June 11, 2025 • 20 mins
Another shocking twist from former girlfriend “Jane” testifying to the role playing that took place during certain sex parties, with Jane taking on the role of Kobe Bryant, male escort Paul as Shaquille O’Neill and Diddy as Michael Jordan. Amy and T.J. talk about the details most new outlets couldn’t even print and how the defense chipped away at Jane’s credibility, painting her as a love struck gold digger.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
Hey, folks, it is Wednesday, June eleventh, on what is
now officially the fifth week, day twenty one of testimony
in the Didty trial. Welcome everybody to this episode of
Amy and TJA, where we continue to be your one
stop shop to get your pot up on everything going
on in the Didty trial and robes. Usually when we
record these, we're able to say testimony is going on
as we're recording. This is different today than getting a
(00:25):
later start in course, so there won't be any highlights
to come out of it this morning, Yes, we won't.
Speaker 2 (00:30):
We'll only have actually a very truncated afternoon session because
the jury has been staying late to try and get
in all of this insane testimony from Jane Ditty's ex girlfriend.
And so yeah, they're starting at one pm and he
said the judge said they are going to end no
later than four pm. They've been extending to five pm
(00:50):
some days to try and get it all in. No
word on why they're starting later this morning though, maybe just.
Speaker 3 (00:55):
Giving them a little bit of a break.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
We know there was nothing official from anybody in the
courtroom for is taking place. But to your point as well,
it's we got to point out. This is the witness
that's been on the stand. Now, Jane, this will be now,
I mean tomorrow, it'll be a full week, a full
week that she has been on the witness stand. And
was she not the one they were trying to get
out of there? She had somewhere to go, something to
(01:18):
something to do.
Speaker 2 (01:19):
They said an international flight on Thursday afternoon, and yet
we heard from defense attorneys yesterday saying they're going to
need all day tomorrow to continue their cross examination. So
no word if she's got like an eleven pm international flight.
You know, sometimes they are late at night on Thursday,
so she might be able to actually be on the
standard will three pm and then make her way to
Newark or JFK and get out of Dodge.
Speaker 1 (01:41):
Literally, that sounds crazy to do that. And look, they
are trying to be accommodating. A lot of people might
look at this and we even question, like, wait a minute,
this is this important, and why with somebody's vacation or
international flight, whatever they have to do, shouldn't they move
everything else. Well, it's nice that maybe the government is
trying to be accommodating, or the judge at least is trying.
Speaker 2 (01:59):
To maybe Jane has learned through all of these experiences boundaries,
and she said, hey, here's mine. I'm leaving on Thursday night.
Speaker 1 (02:07):
And they get smack her with a Pacinka sabbena as
soon as they wanted.
Speaker 2 (02:12):
To after that area, probably not good to draw your
first boundary with the federal goverm federal.
Speaker 1 (02:18):
But of course we are talking about Jane again. She's
a very very important key witness for the prosecution. Obviously,
she is one of four victims that they are basing
their case against Diddy on. She is testifying under that
pseudonym Jane to protect her identity. She is someone who
was dating. I guess this is fun dating.
Speaker 2 (02:36):
That's a very I don't know if that term is appropriate.
Speaker 1 (02:40):
You know what, I thought this was good. I don't
know if we got into it. The defense and talking
to her on the stand, said she was there for
love and he was there for desire, like they had
two different things they wanted out of that relationship. She
and Sean Combs, and he just wasn't to her what
she was to him. And she talked about continuing to
(03:00):
love this man.
Speaker 2 (03:02):
As she's testified, and she said their relationship was private
versus he had public relationships while he was with her,
and that fueled a lot of jealousy. And that's what
the defense is going for right now. They are trying
to make the case that what she's testified to and
her anger and resentment and feelings now come from a
(03:22):
place of jealousy, not from coercion, not from anything criminal,
but because she was jealous.
Speaker 3 (03:28):
She was jealous.
Speaker 1 (03:30):
She was They are trying to portray her as some
kind of a gold digger or a clinger on her
if you will, yes, that you were getting something. Again,
they are making the point that she was getting something
out of this relationship. Apparently there was something financial plenty
that we have gotten into. But she continues and again,
she was on there for several days with direct examination
(03:50):
from the prosecution, but we knew things were going to change.
You're going to look a little different, sound a little different.
Once the defense got up there and it was all
day a cross examination, and they kind of did do
what they were trying to do, chip away at this
idea that she couldn't get away, that she was scorse,
that she didn't have an option, and they did this
(04:11):
through text messages and some video messages. Excuse me, some
audio messages, voicemails that showed that she was sometimes a
willing enthusiastic and even had a say in a lot
of what happened in these free.
Speaker 2 (04:27):
Costs, a say in who perhaps the escorts might be,
certain male escorts that she liked better than others, So
she had choices in terms of who she was having
sex with in front of Ditty. But so many other
details came out. You talked about how the defense was
trying to set into record that she was a gold digger,
(04:47):
that she got something financially, significantly financially out of this.
She apparently went from a fourteen hundred square foot apartment
to a fifty three hundred square foot home paid for
by Ditty. One of the more contentious exchanges between Ditty's
defense attorneys and Jane was involving a bag. It started
(05:09):
out because I talked about that jealousy. She was jealous
about one of the girlfriends receiving a Chanel bag, and
so Ditty's attorney said, did you get a Chanelle bag
as a gift from Ditty? And she said no, I
only got trauma. But then the defense attorney pointed out
that she got a botakea bag what is a botakea bag.
(05:30):
Jane's response was, I'm sure you have one. The defense
attorney said she did not, and then she asked how
much does a botaga bag cost? And Jane said, how
much does my body cost? So there was a little
bit of contentious back and forth when I think Jane
realized what they were trying to imply about her.
Speaker 1 (05:47):
Well, they implied it without saying it directly, but they
were as close to the line as you could get.
They're trying to tell the jury, Look, this is a
woman who was there willingly, she was getting all of
this out of it, and now she doesn't like how
something went, and she's telling all these wild stories.
Speaker 3 (06:01):
Now they haven't gone as.
Speaker 1 (06:02):
Far as they've gone on some witnesses and saying they're
not suggesting she's making necessarily things up. But the characterization
of her relationship from listening to her being talked to
by the prosecution versus being her a question by the
defense are two starkly different experiences, and that is what
they're trying. So any of that is going to what
(06:24):
confuse a duror at least give a juror some doubt
about the stories they're hearing. But the point being was
she there willingly or not. That has everything to do
with the racketeering and the sex trafficking, the sex trafficking case.
That's everything it is.
Speaker 2 (06:37):
And to that point, the defense had her read some
wildly explicit text messages that most news outlets reported that
they couldn't report. It was too salacious, it was just
too much to put into writing. But we did get
a few of those that were out there, and I
(06:59):
don't know what are we willing to even say here
on this podcast about what some of those text messages
were where it showed Jane, like you said, enthusiastically participating
or talking about participating in upcoming freak offs.
Speaker 1 (07:15):
Look, if folks you can go try to track these
down or read them yourself. But it's not I would
argue ropes. I think a lot of people in their
personal lives might talk to their.
Speaker 3 (07:23):
Lover that way.
Speaker 1 (07:26):
A news outlet is not used to printing some of
that stuff. But I'm just trying to give a sense
to the listener here that you were not talking about
some outlandish Where did they get that? I've never heard
of that before type language. It was just crude, it
was vulgar. It was it was eroji, it was profane,
It was two people talking about having sex.
Speaker 2 (07:46):
The point being that Jane seemed like she was really
into it. Yes, in her text messages.
Speaker 3 (07:52):
Seemed it was. I mean, it was clear.
Speaker 1 (07:54):
The same point you make about text messages that were
written years ago when people what was their mindset at
the time when they're explaining some pain they're in or
some trauma or experience.
Speaker 3 (08:03):
Well, how do you take these now?
Speaker 1 (08:05):
If she wrote these a year, two year, three years ago,
does that not give her, give us, give the jury
an idea in real time where her head was.
Speaker 2 (08:16):
Does it not do yes? And she claims that she
wrote those texts and exchanged those types of texts and
voicemails with Diddy because she didn't want him to feel rejected.
She is maintaining that she still didn't want to do
any of these things, but she knew the only way
she could see him and be around him was if
she agreed to it, and so she agreed to it
(08:37):
enthusiastically only to make him excited about seeing her. So
she was manipulating him. And she's admitting that on the
stand that she didn't really feel the way she said
she felt in those texts, she was only doing it
to keep him with her.
Speaker 1 (08:52):
Okay, but does that tell the jury that she was
doing it consciously, yes, willingly, Yes, had a means to
an end. There was a purpose to what she was doing.
So does that mean non con sexual consensual? Excuse me,
it was flipball co sexual.
Speaker 2 (09:09):
That could be a new term. Actually in this was
it conseexual? No, we don't. We don't need any new terms.
But no, I think that from what I read, it doesn't.
I think the defense is doing an excellent job at
showing the jury that she, at least in terms of
what Combe was receiving from her, seemed as though she
(09:30):
was not only willing but excited to participate in some
of these freak offs. Now, we did see other texts
that the the prosecution talked about in her direct testimony,
where she clearly was telling him she did not want
to do it anymore, that she felt awful about herself
and about the experience. So we've seen those texts too.
But if the defense is trying to show jurors, hey,
(09:50):
how would did he have known half the time she
was telling him she was into it, She was excited
about it, She couldn't wait to see him, She couldn't
wait to do all the things they had planned to do.
So that's fairly damning, I would have to say.
Speaker 1 (10:13):
You know, she does, in her testimony over the past
hour day, seemed like someone who like genuinely did care
for this guy, and so well, she claims she still does,
but she says she cared enough to that point there
she felt responsible for him, she explained, because he was
revealing himself in these freak offs, in these private moments,
(10:34):
how vulnerable he was. She took them as what an
honor for me that he has let me into these,
So now I have to take care of him. He's
in a vulnerable state, so I need to make sure
he's okay. And she went as far, she claims robe
as to start researching, start looking into why a man
(10:55):
would be into seeing somebody he cared about, somebody he
was dating have sex with another man. I thought that
was interesting that she took it, because, to be honest
with you, I don't get it. I think a lot
of people don't get that particular kink or whatever it's proclivity.
Speaker 3 (11:11):
I don't know. But she looked into it.
Speaker 2 (11:13):
And she talked about that specifically on the stand, and I, man,
I'm learning things that I didn't know. She said. She
with her research discovered that Diddy was a cuck, which
is aluckl.
Speaker 1 (11:27):
That's something we've seen now that word is out there,
we're used to that. Yeah, what that means, But she says,
she turned it into something and started using the word
she cuck shortened it.
Speaker 2 (11:35):
Yes, so she said, because a cock derives pleasure seeing
his woman derive pleasure from another man.
Speaker 1 (11:44):
And that's where we usually stop and go, Okay, we've
heard a similar definition. That makes sense, But she continued,
do you do have the exact quote?
Speaker 2 (11:52):
I do? She well, She continued to say that cucks
could also have by curiosity that they are too ashamed
to ex experience themselves, so they use the woman, their
woman to venture or to at least explore this curiosity
without actually doing the act itself. So he wanted his
(12:12):
girl to have sex with another man in lieu of
him having sex with another man, and he derived pleasure
from watching that because he himself wasn't willing to have sex.
Speaker 3 (12:24):
With the man. That is what she testified.
Speaker 1 (12:26):
That was a direct quote you delivered, and that was
kind of an eye opening moment because why a lot
of people just why look, people are into what they're into.
Speaker 3 (12:34):
There's no judgment there.
Speaker 1 (12:36):
Which you're doing in whatever dark room, as long as
you're not hurting yourself or anybody else, knock yourself out.
But we heard repeatedly about him sitting in a corner
and masturbating while he watched the woman he was in
a relationship have sex with one, two, three guys at
times in a night.
Speaker 2 (12:52):
And interestingly, she testified to this that if he found
out that she might have been or could have been
hooking up with another man while he wasn't there, he
went into jealous rages. So it wasn't even about the
idea that it was something he wanted to watch. He
wanted to experience and that gave him sexual pleasure, which
is very specific, and I think a lot of light
bulbs went off. It made sense to me for the
(13:14):
first time because none of it really did up until
she described it that way.
Speaker 1 (13:18):
It really wasn't. Oh, and who's to say if that's
actually the case?
Speaker 3 (13:26):
Whatever? Did he's into? Did he's into?
Speaker 1 (13:28):
But that gave really I am And wasn't she the
one that testified as well that he only wanted to
have sex with her after yes, watching her sex have
sex with That's.
Speaker 2 (13:40):
The only way that he would want to actually have
sex with her is after he saw her have sex
with another man.
Speaker 1 (13:47):
Well, again, these folks are into what they're into. But
she again, why would she keep doing this? She talked
about it being ninety percent of the time that they
were to together.
Speaker 3 (13:56):
Was a freak off.
Speaker 1 (13:57):
But she said this, She talked it was almost I'm
only able to read it, we can only read it,
but softly and sweetly about these intimate moments like this
was the time I got to be with him.
Speaker 2 (14:09):
They said. She was smiling, smiling, and that's damning for
the prosecution. If she is recalling these freak offs now
speaking with the defense attorney under cross examination with loving
energy and a smile on her face. That's not a
victim crying and ashamed and tortured. It's the defense is
(14:35):
doing an excellent job. I think I'll just leave it
at that. I'm no legal expert, but certainly if you're
watching this as a layman, that is what jurors are doing.
So they're not legal experts either. So actually, the way
we're watching this, the way we're reading this is I think,
probably a decent idea of what a lot of jurors
may be thinking and feeling.
Speaker 1 (14:53):
The only upside we are getting is we do have
the advantage of we can go look up and we
can go talk to legal experts to break this stuff
down for us, who are telling us that, yes, the
defense has been doing a good job with his winners.
The juror doesn't have anybody to break it down for them.
They're not supposed to read, watch, talk nothing about this trial,
so they have to do your point. They are as
(15:14):
lay as lay people get. They get no by you
to tell.
Speaker 2 (15:18):
You're not sequestered. Right. I can't even imagine you are
now sitting on the biggest case the world is watching,
and the details are as salacious as any trial I
have ever seen. Get and you're not talking to anyone
about it. That seems wild.
Speaker 3 (15:35):
You think you could come home to me.
Speaker 2 (15:37):
Everybody tells one person. That's my theory, No matter what,
no matter what secret you're told at work or by
your best friend or whatever, everyone tells one person, and
usually it's the person you're in a relationship with, and
then that person tells one person.
Speaker 3 (15:50):
Essentially that means everybody's going to help.
Speaker 1 (15:52):
That's what I think.
Speaker 2 (15:53):
That's just that's just my, yes, non expert opinion about
how things are past life and around.
Speaker 1 (16:01):
Look, this is the last one. You'll see a lot
of headlines about this. But we'll just tell you again
the trifecta. Yes, they've talked. We almost know the names.
That was what the punisher? That was Anton. There's a Paul,
there's a Don, there's a Sly. Why in God's name
am I right now able to reel off the names
of that many male escorts.
Speaker 2 (16:21):
Yes, because there's Cabral too. Don't forget about Cara.
Speaker 1 (16:25):
I wanted to save Cabral for the Big Nights.
Speaker 2 (16:27):
So was the showstopper. Oh yeah, he was the grand
finale and the game over situation, the big boom. These
are all the names that they were giving Cabral.
Speaker 1 (16:36):
Cabral also the one that tried to blackmail them.
Speaker 2 (16:39):
I don't know who which which name was trying to
get I thought you thought it was Anton, but maybe it.
Speaker 3 (16:44):
Was Anton is a dependable fellow.
Speaker 2 (16:46):
There he was reoccurring.
Speaker 1 (16:51):
But at this one about all these male escorts, they
had one in particular that they really liked. His name
is Paul, and I said the three of them did.
He and Jane had such a good chemistry going that
they call themselves the Trifecta. They had a nickname for themselves,
and they did I don't know if it's role playing,
is it the right way to say it, but they
(17:13):
did a little something which they had names for each other.
Speaker 2 (17:16):
Yes, So Jane was Kobe, Paul was Shack, and Diddy
was Jordan. I gut as in as in yes as Kobe, Bryan,
Shaquille O'Neal and Michael Jordan. Sorry, I didn't think those
names needed clarification, but just in case, fine.
Speaker 1 (17:33):
Because you would hear that and go, wait, what, Well,
she's not really talking about Wait what is it?
Speaker 2 (17:37):
Was it just in name? There was like and again
I don't know that I want a visual, but I'm
just curious the basketball. The reason why they used basketball
grades we was just because they're goats, because they're amazing
at what they do, and so that's why they took
on those names. I don't I can't imagine how role
playing would come into play when it came to having sex.
Speaker 3 (17:58):
I don't know.
Speaker 2 (17:59):
Look, I don't want to know. Actually into it might
ruin basketball for me, or might ruin sex for.
Speaker 1 (18:05):
You, could be far worse. I don't get it. Look
we are. There has been a horrific testimony and details
in this trial, but some of these things you really
just your jaws drop. You're not supposed to know this
stuff about somebody's life. Again, knock yourself out, but you're
(18:26):
just not supposed to know. That's the one that's going
to get a lot up and has been getting a
lot of headlines. Why Diddy wanted to call himself Michael
Jordan during a threesome with his girlfriend and another man,
a man that he was referring to as who was
shack again?
Speaker 2 (18:40):
Oh wait, Shaq was Paul? I think, yes, Shaq was Paul.
Speaker 3 (18:44):
And she's Kobe.
Speaker 1 (18:45):
And that detail came out and it's one that all
the reporters in the room immediately wrote about.
Speaker 2 (18:51):
It was headline grabbing for sure, and that wasn't just
clickbait because there was truth to it. I mean, it's
one of those headlines where you think, nah, this can't
be real, and lo and behold it was.
Speaker 1 (19:01):
Yeah, that's one you didn't have to try on. You
didn't have to try to come up with something clever,
just right, the headline, did he used to call himself
Michael Jordan during sex?
Speaker 3 (19:08):
What?
Speaker 2 (19:10):
Oh my goodness.
Speaker 1 (19:11):
So yeah.
Speaker 2 (19:11):
So cross examination continues today for a couple hours and
then reportedly all day tomorrow, So we'll see where the
defense goes. But certainly they have I think they've done
what they've accomplished or what they set out to do.
They've accomplished what they set out to do, which was
to certainly bring a question into juror's minds as to
whether or not Jane was there willingly and profited handsomely,
(19:35):
handsomely for it.
Speaker 1 (19:37):
And again, as she testifies again today, her rent is
being paid by the defendant, Her attorney's fees are being
paid by the defendant. Didty is still paying for all
that with her? Again, that's got to be something that
stands out in juror's minds one way or another.
Speaker 3 (19:52):
How don't know.
Speaker 2 (19:53):
And she reiterated that she loves him still and that
also has to have an impact on jurors as well.
So we will continue to give you all the updates
what happens in this Manhattan courtroom today and the days
that follow. Thank you, though for listening to us, and
we hope you have a wonderful day. Everybody
Hey, folks, it is Wednesday, June eleventh, on what is
now officially the fifth week, day twenty one of testimony
in the Didty trial. Welcome everybody to this episode of
Amy and TJA, where we continue to be your one
stop shop to get your pot up on everything going
on in the Didty trial and robes. Usually when we
record these, we're able to say testimony is going on
as we're recording. This is different today than getting a
(00:25):
later start in course, so there won't be any highlights
to come out of it this morning, Yes, we won't.
Speaker 2 (00:30):
We'll only have actually a very truncated afternoon session because
the jury has been staying late to try and get
in all of this insane testimony from Jane Ditty's ex girlfriend.
And so yeah, they're starting at one pm and he
said the judge said they are going to end no
later than four pm. They've been extending to five pm
(00:50):
some days to try and get it all in. No
word on why they're starting later this morning though, maybe just.
Speaker 3 (00:55):
Giving them a little bit of a break.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
We know there was nothing official from anybody in the
courtroom for is taking place. But to your point as well,
it's we got to point out. This is the witness
that's been on the stand. Now, Jane, this will be now,
I mean tomorrow, it'll be a full week, a full
week that she has been on the witness stand. And
was she not the one they were trying to get
out of there? She had somewhere to go, something to
(01:18):
something to do.
Speaker 2 (01:19):
They said an international flight on Thursday afternoon, and yet
we heard from defense attorneys yesterday saying they're going to
need all day tomorrow to continue their cross examination. So
no word if she's got like an eleven pm international flight.
You know, sometimes they are late at night on Thursday,
so she might be able to actually be on the
standard will three pm and then make her way to
Newark or JFK and get out of Dodge.
Speaker 1 (01:41):
Literally, that sounds crazy to do that. And look, they
are trying to be accommodating. A lot of people might
look at this and we even question, like, wait a minute,
this is this important, and why with somebody's vacation or
international flight, whatever they have to do, shouldn't they move
everything else. Well, it's nice that maybe the government is
trying to be accommodating, or the judge at least is trying.
Speaker 2 (01:59):
To maybe Jane has learned through all of these experiences boundaries,
and she said, hey, here's mine. I'm leaving on Thursday night.
Speaker 1 (02:07):
And they get smack her with a Pacinka sabbena as
soon as they wanted.
Speaker 2 (02:12):
To after that area, probably not good to draw your
first boundary with the federal goverm federal.
Speaker 1 (02:18):
But of course we are talking about Jane again. She's
a very very important key witness for the prosecution. Obviously,
she is one of four victims that they are basing
their case against Diddy on. She is testifying under that
pseudonym Jane to protect her identity. She is someone who
was dating. I guess this is fun dating.
Speaker 2 (02:36):
That's a very I don't know if that term is appropriate.
Speaker 1 (02:40):
You know what, I thought this was good. I don't
know if we got into it. The defense and talking
to her on the stand, said she was there for
love and he was there for desire, like they had
two different things they wanted out of that relationship. She
and Sean Combs, and he just wasn't to her what
she was to him. And she talked about continuing to
(03:00):
love this man.
Speaker 2 (03:02):
As she's testified, and she said their relationship was private
versus he had public relationships while he was with her,
and that fueled a lot of jealousy. And that's what
the defense is going for right now. They are trying
to make the case that what she's testified to and
her anger and resentment and feelings now come from a
(03:22):
place of jealousy, not from coercion, not from anything criminal,
but because she was jealous.
Speaker 3 (03:28):
She was jealous.
Speaker 1 (03:30):
She was They are trying to portray her as some
kind of a gold digger or a clinger on her
if you will, yes, that you were getting something. Again,
they are making the point that she was getting something
out of this relationship. Apparently there was something financial plenty
that we have gotten into. But she continues and again,
she was on there for several days with direct examination
(03:50):
from the prosecution, but we knew things were going to change.
You're going to look a little different, sound a little different.
Once the defense got up there and it was all
day a cross examination, and they kind of did do
what they were trying to do, chip away at this
idea that she couldn't get away, that she was scorse,
that she didn't have an option, and they did this
(04:11):
through text messages and some video messages. Excuse me, some
audio messages, voicemails that showed that she was sometimes a
willing enthusiastic and even had a say in a lot
of what happened in these free.
Speaker 2 (04:27):
Costs, a say in who perhaps the escorts might be,
certain male escorts that she liked better than others, So
she had choices in terms of who she was having
sex with in front of Ditty. But so many other
details came out. You talked about how the defense was
trying to set into record that she was a gold digger,
(04:47):
that she got something financially, significantly financially out of this.
She apparently went from a fourteen hundred square foot apartment
to a fifty three hundred square foot home paid for
by Ditty. One of the more contentious exchanges between Ditty's
defense attorneys and Jane was involving a bag. It started
(05:09):
out because I talked about that jealousy. She was jealous
about one of the girlfriends receiving a Chanel bag, and
so Ditty's attorney said, did you get a Chanelle bag
as a gift from Ditty? And she said no, I
only got trauma. But then the defense attorney pointed out
that she got a botakea bag what is a botakea bag.
(05:30):
Jane's response was, I'm sure you have one. The defense
attorney said she did not, and then she asked how
much does a botaga bag cost? And Jane said, how
much does my body cost? So there was a little
bit of contentious back and forth when I think Jane
realized what they were trying to imply about her.
Speaker 1 (05:47):
Well, they implied it without saying it directly, but they
were as close to the line as you could get.
They're trying to tell the jury, Look, this is a
woman who was there willingly, she was getting all of
this out of it, and now she doesn't like how
something went, and she's telling all these wild stories.
Speaker 3 (06:01):
Now they haven't gone as.
Speaker 1 (06:02):
Far as they've gone on some witnesses and saying they're
not suggesting she's making necessarily things up. But the characterization
of her relationship from listening to her being talked to
by the prosecution versus being her a question by the
defense are two starkly different experiences, and that is what
they're trying. So any of that is going to what
(06:24):
confuse a duror at least give a juror some doubt
about the stories they're hearing. But the point being was
she there willingly or not. That has everything to do
with the racketeering and the sex trafficking, the sex trafficking case.
That's everything it is.
Speaker 2 (06:37):
And to that point, the defense had her read some
wildly explicit text messages that most news outlets reported that
they couldn't report. It was too salacious, it was just
too much to put into writing. But we did get
a few of those that were out there, and I
(06:59):
don't know what are we willing to even say here
on this podcast about what some of those text messages
were where it showed Jane, like you said, enthusiastically participating
or talking about participating in upcoming freak offs.
Speaker 1 (07:15):
Look, if folks you can go try to track these
down or read them yourself. But it's not I would
argue ropes. I think a lot of people in their
personal lives might talk to their.
Speaker 3 (07:23):
Lover that way.
Speaker 1 (07:26):
A news outlet is not used to printing some of
that stuff. But I'm just trying to give a sense
to the listener here that you were not talking about
some outlandish Where did they get that? I've never heard
of that before type language. It was just crude, it
was vulgar. It was it was eroji, it was profane,
It was two people talking about having sex.
Speaker 2 (07:46):
The point being that Jane seemed like she was really
into it. Yes, in her text messages.
Speaker 3 (07:52):
Seemed it was. I mean, it was clear.
Speaker 1 (07:54):
The same point you make about text messages that were
written years ago when people what was their mindset at
the time when they're explaining some pain they're in or
some trauma or experience.
Speaker 3 (08:03):
Well, how do you take these now?
Speaker 1 (08:05):
If she wrote these a year, two year, three years ago,
does that not give her, give us, give the jury
an idea in real time where her head was.
Speaker 2 (08:16):
Does it not do yes? And she claims that she
wrote those texts and exchanged those types of texts and
voicemails with Diddy because she didn't want him to feel rejected.
She is maintaining that she still didn't want to do
any of these things, but she knew the only way
she could see him and be around him was if
she agreed to it, and so she agreed to it
(08:37):
enthusiastically only to make him excited about seeing her. So
she was manipulating him. And she's admitting that on the
stand that she didn't really feel the way she said
she felt in those texts, she was only doing it
to keep him with her.
Speaker 1 (08:52):
Okay, but does that tell the jury that she was
doing it consciously, yes, willingly, Yes, had a means to
an end. There was a purpose to what she was doing.
So does that mean non con sexual consensual? Excuse me,
it was flipball co sexual.
Speaker 2 (09:09):
That could be a new term. Actually in this was
it conseexual? No, we don't. We don't need any new terms.
But no, I think that from what I read, it doesn't.
I think the defense is doing an excellent job at
showing the jury that she, at least in terms of
what Combe was receiving from her, seemed as though she
(09:30):
was not only willing but excited to participate in some
of these freak offs. Now, we did see other texts
that the the prosecution talked about in her direct testimony,
where she clearly was telling him she did not want
to do it anymore, that she felt awful about herself
and about the experience. So we've seen those texts too.
But if the defense is trying to show jurors, hey,
(09:50):
how would did he have known half the time she
was telling him she was into it, She was excited
about it, She couldn't wait to see him, She couldn't
wait to do all the things they had planned to do.
So that's fairly damning, I would have to say.
Speaker 1 (10:13):
You know, she does, in her testimony over the past
hour day, seemed like someone who like genuinely did care
for this guy, and so well, she claims she still does,
but she says she cared enough to that point there
she felt responsible for him, she explained, because he was
revealing himself in these freak offs, in these private moments,
(10:34):
how vulnerable he was. She took them as what an
honor for me that he has let me into these,
So now I have to take care of him. He's
in a vulnerable state, so I need to make sure
he's okay. And she went as far, she claims robe
as to start researching, start looking into why a man
(10:55):
would be into seeing somebody he cared about, somebody he
was dating have sex with another man. I thought that
was interesting that she took it, because, to be honest
with you, I don't get it. I think a lot
of people don't get that particular kink or whatever it's proclivity.
Speaker 3 (11:11):
I don't know. But she looked into it.
Speaker 2 (11:13):
And she talked about that specifically on the stand, and I, man,
I'm learning things that I didn't know. She said. She
with her research discovered that Diddy was a cuck, which
is aluckl.
Speaker 1 (11:27):
That's something we've seen now that word is out there,
we're used to that. Yeah, what that means, But she says,
she turned it into something and started using the word
she cuck shortened it.
Speaker 2 (11:35):
Yes, so she said, because a cock derives pleasure seeing
his woman derive pleasure from another man.
Speaker 1 (11:44):
And that's where we usually stop and go, Okay, we've
heard a similar definition. That makes sense, But she continued,
do you do have the exact quote?
Speaker 2 (11:52):
I do? She well, She continued to say that cucks
could also have by curiosity that they are too ashamed
to ex experience themselves, so they use the woman, their
woman to venture or to at least explore this curiosity
without actually doing the act itself. So he wanted his
(12:12):
girl to have sex with another man in lieu of
him having sex with another man, and he derived pleasure
from watching that because he himself wasn't willing to have sex.
Speaker 3 (12:24):
With the man. That is what she testified.
Speaker 1 (12:26):
That was a direct quote you delivered, and that was
kind of an eye opening moment because why a lot
of people just why look, people are into what they're into.
Speaker 3 (12:34):
There's no judgment there.
Speaker 1 (12:36):
Which you're doing in whatever dark room, as long as
you're not hurting yourself or anybody else, knock yourself out.
But we heard repeatedly about him sitting in a corner
and masturbating while he watched the woman he was in
a relationship have sex with one, two, three guys at
times in a night.
Speaker 2 (12:52):
And interestingly, she testified to this that if he found
out that she might have been or could have been
hooking up with another man while he wasn't there, he
went into jealous rages. So it wasn't even about the
idea that it was something he wanted to watch. He
wanted to experience and that gave him sexual pleasure, which
is very specific, and I think a lot of light
bulbs went off. It made sense to me for the
(13:14):
first time because none of it really did up until
she described it that way.
Speaker 1 (13:18):
It really wasn't. Oh, and who's to say if that's
actually the case?
Speaker 3 (13:26):
Whatever? Did he's into? Did he's into?
Speaker 1 (13:28):
But that gave really I am And wasn't she the
one that testified as well that he only wanted to
have sex with her after yes, watching her sex have
sex with That's.
Speaker 2 (13:40):
The only way that he would want to actually have
sex with her is after he saw her have sex
with another man.
Speaker 1 (13:47):
Well, again, these folks are into what they're into. But
she again, why would she keep doing this? She talked
about it being ninety percent of the time that they
were to together.
Speaker 3 (13:56):
Was a freak off.
Speaker 1 (13:57):
But she said this, She talked it was almost I'm
only able to read it, we can only read it,
but softly and sweetly about these intimate moments like this
was the time I got to be with him.
Speaker 2 (14:09):
They said. She was smiling, smiling, and that's damning for
the prosecution. If she is recalling these freak offs now
speaking with the defense attorney under cross examination with loving
energy and a smile on her face. That's not a
victim crying and ashamed and tortured. It's the defense is
(14:35):
doing an excellent job. I think I'll just leave it
at that. I'm no legal expert, but certainly if you're
watching this as a layman, that is what jurors are doing.
So they're not legal experts either. So actually, the way
we're watching this, the way we're reading this is I think,
probably a decent idea of what a lot of jurors
may be thinking and feeling.
Speaker 1 (14:53):
The only upside we are getting is we do have
the advantage of we can go look up and we
can go talk to legal experts to break this stuff
down for us, who are telling us that, yes, the
defense has been doing a good job with his winners.
The juror doesn't have anybody to break it down for them.
They're not supposed to read, watch, talk nothing about this trial,
so they have to do your point. They are as
(15:14):
lay as lay people get. They get no by you
to tell.
Speaker 2 (15:18):
You're not sequestered. Right. I can't even imagine you are
now sitting on the biggest case the world is watching,
and the details are as salacious as any trial I
have ever seen. Get and you're not talking to anyone
about it. That seems wild.
Speaker 3 (15:35):
You think you could come home to me.
Speaker 2 (15:37):
Everybody tells one person. That's my theory, No matter what,
no matter what secret you're told at work or by
your best friend or whatever, everyone tells one person, and
usually it's the person you're in a relationship with, and
then that person tells one person.
Speaker 3 (15:50):
Essentially that means everybody's going to help.
Speaker 1 (15:52):
That's what I think.
Speaker 2 (15:53):
That's just that's just my, yes, non expert opinion about
how things are past life and around.
Speaker 1 (16:01):
Look, this is the last one. You'll see a lot
of headlines about this. But we'll just tell you again
the trifecta. Yes, they've talked. We almost know the names.
That was what the punisher? That was Anton. There's a Paul,
there's a Don, there's a Sly. Why in God's name
am I right now able to reel off the names
of that many male escorts.
Speaker 2 (16:21):
Yes, because there's Cabral too. Don't forget about Cara.
Speaker 1 (16:25):
I wanted to save Cabral for the Big Nights.
Speaker 2 (16:27):
So was the showstopper. Oh yeah, he was the grand
finale and the game over situation, the big boom. These
are all the names that they were giving Cabral.
Speaker 1 (16:36):
Cabral also the one that tried to blackmail them.
Speaker 2 (16:39):
I don't know who which which name was trying to
get I thought you thought it was Anton, but maybe it.
Speaker 3 (16:44):
Was Anton is a dependable fellow.
Speaker 2 (16:46):
There he was reoccurring.
Speaker 1 (16:51):
But at this one about all these male escorts, they
had one in particular that they really liked. His name
is Paul, and I said the three of them did.
He and Jane had such a good chemistry going that
they call themselves the Trifecta. They had a nickname for themselves,
and they did I don't know if it's role playing,
is it the right way to say it, but they
(17:13):
did a little something which they had names for each other.
Speaker 2 (17:16):
Yes, So Jane was Kobe, Paul was Shack, and Diddy
was Jordan. I gut as in as in yes as Kobe, Bryan,
Shaquille O'Neal and Michael Jordan. Sorry, I didn't think those
names needed clarification, but just in case, fine.
Speaker 1 (17:33):
Because you would hear that and go, wait, what, Well,
she's not really talking about Wait what is it?
Speaker 2 (17:37):
Was it just in name? There was like and again
I don't know that I want a visual, but I'm
just curious the basketball. The reason why they used basketball
grades we was just because they're goats, because they're amazing
at what they do, and so that's why they took
on those names. I don't I can't imagine how role
playing would come into play when it came to having sex.
Speaker 3 (17:58):
I don't know.
Speaker 2 (17:59):
Look, I don't want to know. Actually into it might
ruin basketball for me, or might ruin sex for.
Speaker 1 (18:05):
You, could be far worse. I don't get it. Look
we are. There has been a horrific testimony and details
in this trial, but some of these things you really
just your jaws drop. You're not supposed to know this
stuff about somebody's life. Again, knock yourself out, but you're
(18:26):
just not supposed to know. That's the one that's going
to get a lot up and has been getting a
lot of headlines. Why Diddy wanted to call himself Michael
Jordan during a threesome with his girlfriend and another man,
a man that he was referring to as who was
shack again?
Speaker 2 (18:40):
Oh wait, Shaq was Paul? I think, yes, Shaq was Paul.
Speaker 3 (18:44):
And she's Kobe.
Speaker 1 (18:45):
And that detail came out and it's one that all
the reporters in the room immediately wrote about.
Speaker 2 (18:51):
It was headline grabbing for sure, and that wasn't just
clickbait because there was truth to it. I mean, it's
one of those headlines where you think, nah, this can't
be real, and lo and behold it was.
Speaker 1 (19:01):
Yeah, that's one you didn't have to try on. You
didn't have to try to come up with something clever,
just right, the headline, did he used to call himself
Michael Jordan during sex?
Speaker 3 (19:08):
What?
Speaker 2 (19:10):
Oh my goodness.
Speaker 1 (19:11):
So yeah.
Speaker 2 (19:11):
So cross examination continues today for a couple hours and
then reportedly all day tomorrow, So we'll see where the
defense goes. But certainly they have I think they've done
what they've accomplished or what they set out to do.
They've accomplished what they set out to do, which was
to certainly bring a question into juror's minds as to
whether or not Jane was there willingly and profited handsomely,
(19:35):
handsomely for it.
Speaker 1 (19:37):
And again, as she testifies again today, her rent is
being paid by the defendant, Her attorney's fees are being
paid by the defendant. Didty is still paying for all
that with her? Again, that's got to be something that
stands out in juror's minds one way or another.
Speaker 3 (19:52):
How don't know.
Speaker 2 (19:53):
And she reiterated that she loves him still and that
also has to have an impact on jurors as well.
So we will continue to give you all the updates
what happens in this Manhattan courtroom today and the days
that follow. Thank you, though for listening to us, and
we hope you have a wonderful day. Everybody
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Ridiculous History
History is beautiful, brutal and, often, ridiculous. Join Ben Bowlin and Noel Brown as they dive into some of the weirdest stories from across the span of human civilization in Ridiculous History, a podcast by iHeartRadio.