Podcasts about Southern District

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

No court proceedings today (June 11, 2025) in Sean "Diddy" Combs' federal racketeering and sex trafficking trial at the Southern District of New York. Yesterday's explosive cross-examination of witness "Jane" ended early at 3 PM, with defense attorney Teny Geragos challenging her credibility through explicit text messages and questions about financial arrangements with the hip-hop mogul. In this comprehensive trial update, we analyze the most damaging testimony from Combs' ex-girlfriend, who described disturbing "hotel nights" that prosecutors call "freak-offs" - allegedly coercive events at the center of the federal RICO case. The defense strategy focuses on portraying these as consensual encounters, but with prosecutors suggesting they'll call final witnesses next week, the government's case appears to be building toward a devastating conclusion. We examine how federal prosecutors are using the same RICO statutes that brought down organized crime families to paint Combs as the leader of a criminal enterprise. From Bad Boy Records CEO to federal defendant, we track how testimonies from multiple alleged victims are establishing a pattern of systematic abuse that spans years. Key topics covered: Jane's harrowing testimony about alleged coercion and control Defense cross-examination tactics and their effectiveness Why today's trial break matters for both sides Federal conviction rates and what they mean for Combs The prosecution's endgame strategy as they near rest Legal analysis of racketeering charges in celebrity cases What happens when the defense presents their case This video provides crucial updates for anyone following the biggest celebrity federal trial of 2025, examining how power, money, and alleged exploitation intersect in one of hip-hop's darkest chapters. #DiddyTrial #SeanCombs #FederalTrial #Racketeering #BadBoyRecords #TrueCrime #BreakingNews #CourtroomUpdate #CelebityTrial #JusticeSystem 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

No court proceedings today (June 11, 2025) in Sean "Diddy" Combs' federal racketeering and sex trafficking trial at the Southern District of New York. Yesterday's explosive cross-examination of witness "Jane" ended early at 3 PM, with defense attorney Teny Geragos challenging her credibility through explicit text messages and questions about financial arrangements with the hip-hop mogul. In this comprehensive trial update, we analyze the most damaging testimony from Combs' ex-girlfriend, who described disturbing "hotel nights" that prosecutors call "freak-offs" - allegedly coercive events at the center of the federal RICO case. The defense strategy focuses on portraying these as consensual encounters, but with prosecutors suggesting they'll call final witnesses next week, the government's case appears to be building toward a devastating conclusion. We examine how federal prosecutors are using the same RICO statutes that brought down organized crime families to paint Combs as the leader of a criminal enterprise. From Bad Boy Records CEO to federal defendant, we track how testimonies from multiple alleged victims are establishing a pattern of systematic abuse that spans years. Key topics covered: Jane's harrowing testimony about alleged coercion and control Defense cross-examination tactics and their effectiveness Why today's trial break matters for both sides Federal conviction rates and what they mean for Combs The prosecution's endgame strategy as they near rest Legal analysis of racketeering charges in celebrity cases What happens when the defense presents their case This video provides crucial updates for anyone following the biggest celebrity federal trial of 2025, examining how power, money, and alleged exploitation intersect in one of hip-hop's darkest chapters. #DiddyTrial #SeanCombs #FederalTrial #Racketeering #BadBoyRecords #TrueCrime #BreakingNews #CourtroomUpdate #CelebityTrial #JusticeSystem 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

This document records the presentment hearing for Sean Combs (also known by various aliases including Puff Daddy, P. Diddy, Diddy, PD, and Love) held on September 17, 2024, at 2:30 p.m. in the Southern District of New York before U.S. Magistrate Judge Robyn F. Tarnofsky. The case is formally docketed as United States v. Combs, 24 Cr. 542 (RFT). The presentment marked Combs' initial appearance in federal court following the unsealing of the indictment charging him with racketeering conspiracy and related offenses.During this proceeding, the Court advised Combs of the charges against him and the potential penalties, ensured that he was represented by counsel, and addressed matters related to bail and pretrial conditions. The hearing served as the procedural starting point for the federal criminal case, officially bringing Combs under the jurisdiction of the Court. No substantive arguments or evidence were presented at this stage; the focus remained on formal advisement and setting the framework for future proceedings.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:O9HLComCBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Ambassador Kay Bailey Hutchison served as the U.S. Ambassador to NATO from 2017-2021. From 1993-2013, she represented Texas in the U.S. Senate. Join us for a conversation about her life and career.Featuring: Hon. Kay Bailey Hutchison, Former U.S. Ambassador to NATO; Former U.S. Senator, TexasModerator: Nitin Nainani, Judicial Law Clerk, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida

The Rich Zeoli Show- Full Episode (06/10/2025): 3:05pm- In response to a series of ICE raids intended to remove migrants residing in the United States unlawfully, protests broke out in Los Angeles, California—sometimes turning violent and destructive. Videos circulating on social media show ICE agents being assaulted with bricks and commercial-grade fireworks. Numerous vehicles—including Waymo self-driving taxis—were set on fire by violent demonstrators. Other videos show demonstrators burning American flags and chanting “F*** ICE.” As the protests carried on into the night on Sunday, multiple businesses were looted in downtown Los Angeles, according to reports. President Donald Trump used the National Guard to stifle ongoing violence—and on Monday night, the administration authorized the deployment of 700 Marines. According to estimations from CNN, at least 113 people were arrested on Monday. 3:15pm- While speaking from the Oval Office on Tuesday, President Donald Trump was asked about Saturday's parade in Washington D.C. to celebrate the Army's 250th birthday. Trump explained the importance of celebrating our country and its achievements, specifically referencing America's victory over authoritarianism in World War II—“We are the one that won the war. If it wasn't for us, you would be speaking German right now, ok? We won the war and—you might be speaking Japanese, too. You might be speaking a combination of both." 3:30pm- While appearing on CNN with host Dana Bash, Senator Bernie Sanders (D-VT) accused President Donald Trump of being an authoritarian for deploying the California National Guard to stifle violent outbreaks in Los Angeles. Rich asks: Does Bernie think John F. Kennedy and Dwight Eisenhower were authoritarians when they federalized the National Guard to prevent violence and enforce the national expansion of Civil Rights? 4:00pm- Congressman Guy Reschenthaler—U.S. Representative for Pennsylvania's 14th Congressional District & House Republican Chief Deputy Whip—joins The Rich Zeoli Show and reacts to the far-left downplaying violence in L.A.: “you don't wear a mask during Covid and that's an insurrection,” according to Democrats. But when people attack ICE agents, they call it a “peaceful protest.” Plus, what is the status of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act? 4:30pm- On Tuesday, President Donald Trump delivered a speech from Fort Bragg in North Carolina where he called the U.S. military the greatest fighting force in the history of the world. 5:00pm- On Tuesday, President Donald Trump delivered a speech from Fort Bragg in North Carolina where he called the U.S. military the greatest fighting force in the history of the world. 5:15pm- Primary Day in New Jersey: Mikie Sherril, the frontrunner to win the Democratic Party's nomination for Governor of New Jersey, responded to the Trump Administration's decision to use the National Guard and Marines to stifle violent protests in Los Angeles: “To have someone like [Defense Secretary Pete] Hegseth say that he's going to put the Marines on the streets of America, that's really dangerous. It's dangerous for our civilization population, it's not good for the Marines” 5:30pm- Andrew C. McCarthy—Senior fellow at National Review & former Assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York—joins The Rich Zeoli Show to discuss his latest article, “President Trump Has Legal Authority to Suppress the Siege in L.A.” McCarthy reacts to news that a federal judge has denied Gov. Gavin Newsom's (D-CA) effort to prevent the Trump Administration's use of the National Guard to halt violence in Los Angeles. You can read the full article here: https://www.nationalreview.com/2025/06/president-trump-has-legal-authority-to-suppress-the-siege-in-l-a/. McCarthy is also author of the book “Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency.” 6:05pm- ABC News correspondent Terry Moran was suspended yesterday after openly expressing disdain for W ...

The Rich Zeoli Show- Hour 3: 5:00pm- On Tuesday, President Donald Trump delivered a speech from Fort Bragg in North Carolina where he called the U.S. military the greatest fighting force in the history of the world. 5:15pm- Primary Day in New Jersey: Mikie Sherril, the frontrunner to win the Democratic Party's nomination for Governor of New Jersey, responded to the Trump Administration's decision to use the National Guard and Marines to stifle violent protests in Los Angeles: “To have someone like [Defense Secretary Pete] Hegseth say that he's going to put the Marines on the streets of America, that's really dangerous. It's dangerous for our civilization population, it's not good for the Marines” 5:30pm- Andrew C. McCarthy—Senior fellow at National Review & former Assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York—joins The Rich Zeoli Show to discuss his latest article, “President Trump Has Legal Authority to Suppress the Siege in L.A.” McCarthy reacts to news that a federal judge has denied Gov. Gavin Newsom's (D-CA) effort to prevent the Trump Administration's use of the National Guard to halt violence in Los Angeles. You can read the full article here: https://www.nationalreview.com/2025/06/president-trump-has-legal-authority-to-suppress-the-siege-in-l-a/. McCarthy is also author of the book “Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency.”

Encinitas Unified School District required two fifth-grade boys and their assigned kindergarten buddies to read and watch My Shadow is Pink and do an activity, pressuring the kindergartners to choose a color to represent their own shadows. The plaintiffs allege this was designed to make the students question their gender identity. Represented by First Liberty Institute and the National Center for Law and Policy, the families filed a complaint in the Southern District of California and sought a motion for preliminary injunction. On May 12, 2025, Judge M. James Lorenz granted that motion in part, requiring the school district to provide advance notice and opt-outs when gender identity material is taught in mentoring programs. The judge’s opinion focused on compelled speech, finding that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits of that claim.Free speech expert Professor Eugene Volokh and counsel Kayla Toney, who represents the families, will break down the opinion and discuss its ramifications for First Amendment jurisprudence.Featuring:Kayla Ann Toney, Counsel, First Liberty Institute(Moderator) Prof. Eugene Volokh, Gary T. Schwartz Distinguished Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law

This Day in Legal History: “Have You No Sense of Decency, Sir?”On June 9, 1954, one of the most pivotal moments in American legal and political history unfolded during the Army–McCarthy hearings. The hearings were part of a broader investigation into allegations that Senator Joseph McCarthy and his staff had pressured the U.S. Army for preferential treatment of a former aide. By this time, McCarthy had become infamous for his aggressive campaign against alleged communists in government, using Senate hearings as a stage for accusations often lacking in evidence. His tactics had created a culture of fear and censorship across multiple sectors of American life.The dramatic turning point came when Army chief counsel Joseph Welch confronted McCarthy after the senator attempted to smear a young attorney from Welch's law firm. With millions watching the nationally televised hearing, Welch famously asked, “Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?” The moment drew applause and signaled a critical shift in public sentiment. It crystallized growing discomfort with McCarthy's bullying methods and marked the beginning of his political downfall.The legal significance of this day lies not in a court decision but in the public rejection of demagoguery and the defense of due process and professional ethics. Welch's rebuke helped reassert norms of fairness in legislative proceedings and served as a precedent for reining in congressional overreach. Within months, McCarthy was censured by the Senate, and his influence waned. June 9, 1954, thus stands as a symbolic restoration of institutional decency amid the legal theater of Cold War America.Getty Images has launched a major copyright lawsuit against Stability AI in the UK, accusing the company of using millions of its images without permission to train its AI system, Stable Diffusion. The case, now underway in London's High Court, challenges whether such data use falls within fair use or infringes intellectual property rights. Getty insists the lawsuit is not an attack on AI itself, but a defense of copyright protections, arguing that AI can thrive alongside creators if proper licensing is respected. Stability AI denies any wrongdoing, framing the dispute as a broader debate about innovation and freedom of expression.The legal battle is unfolding amid a global wave of lawsuits over AI training data, as creative industries express concern about the unauthorized use of their work. Getty is also pursuing a parallel case in the United States. Lawyers for Stability AI argue the suit could endanger the entire generative AI industry, but Getty counters that respecting copyright is key to AI's future. The outcome of this case could reshape how copyright law is applied to AI in the UK and potentially influence government policy.One legal element of note is UK copyright's application to machine learning, particularly regarding the "scraping" of protected content. This is significant because the UK lacks a settled precedent on whether using copyrighted data to train AI systems constitutes infringement, especially in the absence of express licensing. This case could establish that precedent.Getty argues its landmark UK copyright case does not threaten AI | ReutersDamian Williams, the former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, has left Paul Weiss just months after joining the firm to move to Jenner & Block. His departure comes as Paul Weiss faces scrutiny for striking a controversial deal with the Trump administration in March, agreeing to provide $40 million in pro bono legal services in exchange for rescinding an executive order targeting the firm. Jenner & Block, in contrast, opposed the same Trump-era executive order in court and recently secured a permanent ruling against it.Williams will now co-chair Jenner's litigation and investigations practice. During his time as U.S. Attorney, he led major prosecutions including those of FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried and Senator Bob Menendez. In a statement, Williams praised Jenner's fearless advocacy and strategic counsel. Jenner did not mention its legal fight against Trump or Paul Weiss's agreement in its announcement.Paul Weiss has seen several other high-profile departures in recent months, including five partners who left to start a new firm and the head of its pro bono practice, who left to work on housing advocacy. The Trump-related agreement has sparked debate within the legal community, with some praising it as pragmatic and others criticizing it as compromising firm independence.Former Manhattan US attorney leaves Paul Weiss for law firm fighting Trump | ReutersA federal judge has given final approval to a groundbreaking $2.8 billion antitrust settlement between the NCAA, its Power Five conferences, and student-athletes, allowing for direct payments to college athletes for the first time. Judge Claudia Wilken ruled that the deal, which also resolves ongoing litigation over name, image, and likeness (NIL) rights, was fair and served pro-competitive purposes despite concerns raised over team roster limits and compensation caps. As part of the agreement, schools can begin sharing up to 22% of their athletic revenue—around $20 million annually per Power Five school—with athletes as soon as this summer.The deal includes $2.75 billion in back payments over 10 years to Division I athletes who played from 2016 onward. Some athletes had objected, citing unfair pay practices, gender inequities, and a lack of input from future players. Wilken responded by approving revisions that exempt some athletes from roster limits and clarified that future athletes can object to the settlement before being bound by it. Less than 0.1% of nearly 390,000 class members formally objected.While this decision marks a shift toward a new financial model in college sports, litigation will continue. Former athletes not covered by this deal are still pursuing claims, and broader legal fights remain over whether athletes should be considered employees. NCAA President Charlie Baker emphasized the deal as a stabilizing step amid ongoing legal and political challenges, including state-level competition over NIL rules.NCAA Wins Final Approval of $2.8 Billion Player-Pay Deal (2) This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

In November 2024, an individual identified as "John Doe" filed a lawsuit against Sean "Diddy" Combs and several of his affiliated companies, including Bad Boy Records LLC and Daddy's House Recordings Inc., in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Case No. 1:24-cv-08852-JPC). The plaintiff alleges that in 2022, during a house party in New York City, Combs drugged him with Rohypnol, causing him to lose consciousness. Upon regaining consciousness, Doe claims he found Combs sexually assaulting him. The lawsuit includes charges of sexual assault, battery, and intentional infliction of emotional distress, with Doe seeking compensatory and punitive damages.(commercial at 7:44)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.632109.1.0_1.pdf

In November 2024, an individual identified as "John Doe" filed a lawsuit against Sean "Diddy" Combs and several of his affiliated companies, including Bad Boy Records LLC and Daddy's House Recordings Inc., in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Case No. 1:24-cv-08852-JPC). The plaintiff alleges that in 2022, during a house party in New York City, Combs drugged him with Rohypnol, causing him to lose consciousness. Upon regaining consciousness, Doe claims he found Combs sexually assaulting him. The lawsuit includes charges of sexual assault, battery, and intentional infliction of emotional distress, with Doe seeking compensatory and punitive damages.(commercial at 7:44)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.632109.1.0_1.pdf

In November 2024, an individual identified as "John Doe" filed a lawsuit against Sean "Diddy" Combs and several of his affiliated companies, including Bad Boy Records LLC and Daddy's House Recordings Inc., in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Case No. 1:24-cv-08852-JPC). The plaintiff alleges that in 2022, during a house party in New York City, Combs drugged him with Rohypnol, causing him to lose consciousness. Upon regaining consciousness, Doe claims he found Combs sexually assaulting him. The lawsuit includes charges of sexual assault, battery, and intentional infliction of emotional distress, with Doe seeking compensatory and punitive damages.(commercial at 7:44)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.632109.1.0_1.pdf

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

This week, the boys head back to 2007 to spin another Roger Deakins film, “No Country For Old Men”, currently streaming on Paramount+. While other shows have covered the film, we shoot from the hip and discuss how it felt to re-watch it and what it means to us. F those other stuffy critic narcs. The cinematographer from Dave's homeland had a helluva a year with three award-winning films, this one winning Best Picture at the Oscars, and cementing the Coen Brothers as industry elites, much to their Chigurh (that's a movie joke). Yeah, it beat “There Will Be Blood”. We talk about it a bit. John also opens with his “MI” and “Friendship” takes. Grab a beer and hear our thoughts. Our phone number is 646-484-9298. It accepts texts or voice messages.  0:00 Intro; 4:29 John's mini-review of “MI: The Final Reckoning” and “Friendship”; 14:52 Gripes; 17:47 2007 Year in Review; 38:52 Films of 2007: “No Country For Old Men”; 1:38:52 What You Been Watching?; 1:47:34 Next Episode Teaser Additional Cast/Crew: Tommy Lee Jones, Josh Brolin, Javier Bardem, Roger Deakins, Joel Coen, Ethan Coen, Kelly Macdonald, Woody Harrelson, Stephen Root, Barry Corbin, Tess Harper, Gerret Dillahunt, Gene Jones, Scott Rudin, Paul Rudd, Tim Robinson, Hosts: Dave Green, Jeff Ostermueller, John Say Edited & Produced by Dave Green. Beer Sponsor: Carlos Barrozo Music Sponsor: Dasein Dasein on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/artist/77H3GPgYigeKNlZKGx11KZ 
Dasein on Apple Music: https://music.apple.com/us/artist/dasein/1637517407 Additional Tags: Mission: Impossible, submarine, nuclear weapons, Top Gun: Maverick, Ben Mendelsohn, French Accents, PEN15, Tom Cruise, The Monuments Men, George Clooney, The Stock Market Crash, Bear Market, Trains, Locomotions, Museums, Fuhrermuseum, Nazis, WWII movies, WWI Shows, Plastic ExplosivesThe Crusades, Swedish Art, Knights, Death, MGM, Amazon Prime, Marvel, Sony, Wicked, All Quiet on the Western Front, Wicked, Conclave, Here, Venom: The Last Dance, Casablanca, The Wizard of Oz, Oscars, Academy Awards, BFI, BAFTA, BAFTAS, British Cinema. England, Vienna, Leopoldstadt, The Golden Globes, Past Lives, Monarch: Legacy of Monsters, The Holiday, Sunset Boulevard, Napoleon, Ferrari, Beer, Scotch, Travis Scott, U2, Apple, Apple Podcasts, Switzerland, West Side Story, Wikipedia, Adelaide, Australia, Queensland, New South Wales, Melbourne, Indonesia, Java, Jakarta, Bali, Guinea, The British, England, The SEC, Ronald Reagan, Stock Buybacks, Marvel, MCU, DCEU, Film, Movies, Southeast Asia, The Phillippines, Vietnam, America, The US, Academy Awards, WGA Strike, SAG-AFTRA, SAG Strike, Peter Weir, Jidaigeki, chambara movies, sword fight, samurai, ronin, Meiji Restoration, plague, HBO Max, Amazon Prime, casket maker, Seven Samurai, Roshomon, Sergio Leone, Clint Eastwood, Stellen Skarsgard, the matt and mark movie show.The Southern District's Waratah Championship, Night of a Thousand Stars, The Pan Pacific Grand Prix (The Pan Pacifics) 


Just a few days ago, the latest chapter in Donald Trump's legal odyssey unfolded—one that's been captivating the nation. On May 30, 2024, in a packed New York City courtroom, a Manhattan jury delivered a historic verdict: former President Trump was found guilty on all 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. This was the culmination of the People of the State of New York v. Donald J. Trump, a case that began with accusations that Trump had manipulated financial documents to conceal information during the 2016 campaign. The trial, presided over by Justice Juan Merchan, started back on April 15, 2024, and the verdict marked the first time a former U.S. president was convicted of felony crimes after leaving office.The world watched as Justice Merchan handed down his sentence on January 10, 2025. Trump received an unconditional discharge, meaning he won't serve jail time but the felony convictions remain on his record. This outcome reverberated far beyond the courtroom, fueling debate across political, legal, and public spheres.But New York is only one front in Trump's legal battles. Down in Florida, another high-profile prosecution took center stage. On June 8, 2023, Trump, along with aides Waltine Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, was indicted in the Southern District of Florida, accused of retaining classified national defense information, obstructing justice, and making false statements. By July 15, 2024, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon dropped the federal indictment, arguing that Special Counsel Jack Smith's appointment was flawed. The government swiftly appealed, but by November 29, 2024, the Justice Department dismissed its case against Trump, and by January 29, 2025, cases against his aides were dropped too.Trump's legal calendar is dense with ongoing appeals and litigation. In New York, Trump's legal team filed appeals against both Justice Engoron's earlier summary judgment and the final February 2024 decision in his civil fraud case. The Appellate Division, First Department, has consolidated these appeals, and the parties are in the thick of written arguments. Back in Georgia, legal wrangling continues in the sprawling case against Trump and allies over alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election, with appeals regarding District Attorney Fani Willis's role all being heard together and oral arguments scheduled.Amid this legal storm, Donald Trump remains a dominant figure in American politics and headlines. Each courtroom drama brings new twists, sparking fierce reactions from supporters, critics, and legal experts alike. With appeals grinding forward and new legal challenges constantly surfacing, the courtroom battles involving the former president show no sign of slowing as the country follows every development.

How the FBI Used 1,000 Bottles of Baby Oil to Build a RICO Case Against Diddy: Digital Evidence Breakdown  The federal investigation that brought down Sean "Diddy" Combs represents one of the most sophisticated law enforcement operations in entertainment history. This comprehensive analysis examines how federal agents from Homeland Security Investigations, the FBI, DEA, and ATF coordinated a multi-agency takedown that began with Cassie Ventura's explosive lawsuit and culminated in RICO charges carrying a potential life sentence. Our investigation reveals the intricate timeline from November 2023 when Cassie filed her $20 million settlement lawsuit to the dramatic March 2024 simultaneous raids on Diddy's Los Angeles and Miami mansions. Federal agents discovered over 1,000 bottles of baby oil allegedly used in "Freak-Off" parties, three AR-15 rifles with defaced serial numbers, and thousands of videos that prosecutors claim Diddy used for blackmail. This video breaks down the digital forensics operation that analyzed over 10,500 terabytes of data from seized phones and computers. We explore how the FBI's Computer Analysis and Response Team, consisting of nearly 500 highly trained agents, extracted evidence even from devices Diddy thought were secure. The investigation utilized cutting-edge cell phone forensics tools, GPS tracking, metadata analysis, and social media enhancement techniques to build an airtight case. The Southern District of New York's prosecution strategy transforms individual allegations into a comprehensive RICO conspiracy case, treating Diddy's business empire as a criminal enterprise. Led by U.S. Attorney Damian Williams and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Meredith Foster, Emily Johnson, and their team, prosecutors argue that Bad Boy Entertainment, Combs Enterprises, and related businesses facilitated sex trafficking, forced labor, kidnapping, arson, and witness intimidation. We analyze the legal significance of charging a celebrity under racketeering laws typically reserved for organized crime families. The case demonstrates how modern federal investigators approach complex criminal enterprises in the digital age, using sophisticated analytical tools to map relationships, track communications, and visualize criminal operations spanning decades. Expert commentary from former federal prosecutors explains why this case could result in a life sentence and how it compares to other high-profile RICO prosecutions like R. Kelly and Harvey Weinstein. The investigation's speed—from initial lawsuit to federal indictment in less than a year—reveals either pre-existing intelligence or the extensive nature of the alleged criminal activity. #DiddyInvestigation #FederalRICO #DigitalForensics #LawEnforcement #SouthernDistrictNY #HSIRaids #CelebryJustice #TrueCrimeAnalysis #FederalCharges #CriminalEnterprise    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 

How the FBI Used 1,000 Bottles of Baby Oil to Build a RICO Case Against Diddy: Digital Evidence Breakdown  The federal investigation that brought down Sean "Diddy" Combs represents one of the most sophisticated law enforcement operations in entertainment history. This comprehensive analysis examines how federal agents from Homeland Security Investigations, the FBI, DEA, and ATF coordinated a multi-agency takedown that began with Cassie Ventura's explosive lawsuit and culminated in RICO charges carrying a potential life sentence. Our investigation reveals the intricate timeline from November 2023 when Cassie filed her $20 million settlement lawsuit to the dramatic March 2024 simultaneous raids on Diddy's Los Angeles and Miami mansions. Federal agents discovered over 1,000 bottles of baby oil allegedly used in "Freak-Off" parties, three AR-15 rifles with defaced serial numbers, and thousands of videos that prosecutors claim Diddy used for blackmail. This video breaks down the digital forensics operation that analyzed over 10,500 terabytes of data from seized phones and computers. We explore how the FBI's Computer Analysis and Response Team, consisting of nearly 500 highly trained agents, extracted evidence even from devices Diddy thought were secure. The investigation utilized cutting-edge cell phone forensics tools, GPS tracking, metadata analysis, and social media enhancement techniques to build an airtight case. The Southern District of New York's prosecution strategy transforms individual allegations into a comprehensive RICO conspiracy case, treating Diddy's business empire as a criminal enterprise. Led by U.S. Attorney Damian Williams and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Meredith Foster, Emily Johnson, and their team, prosecutors argue that Bad Boy Entertainment, Combs Enterprises, and related businesses facilitated sex trafficking, forced labor, kidnapping, arson, and witness intimidation. We analyze the legal significance of charging a celebrity under racketeering laws typically reserved for organized crime families. The case demonstrates how modern federal investigators approach complex criminal enterprises in the digital age, using sophisticated analytical tools to map relationships, track communications, and visualize criminal operations spanning decades. Expert commentary from former federal prosecutors explains why this case could result in a life sentence and how it compares to other high-profile RICO prosecutions like R. Kelly and Harvey Weinstein. The investigation's speed—from initial lawsuit to federal indictment in less than a year—reveals either pre-existing intelligence or the extensive nature of the alleged criminal activity. #DiddyInvestigation #FederalRICO #DigitalForensics #LawEnforcement #SouthernDistrictNY #HSIRaids #CelebryJustice #TrueCrimeAnalysis #FederalCharges #CriminalEnterprise    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 

How the FBI Used 1,000 Bottles of Baby Oil to Build a RICO Case Against Diddy: Digital Evidence Breakdown  The federal investigation that brought down Sean "Diddy" Combs represents one of the most sophisticated law enforcement operations in entertainment history. This comprehensive analysis examines how federal agents from Homeland Security Investigations, the FBI, DEA, and ATF coordinated a multi-agency takedown that began with Cassie Ventura's explosive lawsuit and culminated in RICO charges carrying a potential life sentence. Our investigation reveals the intricate timeline from November 2023 when Cassie filed her $20 million settlement lawsuit to the dramatic March 2024 simultaneous raids on Diddy's Los Angeles and Miami mansions. Federal agents discovered over 1,000 bottles of baby oil allegedly used in "Freak-Off" parties, three AR-15 rifles with defaced serial numbers, and thousands of videos that prosecutors claim Diddy used for blackmail. This video breaks down the digital forensics operation that analyzed over 10,500 terabytes of data from seized phones and computers. We explore how the FBI's Computer Analysis and Response Team, consisting of nearly 500 highly trained agents, extracted evidence even from devices Diddy thought were secure. The investigation utilized cutting-edge cell phone forensics tools, GPS tracking, metadata analysis, and social media enhancement techniques to build an airtight case. The Southern District of New York's prosecution strategy transforms individual allegations into a comprehensive RICO conspiracy case, treating Diddy's business empire as a criminal enterprise. Led by U.S. Attorney Damian Williams and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Meredith Foster, Emily Johnson, and their team, prosecutors argue that Bad Boy Entertainment, Combs Enterprises, and related businesses facilitated sex trafficking, forced labor, kidnapping, arson, and witness intimidation. We analyze the legal significance of charging a celebrity under racketeering laws typically reserved for organized crime families. The case demonstrates how modern federal investigators approach complex criminal enterprises in the digital age, using sophisticated analytical tools to map relationships, track communications, and visualize criminal operations spanning decades. Expert commentary from former federal prosecutors explains why this case could result in a life sentence and how it compares to other high-profile RICO prosecutions like R. Kelly and Harvey Weinstein. The investigation's speed—from initial lawsuit to federal indictment in less than a year—reveals either pre-existing intelligence or the extensive nature of the alleged criminal activity. #DiddyInvestigation #FederalRICO #DigitalForensics #LawEnforcement #SouthernDistrictNY #HSIRaids #CelebryJustice #TrueCrimeAnalysis #FederalCharges #CriminalEnterprise    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 

It's been a whirlwind in the courts these past few days, and Donald Trump's legal saga remains at the center of national headlines. Just three days ago, on May 30, 2024, in Manhattan, a historic verdict shook the political landscape—Trump was found guilty on all 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. The charges stemmed from allegations that he orchestrated the falsification to conceal damaging information during his 2016 presidential campaign. The trial, officially titled “The People for the State of New York v. Donald J. Trump,” kicked off April 15, 2024, and with unprecedented media attention, jurors quickly became household names and Judge Juan Merchan's courtroom a focal point for heated debate.After weeks of testimony, cross-examination, and high legal drama, the jury delivered a resounding verdict: guilty on every count. Then, on January 10, 2025, Judge Merchan issued the sentence. While many speculated about possible prison time or hefty penalties, the sentence was an unconditional discharge—meaning Trump avoided incarceration or probation, but carries 34 felony convictions on his record. The country watched as Trump exited the courthouse, defiant as ever, vowing to appeal and framing the result as politically motivated, only further energizing his base.Meanwhile, down in Florida, another major courtroom battle unfolded. Special Counsel Jack Smith led the prosecution against Trump in the Southern District of Florida. This time, charges focused on Trump's handling of classified documents after leaving office. The indictment was sweeping: 32 counts for willfully retaining national defense information, alongside counts of obstruction of justice, making false statements, and interfering with a federal investigation. Trump wasn't alone—his longtime aide Waltine Nauta and Mar-a-Lago's property manager Carlos De Oliveira were also named as defendants.But on July 15, 2024, Judge Aileen Cannon ignited controversy of her own by dismissing the federal indictment, ruling that Jack Smith's appointment and funding as special counsel were improper. The Justice Department did appeal, but by November 29, 2024, it dropped its appeal against Trump, and two months later, on January 29, 2025, dropped it against his co-defendants as well.Through all of this, the courtroom has become a political stage, with Trump's legal battles fueling his continued national prominence. Jury verdicts, sentencing hearings, and surprise judicial rulings have turned legal language into front-page news and daily conversation across America. These past few days have only reinforced that in Donald Trump's world, the courtroom is as much a battleground as any campaign trail.

Elie Honig is an attorney and CNN senior legal analyst and the bestselling author of Hatchet Man and last year's Untouchable: How Powerful People Get Away With It. He's a former assistant United States attorney for the Southern District of New York. He also hosts podcasts, writes for CAFE, Vox Media and writes a weekly column for New York Magazine. Eli's back in THE BACK ROOM discussing the latest legal cases and court decisions relating to Trump's tariffs, deportations, Harvard, Cuomo, P. Diddy and, yes, Bruce Springsteen! Got somethin' to say?! Email us at BackroomAndy@gmail.com Leave us a message: 845-307-7446 Twitter: @AndyOstroy Produced by Andy Ostroy, Matty Rosenberg, and Jennifer Hammoud @ Radio Free Rhiniecliff Design by Cricket Lengyel

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

This document is a motion in limine filed by Sean Combs' legal team in his federal criminal case (Case No. 24-cr-542) in the Southern District of New York, seeking to exclude the testimony of Dr. Dawn Hughes, a psychological expert the prosecution intends to call. Dr. Hughes is expected to testify about general behavioral patterns of victims and perpetrators of sexual and domestic abuse, which the defense argues would unfairly bolster the credibility of the government's witnesses — including alleged victims — without having evaluated any facts specific to this case. The defense asserts that Dr. Hughes's testimony is not based on a reliable scientific application to the actual circumstances surrounding Combs and instead consists of broad generalizations that risk misleading the jury by presenting “typical” abuse behavior as evidence of guilt.Combs' attorneys argue that Hughes's proposed testimony violates the standards set by Federal Rules of Evidence 702 and 403, which regulate expert witness admissibility. They claim her statements offer no specialized knowledge beyond what jurors already understand — such as abusers exploiting power or victims remaining in abusive relationships — and that she conflates clinical definitions of coercion with legal ones, potentially confusing the jury. The motion asserts that Hughes's testimony is “advocacy masquerading as expertise” and warns it would improperly bolster the credibility of government witnesses under the guise of psychology. The defense urges the court to block her from testifying, citing that her opinions are methodologically unsound and prejudicial rather than probative.to contact  me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.206.0.pdf

This document is a motion in limine filed by Sean Combs' legal team in his federal criminal case (Case No. 24-cr-542) in the Southern District of New York, seeking to exclude the testimony of Dr. Dawn Hughes, a psychological expert the prosecution intends to call. Dr. Hughes is expected to testify about general behavioral patterns of victims and perpetrators of sexual and domestic abuse, which the defense argues would unfairly bolster the credibility of the government's witnesses — including alleged victims — without having evaluated any facts specific to this case. The defense asserts that Dr. Hughes's testimony is not based on a reliable scientific application to the actual circumstances surrounding Combs and instead consists of broad generalizations that risk misleading the jury by presenting “typical” abuse behavior as evidence of guilt.Combs' attorneys argue that Hughes's proposed testimony violates the standards set by Federal Rules of Evidence 702 and 403, which regulate expert witness admissibility. They claim her statements offer no specialized knowledge beyond what jurors already understand — such as abusers exploiting power or victims remaining in abusive relationships — and that she conflates clinical definitions of coercion with legal ones, potentially confusing the jury. The motion asserts that Hughes's testimony is “advocacy masquerading as expertise” and warns it would improperly bolster the credibility of government witnesses under the guise of psychology. The defense urges the court to block her from testifying, citing that her opinions are methodologically unsound and prejudicial rather than probative.to contact  me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.206.0.pdf

This explosive episode features legendary New York defense attorney Murray Richman joining Anita Marks and Nevin Shapiro to unpack the legal storm surrounding Sean “Diddy” Combs. Richman, who once represented key figures in Diddy's past legal battles, offers unprecedented insight into the prosecution's strategy, the Southern District of New York's conviction culture, and what it really means to face federal charges as a celebrity. From jury psychology to political agendas, this episode doesn't hold back.Murray Richman brings over 60 years of courtroom experience, sharing war stories from his time defending high-profile clients—while offering a sobering view on how the justice system works behind closed doors. As Richman and Nevin compare their experiences with federal power plays, Anita pushes the discussion into controversial territory: racial bias, celebrity persecution, and the weaponization of the DOJ.Whether you're a true crime fanatic, a legal drama addict, or just following the evolving Diddy saga, this episode breaks down what's at stake, how the prosecution builds its narrative, and why a “dream team” might not be enough to beat the feds. If you care about truth, justice, and the future of high-profile prosecutions, this one is a must-watch.From reflections on media manipulation to exposing the power imbalance inside federal courtrooms, this conversation challenges viewers to rethink how narratives are crafted, and who benefits when the system decides to make an example out of someone. It's more than a legal breakdown — it's a deep dive into the psychology of public trials, the machinery of federal power, and the voices fighting to balance the scale.Timestamps: 02:33 – Legendary attorney Murray Richman joins the show 03:06 – Representing Shine: Murray recalls the original Diddy/J.Lo case 08:01 – Has the prosecution made their case? Murray's raw legal take 10:36 – “The feds milk everything” – Inside federal tactics and pressure 12:00 – Weaponized DOJ? Murray calls out political prosecutions 13:27 – Could Trump pardon Diddy? A shocking legal twist 15:05 – Nevin reveals how his sentence doubled due to media pressure 17:06 – Truth about plea deals: Does turning one down seal your fate? 19:08 – “No such thing as a dream team” – Murray dismantles the myth 22:17 – Diddy allegedly plotted to kill Kid Cudi? Explosive testimony 26:29 – “They're building the RICO” – Is the government setting the stage? 34:13 – Why Diddy? Murray says it's racial, political, and personalFollow the Hosts on Instagram: Anita Marks: https://www.instagram.com/anita_marks Nevin Shapiro: https://www.instagram.com/nevinshapiro/Producer: Michael Lazo: https://www.instagram.com/digilazo/

This document is a motion in limine filed by Sean Combs' legal team in his federal criminal case (Case No. 24-cr-542) in the Southern District of New York, seeking to exclude the testimony of Dr. Dawn Hughes, a psychological expert the prosecution intends to call. Dr. Hughes is expected to testify about general behavioral patterns of victims and perpetrators of sexual and domestic abuse, which the defense argues would unfairly bolster the credibility of the government's witnesses — including alleged victims — without having evaluated any facts specific to this case. The defense asserts that Dr. Hughes's testimony is not based on a reliable scientific application to the actual circumstances surrounding Combs and instead consists of broad generalizations that risk misleading the jury by presenting “typical” abuse behavior as evidence of guilt.Combs' attorneys argue that Hughes's proposed testimony violates the standards set by Federal Rules of Evidence 702 and 403, which regulate expert witness admissibility. They claim her statements offer no specialized knowledge beyond what jurors already understand — such as abusers exploiting power or victims remaining in abusive relationships — and that she conflates clinical definitions of coercion with legal ones, potentially confusing the jury. The motion asserts that Hughes's testimony is “advocacy masquerading as expertise” and warns it would improperly bolster the credibility of government witnesses under the guise of psychology. The defense urges the court to block her from testifying, citing that her opinions are methodologically unsound and prejudicial rather than probative.to contact  me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.206.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

This document is a motion in limine filed by Sean Combs' legal team in his federal criminal case (Case No. 24-cr-542) in the Southern District of New York, seeking to exclude the testimony of Dr. Dawn Hughes, a psychological expert the prosecution intends to call. Dr. Hughes is expected to testify about general behavioral patterns of victims and perpetrators of sexual and domestic abuse, which the defense argues would unfairly bolster the credibility of the government's witnesses — including alleged victims — without having evaluated any facts specific to this case. The defense asserts that Dr. Hughes's testimony is not based on a reliable scientific application to the actual circumstances surrounding Combs and instead consists of broad generalizations that risk misleading the jury by presenting “typical” abuse behavior as evidence of guilt.Combs' attorneys argue that Hughes's proposed testimony violates the standards set by Federal Rules of Evidence 702 and 403, which regulate expert witness admissibility. They claim her statements offer no specialized knowledge beyond what jurors already understand — such as abusers exploiting power or victims remaining in abusive relationships — and that she conflates clinical definitions of coercion with legal ones, potentially confusing the jury. The motion asserts that Hughes's testimony is “advocacy masquerading as expertise” and warns it would improperly bolster the credibility of government witnesses under the guise of psychology. The defense urges the court to block her from testifying, citing that her opinions are methodologically unsound and prejudicial rather than probative.to contact  me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.206.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

This document is a motion in limine filed by Sean Combs' legal team in his federal criminal case (Case No. 24-cr-542) in the Southern District of New York, seeking to exclude the testimony of Dr. Dawn Hughes, a psychological expert the prosecution intends to call. Dr. Hughes is expected to testify about general behavioral patterns of victims and perpetrators of sexual and domestic abuse, which the defense argues would unfairly bolster the credibility of the government's witnesses — including alleged victims — without having evaluated any facts specific to this case. The defense asserts that Dr. Hughes's testimony is not based on a reliable scientific application to the actual circumstances surrounding Combs and instead consists of broad generalizations that risk misleading the jury by presenting “typical” abuse behavior as evidence of guilt.Combs' attorneys argue that Hughes's proposed testimony violates the standards set by Federal Rules of Evidence 702 and 403, which regulate expert witness admissibility. They claim her statements offer no specialized knowledge beyond what jurors already understand — such as abusers exploiting power or victims remaining in abusive relationships — and that she conflates clinical definitions of coercion with legal ones, potentially confusing the jury. The motion asserts that Hughes's testimony is “advocacy masquerading as expertise” and warns it would improperly bolster the credibility of government witnesses under the guise of psychology. The defense urges the court to block her from testifying, citing that her opinions are methodologically unsound and prejudicial rather than probative.to contact  me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.206.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

This document is a motion in limine filed by Sean Combs' legal team in his federal criminal case (Case No. 24-cr-542) in the Southern District of New York, seeking to exclude the testimony of Dr. Dawn Hughes, a psychological expert the prosecution intends to call. Dr. Hughes is expected to testify about general behavioral patterns of victims and perpetrators of sexual and domestic abuse, which the defense argues would unfairly bolster the credibility of the government's witnesses — including alleged victims — without having evaluated any facts specific to this case. The defense asserts that Dr. Hughes's testimony is not based on a reliable scientific application to the actual circumstances surrounding Combs and instead consists of broad generalizations that risk misleading the jury by presenting “typical” abuse behavior as evidence of guilt.Combs' attorneys argue that Hughes's proposed testimony violates the standards set by Federal Rules of Evidence 702 and 403, which regulate expert witness admissibility. They claim her statements offer no specialized knowledge beyond what jurors already understand — such as abusers exploiting power or victims remaining in abusive relationships — and that she conflates clinical definitions of coercion with legal ones, potentially confusing the jury. The motion asserts that Hughes's testimony is “advocacy masquerading as expertise” and warns it would improperly bolster the credibility of government witnesses under the guise of psychology. The defense urges the court to block her from testifying, citing that her opinions are methodologically unsound and prejudicial rather than probative.to contact  me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.206.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Jay-Z and Sean "Diddy" Combs are actively pursuing legal action against attorney Tony Buzbee following allegations made in a civil lawsuit. In December 2024, Buzbee filed a lawsuit accusing both artists of sexually assaulting a 13-year-old girl in 2000, claims which Jay-Z and Combs vehemently denied, labeling them as baseless and extortionate. Jay-Z responded by filing a defamation lawsuit against Buzbee, asserting that the attorney's public statements and social media posts were defamatory and intended to inflict emotional distress. Despite the original lawsuit being withdrawn in February 2025, Jay-Z's defamation claim has been deemed substantial enough by a Los Angeles judge to proceed to trial, with the next court hearing scheduled for March 26.Concurrently, Sean Combs is challenging Buzbee's legal maneuvers in other jurisdictions. Buzbee, representing multiple individuals alleging sexual misconduct by Combs, sought permission to practice in the Southern District of New York for these cases. Combs' legal team opposed this request, citing "egregious misconduct" by Buzbee and arguing that such behavior should disqualify him from practicing in that district. This opposition reflects Combs' broader strategy to contest the credibility and legal standing of Buzbee as he defends against the numerous allegations.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Diddy & Jay-Z Claim "Egregious Misconduct" By Lawyer Behind Dozens Of Cases

​Prominent Houston attorney Tony Buzbee has withdrawn from representing plaintiffs in over a dozen sexual abuse lawsuits against Sean "Diddy" Combs in the Southern District of New York (SDNY). This decision follows a court order from U.S. District Judge Ronnie Abrams, who noted that Buzbee was not admitted to practice in the SDNY and had failed to disclose this information. In response, Buzbee acknowledged his oversight and filed motions to withdraw from 15 federal cases, stating that his admission status had become a "distraction" from the pursuit of justice for his clientsThe issue arose after Shawn "Jay-Z" Carter filed a grievance against Buzbee, alleging unauthorized practice in the SDNY. Buzbee, who is licensed to practice in New York state courts and the Eastern District of New York, indicated that he plans to address the grievance and seek proper admission to the SDNY. In the meantime, he continues to represent clients in related cases in New York state courts and intends to file additional lawsuits in Nevada and California.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Texas' Tony Buzbee off Sean 'Diddy' Combs-related case

In the civil case Doe v. Combs et al., filed on February 4, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Case No. 1:25-cv-00996-JLR), the plaintiff, identified as John Doe, brings forth multiple allegations against defendants Sean Combs and Bad Boy Records. The claims include human trafficking, sexual battery, assault, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and breach of contract. Doe asserts that from approximately 2007 to 2012, Combs engaged in non-consensual sexual acts, including forcible anal penetration, and subjected him to physical confinement in various locations, including hotel rooms and Combs' residence. Additionally, Doe alleges that Combs' continuous death threats and coercion prevented him from asserting his rights within the statutory period, leading to claims under the California Trafficking Victims Protection Act and other related statutes.The complaint further contends that Bad Boy Records benefited from and facilitated Combs' alleged misconduct by maintaining an environment that enabled these actions. Doe claims that the defendants' actions have caused him significant monetary damages, physical injury, and severe psychological distress. He seeks compensatory and punitive damages, as well as injunctive and declaratory relief. The lawsuit emphasizes that due to the alleged continuous threats and coercion by Combs, Doe was compelled to delay filing the action, and it argues that the defendants should be estopped from invoking the statute of limitations as a defense.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 civil case Doe v. Combs et al., filed on February 4, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Case No. 1:25-cv-00996-JLR), the plaintiff, identified as John Doe, brings forth multiple allegations against defendants Sean Combs and Bad Boy Records. The claims include human trafficking, sexual battery, assault, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and breach of contract. Doe asserts that from approximately 2007 to 2012, Combs engaged in non-consensual sexual acts, including forcible anal penetration, and subjected him to physical confinement in various locations, including hotel rooms and Combs' residence. Additionally, Doe alleges that Combs' continuous death threats and coercion prevented him from asserting his rights within the statutory period, leading to claims under the California Trafficking Victims Protection Act and other related statutes.The complaint further contends that Bad Boy Records benefited from and facilitated Combs' alleged misconduct by maintaining an environment that enabled these actions. Doe claims that the defendants' actions have caused him significant monetary damages, physical injury, and severe psychological distress. He seeks compensatory and punitive damages, as well as injunctive and declaratory relief. The lawsuit emphasizes that due to the alleged continuous threats and coercion by Combs, Doe was compelled to delay filing the action, and it argues that the defendants should be estopped from invoking the statute of limitations as a defense.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 civil case Doe v. Combs et al., filed on February 4, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Case No. 1:25-cv-00996-JLR), the plaintiff, identified as John Doe, brings forth multiple allegations against defendants Sean Combs and Bad Boy Records. The claims include human trafficking, sexual battery, assault, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and breach of contract. Doe asserts that from approximately 2007 to 2012, Combs engaged in non-consensual sexual acts, including forcible anal penetration, and subjected him to physical confinement in various locations, including hotel rooms and Combs' residence. Additionally, Doe alleges that Combs' continuous death threats and coercion prevented him from asserting his rights within the statutory period, leading to claims under the California Trafficking Victims Protection Act and other related statutes.The complaint further contends that Bad Boy Records benefited from and facilitated Combs' alleged misconduct by maintaining an environment that enabled these actions. Doe claims that the defendants' actions have caused him significant monetary damages, physical injury, and severe psychological distress. He seeks compensatory and punitive damages, as well as injunctive and declaratory relief. The lawsuit emphasizes that due to the alleged continuous threats and coercion by Combs, Doe was compelled to delay filing the action, and it argues that the defendants should be estopped from invoking the statute of limitations as a defense.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

In the civil case Doe v. Combs et al., filed on February 4, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Case No. 1:25-cv-00996-JLR), the plaintiff, identified as John Doe, brings forth multiple allegations against defendants Sean Combs and Bad Boy Records. The claims include human trafficking, sexual battery, assault, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and breach of contract. Doe asserts that from approximately 2007 to 2012, Combs engaged in non-consensual sexual acts, including forcible anal penetration, and subjected him to physical confinement in various locations, including hotel rooms and Combs' residence. Additionally, Doe alleges that Combs' continuous death threats and coercion prevented him from asserting his rights within the statutory period, leading to claims under the California Trafficking Victims Protection Act and other related statutes.The complaint further contends that Bad Boy Records benefited from and facilitated Combs' alleged misconduct by maintaining an environment that enabled these actions. Doe claims that the defendants' actions have caused him significant monetary damages, physical injury, and severe psychological distress. He seeks compensatory and punitive damages, as well as injunctive and declaratory relief. The lawsuit emphasizes that due to the alleged continuous threats and coercion by Combs, Doe was compelled to delay filing the action, and it argues that the defendants should be estopped from invoking the statute of limitations as a defense.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Attorney Tony Buzbee, known for representing over 100 alleged victims in sexual assault lawsuits against Sean "Diddy" Combs, has encountered a significant legal hurdle. The Committee on Grievances for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) recently denied his application for admission to practice in the district, citing his failure to seek proper admission before appearing in cases within its jurisdiction. This decision restricts Buzbee from litigating in the SDNY, which encompasses key areas including New York City's five boroughs.In response, Buzbee has indicated plans to seek "pro hac vice" admission, a legal provision allowing attorneys not licensed in a specific jurisdiction to practice temporarily for particular cases, contingent upon court approval. This process requires him to attach the denial order to each request for admission moving forward. Despite this setback, Buzbee maintains that he is licensed to practice law in New York State and remains committed to his ongoing cases.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Tony Buzbee, attorney for sexual assault suits against Jay-Z and Diddy, hit with minor roadblock

This week, the boys pull up their dacks, lace up their blunnies, pull over their cardies, eat a bikkie, grab a tinny, and lob in for the Ridgy Didge himself, Baz Luhrmann's first feature film, “Strictly Ballroom”. This isn't any ear bashing- we loved it! It made us three happy little Vegemites. After Jeff gives a quick mini-review of “Mission: Impossible— The Final Reckoning”, our native Aussie and gutless wonder, Dave, knackered from a good hissy at his lappy, guides us through this absolute hooley dooley. Don't be a drongo- grab a coldie and listen- you'll be doing the bogo pogo in a jiff!  Our phone number is 646-484-9298. It accepts texts or voice messages.  0:00 Intro; 6:27 Jeff's mini-review of Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning; 11:29 Gripes; 15:01 1992 Year in Review; 39:02 Films of 1992: Strictly Ballroom; 1:21:26 What You Been Watching?; 1:28:53 Next Episode Teaser Additional Cast/Crew: Paul Mercurio, Tara Morice, Craig Pearce, Bill Hunter, Pat Thompson, Gia Carides, Peter Whitford, Barry Otto, Sonia Kruger, Tom Cruise, Hayley Atwell, Simon Pegg, Ving Rhames, Pom Klementieff, Esai Morales, Holt McCalleny, Janet McTeer, Nick Offerman, Shea Whigham, Tramell Tillman, Angela Bassett, Mark Gatiss, Rolf Saxon, Greg Tarzan Davis. Hosts: Dave Green, Jeff Ostermueller, John Say Edited & Produced by Dave Green. Beer Sponsor: Carlos Barrozo Music Sponsor: Dasein Dasein on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/artist/77H3GPgYigeKNlZKGx11KZ 
Dasein on Apple Music: https://music.apple.com/us/artist/dasein/1637517407 Additional Tags: Mission: Impossible, submarine, nuclear weapons, Top Gun: Maverick, Ben Mendelsohn, French Accents, The Monuments Men, George Clooney, The Stock Market Crash, Bear Market, Trains, Locomotions, Museums, Fuhrermuseum, Nazis, WWII movies, WWI Shows, Plastic ExplosivesThe Crusades, Swedish Art, Knights, Death, MGM, Amazon Prime, Marvel, Sony, Wicked, All Quiet on the Western Front, Wicked, Conclave, Here, Venom: The Last Dance, Casablanca, The Wizard of Oz, Oscars, Academy Awards, BFI, BAFTA, BAFTAS, British Cinema. England, Vienna, Leopoldstadt, The Golden Globes, Past Lives, Monarch: Legacy of Monsters, The Holiday, Sunset Boulevard, Napoleon, Ferrari, Beer, Scotch, Travis Scott, U2, Apple, Apple Podcasts, Switzerland, West Side Story, Wikipedia, Adelaide, Australia, Queensland, New South Wales, Melbourne, Indonesia, Java, Jakarta, Bali, Guinea, The British, England, The SEC, Ronald Reagan, Stock Buybacks, Marvel, MCU, DCEU, Film, Movies, Southeast Asia, The Phillippines, Vietnam, America, The US, Academy Awards, WGA Strike, SAG-AFTRA, SAG Strike, Peter Weir, Jidaigeki, chambara movies, sword fight, samurai, ronin, Meiji Restoration, plague, HBO Max, Amazon Prime, casket maker, Seven Samurai, Roshomon, Sergio Leone, Clint Eastwood, Stellen Skarsgard, the matt and mark movie show.The Southern District's Waratah Championship, Night of a Thousand Stars, The Pan Pacific Grand Prix (The Pan Pacifics)    

In October 2024, a lawsuit was filed in the Southern District of New York under case number 1:24-cv-07777, titled Doe v. Combs et al. The plaintiff, identified as Jane Doe, alleges that Sean Combs, also known as "P. Diddy," "Puff Daddy," and other monikers, sexually assaulted her during a party at his residence. The complaint details that Combs forcibly raped the plaintiff in a bathroom, subsequently threatening her to ensure her silence. The lawsuit seeks both compensatory and punitive damages for the alleged assault.(commercial at 7:54)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

In October 2024, a lawsuit was filed in the Southern District of New York under case number 1:24-cv-07777, titled Doe v. Combs et al. The plaintiff, identified as Jane Doe, alleges that Sean Combs, also known as "P. Diddy," "Puff Daddy," and other monikers, sexually assaulted her during a party at his residence. The complaint details that Combs forcibly raped the plaintiff in a bathroom, subsequently threatening her to ensure her silence. The lawsuit seeks both compensatory and punitive damages for the alleged assault.(commercial at 7:54)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

In October 2024, a lawsuit was filed in the Southern District of New York under case number 1:24-cv-07777, titled Doe v. Combs et al. The plaintiff, identified as Jane Doe, alleges that Sean Combs, also known as "P. Diddy," "Puff Daddy," and other monikers, sexually assaulted her during a party at his residence. The complaint details that Combs forcibly raped the plaintiff in a bathroom, subsequently threatening her to ensure her silence. The lawsuit seeks both compensatory and punitive damages for the alleged assault.(commercial at 7:54)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

In the civil case Doe v. Combs et al., filed on February 4, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Case No. 1:25-cv-00996-JLR), the plaintiff, identified as John Doe, brings forth multiple allegations against defendants Sean Combs and Bad Boy Records. The claims include human trafficking, sexual battery, assault, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and breach of contract. Doe asserts that from approximately 2007 to 2012, Combs engaged in non-consensual sexual acts, including forcible anal penetration, and subjected him to physical confinement in various locations, including hotel rooms and Combs' residence. Additionally, Doe alleges that Combs' continuous death threats and coercion prevented him from asserting his rights within the statutory period, leading to claims under the California Trafficking Victims Protection Act and other related statutes.The complaint further contends that Bad Boy Records benefited from and facilitated Combs' alleged misconduct by maintaining an environment that enabled these actions. Doe claims that the defendants' actions have caused him significant monetary damages, physical injury, and severe psychological distress. He seeks compensatory and punitive damages, as well as injunctive and declaratory relief. The lawsuit emphasizes that due to the alleged continuous threats and coercion by Combs, Doe was compelled to delay filing the action, and it argues that the defendants should be estopped from invoking the statute of limitations as a defense.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In the civil case Doe v. Combs et al., filed on February 4, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Case No. 1:25-cv-00996-JLR), the plaintiff, identified as John Doe, brings forth multiple allegations against defendants Sean Combs and Bad Boy Records. The claims include human trafficking, sexual battery, assault, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and breach of contract. Doe asserts that from approximately 2007 to 2012, Combs engaged in non-consensual sexual acts, including forcible anal penetration, and subjected him to physical confinement in various locations, including hotel rooms and Combs' residence. Additionally, Doe alleges that Combs' continuous death threats and coercion prevented him from asserting his rights within the statutory period, leading to claims under the California Trafficking Victims Protection Act and other related statutes.The complaint further contends that Bad Boy Records benefited from and facilitated Combs' alleged misconduct by maintaining an environment that enabled these actions. Doe claims that the defendants' actions have caused him significant monetary damages, physical injury, and severe psychological distress. He seeks compensatory and punitive damages, as well as injunctive and declaratory relief. The lawsuit emphasizes that due to the alleged continuous threats and coercion by Combs, Doe was compelled to delay filing the action, and it argues that the defendants should be estopped from invoking the statute of limitations as a defense.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In Case No. 1:24-cv-08812, filed on November 19, 2024, in the Southern District of New York, the plaintiff, identified as John Doe, alleges that in October 2001, he was lured to New York City under the pretense of auditioning for a role as a police officer in a music video. After coordinating with a female casting director, he traveled to Manhattan, booking a room at the Hotel Newton on the Upper West Side. The following day, he was directed to a suite near the top of a hotel located on the south side of Central Park.The plaintiff claims that upon arrival, he was offered a Diet Coke that tasted unusual. Subsequently, he began to feel disoriented and lost consciousness. He alleges that he awoke to find Sean "Diddy" Combs sexually assaulting him, with Combs's bodyguard restraining his arms. After the assault, the plaintiff asserts that he fled the scene. The lawsuit seeks compensatory and punitive damages for the alleged assault, emphasizing a pattern of such behavior by Combs over the years, purportedly facilitated by various individuals and entities.(commercial at 8:26)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.632028.1.0.pdf

In Case No. 1:24-cv-08812, filed on November 19, 2024, in the Southern District of New York, the plaintiff, identified as John Doe, alleges that in October 2001, he was lured to New York City under the pretense of auditioning for a role as a police officer in a music video. After coordinating with a female casting director, he traveled to Manhattan, booking a room at the Hotel Newton on the Upper West Side. The following day, he was directed to a suite near the top of a hotel located on the south side of Central Park.The plaintiff claims that upon arrival, he was offered a Diet Coke that tasted unusual. Subsequently, he began to feel disoriented and lost consciousness. He alleges that he awoke to find Sean "Diddy" Combs sexually assaulting him, with Combs's bodyguard restraining his arms. After the assault, the plaintiff asserts that he fled the scene. The lawsuit seeks compensatory and punitive damages for the alleged assault, emphasizing a pattern of such behavior by Combs over the years, purportedly facilitated by various individuals and entities.(commercial at 8:26)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.632028.1.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

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

The federal courthouse in New York City, where Sean “Diddy” Combs is on trial for racketeering and sex crimes, doesn't allow cameras or other recording devices. But certain journalists who regularly report on the Southern District of New York have special dispensation to live-tweet the proceedings. Law&Crime's Jesse Weber spoke with journalist Matthew R. Lee about his experience inside the courtroom as he keeps the public updated in real time.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW: If you received Depo-Provera birth control shots and were later diagnosed with a brain or spinal tumor called meningioma, you may be eligible for a lawsuit. Visit https://forthepeople.com/lcdepo to start a claim now!HOST:Jesse Weber: https://twitter.com/jessecordweberLAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokeVideo Editing - Michael Deininger, Christina O'Shea & Jay CruzScript Writing & Producing - Savannah Williamson & Juliana BattagliaGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSocial Media Management - Vanessa BeinSTAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:Watch Law&Crime Network on YouTubeTV: https://bit.ly/3td2e3yWhere To Watch Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3akxLK5Sign Up For Law&Crime's Daily Newsletter: https://bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletterRead Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3td2IqoLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Sarah Isgur and David French invite Judge Kevin Newsom of the 11th Circuit to discuss his time clerking for Justice David Souter and the strong humility that defines the late justice's legacy. Then, Sarah and David recap their annual Legal Eagles trip to Gettysburg. The Agenda:—Justice David Souter's independent mind and the significance of his judicial philosophy—6th Circuit Judge Chad Readler breaks down Legal Eagles trip to Gettysburg—The Constitution and the Civil War with 6th Circuit Chief Judge Jeffrey Sutton—Chief Judge Edmund Sargus of the Southern District of Ohioshares the story of Thomas Drummond and his overlooked role in the Civil War—Pickett's Charge! Show Notes:—SCOTUSblog: “David Souter, Retired Supreme Court Justice, Dies at 85” Advisory Opinions is a production of The Dispatch, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a non-partisan, conservative perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings, ⁠⁠⁠⁠click here⁠⁠⁠⁠. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Plaintiff John Doe, represented by Eisenberg & Baum, LLP, has filed a civil lawsuit against defendant Sean Combs in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint alleges claims against Combs based on actions detailed through the plaintiff's personal knowledge, along with other facts and information. The lawsuit initiates formal litigation, aiming to hold Combs accountable for alleged wrongdoing, though the precise details of the claims are yet to be outlined publicly.The case, brought anonymously under the name "John Doe," suggests sensitivity surrounding the allegations or potential concerns for the plaintiff's safety or privacy. As the legal process advances, further specifics regarding the nature of the allegations and the damages sought are expected to emerge, clarifying the basis for this legal action against Combs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.637615.1.0_1.pdf

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

Seth for Privacy breaks down the Samurai Wallet legal case, Bitcoin's current privacy limitations, and solutions like Silent Payments and Payjoin V2. He discusses the government's attack on privacy tools and why Monero offers better privacy by default.You're listening to Bitcoin Season 2. Subscribe to the newsletter, trusted by over 7,000 Bitcoiners: https://newsletter.blockspacemedia.comSeth for Privacy, VP at Cake Wallet, joins us to discuss the ongoing Samurai Wallet legal case and its implications for Bitcoin privacy. Seth explains how the DOJ's prosecution of Samurai developers threatens the entire crypto privacy landscape, despite FinCEN's admission that self-custodial wallets shouldn't be regulated as money services. He breaks down Bitcoin's current privacy limitations, highlighting promising technologies like Silent Payments and Payjoin V2, while candidly addressing why Monero offers superior privacy by design. Are we re-living through the same cryptography battle we fought in the 90s?Follow our guests: @SethforprivacyNotes:- Samurai indicted April 24, 2024, despite self-custody- 98% conviction rate in Southern District of NY- DOJ hid key FinCEN evidence from defense- Silent Payments gives one reusable static address- Payjoin V2 coming to Cake Wallet this week- Bitcoin privacy tools fighting transparent designTimestamps00:00 Start01:04 Samurai wallet legal case06:30 Jurisdiction & charges11:59 How significant is this case?16:28 Arch Network17:00 Current privacy on BTC19:47 Silent payments21:54 Payjoin V224:43 Privacy tech limits of BTC27:42 Privacy soft forks32:51 Future of oh-chain privacy37:31 OP_RETURN debate-

Dozens of people showed up for jury duty this week at the Southern District of New York's courthouse in Lower Manhattan. There, they would find out if they would serve as one of the handful of people who would determine whether Sean “Diddy” Combs was guilty or not. The federal government is accusing him of racketeering conspiracy, sex trafficking and transportation to engage in prostitution. He has pleaded not guilty. Reporter Anne Branigin and audio producer Sabby Robinson reported from New York City to see the dynamics in the courtroom and how the jury pool was narrowed down. On today's episode, Anne describes Combs's demeanor and who the other important players are – and what we can gather about each team's strategy from the jury selection process.Today's show was produced by Sabby Robinson. It was edited by Reena Flores and mixed by Sean Carter. Thanks to Carla Spartos and Shayna Jacobs.Follow our coverage of the trial of Sean “Diddy” Combs on Spotify here.Subscribe to The Washington Post here.