On Day 7 of Sean "Diddy" Combs' federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial, Sharay Hayes, a male exotic dancer known as "The Punisher," provided detailed testimony about his involvement in orchestrated sexual encounters, referred to as "freak-offs," involving Combs and singer Cassie Ventura. Hayes recounted that his first encounter occurred in 2012 at a Trump Tower suite in New York City, where he was instructed by Ventura to perform a "sexy scene" while a man, later identified as Combs, observed silently from a distance, wearing a veil over his face. Over the next few years, Hayes participated in approximately eight to twelve such sessions, during which Combs would direct the activities, including instructing on positioning and lighting. Hayes noted that while he never witnessed drug use during these encounters, he felt pressure and discomfort, sometimes resorting to medication for performance anxiety. He also observed signs of frustration from Cassie during these events, suggesting a lack of enthusiasm or consent.

During cross-examination, Hayes stated that he did not perceive Cassie as being forced into these encounters, describing her as a "willing participant." However, he acknowledged that she occasionally winced or sighed at Combs' instructions and often looked to Combs for approval before proceeding with certain acts. Hayes also mentioned that he was paid $800 upon arrival and an additional $1,200 after declining to "finish," indicating the transactional nature of these sessions. His testimony provides insight into the alleged power dynamics and control exerted by Combs over Ventura, contributing to the prosecution's narrative of a pattern of coercion and abuse.


to contact me:

[email protected]



soure:

In the federal trial of Sean “Diddy” Combs, Judge Arun Subramanian delivered final jury instructions that laid out the legal framework the jurors must follow as they deliberate on the charges. He emphasized the presumption of innocence, reminding jurors that the burden of proof rests entirely on the government and that Combs is not required to prove anything or call any witnesses. The judge explained that the prosecution must prove each element of every charged crime beyond a reasonable doubt, and that speculation, bias, or media narratives have no place in the jury room. He cautioned jurors to evaluate the evidence objectively, including the credibility of witnesses, and warned against letting emotions, celebrity, or public opinion sway their verdict.


Subramanian also gave detailed explanations of the legal definitions behind each charge Combs faces, including the alleged predicate acts tied to sex trafficking, conspiracy, and obstruction. He clarified that even if jurors find certain behavior distasteful or immoral, it is not criminal unless it meets the specific legal thresholds outlined. Jurors were instructed to consider each count separately, and not to infer guilt on one charge simply because they believe guilt on another. Additionally, he reiterated the importance of unanimous agreement for any verdict and instructed them not to discuss the case with anyone outside the jury room, nor consume any media coverage about it. The instructions closed with a reminder that the rule of law—not fame, wealth, or notoriety—governs the courtroom.


to  contact me:


[email protected]



source:

gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.424.0.pdf

In the federal trial of Sean “Diddy” Combs, Judge Arun Subramanian delivered final jury instructions that laid out the legal framework the jurors must follow as they deliberate on the charges. He emphasized the presumption of innocence, reminding jurors that the burden of proof rests entirely on the government and that Combs is not required to prove anything or call any witnesses. The judge explained that the prosecution must prove each element of every charged crime beyond a reasonable doubt, and that speculation, bias, or media narratives have no place in the jury room. He cautioned jurors to evaluate the evidence objectively, including the credibility of witnesses, and warned against letting emotions, celebrity, or public opinion sway their verdict.


Subramanian also gave detailed explanations of the legal definitions behind each charge Combs faces, including the alleged predicate acts tied to sex trafficking, conspiracy, and obstruction. He clarified that even if jurors find certain behavior distasteful or immoral, it is not criminal unless it meets the specific legal thresholds outlined. Jurors were instructed to consider each count separately, and not to infer guilt on one charge simply because they believe guilt on another. Additionally, he reiterated the importance of unanimous agreement for any verdict and instructed them not to discuss the case with anyone outside the jury room, nor consume any media coverage about it. The instructions closed with a reminder that the rule of law—not fame, wealth, or notoriety—governs the courtroom.


to  contact me:


[email protected]



source:

gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.424.0.pdf

In the federal trial of Sean “Diddy” Combs, Judge Arun Subramanian delivered final jury instructions that laid out the legal framework the jurors must follow as they deliberate on the charges. He emphasized the presumption of innocence, reminding jurors that the burden of proof rests entirely on the government and that Combs is not required to prove anything or call any witnesses. The judge explained that the prosecution must prove each element of every charged crime beyond a reasonable doubt, and that speculation, bias, or media narratives have no place in the jury room. He cautioned jurors to evaluate the evidence objectively, including the credibility of witnesses, and warned against letting emotions, celebrity, or public opinion sway their verdict.


Subramanian also gave detailed explanations of the legal definitions behind each charge Combs faces, including the alleged predicate acts tied to sex trafficking, conspiracy, and obstruction. He clarified that even if jurors find certain behavior distasteful or immoral, it is not criminal unless it meets the specific legal thresholds outlined. Jurors were instructed to consider each count separately, and not to infer guilt on one charge simply because they believe guilt on another. Additionally, he reiterated the importance of unanimous agreement for any verdict and instructed them not to discuss the case with anyone outside the jury room, nor consume any media coverage about it. The instructions closed with a reminder that the rule of law—not fame, wealth, or notoriety—governs the courtroom.


to  contact me:


[email protected]



source:

gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.424.0.pdf

In the federal trial of Sean “Diddy” Combs, Judge Arun Subramanian delivered final jury instructions that laid out the legal framework the jurors must follow as they deliberate on the charges. He emphasized the presumption of innocence, reminding jurors that the burden of proof rests entirely on the government and that Combs is not required to prove anything or call any witnesses. The judge explained that the prosecution must prove each element of every charged crime beyond a reasonable doubt, and that speculation, bias, or media narratives have no place in the jury room. He cautioned jurors to evaluate the evidence objectively, including the credibility of witnesses, and warned against letting emotions, celebrity, or public opinion sway their verdict.


Subramanian also gave detailed explanations of the legal definitions behind each charge Combs faces, including the alleged predicate acts tied to sex trafficking, conspiracy, and obstruction. He clarified that even if jurors find certain behavior distasteful or immoral, it is not criminal unless it meets the specific legal thresholds outlined. Jurors were instructed to consider each count separately, and not to infer guilt on one charge simply because they believe guilt on another. Additionally, he reiterated the importance of unanimous agreement for any verdict and instructed them not to discuss the case with anyone outside the jury room, nor consume any media coverage about it. The instructions closed with a reminder that the rule of law—not fame, wealth, or notoriety—governs the courtroom.


to  contact me:


[email protected]



source:

gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.424.0.pdf

In the federal trial of Sean “Diddy” Combs, Judge Arun Subramanian delivered final jury instructions that laid out the legal framework the jurors must follow as they deliberate on the charges. He emphasized the presumption of innocence, reminding jurors that the burden of proof rests entirely on the government and that Combs is not required to prove anything or call any witnesses. The judge explained that the prosecution must prove each element of every charged crime beyond a reasonable doubt, and that speculation, bias, or media narratives have no place in the jury room. He cautioned jurors to evaluate the evidence objectively, including the credibility of witnesses, and warned against letting emotions, celebrity, or public opinion sway their verdict.


Subramanian also gave detailed explanations of the legal definitions behind each charge Combs faces, including the alleged predicate acts tied to sex trafficking, conspiracy, and obstruction. He clarified that even if jurors find certain behavior distasteful or immoral, it is not criminal unless it meets the specific legal thresholds outlined. Jurors were instructed to consider each count separately, and not to infer guilt on one charge simply because they believe guilt on another. Additionally, he reiterated the importance of unanimous agreement for any verdict and instructed them not to discuss the case with anyone outside the jury room, nor consume any media coverage about it. The instructions closed with a reminder that the rule of law—not fame, wealth, or notoriety—governs the courtroom.


to  contact me:


[email protected]



source:

gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.424.0.pdf

On Day 9 of Sean "Diddy" Combs' federal trial, former personal assistant George Kaplan delivered compelling testimony that shed light on the inner workings of Combs' operations. Kaplan recounted an incident aboard a private jet in 2015, where he witnessed Combs allegedly assaulting singer Cassie Ventura. According to Kaplan, he heard glass shattering and saw Combs standing over Ventura, who was on her back with her legs up, seemingly trying to create space. Ventura reportedly screamed, "Isn't anybody seeing this?" as the altercation unfolded. Kaplan also described another episode where he observed Ventura with bruises under her eye, after which Combs instructed him to purchase over-the-counter remedies to conceal the injuries .

Beyond these incidents, Kaplan detailed his responsibilities, which extended beyond typical assistant duties. He testified about preparing hotel rooms for Combs' events, ensuring they were stocked with specific items and later cleaning them to protect Combs' public image. Kaplan also mentioned procuring drugs like MDMA for Combs and maintaining a "medicine bag" containing substances such as ketamine and Wellbutrin. Despite expressing admiration for Combs, Kaplan stated that he ultimately resigned in December 2015 due to discomfort with the physical behavior he witnessed .




On Day 9 of Sean "Diddy" Combs' federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial, rapper Kid Cudi (Scott Mescudi) delivered a compelling testimony detailing a series of unsettling events he attributed to Combs' jealousy over Cudi's brief relationship with Casandra "Cassie" Ventura in 2011. Cudi recounted receiving a distressed call from Ventura, warning him that Combs had discovered their relationship and had obtained Cudi's home address. Subsequently, Cudi found his Los Angeles home broken into, with Christmas gifts unwrapped and his dog locked in a bathroom. He reported the incident to the police. Weeks later, in early 2012, Cudi's Porsche was destroyed by a Molotov cocktail in his driveway—a retaliatory act he suspected was orchestrated by Combs. Although Combs later denied involvement during a meeting at a Los Angeles hotel, Cudi testified that he believed the incidents were meant to intimidate him.

Cudi's testimony aligns with previous allegations made by Ventura in her 2023 lawsuit, where she claimed Combs threatened violence against both her and Cudi upon learning of their relationship. During his testimony, Cudi described Combs' demeanor during their confrontation as reminiscent of a "Marvel supervillain," noting his calmness and the unsettling nature of the encounter. These accounts contribute to the prosecution's narrative of Combs' alleged pattern of coercive and violent behavior to maintain control over individuals in his personal and professional life. Combs has pleaded not guilty to all charges, including racketeering conspiracy and sex trafficking, and faces the possibility of life imprisonment if convicted.

Mylah Morales testified about a 2010 incident at the Beverly Hills Hotel during the Grammy Awards weekend. She recounted waking up to the sounds of a heated argument between Combs and Cassie Ventura. After Combs stormed out of the room, Morales found Ventura with visible injuries, including a swollen lip, a black eye, and knots on her head. Concerned for Ventura's safety, Morales took her to her own home and consulted a doctor friend, who advised that Ventura should visit the emergency room. However, Ventura declined to seek medical attention or involve the police. Morales expressed fear for her own safety, stating she was afraid of Combs and feared for her life

Frederic Zemmour, manager at the L’Ermitage Hotel in Beverly Hills, also testified on Day 9. He stated that Combs' customer profile had several notes to staff, including one that warned he "always spills candle wax on everything and uses excessive amounts of oil." These details were presented to illustrate Combs' behavior and its impact on hotel staff and property.


to contact me:


[email protected]



source:


May 22, 2025 - Day 9 of testimony in the Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs trial | CNN

On Day 8 of Sean "Diddy" Combs' federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial, the courtroom heard critical testimonies from a forensic psychologist and a former executive assistant, shedding light on the alleged abusive dynamics within Combs' personal and professional life. Forensic psychologist Dr. Dawn Hughes testified about the psychological patterns commonly observed in abusive relationships, such as trauma bonding and victim behavior, without directly referencing Combs or specific accusers. Despite the defense's attempts to portray her as biased, Hughes maintained her neutrality and emphasized the complexities victims face in abusive situations. Her insights aimed to provide context to the behaviors and decisions of individuals involved in such relationships.

As Day 8 of Sean "Diddy" Combs' federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial continued, former executive assistant George Kaplan provided detailed testimony about his tenure with Combs from 2013 to 2015. Kaplan described working extensive hours, often between 80 to 100 per week, and performing tasks that extended beyond typical assistant duties. He was responsible for booking hotel rooms under the alias "Frank Black," a nod to the late rapper Notorious B.I.G., and preparing them with specific items such as candles, baby oil, Astroglide, and liquor. Kaplan also testified that he procured drugs like MDMA and ketamine for Combs, sometimes using a corporate card, and maintained a kit containing various pills, including Advil and ketamine. He emphasized that these preparations were aimed at protecting Combs' public image, as hotels might sell compromising photos or videos of celebrities.

Kaplan further recounted instances where he cleaned up hotel rooms after Combs' alleged "freak-off" sex parties, disposing of items like empty alcohol bottles, baby oil, and drugs, and tidying pillows to make it appear as if nothing had occurred. He mentioned encountering a brown crystallized powder in a bathroom during one cleanup. Kaplan testified that Combs frequently threatened his job, sometimes over minor issues, such as purchasing the wrong type of water bottles. He also stated that he left his position after witnessing Combs physically abuse his then-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. Kaplan's testimony provides insight into the alleged operations within Combs' inner circle and supports the prosecution's narrative of a pattern of coercion and abuse.


to contact me:


[email protected]



source:

May 21, 2025 - Day 8 of testimony in the Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs trial | CNN

In a memorandum dated April 17, 2025, Sean "Diddy" Combs' legal team opposed a motion to quash a subpoena directed at Cassie Ventura, a key accuser in his upcoming federal trial. The defense argued that the subpoena, which sought drafts of Ventura's memoir, personal diaries, journals, and bank statements, was justified under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 17(c). They contended that these materials could contain information pertinent to Combs' defense, asserting that the requests were specific, relevant, and not oppressive. The defense emphasized that the subpoena aimed to uncover evidence that might challenge Ventura's credibility or provide context to her allegations.​

Furthermore, Combs' attorneys addressed concerns about the breadth of the subpoena, arguing that it did not constitute a "fishing expedition" but was a targeted effort to obtain materials directly related to the case. They maintained that the requested documents could reveal inconsistencies or motivations behind Ventura's claims, thereby playing a crucial role in ensuring a fair trial. The memorandum cited legal precedents supporting the admissibility of such evidence when it bears directly on the issues at hand. Ultimately, the defense sought to demonstrate that the subpoena was a legitimate tool for gathering evidence essential to Combs' defense strategy.​


to  contact me:

[email protected]



source:


gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.256.0.pdf

In a memorandum dated April 17, 2025, Sean "Diddy" Combs' legal team opposed a motion to quash a subpoena directed at Cassie Ventura, a key accuser in his upcoming federal trial. The defense argued that the subpoena, which sought drafts of Ventura's memoir, personal diaries, journals, and bank statements, was justified under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 17(c). They contended that these materials could contain information pertinent to Combs' defense, asserting that the requests were specific, relevant, and not oppressive. The defense emphasized that the subpoena aimed to uncover evidence that might challenge Ventura's credibility or provide context to her allegations.​

Furthermore, Combs' attorneys addressed concerns about the breadth of the subpoena, arguing that it did not constitute a "fishing expedition" but was a targeted effort to obtain materials directly related to the case. They maintained that the requested documents could reveal inconsistencies or motivations behind Ventura's claims, thereby playing a crucial role in ensuring a fair trial. The memorandum cited legal precedents supporting the admissibility of such evidence when it bears directly on the issues at hand. Ultimately, the defense sought to demonstrate that the subpoena was a legitimate tool for gathering evidence essential to Combs' defense strategy.​


to  contact me:

[email protected]



source:


gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.256.0.pdf