Podcasts about prosecution

Court is now in session! Join Judge Joe Pisapia, Prosecutor Pat Fitzmaurice, and Defense Attorney Derek Brown as they present their arguments for where RJ Harvey belongs in running back draft rankings in 2025: RB12 or RB22? Tune in as both sides of the courtroom present their arguments before you, the Twitch Jury, render a verdict in the case! Want to join the jury for next week’s trial? Tune in every Tuesday at 3 p.m. ET over at twitch.tv/fantasypros to enter the deliberations and cast your vote! Timestamps: (May be off due to ads) Intro - 0:00:00 Opening Arguments - 0:01:40 The Prosecution - 0:02:25 The Defense - 0:04:28 Cross Examinations - 0:07:54 Closing Arguments - 0:09:01 The Verdict - 0:09:37 Outro - 0:11:03 Helpful Links: Dynasty Rookie Draft Simulator - Our Dynasty Rookie Draft Simulator lets you complete a mock in minutes with no waiting between picks! Customize your league settings to match your league’s exact format. Premium subscribers can test trade scenarios by mocking with their traded draft picks. Prepare for rookie drafts AND dynasty startup drafts in one place! Use the Dynasty Rookie Draft Simulator to dominate your rookie draft today at fantasypros.com/simulator! Discord - Join our FantasyPros Discord Community! Chat with other fans and get access to exclusive AMAs that wind up on our podcast feed. Come get your questions answered and BE ON THE SHOW at fantasypros.com/chat Leave a Review – If you enjoy our show and find our insight to be valuable, we’d love to hear from you! Your reviews fuel our passion and help us tailor content specifically for YOU. Head to Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever else you get your podcasts and leave an honest review. Let’s make this show the ultimate destination for fantasy football enthusiasts like us. Thank you for watching and for showing your support – https://fantasypros.com/review/ BettingPros Podcast – For advice on the best picks and props across both the NFL and college football each and every week, check out the BettingPros Podcast at bettingpros.com/podcast, our BettingPros YouTube channel at youtube.com/bettingpros, or wherever you listen to podcasts.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General (OIG) report into Jeffrey Epstein's 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) presents a disturbing portrait of federal cowardice, systemic failures, and deliberate abdication of prosecutorial duty. Instead of zealously pursuing justice against a serial predator with dozens of underage victims, the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Southern District of Florida, under Alexander Acosta, caved to Epstein's high-powered legal team and crafted a sweetheart deal that immunized not just Epstein, but unnamed potential co-conspirators—many of whom are still shielded to this day. The report shows that career prosecutors initially prepared a 53-page indictment, but this was ultimately buried, replaced by state charges that led to minimal jail time, lenient conditions, and near-total impunity. The OIG paints the decision as a series of poor judgments rather than criminal misconduct, but this framing betrays the magnitude of what actually occurred: a calculated retreat in the face of wealth and influence.Critically, the report fails to hold any individuals truly accountable, nor does it demand structural reform that could prevent similar derelictions of justice. It accepts, without sufficient pushback, the justifications offered by federal prosecutors who claimed their hands were tied or that the case was too risky—despite overwhelming evidence and a mountain of victim statements. The OIG sidesteps the glaring reality that this was not just bureaucratic failure, but a protection racket masquerading as legal discretion. It treats corruption as incompetence and power as inevitability. The conclusion, ultimately, feels like a shrug—a bureaucratic absolution of one of the most disgraceful collapses of federal prosecutorial integrity in modern history. It is less a reckoning than a rubber stamp on institutional failure.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:dl (justice.gov)

The Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General (OIG) report into Jeffrey Epstein's 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) presents a disturbing portrait of federal cowardice, systemic failures, and deliberate abdication of prosecutorial duty. Instead of zealously pursuing justice against a serial predator with dozens of underage victims, the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Southern District of Florida, under Alexander Acosta, caved to Epstein's high-powered legal team and crafted a sweetheart deal that immunized not just Epstein, but unnamed potential co-conspirators—many of whom are still shielded to this day. The report shows that career prosecutors initially prepared a 53-page indictment, but this was ultimately buried, replaced by state charges that led to minimal jail time, lenient conditions, and near-total impunity. The OIG paints the decision as a series of poor judgments rather than criminal misconduct, but this framing betrays the magnitude of what actually occurred: a calculated retreat in the face of wealth and influence.Critically, the report fails to hold any individuals truly accountable, nor does it demand structural reform that could prevent similar derelictions of justice. It accepts, without sufficient pushback, the justifications offered by federal prosecutors who claimed their hands were tied or that the case was too risky—despite overwhelming evidence and a mountain of victim statements. The OIG sidesteps the glaring reality that this was not just bureaucratic failure, but a protection racket masquerading as legal discretion. It treats corruption as incompetence and power as inevitability. The conclusion, ultimately, feels like a shrug—a bureaucratic absolution of one of the most disgraceful collapses of federal prosecutorial integrity in modern history. It is less a reckoning than a rubber stamp on institutional failure.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:dl (justice.gov)

The Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General (OIG) report into Jeffrey Epstein's 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) presents a disturbing portrait of federal cowardice, systemic failures, and deliberate abdication of prosecutorial duty. Instead of zealously pursuing justice against a serial predator with dozens of underage victims, the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Southern District of Florida, under Alexander Acosta, caved to Epstein's high-powered legal team and crafted a sweetheart deal that immunized not just Epstein, but unnamed potential co-conspirators—many of whom are still shielded to this day. The report shows that career prosecutors initially prepared a 53-page indictment, but this was ultimately buried, replaced by state charges that led to minimal jail time, lenient conditions, and near-total impunity. The OIG paints the decision as a series of poor judgments rather than criminal misconduct, but this framing betrays the magnitude of what actually occurred: a calculated retreat in the face of wealth and influence.Critically, the report fails to hold any individuals truly accountable, nor does it demand structural reform that could prevent similar derelictions of justice. It accepts, without sufficient pushback, the justifications offered by federal prosecutors who claimed their hands were tied or that the case was too risky—despite overwhelming evidence and a mountain of victim statements. The OIG sidesteps the glaring reality that this was not just bureaucratic failure, but a protection racket masquerading as legal discretion. It treats corruption as incompetence and power as inevitability. The conclusion, ultimately, feels like a shrug—a bureaucratic absolution of one of the most disgraceful collapses of federal prosecutorial integrity in modern history. It is less a reckoning than a rubber stamp on institutional failure.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:dl (justice.gov)

The Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General (OIG) report into Jeffrey Epstein's 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) presents a disturbing portrait of federal cowardice, systemic failures, and deliberate abdication of prosecutorial duty. Instead of zealously pursuing justice against a serial predator with dozens of underage victims, the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Southern District of Florida, under Alexander Acosta, caved to Epstein's high-powered legal team and crafted a sweetheart deal that immunized not just Epstein, but unnamed potential co-conspirators—many of whom are still shielded to this day. The report shows that career prosecutors initially prepared a 53-page indictment, but this was ultimately buried, replaced by state charges that led to minimal jail time, lenient conditions, and near-total impunity. The OIG paints the decision as a series of poor judgments rather than criminal misconduct, but this framing betrays the magnitude of what actually occurred: a calculated retreat in the face of wealth and influence.Critically, the report fails to hold any individuals truly accountable, nor does it demand structural reform that could prevent similar derelictions of justice. It accepts, without sufficient pushback, the justifications offered by federal prosecutors who claimed their hands were tied or that the case was too risky—despite overwhelming evidence and a mountain of victim statements. The OIG sidesteps the glaring reality that this was not just bureaucratic failure, but a protection racket masquerading as legal discretion. It treats corruption as incompetence and power as inevitability. The conclusion, ultimately, feels like a shrug—a bureaucratic absolution of one of the most disgraceful collapses of federal prosecutorial integrity in modern history. It is less a reckoning than a rubber stamp on institutional failure.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:dl (justice.gov)

The Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General (OIG) report into Jeffrey Epstein's 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) presents a disturbing portrait of federal cowardice, systemic failures, and deliberate abdication of prosecutorial duty. Instead of zealously pursuing justice against a serial predator with dozens of underage victims, the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Southern District of Florida, under Alexander Acosta, caved to Epstein's high-powered legal team and crafted a sweetheart deal that immunized not just Epstein, but unnamed potential co-conspirators—many of whom are still shielded to this day. The report shows that career prosecutors initially prepared a 53-page indictment, but this was ultimately buried, replaced by state charges that led to minimal jail time, lenient conditions, and near-total impunity. The OIG paints the decision as a series of poor judgments rather than criminal misconduct, but this framing betrays the magnitude of what actually occurred: a calculated retreat in the face of wealth and influence.Critically, the report fails to hold any individuals truly accountable, nor does it demand structural reform that could prevent similar derelictions of justice. It accepts, without sufficient pushback, the justifications offered by federal prosecutors who claimed their hands were tied or that the case was too risky—despite overwhelming evidence and a mountain of victim statements. The OIG sidesteps the glaring reality that this was not just bureaucratic failure, but a protection racket masquerading as legal discretion. It treats corruption as incompetence and power as inevitability. The conclusion, ultimately, feels like a shrug—a bureaucratic absolution of one of the most disgraceful collapses of federal prosecutorial integrity in modern history. It is less a reckoning than a rubber stamp on institutional failure.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:dl (justice.gov)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General (OIG) report into Jeffrey Epstein's 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) presents a disturbing portrait of federal cowardice, systemic failures, and deliberate abdication of prosecutorial duty. Instead of zealously pursuing justice against a serial predator with dozens of underage victims, the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Southern District of Florida, under Alexander Acosta, caved to Epstein's high-powered legal team and crafted a sweetheart deal that immunized not just Epstein, but unnamed potential co-conspirators—many of whom are still shielded to this day. The report shows that career prosecutors initially prepared a 53-page indictment, but this was ultimately buried, replaced by state charges that led to minimal jail time, lenient conditions, and near-total impunity. The OIG paints the decision as a series of poor judgments rather than criminal misconduct, but this framing betrays the magnitude of what actually occurred: a calculated retreat in the face of wealth and influence.Critically, the report fails to hold any individuals truly accountable, nor does it demand structural reform that could prevent similar derelictions of justice. It accepts, without sufficient pushback, the justifications offered by federal prosecutors who claimed their hands were tied or that the case was too risky—despite overwhelming evidence and a mountain of victim statements. The OIG sidesteps the glaring reality that this was not just bureaucratic failure, but a protection racket masquerading as legal discretion. It treats corruption as incompetence and power as inevitability. The conclusion, ultimately, feels like a shrug—a bureaucratic absolution of one of the most disgraceful collapses of federal prosecutorial integrity in modern history. It is less a reckoning than a rubber stamp on institutional failure.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:dl (justice.gov)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

This week, Drewby and Yergy head down to Savannah, Georgia, to discuss the case of Quinton Simon, and adorable little boy born to a drug addicted mother, Leilani Simon. At the time of our story, Quinton and his siblings were living in the home of their grandmother, Billie Jo Howell, when one morning, Quinton went missing. Eventually, all signs pointed to his mother, 22-year-old Leilani, and after weeks of searching through mounds of trash in a landfill, pieces of the toddler were finally recovered.  Support Our Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/themiserymachine PayPal: https://www.paypal.me/themiserymachine Join Our Facebook Group: https://t.co/DeSZIIMgXs?amp=1 Instagram: miserymachinepodcast Twitter: misery_podcast Discord: https://discord.gg/kCCzjZM #themiserymachine #podcast #truecrime Source Materials: https://www.wjcl.com/article/quinton-simon-home-up-for-sale/46306130 https://www.wjcl.com/article/quinton-simon-landfill-search-murder-trial/62674115 Leilani Simon asks for new trial, is transferred to prison Leilani Simon sentenced to life with possibility of parole in death of her son Quinton Oruta Ruth Simon (2021-2022) - Find a Grave Memorial New findings released following investigation on Georgia's foster care system Quinton Oruta "Ruth" Simon Obituary (2022) | Savannah, Georgia ‘My baby's not dead': Heated exchange between grandmother, babysitter of missing Georgia toddler caught on camera | WSAV-TV Grandmother of Quinton Simon sentenced to 10 days in jail for violating court order Babysitter ‘very concerned' about Quinton Simon as mother's trial continues in his killing Quinton Simon family home in Savannah on the market One year anniversary of Quinton Simon's disappearance Quinton Simon | WSAV.com Day 8 of Leilani Simon murder trial ‘Heartbreaking': Day 7 of Leilani Simon murder trial focuses on search for Quinton's remains Week 2 of Leilani Simon murder trial opens with FBI testimony Day 5 of Leilani Simon murder trial Memorial set up outside of toddler's home as investigation continues Leilani Simon murder trial day 4: Prosecution paints picture of abuse for toddler Quinton | FOX 5 Atlanta Leilani Simon, Sentenced to Life for Murder of 20-Month-Old Son, Wants Child's Remains Given to Her Brother Quinton Simon: Grandmother of Slain Tot Calls FBI After Accused Murderer Mom Checks out of Rehab Hours Before Arrest – Crime Online Quinton Simon: Babysitter reveals odd text before toddler's disappearance | The Independent Savannah Murder Trial: Babysitter Testifies Against Leilani Simon Its been almost 2 years since Quinton Simon died. When will his mother go to trial? Georgia toddler Quinton Simon remembered as 'fun, smart, loving little monkey' | Fox News Heartbreaking obituary released for toddler found dead in Georgia landfill – WSB-TV Channel 2 - Atlanta Search continues for Chatham Co. toddler last seen Wednesday morning One week since the disappearance of Quinton Simon Police resume search at home of missing toddler Chatham County Police seize evidence in missing toddler case UPDATE: Chatham Co. PD provides new tips number for missing toddler Police searching for missing 20-month-old child on Buckhalter Rd. Quinton Simon's Mother Leilani Simon Convicted of Murdering Toddler Georgia mother sentenced to life for killing son Quinton Simon whose body was found in landfill https://www.yourtango.com/crime/quinton-simon-grandmother-billie-jo-howell-claims-toddler-drowned https://www.instagram.com/itsdannyyoungkin/ https://www.newsnationnow.com/missing/babysitter-quinton-simon-may-have-drowned/ https://www.crimeonline.com/2022/11/23/quinton-simon-grandmother-of-missing-tot-calls-fbi-afte-accused-murderer-mom-checks-out-of-rehab-hours-before-arrest/ https://nypost.com/2022/10/26/quinton-simon-may-have-drowned-in-bath-while-mom-was-high-report/

The Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General (OIG) report into Jeffrey Epstein's 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) presents a disturbing portrait of federal cowardice, systemic failures, and deliberate abdication of prosecutorial duty. Instead of zealously pursuing justice against a serial predator with dozens of underage victims, the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Southern District of Florida, under Alexander Acosta, caved to Epstein's high-powered legal team and crafted a sweetheart deal that immunized not just Epstein, but unnamed potential co-conspirators—many of whom are still shielded to this day. The report shows that career prosecutors initially prepared a 53-page indictment, but this was ultimately buried, replaced by state charges that led to minimal jail time, lenient conditions, and near-total impunity. The OIG paints the decision as a series of poor judgments rather than criminal misconduct, but this framing betrays the magnitude of what actually occurred: a calculated retreat in the face of wealth and influence.Critically, the report fails to hold any individuals truly accountable, nor does it demand structural reform that could prevent similar derelictions of justice. It accepts, without sufficient pushback, the justifications offered by federal prosecutors who claimed their hands were tied or that the case was too risky—despite overwhelming evidence and a mountain of victim statements. The OIG sidesteps the glaring reality that this was not just bureaucratic failure, but a protection racket masquerading as legal discretion. It treats corruption as incompetence and power as inevitability. The conclusion, ultimately, feels like a shrug—a bureaucratic absolution of one of the most disgraceful collapses of federal prosecutorial integrity in modern history. It is less a reckoning than a rubber stamp on institutional failure.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:dl (justice.gov)

The Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General (OIG) report into Jeffrey Epstein's 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) presents a disturbing portrait of federal cowardice, systemic failures, and deliberate abdication of prosecutorial duty. Instead of zealously pursuing justice against a serial predator with dozens of underage victims, the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Southern District of Florida, under Alexander Acosta, caved to Epstein's high-powered legal team and crafted a sweetheart deal that immunized not just Epstein, but unnamed potential co-conspirators—many of whom are still shielded to this day. The report shows that career prosecutors initially prepared a 53-page indictment, but this was ultimately buried, replaced by state charges that led to minimal jail time, lenient conditions, and near-total impunity. The OIG paints the decision as a series of poor judgments rather than criminal misconduct, but this framing betrays the magnitude of what actually occurred: a calculated retreat in the face of wealth and influence.Critically, the report fails to hold any individuals truly accountable, nor does it demand structural reform that could prevent similar derelictions of justice. It accepts, without sufficient pushback, the justifications offered by federal prosecutors who claimed their hands were tied or that the case was too risky—despite overwhelming evidence and a mountain of victim statements. The OIG sidesteps the glaring reality that this was not just bureaucratic failure, but a protection racket masquerading as legal discretion. It treats corruption as incompetence and power as inevitability. The conclusion, ultimately, feels like a shrug—a bureaucratic absolution of one of the most disgraceful collapses of federal prosecutorial integrity in modern history. It is less a reckoning than a rubber stamp on institutional failure.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:dl (justice.gov)

In this episode, the brothers discuss Diddy's recent legal troubles, the implications of RICO charges, and the shifting moral landscape in society. They explore the complexities of public perception regarding legal issues, the political climate under Trump, and the potential for authoritarianism. The conversation also touches on personal relationships and the hypothetical scenario of rekindling love after loss, reflecting on the emotional and societal implications of such situations. In this engaging conversation, the hosts explore a variety of themes ranging from the complexities of relationships after loss, the impact of cultural representation in media, and significant historical events that shaped their perspectives. They reflect on memorable TV moments from their childhood, discuss community efforts in crime reduction, and emphasize the importance of political engagement. The conversation also touches on achievements in sports, highlighting the successes of athletes and the challenges they face in the public eye.Chapters00:00 Diddy's Legal Troubles and Public Perception04:05 Prosecution's Strategy and Public Morality06:47 RICO Charges and Their Implications09:38 Prostitution, Trafficking, and Legal Boundaries12:05 Political Landscape and Federal Funding Issues14:44 NFL Collusion and Player Contracts17:24 Riri Williams and Character Development20:06 Birthright Citizenship and Legal Implications22:51 Authoritarianism and Long-term Political Trends29:02 The Legacy of Leadership30:30 Navigating Relationships in a Changed World43:36 Impactful TV Moments51:12 Cultural Reflections in Television58:08 Political and Social Commentary01:03:03 Community and Crime Reduction01:09:56 Sports and Representation

Criminal defense lawyer Damon Cheronis joins Karen Conti to discuss the P. Diddy verdict this past week and what happens next. Damon also talks about the Idaho murder plea deal and the death penalty no longer being considered as a method of punishment in the case.

Lawyer and author Patrick Wohl joins Karen Conti to talk about his new book, ‘Something Big’, which focuses on the Brown's Chicken murders in Palatine in 1993. Patrick shares the victims’ stories and explains the impact this crime had on the franchise. Patrick also discusses how this crime was eventually solved and why the death […]

This episode was originally published on The Murder Sheet's main feed on July 4, 2025.The Cheat Sheet is The Murder Sheet's segment breaking down weekly news and updates in some of the murder cases we cover. In this episode, we'll talk about cases from Alabama, Idaho, Missouri, and Ohio, as well as nation-wide, across the United States of America. Associated Press's reporting on the murders of Idaho firefighters John Morrison and Frank Harwood and the wounding of David Tysdal: https://www.boston.com/news/national-news/2025/07/01/idaho-ambush-suspect-wess-roley/Fox 11's reporting on the murders of Idaho firefighters John Morrison and Frank Harwood and the wounding of David Tysdal: https://fox11online.com/news/local/neenah-high-school-alum-among-firefighters-killed-in-idaho-ambush-frank-harwood-wisconsin-coeur-dalene-kootenai-county-battalion-john-morrison-wess-roley-brush-fire-dave-tysdalThe Spokesman-Review's reporting on the murders of Idaho firefighters John Morrison and Frank Harwood and the wounding of David Tysdal: https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2025/jun/30/suspect-in-idaho-firefighter-killings-identified-a/Fox News's report on the charges against Jordan Willis and Ivory Carson in the deaths of Ricky Johnson, David Harrington, and Clayton McGeeney: https://www.foxnews.com/us/kansas-city-chiefs-fans-deaths-prosecutors-seek-tougher-chargesUSA Today's report on the charges against Jordan Willis and Ivory Carson in the deaths of Ricky Johnson, David Harrington, and Clayton McGeeney:https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2025/06/27/kansas-city-chiefs-fans-death-murder-charge/84387725007/People's report on the charges against Jordan Willis and Ivory Carson in the deaths of Ricky Johnson, David Harrington, and Clayton McGeeney: https://people.com/why-chiefs-fans-friend-is-now-charged-with-murder-exclusive-quotes-11763812The Sandusky Register's report on the case of true crime podcaster Ashli Ford and her attorney: https://sanduskyregister.com/news/595034/attorney-switches-sides/The Sandusky Register's report on the case of true crime podcaster Ashli Ford: https://sanduskyregister.com/news/594351/state-opposes-podcasters-motion/The Norwalk Reflector's report on the case of true crime podcaster Ashli Ford: https://norwalkreflector.com/news/589011/podcaster-takes-witness-stand/The opinion on the Michael Sockwell case in the murder of Isaiah Harris the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit: https://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/202313321.pdfWSFA's reporting on the Michael Sockwell case in the murder of Isaiah Harris: https://www.wsfa.com/2025/07/01/alabama-death-row-inmate-convicted-murder-for-hire-granted-retrial-after-3-decades/NPR's report on falling murder rates: https://www.npr.org/2025/06/30/nx-s1-5448852/murders-down-nationwide-covidPre-order our book on Delphi here: https://bookshop.org/p/books/shadow-of-the-bridge-the-delphi-murders-and-the-dark-side-of-the-american-heartland-aine-cain/21866881?ean=9781639369232Or here: https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Shadow-of-the-Bridge/Aine-Cain/9781639369232Or here: https://www.amazon.com/Shadow-Bridge-Murders-American-Heartland/dp/1639369236Join our Patreon here! https://www.patreon.com/c/murdersheetSupport The Murder Sheet by buying a t-shirt here: https://www.murdersheetshop.com/Check out more inclusive sizing and t-shirt and merchandising options here: https://themurdersheet.dashery.com/Send tips to murdersheet@gmail.com.The Murder Sheet is a production of Mystery Sheet LLC.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

The evidence against Bryan Kohberger that has been presented thus far has been very strong as far as circumstational evidence goes. However, that doesn't mean that there is no room for the defense to try to punch holes in the evidence, especially if the only DNA turns out to be the DNA left on the sheath.In this episode, we hear from Tracy Walder who discusses what the DNA found on the sheath tells us and doesn't tell us and how the defense might attempt to attack this evidence.(commercial at 7:59)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Why Bryan Kohberger's DNA Presents Problem for Prosecution (newsweek.com)

Prosecutors are moving forward with their case against the man accused of killing former DFL House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband Mark. Vance Boelter, 57, is charged in a six-count criminal complaint with the murder of the Hortmans early on June 14 and with shooting and wounding DFL State Sen. John Hoffman and his wife Yvette earlier the same night. Boelter is also charged with stalking the lawmakers.A Minnesota Department of Education employee no longer works there after a conservative news site reported on a prior conviction of criminal sexual conduct.And boaters can expect to see extra law enforcement officers on Minnesota waterways Friday and through the holiday weekend.Go deeper with the latest edition of the Minnesota Today newsletter.Prosecution moves forward after alleged Hortman assassin waives hearingsMinnesota education agency employee out after sex-crime conviction surfacesLaw enforcement warns boaters to drive sober this holiday weekendSubscribe on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube or RSS.

In Idaho, Bryan Kohberger faces a judge and the families of the students he murdered as he pleads guilty. In Kentucky, the prosecution calls more than a dozen witnesses in the case of a murdered mom of five. A verdict in Sean Combs's trial and new charges in the Kouri Richins case. Plus, in New Mexico, a new public alert system for the missing.Find out more about the cases covered each week here: www.datelinetruecrimeweekly.com

In Idaho, Bryan Kohberger faces a judge and the families of the students he murdered as he pleads guilty. In Kentucky, the prosecution calls more than a dozen witnesses in the case of a murdered mom of five. A verdict in Sean Combs's trial and new charges in the Kouri Richins case. Plus, in New Mexico, a new public alert system for the missing.Find out more about the cases covered each week here: www.datelinetruecrimeweekly.com

In Document 308, both parties in the United States v. Combs trial submitted a joint letter to Judge Arun Subramanian addressing the voir dire process, following their earlier filings (ECF Nos. 272 and 274) containing proposed questions for prospective jurors. The letter outlines areas of agreement between the prosecution and defense concerning how potential jurors should be questioned during selection. This includes standard demographic questions, prior jury service, general attitudes toward law enforcement and the justice system, and the ability to remain impartial in a high-profile case involving serious allegations. Both parties also agree on using written juror questionnaires before oral voir dire and ensuring the anonymity of jurors throughout the proceedings.However, the letter also details several points of dispute between the parties regarding specific voir dire questions. These disagreements primarily center around how directly jurors should be asked about their knowledge of Combs' past media controversies, opinions about the #MeToo movement, and whether jurors should be specifically questioned about their views on celebrity privilege or racial bias. The defense appears to want more targeted, probing questions to detect potential prosecutorial bias, while the government pushes back on what it sees as overly leading or prejudicial language. The letter asks Judge Subramanian to resolve these disputes before voir dire begins in earnest, underscoring how both teams are already deeply invested in shaping the jury long before opening statements are heard.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

On this full episode of LARRY, we discuss the unbelievable "ICEBlock" app that is being pushed by CNN, the BREAKING news that Kristi Noem just announced potential PROSECUTION for their role in promoting the app, Elon Musk and Donald Trump's feud heating up over the One Big Beautiful Bill, SOARING Trump poll numbers, Zohran Mamdani's HUMILIATING mistake about his state run grocery stores, and MUCH, much more! SHOP OUR MERCH: https://store.townhallmedia.com/ BUY A LARRY MUG: https://store.townhallmedia.com/products/larry-mug Watch LARRY with Larry O'Connor LIVE — Monday-Thursday at 12PM Eastern on YouTube, Facebook, & Rumble! Find LARRY with Larry O'Connor wherever you get your podcasts! SPOTIFY: https://open.spotify.com/show/7i8F7K4fqIDmqZSIHJNhMh?si=814ce2f8478944c0&nd=1&dlsi=e799ca22e81b456f APPLE: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/larry/id1730596733 Become a Townhall VIP Member today and use promo code LARRY for 50% off: https://townhall.com/subscribe?tpcc=poddescription https://townhall.com/ https://rumble.com/c/c-5769468 https://www.facebook.com/townhallcom/ https://www.instagram.com/townhallmedia/ https://twitter.com/townhallcomBecome a Townhall VIP member with promo code "LARRY": https://townhall.com/subscribeSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Question: Does the new ground of rejection raised by the Board in an appeal reopen prosecution? Answer: The new ground of rejection raised by the Board does not reopen prosecution except as to that subject matter to which the new rejection was applied. If the Board's decision in which the rejection was made includes an affirmance […] The post MPEP Q & A 331: Does new ground of rejection raised by the Board in an appeal reopen prosecution? appeared first on Patent Education Series.

Ronald Allen, a Northwestern Law School Professor, joins Karen Conti to discuss two U.S. Supreme Court decisions that were handed down this week. Ronald touches on the issue of birthright citizenship and how the 14th Amendment impacts it. Ronald also talks about a Maryland case that gives the right to parents to opt out their children […]

Colin Diamond, attorney at Mathys and Schneid Injury Law, joins Karen Conti to talk about summer legal issues. Colin details which fireworks are legal and illegal in Illinois and the consequences of bringing fireworks from other states into Illinois. Colin discusses swimming pool liability, bicycle and car accidents, nursing home liability, and dog bite liability. Colin […]

In a letter submitted via ECF to Judge Arun Subramanian, attorney Robert Balin, representing a coalition of major media outlets—including The Associated Press, ABC News, NBC News, The New York Times, The Washington Post, CBS News, NPR, Reuters, and others—raised concerns over the government's failure to provide timely public access to exhibits introduced during the testimony of the pseudonymous witness known as “Jane” in United States v. Combs. The government had previously assured both the Court and the News Organizations that such access would be granted in a manner consistent with open court proceedings and First Amendment protections.However, the letter asserts that those assurances were not honored, and the media was effectively prevented from reviewing exhibits contemporaneously with the witness's testimony. The News Organizations argue that this delay undermines both the principles of transparency and the public's constitutional right to observe judicial proceedings in real time. They request that the Court ensure immediate access to all future exhibits admitted into evidence, including those associated with sensitive or pseudonymous witnesses, barring any compelling and legally justified reason for delay.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Combs Trial - Letter re Delays re Jane Doe Exhibits 4913-4050-8751 v.2

Sean “Diddy” Combs, also known as Puff Daddy, is at the center of one of the biggest racketeering trials in hip hop history. Accused of running a criminal organization tied to RICO charges, sex trafficking, drug trafficking, bribery, forced labor, kidnapping, and witness tampering, Diddy faces a high-stakes jury deliberation that could bring down his entire empire.Anita Marks and Nevin Shapiro team up with top South Florida criminal defense attorney Mark Eiglarsh to break down every explosive detail of the trial. They explore how federal prosecutors portrayed Diddy as the ruthless leader of a racketeering enterprise, why his legal team chose to call zero defense witnesses, and what the jury must decide next. Could this be the ultimate downfall of Puff Daddy, or will the defense's gamble pay off?If you're following every twist in this case — from the Cassie Ventura settlement to witness intimidation claims — this episode gives you a front-row seat to the legal drama gripping the nation. Stay tuned for our upcoming reaction to the verdict and what it means for the future of hip hop.Timestamps: 00:00 Closing Arguments Wrap 00:20 Jury Set to Deliberate 02:22 Jury Instructions and Legal Standards 03:42 The “Criminal Kingdom” Theory 04:11 RICO and Racketeering Explained 06:24 Prosecution's Performance 09:10 No Defense Witnesses Surprise 10:25 Why Zero Witnesses? 17:56 $100K Hotel Payment — Bribe or Not?Follow the Hosts: Anita Marks: https://www.instagram.com/anita_marks Nevin Shapiro: https://www.instagram.com/nevinshapiro/Produced by: Michael Lazo: https://www.instagram.com/digilazo/

Defense attorney Marc Agnifilo argued that Cassie Ventura was the winner of her relationship with Combs. "She is sitting somewhere in the world with $30 million," he said. "He's in jail." And he tried to make the prosecution of Combs relatable. "They take yellow crime scene tape, figuratively, and they wrap it around his bedroom," he said. "The crime scene is your private sex life." In its rebuttal, the prosecution said the defense "just spent a whole lot of energy trying to blame his victims and the U.S. government for his lies, his threats, and his violence."If you want to read NBC's coverage of the trial, check out our newsletter, “Diddy On Trial”: NBCNews.com/Diddy 

In the final rebuttal of the government's closing arguments, Assistant U.S. Attorney Maurene Comey delivered a sharp, surgical dismantling of the defense's narrative. She told the jury that Sean Combs' legal team had spent more time attacking the victims than actually refuting the charges. Comey emphasized that the defense wanted the jury to fixate on distractions—on credibility issues, sex, fame, and salacious details—rather than the through-line of abuse and control that ran across every victim's testimony. She asserted that the witnesses' imperfections didn't negate the consistency of their stories, but rather underscored how real and raw their trauma was. According to Comey, the defense's case relied not on innocence, but on shame—shaming the victims, questioning their motives, and hoping the jury would do the same.Comey then turned her focus to the broader implications of the case, urging jurors not to be seduced by the glitz and chaos that surrounded Combs' world. She reminded them that at its core, this wasn't about celebrity—it was about a man who used money, violence, and manipulation to maintain control over his inner circle. She walked them back through key testimony, highlighting how the accounts independently aligned on themes of fear, coercion, and isolation. In her final moments, Comey made a direct appeal to the jury's sense of duty—not to be dazzled, not to be intimidated, but to see the case for what it was: a clear, prosecutable pattern of criminal conduct under the law. Her tone was resolute, leaving the jury with a piercing reminder: the law doesn't bend for fame.And now...Diddy is on the clock as verdict watch is set to begin starating next week.   to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:@innercitypress

Defense attorney Marc Agnifilo argued that Cassie Ventura was the winner of her relationship with Combs. "She is sitting somewhere in the world with $30 million," he said. "He's in jail." And he tried to make the prosecution of Combs relatable. "They take yellow crime scene tape, figuratively, and they wrap it around his bedroom," he said. "The crime scene is your private sex life." In its rebuttal, the prosecution said the defense "just spent a whole lot of energy trying to blame his victims and the U.S. government for his lies, his threats, and his violence."If you want to read NBC's coverage of the trial, check out our newsletter, “Diddy On Trial”: NBCNews.com/Diddy 

U.S. government prosecutor Christy Slavik has delivered closing arguments to the jury. Slavik, who addressed jurors for nearly five hours, painted a scathing portrait of Diddy, casting the defendant as “the leader of a criminal enterprise” who did “not take no for an answer” and “used power, violence and fear to get what he wanted.”Jim Chapman brings you Slavik in her own words as he covers the Prosecution's closing Arguments in the Diddy Trial.#Prosecution #closingstatements #diddy #trial #exposed #podcastBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/exposed-scandalous-files-of-the-elite--6073723/support.

In the final rebuttal of the government's closing arguments, Assistant U.S. Attorney Maurene Comey delivered a sharp, surgical dismantling of the defense's narrative. She told the jury that Sean Combs' legal team had spent more time attacking the victims than actually refuting the charges. Comey emphasized that the defense wanted the jury to fixate on distractions—on credibility issues, sex, fame, and salacious details—rather than the through-line of abuse and control that ran across every victim's testimony. She asserted that the witnesses' imperfections didn't negate the consistency of their stories, but rather underscored how real and raw their trauma was. According to Comey, the defense's case relied not on innocence, but on shame—shaming the victims, questioning their motives, and hoping the jury would do the same.Comey then turned her focus to the broader implications of the case, urging jurors not to be seduced by the glitz and chaos that surrounded Combs' world. She reminded them that at its core, this wasn't about celebrity—it was about a man who used money, violence, and manipulation to maintain control over his inner circle. She walked them back through key testimony, highlighting how the accounts independently aligned on themes of fear, coercion, and isolation. In her final moments, Comey made a direct appeal to the jury's sense of duty—not to be dazzled, not to be intimidated, but to see the case for what it was: a clear, prosecutable pattern of criminal conduct under the law. Her tone was resolute, leaving the jury with a piercing reminder: the law doesn't bend for fame.And now...Diddy is on the clock as verdict watch is set to begin starating next week.   to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:@innercitypressBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

"He won't take no for an answer," said prosecutor Christy Slavik. She said it over and over during a summation that lasted more than four hours. She argued that the "common purpose" of Combs and his "inner circle" -- his chief of staff, his bodyguards, and some of his assistants -- was to protect him from bad press and law enforcement. And she recounted the dramatic stories told in the courtroom in the past six weeks: Goodfellas-type scenes of alleged bribery, arson, and kidnapping.If you want to read NBC's coverage of the trial, check out our newsletter, “Diddy On Trial”: NBCNews.com/Diddy

In the trial of Sean "Diddy" Combs, the government reminded jurors of the complex web of witnesses and evidence it has presented over the past month and a half to try to prove racketeering and sex trafficking charges. The defense team will make its closing arguments Friday.  ABC News legal contributors Channa Lloyd and Bernarda Villalona join Brian Buckmire to break down how prosecutors made their case. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Diddy Closing Arguments: 5 Damning Hours From Prosecution! The federal trial of Sean "Diddy" Combs has captivated the nation, laying bare unsettling allegations involving racketeering, sex trafficking, coercion, and interstate prostitution. Federal prosecutors argue that the iconic music mogul orchestrated a sinister criminal enterprise, using his fame and wealth to manipulate, coerce, and exploit vulnerable individuals under the guise of extravagant lifestyle parties. Yet, despite presenting graphic video evidence, explicit text messages, financial documents, and emotionally-charged testimonies from alleged victims such as Cassie Ventura, the prosecution surprisingly dropped significant charges—kidnapping and arson—just before closing arguments. This shocking courtroom twist has raised pressing questions about the strength and integrity of their case. Defense attorneys, in an unexpected and risky maneuver, chose not to call any witnesses—not even Sean Combs himself—to rebut the serious accusations. This bold silence raises intriguing legal and psychological questions: Did the defense confidently bet on prosecutorial overreach, or was this strategic silence a desperate attempt to avoid further incrimination? In this compelling video, we dive deep into the trial's most troubling and confusing aspects. We explore psychological dynamics at play, including coercive control, celebrity influence, and juror biases. Expert analysis from legal insiders sheds light on critical courtroom strategies, jury decision-making processes, and the implications of dropped charges on jury deliberations. Whether Diddy walks free or spends life behind bars hinges on jurors interpreting complex laws like RICO and sex trafficking statutes. Viewers will gain a thorough understanding of the intricate interplay between celebrity privilege, legal accountability, and the psychology behind criminal behavior. Don't miss this comprehensive breakdown of one of the most intriguing celebrity trials in recent history, packed with revelations, mysteries, and profound implications for justice and accountability. Stay tuned and subscribe for updates, expert analysis, and real-time developments from the courtroom. Hashtags: #SeanCombs #DiddyTrial #TrueCrime #FederalTrial #CelebrityCrime #Racketeering #SexTrafficking #CourtroomDrama #LegalAnalysis #PsychologyOfCrime Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?  Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872  

Diddy Closing Arguments: 5 Damning Hours From Prosecution! The federal trial of Sean "Diddy" Combs has captivated the nation, laying bare unsettling allegations involving racketeering, sex trafficking, coercion, and interstate prostitution. Federal prosecutors argue that the iconic music mogul orchestrated a sinister criminal enterprise, using his fame and wealth to manipulate, coerce, and exploit vulnerable individuals under the guise of extravagant lifestyle parties. Yet, despite presenting graphic video evidence, explicit text messages, financial documents, and emotionally-charged testimonies from alleged victims such as Cassie Ventura, the prosecution surprisingly dropped significant charges—kidnapping and arson—just before closing arguments. This shocking courtroom twist has raised pressing questions about the strength and integrity of their case. Defense attorneys, in an unexpected and risky maneuver, chose not to call any witnesses—not even Sean Combs himself—to rebut the serious accusations. This bold silence raises intriguing legal and psychological questions: Did the defense confidently bet on prosecutorial overreach, or was this strategic silence a desperate attempt to avoid further incrimination? In this compelling video, we dive deep into the trial's most troubling and confusing aspects. We explore psychological dynamics at play, including coercive control, celebrity influence, and juror biases. Expert analysis from legal insiders sheds light on critical courtroom strategies, jury decision-making processes, and the implications of dropped charges on jury deliberations. Whether Diddy walks free or spends life behind bars hinges on jurors interpreting complex laws like RICO and sex trafficking statutes. Viewers will gain a thorough understanding of the intricate interplay between celebrity privilege, legal accountability, and the psychology behind criminal behavior. Don't miss this comprehensive breakdown of one of the most intriguing celebrity trials in recent history, packed with revelations, mysteries, and profound implications for justice and accountability. Stay tuned and subscribe for updates, expert analysis, and real-time developments from the courtroom. Hashtags: #SeanCombs #DiddyTrial #TrueCrime #FederalTrial #CelebrityCrime #Racketeering #SexTrafficking #CourtroomDrama #LegalAnalysis #PsychologyOfCrime Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?  Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

Diddy Closing Arguments: 5 Damning Hours From Prosecution! The federal trial of Sean "Diddy" Combs has captivated the nation, laying bare unsettling allegations involving racketeering, sex trafficking, coercion, and interstate prostitution. Federal prosecutors argue that the iconic music mogul orchestrated a sinister criminal enterprise, using his fame and wealth to manipulate, coerce, and exploit vulnerable individuals under the guise of extravagant lifestyle parties. Yet, despite presenting graphic video evidence, explicit text messages, financial documents, and emotionally-charged testimonies from alleged victims such as Cassie Ventura, the prosecution surprisingly dropped significant charges—kidnapping and arson—just before closing arguments. This shocking courtroom twist has raised pressing questions about the strength and integrity of their case. Defense attorneys, in an unexpected and risky maneuver, chose not to call any witnesses—not even Sean Combs himself—to rebut the serious accusations. This bold silence raises intriguing legal and psychological questions: Did the defense confidently bet on prosecutorial overreach, or was this strategic silence a desperate attempt to avoid further incrimination? In this compelling video, we dive deep into the trial's most troubling and confusing aspects. We explore psychological dynamics at play, including coercive control, celebrity influence, and juror biases. Expert analysis from legal insiders sheds light on critical courtroom strategies, jury decision-making processes, and the implications of dropped charges on jury deliberations. Whether Diddy walks free or spends life behind bars hinges on jurors interpreting complex laws like RICO and sex trafficking statutes. Viewers will gain a thorough understanding of the intricate interplay between celebrity privilege, legal accountability, and the psychology behind criminal behavior. Don't miss this comprehensive breakdown of one of the most intriguing celebrity trials in recent history, packed with revelations, mysteries, and profound implications for justice and accountability. Stay tuned and subscribe for updates, expert analysis, and real-time developments from the courtroom. Hashtags: #SeanCombs #DiddyTrial #TrueCrime #FederalTrial #CelebrityCrime #Racketeering #SexTrafficking #CourtroomDrama #LegalAnalysis #PsychologyOfCrime Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?  Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872  

"He won't take no for an answer," said prosecutor Christy Slavik. She said it over and over during a summation that lasted more than four hours. She argued that the "common purpose" of Combs and his "inner circle" -- his chief of staff, his bodyguards, and some of his assistants -- was to protect him from bad press and law enforcement. And she recounted the dramatic stories told in the courtroom in the past six weeks: Goodfellas-type scenes of alleged bribery, arson, and kidnapping.If you want to read NBC's coverage of the trial, check out our newsletter, “Diddy On Trial”: NBCNews.com/Diddy https://www.nbcnews.com/diddy-on-trial

In Episode 160, Scott Piehler's topics include: City Council approves the Pacific Fusion purchase. A would-be entrepreneur makes a head-scratching pitch. The City and Port of Oakland's Turning Basin project. AHS names its scoreboard. The Prosecution and Public Rights Unit reflects on 2024. A stronger than usual Alameda connection for Pixar's latest. Events for the weekend, and Scott digs in at some local favorites.Support the show• AlamedaPost.com • Podcast • Events • Contact •• Facebook • Instagram • Threads • BlueSky • Reddit • Mastodon • NextDoor • YouTube • Apple News •

The Prosecution took nearly 5 hours to make its closing arguments in the Diddy Trial. Amy and T.J. go over the afternoon session where Christy Slavic told jurors “It’s time to hold him accountable, it is time for justice and it’s time to find him guilty.”See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Prosecution took nearly 5 hours to make its closing arguments in the Diddy Trial. Amy and T.J. go over the afternoon session where Christy Slavic told jurors “It’s time to hold him accountable, it is time for justice and it’s time to find him guilty.”See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Prosecution took nearly 5 hours to make its closing arguments in the Diddy Trial. Amy and T.J. go over the afternoon session where Christy Slavic told jurors “It’s time to hold him accountable, it is time for justice and it’s time to find him guilty.”See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Elie Honig is a former Assistant U.S. Attorney and co-chief of the organized crime unit at the Southern District of New York, where he prosecuted more than 100 mobsters, including members of La Cosa Nostra, and the Gambino and Genovese crime families. He went on to serve as Director of the Department of Law and Public Safety at New Jersey Division of Criminal Justice. He is currently Special Counsel at Lowenstein Sandler and a CNN legal analyst.  For a transcript of Elie's note and the full archive of contributor notes, head to CAFE.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

On May 18, 2025, the Government submitted a letter to Judge Arun Subramanian in United States v. Combs, S3 24 Cr. 542 (AS), addressing unresolved issues regarding witnesses for the upcoming trial session. The letter highlights a dispute over the introduction of text communications between Dawn Richard and the defendant, Sean Combs, from 2020 to 2023, which the defense plans to present under the hearsay exception for the declarant's then-existing state of mind (Rule 803(3)). The communications involve Ms. Richard initiating contact with Combs, discussing professional matters, and expressing affection for him. The Government objects to the introduction of these messages, arguing they are irrelevant to her expected testimony, which focuses on events from 2009 to 2011. Additionally, the Government notes that the defense's proffered evidence does not relate to Ms. Richard's state of mind during the relevant time period, nor does it support her testimony.The letter also addresses Kerry Morgan and David James, who are involved in the same issue. The defense seeks to use communications from both of these individuals, but the Government asserts that these too are irrelevant and should be excluded. The Government further argues that the text exchanges between Ms. Richard and Combs cannot be used for impeachment, as they would actually corroborate Ms. Richard's testimony. She is expected to testify that, after leaving her employment with Combs in 2011, she intentionally maintained a professional relationship with him, given his past threats. Therefore, the affectionate nature of the text messages would support, rather than challenge, her testimony. The Government requests that the Court preclude these communications from being introduced as evidence.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.355.0.pdf

ICYMI: Hour Two of ‘Later, with Mo'Kelly' Presents – A look at the “best & worst Places for 4th of July Celebrations” according to WalletHub AND the rough rollout for Tesla's new fleet of Robotaxi's…PLUS – Thoughts on the Sean ‘Diddy” Combs trial and his chances of actually avoiding jail-time - on KFI AM 640…Live everywhere on the iHeartRadio app & YouTube @MrMoKelly

In this episode of Music for Breakfast, hosts Octavia March, J. Manning, and Kia "KC" discuss the opening arguments in the highly publicized ASAP Rocky shooting trial. ASAP Relli has filed a civil lawsuit alleging that ASAP Rocky shot at him during a confrontation in 2021. The prosecution presented text messages and video evidence, while the defense contends that Relli's accusations are financially motivated and claims the gun was a prop. The episode explores the courtroom drama, key evidence, and witness testimonies, and offers opinions on the case's credibility. Tune in for a thought-provoking discussion intertwined with music and cultural insights.00:00 Introduction to the ASAP Rocky Shooting Case00:52 Welcome to Music for Breakfast01:39 Overview of the ASAP Rocky Shooting Trial03:41 Details of the Confrontation and Evidence06:15 Courtroom Drama and Defense Arguments07:54 Prosecution's Case and Key Evidence15:06 Conclusion and Final Thoughts16:18 Outro and Where to Follow#asaprocky #courtcase #lawsuit #hiphop #rap #music #fyp #trending #youtube Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use. No copyright infringement intended. ALL RIGHTS BELONG TO THEIR RESPECTIVE OWNERS

In Colorado, Barry Morphew is arrested for the second time for the murder of his wife, Suzanne, who disappeared on Mother's Day in 2020. In Bowling Green, Kentucky, two men go on trial for the murder of mom Crystal Rogers. Updates on Monica Sementilli and former MLB pitcher Dan Serafini. Plus, we've all seen age-progressed images of missing children — can they actually help?See more of Dateline's reporting on missing persons cases in which age-progressed images are featured here: https://www.nbcnews.com/age-progressions Find out more about the cases covered each week here: www.datelinetruecrimeweekly.com

The Prosecution took nearly 5 hours to make its closing arguments in the Diddy Trial. Amy and T.J. go over the afternoon session where Christy Slavic told jurors “It’s time to hold him accountable, it is time for justice and it’s time to find him guilty.”See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today, after calling 34 witnesses over six weeks, federal prosecutors rested their case. After that, the defense put on their case. It took them only a half an hour. They called no witnesses. They did argue that the case should be dismissed because the prosecution didn't meet its burden of proof. But the judge reserved his decision on that, and the trial remains on track for the jury to hear summations on Thursday.If you want to read NBC's coverage of the trial, check out our newsletter, “Diddy On Trial”: NBCNews.com/Diddy

Diddy's team didn't need much time to wrap up their case, and a new reality show that's right up J-Si's alley. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Count 4 of the federal indictment against Sean "Diddy" Combs charges him with transporting Victim 1, identified as Cassie Ventura, across state lines with the intent to engage her in prostitution. Prosecutors allege that between 2009 and 2018, Combs orchestrated and facilitated "freak-off" events—drug-fueled sexual encounters involving male escorts—which he directed, filmed, and used to exert control over Ventura. These events reportedly took place in various locations, including New York City, Los Angeles, and Miami. The prosecution argues that Combs used his influence and resources to transport Ventura and other women to these events, where they were coerced into participating in commercial sex acts. Evidence presented includes travel records and communications that suggest the transportation was part of a broader scheme to exploit women for prostitution.In response, Combs' defense team contends that the interactions were consensual and part of a private, non-criminal lifestyle. They argue that Ventura willingly participated in these events and that the transportation was not for the purpose of engaging her in prostitution. The defense also points to the absence of direct evidence linking the transportation to prostitution, suggesting that the charges are based on assumptions rather than concrete proof. The outcome of this count will depend on the jury's assessment of the credibility of the evidence and testimonies presented, including the context of the relationships and the nature of the events in question.to contact  me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Count 5 of the federal indictment against Sean "Diddy" Combs charges him with transporting Victim 2, referred to as "Jane," and male commercial sex workers across state lines with the intent to engage in prostitution between 2021 and 2024. Prosecutors allege that Combs orchestrated and facilitated "freak-off" events—drug-fueled sexual encounters involving male escorts—which he directed, filmed, and used to exert control over Jane. These events reportedly took place in various locations, including New York City, Los Angeles, and Miami. The prosecution's claim hinges on the idea that Jane was not participating in these acts voluntarily but was instead coerced or manipulated into doing so under duress, a key aspect of the trafficking charge under federal law. If the prosecution's evidence is found to be credible, it would prove that Combs played a central role in exploiting Jane, using his power and influence to subject her to coercive circumstancesIn response, Combs' defense team contends that the interactions were consensual and part of a private, non-criminal lifestyle. They argue that Jane willingly participated in these events and that the transportation was not for the purpose of engaging her in prostitution. The defense also points to the absence of direct evidence linking the transportation to prostitution, suggesting that the charges are based on assumptions rather than concrete proof. The outcome of this count will depend on the jury's assessment of the credibility of the evidence and testimonies presented, including the context of the relationships and the nature of the events in question.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com