Diddy And The "Slippery As Baby Oil" Defenses (5/9/25)

​In the case of Parham v. Combs et al (Case No. 3:24-cv-07191-RFL), plaintiff Ashley Parham filed an amended complaint against defendants Sean Combs, Kristina Khorram,Druski, Odell Beckham and Shane Pearce, alleging personal injury claims related to assault, libel, and slander under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. The original complaint was filed on October 15, 2024, in the Northern District of California, with Parham seeking a jury trial to address these allegations.to contact me:[email protected]:Parham complaint FINAL-3

In Document 308, both parties in the United States v. Combs trial submitted a joint letter to Judge Arun Subramanian addressing the voir dire process, following their earlier filings (ECF Nos. 272 and 274) containing proposed questions for prospective jurors. The letter outlines areas of agreement between the prosecution and defense concerning how potential jurors should be questioned during selection. This includes standard demographic questions, prior jury service, general attitudes toward law enforcement and the justice system, and the ability to remain impartial in a high-profile case involving serious allegations. Both parties also agree on using written juror questionnaires before oral voir dire and ensuring the anonymity of jurors throughout the proceedings.However, the letter also details several points of dispute between the parties regarding specific voir dire questions. These disagreements primarily center around how directly jurors should be asked about their knowledge of Combs’ past media controversies, opinions about the #MeToo movement, and whether jurors should be specifically questioned about their views on celebrity privilege or racial bias. The defense appears to want more targeted, probing questions to detect potential prosecutorial bias, while the government pushes back on what it sees as overly leading or prejudicial language. The letter asks Judge Subramanian to resolve these disputes before voir dire begins in earnest, underscoring how both teams are already deeply invested in shaping the jury long before opening statements are heard.

Sean “Diddy” Combs is facing near-certain conviction in his federal criminal trial, where he's charged with a sweeping racketeering conspiracy that includes arson, kidnapping, drug trafficking, and multiple sex-trafficking offenses. The case is being prosecuted by the Southern District of New York, and the evidence is stacked heavily against him—featuring surveillance footage of a brutal assault and testimony from four women who allege years of sexual abuse and coercion. Given the strength of the case and the fact that over 80 percent of federal prosecutions result in guilty verdicts, the odds are decisively not in Combs’ favor.His defense, despite being backed by elite attorneys, has little room to maneuver. The phrase “baby-oil defense” is used to underscore the perceived absurdity of any attempt to explain away the damning evidence—particularly claims that recorded acts of violence were somehow consensual or misunderstood. The courtroom strategy will likely try to blur intent or context, but with such severe allegations and extensive corroboration, that approach is unlikely to resonate with a jury. The prosecution appears well-prepared to dismantle any narrative of innocence Combs tries to offer.to contact me:[email protected]:Diddy’s Baby-Oil Defense

On the fourth day of jury selection for Sean "Diddy" Combs' federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial, the process focused on narrowing down the remaining pool of 45 prospective jurors. Judge Arun Subramanian, along with prosecutors and defense attorneys, conducted in-depth interviews to assess potential biases, particularly concerning jurors' exposure to a 2016 video showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. Several candidates were dismissed due to their familiarity with the footage or personal experiences with sexual assault, which could affect their impartiality. The defense and prosecution utilized their peremptory strikes—ten for the defense and six for the prosecution—to finalize a panel of 12 jurors and six alternates. The selection process concluded on Friday, May 9, setting the stage for opening statements scheduled for Monday, May 12Throughout the selection process, the court encountered a mix of serious and unexpected moments. Some prospective jurors shared personal traumas, including experiences with sexual assault, leading to their dismissal. Conversely, lighter moments emerged, such as a juror admitting to stealing a Harry Potter wand during their youth and another confessing to falling asleep while binge-watching a television series. Judge Subramanian even joked about the extensive list of names involved in the case, comparing it to a Tolkien novel. These instances highlighted the challenges of assembling an impartial jury for a high-profile case involving a celebrity defendant.to contact me:[email protected]:Diddy trial delayed as judge makes shock ruling on witnesses | Daily Mail Online

On Day 12 of Karen Read’s murder retrial, Massachusetts State Police Sgt. Yuriy Bukhenik, the supervising investigator in the case, took the stand. He recounted arriving at Canton police headquarters approximately three hours after John O’Keefe’s body was discovered, where he and former Trooper Michael Proctor were shown evidence collected at the scene, including a broken cocktail glass, O’Keefe’s cellphone, and blood samples stored in Solo cups within a Stop & Shop bag. Bukhenik testified that upon learning O’Keefe was missing a shoe, he theorized that O’Keefe had been struck by a vehicle, a hypothesis he later demonstrated to the jury by presenting the missing shoe and the shirt O’Keefe was wearing at the time of his deathDuring cross-examination, defense attorney Alan Jackson scrutinized Bukhenik’s oversight of the investigation, particularly focusing on his supervision of Proctor, who was later dismissed for sending inappropriate texts about Read. Jackson questioned Bukhenik about potential conflicts of interest, including the involvement of Canton Police Chief Ken Berkowitz, who had recused his department from the investigation due to familial ties to individuals connected to the case. Bukhenik defended the integrity of the investigation, asserting that it was conducted professionally and without bias, despite acknowledging that all individuals possess inherent biasesto contact me:[email protected]:Key investigator in Karen Read case questioned about cocktail glass theory | Fox News

This Friday, May 9, 2025, at 9 p.m. ET/8 p.m. CT, Dateline NBC will air a two-hour special titled “The Terrible Night on King Road”, offering exclusive new insights into the investigation of the 2022 murders of four University of Idaho students. The episode will feature never-before-seen evidence, including video, photographic, and digital materials that investigators say track the movements of the accused, Bryan Kohberger. Additionally, the special will include interviews with friends of the victims and in-depth analysis from criminology and genetics experts. A preview of the special is set to air on TODAY on Thursday, May 8Correspondent Keith Morrison will also present interviews with former students who interacted with Kohberger. One such interview includes a former graduate student named Holly, who recounts meeting Kohberger at a pool party and receiving a text from him the next day with "peculiar" wording. The special aims to provide a comprehensive look into the case as Kohberger's trial approaches. He has pleaded not guilty to the charges. Dateline NBC has been covering this case extensively, and this upcoming episode promises to shed new light on the events leading up to the trial.to  contact me:[email protected]:Video shows car resembling Bryan Kohberger’s around time of Idaho student murders

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.  Amidst Sean "Diddy" Combs' ongoing legal troubles, Ariel Mitchell-Kidd, the lawyer representing one of his accusers, disclosed that a "high-profile" individual was unknowingly recorded in a pornographic video at Combs' home. This revelation is part of a broader case involving multiple accusations of sexual assault and sex trafficking against Combs. The video, which is allegedly being offered for sale, has sparked interest due to the unknown identity of the prominent figure captured in it. The lawyer refrained from naming the individual but hinted at their higher profile than Combs.The case also includes disturbing allegations involving Combs' violent behavior, with reports suggesting that he assaulted one of his accusers with an inanimate object and directed others to commit further sexual acts against her. The incident is said to have occurred in 2018 but came to light only recently. Combs' defense team, while preparing for his sex trafficking and racketeering trial, is grappling with these additional accusations, complicating the legal landscape for the music mogul.to contact me:[email protected]:Diddy accuser's lawyer claims 'high-profile person' was present while 'pornographic' acts were performed at rapper's house | Daily Mail Onlinesource: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 Independent

The news regarding Kim Porter's posthumous memoir, titled Kim's Lost Words, has stirred significant controversy. The memoir, which surfaced earlier this year, allegedly comprises diary entries from Porter's time with Sean "Diddy" Combs. Within its pages, Porter describes harrowing instances of emotional and physical abuse, including allegations of Diddy assaulting her with a chair and making death threats. The memoir also details accusations involving Diddy’s infidelity, manipulation, and control throughout their relationship.The memoir, which has reportedly been found on a flash drive by Porter's friends, paints a dark picture of their relationship, stretching from the 1990s to the years leading up to her passing in 2018. While the memoir has not been officially authenticated, its release has drawn renewed scrutiny, especially in light of Diddy's recent legal troubles.However...Lawanda Lane, Kim Porter's longtime best friend and caregiver to her twin daughters with Sean "Diddy" Combs, has firmly denied the existence of any memoir authored by Porter. Lane, who lived with Porter for over two decades, stated that Porter never wrote such a manuscript and emphasized that, as someone who was with Porter daily, she would have been aware of any such writings. She also mentioned that after Porter's passing, she was responsible for organizing Porter's belongings and found no evidence of a memoir.Lane expressed skepticism about individuals claiming to possess Porter's writings, suggesting that these assertions are unfounded. She highlighted that Porter was an extremely private person and would not have documented her personal experiences in a memoir.to contact me:bobbycapucci!protonmail.com

​In the case of Parham v. Combs et al (Case No. 3:24-cv-07191-RFL), plaintiff Ashley Parham filed an amended complaint against defendants Sean Combs, Kristina Khorram,Druski, Odell Beckham and Shane Pearce, alleging personal injury claims related to assault, libel, and slander under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. The original complaint was filed on October 15, 2024, in the Northern District of California, with Parham seeking a jury trial to address these allegations.to contact me:[email protected]:Parham complaint FINAL-3

​In the case of Parham v. Combs et al (Case No. 3:24-cv-07191-RFL), plaintiff Ashley Parham filed an amended complaint against defendants Sean Combs, Kristina Khorram,Druski, Odell Beckham and Shane Pearce, alleging personal injury claims related to assault, libel, and slander under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. The original complaint was filed on October 15, 2024, in the Northern District of California, with Parham seeking a jury trial to address these allegations.to contact me:[email protected]:Parham complaint FINAL-3