Interview Only: Stephen A reacts to Attorney Ryan Smith stating Diddy's attorney catching a major error, trial, and staring at the jury.

Summary

Podcast Summary: The Stephen A. Smith Show – Interview on Sean "Diddy" Combs' Trial

Release Date: June 7, 2025

In this episode of The Stephen A. Smith Show, host Stephen A. Smith engages in a detailed discussion with legal analyst Ryan Smith regarding the ongoing federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial of Sean "Diddy" Combs. The conversation delves into the latest testimonies, courtroom dynamics, and the strategic maneuvers of both the prosecution and defense teams. Below is a comprehensive summary of the key points, insights, and conclusions drawn during the episode.

---

1. Overview of Sean "Diddy" Combs' Federal Trial

Stephen A. Smith introduces the subject by outlining the seriousness of the charges against Sean "Diddy" Combs, including federal sex trafficking and racketeering. The focus is on recent courtroom developments, particularly the testimony of a witness using the pseudonym Jane.

2. Witness Testimony on Violent Tendencies

Timestamp: [02:44]

Ryan Smith emphasizes the significance of Jane's testimony, where she describes being "dangled over a balcony railing" by Combs in 2016. Smith explains:

“Jane Says: ... this shows the violent tendencies that the prosecution is saying Diddy has... if he could dangle somebody off a balcony, imagine what he might have threatened to do to Cassie if she didn't engage in the freak offs or to Jane...” ([02:44])

This testimony aims to establish a pattern of intimidation and potential violence used by Combs to control individuals in his circle.

3. Judge's Intervention on Courtroom Conduct

Timestamp: [03:34]

The judge has ordered the exclusion of Diddy from interacting with the jury to prevent any undue influence. Ryan Smith comments on the gravity of this decision:

“If the jury walks in one day and they don't see Diddy there, they wonder why... this is somebody trying to send an indication to somebody on the jury saying believe this or don't believe this, which could influence their decision.” ([03:34])

This move by the judge is portrayed as a crucial step in maintaining the trial's integrity.

4. Diddy's Courtroom Behavior and Limitations

Timestamp: [04:34]

Stephen A. Smith raises concerns about the restrictions placed on Diddy’s behavior in court, questioning the fairness of prohibiting any bodily expressions. Ryan Smith responds:

“It's reasonable to be able to have a reaction to things, but to be turning to the jury and reacting to them is borderline influencing them... the judge has to clamp down on that immediately.” ([04:55])

The discussion highlights the balance courts must maintain between allowing defendants to express themselves and preventing potential jury influence.

5. Defense Challenges: Alibi and Witness Credibility

Timestamp: [06:05]

Ryan Smith discusses a critical defense maneuver where Combs' team provided receipts proving his alibi, suggesting he could not have been present during the alleged incidents:

“He can't be in two places at once... this damages her testimony completely.” ([06:58])

This revelation poses significant challenges to the prosecution's case, undermining the credibility of witness Jane's statements.

6. Jane's Allegations of Coercion and Threats

Timestamp: [08:04]

Jane testified that Combs threatened to revoke her financial support if she did not continue participating in drug-fueled sexual parties ("hotel nights"). Ryan Smith analyzes:

“She now is talking about exactly what Cassie was talking about, which makes it a pattern... prosecutors are trying to show that Diddy is a person who strings people along, gets them in these relationships, gives them things, and then gets them in a situation that they feel they can't get out of...” ([08:29])

This aligns with the prosecution's strategy to depict a consistent pattern of manipulative and coercive behavior.

7. RICO Conspiracy and Pattern of Behavior

Timestamp: [08:29]

Ryan Smith elaborates on the RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) aspect of the case, which seeks to establish a pattern of criminal activity:

“They're trying to describe how he got his hands into them and then in their mind, put them in a position where they couldn't get out... building the RICO case, the sex trafficking case, the drug trafficking case, all of it is all based on him and his associates getting these people in a world that they couldn't get out of.” ([09:30])

The RICO charges underscore the systematic nature of the alleged crimes, linking various offenses to a central figure.

8. The Role of Age and Power Dynamics in the Case

Timestamp: [10:41]

Stephen A. Smith probes the relevance of the victims' ages in the context of consent and vulnerability. Ryan Smith responds:

“I think it's part of it, but I don't think it's all of it... how he conducted himself... putting them in a position where they couldn't get out.” ([11:27])

The conversation highlights how age and power dynamics may have made certain individuals more susceptible to manipulation and coercion.

9. Anticipating the Defense's Cross-Examination Strategy

Timestamp: [12:37]

Looking ahead, Ryan Smith anticipates aggressive cross-examinations from the defense team, aiming to undermine the prosecution's narrative by portraying the interactions as consensual:

“The defense is going to say, look, but you're calling these experts, you're saying, are we doing this?... it's going to be aggressive, it's going to be strong because that's exactly what they did with Cassie.” ([13:15])

This sets the stage for further legal battles, emphasizing the contentious nature of the trial.

Conclusion

Stephen A. Smith and Ryan Smith provide a nuanced analysis of the trial, dissecting both the prosecution's efforts to establish a pattern of coercion and violence, and the defense's strategies to counter these allegations. The discussion underscores the complexity of the case, the high stakes involved, and the broader implications for those in positions of power.

---

Notable Quotes:

• Ryan Smith on Diddy's Violent Tendencies:
  “...this is somebody trying to send an indication to somebody on the jury saying believe this or don't believe this, which could influence their decision.” ([03:34])

• Ryan Smith on Witness Credibility:
  “He can't be in two places at once... this damages her testimony completely.” ([06:58])

• Ryan Smith on RICO Conspiracy:
  “...building the RICO case, the sex trafficking case, the drug trafficking case, all of it is all based on him and his associates getting these people in a world that they couldn't get out of.” ([09:30])

• Ryan Smith on Defense Strategy:
  “The defense is going to get that chance when they cross-examine her... if that doesn't happen today, it's going to happen early next week.” ([13:15])

This episode offers an in-depth look into the strategic elements of a high-profile trial, providing listeners with expert insights into the legal maneuvers and implications surrounding Sean "Diddy" Combs' case.

Transcript

[Stephen A. Smith]

This is an iHeart podcast.

[AT&T Advertiser]

At&T has a new guarantee because most things in life are not guaranteed like getting through self checkout by yourself. Not guaranteed in a world where Nothing is guaranteed at&t is bringing something new to the table. At&t is introducing a guarantee with connectivity you depend on, deals you want and service you deserve or they make it right. Learn [e-mail] guarantee@&t connecting changes everything. Terms and conditions apply. Visit att.comguarantee for details.

[Ryan Seacrest]

Hello, it is Ryan and I was on a flight the other day playing one of my favorite social spin slot games on jumbacasino.com I looked over the person sitting next to me and you know what they were doing? They were also playing Jumba Casino. Everybody's loving having fun with it. Chumba Casino is home to hundreds of casino style games that you can play for free anytime, anywhere. So sign up [e-mail] to claim your free welcome bonus. That's chumbacasino.com and live the Chumba Life.

[Chumba Casino Advertiser]

Sponsored by Chumba Casino. No purchase necessary VGW Group Void where prohibited by law 21 plus terms and conditions apply.

[Stephen A. Smith]

Now let's get to the latest on the federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial of Sean Diddy Combs, a Diddy ex girlfriend. The latest, using the pseudonym Jane, was back on the stand today. She described the drug fueled sexual parties called hotel nights she endured during her relationship with Sean Diddy Combs. Jane says she felt pressured to have sex with other men. She also broke down in sobs as she recalled getting to spend time alone with Combs afterwards. And just yesterday the judge threatened to exclude Combs from court if he kept trying to interact with the jury. Combs was seen nodding in the jury's direction during the testimony of a woman who said Combs dangled her over a balcony railing in 2016. During that testimony, it was revealed that Combs was actually in New York during the Bad Boy reunion tour at the time she claimed the incident happened. Joining me to discuss the latest in the Diddy trials is one of the best legal minds in America as far as I'm concerned. Legal analyst extraordinaire for ABC News, obviously host Sports center on ESPN as well. My buddy, the one and only Ryan Smith. What's up man? How are you?

[Ryan Smith]

Hey man, good to talk to you. How you doing?

[Stephen A. Smith]

Let's get right to it. I'm good man. It's just that. It's just crazy to me, all of this Diddy stuff. We just keep hearing more and More stuff. It's hard to listen to, to be honest with you, but what do you make of the testimony of the witness who says she was dangled over the balcony of her apartment? How incriminating is that against Diddy?

[Ryan Smith]

Yeah, Banna, that's really important for the prosecution's case.

[Chumba Casino Advertiser]

Why?

[Ryan Smith]

Even though she wasn't somebody who said she was assaulted by him sexually. This shows the four the violent tendencies that the prosecution is saying Diddy has, that this is what women were afraid of, that this is why people had. That he had this threat of violence held over people. Because when you look at it from the prosecution's eyes, if he could dangle somebody off a balcony, imagine what he might have threatened to do to Cassie if she didn't engage in the freak offs or to Jane with what she's talking about with the hotel nights. Showing that and showing what happened for the prosecution is like saying this is how dangerous this man is.

[Stephen A. Smith]

When the judge threatened to remove him and exclude him from, from, from trial because he thought his facial expressions and what have you, you were influencing the jury. How big of a deal is that? If it is a big deal at all?

[Ryan Smith]

Yeah, I think that's huge. Because if the jury walks in one day and they don't see Diddy there, they wonder why and they can't necessarily be told why, or the judge will give them an instruction, but won't maybe not tell them all the details. But it goes to. If you're on that jury, you're thinking, wait, why did, why is there a change here? And any change, I think in this case involving Diddy is bad for the defense. So with Diddy, the accusation is that he's nodding to the jury. And here's the thing. When you're a defendant, you cannot interact with the jury. Why? Because that makes it seem like you're trying to influence them in some way. Here's Diddy with this power. People know him, they know of him. And if he's looking straight at you, juror number 12, and he's nodding, don't believe that, don't. I'm not saying I know that he did that per se, but when you talk about nodding for judges and for courtroom watchers, that's somebody trying to send an indication to somebody on the jury saying believe this or don't believe this, which could influence their decision. So in a way, the judge has to clamp down on that immediately.

[Stephen A. Smith]

But damn right, I mean, he got to sit there for weeks. He can't smile, he can't smirk, he can't nod his head. I mean, for weeks at a time. Isn't that an impossible task to expect from a defendant where you can't have any kind of bodily communication whatsoever, affirming or denying anything? Is that not a bit unreasonable?

[Ryan Smith]

It's reasonable to be able to have a reaction to things, but to be turning to the jury and reacting to them is borderline influencing them. And that's the last thing you want. You want these juries, jurors to be able to make any decision they want to make based on the evidence they're hearing, not based on the defendant looking at them, telling them, believe that, don't believe that. The thing here is, Stephen A. We don't know exactly what he was doing in that courtroom. If he's turning and nodding and making indications to them, that's off limits. You can't do that. And before trial, his defense team would have told him, hey, you can't make statements or do things to the jury or have loud outbursts because they know that the judge will clamp down because the judge doesn't want the jury being influenced. But having reactions, being upset or being mad or crying or scribbling a note to your lawyer, that kind of stuff is affected. Keep that, though, away from turning to the jury and trying to send an indication to them. And again, we don't know what Diddy was actually doing in that courtroom or what. What he might have been trying to do. But the judge has to look at that and say, any way in which you are reacting, turning to them and making a motion, is potentially trying to say to them, don't believe this, believe that, and possibly influencing their decision. He can't have that.

[Stephen A. Smith]

My next question is going to be, you know, just as a. As a treat to throw out to Diddy supporters out there, because just like R. Kelly had his supporters, Diddy's got his. And you have a lot of people that's been listening to you and others, you know, talk about what's going on during this trial, reporting accurately on what's actually transpiring in the courtroom and in the case itself, it says everybody's pointing the finger at Diddy. I mean, what about these other witnesses? What are they saying? How did we know they're telling the truth, et cetera, et cetera. I'll give you the latest example. Diddy's defense team said, proved that Diddy wasn't there. The defense actually provided receipts and asked a woman if he could be in two places at once. Once they proved that he wasn't Even in attendance at the time that she said this ordeal happened with them. And when they asked her that question, she said, theoretically. I mean, what does that mean? How incriminating is that against her?

[Ryan Smith]

Yeah, that damages her testimony completely. He can't be in two places at once. And the defense even said that can he be in LA and be in New York at the same time? No. And that kind of opens and shuts the door on her. So that is huge for the defense. That's a big thing for the defense. And you have to believe the jurors, whether they think she outright made that up or they think, hey, your story's got to be dubious. Maybe you had your dates different. Something doesn't add up here. You never want a witness on the stand saying one thing happened and then the other team getting up and saying, well, I can prove he was somewhere else. So, yes, it's damaging for prosecutors, but here's the thing. She was there to offer testimony about how he uses violence to intimidate people. Other people have offered that evidence. So for Diddy supporters out there who might say, hey, well, this is proof that he was never violent, I don't know if it's proof that he was never violent. I think maybe it's proof that he wasn't violent in the way this person described on that date. But Diddy still has a whole lot of things to push back on, to say that he didn't use threats and coercion to get people to do the things he wanted them to do.

[Stephen A. Smith]

Today the jury heard from Jane. Jane is her name, who testified that Combs threatened to stop paying for her apartment if she didn't continue to hotel nights, sleeping with other men for his pleasure. However, it was revealed, like you said, that Combs was going to. Was going to break up with her and she continued with the hotel nights. What do you make of that? She's going to break up with her, but she continued with the hotel nights anyway. Does that help his case at all?

[Ryan Smith]

It does in some ways, but it also helps the prosecution. Let me back up for everybody who hears Jane's testimony and starts reading it. What is important for prosecutors to prove here is a RICO conspiracy. That's a pattern. That's. That's basically saying, in a nutshell that Diddy is either assisting in or operating this sort of criminal enterprise, that other people are involved and it's this pattern of criminal activity. Now, I want people to hang on to the word pattern. We saw Cassie up there for days talking about these tenant, what he did with her, he started dating her, they start going out, he offers her the recording contract, they start working together. And then he starts engaging her in these freak offs, according to her, and starts using these threats and coercion, according to her, in terms of, hey, you got to keep doing this or I'm going to take things away. Now we see Jane talking about the same thing. Stephen. This is why I believe Jane's testimony is some of the most impactful testimony we're going to see in this trial, because she now is talking about exactly what Cassie was talking about, which makes it a pattern. So I know that people are going to say, well, look, she could have withdrawn herself from the free cost, but look at what she's saying as to why. She's saying, well, he started dating me and then we had this relationship. Then part of the relationship became these other things that I had to do, these hotel nights. And then he would say, well, I'm going to take. Of course, according to her, I'm gonna take this housing away. I'm gonna take these things away. It's the same kind of thing. It's a pattern, and in a way, it requires jurors to look at this and say, these women were in a position where they didn't feel like they had a way out. And Stephen, let me touch on one other thing related to this. I think 20, 30 years ago, we might look at this case and say, well, why didn't someone just leave? Now, we tend to look at these cases differently. We look at cases like R. Kelly, and we see grooming, we see how people are conditioned into certain behavior, and then they start feeling like they can't leave situations. That's the case the prosecution is trying to build here. They're trying to show that Diddy is a person who strings people along, gets them in these relationships, gives them things, and then gets them in a situation that they feel they can't get out of, either by violence or coercion, financially or otherwise, and puts them in this untenable situation.

[Stephen A. Smith]

So is it possible, before I let you get on out of here, that the real thing that's incriminating with him is the age of these ladies at the time he started their relationships with them. I'm guessing that based on what you alluded to in terms of how society was in the past, they would say it was consensual. Why couldn't you just walk away from the situation and then you bring in the grooming element? Well, if you. Somebody in your 30s or your 40s, somebody might not want to hear that. But if you're somebody in your teens and you started dating this gentleman, then obviously you're going to be perceived as being a bit more vulnerable. And as a result, he's going to be the person, person in a position of power who manipulated that power to take advantage of you. Is that a good way of, you know, basically drawing a synopsis to all of this and really crystallizing this for the viewers out there?

[Ryan Smith]

I think it's part of it, but I don't think it's all of it. I think the fact that they were younger woman women may have made them a little bit more susceptible to his influence. I think his power dynamic plays into part of this, that a woman who's older could have also been swept into this power dynamic. And I think the way he conducted himself, at least according to the prosecution, but making a mistake. STEPHEN A. As you watch these people testify, like Jane when she's talking about he had me take drugs across from LA to Miami. Now they're building the case of drug trafficking when he talks about having her and then her later calling people escorts to come in from different places to do these hotel nights. Now we're talking about the sex trafficking element. What you're seeing here, when I talk about grooming, I'm talking about his M.O. and they're trying to describe how he did this. But I think age, while being a part of it, is not all of it. I think what it is is they're trying to describe how he got his hands into them and then in their mind, put them in a position where they couldn't get out. And that's how they're trying to build the RICO case, the sex trafficking case, the drug trafficking case, all of it is all based on him and his associates getting these people in a world that they couldn't get out of. And age is a part of that, but I don't think it's all of it.

[Stephen A. Smith]

Last question. We've seen so much and we hear so much and it just appears to be getting more and more incriminating for Sean Diddy Combs by the day. But that's through the lens of the prosecution. When are we going to start seeing things through the lens of the defense team?

[Ryan Smith]

I think it's going to be at least a week. I think you can expect Jane to be on the stand for another couple days. And when you talk about the lens of the defense team, just like we saw with Cassie, we saw Cassie getting grilled on the standby. The defense we Heard me, We heard about Mia getting grilled on the standby. The defense, it's going to be the same with Jane because Jane has a lot of text messages going back and forth talking about their relationship. Jane talks about how she over time started booking the escorts herself. According to her, that was so she could control at least know the men that she would be kind of coerced into engaging in these hotel nights with. The defense is going to turn that and they're going to say, look, but you're calling these experts, you're saying, are we doing this? And you can't later come back and say it was non consensual because you were in this relationship with him for three years. As you said, Stephen, why didn't she get out? There are going to be questions like that. The defense is going to press on and they're going to press hard because the defense knows what's getting out there. The impression that Sean Diddy Combs controls these people, that he has a whole pattern of doing these things, that he uses all these associates to do these things. And that's the RICO conspiracy. They have to knock that down by essentially hitting on one key point. All of this was consensual, that he strongly denies all of this and that all of this was what the women wanted to do and wanted to do with him. So the defense is going to get that chance when they cross examine her. And I would say if that doesn't happen today, it's going to happen early next week. But it's going to be aggressive, it's going to be strong because that's exactly what they did with Cassie.

[Stephen A. Smith]

Ryan Smith, legal analyst extraordinaire for ABC News and of course sports center anchor for espn. Appreciate you as always. Have a wonderful weekend, man. Look forward to talking to you next week. You take care of yourself.

[Ryan Smith]

You too, man. Take care.

[Ryan Seacrest]

Hello, it is Ryan. And I was on a flight the other day playing one of my favorite social spin slot games on jumbaccasino.com I looked over the person sitting next to me and you know what they were doing? They were also playing Chumba Casino. Everybody's loving having fun with it. Chumba Casino is home to hundreds of casino style games that you can play for free anytime, anywhere. So sign up [e-mail] to claim your free welcome bonus. That's chumbacasino.com and live the Chumba Life.

[Chumba Casino Advertiser]

Sponsored by Chumba Casino. NO purchase NECESSARY VGW Group Void where prohibited by law 21 + terms and.

[AT&T Advertiser]

Conditions apply this is an iHeart podcast.