Celebrities Are Allegedly Lawyering Up In Hopes Of Avoiding Testifying At Diddy's Trial (5/29/25)

In this memorandum, the plaintiff in the federal case against Sean Combs and others seeks court approval to serve defendants Cuba Gooding Jr. and Justin Dior Combs via publication. The plaintiff argues that despite extensive efforts—including personal service attempts at multiple verified addresses, formal and informal waiver requests, professional skip-trace investigations, physical surveillance, and over $1,000 in service-related expenses—both defendants have deliberately evaded service. The plaintiff contends that traditional methods have been exhausted and that service by publication in widely circulated newspapers like the New York Times and Los Angeles Times is now necessary to proceed with the case.The motion emphasizes that both defendants are aware of the lawsuit: Mr. Gooding has discussed it publicly, and Mr. Combs' father, Sean Combs, has been served and is actively litigating. The plaintiff asserts that the defendants' avoidance tactics are intentional strategies to frustrate the judicial process and avoid accountability in a serious federal lawsuit alleging sexual abuse, trafficking, and related claims. Citing precedents where courts have allowed alternate service methods for high-profile individuals residing in gated communities, the plaintiff urges the court to authorize service by publication to ensure the case can move forward without further delay.to contact me:[email protected]:gov.uscourts.nysd.616406.91.2.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Gene Deal is a former bodyguard who worked closely with Sean "Diddy" Combs during the 1990s, providing personal security and gaining intimate knowledge of the music mogul's professional and personal life. Over the years, Deal has become a vocal critic of Diddy, sharing his experiences and observations through various interviews and media appearances. He has discussed his departure from Diddy's employ, citing discomfort with certain situations and a desire to distance himself from activities he found troubling.In recent times, Deal has made several serious allegations against Diddy. He has claimed that Diddy was transformed into a "monster" by the music industry, suggesting that the pressures and influences within the industry led to negative behavioral changes.Deal has also expressed his willingness to testify against Diddy in ongoing investigations, indicating his readiness to share his firsthand experiences to support allegations of misconduct.Additionally, he has provided alternative accounts of historical events, such as asserting that The Notorious B.I.G.'s death was not the result of a drive-by shooting, challenging the widely accepted narrative.In this episode, we take a dive into some of Gene Deal's most shocking statements.(commercial at 8:32)to contact me:[email protected]'s Former Bodyguard Gene Deal's Most Shocking ClaimsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Gene Deal is a former bodyguard who worked closely with Sean "Diddy" Combs during the 1990s, providing personal security and gaining intimate knowledge of the music mogul's professional and personal life. Over the years, Deal has become a vocal critic of Diddy, sharing his experiences and observations through various interviews and media appearances. He has discussed his departure from Diddy's employ, citing discomfort with certain situations and a desire to distance himself from activities he found troubling.In recent times, Deal has made several serious allegations against Diddy. He has claimed that Diddy was transformed into a "monster" by the music industry, suggesting that the pressures and influences within the industry led to negative behavioral changes.Deal has also expressed his willingness to testify against Diddy in ongoing investigations, indicating his readiness to share his firsthand experiences to support allegations of misconduct.Additionally, he has provided alternative accounts of historical events, such as asserting that The Notorious B.I.G.'s death was not the result of a drive-by shooting, challenging the widely accepted narrative.In this episode, we take a dive into some of Gene Deal's most shocking statements.(commercial at 8:32)to contact me:[email protected]'s Former Bodyguard Gene Deal's Most Shocking ClaimsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

On the morning of Day 13 of Sean "Diddy" Combs's federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial, his former assistant, testifying under the pseudonym "Mia," continued her testimony detailing alleged abuse and manipulation by Combs. She recounted a 2015 incident where, while in South Africa with Combs's then-girlfriend Cassie Ventura, Combs and his chief of staff bombarded her with messages and calls after Ventura discovered his infidelity and refused contact. Mia testified that Combs, appearing irrational and slurring, threatened to ruin her career and pressured her to intervene. She also described how Combs used past assaults to blackmail her and threatened to sabotage her ABC comedy project, which was never aired .Additionally, Mia described the volatile environment while working for Combs over nine years, noting both psychological manipulation and physical abuse, including being thrown against walls and sexually assaulted. She testified that she felt trapped and feared for her safety, stating, "I couldn't tell him 'no' about anything," and that Combs could ruin her future if she left or was fired . Mia's testimony is a key component in the prosecution's effort to establish a pattern of coercion and abuse by Combs.to contact me:[email protected]:(1) Live updates: Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs trial continues with more ‘Mia’ testimony | CNNBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Gene Deal, Sean "Diddy" Combs's former bodyguard, alleged in a recent interview that Combs paid his ex-girlfriend Gina Huynh approximately $2 million, along with providing her housing and educational support, to dissuade her from testifying in his federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial. Deal claimed that Huynh, believed to be "Victim 3" in the indictment, became a "hostile witness" after accepting these benefits, leading to her disappearance from the witness list. Despite being subpoenaed, prosecutors reportedly struggled to locate her, raising concerns about witness tampering and the integrity of the judicial process.Meanwhile...In a recent prison interview, Marion "Suge" Knight, the incarcerated former CEO of Death Row Records, publicly urged his longtime rival Sean "Diddy" Combs to testify in his ongoing federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial. Knight suggested that by taking the stand, Combs could "humanize his old self" and potentially sway the jury's perception in his favor. He emphasized that Combs's silence might be interpreted as fear, stating, "If they keep him sitting down, it's like he's scared to face the music." Knight encouraged Combs to "tell his truth," implying that honesty and personal accountability could be pivotal in the trial's outcome.to contact me:[email protected]:'Brainwashed': Diddy's Former Bodyguard Says Gina Huynh Was Paid Millions To Stay SilentSuge Knight tells Diddy to take the stand in effort to ‘humanize’ himself | The IndependentBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

On Day 12 of Sean "Diddy" Combs's federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial, former assistant "Mia" delivered emotional testimony detailing alleged abuse during her employment from 2009 to 2017. She recounted multiple instances of sexual assault, including an alleged rape at Combs's Los Angeles home in 2010. Mia described a volatile work environment where Combs subjected her to physical violence, such as throwing her into a pool and slamming a door on her arm. She testified that she felt unable to refuse his demands, fearing retaliation and job loss. Mia also alleged that Combs controlled her movements, preventing her from leaving his properties without permission. Her testimony corroborated previous accounts by Combs's ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura, highlighting a pattern of abuse and control.Mia further testified about witnessing Combs's violent behavior toward Ventura, including a 2013 incident where he allegedly assaulted Ventura, resulting in a severe head injury. She described a toxic work environment characterized by extreme demands and fear of retribution. Mia also recounted an event at a party hosted by Prince, where Combs allegedly attacked Ventura, prompting intervention from Prince's security. Despite the abuse, Mia stated that she believed Combs operated above the law, which contributed to her reluctance to report the incidents.to contact me:[email protected]'s 'Freak-Off' hotel rooms were covered in menstrual blood, candle wax and broken glass, ex-assistant claimsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

On the afternoon of Day 12 in Sean "Diddy" Combs's federal trial, former assistant "Mia" continued her testimony, detailing the abuse she allegedly endured during her employment from 2009 to 2017. She recounted an incident where Combs threw a bowl of spaghetti at her after she attempted to retreat to her room, leading her to flee barefoot and hide in a bush before escaping to a hotel. Mia described the work environment as toxic, stating that Combs's volatile behavior included throwing objects at her and subjecting her to extreme demands, such as working for days without sleep. She also testified about being coerced into sexual acts, including an alleged rape at his Los Angeles home, and expressed fear of retaliation if she refused his advances. Mia's testimony painted a picture of a controlling and abusive relationship, where she felt unable to say no to Combs due to fear of losing her job and future prospects.Mia further testified about witnessing Combs's violent behavior towards his then-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. She described an incident where Ventura ran into her room screaming, "You gotta help me, he's going to kill me," and recounted seeing Ventura with visible injuries, including black eyes and bruises. Mia also alleged that a fellow assistant who reported Combs's abuse of Ventura to the chief of staff was subsequently fired, highlighting a culture of silence and fear within Combs's inner circle. Despite the abuse, Mia stated that she believed Combs operated above the law, which contributed to her reluctance to report the incidents. Her testimony is expected to continue, providing further insight into the alleged pattern of abuse and control exerted by Combs over his employees and partners.to contact me:[email protected]:May 29, 2025 - Day 12 of testimony in the Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs trial | CNNBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In a letter to Judge Arun Subramanian in the case of United States v. Combs, the government responded to the defense’s anticipated objections regarding the testimony of Scott Mescudi, known publicly as Kid Cudi. The defense seeks to exclude several portions of Mescudi’s testimony, including his account of a conversation with Capricorn Clark during her alleged kidnapping, which occurred concurrently with a break-in at his own residence in December 2011. Additionally, the defense objects to Mescudi’s testimony about statements made to him by Cassie Ventura regarding alleged physical abuse by Combs. They argue that these statements constitute inadmissible hearsay and are unfairly prejudicial to the defendant.The government counters that this testimony is indeed admissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence. Prosecutors argue that Mescudi’s recollection of events and conversations falls within permissible testimony, especially given the timing and context—such as the kidnapping and break-in happening simultaneously. They also defend the inclusion of Mescudi’s understanding of who was responsible for the arson attack on his vehicle, as well as Diddy’s subsequent 2015 apology to him, as probative and relevant to demonstrating the defendant’s consciousness of guilt. The government maintains that this testimony supports their broader narrative of a pattern of intimidation, abuse, and retaliatory violence.to contact me:[email protected]:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.360.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In response to Defendant Shawn Carter's motion for sanctions, the Plaintiff argues that the motion is both frivolous and procedurally improper. The Plaintiff contends that Carter's reliance on a single television interview to challenge the veracity of events that occurred twenty-four years ago, when the Plaintiff was thirteen, does not substantiate a claim for sanctions. They emphasize that discrepancies in recollection, especially concerning traumatic events from decades prior, are common and do not equate to bad faith or warrant sanctions. Furthermore, the Plaintiff highlights that Carter's attempt to bypass the mandatory twenty-one-day safe harbor provision under Rule 11 lacks legal precedent and justification, rendering his request to expedite the filing deadline to one day as unfounded.The Plaintiff also underscores that expecting a sexual assault victim, particularly one who was a minor at the time and has disclosed being autistic, to have precise recall of all details is unreasonable. They reference New York courts' recognition that survivors of childhood sexual abuse may not remember exact dates or times, which does not invalidate their claims. The Plaintiff asserts that Carter's threats of immediate sanctions are intended to intimidate and silence the Plaintiff and other potential claimants, constituting an abuse of the judicial process. They conclude by urging the court to deny Carter's motion, stating that it lacks substantive merit and is procedurally defective.to contact me:[email protected]:Microsoft Word - NYC-#6394976-v8A-Draft_Rule_11_Opp__MoLBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In response to Defendant Shawn Carter's motion for sanctions, the Plaintiff argues that the motion is both frivolous and procedurally improper. The Plaintiff contends that Carter's reliance on a single television interview to challenge the veracity of events that occurred twenty-four years ago, when the Plaintiff was thirteen, does not substantiate a claim for sanctions. They emphasize that discrepancies in recollection, especially concerning traumatic events from decades prior, are common and do not equate to bad faith or warrant sanctions. Furthermore, the Plaintiff highlights that Carter's attempt to bypass the mandatory twenty-one-day safe harbor provision under Rule 11 lacks legal precedent and justification, rendering his request to expedite the filing deadline to one day as unfounded.The Plaintiff also underscores that expecting a sexual assault victim, particularly one who was a minor at the time and has disclosed being autistic, to have precise recall of all details is unreasonable. They reference New York courts' recognition that survivors of childhood sexual abuse may not remember exact dates or times, which does not invalidate their claims. The Plaintiff asserts that Carter's threats of immediate sanctions are intended to intimidate and silence the Plaintiff and other potential claimants, constituting an abuse of the judicial process. They conclude by urging the court to deny Carter's motion, stating that it lacks substantive merit and is procedurally defective.to contact me:[email protected]:Microsoft Word - NYC-#6394976-v8A-Draft_Rule_11_Opp__MoLBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.