UMG/Diddy And Their Motion For Sanctions Against Rod Jones (Part 3)

​The U.S. government's motions in limine in the case against Sean "Diddy" Combs seek to shape the evidentiary landscape for the upcoming trial. Prosecutors aim to introduce corroborative materials such as text messages, diary entries from a former employee, and a 911 call to support the testimonies of alleged victims. They argue that these pieces of evidence are crucial to demonstrate patterns of behavior and to counter anticipated challenges to the credibility of witnesses. Additionally, the government requests the exclusion of certain defense evidence, including prior consensual sexual encounters Combs had with individuals not involved in the case, asserting that such information is irrelevant and could mislead the jury.Furthermore, the prosecution seeks to admit expert testimony from psychologist Dr. Dawn Hughes, who would explain how victims of abuse might remain in relationships with their abusers due to emotional manipulation or fear. This testimony is intended to provide context for the victims' continued association with Combs, which the defense might use to question their credibility. The motions also address the admissibility of a 2016 surveillance video allegedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. The defense contests this video's inclusion, claiming it has been altered and lacks authenticityto contact me:[email protected]:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.260.0_1.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In Case No. 1:24-cv-08812, filed on November 19, 2024, in the Southern District of New York, the plaintiff, identified as John Doe, alleges that in October 2001, he was lured to New York City under the pretense of auditioning for a role as a police officer in a music video. After coordinating with a female casting director, he traveled to Manhattan, booking a room at the Hotel Newton on the Upper West Side. The following day, he was directed to a suite near the top of a hotel located on the south side of Central Park.The plaintiff claims that upon arrival, he was offered a Diet Coke that tasted unusual. Subsequently, he began to feel disoriented and lost consciousness. He alleges that he awoke to find Sean "Diddy" Combs sexually assaulting him, with Combs's bodyguard restraining his arms. After the assault, the plaintiff asserts that he fled the scene. The lawsuit seeks compensatory and punitive damages for the alleged assault, emphasizing a pattern of such behavior by Combs over the years, purportedly facilitated by various individuals and entities.(commercial at 8:26)to contact me:[email protected]:gov.uscourts.nysd.632028.1.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

memorandum of law in support of a motion for sanctions is a legal document submitted to a court that outlines the legal arguments and relevant facts supporting a party's request for the court to impose penalties or corrective measures against an opposing party for misconduct or violation of court rules. Here’s a detailed breakdown of what it typically includes:Structure and Content:Title and Caption:The document begins with a title that clearly states it is a "Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Sanctions."The caption includes the name of the court, the parties involved in the case, the case number, and other identifying information.Introduction:A brief overview of the nature of the motion and the sanctions being requested.A summary of the key points that will be elaborated on in the memorandum.Background and Factual Context:A detailed explanation of the facts that led to the motion for sanctions.Specific instances of the opposing party’s misconduct or violation of court rules.Any previous warnings or attempts to resolve the issue without court intervention.Legal Standard:An outline of the legal standards and rules governing sanctions (e.g., Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11, Rule 37, or other applicable state or federal rules).Discussion of the authority and discretion of the court to impose sanctions under these rules.Argument:A comprehensive legal argument detailing why sanctions are appropriate in this case.Citation of relevant case law, statutes, and rules that support the request for sanctions.Analysis of how the opposing party’s conduct fits within the legal framework warranting sanctions.Discussion of the specific type of sanctions being sought (e.g., monetary penalties, dismissal of claims, striking of pleadings, etc.).Conclusion:A concise statement reiterating the request for sanctions.A summary of the key reasons the court should grant the motion.Certificate of Service:A statement verifying that the memorandum and the motion for sanctions have been properly served on the opposing party.Purpose and Importance:Accountability: It seeks to hold the opposing party accountable for improper conduct, such as frivolous filings, failure to comply with discovery obligations, or other abuses of the judicial process.Deterrence: Imposing sanctions serves to deter similar conduct in the future by the offending party or others.Compensation: Sanctions can compensate the moving party for expenses incurred due to the misconduct, such as attorney fees and costs.Efficiency: It helps maintain the integrity and efficiency of the judicial process by discouraging actions that waste court time and resources.(commercial at 8:31)to contact me:[email protected]:2024.05.17 MOL ISO Motion for Sanctions(8677390.10) (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

memorandum of law in support of a motion for sanctions is a legal document submitted to a court that outlines the legal arguments and relevant facts supporting a party's request for the court to impose penalties or corrective measures against an opposing party for misconduct or violation of court rules. Here’s a detailed breakdown of what it typically includes:Structure and Content:Title and Caption:The document begins with a title that clearly states it is a "Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Sanctions."The caption includes the name of the court, the parties involved in the case, the case number, and other identifying information.Introduction:A brief overview of the nature of the motion and the sanctions being requested.A summary of the key points that will be elaborated on in the memorandum.Background and Factual Context:A detailed explanation of the facts that led to the motion for sanctions.Specific instances of the opposing party’s misconduct or violation of court rules.Any previous warnings or attempts to resolve the issue without court intervention.Legal Standard:An outline of the legal standards and rules governing sanctions (e.g., Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11, Rule 37, or other applicable state or federal rules).Discussion of the authority and discretion of the court to impose sanctions under these rules.Argument:A comprehensive legal argument detailing why sanctions are appropriate in this case.Citation of relevant case law, statutes, and rules that support the request for sanctions.Analysis of how the opposing party’s conduct fits within the legal framework warranting sanctions.Discussion of the specific type of sanctions being sought (e.g., monetary penalties, dismissal of claims, striking of pleadings, etc.).Conclusion:A concise statement reiterating the request for sanctions.A summary of the key reasons the court should grant the motion.Certificate of Service:A statement verifying that the memorandum and the motion for sanctions have been properly served on the opposing party.Purpose and Importance:Accountability: It seeks to hold the opposing party accountable for improper conduct, such as frivolous filings, failure to comply with discovery obligations, or other abuses of the judicial process.Deterrence: Imposing sanctions serves to deter similar conduct in the future by the offending party or others.Compensation: Sanctions can compensate the moving party for expenses incurred due to the misconduct, such as attorney fees and costs.Efficiency: It helps maintain the integrity and efficiency of the judicial process by discouraging actions that waste court time and resources.(commercial at 8:31)to contact me:[email protected]:2024.05.17 MOL ISO Motion for Sanctions(8677390.10) (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

memorandum of law in support of a motion for sanctions is a legal document submitted to a court that outlines the legal arguments and relevant facts supporting a party's request for the court to impose penalties or corrective measures against an opposing party for misconduct or violation of court rules. Here’s a detailed breakdown of what it typically includes:Structure and Content:Title and Caption:The document begins with a title that clearly states it is a "Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Sanctions."The caption includes the name of the court, the parties involved in the case, the case number, and other identifying information.Introduction:A brief overview of the nature of the motion and the sanctions being requested.A summary of the key points that will be elaborated on in the memorandum.Background and Factual Context:A detailed explanation of the facts that led to the motion for sanctions.Specific instances of the opposing party’s misconduct or violation of court rules.Any previous warnings or attempts to resolve the issue without court intervention.Legal Standard:An outline of the legal standards and rules governing sanctions (e.g., Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11, Rule 37, or other applicable state or federal rules).Discussion of the authority and discretion of the court to impose sanctions under these rules.Argument:A comprehensive legal argument detailing why sanctions are appropriate in this case.Citation of relevant case law, statutes, and rules that support the request for sanctions.Analysis of how the opposing party’s conduct fits within the legal framework warranting sanctions.Discussion of the specific type of sanctions being sought (e.g., monetary penalties, dismissal of claims, striking of pleadings, etc.).Conclusion:A concise statement reiterating the request for sanctions.A summary of the key reasons the court should grant the motion.Certificate of Service:A statement verifying that the memorandum and the motion for sanctions have been properly served on the opposing party.Purpose and Importance:Accountability: It seeks to hold the opposing party accountable for improper conduct, such as frivolous filings, failure to comply with discovery obligations, or other abuses of the judicial process.Deterrence: Imposing sanctions serves to deter similar conduct in the future by the offending party or others.Compensation: Sanctions can compensate the moving party for expenses incurred due to the misconduct, such as attorney fees and costs.Efficiency: It helps maintain the integrity and efficiency of the judicial process by discouraging actions that waste court time and resources.(commercial at 8:31)to contact me:[email protected]:2024.05.17 MOL ISO Motion for Sanctions(8677390.10) (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In mid-November 2024, Sean "Diddy" Combs' sons, Christian Combs and Quincy Brown, issued a cease-and-desist letter to Courtney Burgess regarding his book, "Kim Porter Tell It All," which he published under the pseudonym Jamal Millwood. The brothers asserted that, as the rightful heirs to their late mother Kim Porter's intellectual property, any purported diary entries or personal writings belong to them. They demanded that Burgess cease the book's sale, halt interviews promoting it, and surrender any of Porter's possessions he claimed to have.In response, Burgess dismissed the cease-and-desist letter as a "desperate ploy" orchestrated by Diddy, labeling it a "pathetic attempt" reflecting the family's dire financial situation. His attorney, Ariel Mitchell, maintained that Burgess obtained the manuscript through a mutual acquaintance and that Porter had promised to share her memoir with him during a phone call. This exchange has intensified the legal dispute over the rights to Porter's personal writings and the legitimacy of Burgess's claims.(commercial at 7:14)to contact me:[email protected]:Diddy witness Courtney Burgess fires back at his sons amid legal battle over rights to Kim Porter's alleged diary | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Sean "Diddy" Combs has filed a $50 million defamation lawsuit against Courtney Burgess, his attorney Ariel Mitchell, and NewsNation's parent company, Nexstar Media Inc. The lawsuit, filed in a New York federal court, stems from allegations made by Burgess that he possessed incriminating videos of Combs involved in sexual assaults, including those of minors. Combs claims these accusations are baseless and have severely damaged his reputation and compromised his right to a fair trial. The suit accuses Burgess and Mitchell of leveraging these claims for personal gain and media attention, particularly after Combs faced federal charges of sex trafficking and racketeering.The lawsuit specifically targets NewsNation for broadcasting these unverified claims without proper fact-checking or reaching out to Combs' representatives for comment. Combs' attorney, Erica Wolff, stated that the rapper is taking a stand against what she describes as "malicious falsehoods" intended to profit at Combs' expense. The legal documents assert that no such videos exist, and the claims have led to Combs being publicly labeled as a "monster" and a pedophile on social media platforms, which have a vast reach. This defamation suit aims to hold the defendants accountable for what Combs alleges are intentional falsehoods that have significantly impacted his public perception and legal proceedings.to contact me:[email protected]:Sean 'Diddy' Combs sues grand jury witness for $50 million | Fox NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In the memorandum supporting their consolidated motion to dismiss, the defendants in the case of Dawn Angelique Richard v. Sean Combs et al. argue that the plaintiff's claims are largely time-barred under New York's statutes of limitations. They contend that the state’s shorter limitation periods should apply, rendering many of the plaintiff's causes of action untimely. Specifically, they assert that claims related to assault, battery, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, trafficking, forced labor, and various employment-related allegations fall outside the permissible time frames. The defendants also challenge the applicability of revival statutes, arguing that the Gender-Motivated Violence Law (GMVL) revival provision conflicts with existing laws like the Child Victims Act (CVA) and Adult Survivors Act (ASA), and thus cannot retroactively apply to the defendants.Additionally, the defendants argue that the plaintiff's claims against various entities associated with Sean Combs, such as the "Bad Boy" and "Combs" entities, rely on improper group pleadings without specific allegations against each entity. They assert that the GMVL claim fails because the law did not apply to certain defendants at the relevant times and that the plaintiff does not sufficiently allege a gender-motivated crime of violence. Furthermore, the defendants contend that the plaintiff fails to state valid claims for forced labor, sex trafficking, discrimination under the New York State Human Rights Law, right of publicity, and unjust enrichment. They argue that these claims are either inadequately pled or legally baseless, and in some cases, barred by applicable statutes of limitations.to contact me:[email protected]:gov.uscourts.nysd.628103.154.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In a sealed letter submitted to Judge Subramanian, legal counsel for Jane Doe—referred to as Victim-2 in the Sean Combs federal criminal case—opposed a media request filed on May 12, 2025, by attorneys Robert Balin and Alexandra Perloff-Giles. That request, made on behalf of several news organizations, sought courtroom access to view “sexually explicit and sensitive” audiovisual exhibits that are set to be shown to the jury but not played in open court. Jane Doe’s counsel argued against the release, emphasizing the highly personal and traumatic nature of the content and citing her court-granted right to proceed anonymously. The letter underscores the importance of safeguarding Jane Doe’s dignity and privacy during trial proceedings that already carry significant emotional weight for her.The opposition also stresses the unique harm that could arise from permitting the press to view such sensitive materials, especially given their graphic and intimate nature. Jane Doe’s legal team asserts that allowing the media to access these exhibits, even if only while they are played for the jury, would essentially nullify the court’s protective measures and could lead to secondary dissemination—further traumatizing the victim and potentially undermining the integrity of the trial. The letter frames the issue not as a matter of transparency, but one of protecting victims’ rights, ensuring due process, and upholding the court’s earlier rulings that prioritized the safety and anonymity of individuals involved in the case.to contact me:[email protected]:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.350.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

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 lifeFrederic 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] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.