Celebrity Lawyer Analyzes Testimonies & Strategies in Diddy Trial

[Source: Merit TV]

Celebrity lawyer and legal analyst Christopher C. Melcher, who is ranked as a best family law attorney in California, analyzes testimonies and strategies in the Diddy federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial.

Joe Gumm:

Happening now. Bombshell testimony, the Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs sex trafficking and racketeering trial. trial. Victim number two, testifying under the name Jane, back on the stand for a second day sobbing through much of her testimony. And just moments ago saying she took drugs during the hotel nights with Diddy because she “didn’t want to feel like it was too real.”

Telling the jury that her relationship with Diddy lasted right up until the night he was arrested. Of course, this after dramatic moments in court yesterday with the judge threatening to kick Diddy out of his own trial for making facial expressions and nodding at the jury during testimony of Cassie Ventura‘s friend, Bryana Bongolan.

Let’s bring in Chris Melcher, celebrity lawyer and partner at Walzer Melcher & Yoda LLP, which is ranked as a best family law firm in Los Angeles, CA. Chris, we appreciate you joining us here on this Friday.

Judge Threatens to Remove Diddy from Court

Let’s start with the judge threatening to kick Diddy out of the courtroom for repeatedly nodding at the jury. Do you know what part Diddy was nodding during specific testimony and do you know how the jury reacted to that and how important is this disruption?

Chris Melcher:

Well, Joe, I’ve heard from media accounts, so this is not the first time that this has happened. So the judge witnessed twice during testimony that Diddy was nodding or showing disapproval for certain parts of this testimony. And that’s really a way of communicating to the jury without taking the stand. Because he does not have to obviously testify in his own defense, but if he’s sitting there and communicating and saying, yes, this is something I agree or disagree with during this testimony, it’s like the same.

And also we don’t know, and it’s so hard to read jurors, are they just agreeing with him or are they just trying to be polite in just engaging with him with their eyes. So we don’t know the impact that that would have. The judge was furious about it and could result in him being excluded from the courtroom if it continues.

Will Diddy Testify?

Joe Gumm:

All right, two questions from that, Chris. First of all, if you’re defending Diddy, do you like that passion and explosions and head nodding and facial expressions and hands and things like that? And do you think Diddy will, when it’s the defense’s turn, do you think Diddy will testify?

Chris Melcher:

Well, Joe, this is always very difficult. It would be really hard, obviously for any of us to stand trial and listen to all this and not react to it. So that’s human nature. And jurors are looking at the defendant and they’re observing this conduct. And if you’re just standing still and stoic, the jury might say, oh, this person has no conscience, has no feelings. How could they just sit there expressionless listening to this? So it’s a very fine thing to do. I think that they would be better if he was showing remorse or feeling sad or compassion. Those would be better emotions there.

I think testifying, I really doubt that he would testify because there’s so much out there that we’ve heard of horrific and depraved conduct that I just don’t see him attempting to explain this on the stand.

Witness “Jane” Back on the Stand

Joe Gumm:

All right. Jane is back on the stand now, a much anticipated witness. She is the central figure in one of the sex trafficking counts that Diddy is facing. She talked a little bit about Diddy flying her around to Miami in New York. Turks and Caicos. Talk to us about why her testimony is so important to this charge.

Chris Melcher:

Sure. So there’s a transportation element to one of the charges that he’s facing. So if he transported someone for the purpose of prostitution or trafficking, then that’s itself a crime. So it seems to me that on that transportation count that he’s going to be most likely convicted of that, or at least I should say there’s sufficient evidence from which a jury could reasonably do that. The same with the trafficking.

I think the more difficult one is this RICO, this criminal enterprise charge, which is normally we see used for a cartel or the mafia. Technically they might have enough here, but it really doesn’t make a lot of sense to apply to him.

New Testimony in Diddy Trial

Joe Gumm:

All right. Cassie’s friend, Bryana Bongolan, she concluded her testimony yesterday with the defense really trying to poke holes in her testimony, questioning the timeline of the alleged 2016 incident with Diddy holding her over the balcony, but introducing text messages, showing dates that were wrong and asking, “Can you be in California and New York at the same time?”

So was she an effective witness for the prosecution?

Chris Melcher:

I think so. The defense did a good job in showing that she said, I think it was like September 24th or 26, something that this incident allegedly happened and the defense showed that Diddy was in New York there, at least. There were hotel bills during that period.

But afterwards on redirect, she was rehabilitated in saying, look, she didn’t make an exact note of the day. She had taken some photos of her injuries from the balcony incident afterwards and was trying to recreate the date. And then there was a text message that Cassie had sent, I believe it was. But one of her friends, and I can’t recall, I think it was Cassie, sent a message recounting what had happened. So that seemed to validate it.

The other attack was on all these drugs she was using, which I understand could certainly impair her judgment or memory, but Diddy was allegedly involved in this and actually supplying those substances to her. So I didn’t quite understand what the defense was trying to do there.

Diddy Prosecution Team Analysis

Joe Gumm:

Chris, 10 seconds or less, how is the prosecution team doing in the last four weeks? Give them a grade of the witnesses they’ve had on the stand so far.

Chris Melcher:

Well, Joe, I’m going to say a B+ or an A-. It’s hard to judge in the middle of this, but they’re doing it methodically. They’re getting the evidence out there and he is taking some really devastating blows so far.

Joe Gumm:

Yep, trying to prove those charges. Chris Melcher, top family law attorney and celebrity legal analyst always a pleasure. Thank you for the context and insight. We appreciate it. Have a great weekend.

Make sure to follow Chris on Twitter at @CA_Divorce.