Speaker 1: Amy and TJ presents Aubrey Oday covering the Diddy Trial.
Speaker 2: Welcome everyone to Amy Roebuck and TJ. Holmes presents Aubrey
Speaker 2: O Day covering the Diddy Trial. I'm here with my
Speaker 2: partner TJ. Holmes, and we're looking at miss Aubrey O
Speaker 2: day right now and Aubrey another huge day in court
Speaker 2: and one of the star witnesses, one of Cassie's closest friends, Brianna,
Speaker 2: is back on the stand right now, still facing some
Speaker 2: of that cross examination.
Speaker 3: Yeah, some of that cross examination that she is just
Speaker 3: failing miserably with. Unfortunately, it has what a difference a
Speaker 3: day makes.
Speaker 4: You know, you're on a high from Mia.
Speaker 3: You start to get into racketeering, sex trafficking, We start
Speaker 3: to really get into the nuts and bolts of this,
Speaker 3: these the charges, and unfortunately Bona has just not been
Speaker 3: consistent with you know, what she's told prosecutors versus what
Speaker 3: she's said on the stand. Nicole west Morland, who also
Speaker 3: crossed my bandmate Don Richard, is crossing her and she's
Speaker 3: a beast. She is just she is finding every inconsistency,
Speaker 3: every way to discredit and there are some real ways
Speaker 3: to discredit in this round, some of those things being
Speaker 3: I mean, at this point, what I think that she's
Speaker 3: doing is not only you know, she's there to coroborate Cassie,
Speaker 3: but we don't need any more coroboration in regards to
Speaker 3: the violence. In my opinion, what I see her doing
Speaker 3: is her testimony is an impeachment on both of their
Speaker 3: characters a bit at this point, which we don't need
Speaker 3: to go backwards. The defense scored some serious points. They
Speaker 3: also really pushed the fact that she does have a
Speaker 3: civil suit.
Speaker 4: She's in kahoots or she was in cahoots allegedly with.
Speaker 3: Cassie after she filed her lawsuit, and you know that's
Speaker 3: witnesses talk victims put to alleged victims talking to victims.
Speaker 3: And she's also having to testify under immunity because she
Speaker 3: was the drugs supplier and although she did establish that
Speaker 3: that's not where the majority of her income usually comes from,
Speaker 3: at the time, it was coming a lot from that
Speaker 3: direction because of the amount of drugs that Cassie needed supplied.
Speaker 3: And then there are just too many inconsistencies about all
Speaker 3: of these horrific stories that she was.
Speaker 4: Able to get out. And then when Nicole came in.
Speaker 3: She just couldn't remember if it was this, if it
Speaker 3: was that, I don't recall.
Speaker 4: I don't recall it was brutal.
Speaker 1: You don't think it was enough of some of the inconsistencies,
Speaker 1: and there were plenty, she said, I don't remember a lot,
Speaker 1: but one of them was, you told them you were
Speaker 1: smoking a cigarette at the time, and you're telling us
Speaker 1: she was smoking marijuana at the time. I know that
Speaker 1: seems minor, but do you think it was effective enough
Speaker 1: even if the inconsistencies were minor, that they collected enough
Speaker 1: to put in a juror's mind. You know what, if
Speaker 1: she didn't remember that thing, then maybe she's not remembering
Speaker 1: the other thing correctly.
Speaker 4: Well.
Speaker 3: According to what I experienced, how this process works is
Speaker 3: Homeland Security will reach out to you directly. They will
Speaker 3: set up a meeting if you're willing to speak with them.
Speaker 3: He did tell me that the men told me within
Speaker 3: the laws that occur now, they can't tape you during
Speaker 3: those meetings.
Speaker 4: They just are taking notes.
Speaker 3: So I assume if you go past that level and
Speaker 3: they are able to put you in the circle of
Speaker 3: the criminal behavior in one way or another, that really
Speaker 3: speaks to the charges that they're going for. Then you're
Speaker 3: speaking to prosecutors, you're being deposed, and you're having depositions,
Speaker 3: and you're giving answers. So to me, once again, we
Speaker 3: have somebody that was inconsistent in the way that she
Speaker 3: told the story and the way she's telling it on
Speaker 3: the stand, and I think throughout that entire process you
Speaker 3: should be able to weed out what you should be
Speaker 3: able to weed.
Speaker 4: Out these inconsistencies.
Speaker 3: And also I don't know that she made any points
Speaker 3: towards I think there were two good things that were established.
Speaker 4: One of them is that Cassie's drug addiction, in.
Speaker 3: Her involvement in it, was starting around two thousand and
Speaker 3: nine and that it was really bad in about twenty fourteen,
Speaker 3: which is establishing it got worse due to the hands
Speaker 3: and her time with Puff, which is something that she
Speaker 3: did testify to.
Speaker 4: So I guess that's one good thing. Another good thing.
Speaker 4: But again, Nicole.
Speaker 3: Is so effective, which Diddy's defense attorney, Nicole Westmoreland is
Speaker 3: so effective in regards to just not letting things get
Speaker 3: by the jury and.
Speaker 4: Not letting things in. But there was a moment where
Speaker 4: they were trying.
Speaker 3: To establish then a producer named rob Holiday was contacted
Speaker 3: and or sorry, contacted Brianna and wanted to try to
Speaker 3: fix and settle out the situation. So that's a bit
Speaker 3: helpful in regards to the prosecution proving coercion and you know,
Speaker 3: the cleanup.
Speaker 4: Messes, etc.
Speaker 3: I'm sure something did happen, but because there were so
Speaker 3: many inconsistent statements, I'm not exactly.
Speaker 2: Sure what I was going to ask you, Aubrey, based
Speaker 2: on your experience and what you've seen and heard and
Speaker 2: the people who you intimately know who are a part
Speaker 2: of Diddy's inner circle, did it sound believable what she
Speaker 2: testified to, even if the defense was able to poke
Speaker 2: some holes into some inconsistencies. Do you believe that did
Speaker 2: he said to her? I am the devil and I
Speaker 2: could kill you. Do you believe did he dangled her
Speaker 2: over that seventeenth floor balcony even though there were no
Speaker 2: other witnesses?
Speaker 3: I would believe that that type of behavior sounds pretty
Speaker 3: consistent with everything that we've heard so far from other
Speaker 3: witnesses that are consistent.
Speaker 4: So yeah, I, in my.
Speaker 3: Opinion, I believe that that sounds consistent in my opinion,
Speaker 3: just being around the man, Like I said, almighty King
Speaker 3: rides on the backs of everybody, and you know the
Speaker 3: stories that he would do, all of these grandiose events
Speaker 3: of how he could go to Dubai and ride.
Speaker 4: On the backs of people, and he's a king of
Speaker 4: all kings, like you know, these these these these.
Speaker 3: People that are saying he was like a god and
Speaker 3: he was all encompassing. We all have the same narrative.
Speaker 3: And then again, he kept us so isolated that any
Speaker 3: thought outside of that wasn't even being presented to us.
Speaker 3: We didn't even have anything to bounce that idea off of.
Speaker 3: All we saw was the King, and everybody was falling
Speaker 3: in line.
Speaker 2: You said, King, God, you heard him say those things,
Speaker 2: But what about a devil? Does that sound like something
Speaker 2: he would want to be known as or be feared as.
Speaker 3: I think when if you're on a lot of drugs
Speaker 3: and you're there to potentially threaten someone, or you're offended or.
Speaker 4: You know, angry at a situation, and.
Speaker 3: You're on a lot of drugs, that allegedly you could
Speaker 3: say any of the number of things he's been accused
Speaker 3: of saying.
Speaker 1: God, King, what about monster? Is that going too far?
Speaker 1: Because some of the behavior that has been laid out
Speaker 1: the past four weeks is of someone who is other
Speaker 1: level beyond just a bad boss. Does monster fit based
Speaker 1: on what you know of this man? Is that just
Speaker 1: too far?
Speaker 3: Well, geez tj if Devil is maybe potentially accurate monsters
Speaker 3: like a little few steps above devil in my book,
Speaker 3: But I can't say personally that I would call him
Speaker 3: those names. But after witnessing the things that I did
Speaker 3: and understanding it in much more detail since this trial
Speaker 3: has started, those words are very They feel like they
Speaker 3: align with the testimony that's being given.
Speaker 1: Wait a second, you worked with him closely intimately for years.
Speaker 1: You know him better than most or certainly during that time.
Speaker 1: But you're telling us right, you have learned more about
Speaker 1: him in this trial. Now that's giving you a different
Speaker 1: impression of the guy you knew.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean, like of all the things that I knew,
Speaker 3: I mean, I didn't spend much of my time after
Speaker 3: leaving being fired considering him as a person. I just
Speaker 3: moved on. But if, But now, because I've been so
Speaker 3: involved in this for the past two weeks, before anyone
Speaker 3: even knew what was happening, I've just been able to
Speaker 3: talk to so many people and to understand so many
Speaker 3: levels of things that were occurring that were out of
Speaker 3: my advantage point.
Speaker 4: And I think that when you.
Speaker 3: Add them all up and they have you know, people
Speaker 3: that are coroborating those stories, that it's it's just it's
Speaker 3: out of the realm of anything that I could understand
Speaker 3: a man to be. You know, I just I don't
Speaker 3: know many men that I don't know any men.
Speaker 4: You know, I know some really bad, powerful people, But.
Speaker 3: To be aired out at this extend to this level,
Speaker 3: it's pretty it's very.
Speaker 4: Bad behavior to me.
Speaker 3: I'm a hard person to ask the words question too,
Speaker 3: because I think words.
Speaker 4: Are man made and they have the meaning that you
Speaker 4: allow them to have.
Speaker 3: So whether you say devil, god, king, or mad man,
Speaker 3: whatever the words are, those are just descriptive words.
Speaker 4: To me. They're just man made words. They don't really
Speaker 4: hold any meaning other than what you give them.
Speaker 3: But that's not technically how the world chooses to see words. So,
Speaker 3: you know, that's more of my bally alternative healing wu
Speaker 3: wou side. Something only has the power that you allow
Speaker 3: it to have. But in this specific trial in court
Speaker 3: and with jurors, words absolutely matter, and those words are
Speaker 3: very damning.
Speaker 5: I don't think we've discussed this before.
Speaker 2: We had a question, did you ever see meat or
Speaker 2: no Brianna in any way, shape or form while you
Speaker 2: were there?
Speaker 3: If I ever met her, it would have been in
Speaker 3: She seems to have been around during a time period
Speaker 3: that I was there. But like I said, the worlds
Speaker 3: were so separate in regards to you know, Cassie wasn't
Speaker 3: in the studio making music, like she said, her full
Speaker 3: time job became something else. We were in the studio
Speaker 3: all day making music. We were around the enterprise every day,
Speaker 3: and then when we were taken out, we were with
Speaker 3: her in all of the social settings. They would have
Speaker 3: her around with us.
Speaker 2: With all of the drug use that Breonna testified to,
Speaker 2: and not just her own or Cassie's, but also Ditti's
Speaker 2: as well. Did you I don't think we've asked you this.
Speaker 2: When you were around Diddy in a professional environment, recording
Speaker 2: in the studio or at least for the show, making
Speaker 2: the band, did you ever see him seemingly out of
Speaker 2: control on drugs? Inebriated not fully there.
Speaker 4: The first couple of words.
Speaker 3: I mean, I was laughing in my head thinking have
Speaker 3: you seen making the band?
Speaker 4: But the last few were the last.
Speaker 3: Few statements, inebriated, not having any control.
Speaker 2: No high, how about really really high?
Speaker 3: I think even on a normal day, his energy is
Speaker 3: at a place that you could potentially gather the thought
Speaker 3: that he might be really high.
Speaker 2: Were you too young to know that or to think
Speaker 2: that at the time? Only upon what you're hearing? And
Speaker 2: then reflection, are you thinking that or at the time
Speaker 2: you know what? Were you seventeen eighteen nine, I mean
Speaker 2: you were young. Would you even know what that look like?
Speaker 2: Would you even have known to be concerned about it
Speaker 2: or recognize it?
Speaker 3: I didn't even know when we would get out of
Speaker 3: the studio at Daddy's house, out of the elevator and
Speaker 3: there would just be like a puff of white smoke,
Speaker 3: and we couldn't figure out what direction to go in.
Speaker 3: I didn't even really understand what that was until it
Speaker 3: was explained to me, and until I started feeling a
Speaker 3: little loopy. Like I said, we used to run to
Speaker 3: the staircase.
Speaker 4: To get air.
Speaker 1: Rihanna test point. Of course, the incident we'd heard so
Speaker 1: much about, but this was the first time we got
Speaker 1: a first person account of it. Brianna said, he dangles
Speaker 1: her off a seventeenth floor balcony, he said. She claims
Speaker 1: he was yelling, you know what the fuck you did?
Speaker 1: And she says she has no idea what she did.
Speaker 1: How did that story, or at least that part of it.
Speaker 1: I want to ask you about that in particular, like
Speaker 1: this man is banging on the door, he comes in,
Speaker 1: Matt hangs me off a balcony, and I don't even
Speaker 1: know what he's upset about.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean that did stand out to me. I
Speaker 4: was wondering. I could make tons of different assumptions.
Speaker 3: Somehow it's likely protecting Cassie's secret or something protecting her
Speaker 3: from him in some type of way that he found out.
Speaker 4: But that's just allegedly. I would have no idea.
Speaker 3: But also I don't know what the situation was because
Speaker 3: first she says it was a party, then she was
Speaker 3: sleeping in her bed. I mean, what was it, girl?
Speaker 3: I need a picture. I was seeing a party at first,
Speaker 3: and then apparently it's a sleep in bed.
Speaker 4: I don't know which story is true.
Speaker 3: And unfortunately, in a juror's mind, when they can't even
Speaker 3: place where the events started and they can't put a
Speaker 3: picture of how it all began, and that's not even clear.
Speaker 3: I don't know as a juror how how clear everything
Speaker 3: else could be for me if we couldn't even start
Speaker 3: off the setting of the situation, and a big and
Speaker 3: a house party and sleeping in bed are two very
Speaker 3: different things. And I think if you remember being hung
Speaker 3: off the balcony, you probably remember if you were in
Speaker 3: bed sleeping, or if it was a house party.
Speaker 2: It might determine how much drugs you had been taking.
Speaker 2: I mean, I was thinking that also would speak in
Speaker 2: a weird way. Maybe not in the way in a
Speaker 2: counterintuitive way, but as a juror, I'd be thinking, well,
Speaker 2: if she was taking the copious amount of drugs that
Speaker 2: she said she was, it would make sense that maybe
Speaker 2: it is a little fuzzy, but you wouldn't forget being dangled.
Speaker 3: No, you wouldn't forget being dangled. I think that there's
Speaker 3: a possibility of that. Listen, we still have more cross left,
Speaker 3: and we have a redirect. The redirect might fable to
Speaker 3: establish things a bit more clearer. Sometimes just being you know,
Speaker 3: it's a high pressure situation, being on a stand and
Speaker 3: these are incredible lawyers that are cross examining her, So
Speaker 3: maybe just the pressure of that situation had her faltering.
Speaker 4: I don't know, but to me, when I look.
Speaker 3: At any of these people, like like, sorry to roll
Speaker 3: back to what you asked me in the beginning, TJ.
Speaker 3: I took what I said to Homeland Security so seriously.
Speaker 3: If there were things that I saw, like I witnessed
Speaker 3: a whole lot of things, But unless I understood the
Speaker 3: beginning and end of how it happened, or who was
Speaker 3: doing it, or or what this person said it was
Speaker 3: after the fact, I'm not going to offer up that
Speaker 3: type of information because that information is just not valuable
Speaker 3: because it could be shred apart, too inconsistent. There were
Speaker 3: things that I told them, Hey, I saw this.
Speaker 4: I saw that.
Speaker 3: But if I was to get crossed, and cross was
Speaker 3: to ask me, are you sure it wasn't a facelift
Speaker 3: or a nose job, I'd have to say that could
Speaker 3: be a possibility. And I don't think maybe just people
Speaker 3: don't understand to be that clear. And because I grew
Speaker 3: up around lawyers, I knew to be but I just
Speaker 3: I didn't offer anything that I couldn't factually prove that
Speaker 3: I didn't have. I like always at least two people
Speaker 3: that can cooberate a story. I make sure even in life,
Speaker 3: when I go through something very hectic or something that
Speaker 3: I think is unethical in any workplace, I will document
Speaker 3: it immediately to a friend through phone call, through text,
Speaker 3: and even if I can record, if it's in a
Speaker 3: one party consent record state, I will start recording immediately,
Speaker 3: just to make.
Speaker 4: Sure that I've got the receipts.
Speaker 3: To prove what I'm talking about, because when we get
Speaker 3: to levels like these, inconsistencies can lose a case and
Speaker 3: it can send somebody free that potentially could be very dangerous.
Speaker 1: Again, as we sit here, she's not done yet. There
Speaker 1: is cross examination and a redirect butt at this point.
Speaker 1: Maybe we know the answer given some of the responses
Speaker 1: you've given us already, but I'll ask, yeah, has she
Speaker 1: been a win for the defense, a win for the prosecution,
Speaker 1: or this one's right now about playing even.
Speaker 4: So far as of now, defense serious win.
Speaker 3: They made some serious points on her. Prosecution probably regrets
Speaker 3: putting her on the stand. I just don't think it
Speaker 3: was necessary.
Speaker 4: I think they're.
Speaker 3: Overshooting with a few people, with certain people. I think
Speaker 3: they're just overshooting it a bit, and that's a very
Speaker 3: risky game to play against lawyers that are very good.
Speaker 3: And another thing that I'm concerned about it after she's
Speaker 3: finished with redirect today, I believe we're going to have
Speaker 3: I believe that we're going to have the final Jane
Speaker 3: speaking and I and from what I hear, it will
Speaker 3: take maybe five to six days and then they're done
Speaker 3: with presenting their case, which means sadly, I don't think
Speaker 3: we're seeing a KK and I don't think we're seeing
Speaker 3: a bodyguard. And of all the things that I have
Speaker 3: been able to understand throughout my time being like you know,
Speaker 3: I said, I'm a self acclaimed attorney, investigator, journalist. For
Speaker 3: the past two years, I have spent a lot of
Speaker 3: time trying to put pieces together, partly for the project
Speaker 3: that I was working on, and also partly just for
Speaker 3: my own understanding of something as serious as a man's
Speaker 3: life that will be will be taken from him. And
Speaker 3: because you know, as we've seen throughout this trial, I
Speaker 3: have no people to be inconsistent, I had to wonder,
Speaker 3: what is everybody that takes the stand going to be
Speaker 3: giving and is this something that is corroborated and proved
Speaker 3: by very consistent people.
Speaker 4: Are we going to venture off.
Speaker 3: Into a lot of things that maybe are closer to
Speaker 3: the line of piling up on now the things that
Speaker 3: have been proven, and my eyes are so strong that
Speaker 3: I think it's still there. But a witness that's inconsistent
Speaker 3: and very inconsistent and also getting immunity because of supplying
Speaker 3: a lot of drugs that they were both taking, I
Speaker 3: don't know how much that testimony is going to sit
Speaker 3: with me well as a juror. You don't recall a
Speaker 3: lot of things when you're on drugs.
Speaker 4: If you can't recall a lot of.
Speaker 3: Things, and you're saying you can't, and we know that
Speaker 3: you're where the drug supplier and that you did a
Speaker 3: lot of drugs, to me, I need it something more credible.
Speaker 3: And by the way, me personally, I know a lot
Speaker 3: of people that are more credible that should be on
Speaker 3: that stand.
Speaker 4: So I'm just.
Speaker 3: I was like, it was hard to sleep last night.
Speaker 3: I'm very concerned about the case that I'm seeing.
Speaker 4: And I still believe that you.
Speaker 3: Know that this is the prosecution in ausas have such
Speaker 3: a high threshold, but they also have such a high
Speaker 3: conviction rate that they wouldn't just be playing silly games
Speaker 3: right now.
Speaker 4: But some of.
Speaker 3: These some of these people that are being so inconsistent
Speaker 3: on the stand are making them take some very big losses.
Speaker 2: Aubrey, who do you think should have been called to
Speaker 2: testify bodyguards?
Speaker 3: If they can give her immunity for pushing some drugs,
Speaker 3: they could have given the bodyguard's immunity for some of
Speaker 3: the more dangerous behave. Some of them put allegedly more
Speaker 3: criminal things that I've.
Speaker 4: Been told of alleged lead. I believe that.
Speaker 3: If there is proof that KK was ever involved in
Speaker 3: any of the stuff the civil suits are suggesting, any
Speaker 3: of the stuff that's even been suggested on the stand,
Speaker 3: that whether she wants to or not, she should have
Speaker 3: been subpoena and she should have been taking that stand.
Speaker 4: And talking about what.
Speaker 3: Has been suggested in regards to her and all of
Speaker 3: this enterprise in her role in it. However, what it
Speaker 3: makes me feel now is I think she's probably going
Speaker 3: to take the stand for Puff, and maybe the bodyguards
Speaker 3: are too, and maybe some I know somebody that's taking
Speaker 3: the stand for Puff.
Speaker 4: And I don't know how many.
Speaker 5: I don't know who's that.
Speaker 3: I don't want to say, just because I don't know
Speaker 3: if they're what name they're choosing to go under. And
Speaker 3: I take victim's choice in whether they want to test
Speaker 3: a buys themselves are under a pseudo name.
Speaker 2: Very seriously, what would be the role that that person
Speaker 2: played in the ditty inner circle?
Speaker 5: Real inner, real inner.
Speaker 4: Yeah, real inner, real freak coffee.
Speaker 5: Okay.
Speaker 2: And I'm curious what your thoughts are because you're questioning
Speaker 2: why the prosecution wouldn't have called bodyguards kkuh. Do you
Speaker 2: believe it's possibly because they don't want to offer them immunity?
Speaker 5: Do you think that there would be no.
Speaker 4: Think I think they would offer them immunity.
Speaker 3: I mean I literally, like, I'm sure you can't run this,
Speaker 3: but I literally said to them, hey, there's this bodyguard
Speaker 3: that said X, Y and Z. He's willing to tell
Speaker 3: you if you guys give him immunity. Here's his name
Speaker 3: and phone number.
Speaker 4: Let's move on. So so like, I know it was said,
Speaker 4: I know it was there.
Speaker 3: So to me, no, I don't think it's about not
Speaker 3: they're giving immunity to people that are bringing nothing to
Speaker 3: the to their charges right now, Remember, as a prosecutor,
Speaker 3: you only want to put people on stand that are
Speaker 3: going to speak to your charges. We all, I don't
Speaker 3: think anyone has a doubt in their mind that there
Speaker 3: was abuse, force, coercion and violence. We need to start
Speaker 3: focusing on the other charges.
Speaker 4: That might be a little lighter.
Speaker 3: There's still and the threshold has been met, but met
Speaker 3: by many people is always better than met by one
Speaker 3: or two. In regards to sorry, tell me where you
Speaker 3: went with that in the very beginning.
Speaker 2: Well, my question was why do you think the prosecutors
Speaker 2: wouldn't have put these other critical witnesses on the stand?
Speaker 2: I asked, is it because they didn't want to offer
Speaker 2: them immunity because potentially charges could be coming for other
Speaker 2: members of the ditty circle?
Speaker 4: I got you the bodyguards.
Speaker 3: I believe potentially could be problematic in that when everything
Speaker 3: first started happening, A lot of them have come forward
Speaker 3: in the documentaries, in podcasts and interviews. They re payments
Speaker 3: for all of those things, and they were serving up
Speaker 3: more gossip. I mean, I know some pretty horrifying things
Speaker 3: that were told to me, and you know it's alleged,
Speaker 3: but they track and there were other people that suggested
Speaker 3: those same alleged things. But I think when you put
Speaker 3: someone like that on the stand, then Diddy's team has
Speaker 3: an easy cross by saying, aren't you just after money?
Speaker 3: Because you made a lot. You did this one, this one,
Speaker 3: this one, this one. You talked about his sexuality, You
Speaker 3: shamed him, you called him gay, you said he wanted
Speaker 3: butt plugs, you talked about dildo's, and you became a
Speaker 3: gossip in the streets. Even the streets were getting to
Speaker 3: a point where they were like, yeah, moving along on
Speaker 3: him like you. You really shouldn't be out there doing
Speaker 3: interview after interview if you really want to participate in
Speaker 3: a federal try. I didn't do anything until I knew
Speaker 3: that I was not subpoena. And that's why I could
Speaker 3: come to you and start this journey with you guys,
Speaker 3: because I am a wealth of information.
Speaker 4: However, I needed.
Speaker 3: To protect that just in case I was called to
Speaker 3: speak to anyone's character or any possible events that.
Speaker 4: Could have been something I was unaware of.
Speaker 1: Re you said a moment ago you had a hard
Speaker 1: time sleeping last night. Can you tell us, for a
Speaker 1: moment and from a personal standboy standpoint, whether it was
Speaker 1: in your head and in your heart, what was so
Speaker 1: upsetting about what you saw yesterday that you had a
Speaker 1: difficult time processing and settling down.
Speaker 4: If you will, well, a.
Speaker 3: Lot of people are going to be very scared to
Speaker 3: ever come forward and tell the truth about very powerful
Speaker 3: people that are taking advantage of them, potentially even criminally,
Speaker 3: if he's able to get off on all of this,
Speaker 3: And if he gets off on all of this, it's
Speaker 3: likely because there has been too so far people that
Speaker 3: have taken the stand, in my opinion, that have been
Speaker 3: far too inconsistent.
Speaker 1: We've talked to you almost every day, and you said
Speaker 1: the prosecution was doing fairly well. This, I think rogues
Speaker 1: correct me if I'm wrong. This is the first time
Speaker 1: we heard something from you that you're kind of pausing
Speaker 1: and you're concerned, if you will, about the direction things went.
Speaker 3: I had a pause at the second person that took
Speaker 3: the stand, because Cassy was so strong and so believable
Speaker 3: according to everyone that actually even watched her, let.
Speaker 4: Alone just reading through her transcripts.
Speaker 3: Of being accountable, holding herself, holding herself accountable for both
Speaker 3: sides of it. The days she wanted to do it,
Speaker 3: in the days that she didn't, she was honest, She
Speaker 3: didn't shy away from it. She didn't seem to be
Speaker 3: lying about the reasons why she sent the messages.
Speaker 4: She did.
Speaker 3: It came off very even keeled, and for me, I
Speaker 3: respected that because I knew that there were both of
Speaker 3: those days, and I was worried that she would only
Speaker 3: go with one because obviously in a civil suit, when
Speaker 3: you file, you're not putting the good days in there.
Speaker 3: So I was worried, is she only going to run
Speaker 3: with what I saw in the civil suit, because that's
Speaker 3: going to get eaten up alive.
Speaker 4: But she held herself accountable on both sides.
Speaker 3: The second witness caused me pause and concern because of
Speaker 3: two reasons. One, we had two people drop out that
Speaker 3: were strong. Then we moved somebody in that was very inconsistent,
Speaker 3: and I had a pause during that moment as well.
Speaker 4: This is not my second pause.
Speaker 3: But Mia was like incredible, great consistent. They just didn't
Speaker 3: really pick apart anything that she said. And there are
Speaker 3: other people, forensic therapists, forensic analysis, there are people that
Speaker 3: have come very strong with you know, kind of giving
Speaker 3: the jury an understanding of why they're seeing behaviors of
Speaker 3: people staying. So a lot of things have been established
Speaker 3: that were very strong. But this specific witness, unfortunately.
Speaker 4: I think she's kind of impeaching.
Speaker 3: Both her and Cassie's characters a bit with her testimony.
Speaker 4: I don't love it.
Speaker 3: I'm not saying that she didn't see horrible things. I
Speaker 3: just don't think this was the strongest person to put
Speaker 3: on the stand. Another pause I had was the eight
Speaker 3: pack of white women before this started, Mark Erragos being
Speaker 3: able to say that, we know that optics are everything
Speaker 3: in a case like this. You've got a pregnant woman,
Speaker 3: Diddy grew his hair out gray. There's a lot of
Speaker 3: people that understood how strong that optics need to be
Speaker 3: inside a courtroom, And I just thought, eight pack of
Speaker 3: white women, why give them that?
Speaker 4: Why give them the ability to even say that? Now.
Speaker 3: I also do believe you should pick the best for
Speaker 3: the job, and that it shouldn't you shouldn't have to
Speaker 3: play those types of games when it comes down to
Speaker 3: a federal trial and.
Speaker 4: Criminal charges on this level.
Speaker 3: But you also have to be do some smart lawyering
Speaker 3: in these types of situations as well.
Speaker 4: So there have been moments of pause that I've had
Speaker 4: with this, and I get worried that victims will.
Speaker 3: First of all, many people will fall by the wayside
Speaker 3: in those civil suits, maybe because they should, maybe because
Speaker 3: they're scared there's going to be a whole lot more
Speaker 3: reasons to.
Speaker 4: Be scared, because, as we know, there has been obvious
Speaker 4: testimony to witness tampering and to.
Speaker 3: Force and coercion, and following people around, blacklisting people, having
Speaker 3: them live in states of fear, blackmailing people would suggested.
Speaker 4: Even on the stand. So all of those things tell
Speaker 4: me that.
Speaker 3: And Diddy's a scorpio and if he hasn't learned anything,
Speaker 3: he's going to be He's gonna come after everybody.
Speaker 2: Leading into now this next witness that we're all anticipating,
Speaker 2: and potentially, as you mentioned, the final victim. I don't
Speaker 2: know if it's the final witness totally, but I definitely
Speaker 2: heard that it might be the final victim. You're hearing
Speaker 2: that she might actually be the final witness.
Speaker 4: That might be the case, might be right, Yeah, I.
Speaker 2: Believe I heard that she was going to be the
Speaker 2: final victim who will be testifying on the stand. But
Speaker 2: the State is going to be calling more but for
Speaker 2: the Fed, sorry, not the State, but Jane Doe, what
Speaker 2: are you anticipating hearing from her? She, from what we've gathered,
Speaker 2: is an ex girlfriend of Sean Ditty Combs. She was
Speaker 2: involved in the freak offs, and she too, says she
Speaker 2: was a victim of his.
Speaker 4: Well, I know who this person is now.
Speaker 3: By the way, there has been a lot of changes
Speaker 3: in the ninth inning, because who this person was two
Speaker 3: days ago could have been somebody else. There's been a
Speaker 3: lot of shifting and turning and making choices.
Speaker 4: I think after seeing.
Speaker 3: What happened with Brianna, maybe they needed to shift in
Speaker 3: a certain direction. But this person, I believe, has alleged
Speaker 3: that they were a girlfriend. You know how I feel
Speaker 3: about that term, but a girlfriend. So now we're going
Speaker 3: back to the girlfriend's stuff, and we're going back to
Speaker 3: the freak offs, and we're going back to forest coercion and.
Speaker 4: The patterns that we've already.
Speaker 3: Established in the beginning of this trial. And if that's
Speaker 3: all we're getting, and maybe i've heard that this person
Speaker 3: could be on the stand for multiple days.
Speaker 2: Yes, we did actually hear from prosecutors telling the judge
Speaker 2: that they were concerned because she has an international flight
Speaker 2: a week from today. So that would imply they're concerned
Speaker 2: about the timing and that they might not be able
Speaker 2: to get it all in. And if she stakes the
Speaker 2: stand today, that would be you know, at least four
Speaker 2: or five days of testifying. That's significant, and that's more
Speaker 2: than Cassie even was on the stand, correct more than Cassie.
Speaker 3: I'm The thing is with this person is I have
Speaker 3: a personal connection that's a conflict, So I have to
Speaker 3: be very careful. I'll have to go off of her
Speaker 3: testimony alone. I don't want to get into my feelings
Speaker 3: about what she does or doesn't do, or what I
Speaker 3: you know, know to be true or not know to
Speaker 3: be true. But I really hope that they made a
Speaker 3: good decision with this person and that she is not
Speaker 3: somebody that they are going to be able to cross
Speaker 3: it with as much effectiveness as they did with Brionna.
Speaker 1: It can for clarity here. You said, you know who
Speaker 1: the person is, but do you also know the person personally?
Speaker 1: Have had interactions with this person? Yeah, can you go
Speaker 1: as far as you can? Obviously we're not asking you
Speaker 1: to identify because she's not going to be identified in court.
Speaker 1: Just anything about her, just demeanor, how she comes off
Speaker 1: to you, what your impressions are of her, just some
Speaker 1: simpler blanket thing, just your impressions of this person upon
Speaker 1: just having whatever interaction you've had with the.
Speaker 3: Interactions are minor, the understandings are major. I would say
Speaker 3: I got to see what she does in court. I'm
Speaker 3: not exactly sure. I know how she came off to me,
Speaker 3: but I'm one person, right like how you come off
Speaker 3: to a man, how you come off to other people
Speaker 3: that you are into the things you're into could be
Speaker 3: completely different.
Speaker 5: But it sounds like you're concerned about what she may
Speaker 5: do for or maybe even inadvertently against the prosecution.
Speaker 3: I'm concerned about where they could go with the cross
Speaker 3: and I'm concerned about other things outside of this trial
Speaker 3: that could get messy.
Speaker 2: Is it surprising to you that she would be needed
Speaker 2: for that long, that she has that much to say
Speaker 2: and that much to tell.
Speaker 3: Yes, but she doesn't have a civil suit yet. I
Speaker 3: don't even know that I can mention if she's in
Speaker 3: one or not, because that could be potentially putting someone's
Speaker 3: name out there and.
Speaker 4: I'm not going to do that.
Speaker 2: But is it fair to say we haven't heard details
Speaker 2: of her story yet because we had heard about the
Speaker 2: balcony dangling, because that was in Cassie's lawsuit, even though
Speaker 2: Brianna wasn't named. We'd heard rumblings about what some of
Speaker 2: these women would be testifying too. Do you believe we're
Speaker 2: going to hear things we haven't heard before in Jane
Speaker 2: Doe's testimony or is it going to be more of
Speaker 2: the same, just her personal experience.
Speaker 3: No, I believe we're going to hear more. And she
Speaker 3: also has been introduced to the public. If you're paying
Speaker 3: attention to the trial well and all of the civil
Speaker 3: suits and all of the accusations, you would be familiar
Speaker 3: with her.
Speaker 1: All right, And as we're doing this, testimony is underway
Speaker 1: and Breonna is back on the stand this morning. I
Speaker 1: wanted to ask you and one thing that's going back
Speaker 1: and forth and to your point, she's struggling.
Speaker 4: Is she still struggling this morning.
Speaker 1: Well, it seems like she's struggling pretty badly because they're
Speaker 1: going at her on one of the critical critical points,
Speaker 1: critical point about her lawsuit, which when it came out,
Speaker 1: we knew some details about the dangling over the balcony,
Speaker 1: but another very big part of that was that she
Speaker 1: said Comb's didd He groped her, grabbed her breasts, and
Speaker 1: then she got loose from him, and then there was
Speaker 1: a little back and forth and then he dangled her. Well,
Speaker 1: in court, even when she was prompted to recall that
Speaker 1: detail about her civil lawsuit that she was groped, even
Speaker 1: when prompted, she didn't come up with it again. So
Speaker 1: she's they are really going out right now.
Speaker 4: Now.
Speaker 1: It's one thing you can't remember if you were smoking
Speaker 1: weed or smoking a cigarette. It's another thing. The major point,
Speaker 1: a major point of her civil lawsuit is that groping,
Speaker 1: And what do you think hearing that now? Today? She's
Speaker 1: she couldn't come up with that detail, which, by the.
Speaker 4: Way, I don't know if she suggested any other.
Speaker 3: Drugs of that night, But if you've ever smoked the
Speaker 3: blunt or smoked a cigarette, it.
Speaker 4: Does not put your memory out. It just doesn't.
Speaker 3: You would be able to recall the events of the night.
Speaker 4: It's not a drug that.
Speaker 3: Especially at the frequency in which she sounds like she
Speaker 3: was using drugs in regards to how she's testified to
Speaker 3: using a lot of drugs. Marijuana ain't taken anybody that
Speaker 3: does a lot of drugs out anytime soon. People smoke
Speaker 3: it recreationally. It's legal in some states. You could drive
Speaker 3: while after smoking. It's not making you forget this many details.
Speaker 3: It's not making you not be able to recall this
Speaker 3: many details.
Speaker 1: Claimer, we should say we do not recommend driving after
Speaker 1: you smoke wheed, but go ahead. We got your point.
Speaker 4: You can.
Speaker 2: I have heard of, like obviously, when you drink alcohol,
Speaker 2: people talk about blacking out, right, So that's an obvious thing.
Speaker 2: Your memory is absolutely impacted with alcohol. You can't remember
Speaker 2: what you did, where you were, or sometimes how you
Speaker 2: got home. But I've heard of these instances called green outs.
Speaker 2: I've heard my daughters talk about it. I don't know
Speaker 2: if it's a thing, but I'm a green out. What
Speaker 2: is a green out?
Speaker 3: If you're taking like the one that's I don't smoke weed,
Speaker 3: but one brings you up sativa and something else.
Speaker 5: Indica is in the couch. That's how you know.
Speaker 2: Indica puts you into couch and sativa keeps you up
Speaker 2: and focused.
Speaker 3: Yes, she might have been in the couch, but I've
Speaker 3: smoken some in the couch, and if I were in
Speaker 3: the couch and then over the balcony, I'd be able
Speaker 3: to remember it even if I had been in the
Speaker 3: couch before.
Speaker 2: Yes, those are very dramatic events, as she has testified
Speaker 2: to that would be almost impossible to forget on drugs.
Speaker 1: What was it called a cocoa puff?
Speaker 5: Oh yeah, there was a Yeah, they were talking about
Speaker 5: a coke.
Speaker 4: Puff, something that you could smoke.
Speaker 1: They can know that is a blunt with cocaine sprinkled
Speaker 1: on it.
Speaker 2: Yep.
Speaker 3: It's like a black and Mile.
Speaker 4: So there's some tobacco in there and then you put
Speaker 4: marijuana on.
Speaker 3: The top and then you sprinkle cocaine on it. I've
Speaker 3: never done that, but that was a big hit over.
Speaker 4: At Bad Boy.
Speaker 1: Oh you, this was a thing. This was popular allegedly.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm just putting two and two together. You can
Speaker 2: make fun of me all you want. Obviously, he now
Speaker 2: goes by Diddy, but when you call him Puff and
Speaker 2: people who knew them and that era are still referring
Speaker 2: to him as Puff.
Speaker 5: That's how he got the name.
Speaker 1: It used to be Puff Daddy. I can't remember how
Speaker 1: we started. He's changed it four or five times, I
Speaker 1: believe legally. Even Well, now he's love, Oh yeah, he's
Speaker 1: love now?
Speaker 5: Oh yeah, no, he's love. I forgot right. We're not
Speaker 5: supposed to call him Diddy. We're supposed to call him love well, correct.
Speaker 3: Yeah, just like we're supposed to call X or Twitter
Speaker 3: X girl it's not going to happen. There are just
Speaker 3: some of us that will not be able to make
Speaker 3: that transition occur.
Speaker 1: And it's still the Sears Tower in Chicago for me.
Speaker 1: There's some things I'll just never And also it's still.
Speaker 3: The what's our stadium in LA that they changed to
Speaker 3: the crypto place, that's not the crypto place.
Speaker 2: And I'll add on reading a story this morning someone
Speaker 2: fell to their death from Mount McKinley, I was like, where, Oh,
Speaker 2: Denali Like.
Speaker 5: It's just really hard.
Speaker 2: Sometimes things don't necessarily switch off or switch on.
Speaker 4: Let us all people have some of our memories.
Speaker 3: Good guys, they just take it all away from you
Speaker 3: as you get older.
Speaker 2: All right, Well, any so we're expecting I always I
Speaker 2: want to say, there's so many different names of monikers.
Speaker 2: We are expecting Jane Doe to take the stand this afternoon.
Speaker 5: What do you hope you hear from her?
Speaker 3: Well, first thing I hope is that if prosecution starts
Speaker 3: going anywhere near the direction that they went in with Brianna,
Speaker 3: that they take her off the stand quickly, because they
Speaker 3: done left Brianna on the stand for so long that
Speaker 3: if I'm a juror, I'm confused. I have reasonable doubt
Speaker 3: now by the way I moved a vacation in order
Speaker 3: to just report on this trial. You'd think if you
Speaker 3: were a key witness and somebody who was so horrific
Speaker 3: to you that like, there's a federal trial occurring. It's
Speaker 3: just a little crazy to me that you can't move
Speaker 3: the vacation a bit to make sure that the testimony
Speaker 3: is laid out.
Speaker 4: And a bad person that shouldn't be her.
Speaker 3: If this person's opinion is they shouldn't be freed, that
Speaker 3: they wouldn't make the time to make sure that that
Speaker 3: point gets that point gets made.
Speaker 4: But who am I? I don't know. Maybe they had
Speaker 4: a birthday party to attend.
Speaker 2: Maybe she's just learned how to create boundaries in her
Speaker 2: life now because she.
Speaker 5: Didn't have any before.
Speaker 1: This is a.
Speaker 3: Federal trial and this is a man's life on the line.
Speaker 3: You better show up and move the vacation. To me,
Speaker 3: it's already giving three p suit with diamonds on the caller.
Speaker 4: I don't know.
Speaker 1: I want to ask you one last thing for me,
Speaker 1: because this has been jumping out at me almost every day,
Speaker 1: is that someone there's always somebody we discover knew and
Speaker 1: didn't say anything like someone knew or witnessed. And we'd
Speaker 1: go through a long list of folks, and some of
Speaker 1: them have been witnesses to crimes that this man committed,
Speaker 1: in particular Diddy beating Cassie on that video. We learned, Aubrey,
Speaker 1: that another security guard recorded that video on his cell
Speaker 1: phone and he took it home just so he could
Speaker 1: show his wife. Now that is disgusting to hear and
Speaker 1: to think about that. It was just voyeurism, ROAs.
Speaker 3: Can you imagine if TJ came home and was like, Hey,
Speaker 3: I want to see this girl get beat up by Diddy.
Speaker 4: Let's watch it again. Maybe we'll get turned on.
Speaker 5: I would say, who am I dating? And who am
Speaker 5: I if? I am cool with watching this and not reporting.
Speaker 1: But it's one thing, Aubrey, when we talk about people
Speaker 1: in his inner circle that saw it and they were
Speaker 1: scared of him, or they feared for their jobs or
Speaker 1: their careers, or their money, or even their their physical harm.
Speaker 1: We're talking now about this is an account. Five people,
Speaker 1: one supervisor at the security another security guard, another security guard,
Speaker 1: another security guard, and then that security guard's wife. Five
Speaker 1: people eight years ago who did not work for Sean
Speaker 1: Diddy Combs saw this woman get the shit beat out
Speaker 1: of her on video. They saw a crime being committed,
Speaker 1: and those five people did nothing. Help me with that.
Speaker 1: You've explained to his plenty ari about people in his
Speaker 1: inner circle. Help us understand that a little better, because
Speaker 1: that is a very difficult one to stomach.
Speaker 3: We just don't care enough about each other in this society.
Speaker 3: We're very individualistic, you know, not to go on a rant.
Speaker 3: But when I was in Japan and Anoma case, he
Speaker 3: asked everyone where they were from, and everyone said there
Speaker 3: are places, and then I said, oh la, and the
Speaker 3: people next to me said San Francisco. And the chef
Speaker 3: said to me, every time, we're the biggest.
Speaker 4: You know, he's the biggest name. He has all the biggest.
Speaker 3: People in the world that come and they'll say Russia,
Speaker 3: they'll say China, they'll say all they'll name their country first.
Speaker 4: Here in America.
Speaker 3: He's like, but Americans always say their location in America.
Speaker 3: We're just a very end of it visualistic place. We
Speaker 3: don't agree with those other states that are across from us.
Speaker 3: Half the time. This overall embodiment of being a proud American.
Speaker 3: It's kind of something that we sell to the rest
Speaker 3: of the world. But I don't know how many people
Speaker 3: actually feel so proud, especially with what's going on right now.
Speaker 4: I think it's on a mac that is a macro
Speaker 4: scale understanding of a micro scale in regards to this being.
Speaker 3: People see someone shot and they bust out their cameras
Speaker 3: because they want to be the first to maybe sell
Speaker 3: it to TMZ. TMZ reports somebody died before they've even died.
Speaker 3: There are all kinds of like really odd, unethical, tacky,
Speaker 3: weirdo behavior occurring constantly, and we just don't have this
Speaker 3: desire to really do what's right. If there's a come
Speaker 3: up in it for you, you'll consider that come up first.
Speaker 3: And I don't know how we got here, and I
Speaker 3: have some ideas of how we could fix it, but
Speaker 3: I don't know how we got here because when the
Speaker 3: people running the country are really individualistic, it's a top
Speaker 3: down messaging that goes something like this, protect you and
Speaker 3: your own first, worry.
Speaker 4: About others later. So if any of these people.
Speaker 3: Or or if at all, Yeah, And technology makes it
Speaker 3: even easier to do that because it isolates you from
Speaker 3: having to create friendship circles. And AI's making it so
Speaker 3: you can have friends now that you don't even have
Speaker 3: to have friends. Really, you could just ask chat GPT
Speaker 3: loves me more than my own friends do.
Speaker 4: So it's like we're being more and more isolated. I
Speaker 4: think it really is going to come down.
Speaker 3: To parents truly like grounding their kids in nature, making
Speaker 3: them put their bare feet in the grass and get
Speaker 3: out away from their phones more, because they're just they're
Speaker 3: they're truly becoming such a everything is becoming such a
Speaker 3: viral quick moment, and if you don't have it, and
Speaker 3: you can't do it, you aren't relevant. And everybody has
Speaker 3: moved on after five or six minutes of it being
Speaker 3: all the talk of the town.
Speaker 2: It's insane and what we're seeing in that courtroom is
Speaker 2: just the worst possible outcome of all of that. But Aubrey,
Speaker 2: as always, we so appreciate your insight and just the
Speaker 2: knowledge you have about what was happening and what is
Speaker 2: happening in that courtroom, but what was happening inside that
Speaker 2: inner circle of Diddy. So thank you once again for
Speaker 2: another incredible breakdown of the day's events of yesterday and today.
Speaker 2: Of course, Thursday, we'll have much more to talk about
Speaker 2: soon with you, but thank you all for listening to us.
Speaker 2: I'm Amy roebuck On behalf of my partner TJ. Holmes
Speaker 2: and Aubrey O Day. Thank you for listening