Podcasts about Bad Boy

In the memorandum of law filed in Case No. 25-cv-00996, the Combs Defendants—consisting of Sean Combs and several affiliated Bad Boy entities—move to dismiss the complaint brought by a plaintiff identified as John Doe. The defense argues that the complaint fails to meet the basic legal standards required for litigation, lacking specific factual allegations that would establish a plausible claim for relief. They contend that the complaint is overly broad, relies on conclusory assertions, and does not clearly link the named defendants to any actionable conduct. The motion emphasizes that Doe's claims are insufficient under Rule 12(b)(6) and should not survive judicial scrutiny.Additionally, the Combs Defendants argue that the complaint improperly lumps together numerous corporate entities and unidentified “Doe” defendants without distinguishing their individual roles or responsibilities, making it impossible to determine who allegedly did what. They maintain that this generalized approach violates federal pleading standards and fails to provide the clarity needed for a meaningful legal defense. The memorandum ultimately requests that the court dismiss the complaint in its entirety and with prejudice, asserting that further amendments would be futile given the lack of concrete factual support.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.636272.44.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In the memorandum of law filed in Case No. 25-cv-00996, the Combs Defendants—consisting of Sean Combs and several affiliated Bad Boy entities—move to dismiss the complaint brought by a plaintiff identified as John Doe. The defense argues that the complaint fails to meet the basic legal standards required for litigation, lacking specific factual allegations that would establish a plausible claim for relief. They contend that the complaint is overly broad, relies on conclusory assertions, and does not clearly link the named defendants to any actionable conduct. The motion emphasizes that Doe's claims are insufficient under Rule 12(b)(6) and should not survive judicial scrutiny.Additionally, the Combs Defendants argue that the complaint improperly lumps together numerous corporate entities and unidentified “Doe” defendants without distinguishing their individual roles or responsibilities, making it impossible to determine who allegedly did what. They maintain that this generalized approach violates federal pleading standards and fails to provide the clarity needed for a meaningful legal defense. The memorandum ultimately requests that the court dismiss the complaint in its entirety and with prejudice, asserting that further amendments would be futile given the lack of concrete factual support.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.636272.44.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Bridget, Caitlin, and Hilda discuss roughly 39% of "Echo Fort," book 2 in the Sins of the Zodiac series by our favorite Twisted Sisters, Caroline Peckham and Susanne Valenti. But don't worry, that still gives them plenty of material to gab for a while.  Join our Patreon for exclusive behind-the-scenes content and let's be friends!Instagram > @Booktokmademe_podTikTok > @BooktokMadeMe

In the memorandum of law filed in Case No. 25-cv-00996, the Combs Defendants—consisting of Sean Combs and several affiliated Bad Boy entities—move to dismiss the complaint brought by a plaintiff identified as John Doe. The defense argues that the complaint fails to meet the basic legal standards required for litigation, lacking specific factual allegations that would establish a plausible claim for relief. They contend that the complaint is overly broad, relies on conclusory assertions, and does not clearly link the named defendants to any actionable conduct. The motion emphasizes that Doe's claims are insufficient under Rule 12(b)(6) and should not survive judicial scrutiny.Additionally, the Combs Defendants argue that the complaint improperly lumps together numerous corporate entities and unidentified “Doe” defendants without distinguishing their individual roles or responsibilities, making it impossible to determine who allegedly did what. They maintain that this generalized approach violates federal pleading standards and fails to provide the clarity needed for a meaningful legal defense. The memorandum ultimately requests that the court dismiss the complaint in its entirety and with prejudice, asserting that further amendments would be futile given the lack of concrete factual support.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.636272.44.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In the memorandum of law filed in Case No. 25-cv-00996, the Combs Defendants—consisting of Sean Combs and several affiliated Bad Boy entities—move to dismiss the complaint brought by a plaintiff identified as John Doe. The defense argues that the complaint fails to meet the basic legal standards required for litigation, lacking specific factual allegations that would establish a plausible claim for relief. They contend that the complaint is overly broad, relies on conclusory assertions, and does not clearly link the named defendants to any actionable conduct. The motion emphasizes that Doe's claims are insufficient under Rule 12(b)(6) and should not survive judicial scrutiny.Additionally, the Combs Defendants argue that the complaint improperly lumps together numerous corporate entities and unidentified “Doe” defendants without distinguishing their individual roles or responsibilities, making it impossible to determine who allegedly did what. They maintain that this generalized approach violates federal pleading standards and fails to provide the clarity needed for a meaningful legal defense. The memorandum ultimately requests that the court dismiss the complaint in its entirety and with prejudice, asserting that further amendments would be futile given the lack of concrete factual support.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.636272.44.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In the latest developments surrounding Sean Combs, also known to listeners as Puffy or P Diddy, the hip-hop mogul remains the center of national headlines as he awaits sentencing after a dramatic and closely watched federal trial. Nearly two weeks ago, the 55-year-old was convicted on two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution, but acquitted on more severe charges of racketeering and sex trafficking. This mixed verdict sparked widespread reactions across the industry and beyond. According to both Fox News and legal experts like Robert Shapiro, who famously represented O.J. Simpson, Diddy will remain behind bars until his sentencing, scheduled for October 3. Shapiro commented that because bail was denied, the judge may be preparing to send a message with the sentence, speculating the length could fall between two and a half to three and a half years.The trial has captivated not just legal analysts and journalists but also ignited intense scenes outside the courthouse, where supporters of Combs gathered in celebration—some even dousing themselves in baby oil, a pointed reference to allegations aired during the trial. CNN described the post-verdict atmosphere as chaotic, with chants of "Free Puff!" and "Bad Boy!" echoing in the Manhattan streets.Amidst the criminal proceedings, Combs continues to face civil lawsuits, including a high-profile $30 million case brought by former producer Rodney "Lil Rod" Jones. A federal judge recently dismissed several charges in that suit, including racketeering and emotional distress, but allowed sexual assault and some trafficking claims to proceed, reprimanding the plaintiff's legal counsel for their conduct during motions. In a separate case, a New York judge dismissed a sexual assault lawsuit against Combs after the plaintiff declined to reveal her identity.On the business side, Combs' legacy in fashion and music is still being felt, with Instagram posts highlighting the ongoing influence of his Sean John clothing brand and his past success as an entrepreneur. However, the future for Diddy and those in his circle remains uncertain, with some close associates reportedly seeking to leave the country due to safety concerns.Listeners, thanks for tuning in to this update on Sean Combs. Be sure to come back next week for more. This has been a Quiet Please production and for more, check out Quiet Please Dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.ai

This week, Ravi's a smoking hot bad boy as a supply of drugs causes trouble for Harry and Kojo - so just what will Harry have to do now he works for Mr Gulati?Meanwhile, Louis does a flit with Jimmy leaving Lauren and Peter to face up to their relationship problems and Johnny and Callum take their forbidden lust to the next level...

In today's episode, 2025 World Crokinole Championship competitive singles champion Shawn Hagarty joins me to discuss his victory.Bad Boy: https://badboycountry.com/To discuss participating in an upcoming Pink Shirt Pod "Dragon's Den/Shark's Tank" type episode, email me at pinkshirtpod@gmail.com (listen to episode for details).Remember, August 20, 2025 is International Crokinole Day. Check out here for more details: https://crokinoleuk.com/international-crokinole-day-august-20th/

Click to Subscribe: https://bit.ly/Youtube-Subscribe-SoapDirt Days of our Lives sees Leo Stark's (Greg Rikaart) past sins continue to cast a shadow over his attempts at redemption. Introduced to Salem in 2018 by Vivian Alamain (Louise Sorel), who hired him to cause a scandal for Sonny Kiriakis (Zach Tinker), Leo has since been on a rollercoaster of mischief and self-improvement. A notable point in his journey was the counseling he received from Dr. Marlena Evans (Deidre Hall) after a heartbreak from Dimitri von Leuschner (Peter Porte). DOOL sees Leo's transformation became evident when he pivoted from gossip to serious investigative reporting at the Spectator. However, the return of his ex-best friend Gwen Rizczech (Emily O'Brien), with whom he had a devastating falling out, brings back memories of his wicked past. His boyfriend Javi Hernandez (Al Calderon) is also learning about Leo's dark history, which includes a betrayal of his best friend and other misdeeds.  Days of our Lives sees that despite the odds, Leo's bond with Javi and their foster son, Tesoro, has shown a softer side to the character. He even managed to clear the air with Will Horton (Chandler Massey) during a recent visit. However, Gwen's prolonged stay in Salem could potentially stir up old demons and threaten Leo's newfound peace. But with the support of his loved ones, including Gabi Hernandez (Cherie Jimenez), who has seen a change in Leo, he might just convince everyone that he has truly changed.  This episode was hosted by Belynda Gates-Turner for Soap Dirt. Visit our Days of our Lives section of Soap Dirt: https://soapdirt.com/category/days-of-our-lives/ Listen to our Podcasts: https://soapdirt.podbean.com/ Check out our always up-to-date Days of our Lives Spoilers page at: https://soapdirt.com/days-of-our-lives-spoilers/ Check Out our Social Media... Twitter: https://twitter.com/SoapDirtTV Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/SoapDirt Pinterest: https://www.pinterest.com/soapdirt/ TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@soapdirt Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/soapdirt/

The Diddy trial may be over, but the consequences from the courtroom remain to be seen. Aubrey tells us what industry insiders are saying about Puff’s next move. Could this be the beginning of more bad boy behavior? While the crowd cheered for the ‘Dream Team,’ Aubrey reminds us that Cassie’s nightmare still resonates with victims everywhere.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Sean "Diddy" Combs, once a titan of music and media with a billion-dollar empire, is watching his fortune shrink under the crushing weight of mounting legal battles. Federal criminal charges, sprawling civil lawsuits, and high-profile accusations have turned his brand from gold to toxic overnight. Partnerships have been severed, business ventures frozen, and revenue streams throttled as sponsors, artists, and corporations flee the storm. What was once a sprawling Bad Boy kingdom—spanning liquor, fashion, music, and television—now resembles a crumbling fortress under siege. Legal fees alone are bleeding him dry, with elite defense teams billing by the hour while court after court keeps the fire roaring.Behind the scenes, Diddy's vast wealth is being dissected by plaintiffs, prosecutors, and investigators like vultures circling a carcass. Bank accounts are being subpoenaed, assets traced, and shell companies unraveled. Real estate holdings are under scrutiny. Royalties and intellectual property once seen as long-term goldmines are now potential collateral. The lifestyle he once flaunted—private jets, champagne nights, and mogul bravado—has been replaced with a desperate damage control operation. And as new accusers continue to step forward and civil litigation piles higher, it's becoming increasingly clear: Diddy isn't just fighting for his legacy anymore—he's fighting to keep the lights on.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

The Diddy trial may be over, but the consequences from the courtroom remain to be seen. Aubrey tells us what industry insiders are saying about Puff’s next move. Could this be the beginning of more bad boy behavior? While the crowd cheered for the ‘Dream Team,’ Aubrey reminds us that Cassie’s nightmare still resonates with victims everywhere.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Sean "Diddy" Combs, once a titan of music and media with a billion-dollar empire, is watching his fortune shrink under the crushing weight of mounting legal battles. Federal criminal charges, sprawling civil lawsuits, and high-profile accusations have turned his brand from gold to toxic overnight. Partnerships have been severed, business ventures frozen, and revenue streams throttled as sponsors, artists, and corporations flee the storm. What was once a sprawling Bad Boy kingdom—spanning liquor, fashion, music, and television—now resembles a crumbling fortress under siege. Legal fees alone are bleeding him dry, with elite defense teams billing by the hour while court after court keeps the fire roaring.Behind the scenes, Diddy's vast wealth is being dissected by plaintiffs, prosecutors, and investigators like vultures circling a carcass. Bank accounts are being subpoenaed, assets traced, and shell companies unraveled. Real estate holdings are under scrutiny. Royalties and intellectual property once seen as long-term goldmines are now potential collateral. The lifestyle he once flaunted—private jets, champagne nights, and mogul bravado—has been replaced with a desperate damage control operation. And as new accusers continue to step forward and civil litigation piles higher, it's becoming increasingly clear: Diddy isn't just fighting for his legacy anymore—he's fighting to keep the lights on.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Es ist wieder Donnie Time! In der neusten TWHS-Folge nimmt euch euer allerliebster Bad Boy mit in die Schule. Hier erfahrt ihr alles über Schulfeindschaften in Tübingen. Außerdem erzählt Donnie von den Anfängen seiner Comedy-Karriere am Yamaha-Keyboard. Und ganz nebenbei löst der beliebteste Podcasthost der Welt (eine aktuelle Umfrage läuft noch, sieht aber ganz okay aus) eure Schlafprobleme. Also macht es euch auf eurem Boxspring-Bett gemütlich und sperrt die Lauscher auf. Viel Spaß mit That's What He Said!Codes, Support und Partner:innen von Donnie unter https://linktr.ee/dosullivanMehr von Donnie gibt es auf Twitter, Instagram, Twitch und YouTube: Donnies Hauptkanal und Donnie Uncut.Ihr wollt Donnie unterstützen? Hier geht's zur Patreon-Seite von TWHS: https://www.patreon.com/TWHSBock auf Merch? Hier geht's zu Donnies Supergeek-Shop: https://supergeek.de/de/donnieosullivan/Feedback oder Fragen an Donnie? Schick eine Mail an donnie@poolartists.de! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

DC Comics Ep 596: Secret Six Oddities, Super(Bad)Boy, Brothers and Sisters & More / Weird Science DC Comics -Keywords: DC Comics, DC Comics Podcast, Batman, Superman, World's Finest, Flash, Green Lantern, comics, comic Gabe's Youtube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@comicalopinions Gray's Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2NfSPGZ5OFcek6Baw3iQQw SuS Records: https://www.youtube.com/@SusRecordsCEO Jared's Youtube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@ComicsLeague Jared's Podcast: https://open.spotify.com/show/3jv6I2edZ8lpc02gJEHw3e?si=cb5f48a6f8d84add Stork's Podcast: https://besottedgeek.podbean.com/   Join us on Friday Nights @ 7:15 PM EST on our Youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/@WeirdScienceComics when we do the Absolute show LIVE!  YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@WeirdScienceComics This Week's Patreon-Exclusive Spotlight Show is Justice League vs. Godzilla vs. Kong: 2 #2 & Gotham City Sirens: Unfit For Orbit #1 Listen to the Spotlight Podcast by signing up to our Patreon - https://www.patreon.com/weirdscience   0:00:00 - Intro 0:07:41 - JSA #9 0:40:43 - Secret Six #5 1:14:18 - Retro Book of the Week: Superboy #75 (1959) 2:12:08 - Resurrection Man: Quantum Karma #4 2:41:09 - Batgirl #9 2:57:15 - Birds of Prey #23 3:16:44 - Next Week's Books   FOLLOW WEIRD SCIENCE COMICS Twitter:  https://twitter.com/WeirdScienceDC  Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/weirdscience DC Comics Review Site: https://bit.ly/WeirdScienceDC Marvel Review Site: https://bit.ly/WeirdScienceMarvel   SUBSCRIBE TO WEIRD SCIENCE COMIC PODCASTS:  DC Comics Podcast iTunes - https://apple.co/47jNeme Spotify - https://spoti.fi/2XzDALI Stitcher - https://bit.ly/45XPtKS   Marvel Comics Podcast iTunes - https://apple.co/3u1xxSh Spotify - https://spoti.fi/3QJFAfe Pandora - https://bit.ly/3Qq5cwd YT - https://bit.ly/WeirdSciencePodcasts

Sean "Diddy" Combs, once a titan of music and media with a billion-dollar empire, is watching his fortune shrink under the crushing weight of mounting legal battles. Federal criminal charges, sprawling civil lawsuits, and high-profile accusations have turned his brand from gold to toxic overnight. Partnerships have been severed, business ventures frozen, and revenue streams throttled as sponsors, artists, and corporations flee the storm. What was once a sprawling Bad Boy kingdom—spanning liquor, fashion, music, and television—now resembles a crumbling fortress under siege. Legal fees alone are bleeding him dry, with elite defense teams billing by the hour while court after court keeps the fire roaring.Behind the scenes, Diddy's vast wealth is being dissected by plaintiffs, prosecutors, and investigators like vultures circling a carcass. Bank accounts are being subpoenaed, assets traced, and shell companies unraveled. Real estate holdings are under scrutiny. Royalties and intellectual property once seen as long-term goldmines are now potential collateral. The lifestyle he once flaunted—private jets, champagne nights, and mogul bravado—has been replaced with a desperate damage control operation. And as new accusers continue to step forward and civil litigation piles higher, it's becoming increasingly clear: Diddy isn't just fighting for his legacy anymore—he's fighting to keep the lights on.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In the memorandum supporting their consolidated motion to dismiss, the defendants in the case of Dawn Angelique Richard v. Sean Combs et al. argue that the plaintiff's claims are largely time-barred under New York's statutes of limitations. They contend that the state's shorter limitation periods should apply, rendering many of the plaintiff's causes of action untimely. Specifically, they assert that claims related to assault, battery, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, trafficking, forced labor, and various employment-related allegations fall outside the permissible time frames. The defendants also challenge the applicability of revival statutes, arguing that the Gender-Motivated Violence Law (GMVL) revival provision conflicts with existing laws like the Child Victims Act (CVA) and Adult Survivors Act (ASA), and thus cannot retroactively apply to the defendants.Additionally, the defendants argue that the plaintiff's claims against various entities associated with Sean Combs, such as the "Bad Boy" and "Combs" entities, rely on improper group pleadings without specific allegations against each entity. They assert that the GMVL claim fails because the law did not apply to certain defendants at the relevant times and that the plaintiff does not sufficiently allege a gender-motivated crime of violence. Furthermore, the defendants contend that the plaintiff fails to state valid claims for forced labor, sex trafficking, discrimination under the New York State Human Rights Law, right of publicity, and unjust enrichment. They argue that these claims are either inadequately pled or legally baseless, and in some cases, barred by applicable statutes of limitations.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628103.154.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In the memorandum supporting their consolidated motion to dismiss, the defendants in the case of Dawn Angelique Richard v. Sean Combs et al. argue that the plaintiff's claims are largely time-barred under New York's statutes of limitations. They contend that the state's shorter limitation periods should apply, rendering many of the plaintiff's causes of action untimely. Specifically, they assert that claims related to assault, battery, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, trafficking, forced labor, and various employment-related allegations fall outside the permissible time frames. The defendants also challenge the applicability of revival statutes, arguing that the Gender-Motivated Violence Law (GMVL) revival provision conflicts with existing laws like the Child Victims Act (CVA) and Adult Survivors Act (ASA), and thus cannot retroactively apply to the defendants.Additionally, the defendants argue that the plaintiff's claims against various entities associated with Sean Combs, such as the "Bad Boy" and "Combs" entities, rely on improper group pleadings without specific allegations against each entity. They assert that the GMVL claim fails because the law did not apply to certain defendants at the relevant times and that the plaintiff does not sufficiently allege a gender-motivated crime of violence. Furthermore, the defendants contend that the plaintiff fails to state valid claims for forced labor, sex trafficking, discrimination under the New York State Human Rights Law, right of publicity, and unjust enrichment. They argue that these claims are either inadequately pled or legally baseless, and in some cases, barred by applicable statutes of limitations.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628103.154.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In the memorandum supporting their consolidated motion to dismiss, the defendants in the case of Dawn Angelique Richard v. Sean Combs et al. argue that the plaintiff's claims are largely time-barred under New York's statutes of limitations. They contend that the state's shorter limitation periods should apply, rendering many of the plaintiff's causes of action untimely. Specifically, they assert that claims related to assault, battery, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, trafficking, forced labor, and various employment-related allegations fall outside the permissible time frames. The defendants also challenge the applicability of revival statutes, arguing that the Gender-Motivated Violence Law (GMVL) revival provision conflicts with existing laws like the Child Victims Act (CVA) and Adult Survivors Act (ASA), and thus cannot retroactively apply to the defendants.Additionally, the defendants argue that the plaintiff's claims against various entities associated with Sean Combs, such as the "Bad Boy" and "Combs" entities, rely on improper group pleadings without specific allegations against each entity. They assert that the GMVL claim fails because the law did not apply to certain defendants at the relevant times and that the plaintiff does not sufficiently allege a gender-motivated crime of violence. Furthermore, the defendants contend that the plaintiff fails to state valid claims for forced labor, sex trafficking, discrimination under the New York State Human Rights Law, right of publicity, and unjust enrichment. They argue that these claims are either inadequately pled or legally baseless, and in some cases, barred by applicable statutes of limitations.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628103.154.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

This week's Bad Boys tale circles back to one specific case that has recently entered unchartered waters!

Rockett and Figgy discuss the verdict in the Diddy trial and what may come next for him plus Cardi B's new album release date, Travis Scott potentially stepping on the Clipse album, the XXL 2025 Freshman list, Drake's fake abs and much more!

In the memorandum supporting their consolidated motion to dismiss, the defendants in the case of Dawn Angelique Richard v. Sean Combs et al. argue that the plaintiff's claims are largely time-barred under New York's statutes of limitations. They contend that the state's shorter limitation periods should apply, rendering many of the plaintiff's causes of action untimely. Specifically, they assert that claims related to assault, battery, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, trafficking, forced labor, and various employment-related allegations fall outside the permissible time frames. The defendants also challenge the applicability of revival statutes, arguing that the Gender-Motivated Violence Law (GMVL) revival provision conflicts with existing laws like the Child Victims Act (CVA) and Adult Survivors Act (ASA), and thus cannot retroactively apply to the defendants.Additionally, the defendants argue that the plaintiff's claims against various entities associated with Sean Combs, such as the "Bad Boy" and "Combs" entities, rely on improper group pleadings without specific allegations against each entity. They assert that the GMVL claim fails because the law did not apply to certain defendants at the relevant times and that the plaintiff does not sufficiently allege a gender-motivated crime of violence. Furthermore, the defendants contend that the plaintiff fails to state valid claims for forced labor, sex trafficking, discrimination under the New York State Human Rights Law, right of publicity, and unjust enrichment. They argue that these claims are either inadequately pled or legally baseless, and in some cases, barred by applicable statutes of limitations.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628103.154.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In the memorandum supporting their consolidated motion to dismiss, the defendants in the case of Dawn Angelique Richard v. Sean Combs et al. argue that the plaintiff's claims are largely time-barred under New York's statutes of limitations. They contend that the state's shorter limitation periods should apply, rendering many of the plaintiff's causes of action untimely. Specifically, they assert that claims related to assault, battery, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, trafficking, forced labor, and various employment-related allegations fall outside the permissible time frames. The defendants also challenge the applicability of revival statutes, arguing that the Gender-Motivated Violence Law (GMVL) revival provision conflicts with existing laws like the Child Victims Act (CVA) and Adult Survivors Act (ASA), and thus cannot retroactively apply to the defendants.Additionally, the defendants argue that the plaintiff's claims against various entities associated with Sean Combs, such as the "Bad Boy" and "Combs" entities, rely on improper group pleadings without specific allegations against each entity. They assert that the GMVL claim fails because the law did not apply to certain defendants at the relevant times and that the plaintiff does not sufficiently allege a gender-motivated crime of violence. Furthermore, the defendants contend that the plaintiff fails to state valid claims for forced labor, sex trafficking, discrimination under the New York State Human Rights Law, right of publicity, and unjust enrichment. They argue that these claims are either inadequately pled or legally baseless, and in some cases, barred by applicable statutes of limitations.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628103.154.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In the memorandum supporting their consolidated motion to dismiss, the defendants in the case of Dawn Angelique Richard v. Sean Combs et al. argue that the plaintiff's claims are largely time-barred under New York's statutes of limitations. They contend that the state's shorter limitation periods should apply, rendering many of the plaintiff's causes of action untimely. Specifically, they assert that claims related to assault, battery, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, trafficking, forced labor, and various employment-related allegations fall outside the permissible time frames. The defendants also challenge the applicability of revival statutes, arguing that the Gender-Motivated Violence Law (GMVL) revival provision conflicts with existing laws like the Child Victims Act (CVA) and Adult Survivors Act (ASA), and thus cannot retroactively apply to the defendants.Additionally, the defendants argue that the plaintiff's claims against various entities associated with Sean Combs, such as the "Bad Boy" and "Combs" entities, rely on improper group pleadings without specific allegations against each entity. They assert that the GMVL claim fails because the law did not apply to certain defendants at the relevant times and that the plaintiff does not sufficiently allege a gender-motivated crime of violence. Furthermore, the defendants contend that the plaintiff fails to state valid claims for forced labor, sex trafficking, discrimination under the New York State Human Rights Law, right of publicity, and unjust enrichment. They argue that these claims are either inadequately pled or legally baseless, and in some cases, barred by applicable statutes of limitations.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628103.154.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Live Recorded Set from VirtualDJ Radio TheGrind

Unawakened men often either embody the bad boy archetype – driven by ego and validation – or fall into the spiritual bypasser phase, where their wounds are hidden behind spiritual language and practices. Both are rooted in a deep need for external validation, often tied to unresolved wounds with the feminine.Shifting out of this means being honest with ourselves, confronting the emotions and patterns we've been avoiding, building a sense of self-worth that isn't tied to external validation, and focusing on embodying integrity in our actions.When we get stuck in thee unawakened archetypes, life becomes shallow and unfulfilling, relationships lack trust and depth, painful cycles of betrayal, insecurity, and emotional chaos repeat themselves, and we miss out on the chance to experience meaningful connection and purpose.But whether it's having an honest conversation, making amends, or simply sitting with the discomfort of your own emotions, real change begins when you see the sacred path, and walk it with integrity.Mentioned in this episode:Healing Mother & Father Wounding August 24th. Attend live – replay available for 2 monthsEvolve – October 3rd, 2025 An intimate afternoon and evening with Lorin Krenn in London

In the memorandum supporting their consolidated motion to dismiss, the defendants in the case of Dawn Angelique Richard v. Sean Combs et al. argue that the plaintiff's claims are largely time-barred under New York's statutes of limitations. They contend that the state's shorter limitation periods should apply, rendering many of the plaintiff's causes of action untimely. Specifically, they assert that claims related to assault, battery, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, trafficking, forced labor, and various employment-related allegations fall outside the permissible time frames. The defendants also challenge the applicability of revival statutes, arguing that the Gender-Motivated Violence Law (GMVL) revival provision conflicts with existing laws like the Child Victims Act (CVA) and Adult Survivors Act (ASA), and thus cannot retroactively apply to the defendants.Additionally, the defendants argue that the plaintiff's claims against various entities associated with Sean Combs, such as the "Bad Boy" and "Combs" entities, rely on improper group pleadings without specific allegations against each entity. They assert that the GMVL claim fails because the law did not apply to certain defendants at the relevant times and that the plaintiff does not sufficiently allege a gender-motivated crime of violence. Furthermore, the defendants contend that the plaintiff fails to state valid claims for forced labor, sex trafficking, discrimination under the New York State Human Rights Law, right of publicity, and unjust enrichment. They argue that these claims are either inadequately pled or legally baseless, and in some cases, barred by applicable statutes of limitations.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628103.154.0.pdf

In the memorandum supporting their consolidated motion to dismiss, the defendants in the case of Dawn Angelique Richard v. Sean Combs et al. argue that the plaintiff's claims are largely time-barred under New York's statutes of limitations. They contend that the state's shorter limitation periods should apply, rendering many of the plaintiff's causes of action untimely. Specifically, they assert that claims related to assault, battery, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, trafficking, forced labor, and various employment-related allegations fall outside the permissible time frames. The defendants also challenge the applicability of revival statutes, arguing that the Gender-Motivated Violence Law (GMVL) revival provision conflicts with existing laws like the Child Victims Act (CVA) and Adult Survivors Act (ASA), and thus cannot retroactively apply to the defendants.Additionally, the defendants argue that the plaintiff's claims against various entities associated with Sean Combs, such as the "Bad Boy" and "Combs" entities, rely on improper group pleadings without specific allegations against each entity. They assert that the GMVL claim fails because the law did not apply to certain defendants at the relevant times and that the plaintiff does not sufficiently allege a gender-motivated crime of violence. Furthermore, the defendants contend that the plaintiff fails to state valid claims for forced labor, sex trafficking, discrimination under the New York State Human Rights Law, right of publicity, and unjust enrichment. They argue that these claims are either inadequately pled or legally baseless, and in some cases, barred by applicable statutes of limitations.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628103.154.0.pdf

In the memorandum supporting their consolidated motion to dismiss, the defendants in the case of Dawn Angelique Richard v. Sean Combs et al. argue that the plaintiff's claims are largely time-barred under New York's statutes of limitations. They contend that the state's shorter limitation periods should apply, rendering many of the plaintiff's causes of action untimely. Specifically, they assert that claims related to assault, battery, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, trafficking, forced labor, and various employment-related allegations fall outside the permissible time frames. The defendants also challenge the applicability of revival statutes, arguing that the Gender-Motivated Violence Law (GMVL) revival provision conflicts with existing laws like the Child Victims Act (CVA) and Adult Survivors Act (ASA), and thus cannot retroactively apply to the defendants.Additionally, the defendants argue that the plaintiff's claims against various entities associated with Sean Combs, such as the "Bad Boy" and "Combs" entities, rely on improper group pleadings without specific allegations against each entity. They assert that the GMVL claim fails because the law did not apply to certain defendants at the relevant times and that the plaintiff does not sufficiently allege a gender-motivated crime of violence. Furthermore, the defendants contend that the plaintiff fails to state valid claims for forced labor, sex trafficking, discrimination under the New York State Human Rights Law, right of publicity, and unjust enrichment. They argue that these claims are either inadequately pled or legally baseless, and in some cases, barred by applicable statutes of limitations.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628103.154.0.pdf

In the memorandum supporting their consolidated motion to dismiss, the defendants in the case of Dawn Angelique Richard v. Sean Combs et al. argue that the plaintiff's claims are largely time-barred under New York's statutes of limitations. They contend that the state's shorter limitation periods should apply, rendering many of the plaintiff's causes of action untimely. Specifically, they assert that claims related to assault, battery, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, trafficking, forced labor, and various employment-related allegations fall outside the permissible time frames. The defendants also challenge the applicability of revival statutes, arguing that the Gender-Motivated Violence Law (GMVL) revival provision conflicts with existing laws like the Child Victims Act (CVA) and Adult Survivors Act (ASA), and thus cannot retroactively apply to the defendants.Additionally, the defendants argue that the plaintiff's claims against various entities associated with Sean Combs, such as the "Bad Boy" and "Combs" entities, rely on improper group pleadings without specific allegations against each entity. They assert that the GMVL claim fails because the law did not apply to certain defendants at the relevant times and that the plaintiff does not sufficiently allege a gender-motivated crime of violence. Furthermore, the defendants contend that the plaintiff fails to state valid claims for forced labor, sex trafficking, discrimination under the New York State Human Rights Law, right of publicity, and unjust enrichment. They argue that these claims are either inadequately pled or legally baseless, and in some cases, barred by applicable statutes of limitations.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628103.154.0.pdf

In the memorandum supporting their consolidated motion to dismiss, the defendants in the case of Dawn Angelique Richard v. Sean Combs et al. argue that the plaintiff's claims are largely time-barred under New York's statutes of limitations. They contend that the state's shorter limitation periods should apply, rendering many of the plaintiff's causes of action untimely. Specifically, they assert that claims related to assault, battery, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, trafficking, forced labor, and various employment-related allegations fall outside the permissible time frames. The defendants also challenge the applicability of revival statutes, arguing that the Gender-Motivated Violence Law (GMVL) revival provision conflicts with existing laws like the Child Victims Act (CVA) and Adult Survivors Act (ASA), and thus cannot retroactively apply to the defendants.Additionally, the defendants argue that the plaintiff's claims against various entities associated with Sean Combs, such as the "Bad Boy" and "Combs" entities, rely on improper group pleadings without specific allegations against each entity. They assert that the GMVL claim fails because the law did not apply to certain defendants at the relevant times and that the plaintiff does not sufficiently allege a gender-motivated crime of violence. Furthermore, the defendants contend that the plaintiff fails to state valid claims for forced labor, sex trafficking, discrimination under the New York State Human Rights Law, right of publicity, and unjust enrichment. They argue that these claims are either inadequately pled or legally baseless, and in some cases, barred by applicable statutes of limitations.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628103.154.0.pdf

In the memorandum supporting their consolidated motion to dismiss, the defendants in the case of Dawn Angelique Richard v. Sean Combs et al. argue that the plaintiff's claims are largely time-barred under New York's statutes of limitations. They contend that the state's shorter limitation periods should apply, rendering many of the plaintiff's causes of action untimely. Specifically, they assert that claims related to assault, battery, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, trafficking, forced labor, and various employment-related allegations fall outside the permissible time frames. The defendants also challenge the applicability of revival statutes, arguing that the Gender-Motivated Violence Law (GMVL) revival provision conflicts with existing laws like the Child Victims Act (CVA) and Adult Survivors Act (ASA), and thus cannot retroactively apply to the defendants.Additionally, the defendants argue that the plaintiff's claims against various entities associated with Sean Combs, such as the "Bad Boy" and "Combs" entities, rely on improper group pleadings without specific allegations against each entity. They assert that the GMVL claim fails because the law did not apply to certain defendants at the relevant times and that the plaintiff does not sufficiently allege a gender-motivated crime of violence. Furthermore, the defendants contend that the plaintiff fails to state valid claims for forced labor, sex trafficking, discrimination under the New York State Human Rights Law, right of publicity, and unjust enrichment. They argue that these claims are either inadequately pled or legally baseless, and in some cases, barred by applicable statutes of limitations.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628103.154.0.pdf

This week's case tells the tale of a ones man stupid plans to steal!

Here's a free clip from POSTwrestlingCafe.com — Wai Ting is joined by Nate Milton & Kris Ealy to listen to and discuss WWF Full Metal: The Album — the 1995 compilation featuring classic entrance themes for wrestlers such as The Undertaker, Razor Ramon, Shawn Michaels, Jeff Jarrett, Bret Hart, Goldust, and more. They discuss:What exactly are the lyrics to “Thorn In Your Eye?”Whether Jim Johnston is the GOAT of wrestling theme composersRazor Ramon's “Bad Guy” vs. The Eagles' “Those Shoes”Shawn vs. Sherri versions of “Sexy Boy”The problematic sirens of King Mabel's “The Lyin' King”The story of “With My Baby Tonight”This topic was selected by Espresso Executive Producer, Kris Ealy.------Listen to the full 2 hour podcast: https://www.patreon.com/posts/wwf-full-metal-132401393------Nefarious Media Network on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmPiil2jWvgjsILyTUkNoqAWWF Full Metal: The AlbumReleased: October 1995Edel Music"We're All Together Now” (Raw Theme Song)"Thorn In Your Eye" (Raw Theme Song)"Diesel Blues" (Diesel)"The Lyin' King" (King Mabel)"1-2-3" (1-2-3 Kid)"Goldust" (Goldust)"Smokin'" (The Smoking Gunns)"Psycho Dance" (Psycho Sid)"Bad Boy" (Razor Ramon)"Hart Attack" (Bret Hart)"Angel" (Hakushi)"Graveyard Symphony" (The Undertaker)"Sexy Boy" (Shawn Michaels)"With My Baby Tonight" (Jeff Jarrett)Listen to the album:YouTube: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_kASEmOEDKxJTm-7WvzNwVV1NhsFA1Qi0Q&si=njs3W1RQ-11Xf7PrSpotify: https://open.spotify.com/album/0tQSr5KN2MIyEZAM7DgVor?si=HK5LbKGoRg-oiZXZx1XNNAApple Music: https://music.apple.com/us/album/wwe-full-metal-the-album-volume-1/548762703Next time on Rewind-A-Wai: WWE Vengeance 2005Check out the Rewind-A-Wai Archives for all patrons: https://www.postwrestling.com/category/podcasts/postwrestlingcafe/raw/Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/postwrestling.comX: http://www.twitter.com/POSTwrestlingInstagram: http://www.instagram.com/POSTwrestlingFacebook: http://www.facebook.com/POSTwrestlingYouTube: http://www.youtube.com/POSTwrestlingSubscribe: https://postwrestling.com/subscribePatreon: http://postwrestlingcafe.comForum: https://forum.postwrestling.comDiscord: https://postwrestling.com/discordMerch: http://Chopped-Tees.com/POSTwrestlingOur Sponsors:* Check out Progressive: https://www.progressive.comAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

This is Part 10 of the mini-series that covers the story of Bobby Baker. This mini-series is part of a larger series covering Billy Sol Estes, Mac Wallace, Bobby Baker and other members of Johnson's Texas inner circle. All of these men were quite intertwined around Johnson at the time of the assassination. They were involved in circumstances that were closing in on Johnson too and that provided him great motive in the killing of the President. The story is extraordinary. Today's episode continues the story of Bobby Baker's Bad Boy friend and business partner Ed Levinson. Today we hear a taped telephone conversation from the Whitehouse between President Lyndon Johnson and  U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark. The discussion addressed Baker and the Levinson connection and it took place about 20 minutes before midnight on July 13th, 1966. It reveals much in the way of Johnson's insight and thinking about the case and the implications are apparent. And they reinforce the impact that Levinson's involvement had on the circumstances that affected Baker directly...and that were  (continuing) to potentially affect the President himself. Levinson was a major player in the Vegas casino scene, and top associate in the mob of Meyer Lansky. He was also a shareholder and investor in Serve-U Corporation. Bobby Baker's vending company. This bad boy would enter into other business partnerships with Baker including both becoming shareholders in the Washington National Bank, of which Baker was influential in obtaining the charter. Explaining some of the men around Baker helps to explain the circumstances that he would later find himself in, when trouble came knocking. The characters, setting and details around this story make it an essential example of one more bad choice of association by Baker which eventually led to his demise and came close to bringing down Vice President Johnson as well. Rumors of Johnson's involvement in the assassination began to swirl almost immediately after the President's  murder and there is a defined school of thought within the JFK assassination research community that staunchly believes in Johnson's involvement. His involvement  in both the assassination and its cover up. Join us in one of the most fascinating story tells of the Kennedy assassination and stick around as we will be returning to the Mexico City series right after we complete this min-series that was spawned by the recent release of the Billy Sol Estes and Cliff Carter tape that the two recorded in 1971. Folks, you just can't write this stuff. Even as early as 1964, rumors and serious concerns over  the lone gunman theory and the evidence that might contravene it,  were becoming a major concern for the government and the commission. Conspiracy theories were contrary to the government's stated narrative from the very beginning. This  real-life story is more fascinating than fiction.  No matter whether you are a serious researcher or a casual student, you will enjoy the fact filled narrative and story as  we relive one of the most shocking moments in American History. An event that changed the nation and changed the world forever.

USMNT: what we have learned about this team and individual players so far this tournament plus what to expect from Costa Rica and (unbiased) predictions GOLD CUP: the pluses and minuses of Jesse Marsch proactively painting himself as the bad boy of CONCACAF as well as whether Saudi Arabia give Mexico problems in other quarterfinal ROUND THE WORLD: thoughts on the Club World Cup so far, games to watch from the last matchday of group stage games and power rankings of both teams and fanbases STOPPAGE TIME: Ivan Toney's Best Bets (#OverTrain is NOT cooking) and GOAWs

Back to the Bobby Baker series! This is  Part 9 of the mini-series that covers the story of Bobby Baker. This mini-series is part of a larger series covering  Billy Sol Estes, Mac Wallace, Bobby Baker and other members of Johnson's Texas inner circle.  All of these  men  were quite intertwined around Johnson at the time of the assassination. They  were involved in circumstances that were closing in on Johnson too and that provided him great motive in the killing of the President.  The story is extraordinary.  Today's episode tells the story of   Bobby Baker's Bad Boy friend and business partner Ed Levinson. Levinson was a major player in the Vegas casino scene, and top associate in the mob of Meyer Lansky. He was also a shareholder and investor in Serv U. Bobby Baker's vending company.  This bad boy would enter into other business partnerships with Baker including the Washington National Bank, of which Baker was influential in obtaining the charter for. Explaining some of the men around Baker helps to explain the circumstances that he would later find himself in, when trouble came knocking. The characters, setting and details around this story make it a quintessential example of influence peddling at it's finest and that was in essence declared by the Senate committee during their investigation.Rumors of Johnson's involvement in the assassination began to swirl almost immediately after the President's  murder and there is a defined school of thought within the JFK assassination research community that staunchly believes in Johnson's involvement. His involvement  in both the assassination and its cover up. Join us in one of the most fascinating story tells of the Kennedy assassination and stick around as we will be returning to the Mexico City series right after we complete this min-series that was spawned by the recent release of the Billy Sol Estes and Cliff Carter tape that the two recorded in 1971. Folks, you just can't write this stuff. Even as early as 1964, rumors and serious concerns over  the lone gunman theory and the evidence that might contravene it,  were becoming a major concern for the government and the commission. Conspiracy theories were contrary to the government's stated narrative from the very beginning. This  real-life story is more fascinating than fiction.  No matter whether you are a serious researcher or a casual student, you will enjoy the fact filled narrative and story as  we relive one of the most shocking moments in American History. An event that changed the nation and changed the world forever.

The East Coast-West Coast hip-hop feud of the 1990s, primarily involving Tupac Shakur, Sean "Diddy" Combs, and The Notorious B.I.G., remains one of the most infamous sagas in music history. What began as a personal falling-out between former friends Tupac and Biggie after a 1994 shooting at Quad Studios in New York escalated into a deadly rivalry. Tupac believed Diddy and Biggie were involved in the ambush, fueling his anger and intensifying the conflict. After being bailed out of prison by Death Row Records' CEO Suge Knight, Tupac fully aligned himself with the West Coast and released the infamous diss track "Hit 'Em Up," publicly attacking Biggie and Bad Boy Records. As the feud gained national attention, gang affiliations on both sides deepened the animosity. Suge Knight's provocations and media sensationalism only fueled the escalating tension between Death Row and Bad Boy.The rivalry ultimately culminated in the tragic murders of both Tupac and Biggie. Tupac was shot in Las Vegas on September 7, 1996, after a violent altercation with Orlando Anderson, a known gang member, and died six days later. Less than six months later, on March 9, 1997, Biggie was gunned down in Los Angeles after attending a party. Both murders remain officially unsolved, although recent developments, including the indictment of Duane "Keefe D" Davis in connection with Tupac's death, have revived hope of uncovering the truth. The legacies of Tupac and Biggie continue to influence hip-hop, serving as stark reminders of the violent cost of fame and the dangerous intersection of music, street life, and power.(commercial at 11:54)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In the case of John Doe v. Sean Combs, Bad Boy Entertainment LLC, and associated entities, the plaintiff, John Doe, has filed a lawsuit against Sean Combs and various affiliated companies, including Bad Boy Entertainment LLC, Bad Boy Records LLC, and others. The case was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, under case number 1:25-CV-00996-JLR. The plaintiff, through his legal representation, The Bloom Firm, is seeking legal action based on the allegations made by John Doe, who asserts claims arising from his personal experience and information he has gathered about the actions of the defendants.John Doe's lawsuit includes several corporate entities affiliated with Sean Combs, such as Bad Boy Entertainment Holdings Inc., Bad Boy Productions Holdings Inc., and Bad Boy Books Holdings Inc. Additionally, the complaint also lists Doe Corporations 1-10 and Doe Defendants 11-20, indicating that the plaintiff may pursue further claims against other unidentified individuals or entities involved in the matter. The plaintiff is requesting a jury trial as part of his legal proceedings.to contact me:bobbycapuccisource:*Microsoft Word - 2025.01.17 Complaint REDACTEDBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Jeffrey Epstein's operation bore all the hallmarks of a high-level honeypot scheme, suggesting far more than the lone actions of a wealthy manipulator. According to Agent X, a former intelligence operative, he suspects  that Epstein systematically lured influential figures—politicians, CEOs, even royalty—into compromising situations that were allegedly recorded and used for blackmail or leverage. The presence of underage girls on his properties magnified the severity of potential incriminations, giving Epstein a powerful hold over his high-profile guests. Moreover, the unusually lenient legal treatment he received—particularly a Florida plea deal granting him near-total immunity—raises strong suspicions of government or intelligence involvement, possibly in exchange for Epstein providing valuable information on bigger, more strategically significant targets.Agent X also underscored the possibility that Epstein may have been “flipped” as an FBI informant, feeding them tapes or intel about the elite figures he ensnared. This scenario would explain his near-magical ability to dodge serious consequences for so long, while potentially enabling federal agencies to gather extraordinary leverage over top-level individuals. If true, Epstein's operation would not be a mere personal blackmail ring, but a sprawling intelligence asset cultivating a vast reservoir of Kompromat for hidden patrons. In this view, the case exemplifies how institutional corruption and clandestine arrangements can permit profound abuse under the guise of exclusive wealth, while showcasing why transparency and accountability remain vital to prevent further exploitation.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In the case of John Doe v. Sean Combs, Bad Boy Entertainment LLC, and associated entities, the plaintiff, John Doe, has filed a lawsuit against Sean Combs and various affiliated companies, including Bad Boy Entertainment LLC, Bad Boy Records LLC, and others. The case was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, under case number 1:25-CV-00996-JLR. The plaintiff, through his legal representation, The Bloom Firm, is seeking legal action based on the allegations made by John Doe, who asserts claims arising from his personal experience and information he has gathered about the actions of the defendants.John Doe's lawsuit includes several corporate entities affiliated with Sean Combs, such as Bad Boy Entertainment Holdings Inc., Bad Boy Productions Holdings Inc., and Bad Boy Books Holdings Inc. Additionally, the complaint also lists Doe Corporations 1-10 and Doe Defendants 11-20, indicating that the plaintiff may pursue further claims against other unidentified individuals or entities involved in the matter. The plaintiff is requesting a jury trial as part of his legal proceedings.to contact me:bobbycapuccisource:*Microsoft Word - 2025.01.17 Complaint REDACTEDBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Sara Rivers, formerly known as Sara Stokes from MTV's Making the Band 2 and a member of Da Band, filed a $60 million lawsuit against Sean "Diddy" Combs alleging a pattern of sexual harassment, battery, psychological abuse, and professional sabotage. Rivers claims that Combs subjected her to degrading treatment throughout her time on the reality series and beyond, including groping her without consent, making sexually explicit comments, and mocking her bulimia. She further alleges that Combs controlled contestants' food, sleep, and movement, orchestrated humiliating stunts like the infamous "cheesecake walk," and forced her into uncompensated labor under exploitative conditions. According to the complaint, Rivers was made to sleep in exposed, unsafe quarters with male co-stars and denied basic dignity and protection.The lawsuit names more than two dozen other parties, including executives at Bad Boy, Universal Music Group, MTV, and even Combs's mother, asserting that they either enabled or failed to intervene in the abuse. Rivers accuses Combs of deliberately dismantling Da Band to assert dominance and retain control of her earnings, effectively sabotaging her career. She asserts that this behavior was not isolated but part of a systemic pattern of exploitation and intimidation that targeted young, vulnerable performers. Combs's legal team has dismissed the suit as meritless and opportunistic, noting it was filed just before the deadline under the New York City Gender-Motivated Violence Act. The case joins a growing list of lawsuits and criminal investigations currently surrounding Combs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Sara cmplt

Sara Rivers, formerly known as Sara Stokes from MTV's Making the Band 2 and a member of Da Band, filed a $60 million lawsuit against Sean "Diddy" Combs alleging a pattern of sexual harassment, battery, psychological abuse, and professional sabotage. Rivers claims that Combs subjected her to degrading treatment throughout her time on the reality series and beyond, including groping her without consent, making sexually explicit comments, and mocking her bulimia. She further alleges that Combs controlled contestants' food, sleep, and movement, orchestrated humiliating stunts like the infamous "cheesecake walk," and forced her into uncompensated labor under exploitative conditions. According to the complaint, Rivers was made to sleep in exposed, unsafe quarters with male co-stars and denied basic dignity and protection.The lawsuit names more than two dozen other parties, including executives at Bad Boy, Universal Music Group, MTV, and even Combs's mother, asserting that they either enabled or failed to intervene in the abuse. Rivers accuses Combs of deliberately dismantling Da Band to assert dominance and retain control of her earnings, effectively sabotaging her career. She asserts that this behavior was not isolated but part of a systemic pattern of exploitation and intimidation that targeted young, vulnerable performers. Combs's legal team has dismissed the suit as meritless and opportunistic, noting it was filed just before the deadline under the New York City Gender-Motivated Violence Act. The case joins a growing list of lawsuits and criminal investigations currently surrounding Combs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Sara cmplt

Sara Rivers, formerly known as Sara Stokes from MTV's Making the Band 2 and a member of Da Band, filed a $60 million lawsuit against Sean "Diddy" Combs alleging a pattern of sexual harassment, battery, psychological abuse, and professional sabotage. Rivers claims that Combs subjected her to degrading treatment throughout her time on the reality series and beyond, including groping her without consent, making sexually explicit comments, and mocking her bulimia. She further alleges that Combs controlled contestants' food, sleep, and movement, orchestrated humiliating stunts like the infamous "cheesecake walk," and forced her into uncompensated labor under exploitative conditions. According to the complaint, Rivers was made to sleep in exposed, unsafe quarters with male co-stars and denied basic dignity and protection.The lawsuit names more than two dozen other parties, including executives at Bad Boy, Universal Music Group, MTV, and even Combs's mother, asserting that they either enabled or failed to intervene in the abuse. Rivers accuses Combs of deliberately dismantling Da Band to assert dominance and retain control of her earnings, effectively sabotaging her career. She asserts that this behavior was not isolated but part of a systemic pattern of exploitation and intimidation that targeted young, vulnerable performers. Combs's legal team has dismissed the suit as meritless and opportunistic, noting it was filed just before the deadline under the New York City Gender-Motivated Violence Act. The case joins a growing list of lawsuits and criminal investigations currently surrounding Combs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Sara cmplt

Sara Rivers, formerly known as Sara Stokes from MTV's Making the Band 2 and a member of Da Band, filed a $60 million lawsuit against Sean "Diddy" Combs alleging a pattern of sexual harassment, battery, psychological abuse, and professional sabotage. Rivers claims that Combs subjected her to degrading treatment throughout her time on the reality series and beyond, including groping her without consent, making sexually explicit comments, and mocking her bulimia. She further alleges that Combs controlled contestants' food, sleep, and movement, orchestrated humiliating stunts like the infamous "cheesecake walk," and forced her into uncompensated labor under exploitative conditions. According to the complaint, Rivers was made to sleep in exposed, unsafe quarters with male co-stars and denied basic dignity and protection.The lawsuit names more than two dozen other parties, including executives at Bad Boy, Universal Music Group, MTV, and even Combs's mother, asserting that they either enabled or failed to intervene in the abuse. Rivers accuses Combs of deliberately dismantling Da Band to assert dominance and retain control of her earnings, effectively sabotaging her career. She asserts that this behavior was not isolated but part of a systemic pattern of exploitation and intimidation that targeted young, vulnerable performers. Combs's legal team has dismissed the suit as meritless and opportunistic, noting it was filed just before the deadline under the New York City Gender-Motivated Violence Act. The case joins a growing list of lawsuits and criminal investigations currently surrounding Combs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Sara cmplt

Sara Rivers, formerly known as Sara Stokes from MTV's Making the Band 2 and a member of Da Band, filed a $60 million lawsuit against Sean "Diddy" Combs alleging a pattern of sexual harassment, battery, psychological abuse, and professional sabotage. Rivers claims that Combs subjected her to degrading treatment throughout her time on the reality series and beyond, including groping her without consent, making sexually explicit comments, and mocking her bulimia. She further alleges that Combs controlled contestants' food, sleep, and movement, orchestrated humiliating stunts like the infamous "cheesecake walk," and forced her into uncompensated labor under exploitative conditions. According to the complaint, Rivers was made to sleep in exposed, unsafe quarters with male co-stars and denied basic dignity and protection.The lawsuit names more than two dozen other parties, including executives at Bad Boy, Universal Music Group, MTV, and even Combs's mother, asserting that they either enabled or failed to intervene in the abuse. Rivers accuses Combs of deliberately dismantling Da Band to assert dominance and retain control of her earnings, effectively sabotaging her career. She asserts that this behavior was not isolated but part of a systemic pattern of exploitation and intimidation that targeted young, vulnerable performers. Combs's legal team has dismissed the suit as meritless and opportunistic, noting it was filed just before the deadline under the New York City Gender-Motivated Violence Act. The case joins a growing list of lawsuits and criminal investigations currently surrounding Combs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Sara cmplt

Sara Rivers, formerly known as Sara Stokes from MTV's Making the Band 2 and a member of Da Band, filed a $60 million lawsuit against Sean "Diddy" Combs alleging a pattern of sexual harassment, battery, psychological abuse, and professional sabotage. Rivers claims that Combs subjected her to degrading treatment throughout her time on the reality series and beyond, including groping her without consent, making sexually explicit comments, and mocking her bulimia. She further alleges that Combs controlled contestants' food, sleep, and movement, orchestrated humiliating stunts like the infamous "cheesecake walk," and forced her into uncompensated labor under exploitative conditions. According to the complaint, Rivers was made to sleep in exposed, unsafe quarters with male co-stars and denied basic dignity and protection.The lawsuit names more than two dozen other parties, including executives at Bad Boy, Universal Music Group, MTV, and even Combs's mother, asserting that they either enabled or failed to intervene in the abuse. Rivers accuses Combs of deliberately dismantling Da Band to assert dominance and retain control of her earnings, effectively sabotaging her career. She asserts that this behavior was not isolated but part of a systemic pattern of exploitation and intimidation that targeted young, vulnerable performers. Combs's legal team has dismissed the suit as meritless and opportunistic, noting it was filed just before the deadline under the New York City Gender-Motivated Violence Act. The case joins a growing list of lawsuits and criminal investigations currently surrounding Combs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Sara cmplt

In this explosive two-part episode, Death Row founder Suge Knight calls Aubrey from prison to deliver his most unfiltered take yet on the trial of his decades-long rival: Sean “Diddy” Combs. Suge doesn’t hold back. He rewinds the clock to the real origins of the East Coast vs. West Coast war. Who REALLY started the long trail of bloodshed that claimed the lives of Biggie and Tupac? Who does Suge blame for Diddy’s ‘Bad Boy’ behavior? And in a chilling prediction, Suge reveals what he believes could happen in court that would shake the music industry forever. This isn’t a headline—it’s a warning. And it's coming from the inside. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Harold Wilkerson on Ja Rule, Bad Boy, J.Lo, Fyre Fest & Building Chase Republic + MoreSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.