Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
Share The Moscow Murders and More
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Or
The Moscow Murders and More
The Moscow Murders and More episodes
- Diddy Trial: Jane Doe (Victim 2) Continues Her Cross Examination On Day 21 (Part 2) (6/12/25)On June 11, the trial entered its fifth day of testimony from the witness known as “Jane,” Combs’s former girlfriend and key prosecution witness. She recounted disturbing details about the coercive dynamics of their relationship between 2021 and 2024, including multiday “hotel nights”—sex parties involving male escorts that witnessed her using Rhino erection pills, prepping matching outfits for participants, and being forced into prolonged foreplay that she described as “really not so fun”. Under direct examination, she detailed how Combs allegedly coerced her into unprotected sex with porn stars and escorts, and physically assaulted her during these “freak-offs”
During cross-examination by defense attorney Teny Geragos, Jane was compelled to read aloud dozens of explicit text messages she had sent to Combs—expressions of love, gratitude, and desire—including passages like “I never had a man take care of me like you do”—a strategy aimed at undermining her credibility and suggesting consent. This emotionally charged moment culminated in Jane breaking down and crying on the stand, The defense also highlighted luxury gifts—such as a $20,000 business investment, monthly rent, designer bags, and a Van Cleef necklace—to argue she benefited materially from the relationship and wasn’t entirely coerced.
to contact me:
[email protected]
source:
June 11, 2025 - Day 21 of testimony in the Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs trial | CNN
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.16 min - Diddy Trial: Jane Doe (Victim 2) Continues Her Cross Examination On Day 21 (Part 1) (6/12/25)On June 11, the trial entered its fifth day of testimony from the witness known as “Jane,” Combs’s former girlfriend and key prosecution witness. She recounted disturbing details about the coercive dynamics of their relationship between 2021 and 2024, including multiday “hotel nights”—sex parties involving male escorts that witnessed her using Rhino erection pills, prepping matching outfits for participants, and being forced into prolonged foreplay that she described as “really not so fun”. Under direct examination, she detailed how Combs allegedly coerced her into unprotected sex with porn stars and escorts, and physically assaulted her during these “freak-offs”
During cross-examination by defense attorney Teny Geragos, Jane was compelled to read aloud dozens of explicit text messages she had sent to Combs—expressions of love, gratitude, and desire—including passages like “I never had a man take care of me like you do”—a strategy aimed at undermining her credibility and suggesting consent. This emotionally charged moment culminated in Jane breaking down and crying on the stand, The defense also highlighted luxury gifts—such as a $20,000 business investment, monthly rent, designer bags, and a Van Cleef necklace—to argue she benefited materially from the relationship and wasn’t entirely coerced.
to contact me:
[email protected]
source:
June 11, 2025 - Day 21 of testimony in the Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs trial | CNN
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.17 min - Diddy Blasts The Feds Request To Put Dr. Dawn Hughes Back On The Stand (Part 2) (6/12/25)In this letter to Judge Subramanian in United States v. Combs, the defense opposes the government’s request to recall expert witness Dr. Dawn Hughes for a second appearance during its case-in-chief. The defense argues that it relied on the Court’s original framework—reinforced in both the opening jury instructions and pretrial rulings—that each witness would testify only once. They further contend that recalling Dr. Hughes after her cross-examination would be unfair and prejudicial, as the defense structured its questioning with the understanding that it would be their sole opportunity to challenge her testimony during the government’s presentation of its case.
The letter also raises concern about the signal it would send to the jury, suggesting that the Court is endorsing the government’s effort to rehabilitate a witness whose methodology and credibility were already subjected to extensive scrutiny. The defense emphasizes that it cannot repeat its prior cross-examination, nor should it be expected to. They argue that such a move is highly irregular and risks altering the fairness of the proceedings. The letter urges the Court to deny the government’s request and preserve the integrity of its prior rulings regarding the scope and structure of Dr. Hughes’s testimony.
to contact me:
[email protected]
source:
gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.393.0.pdf
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.15 min - Diddy Blasts The Feds Request To Put Dr. Dawn Hughes Back On The Stand (Part 1) (6/11/25)In this letter to Judge Subramanian in United States v. Combs, the defense opposes the government’s request to recall expert witness Dr. Dawn Hughes for a second appearance during its case-in-chief. The defense argues that it relied on the Court’s original framework—reinforced in both the opening jury instructions and pretrial rulings—that each witness would testify only once. They further contend that recalling Dr. Hughes after her cross-examination would be unfair and prejudicial, as the defense structured its questioning with the understanding that it would be their sole opportunity to challenge her testimony during the government’s presentation of its case.
The letter also raises concern about the signal it would send to the jury, suggesting that the Court is endorsing the government’s effort to rehabilitate a witness whose methodology and credibility were already subjected to extensive scrutiny. The defense emphasizes that it cannot repeat its prior cross-examination, nor should it be expected to. They argue that such a move is highly irregular and risks altering the fairness of the proceedings. The letter urges the Court to deny the government’s request and preserve the integrity of its prior rulings regarding the scope and structure of Dr. Hughes’s testimony.
to contact me:
[email protected]
source:
gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.393.0.pdf
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.13 min - Mega Edition: The Feds Respond To Diddy's Motion For Pre Trial Release (6/11/25)Sean Combs, the appellant in United States v. Combs, case number 24-CR-542 (AS), has filed a motion for pretrial release from federal custody. The motion argues that Combs does not pose a flight risk, citing his deep ties to the community, longstanding residency in the United States, and significant business investments. Combs' defense emphasizes that he is fully prepared to comply with any conditions of release, including electronic monitoring or home confinement, to ensure his presence at trial.
The motion also contends that Combs’ continued detention negatively impacts his ability to prepare an adequate defense, citing limited access to legal counsel and case materials while in custody. The defense argues that pretrial release is essential to ensure a fair trial, noting that Combs has no history of failing to appear in court and that the charges against him, while serious, do not warrant indefinite pretrial incarceration. The decision on this motion remains pending before the appellate court.
to contact me:
[email protected]
source:
gov.uscourts.ca2.234342fd-2384-426f-a4a4-aeca250ee12d.16.1_2.pdf
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.36 min - Mega Edition: Diddy And The Motion For Pre Trial Release (6/12/25)Sean Combs, the appellant in United States v. Combs, case number 24-CR-542 (AS), has filed a motion for pretrial release from federal custody. The motion argues that Combs does not pose a flight risk, citing his deep ties to the community, longstanding residency in the United States, and significant business investments. Combs' defense emphasizes that he is fully prepared to comply with any conditions of release, including electronic monitoring or home confinement, to ensure his presence at trial.
The motion also contends that Combs’ continued detention negatively impacts his ability to prepare an adequate defense, citing limited access to legal counsel and case materials while in custody. The defense argues that pretrial release is essential to ensure a fair trial, noting that Combs has no history of failing to appear in court and that the charges against him, while serious, do not warrant indefinite pretrial incarceration. The decision on this motion remains pending before the appellate court.
to contact me:
[email protected]
source:
gov.uscourts.ca2.234342fd-2384-426f-a4a4-aeca250ee12d.16.1_2.pdf
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.37 min - Judge Hippler's Order On The Make And Model Of Suspects CarIn a recent ruling, Judge Steven Hippler denied Bryan Kohberger's motion to exclude expert testimony identifying a white sedan seen near the crime scene as a 2014–2016 Hyundai Elantra. The defense argued that linking various surveillance videos to the same vehicle was speculative and could prejudice the jury. However, the judge determined that law enforcement's conclusions were based on logical inferences drawn from multiple surveillance sources, including footage from 1112 King Road and 1125 Ridge Road. These videos captured a white sedan making several passes near the crime scene shortly before the murders, supporting the identification of the vehicle's make and model.
Judge Hippler emphasized that expert opinions derived from such evidence are permissible and do not infringe upon the jury's role in determining guilt. He noted that the investigators' analysis, based on their training and experience, provided a reasonable basis for their conclusions. As a result, the prosecution is allowed to present expert testimony regarding the vehicle's identification during the trial, while the jury will ultimately assess the credibility and significance of this evidence.
to contact me:
[email protected]
source:
041825+Order+on+Defendants+Motion+in+Limine+RE+Make+and+Model+of+Suspect+Vehicle.pdf
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.9 min - Judge Hippler's Order Memorializing The Limine Oral Rulings (Part 3)This order memorializes the oral rulings made by Judge John C. Judge on April 17, 2025, in the Bryan Kohberger case regarding several motions in limine. The court granted the prosecution's request to preclude defense counsel from mentioning or suggesting that third parties—specifically “other men” or unidentified persons—are responsible for the crimes unless the defense can provide a proper evidentiary foundation outside the presence of the jury. This aims to prevent speculation or unsupported accusations from being introduced at trial. Additionally, the judge ruled that the defense may not use characterizations like “rush to judgment” or claims of a biased investigation unless such arguments are supported by specific, admissible evidence.
The court also ruled in favor of the prosecution’s request to limit or exclude any irrelevant or inflammatory evidence, including any references to the victims’ personal histories, sexual activity, or alleged drug use, unless it directly relates to the defense's theory of the case and passes legal scrutiny. Similarly, the judge limited the introduction of expert opinions unless those experts have been properly disclosed and vetted. These rulings were intended to ensure a fair trial, maintain focus on relevant issues, and reduce the potential for prejudicial arguments that could mislead or confuse the jury.
to contact me:
[email protected]
source:
041825+Order+Memorializing+Oral+Rulings+on+Motions+in+Limine.pdf
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.14 min - Judge Hippler's Order Memorializing The Limine Oral Rulings (Part 2)This order memorializes the oral rulings made by Judge John C. Judge on April 17, 2025, in the Bryan Kohberger case regarding several motions in limine. The court granted the prosecution's request to preclude defense counsel from mentioning or suggesting that third parties—specifically “other men” or unidentified persons—are responsible for the crimes unless the defense can provide a proper evidentiary foundation outside the presence of the jury. This aims to prevent speculation or unsupported accusations from being introduced at trial. Additionally, the judge ruled that the defense may not use characterizations like “rush to judgment” or claims of a biased investigation unless such arguments are supported by specific, admissible evidence.
The court also ruled in favor of the prosecution’s request to limit or exclude any irrelevant or inflammatory evidence, including any references to the victims’ personal histories, sexual activity, or alleged drug use, unless it directly relates to the defense's theory of the case and passes legal scrutiny. Similarly, the judge limited the introduction of expert opinions unless those experts have been properly disclosed and vetted. These rulings were intended to ensure a fair trial, maintain focus on relevant issues, and reduce the potential for prejudicial arguments that could mislead or confuse the jury.
to contact me:
[email protected]
source:
041825+Order+Memorializing+Oral+Rulings+on+Motions+in+Limine.pdf
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.11 min - Judge Hippler's Order Memorializing The Limine Oral Rulings (Part 1)This order memorializes the oral rulings made by Judge John C. Judge on April 17, 2025, in the Bryan Kohberger case regarding several motions in limine. The court granted the prosecution's request to preclude defense counsel from mentioning or suggesting that third parties—specifically “other men” or unidentified persons—are responsible for the crimes unless the defense can provide a proper evidentiary foundation outside the presence of the jury. This aims to prevent speculation or unsupported accusations from being introduced at trial. Additionally, the judge ruled that the defense may not use characterizations like “rush to judgment” or claims of a biased investigation unless such arguments are supported by specific, admissible evidence.
The court also ruled in favor of the prosecution’s request to limit or exclude any irrelevant or inflammatory evidence, including any references to the victims’ personal histories, sexual activity, or alleged drug use, unless it directly relates to the defense's theory of the case and passes legal scrutiny. Similarly, the judge limited the introduction of expert opinions unless those experts have been properly disclosed and vetted. These rulings were intended to ensure a fair trial, maintain focus on relevant issues, and reduce the potential for prejudicial arguments that could mislead or confuse the jury.
to contact me:
[email protected]
source:
041825+Order+Memorializing+Oral+Rulings+on+Motions+in+Limine.pdf
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.12 min
About The Moscow Murders and More
From the publisher's feed
Moscow is a city located in northern Idaho, United States, with a population of approximately 25,000 people. It is the largest city and the county seat of Latah County. The city is situated in the…
Palouse region, known for its fertile soil and rolling hills, and is surrounded by wheat fields, forests, and mountains.Moscow is home to the University of Idaho, which is the state's flagship institution and a major research university. The university is a significant contributor to the local economy, and many businesses in the city are directly or indirectly tied to the university.
The city also has a thriving arts and culture scene, with several galleries, museums, and performance venues.In terms of recreation, Moscow has several parks and outdoor recreation areas, including the Latah Trail, the Moscow Mountain Trail System, and the Palouse Divide Nordic Ski Area. The city also hosts several annual events, including the Moscow Farmers Market, the Lionel Hampton Jazz Festival, and the Renaissance Fair.
However, things would change forever after Xana Kernodle, Ethan Chapin, Madison Mogen and Kaylee Goncalves were murdered in the early morning hours of November 13th, 2022.
What followed in the wake of the murders captivated not only the nation but the whole world as the authorities scrambled to find the person responsible for the heinous crime.
This podcast will document the Murders In Moscow from right after the murders were committed all the way through the real time evolution of the trial of the person that the authorities say is responsible, Bryan Kohberger.
We will also cover other stories that are based in the world of true crime that are currently in the courts or that are headed that way.
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.
The city also has a thriving arts and culture scene, with several galleries, museums, and performance venues.In terms of recreation, Moscow has several parks and outdoor recreation areas, including the Latah Trail, the Moscow Mountain Trail System, and the Palouse Divide Nordic Ski Area. The city also hosts several annual events, including the Moscow Farmers Market, the Lionel Hampton Jazz Festival, and the Renaissance Fair.
However, things would change forever after Xana Kernodle, Ethan Chapin, Madison Mogen and Kaylee Goncalves were murdered in the early morning hours of November 13th, 2022.
What followed in the wake of the murders captivated not only the nation but the whole world as the authorities scrambled to find the person responsible for the heinous crime.
This podcast will document the Murders In Moscow from right after the murders were committed all the way through the real time evolution of the trial of the person that the authorities say is responsible, Bryan Kohberger.
We will also cover other stories that are based in the world of true crime that are currently in the courts or that are headed that way.
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.
More shows like The Moscow Murders and More
20/20
11,969 Listeners
48 Hours
10,681 Listeners
Crime Stories with Nancy Grace
8,518 Listeners
The Daily
111,873 Listeners
Crime Junkie
369,469 Listeners
Police Off The Cuff/Real Crime Stories
858 Listeners
Dateline NBC
46,890 Listeners
Hidden True Crime
2,438 Listeners
Hidden Killers With Tony Brueski | True Crime News & Commentary
904 Listeners
On The Case
6 Listeners
Drop Dead Serious With Ashleigh Banfield
823 Listeners