Loading summary
Transcript85 lines
- [00:00]
Hermania Rodriguez Poleo
Welcome to the Trial of Diddy. I'm Hermania Rodriguez Poleo.
- [00:03]
Marjorie Hernandez
And I'm Marjorie Hernandez filling in for Kayla Brantley.
- [00:06]
Hermania Rodriguez Poleo
We'll be back in a second.
- [00:18]
LinkedIn Ad
Does it ever feel like you're a marketing professional just speaking into the void? Well, with LinkedIn ads you can know you're reaching the right decision makers. You can even target buyers by job title, industry, company, seniority, skills. Wait, did I say job title yet? Get started today and see how you can avoid the void and reach the right buyers with LinkedIn ads. We'll even give you a $100 credit on your next campaign. Get started at LinkedIn.com results, terms and conditions apply.
- [00:49]
BetterHelp Ad
BetterHelp Online Therapy bought this 30 second ad to remind you right now, wherever you are, to unclench your jaw, relax your shoulders, take a deep breath in and out. Feels better, right? That's 15 seconds of self care. Imagine what you could do with more visit betterhelp.com randompodcast for 10% off your first month of therapy. No pressure, just help. But for now, just relax.
- [01:30]
Christian Dropo
Have you ever wondered how your body naturally repairs and rejuvenates itself? It all comes down to your stem cells. Your body's built in repair system that renews tissue, restores balance and helps you feel your best. But by age 30, you have up to 90% fewer stem cells in circulation. That's where Stem Regen comes in. Founded by stem cell scientist and health pioneer Christian Dropo, Science Stem Regen products are designed to support your body's natural repair system by using science backed plant based extracts. Just two capsules of stem regen releases an average of 10 million of your own stem cells into your body. No injections, just two capsules empower your body to rejuvenate from within. Whether you're focused on recovery, longevity or just overall wellness, Stem Regen can help release more of your health, more life and more of the best version of you. Try IT now at StemRegen Co and use code POD15 for 15% off. Your first that's STEM REGEN CODEPOD15.
- [02:32]
David Gelman
The biggest secret in the entertainment industry that really wasn't a secret at all.
- [02:37]
Marjorie Hernandez
At the height of his career, Sean Diddy Combs had it all.
- [02:41]
Hermania Rodriguez Poleo
Everything Diddy touched turned to gold. Now he faces multiple federal charges in New York including sex trafficking and allegedly running a criminal enterprise. Another woman has now come forward alleging Combs of sexual assault. Music mogul and rapper Sean Diddy Combs. She claims she was drugged and sexually assaulted by Combs. Oh, this guy is dangerous. From freak offs to the mysterious list. The shocking case that has gripped the world is finally here, and we'll be bringing you every detail as it happens. Welcome to the trial of Diddy. Welcome back to the Trial of Diddy. We're recording on Thursday, July 3, and the verdict in the US vs Sean Diddy Combs trial has been finally announced. Diddy was found not guilty of sex trafficking of his ex girlfriends, Cassie Ventura and Jane, and not guilty of racketeering conspiracy, which was the most serious charge against him.
- [03:40]
Marjorie Hernandez
However, Diddy was found guilty of two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution of both Cassie and Jane. Each of these counts holds a maximum of 10 years in prison. Diddy's lawyers requested that he be let out on bail until his sentencing hearing in October. However, at this time, his bail was denied. A hearing for the bail is set to take place on Tuesday, July 8th.
- [04:05]
Hermania Rodriguez Poleo
Later in the day, Diddy was denied his request for a $1 million bond to be able to spend his time in his Miami home as he awaits sentencing. Judge Aaron Subramanian said that Diddy has shown a propensity towards violence against his ex girlfriends and accusers. He said he was concerned about witness intimidation until the October 3rd sentencing date. The defense was begging the judge to reconsider and even told him that Diddy wanted to talk to him about the bond. But the judge was not having it and said that on the July 8 date he will address the defense's concerns.
- [04:42]
Marjorie Hernandez
Although he was convicted of lesser transportation for prostitution offenses, Diddy's family and his lawyers were very happy about this win. His family was seen exiting the court on Wednesday smiling from ear to ear and waving at the press. Diddy's mom, Janice, was also blowing kisses to the crowd that was assembled outside of the federal courthouse. And Diddy's lawyers also held a press conference. At the end of the day.
- [05:06]
Hermania Rodriguez Poleo
Yeah, Marjorie. Diddy's mood did seem to darken after he was denied bond. However, he was still very supportive of his family. He told his mom, don't worry. I'll be all right. I'll be home soon. We're gonna get through this. Here's the original audio of what his defense team had to say about this legal win.
- [05:27]
Jennifer Beidle
You saw that the Southern District of New York prosecutors came at him with all that they had. They're not stopping. But one thing stands between all of us and a prison, and that is a jury of 12 citizens. And we had a wonderful jury. They listened to every word and they got the situation right, or certainly right enough. They acquitted him of the sex trafficking, which he was absolutely innocent of, they acquitted him of. The racketeering conspiracy that he was absolutely innocent of and all of the components to it. The kidnapping, he was innocent of that. The arson, he was innocent of that. The obstructing justice, he was innocent of that. And that is no longer just me saying that. That is the verdict of our jury. So today's a great day. Today is a win. Today is a victory of all victories for Sean Combs and our legal team.
- [06:28]
Hermania Rodriguez Poleo
Welcome to the trial of Diddy. A win is a win.
- [06:42]
Entera's Gel Ad
Living with ibs, you're not alone. For millions, it's a daily struggle. Diarrhea, bloating, urgency and abdominal pain that disrupts everything from travel to meals and even just leaving the house. You plan your life around where the nearest bathroom is. You cut out foods, you take medication after medication take just to get through the day. That's why I want to tell you about something different. It's called Entera's Gel, IBS Diarrhea Relief. A drug free tasteless gel that gently cleanses your gut of the harmful substances that can trigger IBS symptoms, from bile acids to toxins and other inflammatory molecules. Entera's Gel doesn't just manage symptoms. It's clinically proven to improve quality of life and is recognised by top UK gastroenterologists and GPs as treatment for IBS with diarrhea. It's safe for all ages and with over 8 million packs sold in Europe last year, it's been called life changing, even a miracle gel by reviewers on trustpilot. Simply mix with water and go from exhausted to empowered with one tasteless gel. The great news is you can save 30%@enterasgel.co.uk with code IBS30. You'll find the link in the show notes or you can grab it at Boots, Amaz and all good pharmacies. Entera's Gel Relief that goes beyond the symptoms.
- [08:13]
BetterHelp Ad
BetterHelp Online Therapy bought this 30 second ad to remind you right now, wherever you are, to unclench your jaw, relax your shoulders, take a deep breath in and out. Feels better, right? That's 15 seconds of self care. Imagine what you could do with more. Visit betterhelp.com randompodcast for 10% off your first month of therapy. No pressure, just help. But for now, just relax.
- [08:57]
Marjorie Hernandez
Foreign welcome back to the Trial of Diddy. Joining us today is former SDNY federal prosecutor turned white collar criminal defense Lawyer at Dyke McGossett in Detroit, Jennifer Beidle and friend of the show, David Gelman, who is a Former Burlington county prosecutor, founder of the Gelman law firm. Thank you both for being here.
- [09:24]
Unnamed Legal Expert
Thank you.
- [09:25]
David Gelman
Thanks for having us.
- [09:26]
Marjorie Hernandez
Obviously, we're now into the next phase of this. We were hoping to get your reaction to the verdict itself.
- [09:33]
Hermania Rodriguez Poleo
David can start because I was gonna mention you received a lot of hatred last time we had you on the podcast because your prediction was there's no way this man can be convicted of these things. Well, have your moment to say I told you.
- [09:49]
David Gelman
I mean, you know, I'm not gonna say I told you so, but I really did. And you know, you got all the haters. I just didn't think it was a good case. And neither did the jury. Apparently this is a glorified prostitution case at most. So Diddy can be a bad boy not forever, but for a little longer in jail. I thought the jury, again, they got it right. The defense did a fantastic job. You can't give them enough credit. I don't know how much money they got, but it was money well spent. Kudos to them. And again, I think the jury did a good job. And frankly, I wouldn't have been surprised if he wasn't convicted of anything.
- [10:26]
Hermania Rodriguez Poleo
That really was your prediction that there was going to be no convictions, but he did get convicted on the lesser prostitution charges.
- [10:33]
David Gelman
That's nothing. That really isn't anything. If that was in state court, he would have gotten probation. He'd be out on the street having his freak off for fourth of July. But this is a huge win for him. A huge win. And it's a tremendous loss for the sdny.
- [10:48]
Marjorie Hernandez
I have to say, when I spoke to Jen pre verdict, she also actually got it right. She thought that he would be convicted of transportation for prostitution. So Jen, can you explain how you came to that conclusion and you went all the way in and you also got some criticism from your peers? I believe I did.
- [11:09]
Unnamed Legal Expert
You're right. Sometimes it's hard to be the outlier, but you get vindicated in the end. On the RICO charges, I just thought there wasn't enough evidence of a criminal enterprise. They spent a lot of time on specific bad acts that he engaged in. You know, calling different victims and talking about the things that happened. But I didn't see enough evidence of there being an actual enterprise. Calling the co conspirators, calling cooperating witnesses things that you would typically expect in a RICO case. I thought it was a closer call on the sex trafficking. I think there was some evidence of coercion and some, you know, some evidence of other force and things. But there was Countervailing evidence that the jury obviously thought was more convincing that some of these victims were engaged in the conduct voluntarily, and there wasn't enough to prove coercion beyond a reasonable doubt. I do think it would have been hard to get an acquittal on the transportation for prosecution count because there was pretty clear evidence that people were transported across state lines to engage in prostitution. And the defense, I think, wisely owned up to a lot of the conduct that was actually proven, and that pretty much amounts to that transportation count. So as David says, there's a lot less of a penalty in connection with those counts. And I think it was a calculated risk that seems to have paid off for the defense.
- [12:38]
Marjorie Hernandez
Yeah. One of the things that shocked me actually was when it was the defense turn. Obviously they don't have to put on a case. However, they only spent less than 25 minutes, I think actually 20, 26 minutes. 26 minutes presenting their case. But were you shocked that all. Or do you think that they did the right thing by not putting on a huge defense in that sense?
- [12:58]
David Gelman
Yeah, I do. I think, look, when you are up in the game, you're not going to go for the home run. You know, be safe, get a single. That's all they needed to do. They did a really good job on cross examination of each and every witness. And look, you're not going to do the, you know, the aha moment for everybody, you know, like you see in the movies or TV shows. But overall, the defense, they didn't have to do anything. They certainly didn't have to call Diddy. You know, I understand that the defendant has the right to testify and it's their decision. But I can tell you this. Even if he wanted to do it, all the attorneys, every one of them had to have said, diddy, you are not going to testify. You will only cause harm to yourself. You will only incriminate yourself. Do not testify. And I don't know if there was a fight about that, but however that came out, I'm glad that he didn't testify. Or, well, he should be glad he didn't testify, I should say. But other than that, I don't think they needed to really do much else because the case was weak to begin with. There was reasonable doubt, and that's all you need. And they proved it time and time again with each and every witness to.
- [14:11]
Hermania Rodriguez Poleo
Follow up on that, Jen, I want to hear from you because there seems to be a gap between what the public understands of this case versus what we actually see saw in court. A Lot of shock yesterday. You know, people who don't understand how if we've seen this man beat up Cassie in the way that we have seen, how has he been acquitted? How is he getting such a win in court? I actually also saw a lot of people take that 26 minute defense case as, oh, these lawyers don't know what they're doing. Or even being offended because he had a very snarky tone throughout. I mean, he kept saying something like, oh, I'm glad the country is safe now, cuz they took Diddy's baby oil. A lot of people read that as, that's not gonna work. So Jen, explain to everyone, even though Diddy might be a terrible guy, he was not found to be a sex trafficker or the head of a criminal enterprise.
- [15:07]
Unnamed Legal Expert
Yeah. For that kind of conduct, he's actually really lucky. Found himself in federal court in a way, because the standards and the burdens to prove the federal crime are a lot higher. They have to prove things far beyond just the domestic abuse and just an incident with a frying pan and things like that that we obviously saw. And so I can see how laypeople who don't have a lot of background in the law would look at this and say, we heard about all kinds of horrible conduct that would be state court crimes. But that's not the standard here. The government has to come in, they charge a racketeering conspiracy. So they've got to show this big criminal enterprise that has all of these purposes to continue on in a criminal way. Obviously the jury thought they didn't show that. And then the sex trafficking and the issues with Cassave Ventura and Jane Doe require them to have proven beyond a reasonable doubt, which is a very hard standard, that there was coercion. If there was a civil case where this was by preponderance of the evidence. If Cassie and Jane sue Diddy and bring this to jury, maybe the result would be different. Maybe if you were looking at the evidence of coercion versus the evidence against it, like in the defense's emails and things like that, maybe in a preponderance standard, a jury would find something different. But it is a very different burden to be a juror sitting in a room trying to convict someone than someone on the street just looking at this trial.
- [16:37]
Hermania Rodriguez Poleo
Right. And that brings me to why did the state choose these charges? What happened here? A lot of people are now saying that was mistake number one. You could have gotten him for other things. Why are you going to give yourself such a high standard to reach what Happened here.
- [16:55]
David Gelman
I just want to go back to Jen's point for one second. I know the lay people out there are saying, oh, he's a bad guy. You know, I can't believe he did that to Cassie and everything. Nobody's saying he's a saint, he's a terrible guy. I mean, I think everybody can see that. But he's not being charged with domestic violence charges. All right, Those statute of limitations have passed. They're well passed. If that was, you know, what he was being charged with, he would have been found guilty.
- [17:22]
Hermania Rodriguez Poleo
That was my question. Is that what it is? Were those statutes of limitations done and that's why this was the only way to try and get him. Is that what happened?
- [17:31]
David Gelman
Well, a couple things. Number one there, that's domestic violence. Those aren't federal crimes. So he would have to be charged in state court. That's number one. Number two, yeah. Statute of limitations have long exceeded. Cassie. I forget the exact years, but it's been like was seven, eight years, something like that, where the allegations and the videos have come from. So the statute of limitations are passed. So the government, even if they wanted to, they wouldn't be able to just do the fact that they're domestic violence. But then you have the statute of limitations. So the charges that they are, that they brought now are really the best they could have done. I've been saying this, that these charges were weak to begin with. RICO is something that other attorneys can't even understand. You get 10, 12 attorneys in a room and Jen. Jen is not. Because she agrees. She knows what I'm talking about. You get 10 or 12 attorneys into a room, everybody's going to say something different about RICO because nobody knows what the hell it is. So how are you going to put 12 jurors in a room? You think they're going to know what it is? No. No. So they just overshot their target by a million. Okay. That's as simple as that can be when it comes to it. I don't know if their case just collapsed while it presented itself, because if you remember, witness number three was supposed to be this high profile witness that was going to corroborate everything.
- [18:55]
Hermania Rodriguez Poleo
Well, victim number three, I just wrote a story. Yes, she went missing before the trial started yesterday. She told tmz, Diddy never did anything dangerous to me. I'm not scared of his release. This comes after she had claimed he had abused her. So a change of story there. So, yeah, I think prosecutors were counting on a victim three that just didn't show up.
- [19:20]
David Gelman
I don't think they did a very good job. Look, it's a top down prosecution, all right? So the sdny, the prosecutors, they got their marching orders, if you will, from, you know, from the head. And it's not the head that is.
- [19:34]
Unnamed Legal Expert
There anymore thinking about the state system versus the federal system. Like sometimes prosecutors in the federal system might think it would have been better for the state system to have gone ahead and prosecuted these domestic violence charges, but they don't have any control over that. Even if we were within the statute of limitations, they can't make a local prosecutor in LA or wherever bring a charge. And so if they think there is criminal conduct going on and something needs to be done about it, they are left with only the things that they have to charge. And that's what they did. I do think it was aggressive, but, you know, they also can't force the other things to happen. That maybe would have been a better result.
- [20:16]
Marjorie Hernandez
Now, going back to the RICO charge, like David said, it's very complex. Jury definitely seemed like that they had an issue with that and coming up with a decision right away. And again, that's having to do with the criminal enterprise of the charge. But. And we heard repeatedly two different names that kept coming up during the trial, and Christina Karam and Drock, who was Diddy's security guard, good friend for years, and Christina was his chief of staff for years as well. We heard so much about them from all the different witnesses, but they were not called to the stand. So I was wondering, do you think that really was a huge blow to the prosecution?
- [20:56]
Unnamed Legal Expert
It certainly seems like it to me. I think we're never going to know what happened behind closed, closed doors in this particular jury's mind. Exactly. But I would think one of the things that would come to mind is where were those two? Why is there the mdc? Why don't we hear their story of what supposedly happened? Like David said, there could have been an effort on the prosecution's part to bring in those witnesses too. And maybe that fell apart for some reason, we don't know. But either way, we're left with just sort of bits and pieces of testimony from other lower level witnesses who talk about things maybe they did to help Diddy. The jury obviously didn't think that was enough to make a criminal enterprise. And there were efforts to prove things like the fire bombing of the car and all these other things like kid cuddies that then they withdrew reliance on that. And so, you know, I would think the jury is probably confused on the charge on rico, because I totally agree with David that lawyers don't even understand what RICO is. So then they're left with this very confusing thing. They didn't hear from two witnesses. They probably wanted to. The prosecution's withdrawing evidence, and they. They kind of say, I guess they didn't satisfy, that these comments by the.
- [22:12]
Hermania Rodriguez Poleo
Judge described him as a dangerous person. However, he's only convicted of these lesser charges that experts say shouldn't carry that long. But are these comments by the judge describing Diddy as a threat to society a sign that he could give him the full weight of the laws? Prosecution said they're going to ask. They said they want 10 years per conviction.
- [22:35]
Unnamed Legal Expert
I think that 10 years per conviction is pretty aggressive here. And I don't know that the judge is going to go that far. It is interesting. When they make bond decisions, they're supposed to look at just flight risk and then dangerousness to the community. And so obviously, when he detained him before, there were all these flight risk concerns that, as you said, are removed now. So he is saying he thinks that Diddy poses a danger to society. And we saw in the bond hearing, both sides did sort of a back of the envelope guidelines calculation, and the government's was higher because they want to add all these different enhancements. I think the judge is probably signaling that he's going to be receptive to some of those additions to the guidelines range. And when the guidelines range goes up, the sentence usually goes up. They don't have to stick in the guidelines range, but it's pretty instructive. You know, one of the factors that a federal judge is supposed to consider is sentences of other similarly situated defendants. And the guidelines are supposed to estimate that. So, you know, generally speaking, from where we sit now, the guidelines are a pretty good estimate. And I think that the prosecution was more around like five or six years than the defense is two or three. So I do think the judge is showing he's pretty inclined to consider those prosecution arguments.
- [23:55]
Marjorie Hernandez
And you have to factor in also how much he's already spent in jail as well.
- [24:00]
Unnamed Legal Expert
Yep, that gets backed out. Sometimes as a defense lawyer, if you have somebody who's in custody and then they want to come back out and then they're going to go back in, that might actually end up being more difficult in the end. You know, it's obviously Diddy's call to make whatever kind of motion he wants his team to make with respect to bond, but he's probably going to have to serve more than the 10 months he's already served anyway, so it's not like this is sort of wasted time. And that might have been part of what factored into the judge's decision too.
- [24:31]
Marjorie Hernandez
Now, the sentencing won't be until October, but what can we expect? Do you think that some of the victims are. Maybe Cassie might come back or maybe her attorney might put in a letter, a statement on that.
- [24:45]
Hermania Rodriguez Poleo
Can Cassie and Jane come back if technically he wasn't convicted of sex trafficking them.
- [24:51]
David Gelman
Yeah, they can definitely come back. You know, I don't know if they're going to. They're going to have a victim impact statement which is, you know, a lot of times that's what victims or alleged victims do. So I could definitely see that happening. So there's a lot of different things, but you know what to expect. You're going to get a ton of letters from Diddy. I could tell you that right now. He's going to get his mom. Everybody he's probably ever met who can say something nice about Diddy, they're going to probably have a letter to the judge. Diddy, he's got a big ego. So I could see him at this point maybe even wanting to say to the judge like why he should let him, you know, do a time serve sentence or whatever it may be or house arrest or whatever that would be because did he still. He speaks well, he presents himself well. So I think that would definitely happen. The government on the other hand, man, you know, look, they're going to go for the jugular. They're going to go for the 20 years, the 10 max on each count to run consecutive. I can't see the judge doing that though. I just, I don't believe that'll happen, especially when the guidelines are that's as a Max. Diddy's a first time offender. Even though he's been charged with other things in the past, I don't believe that that will come close to happening. So it'll be, it'll be interesting what happens in October. And the judge did say that he would consider expediting the sentencing. So that may happen in maybe September. Who knows?
- [26:23]
Marjorie Hernandez
To go back to the RICO case again, I think the closest case that comes to mind comparative to Diddy's was the R. Kelly case. And obviously there R. Kelly was found guilty, whereas obviously Diddy was not. And I was wondering why you both think that is.
- [26:38]
Unnamed Legal Expert
I think a lot of what went wrong in the Diddy case is lack of evidence. Also the fact that they were kind of forced into starting with Cassie based on her Pregnancy. So there was like this two week period of you're just hearing a ton about domestic violence and other bad acts, but not really things that you would say were RICO or sex trafficking necessarily. And so the jury's just, you know, in their minds for several weeks, probably thinking, you know, why are we here? This doesn't amount to what they said we were gonna hear in the opening statement. And jurors are people too. Right. And you get something in your head and you get sort of a confirmation bias to kind of like continue thinking that. So I think that's probably what happened here, as opposed to in R. Kelly. It was a more ideal presentation of the evidence in an order you would maybe expect when you're trying to prove any kind of conspiracy, including a RICO conspiracy.
- [27:35]
Marjorie Hernandez
Wow. So timing really matters also.
- [27:38]
Unnamed Legal Expert
It does. As a prosecutor and as a defense lawyer, we always think about the first thing you say and the last thing you say are really important. And it's just like any human conversation. Right. So I do think it matters how they started out here.
- [27:51]
Hermania Rodriguez Poleo
When would you have put Cassie on the stand?
- [27:54]
Unnamed Legal Expert
Ideally, you would be calling these cooperating witnesses that we wanted to hear from first. Right. To set the stage for, you know, Diddy and I were engaged in this agreement to commit all these crimes, and one of them was involved, Cassie. And then you might call her second. But it's like not setting that foundation of this is what we're here to talk about. That, I think, really hurt them. And look, they didn't end up having that anyway. So maybe it isn't really about the order. They just didn't have it. But it's an unusual way to start this kind of charge out.
- [28:29]
Hermania Rodriguez Poleo
Another criticism. I've heard of the prosecution a lot today. Said they focused way too much on the sordid details on the baby oil. What do you guys think about that?
- [28:41]
David Gelman
I think that's 100% accurate. I. You know, following this trial every day and listening to, you know, what was presented and everything, I'm like, why are you doing this? I really, I really was. And I don't know if the SCNY just said, oh, we're just trying to throw everything against the wall and see if something sticks. But the baby oil literally, literally has nothing to do with this case. They just were trying to embarrass Diddy, in my opinion. I mean, okay, he's the maiden stockholder in Astro Glide, I guess. Who cares? It really didn't do anything, the case. And it backfired. It really did backfire, in my opinion. They. I don't know why they tried to do this, maybe, and maybe it's just because the government case kind of fell apart during it, and they're like, all right, well, what are we going to do to, you know, try to, you know, put it out there that we have more things? Oh, we'll just throw all this Astro Glide out there and all these guns and all. But really, at the end of the day, it has nothing to do with it. You want to get straight to the point when you're in a trial, straight to the. To the jury, because that's what the jury cares about. And I can tell you this. I have a feeling the jury got a little pissed at the government when the government told them at the end, after the closing and after everything happened. Oh, you know what? Disregard certain things that we said. Disregard that. Disregard this testimony and that. Because, you know, you don't have to consider that anymore. You just go for the. Go for the easier one.
- [30:06]
Hermania Rodriguez Poleo
There's so much confusion still about that prosecution move, because when you see the sheet of the racketeering charge, it includes the bribery and arson. And I actually thought the bribery part was one of the things the prosecution did prove. We had the guard there saying, I took the money. Jen, can you explain to our audience what happened there and why, Again, I thought bribery was proved.
- [30:31]
Unnamed Legal Expert
Yeah, I'm a little confused on the bribery myself. I think on the arson, you know, the prosecution is always doing two jobs. They're trying to convict at a trial, but they're also trying to do justice and make sure that they only present to a jury things that there's actually evidence of. On the arson, I didn't think it was proved. Somebody threw a Molotov cocktail. Diddy was actually, you know, talking to people in the same time frame. I don't think that proves arson, so I think they withdrew that one because they thought there wasn't proof of that. I don't know what happened on the bribery. Did they put on evidence that they found contradicted in some other way? Like, is there some other reason that they thought that one shouldn't be before the jury? I don't know. But I agree with David that the jury was probably upset by how long this trial was. I think even in the most complex financial crime case, where you got thousands of documents and all of these witnesses, if you go much before three or four weeks, you're just losing the jury. There are people, too. They don't want to sit there and listen to the same stuff for seven weeks and then when the defense decided to do 20 something minutes, I think that probably endeared them to the jury. They thought, okay, fine, we're going to get out of here. We're not going to hear a lot of nonsense from the defense. So they probably went into deliberations feeling better about the defense than the prosecution. Potentially.
- [31:58]
Marjorie Hernandez
One of the things also that was curious was the videos that they showed to the jurors. Obviously, see Cassie, that video of her being dragged in the hotel was a huge point in the trial. However, the prosecution also showed other videos of the freak offs. But at the end of the day, it was actually text messages between the victims, Cassie and Jane and Diddy. That really, I think solidified their decision that they weren't convinced that they were being sex trafficked.
- [32:31]
BetterHelp Ad
Yeah.
- [32:32]
Hermania Rodriguez Poleo
And on that I feel Jane's testimony was not helpful. I wanted to ask about that because they were flirting. He's still paying her rent. She said she loved him. That's her baby. She loves watching Dateline with him. So I would think the jury would feel a little confused about that.
- [32:52]
David Gelman
Yeah, I think Jane's credibility was not very good in this trial. Out of all the witnesses. I mean, when you have somebody on the stand who's saying, oh yeah, he's still paying my, my rent, I don't see how you are a victim in this.
- [33:06]
Unnamed Legal Expert
I wondered, as Jane was testifying if that was another way that the prosecution's case might have been unraveling. Did they expect her to say something different and better for them than what she did say? I would think so, because otherwise I don't know why you would put on that testimony, really.
- [33:22]
Hermania Rodriguez Poleo
He will be walking out of prison eventually. Will he have a public life after this? Will he still be able to make money? Is he still going to be partying in the Hamptons? What is the future for Diddy?
- [33:35]
David Gelman
Look at the celebrations on the street in New York yesterday after the vert came out. I think that's going to tell you everything. Look, he's not going to be everybody's cup of tea. I can, you know, I don't like him personally, but there's going to be, he's going to still have a lot of fans and, you know, he'll be in the public eye and who knows, maybe he'll even be bigger than before. But I don't think he's going away anytime soon.
- [33:59]
Hermania Rodriguez Poleo
What do you think, Jen?
- [34:00]
Unnamed Legal Expert
I agree with that. I also think in 2025 we've come to accept a lot of people who you either love them or you hate them, but they're very much in the public eye and it seems like he might be among those after he serves his sentence.
- [34:18]
David Gelman
Wow.
- [34:19]
Hermania Rodriguez Poleo
That was a lot of insight I needed. I have a million other questions, but for now, I want to thank Jennifer Beitel and David Gelman for joining us today. The trial of Diddy is not over. We will be bringing you more experts and panels next week on Tuesday and Friday. For more exclusives on this case and others, be sure to check out and subscribe to the trial plus@crimedesk.com if you haven't already. See you Tuesday.
- [34:58]
Kristen Bell
Hi, I'm Kristen Bell, and if you know my husband Dax, then you also know he loves shopping for a car. Selling a car, not so much.
- [35:04]
Jennifer Beidle
We're really doing this, huh?
- [35:06]
Kristen Bell
Thankfully, Carvana makes it easy. Answer a few questions, put in your van or license and done. We sold ours in minutes this morning and they'll come pick it up and pay us this afternoon.
- [35:17]
David Gelman
Goodbye, Truckee.
- [35:18]
Kristen Bell
Of course, we kept the favorite.
- [35:22]
Jennifer Beidle
Hello other Truckee.
- [35:23]
Kristen Bell
Sell your car with Carvana today. Terms and conditions apply.
- [35:30]
David Gelman
ACAST powers the world's best podcasts. Here's a show that we recommend.
- [35:37]
Unnamed Legal Expert
Love music.
- [35:39]
David Gelman
We do too.
- [35:40]
Hermania Rodriguez Poleo
Well, if you ever feel like it's hard to keep up, though, don't worry.
- [35:43]
Unnamed Legal Expert
We'Re here to help.
- [35:44]
LinkedIn Ad
Monday through Friday, Daily Music Headlines gets.
- [35:47]
David Gelman
You the top happenings in music from chart toppers, news releases, concert announcements and.
- [35:51]
Hermania Rodriguez Poleo
More, all in less than five minutes.
- [35:54]
LinkedIn Ad
Don't miss out. Get the show at Daily Music Headlines.com.
- [36:02]
David Gelman
Acast helps creators launch, grow and monetize their podcasts everywhere. Acast.com.