NEW YORK (AP) – A ju-search at Sean “Diddy” Combs’ sex trafficking trial said it reached a verdict against the hip-hop mogul on Tuesday on 4 of five counts, failing to reach the highest course decision.
The judge instructed the ju judge to continue measuring the charges, repeating the sentiment of the prosecutor and Combs’ defense team, and that it was too early to give up on reaching the verdict of every count, just two days after deliberation.
Judge Arun Subramanian said he received the memo Tuesday at 4:05pm. The memo said the ju umpire failed to reach a unanimous verdict on the allegations of the shaking conspiracy, as there were ju umpires on both sides with “inexplicable views.”
Subramanian was not keen to have the ju apprentice announce a partial verdict without first trying to determine the remaining count. He stated that the ju judge has the right to issue a partial verdict, but that is a more last resort and showing that the panel is being deliberated given the shortest time, but he rather gives them more time and waits for the full verdict.
Combs’ attorneys surrounded him with a defense table shortly after the memo was sent to court. The hip hop mogul looked gross as if they had explained to him what was going on. At one point, the leading defense counsel, Mark Agnifilo, left the huddle, returned on a piece of paper and handed it over to combs.
Combs’ mother and some of his children returned to court after the judge announced that the ju judge had reached a partial verdict.
Meanwhile, prosecutors were glued to tables on cell phones and laptop computers.
US lawyer Aide Molen Comey suggested that the judge give the ju judge a revised version of what is called Allen’s accusation.
But defense attorney Agnifilo said the ju apprentices do not need to help move quickly and did not want to get Allen’s accusations in any way.
“I don’t ask the court to say a lot because I don’t think there’s much to be needed,” Agnifilo said.
Rade’s conspiracy – counting 1 on the ju apprentice’s verdict sheet is the most complicated of allegations against combs. This is because it requires that he determine not only whether he runs a “assault company,” but also whether he was involved in committing some or all of the various types of crimes, such as lures and arson.
The charges have been affected by Riceteer, best known for being used in organized crime and drug cartel cases, and fall under Rico, a corrupt organizational law.
The ju judges will be deliberating from Monday. Earlier on Tuesday, they asked to consider important testimony from one of the prosecutor’s most important witnesses, the hip-hop mogul’s former longtime girlfriend Cathy.
The ju umpire demanded testimony 75 minutes after the second day, and Combs demanded accusations that he used his fame, wealth and violence to push his two girlfriends into a drug-fueled sex marathon with a male sex worker known as “freak-off” or “hotel night.”
A panel of eight men and four women asked for explanations from Cathy about be-hitting, kicking and dragging her in a hotel in Los Angeles in 2016.
They also asked to see Cathy’s testimony about the incident in which Combs said he accused her of driving her away at the Cannes Film Festival in France in 2013. On her way back to the US, she threatened to release an explicit video of her having sex.
Additionally, the ju-described judges sought testimony from Cathy and stripper Daniel Phillip about jumping into his lap at a hotel in New York City after Philip testified.
Philip, who was at the hotel for a sexual encounter with Cathy between 2012 and 2014, said:
Philip testified that he asked R&B singer Cathy, whose real name is Cassandra Ventura. He said he told her she was in real danger. Cathy said, “I tried to convince me that it was basically okay. It’s fine. It’s fine, it’s fine.”
Philip and Cathy were among the first witnesses to testify when the trial began last month.
The ju apprentice’s request for testimony came soon after the day Combs’ lawyers and prosecutors began to clash with Judge Arun Subramanian on the ju apprentice questions left from the end of the first day of Monday’s deliberation.
The ju apprenticed wanted clarification on the aspects of the shaking conspiracy charges that would help determine what qualifies as a drug distribution, namely whether comb is convicted or exempt from count.
Subramanian said he would remind the ju apprentices of the instructions they gave them in that part of the case before they began deliberations on Monday. Combs’ lawyers wanted a broader response, but prosecutors argued that doing so could be more confusing, Subramanian agreed.
On Monday, the panel deliberated for more than five hours without reaching a verdict.
The defense argues that the prosecutor is trying to criminalize Combs’ swinger lifestyle, and that if any, his actions amounted to domestic violence rather than federal felony.
Combs, 55, could face 15 years in prison to live behind bars if convicted of all charges. Combs was enthusiastically awarded with the lawyer, as he had through the trial, as he argued at the request of the ju judge. He then leaned forward and scrutinized something on the computer screen in front of him.
After pleading not guilty, Combs chose not to testify as his lawyers built their arguments through a lengthy cross-examination of dozens of witnesses, primarily called by prosecutors, through a lengthy cross-examination of dozens of witnesses, including some former combs employees being reluctant only after being given immunity.
When the ju apprentices first left the room and began deliberation on Monday, Combs was sitting in a chair at the defense table for a while, facing the three rows of spectators packed with his family and friends.
Those supporters held their hands and bowed their heads in prayer. After they were finished they applauded together, and Combs also returned to the front of the room to applause.
Combs also showed off two books he is reading: “The Power of Positive Thinking” by Norman Vincent Peel and “The Benefits of Happiness” by Sean Acher.
Just an hour after deliberation, the ju judge sent a note to the judge saying, “The person we are concerned cannot follow the directions of your honor. Can you talk to your honor or could you interview him?”
The judge instead decided to send a note to the ju apprentice reminding him of his deliberate and obligation to follow his direction regarding the law.
By the end of the day, the ju umpire had returned to orbit and sent me a note about the drug distribution.
Source link
