Next week, the Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs defense will present its case, perhaps in as little as two days, which would signal that they are optimistic about his acquittal.
Some papers covering the trial also seem to be leaning this way, with the Daily Mail, for example, saying that the defense scored a ‘win’ when witness Brendan Paul said that the women were NOT forced into the infamous freak-offs.
But it’s less simple than that: Brendan Paul is also the witness who admitted bringing drugs to Diddy on multiple occasions, only to turn around and say he was NOT the rapper’s ‘drug mule’.
So, maybe it’s semantics with Brendan Paul.
By now, both the jury and the world have seen the images of the beating that Diddy inflicted on Cassie Ventura in a Hotel as she was trying to escape a ‘freak-off’ sex marathon. Talk about consent!
That is not to suggest that the high-octane Defense team led by Mark Agnifilo hasn’t poked holes on some aspects of some of the testimonies.
But in the end, it will about be the aggregate effect: has the prosecution proved the racketeering charges?
The disgraced rap mogul is charged with using his fame, his fortune, and (importantly) his companies to further a criminal racket that exploited and sex trafficked women (and male escorts) via violence, threats, or economic leverage.
I find some of the content in the WSJ article below quite on point.
Wall Street Journal reported:
“Former federal prosecutor Maria Cruz Melendez said the government had effectively shown that some of Combs’s former workers aided him in procuring drugs, paying bribes and compensating escorts—a key part of a racketeering conspiracy charge against him. Ventura, a singer who was once signed to Combs’s music label Bad Boy Records, also provided a compelling account, detailing Combs’s hair-trigger temper and the control he had over her music career and finances, said Cruz Melendez, a partner at law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom.”
This other bit is also relevant:
“Brian Klein, a former federal prosecutor and partner at law firm Waymaker, said the defense team so far has been successful in providing additional context to the prosecution’s allegations.
‘The defense is working to paint a picture for the jury that this is a series of long-term relationships and, while the facts might be disturbing, they don’t amount to sex trafficking’, he said.”
But let’s read again what former prosecutor Melendez said: “the government had effectively shown that some of Combs’s former workers aided him in procuring drugs, paying bribes and compensating escorts—a key part of a racketeering conspiracy charge against him.”
There’s no denying his violence against women he ‘controlled’ (prosecution) or was simply ‘involved with’ (defense).
Besides Brendan Paul, several other assistants and security personnel were ordered to ‘bring’ or ‘transport’ drugs to him.
The massive work of scheduling and paying for the multiple male escorts was also dealt with Diddy’s employees or lovers.
It has been clearly established that Diddy and security personnel acted in concert to bribe the security guard from the Hotel to give them ‘the only copy’ of the footage of Diddy beating Cassie.
Much less well established – but potentially credible – is the accusation that Diddy and his ‘crew’ firebombed Kid Cudi’s car and broke into his house for sleeping with Cassie.
Another employee also told the jury about being forcibly rushed into a car where a drugged and armed Diddy was heading to a nightclub to confront a rival.
This is just a sample of the compelling testimony – not to mention Cassie Ventura and ‘Jane’ who gave long, grueling, very uncomfortable but highly consequential accounts of Diddy’s alleged crimes.
So we’ll have to see where the confidence from Diddy’s defense is stemming from, and whether it’s justified.
Read more:
The post Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs: Defense To Present Its Case Next Week in Just Two Days – Has the Prosecution So Far Demonstrated the Racketeering Crimes He Is Charged With? appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.