)

Yeah, this is something. So I read about this and the first thing I thought is there's always, we talked about this earlier. Public perception versus what might have really happened. Public perception. And I'll just give you this perspective. If you're a client on a case and one of your lawyers backs out, you want to be concerned about what that looks like publicly. Because the public sentiment can be, hey, did they drop out because they think there's something wrong in this case? That's the last thing you want people to see. There's a number of reasons. First thing is we don't know why. And that's the most important thing, because there's a number of reasons lawyers can drop out of cases. One could be time constraints. Another, which I think we saw in different high profile cases over time, is when lawyers are involved in cases and they might have a disagreement of how they handle the case or a disagreement of who does what, or a disagreement of how they interact. In this case, it might cause one lawyer to be like, hey, I can't do my job effectively, so I'm going to move back. If you get too deep into the trial process, it's hard to withdraw. But I think we're early enough that this lawyer could pull back. And the key is we can't know exactly what that reasoning was. And I would caution the public to make a read into this and say, oh, it has to do with something about Diddy. The case might not be going his way. A lot of times this is not, this is not abnormal, at least at this point. And a lot of times it can come from stuff going on within the team that we just don't know about.

Stephen A. Smith (25:35)

My brother, it doesn't get any better than you. The one and only Ryan Smith right here breaking down the Diddy Jay Z situation going on and has been going on over the last few weeks and months, obviously. Ryan Smith, thank you so much for your time, my brother. I really, really appreciate it. Have a wonderful weekend.

Ryan Smith (25:51)

Anytime, Stephen. I Take care, man. You too. What's up everyone?

Stephen A. Smith (26:01)

It's Greg Rosenthal and I'm teaming up with the King of Spring, Daniel Jeremiah. He requires me to say that we're.

Ryan Smith (26:08)

Going to be bringing you 40s and.

Stephen A. Smith (26:09)

Free agents, the only podcast you'll need this NFL draft season. From DJs, mock drafts to my top 101 free agents will have have it covered for you with all new episodes.

Ryan Smith (26:19)

Every Thursday keeping you up to date as we head to the NFL Draft. Listen to 40s and free agents starting on March 6th on the iHeartRadio app.

Stephen A. Smith (26:28)

Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. What's up everyone? Julie Swearbinks here along with former NHL player Nate Thompson.

Ryan Smith (26:36)

We're doing a new podcast together. Here we go.

Stephen A. Smith (26:39)

The name Energy Line with Nate and jsb.

Ryan Smith (26:42)

Each week we'll get together and talk about hockey life. All topics are fair game, right?

Stephen A. Smith (26:47)

Exactly. And you'll never know who will drop by to join us. Julie is pretty well connected.

Ryan Smith (26:53)

She has text threads going that you wouldn't believe.

Stephen A. Smith (26:56)

Listen to Energy Line with Nate and jsb on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.