​In the case of Burrowes v. Smalls et al., filed in the Southern District of New York under Index No. 25-1618, plaintiff Kirk Burrowes brings a civil action against defendants including Janice Smalls (also known as Janice Combs), James Doe 1, Lawyer Doe 1, ABC Company 1, John and Jane Does 1-10, and ABC Corporations 1-10. The complaint alleges that the defendants engaged in actions that caused harm to the plaintiff, leading to the pursuit of legal remedies.

​Kirk Burrowes, co-founder and former president of Bad Boy Entertainment, has filed a lawsuit against Janice Combs (also known as Janice Smalls), alleging her involvement in a scheme to unlawfully seize his 25% stake in the company. The complaint asserts that in 1996, Sean "Diddy" Combs, accompanied by the company's attorney, Kenneth Meiselas, confronted Burrowes with a baseball bat, coercing him into signing over his ownership stake to Janice Combs. Burrowes claims that this act was part of a broader plan orchestrated by Janice Combs to gain full control of Bad Boy Entertainment, employing tactics of intimidation, violence, and financial deception. He further alleges that following this incident, he was blacklisted from the music industry, resulting in financial ruin and homelessness. Burrowes is seeking damages for financial losses, reinstatement of his ownership interest, and a forensic audit of the company's financial records since its inception.


to contact me:

[email protected]


source:

burrowes-v-janice-combs-1-25-cv-01618-feb-2025.pdf

​In the case of Burrowes v. Smalls et al., filed in the Southern District of New York under Index No. 25-1618, plaintiff Kirk Burrowes brings a civil action against defendants including Janice Smalls (also known as Janice Combs), James Doe 1, Lawyer Doe 1, ABC Company 1, John and Jane Does 1-10, and ABC Corporations 1-10. The complaint alleges that the defendants engaged in actions that caused harm to the plaintiff, leading to the pursuit of legal remedies.

​Kirk Burrowes, co-founder and former president of Bad Boy Entertainment, has filed a lawsuit against Janice Combs (also known as Janice Smalls), alleging her involvement in a scheme to unlawfully seize his 25% stake in the company. The complaint asserts that in 1996, Sean "Diddy" Combs, accompanied by the company's attorney, Kenneth Meiselas, confronted Burrowes with a baseball bat, coercing him into signing over his ownership stake to Janice Combs. Burrowes claims that this act was part of a broader plan orchestrated by Janice Combs to gain full control of Bad Boy Entertainment, employing tactics of intimidation, violence, and financial deception. He further alleges that following this incident, he was blacklisted from the music industry, resulting in financial ruin and homelessness. Burrowes is seeking damages for financial losses, reinstatement of his ownership interest, and a forensic audit of the company's financial records since its inception.


to contact me:

[email protected]


source:

burrowes-v-janice-combs-1-25-cv-01618-feb-2025.pdf

The Mega condenses  the lawsuits against Sean "Diddy" Combs into one powerful, comprehensive episode. From allegations of misconduct to claims of power abuse, this episode brings together the allegations made by Cindy Rueda in a single, unfiltered narrative. 



Cindy Rueda, a former personal chef for Sean "Diddy" Combs, filed a lawsuit against him in 2017, alleging sexual harassment and wrongful termination. She claimed that Diddy and his associates subjected her to inappropriate behavior, including being asked to serve meals while Diddy was either naked or engaging in sexual activities. Rueda also alleged that when she complained about the harassment, she was fired in retaliation. The lawsuit sought damages for the emotional distress and financial hardship caused by her experience while working for Combs.



to contact me:

[email protected]


source:

Rueda-v-Combs.pdf (mynewsla.com)

The videotaped deposition of Virginia Roberts Giuffre taken on January 16, 2016, in Fort Lauderdale sits at the center of the bitter legal war between Epstein survivors’ attorneys Bradley Edwards and Paul Cassell and Alan Dershowitz, who was accused by Giuffre of sexually abusing her when she was a minor trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein. In the deposition, Giuffre gives a detailed, sworn narrative of how she was recruited by Ghislaine Maxwell, groomed, trafficked to powerful men, and moved across multiple jurisdictions while still underage. She identifies Epstein’s residences, flight patterns, intermediaries, and specific encounters, placing her allegations firmly inside the broader trafficking structure rather than as isolated claims. The testimony was preserved on video precisely because her lawyers anticipated that credibility, consistency, and demeanor would become central issues in the defamation battle that followed. It also captured Giuffre under oath before years of public pressure, media narratives, and evolving legal strategies could reshape the record.

What made this deposition legally explosive was its direct role in the defamation and civil litigation between Dershowitz and the Edwards–Cassell team, after Giuffre publicly accused Dershowitz and he responded with an aggressive campaign claiming she had fabricated the allegations and falsely implicated him. The video became a critical piece of evidence in determining whether Giuffre’s statements were knowingly false or grounded in a consistent trafficking account supported by contemporaneous detail. Dershowitz’s lawyers later argued that contradictions, memory gaps, and timeline disputes undermined her credibility, while Giuffre’s side pointed to the overall coherence of her narrative and the corroborating travel and contact records emerging in parallel cases. Long before the unsealing battles and public reckonings, this deposition quietly locked in one of the earliest comprehensive sworn accounts of Epstein’s trafficking network—and the legal fault line that would later fracture the reputations of some of the most powerful lawyers and institutions tied to the case.



to  contact me:

[email protected]



source:

1257-12.pdf

The videotaped deposition of Virginia Roberts Giuffre taken on January 16, 2016, in Fort Lauderdale sits at the center of the bitter legal war between Epstein survivors’ attorneys Bradley Edwards and Paul Cassell and Alan Dershowitz, who was accused by Giuffre of sexually abusing her when she was a minor trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein. In the deposition, Giuffre gives a detailed, sworn narrative of how she was recruited by Ghislaine Maxwell, groomed, trafficked to powerful men, and moved across multiple jurisdictions while still underage. She identifies Epstein’s residences, flight patterns, intermediaries, and specific encounters, placing her allegations firmly inside the broader trafficking structure rather than as isolated claims. The testimony was preserved on video precisely because her lawyers anticipated that credibility, consistency, and demeanor would become central issues in the defamation battle that followed. It also captured Giuffre under oath before years of public pressure, media narratives, and evolving legal strategies could reshape the record.

What made this deposition legally explosive was its direct role in the defamation and civil litigation between Dershowitz and the Edwards–Cassell team, after Giuffre publicly accused Dershowitz and he responded with an aggressive campaign claiming she had fabricated the allegations and falsely implicated him. The video became a critical piece of evidence in determining whether Giuffre’s statements were knowingly false or grounded in a consistent trafficking account supported by contemporaneous detail. Dershowitz’s lawyers later argued that contradictions, memory gaps, and timeline disputes undermined her credibility, while Giuffre’s side pointed to the overall coherence of her narrative and the corroborating travel and contact records emerging in parallel cases. Long before the unsealing battles and public reckonings, this deposition quietly locked in one of the earliest comprehensive sworn accounts of Epstein’s trafficking network—and the legal fault line that would later fracture the reputations of some of the most powerful lawyers and institutions tied to the case.



to  contact me:

[email protected]



source:

1257-12.pdf

The videotaped deposition of Virginia Roberts Giuffre taken on January 16, 2016, in Fort Lauderdale sits at the center of the bitter legal war between Epstein survivors’ attorneys Bradley Edwards and Paul Cassell and Alan Dershowitz, who was accused by Giuffre of sexually abusing her when she was a minor trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein. In the deposition, Giuffre gives a detailed, sworn narrative of how she was recruited by Ghislaine Maxwell, groomed, trafficked to powerful men, and moved across multiple jurisdictions while still underage. She identifies Epstein’s residences, flight patterns, intermediaries, and specific encounters, placing her allegations firmly inside the broader trafficking structure rather than as isolated claims. The testimony was preserved on video precisely because her lawyers anticipated that credibility, consistency, and demeanor would become central issues in the defamation battle that followed. It also captured Giuffre under oath before years of public pressure, media narratives, and evolving legal strategies could reshape the record.

What made this deposition legally explosive was its direct role in the defamation and civil litigation between Dershowitz and the Edwards–Cassell team, after Giuffre publicly accused Dershowitz and he responded with an aggressive campaign claiming she had fabricated the allegations and falsely implicated him. The video became a critical piece of evidence in determining whether Giuffre’s statements were knowingly false or grounded in a consistent trafficking account supported by contemporaneous detail. Dershowitz’s lawyers later argued that contradictions, memory gaps, and timeline disputes undermined her credibility, while Giuffre’s side pointed to the overall coherence of her narrative and the corroborating travel and contact records emerging in parallel cases. Long before the unsealing battles and public reckonings, this deposition quietly locked in one of the earliest comprehensive sworn accounts of Epstein’s trafficking network—and the legal fault line that would later fracture the reputations of some of the most powerful lawyers and institutions tied to the case.



to  contact me:

[email protected]



source:

1257-12.pdf

The situation Diddy finds himself in is not getting better anytime soon, especially considering the massive amount of evidence that was collected by the Feds during the raid on Diddy's properties.   

According to sources, not only was the CCTV system tapped into, the hard drive from multiple computers was seized as well as documents that were removed from a safe (s). 

In this episode, we get an update on the latest developments and breakdown where things might go from here.

(commercial at 16:04)

to contact me:

[email protected]


sourcce:

Diddy's LA home surveillance footage SEIZED by federal agents amid sex trafficking probe - as lawsuit alleges rapper 'paid Instagram model Jade Ramey stipend for sex work' |

During the trial's second week, jurors heard from a dozen new witnesses who painted a picture of Combs as both violent and controlling. Notably, former Danity Kane singer Dawn Richard testified that she witnessed Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Casandra “Cassie” Ventura, including an incident at a restaurant in West Hollywood where he allegedly punched her in the stomach—a claim she said occurred in the presence of celebrities like Usher and Ne‑Yo.   Richard also recounted a disturbing moment when Combs threatened her life after seeing him beat Ventura, as well as his involvement in orchestrating intimidation tactics.


That same week, rapper Kid Cudi took the stand and testified about a 2011 incident in which Combs allegedly broke into his home, leading to the eventual burning of Cudi’s Porsche—claims that highlighted Combs’s alleged pattern of threatening behavior.    Meanwhile, other career insiders, including former assistants and hotel staff, described the infamous "freak–off" parties: drug‑fueled gatherings stocked with lubricant, baby oil, and escorts, as orchestrated by Combs and supported by his team.  


to contact me:

[email protected]

During the trial's second week, jurors heard from a dozen new witnesses who painted a picture of Combs as both violent and controlling. Notably, former Danity Kane singer Dawn Richard testified that she witnessed Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Casandra “Cassie” Ventura, including an incident at a restaurant in West Hollywood where he allegedly punched her in the stomach—a claim she said occurred in the presence of celebrities like Usher and Ne‑Yo.   Richard also recounted a disturbing moment when Combs threatened her life after seeing him beat Ventura, as well as his involvement in orchestrating intimidation tactics.


That same week, rapper Kid Cudi took the stand and testified about a 2011 incident in which Combs allegedly broke into his home, leading to the eventual burning of Cudi’s Porsche—claims that highlighted Combs’s alleged pattern of threatening behavior.    Meanwhile, other career insiders, including former assistants and hotel staff, described the infamous "freak–off" parties: drug‑fueled gatherings stocked with lubricant, baby oil, and escorts, as orchestrated by Combs and supported by his team.  


to contact me:

[email protected]

The first week of Sean "Diddy" Combs' federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial in New York featured emotionally charged testimony from his former partner, singer Cassie Ventura. Over four days, Ventura detailed an 11-year relationship marked by coercion, physical abuse, and manipulation. She described being forced into drug-fueled "freak-offs"—group sex encounters with paid escorts—often filmed and allegedly used by Combs for blackmail. A 2016 hotel surveillance video showing Combs assaulting Ventura was presented as evidence. Ventura also recounted an incident where Combs allegedly threatened to suspend someone over a balcony, illustrating a pattern of intimidation and control.

The defense acknowledged Combs' history of violence and substance abuse but argued that these actions did not constitute sex trafficking. They portrayed the events as part of a consensual lifestyle, aiming to separate personal misconduct from criminal enterprise. Additional testimony from singer Dawn Richard supported Ventura's claims, recalling a 2009 incident where Combs allegedly assaulted Ventura over a domestic dispute. The prosecution contends that Combs operated a criminal network involving staff who facilitated the alleged abuses. The trial, expected to last several more weeks, continues to draw significant public attention.


to contact me:


[email protected]