June 5, 2025 • 45 mins
Aubrey O’Day isn’t just watching the courtroom drama unfold—she’s sounding the alarm.
In this scorched-earth episode, she reveals the late-night thoughts keeping her up, and the prosecution moves that might just be fatal missteps. And speaking of slipping—did Diddy really call himself the devil? If so, could he now end up dancing through the flames…untouched?
From heavenly hopes to hellish outcomes, Aubrey breaks it all down with her signature flair.. because if the devil is in the details, she’s here to expose every last one.
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 (00:01):
Amy and TJ presents Aubrey Oday covering the Diddy Trial.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
Welcome everyone to Amy Roebuck and TJ. Holmes presents Aubrey
O Day covering the Diddy Trial. I'm here with my
partner TJ. Holmes, and we're looking at miss Aubrey O
day right now and Aubrey another huge day in court
and one of the star witnesses, one of Cassie's closest friends, Brianna,
(00:30):
is back on the stand right now, still facing some
of that cross examination.
Speaker 3 (00:35):
Yeah, some of that cross examination that she is just
failing miserably with. Unfortunately, it has what a difference a
day makes.
Speaker 4 (00:43):
You know, you're on a high from Mia.
Speaker 3 (00:44):
You start to get into racketeering, sex trafficking, We start
to really get into the nuts and bolts of this,
these the charges, and unfortunately Bona has just not been
consistent with you know, what she's told prosecutors versus what
she's said on the stand. Nicole west Morland, who also
(01:08):
crossed my bandmate Don Richard, is crossing her and she's
a beast. She is just she is finding every inconsistency,
every way to discredit and there are some real ways
to discredit in this round, some of those things being
I mean, at this point, what I think that she's
doing is not only you know, she's there to coroborate Cassie,
(01:30):
but we don't need any more coroboration in regards to
the violence. In my opinion, what I see her doing
is her testimony is an impeachment on both of their
characters a bit at this point, which we don't need
to go backwards. The defense scored some serious points. They
also really pushed the fact that she does have a
civil suit.
Speaker 4 (01:49):
She's in kahoots or she was in cahoots allegedly with.
Speaker 3 (01:52):
Cassie after she filed her lawsuit, and you know that's
witnesses talk victims put to alleged victims talking to victims.
And she's also having to testify under immunity because she
was the drugs supplier and although she did establish that
that's not where the majority of her income usually comes from,
(02:14):
at the time, it was coming a lot from that
direction because of the amount of drugs that Cassie needed supplied.
And then there are just too many inconsistencies about all
of these horrific stories that she was.
Speaker 4 (02:26):
Able to get out. And then when Nicole came in.
Speaker 3 (02:29):
She just couldn't remember if it was this, if it
was that, I don't recall.
Speaker 4 (02:33):
I don't recall it was brutal.
Speaker 1 (02:35):
You don't think it was enough of some of the inconsistencies,
and there were plenty, she said, I don't remember a lot,
but one of them was, you told them you were
smoking a cigarette at the time, and you're telling us
she was smoking marijuana at the time. I know that
seems minor, but do you think it was effective enough
even if the inconsistencies were minor, that they collected enough
to put in a juror's mind. You know what, if
(02:55):
she didn't remember that thing, then maybe she's not remembering
the other thing correctly.
Speaker 4 (02:59):
Well.
Speaker 3 (03:00):
According to what I experienced, how this process works is
Homeland Security will reach out to you directly. They will
set up a meeting if you're willing to speak with them.
He did tell me that the men told me within
the laws that occur now, they can't tape you during
those meetings.
Speaker 4 (03:18):
They just are taking notes.
Speaker 3 (03:20):
So I assume if you go past that level and
they are able to put you in the circle of
the criminal behavior in one way or another, that really
speaks to the charges that they're going for. Then you're
speaking to prosecutors, you're being deposed, and you're having depositions,
and you're giving answers. So to me, once again, we
have somebody that was inconsistent in the way that she
(03:41):
told the story and the way she's telling it on
the stand, and I think throughout that entire process you
should be able to weed out what you should be
able to weed.
Speaker 4 (03:53):
Out these inconsistencies.
Speaker 3 (03:55):
And also I don't know that she made any points
towards I think there were two good things that were established.
Speaker 4 (04:03):
One of them is that Cassie's drug addiction, in.
Speaker 3 (04:07):
Her involvement in it, was starting around two thousand and
nine and that it was really bad in about twenty fourteen,
which is establishing it got worse due to the hands
and her time with Puff, which is something that she
did testify to.
Speaker 4 (04:21):
So I guess that's one good thing. Another good thing.
But again, Nicole.
Speaker 3 (04:25):
Is so effective, which Diddy's defense attorney, Nicole Westmoreland is
so effective in regards to just not letting things get
by the jury and.
Speaker 4 (04:38):
Not letting things in. But there was a moment where
they were trying.
Speaker 3 (04:41):
To establish then a producer named rob Holiday was contacted
and or sorry, contacted Brianna and wanted to try to
fix and settle out the situation. So that's a bit
helpful in regards to the prosecution proving coercion and you know,
the cleanup.
Speaker 4 (05:00):
Messes, etc.
Speaker 3 (05:02):
I'm sure something did happen, but because there were so
many inconsistent statements, I'm not exactly.
Speaker 2 (05:07):
Sure what I was going to ask you, Aubrey, based
on your experience and what you've seen and heard and
the people who you intimately know who are a part
of Diddy's inner circle, did it sound believable what she
testified to, even if the defense was able to poke
some holes into some inconsistencies. Do you believe that did
he said to her? I am the devil and I
(05:28):
could kill you. Do you believe did he dangled her
over that seventeenth floor balcony even though there were no
other witnesses?
Speaker 3 (05:35):
I would believe that that type of behavior sounds pretty
consistent with everything that we've heard so far from other
witnesses that are consistent.
Speaker 4 (05:43):
So yeah, I, in my.
Speaker 3 (05:46):
Opinion, I believe that that sounds consistent in my opinion,
just being around the man, Like I said, almighty King
rides on the backs of everybody, and you know the
stories that he would do, all of these grandiose events
of how he could go to Dubai and ride.
Speaker 4 (06:03):
On the backs of people, and he's a king of
all kings, like you know, these these these these.
Speaker 3 (06:09):
People that are saying he was like a god and
he was all encompassing. We all have the same narrative.
And then again, he kept us so isolated that any
thought outside of that wasn't even being presented to us.
We didn't even have anything to bounce that idea off of.
All we saw was the King, and everybody was falling
in line.
Speaker 2 (06:28):
You said, King, God, you heard him say those things,
But what about a devil? Does that sound like something
he would want to be known as or be feared as.
Speaker 3 (06:38):
I think when if you're on a lot of drugs
and you're there to potentially threaten someone, or you're offended or.
Speaker 4 (06:48):
You know, angry at a situation, and.
Speaker 3 (06:50):
You're on a lot of drugs, that allegedly you could
say any of the number of things he's been accused
of saying.
Speaker 1 (06:58):
God, King, what about monster? Is that going too far?
Because some of the behavior that has been laid out
the past four weeks is of someone who is other
level beyond just a bad boss. Does monster fit based
on what you know of this man? Is that just
too far?
Speaker 3 (07:15):
Well, geez tj if Devil is maybe potentially accurate monsters
like a little few steps above devil in my book,
But I can't say personally that I would call him
those names. But after witnessing the things that I did
and understanding it in much more detail since this trial
(07:38):
has started, those words are very They feel like they
align with the testimony that's being given.
Speaker 1 (07:47):
Wait a second, you worked with him closely intimately for years.
You know him better than most or certainly during that time.
But you're telling us right, you have learned more about
him in this trial. Now that's giving you a different
impression of the guy you knew.
Speaker 3 (08:03):
Yeah, I mean, like of all the things that I knew,
I mean, I didn't spend much of my time after
leaving being fired considering him as a person. I just
moved on. But if, But now, because I've been so
involved in this for the past two weeks, before anyone
even knew what was happening, I've just been able to
(08:24):
talk to so many people and to understand so many
levels of things that were occurring that were out of
my advantage point.
Speaker 4 (08:33):
And I think that when you.
Speaker 3 (08:35):
Add them all up and they have you know, people
that are coroborating those stories, that it's it's just it's
out of the realm of anything that I could understand
a man to be. You know, I just I don't
know many men that I don't know any men.
Speaker 4 (08:54):
You know, I know some really bad, powerful people, But.
Speaker 3 (08:58):
To be aired out at this extend to this level,
it's pretty it's very.
Speaker 4 (09:03):
Bad behavior to me.
Speaker 3 (09:05):
I'm a hard person to ask the words question too,
because I think words.
Speaker 4 (09:08):
Are man made and they have the meaning that you
allow them to have.
Speaker 3 (09:13):
So whether you say devil, god, king, or mad man,
whatever the words are, those are just descriptive words.
Speaker 4 (09:21):
To me. They're just man made words. They don't really
hold any meaning other than what you give them.
Speaker 3 (09:27):
But that's not technically how the world chooses to see words. So,
you know, that's more of my bally alternative healing wu
wou side. Something only has the power that you allow
it to have. But in this specific trial in court
and with jurors, words absolutely matter, and those words are
very damning.
Speaker 5 (09:48):
I don't think we've discussed this before.
Speaker 2 (09:50):
We had a question, did you ever see meat or
no Brianna in any way, shape or form while you
were there?
Speaker 3 (09:57):
If I ever met her, it would have been in
She seems to have been around during a time period
that I was there. But like I said, the worlds
were so separate in regards to you know, Cassie wasn't
in the studio making music, like she said, her full
time job became something else. We were in the studio
all day making music. We were around the enterprise every day,
(10:20):
and then when we were taken out, we were with
her in all of the social settings. They would have
her around with us.
Speaker 2 (10:27):
With all of the drug use that Breonna testified to,
and not just her own or Cassie's, but also Ditti's
as well. Did you I don't think we've asked you this.
When you were around Diddy in a professional environment, recording
in the studio or at least for the show, making
the band, did you ever see him seemingly out of
control on drugs? Inebriated not fully there.
Speaker 4 (10:54):
The first couple of words.
Speaker 3 (10:55):
I mean, I was laughing in my head thinking have
you seen making the band?
Speaker 4 (10:59):
But the last few were the last.
Speaker 3 (11:01):
Few statements, inebriated, not having any control.
Speaker 2 (11:07):
No high, how about really really high?
Speaker 3 (11:10):
I think even on a normal day, his energy is
at a place that you could potentially gather the thought
that he might be really high.
Speaker 2 (11:21):
Were you too young to know that or to think
that at the time? Only upon what you're hearing? And
then reflection, are you thinking that or at the time
you know what? Were you seventeen eighteen nine, I mean
you were young. Would you even know what that look like?
Would you even have known to be concerned about it
or recognize it?
Speaker 3 (11:36):
I didn't even know when we would get out of
the studio at Daddy's house, out of the elevator and
there would just be like a puff of white smoke,
and we couldn't figure out what direction to go in.
I didn't even really understand what that was until it
was explained to me, and until I started feeling a
little loopy. Like I said, we used to run to
the staircase.
Speaker 4 (11:55):
To get air.
Speaker 1 (11:58):
Rihanna test point. Of course, the incident we'd heard so
much about, but this was the first time we got
a first person account of it. Brianna said, he dangles
her off a seventeenth floor balcony, he said. She claims
he was yelling, you know what the fuck you did?
And she says she has no idea what she did.
How did that story, or at least that part of it.
(12:19):
I want to ask you about that in particular, like
this man is banging on the door, he comes in,
Matt hangs me off a balcony, and I don't even
know what he's upset about.
Speaker 4 (12:29):
Yeah, I mean that did stand out to me. I
was wondering. I could make tons of different assumptions.
Speaker 3 (12:34):
Somehow it's likely protecting Cassie's secret or something protecting her
from him in some type of way that he found out.
Speaker 4 (12:43):
But that's just allegedly. I would have no idea.
Speaker 3 (12:46):
But also I don't know what the situation was because
first she says it was a party, then she was
sleeping in her bed. I mean, what was it, girl?
I need a picture. I was seeing a party at first,
and then apparently it's a sleep in bed.
Speaker 4 (13:00):
I don't know which story is true.
Speaker 3 (13:04):
And unfortunately, in a juror's mind, when they can't even
place where the events started and they can't put a
picture of how it all began, and that's not even clear.
I don't know as a juror how how clear everything
else could be for me if we couldn't even start
(13:24):
off the setting of the situation, and a big and
a house party and sleeping in bed are two very
different things. And I think if you remember being hung
off the balcony, you probably remember if you were in
bed sleeping, or if it was a house party.
Speaker 2 (13:38):
It might determine how much drugs you had been taking.
I mean, I was thinking that also would speak in
a weird way. Maybe not in the way in a
counterintuitive way, but as a juror, I'd be thinking, well,
if she was taking the copious amount of drugs that
she said she was, it would make sense that maybe
it is a little fuzzy, but you wouldn't forget being dangled.
Speaker 3 (13:57):
No, you wouldn't forget being dangled. I think that there's
a possibility of that. Listen, we still have more cross left,
and we have a redirect. The redirect might fable to
establish things a bit more clearer. Sometimes just being you know,
it's a high pressure situation, being on a stand and
(14:17):
these are incredible lawyers that are cross examining her, So
maybe just the pressure of that situation had her faltering.
Speaker 4 (14:25):
I don't know, but to me, when I look.
Speaker 3 (14:28):
At any of these people, like like, sorry to roll
back to what you asked me in the beginning, TJ.
I took what I said to Homeland Security so seriously.
If there were things that I saw, like I witnessed
a whole lot of things, But unless I understood the
beginning and end of how it happened, or who was
doing it, or or what this person said it was
(14:51):
after the fact, I'm not going to offer up that
type of information because that information is just not valuable
because it could be shred apart, too inconsistent. There were
things that I told them, Hey, I saw this.
Speaker 4 (15:04):
I saw that.
Speaker 3 (15:05):
But if I was to get crossed, and cross was
to ask me, are you sure it wasn't a facelift
or a nose job, I'd have to say that could
be a possibility. And I don't think maybe just people
don't understand to be that clear. And because I grew
up around lawyers, I knew to be but I just
I didn't offer anything that I couldn't factually prove that
(15:29):
I didn't have. I like always at least two people
that can cooberate a story. I make sure even in life,
when I go through something very hectic or something that
I think is unethical in any workplace, I will document
it immediately to a friend through phone call, through text,
and even if I can record, if it's in a
one party consent record state, I will start recording immediately,
(15:52):
just to make.
Speaker 4 (15:52):
Sure that I've got the receipts.
Speaker 3 (15:54):
To prove what I'm talking about, because when we get
to levels like these, inconsistencies can lose a case and
it can send somebody free that potentially could be very dangerous.
Speaker 1 (16:14):
Again, as we sit here, she's not done yet. There
is cross examination and a redirect butt at this point.
Maybe we know the answer given some of the responses
you've given us already, but I'll ask, yeah, has she
been a win for the defense, a win for the prosecution,
or this one's right now about playing even.
Speaker 4 (16:33):
So far as of now, defense serious win.
Speaker 3 (16:36):
They made some serious points on her. Prosecution probably regrets
putting her on the stand. I just don't think it
was necessary.
Speaker 4 (16:44):
I think they're.
Speaker 3 (16:45):
Overshooting with a few people, with certain people. I think
they're just overshooting it a bit, and that's a very
risky game to play against lawyers that are very good.
And another thing that I'm concerned about it after she's
finished with redirect today, I believe we're going to have
(17:06):
I believe that we're going to have the final Jane
speaking and I and from what I hear, it will
take maybe five to six days and then they're done
with presenting their case, which means sadly, I don't think
we're seeing a KK and I don't think we're seeing
a bodyguard. And of all the things that I have
(17:28):
been able to understand throughout my time being like you know,
I said, I'm a self acclaimed attorney, investigator, journalist. For
the past two years, I have spent a lot of
time trying to put pieces together, partly for the project
that I was working on, and also partly just for
my own understanding of something as serious as a man's
(17:52):
life that will be will be taken from him. And
because you know, as we've seen throughout this trial, I
have no people to be inconsistent, I had to wonder,
what is everybody that takes the stand going to be
giving and is this something that is corroborated and proved
(18:13):
by very consistent people.
Speaker 4 (18:15):
Are we going to venture off.
Speaker 3 (18:16):
Into a lot of things that maybe are closer to
the line of piling up on now the things that
have been proven, and my eyes are so strong that
I think it's still there. But a witness that's inconsistent
and very inconsistent and also getting immunity because of supplying
(18:41):
a lot of drugs that they were both taking, I
don't know how much that testimony is going to sit
with me well as a juror. You don't recall a
lot of things when you're on drugs.
Speaker 4 (18:53):
If you can't recall a lot of.
Speaker 3 (18:54):
Things, and you're saying you can't, and we know that
you're where the drug supplier and that you did a
lot of drugs, to me, I need it something more credible.
And by the way, me personally, I know a lot
of people that are more credible that should be on
that stand.
Speaker 4 (19:08):
So I'm just.
Speaker 3 (19:11):
I was like, it was hard to sleep last night.
I'm very concerned about the case that I'm seeing.
Speaker 4 (19:17):
And I still believe that you.
Speaker 3 (19:20):
Know that this is the prosecution in ausas have such
a high threshold, but they also have such a high
conviction rate that they wouldn't just be playing silly games
right now.
Speaker 4 (19:31):
But some of.
Speaker 3 (19:32):
These some of these people that are being so inconsistent
on the stand are making them take some very big losses.
Speaker 2 (19:40):
Aubrey, who do you think should have been called to
testify bodyguards?
Speaker 3 (19:46):
If they can give her immunity for pushing some drugs,
they could have given the bodyguard's immunity for some of
the more dangerous behave. Some of them put allegedly more
criminal things that I've.
Speaker 4 (19:58):
Been told of alleged lead. I believe that.
Speaker 3 (20:04):
If there is proof that KK was ever involved in
any of the stuff the civil suits are suggesting, any
of the stuff that's even been suggested on the stand,
that whether she wants to or not, she should have
been subpoena and she should have been taking that stand.
Speaker 4 (20:21):
And talking about what.
Speaker 3 (20:25):
Has been suggested in regards to her and all of
this enterprise in her role in it. However, what it
makes me feel now is I think she's probably going
to take the stand for Puff, and maybe the bodyguards
are too, and maybe some I know somebody that's taking
the stand for Puff.
Speaker 4 (20:44):
And I don't know how many.
Speaker 5 (20:46):
I don't know who's that.
Speaker 3 (20:51):
I don't want to say, just because I don't know
if they're what name they're choosing to go under. And
I take victim's choice in whether they want to test
a buys themselves are under a pseudo name.
Speaker 2 (21:01):
Very seriously, what would be the role that that person
played in the ditty inner circle?
Speaker 5 (21:07):
Real inner, real inner.
Speaker 4 (21:10):
Yeah, real inner, real freak coffee.
Speaker 5 (21:13):
Okay.
Speaker 2 (21:15):
And I'm curious what your thoughts are because you're questioning
why the prosecution wouldn't have called bodyguards kkuh. Do you
believe it's possibly because they don't want to offer them immunity?
Speaker 5 (21:31):
Do you think that there would be no.
Speaker 4 (21:33):
Think I think they would offer them immunity.
Speaker 3 (21:36):
I mean I literally, like, I'm sure you can't run this,
but I literally said to them, hey, there's this bodyguard
that said X, Y and Z. He's willing to tell
you if you guys give him immunity. Here's his name
and phone number.
Speaker 4 (21:46):
Let's move on. So so like, I know it was said,
I know it was there.
Speaker 3 (21:51):
So to me, no, I don't think it's about not
they're giving immunity to people that are bringing nothing to
the to their charges right now, Remember, as a prosecutor,
you only want to put people on stand that are
going to speak to your charges. We all, I don't
think anyone has a doubt in their mind that there
was abuse, force, coercion and violence. We need to start
(22:13):
focusing on the other charges.
Speaker 4 (22:15):
That might be a little lighter.
Speaker 3 (22:17):
There's still and the threshold has been met, but met
by many people is always better than met by one
or two. In regards to sorry, tell me where you
went with that in the very beginning.
Speaker 2 (22:31):
Well, my question was why do you think the prosecutors
wouldn't have put these other critical witnesses on the stand?
I asked, is it because they didn't want to offer
them immunity because potentially charges could be coming for other
members of the ditty circle?
Speaker 4 (22:45):
I got you the bodyguards.
Speaker 3 (22:47):
I believe potentially could be problematic in that when everything
first started happening, A lot of them have come forward
in the documentaries, in podcasts and interviews. They re payments
for all of those things, and they were serving up
more gossip. I mean, I know some pretty horrifying things
(23:09):
that were told to me, and you know it's alleged,
but they track and there were other people that suggested
those same alleged things. But I think when you put
someone like that on the stand, then Diddy's team has
an easy cross by saying, aren't you just after money?
(23:32):
Because you made a lot. You did this one, this one,
this one, this one. You talked about his sexuality, You
shamed him, you called him gay, you said he wanted
butt plugs, you talked about dildo's, and you became a
gossip in the streets. Even the streets were getting to
a point where they were like, yeah, moving along on
him like you. You really shouldn't be out there doing
(23:55):
interview after interview if you really want to participate in
a federal try. I didn't do anything until I knew
that I was not subpoena. And that's why I could
come to you and start this journey with you guys,
because I am a wealth of information.
Speaker 4 (24:12):
However, I needed.
Speaker 3 (24:14):
To protect that just in case I was called to
speak to anyone's character or any possible events that.
Speaker 4 (24:23):
Could have been something I was unaware of.
Speaker 1 (24:26):
Re you said a moment ago you had a hard
time sleeping last night. Can you tell us, for a
moment and from a personal standboy standpoint, whether it was
in your head and in your heart, what was so
upsetting about what you saw yesterday that you had a
difficult time processing and settling down.
Speaker 4 (24:42):
If you will, well, a.
Speaker 3 (24:45):
Lot of people are going to be very scared to
ever come forward and tell the truth about very powerful
people that are taking advantage of them, potentially even criminally,
if he's able to get off on all of this,
And if he gets off on all of this, it's
likely because there has been too so far people that
(25:10):
have taken the stand, in my opinion, that have been
far too inconsistent.
Speaker 1 (25:15):
We've talked to you almost every day, and you said
the prosecution was doing fairly well. This, I think rogues
correct me if I'm wrong. This is the first time
we heard something from you that you're kind of pausing
and you're concerned, if you will, about the direction things went.
Speaker 3 (25:30):
I had a pause at the second person that took
the stand, because Cassy was so strong and so believable
according to everyone that actually even watched her, let.
Speaker 4 (25:39):
Alone just reading through her transcripts.
Speaker 3 (25:42):
Of being accountable, holding herself, holding herself accountable for both
sides of it. The days she wanted to do it,
in the days that she didn't, she was honest, She
didn't shy away from it. She didn't seem to be
lying about the reasons why she sent the messages.
Speaker 4 (25:56):
She did.
Speaker 3 (25:57):
It came off very even keeled, and for me, I
respected that because I knew that there were both of
those days, and I was worried that she would only
go with one because obviously in a civil suit, when
you file, you're not putting the good days in there.
So I was worried, is she only going to run
with what I saw in the civil suit, because that's
going to get eaten up alive.
Speaker 4 (26:17):
But she held herself accountable on both sides.
Speaker 3 (26:19):
The second witness caused me pause and concern because of
two reasons. One, we had two people drop out that
were strong. Then we moved somebody in that was very inconsistent,
and I had a pause during that moment as well.
Speaker 4 (26:34):
This is not my second pause.
Speaker 3 (26:36):
But Mia was like incredible, great consistent. They just didn't
really pick apart anything that she said. And there are
other people, forensic therapists, forensic analysis, there are people that
have come very strong with you know, kind of giving
the jury an understanding of why they're seeing behaviors of
people staying. So a lot of things have been established
(26:58):
that were very strong. But this specific witness, unfortunately.
Speaker 4 (27:03):
I think she's kind of impeaching.
Speaker 3 (27:06):
Both her and Cassie's characters a bit with her testimony.
Speaker 4 (27:10):
I don't love it.
Speaker 3 (27:12):
I'm not saying that she didn't see horrible things. I
just don't think this was the strongest person to put
on the stand. Another pause I had was the eight
pack of white women before this started, Mark Erragos being
able to say that, we know that optics are everything
in a case like this. You've got a pregnant woman,
Diddy grew his hair out gray. There's a lot of
(27:33):
people that understood how strong that optics need to be
inside a courtroom, And I just thought, eight pack of
white women, why give them that?
Speaker 4 (27:42):
Why give them the ability to even say that? Now.
Speaker 3 (27:45):
I also do believe you should pick the best for
the job, and that it shouldn't you shouldn't have to
play those types of games when it comes down to
a federal trial and.
Speaker 4 (27:56):
Criminal charges on this level.
Speaker 3 (27:58):
But you also have to be do some smart lawyering
in these types of situations as well.
Speaker 4 (28:04):
So there have been moments of pause that I've had
with this, and I get worried that victims will.
Speaker 3 (28:13):
First of all, many people will fall by the wayside
in those civil suits, maybe because they should, maybe because
they're scared there's going to be a whole lot more
reasons to.
Speaker 4 (28:24):
Be scared, because, as we know, there has been obvious
testimony to witness tampering and to.
Speaker 3 (28:37):
Force and coercion, and following people around, blacklisting people, having
them live in states of fear, blackmailing people would suggested.
Speaker 4 (28:47):
Even on the stand. So all of those things tell
me that.
Speaker 3 (28:51):
And Diddy's a scorpio and if he hasn't learned anything,
he's going to be He's gonna come after everybody.
Speaker 2 (29:09):
Leading into now this next witness that we're all anticipating,
and potentially, as you mentioned, the final victim. I don't
know if it's the final witness totally, but I definitely
heard that it might be the final victim. You're hearing
that she might actually be the final witness.
Speaker 4 (29:23):
That might be the case, might be right, Yeah, I.
Speaker 2 (29:25):
Believe I heard that she was going to be the
final victim who will be testifying on the stand. But
the State is going to be calling more but for
the Fed, sorry, not the State, but Jane Doe, what
are you anticipating hearing from her? She, from what we've gathered,
is an ex girlfriend of Sean Ditty Combs. She was
(29:45):
involved in the freak offs, and she too, says she
was a victim of his.
Speaker 4 (29:50):
Well, I know who this person is now.
Speaker 3 (29:56):
By the way, there has been a lot of changes
in the ninth inning, because who this person was two
days ago could have been somebody else. There's been a
lot of shifting and turning and making choices.
Speaker 4 (30:10):
I think after seeing.
Speaker 3 (30:12):
What happened with Brianna, maybe they needed to shift in
a certain direction. But this person, I believe, has alleged
that they were a girlfriend. You know how I feel
about that term, but a girlfriend. So now we're going
back to the girlfriend's stuff, and we're going back to
the freak offs, and we're going back to forest coercion and.
Speaker 4 (30:36):
The patterns that we've already.
Speaker 3 (30:37):
Established in the beginning of this trial. And if that's
all we're getting, and maybe i've heard that this person
could be on the stand for multiple days.
Speaker 2 (30:46):
Yes, we did actually hear from prosecutors telling the judge
that they were concerned because she has an international flight
a week from today. So that would imply they're concerned
about the timing and that they might not be able
to get it all in. And if she stakes the
stand today, that would be you know, at least four
or five days of testifying. That's significant, and that's more
(31:09):
than Cassie even was on the stand, correct more than Cassie.
Speaker 3 (31:12):
I'm The thing is with this person is I have
a personal connection that's a conflict, So I have to
be very careful. I'll have to go off of her
testimony alone. I don't want to get into my feelings
about what she does or doesn't do, or what I
(31:33):
you know, know to be true or not know to
be true. But I really hope that they made a
good decision with this person and that she is not
somebody that they are going to be able to cross
it with as much effectiveness as they did with Brionna.
Speaker 1 (31:55):
It can for clarity here. You said, you know who
the person is, but do you also know the person personally?
Have had interactions with this person? Yeah, can you go
as far as you can? Obviously we're not asking you
to identify because she's not going to be identified in court.
Just anything about her, just demeanor, how she comes off
to you, what your impressions are of her, just some
(32:17):
simpler blanket thing, just your impressions of this person upon
just having whatever interaction you've had with the.
Speaker 3 (32:24):
Interactions are minor, the understandings are major. I would say
I got to see what she does in court. I'm
not exactly sure. I know how she came off to me,
but I'm one person, right like how you come off
to a man, how you come off to other people
(32:45):
that you are into the things you're into could be
completely different.
Speaker 5 (32:50):
But it sounds like you're concerned about what she may
do for or maybe even inadvertently against the prosecution.
Speaker 3 (32:58):
I'm concerned about where they could go with the cross
and I'm concerned about other things outside of this trial
that could get messy.
Speaker 2 (33:07):
Is it surprising to you that she would be needed
for that long, that she has that much to say
and that much to tell.
Speaker 3 (33:15):
Yes, but she doesn't have a civil suit yet. I
don't even know that I can mention if she's in
one or not, because that could be potentially putting someone's
name out there and.
Speaker 4 (33:28):
I'm not going to do that.
Speaker 2 (33:30):
But is it fair to say we haven't heard details
of her story yet because we had heard about the
balcony dangling, because that was in Cassie's lawsuit, even though
Brianna wasn't named. We'd heard rumblings about what some of
these women would be testifying too. Do you believe we're
going to hear things we haven't heard before in Jane
Doe's testimony or is it going to be more of
(33:50):
the same, just her personal experience.
Speaker 3 (33:52):
No, I believe we're going to hear more. And she
also has been introduced to the public. If you're paying
attention to the trial well and all of the civil
suits and all of the accusations, you would be familiar
with her.
Speaker 1 (34:07):
All right, And as we're doing this, testimony is underway
and Breonna is back on the stand this morning. I
wanted to ask you and one thing that's going back
and forth and to your point, she's struggling.
Speaker 4 (34:18):
Is she still struggling this morning.
Speaker 1 (34:19):
Well, it seems like she's struggling pretty badly because they're
going at her on one of the critical critical points,
critical point about her lawsuit, which when it came out,
we knew some details about the dangling over the balcony,
but another very big part of that was that she
said Comb's didd He groped her, grabbed her breasts, and
(34:41):
then she got loose from him, and then there was
a little back and forth and then he dangled her. Well,
in court, even when she was prompted to recall that
detail about her civil lawsuit that she was groped, even
when prompted, she didn't come up with it again. So
she's they are really going out right now.
Speaker 4 (35:00):
Now.
Speaker 1 (35:00):
It's one thing you can't remember if you were smoking
weed or smoking a cigarette. It's another thing. The major point,
a major point of her civil lawsuit is that groping,
And what do you think hearing that now? Today? She's
she couldn't come up with that detail, which, by the.
Speaker 4 (35:15):
Way, I don't know if she suggested any other.
Speaker 3 (35:18):
Drugs of that night, But if you've ever smoked the
blunt or smoked a cigarette, it.
Speaker 4 (35:23):
Does not put your memory out. It just doesn't.
Speaker 3 (35:27):
You would be able to recall the events of the night.
Speaker 4 (35:31):
It's not a drug that.
Speaker 3 (35:33):
Especially at the frequency in which she sounds like she
was using drugs in regards to how she's testified to
using a lot of drugs. Marijuana ain't taken anybody that
does a lot of drugs out anytime soon. People smoke
it recreationally. It's legal in some states. You could drive
while after smoking. It's not making you forget this many details.
(35:56):
It's not making you not be able to recall this
many details.
Speaker 1 (36:00):
Claimer, we should say we do not recommend driving after
you smoke wheed, but go ahead. We got your point.
Speaker 4 (36:04):
You can.
Speaker 2 (36:05):
I have heard of, like obviously, when you drink alcohol,
people talk about blacking out, right, So that's an obvious thing.
Your memory is absolutely impacted with alcohol. You can't remember
what you did, where you were, or sometimes how you
got home. But I've heard of these instances called green outs.
I've heard my daughters talk about it. I don't know
if it's a thing, but I'm a green out. What
is a green out?
Speaker 3 (36:24):
If you're taking like the one that's I don't smoke weed,
but one brings you up sativa and something else.
Speaker 5 (36:30):
Indica is in the couch. That's how you know.
Speaker 2 (36:32):
Indica puts you into couch and sativa keeps you up
and focused.
Speaker 3 (36:36):
Yes, she might have been in the couch, but I've
smoken some in the couch, and if I were in
the couch and then over the balcony, I'd be able
to remember it even if I had been in the
couch before.
Speaker 2 (36:49):
Yes, those are very dramatic events, as she has testified
to that would be almost impossible to forget on drugs.
Speaker 1 (36:56):
What was it called a cocoa puff?
Speaker 5 (36:58):
Oh yeah, there was a Yeah, they were talking about
a coke.
Speaker 4 (37:00):
Puff, something that you could smoke.
Speaker 1 (37:01):
They can know that is a blunt with cocaine sprinkled
on it.
Speaker 2 (37:05):
Yep.
Speaker 3 (37:06):
It's like a black and Mile.
Speaker 4 (37:09):
So there's some tobacco in there and then you put
marijuana on.
Speaker 3 (37:13):
The top and then you sprinkle cocaine on it. I've
never done that, but that was a big hit over.
Speaker 4 (37:17):
At Bad Boy.
Speaker 1 (37:18):
Oh you, this was a thing. This was popular allegedly.
Speaker 2 (37:23):
Yeah, I'm just putting two and two together. You can
make fun of me all you want. Obviously, he now
goes by Diddy, but when you call him Puff and
people who knew them and that era are still referring
to him as Puff.
Speaker 5 (37:32):
That's how he got the name.
Speaker 1 (37:33):
It used to be Puff Daddy. I can't remember how
we started. He's changed it four or five times, I
believe legally. Even Well, now he's love, Oh yeah, he's
love now?
Speaker 5 (37:41):
Oh yeah, no, he's love. I forgot right. We're not
supposed to call him Diddy. We're supposed to call him love well, correct.
Speaker 3 (37:46):
Yeah, just like we're supposed to call X or Twitter
X girl it's not going to happen. There are just
some of us that will not be able to make
that transition occur.
Speaker 1 (37:56):
And it's still the Sears Tower in Chicago for me.
There's some things I'll just never And also it's still.
Speaker 3 (38:01):
The what's our stadium in LA that they changed to
the crypto place, that's not the crypto place.
Speaker 2 (38:07):
And I'll add on reading a story this morning someone
fell to their death from Mount McKinley, I was like, where, Oh,
Denali Like.
Speaker 5 (38:16):
It's just really hard.
Speaker 2 (38:17):
Sometimes things don't necessarily switch off or switch on.
Speaker 4 (38:22):
Let us all people have some of our memories.
Speaker 3 (38:24):
Good guys, they just take it all away from you
as you get older.
Speaker 2 (38:31):
All right, Well, any so we're expecting I always I
want to say, there's so many different names of monikers.
We are expecting Jane Doe to take the stand this afternoon.
Speaker 5 (38:42):
What do you hope you hear from her?
Speaker 3 (38:45):
Well, first thing I hope is that if prosecution starts
going anywhere near the direction that they went in with Brianna,
that they take her off the stand quickly, because they
done left Brianna on the stand for so long that
if I'm a juror, I'm confused. I have reasonable doubt
now by the way I moved a vacation in order
(39:07):
to just report on this trial. You'd think if you
were a key witness and somebody who was so horrific
to you that like, there's a federal trial occurring. It's
just a little crazy to me that you can't move
the vacation a bit to make sure that the testimony
is laid out.
Speaker 4 (39:25):
And a bad person that shouldn't be her.
Speaker 3 (39:28):
If this person's opinion is they shouldn't be freed, that
they wouldn't make the time to make sure that that
point gets that point gets made.
Speaker 4 (39:39):
But who am I? I don't know. Maybe they had
a birthday party to attend.
Speaker 2 (39:44):
Maybe she's just learned how to create boundaries in her
life now because she.
Speaker 5 (39:47):
Didn't have any before.
Speaker 1 (39:48):
This is a.
Speaker 3 (39:49):
Federal trial and this is a man's life on the line.
You better show up and move the vacation. To me,
it's already giving three p suit with diamonds on the caller.
Speaker 4 (39:58):
I don't know.
Speaker 1 (40:01):
I want to ask you one last thing for me,
because this has been jumping out at me almost every day,
is that someone there's always somebody we discover knew and
didn't say anything like someone knew or witnessed. And we'd
go through a long list of folks, and some of
them have been witnesses to crimes that this man committed,
in particular Diddy beating Cassie on that video. We learned, Aubrey,
(40:26):
that another security guard recorded that video on his cell
phone and he took it home just so he could
show his wife. Now that is disgusting to hear and
to think about that. It was just voyeurism, ROAs.
Speaker 3 (40:38):
Can you imagine if TJ came home and was like, Hey,
I want to see this girl get beat up by Diddy.
Speaker 4 (40:42):
Let's watch it again. Maybe we'll get turned on.
Speaker 5 (40:45):
I would say, who am I dating? And who am
I if? I am cool with watching this and not reporting.
Speaker 1 (40:51):
But it's one thing, Aubrey, when we talk about people
in his inner circle that saw it and they were
scared of him, or they feared for their jobs or
their careers, or their money, or even their their physical harm.
We're talking now about this is an account. Five people,
one supervisor at the security another security guard, another security guard,
another security guard, and then that security guard's wife. Five
(41:14):
people eight years ago who did not work for Sean
Diddy Combs saw this woman get the shit beat out
of her on video. They saw a crime being committed,
and those five people did nothing. Help me with that.
You've explained to his plenty ari about people in his
inner circle. Help us understand that a little better, because
(41:35):
that is a very difficult one to stomach.
Speaker 3 (41:38):
We just don't care enough about each other in this society.
We're very individualistic, you know, not to go on a rant.
But when I was in Japan and Anoma case, he
asked everyone where they were from, and everyone said there
are places, and then I said, oh la, and the
people next to me said San Francisco. And the chef
(41:59):
said to me, every time, we're the biggest.
Speaker 4 (42:02):
You know, he's the biggest name. He has all the biggest.
Speaker 3 (42:04):
People in the world that come and they'll say Russia,
they'll say China, they'll say all they'll name their country first.
Speaker 4 (42:12):
Here in America.
Speaker 3 (42:12):
He's like, but Americans always say their location in America.
We're just a very end of it visualistic place. We
don't agree with those other states that are across from us.
Half the time. This overall embodiment of being a proud American.
It's kind of something that we sell to the rest
of the world. But I don't know how many people
(42:33):
actually feel so proud, especially with what's going on right now.
Speaker 4 (42:38):
I think it's on a mac that is a macro
scale understanding of a micro scale in regards to this being.
Speaker 3 (42:47):
People see someone shot and they bust out their cameras
because they want to be the first to maybe sell
it to TMZ. TMZ reports somebody died before they've even died.
There are all kinds of like really odd, unethical, tacky,
weirdo behavior occurring constantly, and we just don't have this
(43:12):
desire to really do what's right. If there's a come
up in it for you, you'll consider that come up first.
And I don't know how we got here, and I
have some ideas of how we could fix it, but
I don't know how we got here because when the
people running the country are really individualistic, it's a top
(43:33):
down messaging that goes something like this, protect you and
your own first, worry.
Speaker 4 (43:40):
About others later. So if any of these people.
Speaker 3 (43:44):
Or or if at all, Yeah, And technology makes it
even easier to do that because it isolates you from
having to create friendship circles. And AI's making it so
you can have friends now that you don't even have
to have friends. Really, you could just ask chat GPT
loves me more than my own friends do.
Speaker 4 (44:01):
So it's like we're being more and more isolated. I
think it really is going to come down.
Speaker 3 (44:06):
To parents truly like grounding their kids in nature, making
them put their bare feet in the grass and get
out away from their phones more, because they're just they're
they're truly becoming such a everything is becoming such a
viral quick moment, and if you don't have it, and
you can't do it, you aren't relevant. And everybody has
(44:28):
moved on after five or six minutes of it being
all the talk of the town.
Speaker 2 (44:33):
It's insane and what we're seeing in that courtroom is
just the worst possible outcome of all of that. But Aubrey,
as always, we so appreciate your insight and just the
knowledge you have about what was happening and what is
happening in that courtroom, but what was happening inside that
inner circle of Diddy. So thank you once again for
(44:55):
another incredible breakdown of the day's events of yesterday and today.
Of course, Thursday, we'll have much more to talk about
soon with you, but thank you all for listening to us.
I'm Amy roebuck On behalf of my partner TJ. Holmes
and Aubrey O Day. Thank you for listening
Amy and TJ presents Aubrey Oday covering the Diddy Trial.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
Welcome everyone to Amy Roebuck and TJ. Holmes presents Aubrey
O Day covering the Diddy Trial. I'm here with my
partner TJ. Holmes, and we're looking at miss Aubrey O
day right now and Aubrey another huge day in court
and one of the star witnesses, one of Cassie's closest friends, Brianna,
(00:30):
is back on the stand right now, still facing some
of that cross examination.
Speaker 3 (00:35):
Yeah, some of that cross examination that she is just
failing miserably with. Unfortunately, it has what a difference a
day makes.
Speaker 4 (00:43):
You know, you're on a high from Mia.
Speaker 3 (00:44):
You start to get into racketeering, sex trafficking, We start
to really get into the nuts and bolts of this,
these the charges, and unfortunately Bona has just not been
consistent with you know, what she's told prosecutors versus what
she's said on the stand. Nicole west Morland, who also
(01:08):
crossed my bandmate Don Richard, is crossing her and she's
a beast. She is just she is finding every inconsistency,
every way to discredit and there are some real ways
to discredit in this round, some of those things being
I mean, at this point, what I think that she's
doing is not only you know, she's there to coroborate Cassie,
(01:30):
but we don't need any more coroboration in regards to
the violence. In my opinion, what I see her doing
is her testimony is an impeachment on both of their
characters a bit at this point, which we don't need
to go backwards. The defense scored some serious points. They
also really pushed the fact that she does have a
civil suit.
Speaker 4 (01:49):
She's in kahoots or she was in cahoots allegedly with.
Speaker 3 (01:52):
Cassie after she filed her lawsuit, and you know that's
witnesses talk victims put to alleged victims talking to victims.
And she's also having to testify under immunity because she
was the drugs supplier and although she did establish that
that's not where the majority of her income usually comes from,
(02:14):
at the time, it was coming a lot from that
direction because of the amount of drugs that Cassie needed supplied.
And then there are just too many inconsistencies about all
of these horrific stories that she was.
Speaker 4 (02:26):
Able to get out. And then when Nicole came in.
Speaker 3 (02:29):
She just couldn't remember if it was this, if it
was that, I don't recall.
Speaker 4 (02:33):
I don't recall it was brutal.
Speaker 1 (02:35):
You don't think it was enough of some of the inconsistencies,
and there were plenty, she said, I don't remember a lot,
but one of them was, you told them you were
smoking a cigarette at the time, and you're telling us
she was smoking marijuana at the time. I know that
seems minor, but do you think it was effective enough
even if the inconsistencies were minor, that they collected enough
to put in a juror's mind. You know what, if
(02:55):
she didn't remember that thing, then maybe she's not remembering
the other thing correctly.
Speaker 4 (02:59):
Well.
Speaker 3 (03:00):
According to what I experienced, how this process works is
Homeland Security will reach out to you directly. They will
set up a meeting if you're willing to speak with them.
He did tell me that the men told me within
the laws that occur now, they can't tape you during
those meetings.
Speaker 4 (03:18):
They just are taking notes.
Speaker 3 (03:20):
So I assume if you go past that level and
they are able to put you in the circle of
the criminal behavior in one way or another, that really
speaks to the charges that they're going for. Then you're
speaking to prosecutors, you're being deposed, and you're having depositions,
and you're giving answers. So to me, once again, we
have somebody that was inconsistent in the way that she
(03:41):
told the story and the way she's telling it on
the stand, and I think throughout that entire process you
should be able to weed out what you should be
able to weed.
Speaker 4 (03:53):
Out these inconsistencies.
Speaker 3 (03:55):
And also I don't know that she made any points
towards I think there were two good things that were established.
Speaker 4 (04:03):
One of them is that Cassie's drug addiction, in.
Speaker 3 (04:07):
Her involvement in it, was starting around two thousand and
nine and that it was really bad in about twenty fourteen,
which is establishing it got worse due to the hands
and her time with Puff, which is something that she
did testify to.
Speaker 4 (04:21):
So I guess that's one good thing. Another good thing.
But again, Nicole.
Speaker 3 (04:25):
Is so effective, which Diddy's defense attorney, Nicole Westmoreland is
so effective in regards to just not letting things get
by the jury and.
Speaker 4 (04:38):
Not letting things in. But there was a moment where
they were trying.
Speaker 3 (04:41):
To establish then a producer named rob Holiday was contacted
and or sorry, contacted Brianna and wanted to try to
fix and settle out the situation. So that's a bit
helpful in regards to the prosecution proving coercion and you know,
the cleanup.
Speaker 4 (05:00):
Messes, etc.
Speaker 3 (05:02):
I'm sure something did happen, but because there were so
many inconsistent statements, I'm not exactly.
Speaker 2 (05:07):
Sure what I was going to ask you, Aubrey, based
on your experience and what you've seen and heard and
the people who you intimately know who are a part
of Diddy's inner circle, did it sound believable what she
testified to, even if the defense was able to poke
some holes into some inconsistencies. Do you believe that did
he said to her? I am the devil and I
(05:28):
could kill you. Do you believe did he dangled her
over that seventeenth floor balcony even though there were no
other witnesses?
Speaker 3 (05:35):
I would believe that that type of behavior sounds pretty
consistent with everything that we've heard so far from other
witnesses that are consistent.
Speaker 4 (05:43):
So yeah, I, in my.
Speaker 3 (05:46):
Opinion, I believe that that sounds consistent in my opinion,
just being around the man, Like I said, almighty King
rides on the backs of everybody, and you know the
stories that he would do, all of these grandiose events
of how he could go to Dubai and ride.
Speaker 4 (06:03):
On the backs of people, and he's a king of
all kings, like you know, these these these these.
Speaker 3 (06:09):
People that are saying he was like a god and
he was all encompassing. We all have the same narrative.
And then again, he kept us so isolated that any
thought outside of that wasn't even being presented to us.
We didn't even have anything to bounce that idea off of.
All we saw was the King, and everybody was falling
in line.
Speaker 2 (06:28):
You said, King, God, you heard him say those things,
But what about a devil? Does that sound like something
he would want to be known as or be feared as.
Speaker 3 (06:38):
I think when if you're on a lot of drugs
and you're there to potentially threaten someone, or you're offended or.
Speaker 4 (06:48):
You know, angry at a situation, and.
Speaker 3 (06:50):
You're on a lot of drugs, that allegedly you could
say any of the number of things he's been accused
of saying.
Speaker 1 (06:58):
God, King, what about monster? Is that going too far?
Because some of the behavior that has been laid out
the past four weeks is of someone who is other
level beyond just a bad boss. Does monster fit based
on what you know of this man? Is that just
too far?
Speaker 3 (07:15):
Well, geez tj if Devil is maybe potentially accurate monsters
like a little few steps above devil in my book,
But I can't say personally that I would call him
those names. But after witnessing the things that I did
and understanding it in much more detail since this trial
(07:38):
has started, those words are very They feel like they
align with the testimony that's being given.
Speaker 1 (07:47):
Wait a second, you worked with him closely intimately for years.
You know him better than most or certainly during that time.
But you're telling us right, you have learned more about
him in this trial. Now that's giving you a different
impression of the guy you knew.
Speaker 3 (08:03):
Yeah, I mean, like of all the things that I knew,
I mean, I didn't spend much of my time after
leaving being fired considering him as a person. I just
moved on. But if, But now, because I've been so
involved in this for the past two weeks, before anyone
even knew what was happening, I've just been able to
(08:24):
talk to so many people and to understand so many
levels of things that were occurring that were out of
my advantage point.
Speaker 4 (08:33):
And I think that when you.
Speaker 3 (08:35):
Add them all up and they have you know, people
that are coroborating those stories, that it's it's just it's
out of the realm of anything that I could understand
a man to be. You know, I just I don't
know many men that I don't know any men.
Speaker 4 (08:54):
You know, I know some really bad, powerful people, But.
Speaker 3 (08:58):
To be aired out at this extend to this level,
it's pretty it's very.
Speaker 4 (09:03):
Bad behavior to me.
Speaker 3 (09:05):
I'm a hard person to ask the words question too,
because I think words.
Speaker 4 (09:08):
Are man made and they have the meaning that you
allow them to have.
Speaker 3 (09:13):
So whether you say devil, god, king, or mad man,
whatever the words are, those are just descriptive words.
Speaker 4 (09:21):
To me. They're just man made words. They don't really
hold any meaning other than what you give them.
Speaker 3 (09:27):
But that's not technically how the world chooses to see words. So,
you know, that's more of my bally alternative healing wu
wou side. Something only has the power that you allow
it to have. But in this specific trial in court
and with jurors, words absolutely matter, and those words are
very damning.
Speaker 5 (09:48):
I don't think we've discussed this before.
Speaker 2 (09:50):
We had a question, did you ever see meat or
no Brianna in any way, shape or form while you
were there?
Speaker 3 (09:57):
If I ever met her, it would have been in
She seems to have been around during a time period
that I was there. But like I said, the worlds
were so separate in regards to you know, Cassie wasn't
in the studio making music, like she said, her full
time job became something else. We were in the studio
all day making music. We were around the enterprise every day,
(10:20):
and then when we were taken out, we were with
her in all of the social settings. They would have
her around with us.
Speaker 2 (10:27):
With all of the drug use that Breonna testified to,
and not just her own or Cassie's, but also Ditti's
as well. Did you I don't think we've asked you this.
When you were around Diddy in a professional environment, recording
in the studio or at least for the show, making
the band, did you ever see him seemingly out of
control on drugs? Inebriated not fully there.
Speaker 4 (10:54):
The first couple of words.
Speaker 3 (10:55):
I mean, I was laughing in my head thinking have
you seen making the band?
Speaker 4 (10:59):
But the last few were the last.
Speaker 3 (11:01):
Few statements, inebriated, not having any control.
Speaker 2 (11:07):
No high, how about really really high?
Speaker 3 (11:10):
I think even on a normal day, his energy is
at a place that you could potentially gather the thought
that he might be really high.
Speaker 2 (11:21):
Were you too young to know that or to think
that at the time? Only upon what you're hearing? And
then reflection, are you thinking that or at the time
you know what? Were you seventeen eighteen nine, I mean
you were young. Would you even know what that look like?
Would you even have known to be concerned about it
or recognize it?
Speaker 3 (11:36):
I didn't even know when we would get out of
the studio at Daddy's house, out of the elevator and
there would just be like a puff of white smoke,
and we couldn't figure out what direction to go in.
I didn't even really understand what that was until it
was explained to me, and until I started feeling a
little loopy. Like I said, we used to run to
the staircase.
Speaker 4 (11:55):
To get air.
Speaker 1 (11:58):
Rihanna test point. Of course, the incident we'd heard so
much about, but this was the first time we got
a first person account of it. Brianna said, he dangles
her off a seventeenth floor balcony, he said. She claims
he was yelling, you know what the fuck you did?
And she says she has no idea what she did.
How did that story, or at least that part of it.
(12:19):
I want to ask you about that in particular, like
this man is banging on the door, he comes in,
Matt hangs me off a balcony, and I don't even
know what he's upset about.
Speaker 4 (12:29):
Yeah, I mean that did stand out to me. I
was wondering. I could make tons of different assumptions.
Speaker 3 (12:34):
Somehow it's likely protecting Cassie's secret or something protecting her
from him in some type of way that he found out.
Speaker 4 (12:43):
But that's just allegedly. I would have no idea.
Speaker 3 (12:46):
But also I don't know what the situation was because
first she says it was a party, then she was
sleeping in her bed. I mean, what was it, girl?
I need a picture. I was seeing a party at first,
and then apparently it's a sleep in bed.
Speaker 4 (13:00):
I don't know which story is true.
Speaker 3 (13:04):
And unfortunately, in a juror's mind, when they can't even
place where the events started and they can't put a
picture of how it all began, and that's not even clear.
I don't know as a juror how how clear everything
else could be for me if we couldn't even start
(13:24):
off the setting of the situation, and a big and
a house party and sleeping in bed are two very
different things. And I think if you remember being hung
off the balcony, you probably remember if you were in
bed sleeping, or if it was a house party.
Speaker 2 (13:38):
It might determine how much drugs you had been taking.
I mean, I was thinking that also would speak in
a weird way. Maybe not in the way in a
counterintuitive way, but as a juror, I'd be thinking, well,
if she was taking the copious amount of drugs that
she said she was, it would make sense that maybe
it is a little fuzzy, but you wouldn't forget being dangled.
Speaker 3 (13:57):
No, you wouldn't forget being dangled. I think that there's
a possibility of that. Listen, we still have more cross left,
and we have a redirect. The redirect might fable to
establish things a bit more clearer. Sometimes just being you know,
it's a high pressure situation, being on a stand and
(14:17):
these are incredible lawyers that are cross examining her, So
maybe just the pressure of that situation had her faltering.
Speaker 4 (14:25):
I don't know, but to me, when I look.
Speaker 3 (14:28):
At any of these people, like like, sorry to roll
back to what you asked me in the beginning, TJ.
I took what I said to Homeland Security so seriously.
If there were things that I saw, like I witnessed
a whole lot of things, But unless I understood the
beginning and end of how it happened, or who was
doing it, or or what this person said it was
(14:51):
after the fact, I'm not going to offer up that
type of information because that information is just not valuable
because it could be shred apart, too inconsistent. There were
things that I told them, Hey, I saw this.
Speaker 4 (15:04):
I saw that.
Speaker 3 (15:05):
But if I was to get crossed, and cross was
to ask me, are you sure it wasn't a facelift
or a nose job, I'd have to say that could
be a possibility. And I don't think maybe just people
don't understand to be that clear. And because I grew
up around lawyers, I knew to be but I just
I didn't offer anything that I couldn't factually prove that
(15:29):
I didn't have. I like always at least two people
that can cooberate a story. I make sure even in life,
when I go through something very hectic or something that
I think is unethical in any workplace, I will document
it immediately to a friend through phone call, through text,
and even if I can record, if it's in a
one party consent record state, I will start recording immediately,
(15:52):
just to make.
Speaker 4 (15:52):
Sure that I've got the receipts.
Speaker 3 (15:54):
To prove what I'm talking about, because when we get
to levels like these, inconsistencies can lose a case and
it can send somebody free that potentially could be very dangerous.
Speaker 1 (16:14):
Again, as we sit here, she's not done yet. There
is cross examination and a redirect butt at this point.
Maybe we know the answer given some of the responses
you've given us already, but I'll ask, yeah, has she
been a win for the defense, a win for the prosecution,
or this one's right now about playing even.
Speaker 4 (16:33):
So far as of now, defense serious win.
Speaker 3 (16:36):
They made some serious points on her. Prosecution probably regrets
putting her on the stand. I just don't think it
was necessary.
Speaker 4 (16:44):
I think they're.
Speaker 3 (16:45):
Overshooting with a few people, with certain people. I think
they're just overshooting it a bit, and that's a very
risky game to play against lawyers that are very good.
And another thing that I'm concerned about it after she's
finished with redirect today, I believe we're going to have
(17:06):
I believe that we're going to have the final Jane
speaking and I and from what I hear, it will
take maybe five to six days and then they're done
with presenting their case, which means sadly, I don't think
we're seeing a KK and I don't think we're seeing
a bodyguard. And of all the things that I have
(17:28):
been able to understand throughout my time being like you know,
I said, I'm a self acclaimed attorney, investigator, journalist. For
the past two years, I have spent a lot of
time trying to put pieces together, partly for the project
that I was working on, and also partly just for
my own understanding of something as serious as a man's
(17:52):
life that will be will be taken from him. And
because you know, as we've seen throughout this trial, I
have no people to be inconsistent, I had to wonder,
what is everybody that takes the stand going to be
giving and is this something that is corroborated and proved
(18:13):
by very consistent people.
Speaker 4 (18:15):
Are we going to venture off.
Speaker 3 (18:16):
Into a lot of things that maybe are closer to
the line of piling up on now the things that
have been proven, and my eyes are so strong that
I think it's still there. But a witness that's inconsistent
and very inconsistent and also getting immunity because of supplying
(18:41):
a lot of drugs that they were both taking, I
don't know how much that testimony is going to sit
with me well as a juror. You don't recall a
lot of things when you're on drugs.
Speaker 4 (18:53):
If you can't recall a lot of.
Speaker 3 (18:54):
Things, and you're saying you can't, and we know that
you're where the drug supplier and that you did a
lot of drugs, to me, I need it something more credible.
And by the way, me personally, I know a lot
of people that are more credible that should be on
that stand.
Speaker 4 (19:08):
So I'm just.
Speaker 3 (19:11):
I was like, it was hard to sleep last night.
I'm very concerned about the case that I'm seeing.
Speaker 4 (19:17):
And I still believe that you.
Speaker 3 (19:20):
Know that this is the prosecution in ausas have such
a high threshold, but they also have such a high
conviction rate that they wouldn't just be playing silly games
right now.
Speaker 4 (19:31):
But some of.
Speaker 3 (19:32):
These some of these people that are being so inconsistent
on the stand are making them take some very big losses.
Speaker 2 (19:40):
Aubrey, who do you think should have been called to
testify bodyguards?
Speaker 3 (19:46):
If they can give her immunity for pushing some drugs,
they could have given the bodyguard's immunity for some of
the more dangerous behave. Some of them put allegedly more
criminal things that I've.
Speaker 4 (19:58):
Been told of alleged lead. I believe that.
Speaker 3 (20:04):
If there is proof that KK was ever involved in
any of the stuff the civil suits are suggesting, any
of the stuff that's even been suggested on the stand,
that whether she wants to or not, she should have
been subpoena and she should have been taking that stand.
Speaker 4 (20:21):
And talking about what.
Speaker 3 (20:25):
Has been suggested in regards to her and all of
this enterprise in her role in it. However, what it
makes me feel now is I think she's probably going
to take the stand for Puff, and maybe the bodyguards
are too, and maybe some I know somebody that's taking
the stand for Puff.
Speaker 4 (20:44):
And I don't know how many.
Speaker 5 (20:46):
I don't know who's that.
Speaker 3 (20:51):
I don't want to say, just because I don't know
if they're what name they're choosing to go under. And
I take victim's choice in whether they want to test
a buys themselves are under a pseudo name.
Speaker 2 (21:01):
Very seriously, what would be the role that that person
played in the ditty inner circle?
Speaker 5 (21:07):
Real inner, real inner.
Speaker 4 (21:10):
Yeah, real inner, real freak coffee.
Speaker 5 (21:13):
Okay.
Speaker 2 (21:15):
And I'm curious what your thoughts are because you're questioning
why the prosecution wouldn't have called bodyguards kkuh. Do you
believe it's possibly because they don't want to offer them immunity?
Speaker 5 (21:31):
Do you think that there would be no.
Speaker 4 (21:33):
Think I think they would offer them immunity.
Speaker 3 (21:36):
I mean I literally, like, I'm sure you can't run this,
but I literally said to them, hey, there's this bodyguard
that said X, Y and Z. He's willing to tell
you if you guys give him immunity. Here's his name
and phone number.
Speaker 4 (21:46):
Let's move on. So so like, I know it was said,
I know it was there.
Speaker 3 (21:51):
So to me, no, I don't think it's about not
they're giving immunity to people that are bringing nothing to
the to their charges right now, Remember, as a prosecutor,
you only want to put people on stand that are
going to speak to your charges. We all, I don't
think anyone has a doubt in their mind that there
was abuse, force, coercion and violence. We need to start
(22:13):
focusing on the other charges.
Speaker 4 (22:15):
That might be a little lighter.
Speaker 3 (22:17):
There's still and the threshold has been met, but met
by many people is always better than met by one
or two. In regards to sorry, tell me where you
went with that in the very beginning.
Speaker 2 (22:31):
Well, my question was why do you think the prosecutors
wouldn't have put these other critical witnesses on the stand?
I asked, is it because they didn't want to offer
them immunity because potentially charges could be coming for other
members of the ditty circle?
Speaker 4 (22:45):
I got you the bodyguards.
Speaker 3 (22:47):
I believe potentially could be problematic in that when everything
first started happening, A lot of them have come forward
in the documentaries, in podcasts and interviews. They re payments
for all of those things, and they were serving up
more gossip. I mean, I know some pretty horrifying things
(23:09):
that were told to me, and you know it's alleged,
but they track and there were other people that suggested
those same alleged things. But I think when you put
someone like that on the stand, then Diddy's team has
an easy cross by saying, aren't you just after money?
(23:32):
Because you made a lot. You did this one, this one,
this one, this one. You talked about his sexuality, You
shamed him, you called him gay, you said he wanted
butt plugs, you talked about dildo's, and you became a
gossip in the streets. Even the streets were getting to
a point where they were like, yeah, moving along on
him like you. You really shouldn't be out there doing
(23:55):
interview after interview if you really want to participate in
a federal try. I didn't do anything until I knew
that I was not subpoena. And that's why I could
come to you and start this journey with you guys,
because I am a wealth of information.
Speaker 4 (24:12):
However, I needed.
Speaker 3 (24:14):
To protect that just in case I was called to
speak to anyone's character or any possible events that.
Speaker 4 (24:23):
Could have been something I was unaware of.
Speaker 1 (24:26):
Re you said a moment ago you had a hard
time sleeping last night. Can you tell us, for a
moment and from a personal standboy standpoint, whether it was
in your head and in your heart, what was so
upsetting about what you saw yesterday that you had a
difficult time processing and settling down.
Speaker 4 (24:42):
If you will, well, a.
Speaker 3 (24:45):
Lot of people are going to be very scared to
ever come forward and tell the truth about very powerful
people that are taking advantage of them, potentially even criminally,
if he's able to get off on all of this,
And if he gets off on all of this, it's
likely because there has been too so far people that
(25:10):
have taken the stand, in my opinion, that have been
far too inconsistent.
Speaker 1 (25:15):
We've talked to you almost every day, and you said
the prosecution was doing fairly well. This, I think rogues
correct me if I'm wrong. This is the first time
we heard something from you that you're kind of pausing
and you're concerned, if you will, about the direction things went.
Speaker 3 (25:30):
I had a pause at the second person that took
the stand, because Cassy was so strong and so believable
according to everyone that actually even watched her, let.
Speaker 4 (25:39):
Alone just reading through her transcripts.
Speaker 3 (25:42):
Of being accountable, holding herself, holding herself accountable for both
sides of it. The days she wanted to do it,
in the days that she didn't, she was honest, She
didn't shy away from it. She didn't seem to be
lying about the reasons why she sent the messages.
Speaker 4 (25:56):
She did.
Speaker 3 (25:57):
It came off very even keeled, and for me, I
respected that because I knew that there were both of
those days, and I was worried that she would only
go with one because obviously in a civil suit, when
you file, you're not putting the good days in there.
So I was worried, is she only going to run
with what I saw in the civil suit, because that's
going to get eaten up alive.
Speaker 4 (26:17):
But she held herself accountable on both sides.
Speaker 3 (26:19):
The second witness caused me pause and concern because of
two reasons. One, we had two people drop out that
were strong. Then we moved somebody in that was very inconsistent,
and I had a pause during that moment as well.
Speaker 4 (26:34):
This is not my second pause.
Speaker 3 (26:36):
But Mia was like incredible, great consistent. They just didn't
really pick apart anything that she said. And there are
other people, forensic therapists, forensic analysis, there are people that
have come very strong with you know, kind of giving
the jury an understanding of why they're seeing behaviors of
people staying. So a lot of things have been established
(26:58):
that were very strong. But this specific witness, unfortunately.
Speaker 4 (27:03):
I think she's kind of impeaching.
Speaker 3 (27:06):
Both her and Cassie's characters a bit with her testimony.
Speaker 4 (27:10):
I don't love it.
Speaker 3 (27:12):
I'm not saying that she didn't see horrible things. I
just don't think this was the strongest person to put
on the stand. Another pause I had was the eight
pack of white women before this started, Mark Erragos being
able to say that, we know that optics are everything
in a case like this. You've got a pregnant woman,
Diddy grew his hair out gray. There's a lot of
(27:33):
people that understood how strong that optics need to be
inside a courtroom, And I just thought, eight pack of
white women, why give them that?
Speaker 4 (27:42):
Why give them the ability to even say that? Now.
Speaker 3 (27:45):
I also do believe you should pick the best for
the job, and that it shouldn't you shouldn't have to
play those types of games when it comes down to
a federal trial and.
Speaker 4 (27:56):
Criminal charges on this level.
Speaker 3 (27:58):
But you also have to be do some smart lawyering
in these types of situations as well.
Speaker 4 (28:04):
So there have been moments of pause that I've had
with this, and I get worried that victims will.
Speaker 3 (28:13):
First of all, many people will fall by the wayside
in those civil suits, maybe because they should, maybe because
they're scared there's going to be a whole lot more
reasons to.
Speaker 4 (28:24):
Be scared, because, as we know, there has been obvious
testimony to witness tampering and to.
Speaker 3 (28:37):
Force and coercion, and following people around, blacklisting people, having
them live in states of fear, blackmailing people would suggested.
Speaker 4 (28:47):
Even on the stand. So all of those things tell
me that.
Speaker 3 (28:51):
And Diddy's a scorpio and if he hasn't learned anything,
he's going to be He's gonna come after everybody.
Speaker 2 (29:09):
Leading into now this next witness that we're all anticipating,
and potentially, as you mentioned, the final victim. I don't
know if it's the final witness totally, but I definitely
heard that it might be the final victim. You're hearing
that she might actually be the final witness.
Speaker 4 (29:23):
That might be the case, might be right, Yeah, I.
Speaker 2 (29:25):
Believe I heard that she was going to be the
final victim who will be testifying on the stand. But
the State is going to be calling more but for
the Fed, sorry, not the State, but Jane Doe, what
are you anticipating hearing from her? She, from what we've gathered,
is an ex girlfriend of Sean Ditty Combs. She was
(29:45):
involved in the freak offs, and she too, says she
was a victim of his.
Speaker 4 (29:50):
Well, I know who this person is now.
Speaker 3 (29:56):
By the way, there has been a lot of changes
in the ninth inning, because who this person was two
days ago could have been somebody else. There's been a
lot of shifting and turning and making choices.
Speaker 4 (30:10):
I think after seeing.
Speaker 3 (30:12):
What happened with Brianna, maybe they needed to shift in
a certain direction. But this person, I believe, has alleged
that they were a girlfriend. You know how I feel
about that term, but a girlfriend. So now we're going
back to the girlfriend's stuff, and we're going back to
the freak offs, and we're going back to forest coercion and.
Speaker 4 (30:36):
The patterns that we've already.
Speaker 3 (30:37):
Established in the beginning of this trial. And if that's
all we're getting, and maybe i've heard that this person
could be on the stand for multiple days.
Speaker 2 (30:46):
Yes, we did actually hear from prosecutors telling the judge
that they were concerned because she has an international flight
a week from today. So that would imply they're concerned
about the timing and that they might not be able
to get it all in. And if she stakes the
stand today, that would be you know, at least four
or five days of testifying. That's significant, and that's more
(31:09):
than Cassie even was on the stand, correct more than Cassie.
Speaker 3 (31:12):
I'm The thing is with this person is I have
a personal connection that's a conflict, So I have to
be very careful. I'll have to go off of her
testimony alone. I don't want to get into my feelings
about what she does or doesn't do, or what I
(31:33):
you know, know to be true or not know to
be true. But I really hope that they made a
good decision with this person and that she is not
somebody that they are going to be able to cross
it with as much effectiveness as they did with Brionna.
Speaker 1 (31:55):
It can for clarity here. You said, you know who
the person is, but do you also know the person personally?
Have had interactions with this person? Yeah, can you go
as far as you can? Obviously we're not asking you
to identify because she's not going to be identified in court.
Just anything about her, just demeanor, how she comes off
to you, what your impressions are of her, just some
(32:17):
simpler blanket thing, just your impressions of this person upon
just having whatever interaction you've had with the.
Speaker 3 (32:24):
Interactions are minor, the understandings are major. I would say
I got to see what she does in court. I'm
not exactly sure. I know how she came off to me,
but I'm one person, right like how you come off
to a man, how you come off to other people
(32:45):
that you are into the things you're into could be
completely different.
Speaker 5 (32:50):
But it sounds like you're concerned about what she may
do for or maybe even inadvertently against the prosecution.
Speaker 3 (32:58):
I'm concerned about where they could go with the cross
and I'm concerned about other things outside of this trial
that could get messy.
Speaker 2 (33:07):
Is it surprising to you that she would be needed
for that long, that she has that much to say
and that much to tell.
Speaker 3 (33:15):
Yes, but she doesn't have a civil suit yet. I
don't even know that I can mention if she's in
one or not, because that could be potentially putting someone's
name out there and.
Speaker 4 (33:28):
I'm not going to do that.
Speaker 2 (33:30):
But is it fair to say we haven't heard details
of her story yet because we had heard about the
balcony dangling, because that was in Cassie's lawsuit, even though
Brianna wasn't named. We'd heard rumblings about what some of
these women would be testifying too. Do you believe we're
going to hear things we haven't heard before in Jane
Doe's testimony or is it going to be more of
(33:50):
the same, just her personal experience.
Speaker 3 (33:52):
No, I believe we're going to hear more. And she
also has been introduced to the public. If you're paying
attention to the trial well and all of the civil
suits and all of the accusations, you would be familiar
with her.
Speaker 1 (34:07):
All right, And as we're doing this, testimony is underway
and Breonna is back on the stand this morning. I
wanted to ask you and one thing that's going back
and forth and to your point, she's struggling.
Speaker 4 (34:18):
Is she still struggling this morning.
Speaker 1 (34:19):
Well, it seems like she's struggling pretty badly because they're
going at her on one of the critical critical points,
critical point about her lawsuit, which when it came out,
we knew some details about the dangling over the balcony,
but another very big part of that was that she
said Comb's didd He groped her, grabbed her breasts, and
(34:41):
then she got loose from him, and then there was
a little back and forth and then he dangled her. Well,
in court, even when she was prompted to recall that
detail about her civil lawsuit that she was groped, even
when prompted, she didn't come up with it again. So
she's they are really going out right now.
Speaker 4 (35:00):
Now.
Speaker 1 (35:00):
It's one thing you can't remember if you were smoking
weed or smoking a cigarette. It's another thing. The major point,
a major point of her civil lawsuit is that groping,
And what do you think hearing that now? Today? She's
she couldn't come up with that detail, which, by the.
Speaker 4 (35:15):
Way, I don't know if she suggested any other.
Speaker 3 (35:18):
Drugs of that night, But if you've ever smoked the
blunt or smoked a cigarette, it.
Speaker 4 (35:23):
Does not put your memory out. It just doesn't.
Speaker 3 (35:27):
You would be able to recall the events of the night.
Speaker 4 (35:31):
It's not a drug that.
Speaker 3 (35:33):
Especially at the frequency in which she sounds like she
was using drugs in regards to how she's testified to
using a lot of drugs. Marijuana ain't taken anybody that
does a lot of drugs out anytime soon. People smoke
it recreationally. It's legal in some states. You could drive
while after smoking. It's not making you forget this many details.
(35:56):
It's not making you not be able to recall this
many details.
Speaker 1 (36:00):
Claimer, we should say we do not recommend driving after
you smoke wheed, but go ahead. We got your point.
Speaker 4 (36:04):
You can.
Speaker 2 (36:05):
I have heard of, like obviously, when you drink alcohol,
people talk about blacking out, right, So that's an obvious thing.
Your memory is absolutely impacted with alcohol. You can't remember
what you did, where you were, or sometimes how you
got home. But I've heard of these instances called green outs.
I've heard my daughters talk about it. I don't know
if it's a thing, but I'm a green out. What
is a green out?
Speaker 3 (36:24):
If you're taking like the one that's I don't smoke weed,
but one brings you up sativa and something else.
Speaker 5 (36:30):
Indica is in the couch. That's how you know.
Speaker 2 (36:32):
Indica puts you into couch and sativa keeps you up
and focused.
Speaker 3 (36:36):
Yes, she might have been in the couch, but I've
smoken some in the couch, and if I were in
the couch and then over the balcony, I'd be able
to remember it even if I had been in the
couch before.
Speaker 2 (36:49):
Yes, those are very dramatic events, as she has testified
to that would be almost impossible to forget on drugs.
Speaker 1 (36:56):
What was it called a cocoa puff?
Speaker 5 (36:58):
Oh yeah, there was a Yeah, they were talking about
a coke.
Speaker 4 (37:00):
Puff, something that you could smoke.
Speaker 1 (37:01):
They can know that is a blunt with cocaine sprinkled
on it.
Speaker 2 (37:05):
Yep.
Speaker 3 (37:06):
It's like a black and Mile.
Speaker 4 (37:09):
So there's some tobacco in there and then you put
marijuana on.
Speaker 3 (37:13):
The top and then you sprinkle cocaine on it. I've
never done that, but that was a big hit over.
Speaker 4 (37:17):
At Bad Boy.
Speaker 1 (37:18):
Oh you, this was a thing. This was popular allegedly.
Speaker 2 (37:23):
Yeah, I'm just putting two and two together. You can
make fun of me all you want. Obviously, he now
goes by Diddy, but when you call him Puff and
people who knew them and that era are still referring
to him as Puff.
Speaker 5 (37:32):
That's how he got the name.
Speaker 1 (37:33):
It used to be Puff Daddy. I can't remember how
we started. He's changed it four or five times, I
believe legally. Even Well, now he's love, Oh yeah, he's
love now?
Speaker 5 (37:41):
Oh yeah, no, he's love. I forgot right. We're not
supposed to call him Diddy. We're supposed to call him love well, correct.
Speaker 3 (37:46):
Yeah, just like we're supposed to call X or Twitter
X girl it's not going to happen. There are just
some of us that will not be able to make
that transition occur.
Speaker 1 (37:56):
And it's still the Sears Tower in Chicago for me.
There's some things I'll just never And also it's still.
Speaker 3 (38:01):
The what's our stadium in LA that they changed to
the crypto place, that's not the crypto place.
Speaker 2 (38:07):
And I'll add on reading a story this morning someone
fell to their death from Mount McKinley, I was like, where, Oh,
Denali Like.
Speaker 5 (38:16):
It's just really hard.
Speaker 2 (38:17):
Sometimes things don't necessarily switch off or switch on.
Speaker 4 (38:22):
Let us all people have some of our memories.
Speaker 3 (38:24):
Good guys, they just take it all away from you
as you get older.
Speaker 2 (38:31):
All right, Well, any so we're expecting I always I
want to say, there's so many different names of monikers.
We are expecting Jane Doe to take the stand this afternoon.
Speaker 5 (38:42):
What do you hope you hear from her?
Speaker 3 (38:45):
Well, first thing I hope is that if prosecution starts
going anywhere near the direction that they went in with Brianna,
that they take her off the stand quickly, because they
done left Brianna on the stand for so long that
if I'm a juror, I'm confused. I have reasonable doubt
now by the way I moved a vacation in order
(39:07):
to just report on this trial. You'd think if you
were a key witness and somebody who was so horrific
to you that like, there's a federal trial occurring. It's
just a little crazy to me that you can't move
the vacation a bit to make sure that the testimony
is laid out.
Speaker 4 (39:25):
And a bad person that shouldn't be her.
Speaker 3 (39:28):
If this person's opinion is they shouldn't be freed, that
they wouldn't make the time to make sure that that
point gets that point gets made.
Speaker 4 (39:39):
But who am I? I don't know. Maybe they had
a birthday party to attend.
Speaker 2 (39:44):
Maybe she's just learned how to create boundaries in her
life now because she.
Speaker 5 (39:47):
Didn't have any before.
Speaker 1 (39:48):
This is a.
Speaker 3 (39:49):
Federal trial and this is a man's life on the line.
You better show up and move the vacation. To me,
it's already giving three p suit with diamonds on the caller.
Speaker 4 (39:58):
I don't know.
Speaker 1 (40:01):
I want to ask you one last thing for me,
because this has been jumping out at me almost every day,
is that someone there's always somebody we discover knew and
didn't say anything like someone knew or witnessed. And we'd
go through a long list of folks, and some of
them have been witnesses to crimes that this man committed,
in particular Diddy beating Cassie on that video. We learned, Aubrey,
(40:26):
that another security guard recorded that video on his cell
phone and he took it home just so he could
show his wife. Now that is disgusting to hear and
to think about that. It was just voyeurism, ROAs.
Speaker 3 (40:38):
Can you imagine if TJ came home and was like, Hey,
I want to see this girl get beat up by Diddy.
Speaker 4 (40:42):
Let's watch it again. Maybe we'll get turned on.
Speaker 5 (40:45):
I would say, who am I dating? And who am
I if? I am cool with watching this and not reporting.
Speaker 1 (40:51):
But it's one thing, Aubrey, when we talk about people
in his inner circle that saw it and they were
scared of him, or they feared for their jobs or
their careers, or their money, or even their their physical harm.
We're talking now about this is an account. Five people,
one supervisor at the security another security guard, another security guard,
another security guard, and then that security guard's wife. Five
(41:14):
people eight years ago who did not work for Sean
Diddy Combs saw this woman get the shit beat out
of her on video. They saw a crime being committed,
and those five people did nothing. Help me with that.
You've explained to his plenty ari about people in his
inner circle. Help us understand that a little better, because
(41:35):
that is a very difficult one to stomach.
Speaker 3 (41:38):
We just don't care enough about each other in this society.
We're very individualistic, you know, not to go on a rant.
But when I was in Japan and Anoma case, he
asked everyone where they were from, and everyone said there
are places, and then I said, oh la, and the
people next to me said San Francisco. And the chef
(41:59):
said to me, every time, we're the biggest.
Speaker 4 (42:02):
You know, he's the biggest name. He has all the biggest.
Speaker 3 (42:04):
People in the world that come and they'll say Russia,
they'll say China, they'll say all they'll name their country first.
Speaker 4 (42:12):
Here in America.
Speaker 3 (42:12):
He's like, but Americans always say their location in America.
We're just a very end of it visualistic place. We
don't agree with those other states that are across from us.
Half the time. This overall embodiment of being a proud American.
It's kind of something that we sell to the rest
of the world. But I don't know how many people
(42:33):
actually feel so proud, especially with what's going on right now.
Speaker 4 (42:38):
I think it's on a mac that is a macro
scale understanding of a micro scale in regards to this being.
Speaker 3 (42:47):
People see someone shot and they bust out their cameras
because they want to be the first to maybe sell
it to TMZ. TMZ reports somebody died before they've even died.
There are all kinds of like really odd, unethical, tacky,
weirdo behavior occurring constantly, and we just don't have this
(43:12):
desire to really do what's right. If there's a come
up in it for you, you'll consider that come up first.
And I don't know how we got here, and I
have some ideas of how we could fix it, but
I don't know how we got here because when the
people running the country are really individualistic, it's a top
(43:33):
down messaging that goes something like this, protect you and
your own first, worry.
Speaker 4 (43:40):
About others later. So if any of these people.
Speaker 3 (43:44):
Or or if at all, Yeah, And technology makes it
even easier to do that because it isolates you from
having to create friendship circles. And AI's making it so
you can have friends now that you don't even have
to have friends. Really, you could just ask chat GPT
loves me more than my own friends do.
Speaker 4 (44:01):
So it's like we're being more and more isolated. I
think it really is going to come down.
Speaker 3 (44:06):
To parents truly like grounding their kids in nature, making
them put their bare feet in the grass and get
out away from their phones more, because they're just they're
they're truly becoming such a everything is becoming such a
viral quick moment, and if you don't have it, and
you can't do it, you aren't relevant. And everybody has
(44:28):
moved on after five or six minutes of it being
all the talk of the town.
Speaker 2 (44:33):
It's insane and what we're seeing in that courtroom is
just the worst possible outcome of all of that. But Aubrey,
as always, we so appreciate your insight and just the
knowledge you have about what was happening and what is
happening in that courtroom, but what was happening inside that
inner circle of Diddy. So thank you once again for
(44:55):
another incredible breakdown of the day's events of yesterday and today.
Of course, Thursday, we'll have much more to talk about
soon with you, but thank you all for listening to us.
I'm Amy roebuck On behalf of my partner TJ. Holmes
and Aubrey O Day. Thank you for listening
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.