Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
The decision by Sean “Diddy” Combs’ Lawyers not to call witnesses to testify in his federal trial for sexual crimes is the responsibility of the accusation of reasonable doubt, according to legal experts.
Diddy’s lawyer Marc AGINFILO, said in court on Monday that the defense plans to examine evidence with the jury and would not need witnesses to testify on behalf of the rapper. The rapper’s legal team plans to rest his file on Wednesday, with closing arguments that should start the next day.
“The decision to call or not witnesses during the defense case is a calculated risk,” said criminal defense and the civil lawyer Adanté Pointer The lawyers from The People LLC told Fox News Digital.
Diddy Defense should not call witnesses in the trial on sexual trafficking
Sean “Diddy” Combs will not testify in his federal trial for sexual crimes. (Stephen Lovekin / Getty Images)
“Not calling witnesses means that the defense is essentially said to the jury that there is no one they know in the whole universe who can speak in the name of Diddy to help his defense. On the other hand, calling a witness can open this person to question and perhaps arouse a prejudicial testimony against Diddy, according to their interactions with him and their knowledge of these women.”
The pointer compared the defense decision not to call witnesses to a “Pandora box”.
“Since the defense indicates that they do not intend to call a single witnessThey do not think that potential witnesses favorable to the defense will lead to a net gain for Diddy. His lawyers have essentially determined that the juice was not worth it. “”
Judge Arun Subramanian Will probably ask Diddy to confirm his decision not to take a stand.
“Diddy’s testimony would simply allow the accusation to tell his case and put the previous evidence before the jury for a second or third time,” said Pointer. “The accusation would have a day on the field, including each declaration of video, text and witness to trial against him and to force Diddy to admit the authenticity of videos, receipts and invoices, articles recovered from his home and hotel rooms, and that he was present during events described in previous testimony.
Diddy’s defense will not call any witness in his federal trial. (Jane Rosenberg)
“In the light of the evidence already presented at the trial, it would most likely be an excoriating and humiliating counter-examination, the genre of prosecutors await their entire career to lead.”
Closing arguments for the trial, which started May 5 with selection of the juryshould start on Thursday after Diddy lawyers explained that they only needed two days to defend their client.
Lawyer Tre Lovell told Fox News Digital that the defense probably wanted to double a reasonable doubt, and that the “exotic lifestyle” of Diddy does not equal that the accusation proposed, namely that “Diddy formed a criminal business to have fun, the Tony Soprano of baby oil”.
Do you like what you read? Click here for more entertainment news
“The only reason not to call witnesses in your defense is that if you absolutely believe that there is a reasonable doubt, and that you want to do anything to withdraw, including calling your own witnesses,” said Lovell. “It would be logical to call a psychiatrist to explain that the behavior of Cassie and Jane more reflects a consensual relationship, based on the autonomy that each woman had, the advantages they received and the love they had for Diddy.
The Duddy federal trial began on May 5 and the case is expected to rest this week. (Jane Rosenberg)
“In addition, calling managers of Bad Boy Entertainment would be useful to ward off the more personal behavior of Diddy, to dispel the criminal business element. Finally, perhaps an industry or a legal expert to distinguish aspects of sex workers’ against” prostitution “,” to counter the prostitution accusation “.
Lovell added: “However, the defense considered that even calling witnesses like these would have the potential to negatively affect a reasonable doubt, and chose not to do it.”
Mark ChutkowWho previously directed the criminal division of the American prosecutor’s office in Detroit, thought that Diddy’s decision not to testify was “intelligent”.
“This is a real big bet to testify in a case like this where the accusation brought charges of racketeering, which allows them to bring evidence of bad acts,” said Chutkow. “By taking a stand, he would simply submit to even worse acts that were prohibited by the court. And that was probably the right call.”
Click here to register for the Entertainment Newsletter
“Diddy’s decision not to testify can also be considered as also warned, because he can say by finishing:” Look, at the jury, the accusation had six weeks of time to show you, to try to prove their case. “Defense lawyers will say this:” We have shown reasonable doubt thanks to our counter-examination, and we no longer want to waste your time. And to remind the jury that the presumption of innocence always goes to Diddy as a defendant in this case. “”
Cassie Ventura testified in the federal trial of Sean “Diddy” for sexual crimes. (Jane Rosenberg)
Chutkow noted how the burden of the evidence concerned the government, not on the founder of Bad Boy Records or his team.
“When you present a case, if you are on the defense side, you would better be good, because if it falls flat, you go back in a way the marker, and you could be in a worse position,” said the lawyer. “So, sometimes, it’s more. I know that some people suggest that” well, wow, doesn’t he have something he could put? “It may be in some ways an opportunity for the defense to say:” No, we did not need it. “
Watch: Legal Expert explains Diddy’s defense movements
The affair approaching his closure more than seven weeks after his start, and nine months after the arrest and the charge of Diddy, Chutkow thought that the two parties had “what they sought to accomplish”.
“The accusation presented all the evidence. It was not excluded. Defense, however, did a good work in a counter-examination,” he said. “They have brought numerous additional communications between Diddy and these other women to show that the relationship is much more complex.
“One of the things I think that the accusation will have to do during the closing argument is to say essentially:” Listen, it is not like a traffic case that you would see on television. It is not, you do not have a situation of someone was kidnapped and chained on a underground radiator and glamorous, but it is always a golden cage. “”.
Click here to obtain the Fox News app
Chutkow added: “The other area which, I think, would like to underline is blackmail in this case. That the use of bands and the threat of exposure of these bands to bring women to comply with what Diddy wanted to do is an element of constraint in itself. And if I was on the side of the prosecution, I would consider this as convincing proof.”
Combs was billed with racket plot (Rico); Sexual traffic by force, fraud or coercion; And transportation to engage in prostitution in a federal accusation not sealed on September 17. He risks 15 years in life prison if he is found guilty. Diddy maintained his innocence throughout.
