The Downfall Of Diddy: The Dawn Richard And Her Diddy Allegations (Part 7) (9/28/24)

Dawn Richard filed a lawsuit against Sean "Diddy" Combs, alleging years of physical, verbal, and sexual abuse during her time with Danity Kane and later as part of Diddy-Dirty Money. The suit claims that Combs forced extreme working conditions, deprived her of basic needs like food and sleep, and subjected her to sexual exploitation. Richard described incidents of violence, including witnessing abusive behavior toward other women and being trapped at parties where drugs and underage girls were involved. She also alleges financial manipulation and threats of violence.(commercial at 10:16)to contact me:[email protected]:Dawn Richard v. Sean Diddy Combs - DocumentCloudBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Dawn Richard filed a lawsuit against Sean "Diddy" Combs, alleging years of physical, verbal, and sexual abuse during her time with Danity Kane and later as part of Diddy-Dirty Money. The suit claims that Combs forced extreme working conditions, deprived her of basic needs like food and sleep, and subjected her to sexual exploitation. Richard described incidents of violence, including witnessing abusive behavior toward other women and being trapped at parties where drugs and underage girls were involved. She also alleges financial manipulation and threats of violence.(commercial at 8:03)to contact me:[email protected]:Dawn Richard v. Sean Diddy Combs - DocumentCloudBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Bid rigging and price fixing are two insidious corporate crimes where companies conspire to manipulate competition and inflate prices, robbing governments, businesses, and consumers of billions. In bid rigging, conspirators secretly agree on who will win contracts, using tactics like cover bidding, bid rotation, and subcontracting to maintain the illusion of competition. Price fixing involves competitors agreeing to set artificially high prices for products or services, removing natural market forces. These practices are difficult to detect and prove, often uncovered by whistleblowers who risk their careers to expose the schemes. Despite legal battles and harsh penalties, bid rigging and price fixing remain prevalent, evolving with globalization and modern technology, leaving the public to pay the hidden costs.(commercial at 9:46)to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) is a United States federal law enacted in 1970 that provides for extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization.The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) is a United States federal law enacted in 1970 that provides for extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization.Under RICO, individuals and organizations can be charged with racketeering if they are found to have engaged in a pattern of illegal activity, such as bribery, extortion, fraud, or trafficking. A "pattern of racketeering activity" requires at least two acts of racketeering within a ten-year period.To take down a human trafficking network using RICO, law enforcement agencies would typically investigate the network's operations, identify key individuals involved, gather evidence of their illegal activities, and establish a pattern of racketeering. This evidence could include financial transactions, communications, witness testimony, and physical evidence linking the individuals to the trafficking activities.Once the evidence is compiled, prosecutors can bring RICO charges against the leaders and members of the trafficking network. If convicted, they could face significant criminal penalties, including imprisonment and forfeiture of assets.Additionally, RICO allows victims of the trafficking network to file civil lawsuits against the perpetrators, seeking damages for the harm they have suffered. This can provide victims with a means of seeking justice and compensation for their ordeal.In this episode we get some confirmation that there are witnesses cooperating with the federal government as far as their RICO investigation goes, and we also get more evidence that the timeline of the Lil Rod suit and the eventual raid was not coincidence, but in fact, connected.  We also get a look at the list of allegations against Puffy over the past few years.  (commercial at 10:57)to contact me:[email protected]:Sean 'Diddy' Combs' alleged victims 'talking a lot,' feds claim 'concrete, detailed, explicit allegations of sex trafficking' (nypost.com)Diddy raided: Here are all the allegations made against Sean Combs | The IndependentBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The Plaintiff's (McKinney) lawsuit against the Defendants is brought under the New York City Gender Motivated Violence Act (GMVA), specifically citing sections 8-901 and following of the New York City Administrative Code. This legislation provides a legal avenue for victims of gender-motivated violence to seek redress for the significant and lasting injuries they have endured. In this case, the Plaintiff asserts that she has suffered substantial and lifelong harm as a result of being drugged and sexually assaulted by the Defendants.Under the GMVA, victims of gender-motivated violence can pursue civil action for damages, including compensation for physical and emotional injuries, pain and suffering, and other related losses. The Plaintiff's claim highlights the severity and enduring impact of the alleged assault, seeking justice and reparation for the trauma and injuries sustained.The NYC Gender Motivated Violence Act (GMVA), codified in N.Y.C. Administrative Code §§ 8-901 et seq., is a law enacted by New York City to address and provide legal remedies for gender-motivated violence. Here are some key points about the Act:Purpose: The GMVA aims to provide a civil remedy for individuals who are victims of gender-motivated violence. This type of violence is defined as a crime of violence committed because of gender or on the basis of gender.Definitions:Crime of Violence: The Act defines a "crime of violence" as any act or series of acts that would constitute a misdemeanor or felony under the penal law of New York State.Gender-Motivated: A crime is considered "gender-motivated" if it is committed, at least in part, because of the victim’s gender or on the basis of gender.Civil Action:Victims of gender-motivated violence have the right to file a civil lawsuit against the perpetrator.The Act allows victims to seek compensatory and punitive damages, as well as attorney's fees and costs.Statute of Limitations:There is a seven-year statute of limitations for filing a civil action under the GMVA, which begins from the date of the last act of gender-motivated violence.Burden of Proof:In a civil action under the GMVA, the plaintiff must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the violence was gender-motivated.Relation to Other Laws:The GMVA is intended to complement existing laws and does not preclude victims from seeking other legal remedies available under state or federal law.(commercial at 8:11)to contact me:[email protected]:mckinney-v-combs-complaint_1716382228.pdf (documentcloud.org)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The Plaintiff's (McKinney) lawsuit against the Defendants is brought under the New York City Gender Motivated Violence Act (GMVA), specifically citing sections 8-901 and following of the New York City Administrative Code. This legislation provides a legal avenue for victims of gender-motivated violence to seek redress for the significant and lasting injuries they have endured. In this case, the Plaintiff asserts that she has suffered substantial and lifelong harm as a result of being drugged and sexually assaulted by the Defendants.Under the GMVA, victims of gender-motivated violence can pursue civil action for damages, including compensation for physical and emotional injuries, pain and suffering, and other related losses. The Plaintiff's claim highlights the severity and enduring impact of the alleged assault, seeking justice and reparation for the trauma and injuries sustained.The NYC Gender Motivated Violence Act (GMVA), codified in N.Y.C. Administrative Code §§ 8-901 et seq., is a law enacted by New York City to address and provide legal remedies for gender-motivated violence. Here are some key points about the Act:Purpose: The GMVA aims to provide a civil remedy for individuals who are victims of gender-motivated violence. This type of violence is defined as a crime of violence committed because of gender or on the basis of gender.Definitions:Crime of Violence: The Act defines a "crime of violence" as any act or series of acts that would constitute a misdemeanor or felony under the penal law of New York State.Gender-Motivated: A crime is considered "gender-motivated" if it is committed, at least in part, because of the victim’s gender or on the basis of gender.Civil Action:Victims of gender-motivated violence have the right to file a civil lawsuit against the perpetrator.The Act allows victims to seek compensatory and punitive damages, as well as attorney's fees and costs.Statute of Limitations:There is a seven-year statute of limitations for filing a civil action under the GMVA, which begins from the date of the last act of gender-motivated violence.Burden of Proof:In a civil action under the GMVA, the plaintiff must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the violence was gender-motivated.Relation to Other Laws:The GMVA is intended to complement existing laws and does not preclude victims from seeking other legal remedies available under state or federal law.(commercial at 8:11)to contact me:[email protected]:mckinney-v-combs-complaint_1716382228.pdf (documentcloud.org)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In the context of a court filing, a declaration is a written statement made under oath or penalty of perjury by a person who has personal knowledge of the facts stated in the document. Declarations are commonly used in legal proceedings to present evidence or provide information relevant to a case.They are typically submitted to the court by parties involved in the case or by witnesses, and they serve as a means of presenting facts or arguments to support or oppose various legal claims. Declarations are often used when a witness is unavailable to testify in person or when it is impractical for them to do so. They are subject to the same standards of truthfulness and accuracy as testimony given in court.In this episode, we take a look at the declaration of Donald Zakarin in support of UMG and Diddy.  (commercial at 14:21)to contact me:[email protected] (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In the context of a court filing, a declaration is a written statement made under oath or penalty of perjury by a person who has personal knowledge of the facts stated in the document. Declarations are commonly used in legal proceedings to present evidence or provide information relevant to a case.They are typically submitted to the court by parties involved in the case or by witnesses, and they serve as a means of presenting facts or arguments to support or oppose various legal claims. Declarations are often used when a witness is unavailable to testify in person or when it is impractical for them to do so. They are subject to the same standards of truthfulness and accuracy as testimony given in court.In this episode, we take a look at the declaration of Donald Zakarin in support of UMG and Diddy.  (commercial at 8:37)to contact me:[email protected] (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In the context of a court filing, a declaration is a written statement made under oath or penalty of perjury by a person who has personal knowledge of the facts stated in the document. Declarations are commonly used in legal proceedings to present evidence or provide information relevant to a case.They are typically submitted to the court by parties involved in the case or by witnesses, and they serve as a means of presenting facts or arguments to support or oppose various legal claims. Declarations are often used when a witness is unavailable to testify in person or when it is impractical for them to do so. They are subject to the same standards of truthfulness and accuracy as testimony given in court.In this episode, we take a look at the declaration of Donald Zakarin in support of UMG and Diddy.  (commercial at 8:03)to contact me:[email protected] (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Illegal bookmaking operates in the shadows, offering bettors credit, anonymity, and better odds than legal sportsbooks, but at the risk of brutal enforcement by organized crime when debts go unpaid. Despite the rise of legalized sports betting, underground bookies remain popular due to the personal relationships they build with clients and the lure of untaxed, unregulated profits. As the industry evolves, many operations have moved online, using offshore servers and cryptocurrencies to avoid detection. High-profile busts, like the 2024 international sting that dismantled a massive betting ring, show that law enforcement continues to fight this illegal trade, but its adaptability ensures its survival.(commercial at 9:46)to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.