This filing, submitted on behalf of Sean Combs and his co-defendants in the case English v. Combs et al., opposes the plaintiff’s renewed request for a 60-day extension to secure a third set of legal counsel. The defense argues that the plaintiff has already cycled through two legal teams—both of whom withdrew due to serious breakdowns in the attorney-client relationship, including what they described as “self-destructive conduct,” refusal to follow legal advice, and irreconcilable differences. The filing outlines a timeline of delays and extensions already granted, emphasizing that the plaintiff’s behavior has repeatedly stalled progress and wasted the court’s and defendants’ time and resources.

The defendants urge the court to deny any further delay, asserting that the plaintiff’s complaint is fatally flawed and that she is unlikely to retain new counsel willing to continue litigating what they call “baseless claims.” They argue that granting another extension would prolong an already mismanaged case that has made little progress nearly a year after being filed. Moreover, the defense indicates it is prepared to file a motion to dismiss all eight of the plaintiff’s claims with prejudice and warns that continued adjournments serve only to avoid scrutiny of the case’s legal shortcomings. Ultimately, the defense calls for the case to move forward without further delay, with or without new representation for the plaintiff.


to contact me:

[email protected]



source:

gov.uscourts.nysd.624352.74.0.pdf

Despite the explosive nature of key witness testimony—most notably from former girlfriend Cassie Ventura—the prosecution’s case against Sean "Diddy" Combs could face significant challenges due to credibility concerns and the risks posed by cross-examination. While multiple witnesses have supported Ventura’s claims of abuse, coercion, and trafficking, legal experts caution that the effectiveness of their testimony may be undermined if the defense successfully exposes inconsistencies, biases, or ulterior motives. Ventura’s allegations are central to the case, but they may not be sufficient to secure a conviction on their own.

The defense is expected to aggressively question the reliability of the government’s witnesses, potentially reframing even graphic and emotionally charged testimony as exaggerated or strategically tailored. If jurors sense that the prosecution is leaning too heavily on character-based accusations without strong supporting evidence, the strategy could backfire. The trial’s outcome may ultimately depend not just on what was said, but on how jurors perceive the credibility, consistency, and intent behind the testimony presented.


to contact me:

[email protected]



source:


Regina Ventura, Kerry Morgan deliver strong testimony in Sean 'Diddy' Combs' trial | Fox News

Despite the explosive nature of key witness testimony—most notably from former girlfriend Cassie Ventura—the prosecution’s case against Sean "Diddy" Combs could face significant challenges due to credibility concerns and the risks posed by cross-examination. While multiple witnesses have supported Ventura’s claims of abuse, coercion, and trafficking, legal experts caution that the effectiveness of their testimony may be undermined if the defense successfully exposes inconsistencies, biases, or ulterior motives. Ventura’s allegations are central to the case, but they may not be sufficient to secure a conviction on their own.

The defense is expected to aggressively question the reliability of the government’s witnesses, potentially reframing even graphic and emotionally charged testimony as exaggerated or strategically tailored. If jurors sense that the prosecution is leaning too heavily on character-based accusations without strong supporting evidence, the strategy could backfire. The trial’s outcome may ultimately depend not just on what was said, but on how jurors perceive the credibility, consistency, and intent behind the testimony presented.


to contact me:

[email protected]



source:


Regina Ventura, Kerry Morgan deliver strong testimony in Sean 'Diddy' Combs' trial | Fox News

Newly uncovered leaked emails show that Prince Andrew remained in contact with Jeffrey Epstein until at least 2015—five years longer than the Duke claimed in his infamous 2019 Newsnight interview. At the time, Andrew insisted he cut ties after meeting Epstein in December 2010, following Epstein’s sex crime conviction. But the emails, originating from former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak’s hacked inbox, include messages where Epstein passed along information attributed directly to “Andrew,” with Epstein confirming the source. These discussions involved potential business ventures, including a private security project in China.

The revelations directly contradict Andrew’s carefully crafted public narrative and expose him as a man who misled the public, the monarchy, and investigators about the true extent of his ties to Epstein. By insisting he severed contact in 2010 while secretly maintaining communications for years, Andrew not only damaged his own credibility but also dragged the Royal Family deeper into scandal. His willingness to keep dealing with a convicted sex offender behind the scenes reveals a level of arrogance and dishonesty that makes his 2019 Newsnight denials look like a calculated performance. Far from being a victim of bad judgment, Andrew now appears complicit in sustaining a relationship he knew was toxic, raising the question of what else he has concealed.


to contact me:

[email protected]



source:

Prince Andrew 'remained in contact with Jeffrey Epstein five years longer than he claimed in Newsnight interview', emails suggest | Daily Mail Online

Suspicious Activity Reports, or SARs, are confidential filings that financial institutions are legally required to send to the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) whenever they detect transactions that may indicate money laundering, fraud, sanctions evasion, or other criminal activity. They’re not evidence of a crime by themselves, but rather red flags—signals that something looks off. Banks, casinos, brokerages, and even crypto platforms file them routinely, and once submitted, they’re closely guarded, unavailable to the public, and protected by strict “no tipping off” rules. Law enforcement uses SARs to trace illicit networks, connect patterns across different institutions, and build out investigations into everything from drug cartels and terrorist cells to human trafficking and large-scale fraud schemes.

Now those same reports sit at the center of a political firestorm. House Oversight Chair James Comer has formally requested that the Treasury Department turn over all SARs connected to Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. His demand signals an attempt to pull back the veil on what banks flagged about Epstein’s vast financial web—wires, transfers, shell accounts, and potential facilitators. If granted, the request could provide Congress with a rare inside look at the money trails behind Epstein’s operations, though it also raises thorny questions about confidentiality, precedent, and how much of this intelligence should be made public.


to contact me:

[email protected]



source:

Comer requests Epstein, Maxwell records from Treasury Secretary | Fox News

Ghislaine Maxwell, now housed at the minimum-security Federal Prison Camp Bryan in Texas, attempted to secure one of the prison’s coveted “town driver” jobs—positions that allow trusted inmates to leave the facility and ferry others to appointments, bus stops, and airports. According to the Daily Mail, her application was swiftly rejected by prison officials, who deemed the 63-year-old sex trafficker far too high a flight risk to be allowed outside unsupervised. The refusal reportedly left Maxwell frustrated, as such roles are seen as the closest thing to freedom an inmate can have while still incarcerated. Instead, another woman was awarded the role, with sources noting that inmates had warned Maxwell there was no chance she would be granted that level of trust.


to contact me:

[email protected]



source:


Ghislaine Maxwell's audacious bid to get job at cushy lock-up that would let her OUTSIDE the prison's walls | Daily Mail Online

On August 22, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice released redacted transcripts and audio recordings of a two-day interview it conducted in July with Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year federal prison sentence for her role in Jeffrey Epstein’s sex-trafficking ring. During the interview, Maxwell denied ever seeing any inappropriate behavior by former President Donald Trump, describing him as a “gentleman in all respects,” and insisted she “never witnessed the president in any inappropriate setting in any way.” She also rejected the existence of a so-called “client list,” countering years of speculation, and claimed to have no knowledge of blackmail or illicit recordings tied to Epstein.

In addition to defending high-profile figures, Maxwell expressed doubt that Epstein’s death was a suicide, while also rejecting the notion of an elaborate conspiracy or murder plot. The release of the transcripts—handled under the Trump-era Justice Department—has stirred sharp political debate. Trump allies have framed her remarks as vindication, while critics and Epstein’s survivors question her credibility, pointing to her conviction and suggesting her words may be aimed at influencing potential clemency or political favor.


to contact me:


[email protected]



source:


Interview Transcript - Maxwell 2025.07.24 (Redacted).pdf

On August 22, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice released redacted transcripts and audio recordings of a two-day interview it conducted in July with Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year federal prison sentence for her role in Jeffrey Epstein’s sex-trafficking ring. During the interview, Maxwell denied ever seeing any inappropriate behavior by former President Donald Trump, describing him as a “gentleman in all respects,” and insisted she “never witnessed the president in any inappropriate setting in any way.” She also rejected the existence of a so-called “client list,” countering years of speculation, and claimed to have no knowledge of blackmail or illicit recordings tied to Epstein.

In addition to defending high-profile figures, Maxwell expressed doubt that Epstein’s death was a suicide, while also rejecting the notion of an elaborate conspiracy or murder plot. The release of the transcripts—handled under the Trump-era Justice Department—has stirred sharp political debate. Trump allies have framed her remarks as vindication, while critics and Epstein’s survivors question her credibility, pointing to her conviction and suggesting her words may be aimed at influencing potential clemency or political favor.


to contact me:


[email protected]



source:


Interview Transcript - Maxwell 2025.07.24 (Redacted).pdf

Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman, the former leader of the Sinaloa Cartel, has had his appeal to overturn his 2019 life sentence rejected by a U.S. court. Guzman was convicted on charges including drug trafficking, operating a criminal enterprise, and firearms violations. His legal team argued that his trial was unfair due to jury misconduct and the harsh conditions of his solitary confinement, which they claimed impacted his ability to mount a defense.

Despite these arguments, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the original verdict, praising the trial judge's management of the high-profile case and rejecting the claims of juror misconduct. The court also dismissed the argument regarding Guzman's solitary confinement, stating it did not infringe on his right to a fair trial.

In this episode, we take a look at the DOJ's El Chapo Brief.


to contact me:

[email protected]

source:

Chapo-ca2-us-brief.pdf (courthousenews.com)

Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman, the former leader of the Sinaloa Cartel, has had his appeal to overturn his 2019 life sentence rejected by a U.S. court. Guzman was convicted on charges including drug trafficking, operating a criminal enterprise, and firearms violations. His legal team argued that his trial was unfair due to jury misconduct and the harsh conditions of his solitary confinement, which they claimed impacted his ability to mount a defense.

Despite these arguments, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the original verdict, praising the trial judge's management of the high-profile case and rejecting the claims of juror misconduct. The court also dismissed the argument regarding Guzman's solitary confinement, stating it did not infringe on his right to a fair trial.

In this episode, we take a look at the DOJ's El Chapo Brief.


to contact me:

[email protected]

source:

Chapo-ca2-us-brief.pdf (courthousenews.com)