Law&Crime Sidebar - 5 Ways P. Diddy's Sex Trafficking Case Echoes Pedophile Jeffrey Epstein's

Episode Date: September 20, 2024

Some have called music icon Sean “Diddy” Combs the Jeffrey Epstein of the rap world. Now Combs faces similar charges in his own sex trafficking case. Law&Crime’s Jesse Weber discusses the stark similarities and differences between the two cases with former prosecutor Matt Murphy.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW:If you’re ever injured in an accident, you can check out Morgan & Morgan. You can submit a claim in 8 clicks or less without having to leave your couch. To start your claim, visit: https://www.forthepeople.com/LCSidebarHOST:Jesse Weber: https://twitter.com/jessecordweberLAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokeVideo Editing - Michael Deininger and Christina FalconeScript Writing & Producing - Savannah WilliamsonGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSocial Media Management - Vanessa BeinSTAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:Watch Law&Crime Network on YouTubeTV: https://bit.ly/3td2e3yWhere To Watch Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3akxLK5Sign Up For Law&Crime's Daily Newsletter: https://bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletterRead Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3td2IqoLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wondery Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this Law and Crimes series ad-free right now. Join Wondry Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify. The indictment alleges that between at least 2008 and the present, Combs abused, threatened, and coerce victims to fulfill his sexual desires, protect his reputation, and conceal his conduct. He's been called the Jeffrey Epstein of the rap world, and in fact, he is facing some similarities. charges because now Sean Diddy Combs is sitting in jail, preparing to face off against prosecutors

in the same court. We are taking a closer look at the investigations into Sean Combs and Jeffrey Epstein, as well as what we could potentially expect at trial. And we will make these comparisons with former prosecutor Matt Murphy. Welcome to Sidebar, presented by Law and Crime. I'm Jesse Weber. music icon Sean Diddy Combs is facing some very serious charges out in federal court right now of sex trafficking, racketeering, transportation to engage in prostitution. Two separate judges decided that the millionaire philanthropist who recently had to return the key to New York City, he's going to have to stay locked up in that same city until he goes to trial. His proposed bail package was denied, no pretrial release. way, just this morning, we learned that Combs is reportedly on suicide watch at the Metropolitan

Detention Center out in Brooklyn. And sources told People magazine that Combs is in shock that his mental state is unclear. So this is more of a preventative step. And when you talk about pretrial detention in a federal case like this, a lot of eyeballs, very high profile, how can we forget that financier sex offender Jeffrey Epstein died while he was locked up at the Metropolitan Correction Center in New York pending trial on his own federal sex trafficking charges. Officials concluded that he took his own life, although, as you know, there have been a long list of rumors and conspiracy theories that he had been murdered. But here's the big thing. It brings me what I want to talk about today. Because as we've dung into the dozens of pages of legal

documents surrounding the indictment and any possible bail, we have heard Combs compared now to two infamous sex offenders, Jeffrey Epstein and fellow hip-hop artist R. Kelly. In fact, we spoke with Nadia Shihata, one of the prosecutors who brought R. Kelly down on a recent episode of Sidebar talking about those comparisons. These are the charges I expected. I expected a racketeering charge. They've charged it as racketeering conspiracy here. And sex trafficking, given the allegations about commercial sex acts with prostitutes being flown in, I think these are. the types of charges I would have expected in a case like this. And you can check out that

full interview over on the long crime YouTube page. But today we want to do the comparison between Combs case and Epstein's case. Wealth, influence, sex crimes allegations, federal cases out in New York. Now, of course, Epstein was a financial manager for some of the richest people in America, which brought him, you know, his own millions and millions. Prosecutors alleged that he used that money to cover up a vast sex trafficking. network. In fact, his indictment, which was filed by a grand jury in 2019, reads, quote, over the course of many years, Jeffrey Epstein, the defendant, sexually exploited and abused dozens of minor girls at his homes in Manhattan, New York, in Palm Beach, Florida, among

other locations. And it goes on to say that he enticed and recruited them to perform these sex acts, that he paid them, that he paid them to recruit other girls. Now, to be clear, the charges that Epstein faced before his death, they were sex trafficking conspiracy, sex trafficking, two counts. So it's different than what Combs is facing, racketeering conspiracy, this kind of agreement to engage in a racketeering criminal enterprise that engaged in a number of illicit activities, sex trafficking by force, fraud, or coercion, and transportation to engage in prostitution. But put that to aside, we want to compare and contrast. Could this give us insight into how Combs will be prosecuted? What can we expect from his prosecution? Are we dealing

with a similar situation? Will we get transparency? By the way, as we're sorting through these details of Sean Combs and Jeffrey Epstein, can I just take a quick second to tell you guys about something positive, something else, something that I will tell you, I think you're going to really, really love? Here's a question for you. Would you want cashback when you buy gas and groceries? Because if you do, we have this amazing partner and sponsor of Sidebar. It's called Upside. They can really help. It is a free app that, It is so easy to use and they get you real cashback. It's money that appears in your Upside app that you can transfer straight into your bank

account. In fact, just this weekend, I used Upside to find a gas station, I claimed an offer, I paid with my credit card at the pump, and then I follow the steps in the app to get cash back. Now here's the thing. You can use Upside at all different kinds of places, restaurants, convenience stores. So to find out how much you could earn, click the link in the description to download Upside or scan the QR code on screen and use our promo code sidebar and you'll get an extra 25 cents back on every gallon on your first tank of gas. Hope you can check it out. And for that,

I have a special guest. I am joined right now by a very familiar face in the true crime world. Matt Murphy, legal analyst for ABC News, former senior deputy district attorney in Orange County, California, now in private practice. And the author of a new book, we have it right here, is called The Book of Murder, A Prosecutor's Journey Through Love and Death. And he joins us right now, Matt, good to see you. Good to see you. Thanks so much for coming on. First, I'm going to set this book up. Look how nice that is. Look how nice I set that up.

It's like a nice little bookstore over here. So, Matt, it's, first of all, great to see you. Happy to have you on here. Before we even get into Combs and Epstein, and there's a lot to get into, talk to me about the book, because I think one of the things that's interesting for me that I cover this day in and day out, we don't think about the impact these cases have on the people who try them or the people who prosecute them. And, you know, we focus so much on the defendants.

we focus on the victims. But in your case, you know, feeling what this impact had on you, is that why you wanted to write the book? You know, I really wanted to write the book, kind of almost as a thank you to all the people behind the scenes. You know, we have, there are so many professionals that go, you know, show up at 3 o'clock in the morning when a murder is committed, that never really get the credit or recognition they deserve. So for the forensic scientists and the detectives and all the hardworking, people that essentially make these cases presentable. And I think they, I really wanted to give them their due a little bit.

And also, you know, there's so much that families go through when they're, when they have a loved one who's been murdered. And as a prosecutor in a vertical unit, so Orange County is a little bit different. Most DA's offices do it almost like an assembly line. One, the detectives will investigate the case. and then one DA will review it for filing, another DA will do the preliminary hearing or the grand jury indictment,

and then it goes on to another one that assigns it to another one for trial. Orange County, when you go into homicide, you get assigned certain parts of the county, and you are the DA ahead of time on any murder that happens. So I had Costa Mesa, Laguna Beach, Newport, and Irvine, and you get the call in the middle of the night,

and you go down there with the detectives and my investigator, and you're there to make sure that the warrants are properly done, and you're essentially there as almost an advisor, a legal advisor to ensure that the constitutional rights of the defendant are scrupulously followed, but also to learn about the case from the ground up. And then from that night, we would do every part of the case. And that's different. That's not in every jurisdiction they handle it. No, it should be, in my opinion, it should be in every jurisdiction, because it's just a better

way to do it, because you learn every aspect of it in real time. You know, you're there. You make the filing decision, you decide who gets charged with what, and then you're the one that presents it to the jury, you conduct the sentencing. So it's from the night of the murder or the day of the murder all the way through the end of sentencing. You're with that case every step of the way, and you're with the detectives that work it up. So you deal with the same detectives over and over again, and you basically establish these relationships of confidence and trust. So when the next one happens and you say, hey, you know, I think we need a warrant before we search that, there's no problem doing that. And you work together as a team. And another thing we would always do is

I would sit down with my team and the victim's family. And I'd give them my personal cell number and make sure that they understood that there were people that cared. And I wanted them to meet my team. I wanted to meet my investigator, my paralegal, the people that were going to be behind the scenes making the case happening, trying to bring justice to that family. Can I tell you how refreshing that is? I have interviewed a number of people, victims, family members who don't have that. They say we've been trying to get a hold of the prosecutor's office and we got nothing. They're keeping us in the dark. And sometimes they're sensitive investigations. I get it. But to hear that is so when people need to hear it the most, when they

need to hear that someone's in their corner, someone's a resource for them, they're going to be transparent. That's commendable that you did that. Well, it's, you know, it's like the golden rule, you know, and I'm not, I'm not religious, but, you know, how would you want to be treated in that situation. And when you think about it, we all lose loved ones over the course of our life, and it is the worst thing that we can experience as human beings. The worst of the worst is when you lose a loved one to murder, and the only thing worse than that is when the person who did it gets away with it. So for somebody that's thrust into that horrific, unbelievable situation, having somebody there explaining, just explaining the process, giving them a face to it,

And because we would stick with the case through the whole pendency of the criminal proceedings, they had somebody that they could go to, that they could call, that they could ask questions to. And I found that when you do that, it really does help them through that process. And it just makes the worst thing just a little bit easier. And you have overseen so many different cases. What are the cases that you can briefly explain, the kind of the cases that you talk about in your book that you wanted to highlight? So I went through sort of a chronological, it's part memoir, you know, so it starts with my first week in the homicide unit in my very first homicide scene.

And I walked the reader kind of through my learning process. When I went into homicide, for example, one of the things I thought, you know, I thought I knew what a serial killer was. I'd seen Silence of the Lambs. You know, it's Buffalo Bill. It's a creepy guy in a van, you know, weird house on the hill. And it turns out that's not what serial killers are at all. They tend to be hyper-intelligent a lot of times, arrogant, manipulative, handsome. They tend to have successful relationships.

And it is counterintuitive in a lot of ways. And I take the reader through my learning process. And I go through the taxonomy of murders. Like a child abuse death is a completely different kind of case than a gang murder, which is different, again, from a conspiracy to kill somebody for money, which is different from serial killers. And I spent 17 years in that unit. I tried 52 cases while I was in the homicide unit.

And, you know, I wanted to share some of the things I learned along the way. And it was a lot more fun writing the book than I thought it was going to be. And it was also cathartic in a way, you know. Sounds like it. Yeah, you see some absolutely horrendous things. But you immediately follow that up with these forensic professionals, you know, buzzing around at three in the morning, not complaining. with detectives who have been up for 18 hours, not complaining. And everybody comes together, so you see one person does the worst thing imaginable.

You see the visceral impact of that with this poor person dead in the house or dead in the ditch or on the autopsy table. You immediately see a team of dedicated professionals coming in to do their job to do what they can to bring justice to that family. And it restores your faith. Well, look, I'm looking forward to reading it. I know our viewers and our listeners who have a passion for the true, crime industry, the true crime field, they're going to be very interested in seeing it. So you

can pick it up, the book of murder, the prosecutor's journey through love and death, available everywhere right now, right? Yeah, and I'm doing a signing tonight at Shakespeare and company right here in New York City on Broadway. Okay, look at you. So I think this will come out right about the same time. Okay, fantastic. Good. All right, so first of all, congratulations on the book. Now I wanted to talk to you about what happened. We were actually planning an interview with you today. We didn't know what the topic would be. just so happens Sean Combs gets arrested and indicted this week, so obviously we're going to talk about it. What was your reaction to reading the indictment? Was it what you expected, were the

charges what you expected? You know, it is interesting the way they did it. So they did, it's a three count indictment, but because of the way they charged it, within those three counts, they've included all of the alleged, you know, crimes committed by him, including the arson and the sex trafficking and the narcotics and the guns. One of the things that struck me immediately is some of these throwaway charges almost like the, like the narcotics, Schedule I narcotics with firearms, for example, if that alone is all he is convicted of under federal sentencing guidelines, there is, I mean, it could be decades in prison. Well, can I clarify that point? He's not charged individually with, for example, possession of a firearm with an obliterated serial number.

He could have been. They could have charged him individually. It's a predicate crime as part of this overall conspiracy, right? If we can, this overall criminal enterprise. You know, if we can prove these things, these are crimes that the criminal enterprise was a part of, and there was an agreement to engage in this activity. He could be found guilty. Why wasn't he charged individually with those crimes? Because two out of the three charges actually carry up to life in prison. So the way they did it, the way it's charged is if the jury finds as a part of the criminal enterprise, if they find that to be true, and all they need are certain individual acts, like the firearms and the narcotics, for example, then that could still

potentially qualify as a life sentence under federal sentencing guidelines. So this was something that was, this was a well-thought-out approach, I think. Behind the scenes somewhere, I think there's a professional prosecutor or several of them who know what they're doing. And when they serve those search warrants, you know, and the Bearcats, rolled in, you know, those big trucks and they went in with the long guns. And if you watch those videos, what they came out with were computers. And so they went in really heavy and they came out with the most important thing, and that is electronic communication devices that could

corroborate the allegations that were made in these civil suits. So this appears to be a very methodical, well thought out, step-by-step investigation and decision to charge. So this this is the way, honestly, this is the way I would have done it if I was the prosecutor on this. So they basically, the jury will have the option. If any of those things listed in those three counts are found to be true, that potentially could lead to a conviction of those things with, you know, the potential for decades in prison. So this was done in a clever way. Yeah, I was talking to Nadia Shihada about the comparisons between this case and R. Kelly,

and she said, look, prosecuting racketeering conspiracy versus what she prosecuted racketeering. They're both, you know, tough cases to prosecute, but in a way it's a more streamlined, easily digestible way to prosecute Combs for racketeering conspiracy than racketeering. And I thought that was interesting. Again, anybody could watch that. But talking about the comparison between Epstein, there is one stark contrast because Epstein was charged with respect to abusing minors, minor girls. And Combs, despite what you might have heard on other networks, and unfortunately, I've seen kind of misinformation. Combs currently is not charged with any crimes involving minors. And while there are some civil lawsuits that name Combs as having been accused of things like having underage girls at his parties or engaging in solicitation of minors, the indictment against him doesn't charge him with anything related to sex crimes with minors, that was a glaring deficiency in the case.

And that could either be maybe they felt there wasn't enough there, maybe they're holding on to it. But I thought that was interesting. Yeah, there's a different quality to that when you're talking about adults because, and it does open some arguments up for the defense, because when it comes to minors, virtually any sexual contact is going to be strict liability. In other words, if it happened, as a prosecutor, you just have to prove the age, and under most states and under most criminal statutes, that's going to be enough. There's no consent. Right, there's no consent. However, consent with adults will be, I think that's going to be a large part of the defense here. And it's going to be interesting to see how that comes out.

Epstein, one parallel that I immediately noticed here is that each one of these men had people orbiting them that wanted their time, that wanted their attention. And, you know, one of the questions I've gotten since coming out the book two days ago is if I could prosecute anybody throughout time and history, who would it be? That's a good question. It's a great question. No, and in my mind, it's Jeffrey Epstein. And the way that man's power and influence, so he had this orbit of people that were around him and they were flying on his jet.

And then there was that abysmal prosecutorial failure that happened in Florida, where they let him plead to one count of solicitation of sex with a minor. And it still said with a minor, it was a ridiculous plea. I think every prosecutor in that should be ashamed of themselves for that, honestly.

And following that, it was like, how did this go so wrong? And then the Miami Herald, to their credit, they ran a series of articles that changed the complexion of that. But what was fascinating is there are people here in New York City who continue to associate with Jeffrey Epstein after he was convicted of a sex crime with a minor, and they were still riding the jet, including a journalist who was involved that is disturbing.

So that case was one where, It was like everybody wanted to forget that conviction. And then the manifest came out for who was flying around on his jet. And there's a big difference between the before that conviction and after. But there were some really famous people that continued to associate with that guy. Only a few months ago, we did sidebars on the documents that were released, like all the communications between prosecutors and his team, the grand jury transcripts, which raised even more questions why he wasn't charged more seriously back.

in the day. There is something interesting. I was going to ask you this. Look, to this day, with Galane Maxwell, his, you know, madam accomplished, she was found guilty of her own sex trafficking charges, sentenced to 20 years in prison. He's dead. There's been no other accountability. We're dedicating another sidebar to whether anybody else could get in trouble with respect to the Combs case. And let's be clear, he hasn't been found guilty. These charges are incredibly fresh. We don't know who else would be involved. But when you're talking about operating a criminal enterprise. You're talking about a conspiracy, and a lot of people have said there's people who've been at his parties and they have to have known. Do you think that this is going to be

a similar situation where he's just going to be the only one and nobody else? If we talk about accountability, if we talk about transparency, people are still asking questions about Epstein. So here's one of the, one of the fascinating things about this case is there's one name on that indictment. One name. One name and one name only. And one of the words you see over and over again as enterprise. So when people think of RICO, you think of the mafia, you know, but these are RICO allegations essentially. So when you're talking about an enterprise, you're talking about conspiracy, whether it's charged or not, and you're talking about other people. So that one name, what that means is behind the scenes, is this thing started, as they started putting it together

with the search wants and everything else, I suspect what we're going to see is people within the organization who had potential criminal liability are going to testify against them. And that's you know, when the civil suits were going on and somebody's getting sued, it's much easier to be loyal to somebody with as much money and power as Sean Combs or a Jeffrey Upstand. When you're talking about a federal investigation,

it is no joke in federal court. Like the sentencing guidelines are severe if you're involved in something like that. And criminal defense lawyers have a euphemism they use when it comes to conspiracy cases. There's two buses. There's the defendant bus or there's the witness

bus. And whenever you have a case like this, it's a race to the witness bus. And every good lawyer representing anybody else in that enterprise is going to be calling the prosecutors faster than you can say go to say, my guys got important things to say and wants to help. And I think that's what we're going to see. I thought it was strategic that Damian Williams, the United States Attorney for the Southern District in York, said this investigation is ongoing and wouldn't rule out what might happen with respect to Combs, additional charges or anybody else getting prosecuted. You know, you mentioned comparing the two cases. So Epstein, you know, was accused of operating this sex trafficking

network, Combs operating a criminal enterprise that engaged in sex trafficking and violent crime. So you see the similarities. There was another thing, too. And I think it's an interesting component of these federal cases is that Epstein was being prosecuted for conduct from the early 2000s, Combs being prosecuted for conduct all the way back from 2008. Does it make it a tough case for prosecutors to go that far back in time? Well, under the current rules of evidence, and this is an interesting thing. So back when I was in law school,

I probably shouldn't even say how long ago it was because I'm going to age myself, but there's a thing called character evidence that goes back hundreds of years. And the general concept is, if you've done something bad in the past, it doesn't mean you did something bad this time, and so it shouldn't be admitted against you.

Okay, so if somebody, for example, robs banks, and just because the bank got robbed down the street, doesn't mean they can just round up the usual suspects. There has to be additional evidence, and you can't simply use somebody's background against them. However, as we've kind of progressed, there are two big exceptions to that that have grown in the last 30 years

in the rules of evidence throughout the 50 states and also in federal law. Those are sex crimes and domestic violence. And, you know, And I think we all saw this, we kind of went through this as a population. Like, I'm not a huge hip-hop fan, but I always kind of like Diddy. I saw, you know, get him to the Greek. Sure, yeah.

I didn't want to believe it. And I didn't want to believe in Bill Cosby either, and none of us wanted to believe in an OJ. But my thoughts changed dramatically when I saw that hotel video. And you hear the allegations made by Cassie Ventura. And, you know, it's a civil case, right? So, you know, in civil, we live in a litigious society, and what does that really mean? And is this somebody that's going for a money grab, which is what he said. And you just don't know one way or another.

And I think it's healthy to keep an open mind and even skepticism when somebody's being accused of something. But then we saw that video, and when he comes out in the towel and severely beats her and kicks her when she's on the ground, and you look at it, it's like, ooh, that's highly corroborative of everything she said. And that piece of evidence is going to be admitted in his trial. And we all knew, it's like, okay, given these allegations, that is going to be admitted evidence-wise. So going back in time, that was 2016, that's old. It's beyond the statute of limitations. However. For sexual assault in California, yeah.

For assault, excuse me. For assault in California, the statute was blown, which is a whole other thing. We've got a DA in Los Angeles that I think has been horrific for public safety and violent crime, but that's another thing. But the idea of that being admitted, and it's recent enough, it's coming in. I didn't think that we would see it as fast as we did, because what happened was his defense made a big pitch for bail. A $50 million bail is immense. And the initial, the federal magistrate denied it, and they appealed it to the full federal judge who came out and the defense said, you know, look, they were involved in a long, 10-year-loving relationship. And immediately the judge pointed at that video and said, what's love got to do?

do with that. And so that tape came in, like day two of the proceedings. I expected it to happen at some point during the trial. I didn't think that it would come to haunt him that quickly. And you know what's haunting him now is that he admitted it was him, right? So two days after that video comes out, he goes on Instagram and apologizes for it when he could have, you know, I mean, he had no choice. That video was incredibly clear about what it was, but, you know, I think he painted himself in a bad legal predicament. I will tell you what I also think is interesting comparing Combs and Epstein, is that, and this is a common theme, you know, the alleged victims might be different here, but prosecutors in both of these cases have said

that the defendants were, they were sex obsessed, and that they used their wealth and their power, resources, network to satisfy these desires. And more specifically for Combs, prosecutors alleged that he had these freakoffs, these FOs, where he would allegedly bring in male sex workers and direct them to have sex with women that he knew, often for days on end while he watched and sometimes participated. A woman claimed that they were drugged and coerced into performing these sex acts, fearing that, by the way, if they didn't, they would face, you know, repercussions, threats, violence. And that I think is why people are making these kinds of comparisons to Epstein, because that also, again, seems to be high-power people, having the ability to do this.

not everybody's going to be charged with these kind of allegations is if you have the ability to do it, right? Yeah, 100%. Another thing that we see in both of these cases you see the allegations of witness intimidation. And Jeffrey Epstein, there were two sisters, the farmer sisters, that were the first to report the allegations against Jeffrey Epstein,

and they reported it to a reporter for Vanity Fair magazine that famously did not run with that story. And then everything happened in Florida, and it turned out all, essentially to be true, and there's a lot of finger pointing back and forth between the reporter and the editors at Vanity Fair, but there have been allegations of threats and intimidation against Vanity Fair magazine from, you know, powerful people in the orbit of Jeffrey Epstein. Glane Maxwell, interestingly, after he was convicted, after Jeffrey Epstein was convicted

in 2008, she was invited at the Vanity Fair Oscar party, you know, and I still have not been able to wrap my head around, people continuing to associate with those with Jeffrey Epstein and Gleine Maxwell after the conviction and at least some of this stuff came to light. So with, you know, Sean Combs, we're going to, I think, see something similar where we're going to see some of these famous people trying to distance themselves as far and as quickly as they can. And he had a lot of powerful famous people showing up to these events. And you talk about the properties, right? So you know what else? You talk about this. There's this Unnamed Department of Homeland Security agent who is apparently part of the raid on Combs Miami Mansion and he told the New York Post that the rapper had rooms in his homes that were obviously dedicated to sex. He told the post, quote, so if you were in those sex parties, you were being recorded from every possible angle, including angles you wouldn't have known about. In my opinion, he's as bad as Jeffrey Epstein. These women are young, either barely legal or barely illegal. And then he also told the post that we have evidence that these women didn't feel.

like they were free to go, and there's video evidence that some of the girls are clearly out of it while these men are having sex with them. And then, if you go back to the indictment, they say, quote, Combs also used the sensitive, embarrassing, and incriminating recordings that he made during freak-offs as collateral to ensure the continued obedience and silence of the victims. But going back to Jeffrey Epstein, he was also accused of having cameras all over his homes, where he would allegedly record himself with underage girls, as well as sex acts between the girls and powerful men that he invited into his home. And these were allegedly kept not only for his viewing pleasure, but also as possible leverage here, Matt. Right. And of course, with Epstein's

suicide or apparent suicide, those never came to light. Now, I don't know what exists or didn't exist. We never had the benefit of seeing the trial. Now, Galane Maxwell's, of course, she was convicted and she is still alive and she's been sentenced to federal prison. But yeah, When they came out of those homes with those computers, that is, I think, probably making quite a few people nervous about what the feds have and what he actually did record. And I don't think anybody knows, except for the federal government and the officers and pretty soon the defense. So that'll be, you know, this could be hugely embarrassing, and we'll see. I mean, those tapes are going to form a critical part of the defense. Because if the defense is consent, the graphic details are going to be a key component of that for them.

They're going to be provided. Not being able to deny it happened. Right. Yes. They won't be able to deny it happen. But also, you know, they're, I think that we're going to see some questions about, you know, hey, look, looks like you're consenting there. You know, we're going to see things like that. And this is going to be a fascinating trial.

It's going to be, it's going to be sorted. I mean, this is really going to be something to watch. you know, and to the extent that anybody was, in fact, and of course we have to presume in a sense, right? If this turns out to be true, hopefully these people that were involved in this, especially the women, will be able to, you know, move on with their lives in a way that they can put this behind them. You know, I think that'll be tough, but hopefully they'll be able to do it. You think this, and 100% this is going to go to trial. What do I mean by that? I'm not talking about a Jeffrey Epstein situation.

I don't mean that. What I'm saying is I don't imagine any kind of deal could be worked out with. him. You know, they talk about, well, he's going to give up everybody. He's going to go after everybody. He's going to name names. He's allegedly at the center of everything. And so, you know, he is looking at potentially life in prison if he's convicted, right? You mentioned that. I don't see any kind of deal where he wouldn't get significant prison time. But what would a deal even look like that he wouldn't go to trial? Well, he's, he's what, he's in his mid-50s now. 54? Yeah, so he's 54 years old. So I cannot envision a

any sort of plea here because if he takes 30 years what does that mean at 80% under the federal sentencing guidelines you know so what what would be a plea that is palatable versus going to trial and i mean you get 30 years at age 54 it's the same as life anyway you know so i think that we are going to see i think we're going to see a trial here let me ask you this and i wanted to ask this comparison so combs and epstein they both had their own private jets epstein was Epstein's was infamously known as the Lolita Express. There were flight manifest that Matt explained that have revealed the names of several high-profile people who have flown on that plane. And Combs' legal team says that he's actually in the process of selling his plane.

His attorneys wrote about it in a letter to the judge where they argued why Combs should be granted bail. We know that was denied. And sure, he has a private plane and can potentially jet off somewhere, but they say he's getting rid of it. And I will ask you, clearly that didn't convince either judge. But this is the question I keep getting asked. why didn't he take off right he knew the charges were coming he comes to new york i think he wanted to surrender himself what makes sense to me why he never did this is besides the difficulty of doing that i think he really believed he could make bail and by being cooperative with the government because there is correspondence that was attached uh in the filings recently this week

where you see the correspondence between his attorneys and the government attorneys talking about hey, we got his passport. We're going to let you know when he goes to X, Y, X, Y, and Z. I think they were thinking he'll make bail, so he'll be on home arrest for like, you know, one, two years until this trial happens. And I think he really thinks he could beat the case. Otherwise, explain to me why he didn't jump on his plane and just take off somewhere. Well, I think

you're right. I think that he clearly, you know, I think they thought he was going to, he would be out. But another problem for them is that where are you going to go? He's one of the most famous people in the world. And any place that you can fly to that does not extradite back to the United

States is no place you want to live. I mean, you're talking about Iran, maybe. Is it better than federal prison? Venezuela? Yeah, probably, especially if you got a lot of money. But, you know, it's fleeing is a lot more complex than a lot of people believe. I mean, we're in the modern age. Look, we can extradite from almost every country. You know, there are a few that won't, but You know, I think that the idea of being out on bail, fighting the charges, you know, having a couple of years at least before it actually goes to trial, was preferable to fleeing to some of the places that won't extradite back to the United States, you know. And look, I've been involved in a lot of international extraditions over the years, and they always catch them. We always get that guy. And, you know, unless it's, you know, there's a few places where, especially if they're not famous and they can go back to their family or go undergratians. ground or maybe they get away with it for a while. But contrary to public opinion or

popular misconception, Mexico extradites murderers and criminals all the time. We saw that with the Caitlin Armstrong case in Texas, the woman who fled to Costa Rica. She was back in like just over a month, you know, the Costa Rican authorities. And there's a lot more... Yoga studio. Yeah, that's right. There's a lot more cooperation internationally among police and the different countries than you might think. And yeah, I don't know where he would have gone. Yeah, I know. I think I just, I think people watch the movies. I say, oh, I didn't you know. I want to end with this point. And going back to something full circle, we know that Jeffrey Epstein was found at. He was found dead at the Metropolitan Correctional Center.

And obviously, they're now comparisons being made with Combs because, in fact, during a news conference, announcing the charges against Combs on Tuesday, United States Attorney, Damien Williams, was asked about Combs pre-trial detention. Is your office concerns with with Combs' safety in custody given what happened with Epstein? So we are concerned with anyone's safety whenever they are detained prior to trial. It's part of our obligations to keep people safe as well as part of the criminal justice system. But I do not draw any sort of connection between Jeffrey Epstein's suicide and what may or may not happen to any other. defendant while they are detained pre-trial. And of course, the decision whether to detain the defendant

will be up to a judge. Our position is that pretrial detention is warranted under the law and based on the facts of this case. And I'll leave it at that. So when you think about that, Matt, what should we be thinking about Combs' pretrial detention? Is his life in jeopardy? You mean from himself? Is he a danger to himself or anybody else? General speaking. You know, I've I've read some of the spirits theories on the Jeffrey Upsen case. And, you know, my personal thoughts on that, and this may be controversial, I think that he did suicide.

I think that, you know, when you're, you know, when you're talking about jails and detention facilities, the camera's never on. The camera never works. It's, you know, I did the Hussein Nairi case who escaped from the Orange County Jail, which is a maximum security facility, and the calamity of errors that had to go to his ability to escape.

Thankfully, we captured him again. But it's like the comedy of errors that lead up to that is, you know, it shouldn't be this way, but it often is. You know, you've got, you know, just the dumbest things can happen. And people do, they suicide in custody. It's a thing that happens. Nobody theoretically should ever be able to do that. But I've got, I've seen cases since I've been in private practice where people have accomplished

that. I had a guy on suicide watch in L.A. County Jail that took like 45 minutes braiding his bed sheets together in order to, you know, he hanged himself in his cell. And there was somebody supposed to be watching that the entire time. You know, so negligence and incompetence like that really does happen. So I would like to think that that same facility, and I think it's the same one, right? It's a different one. Okay. So the Metropolitan Correctional Center where Epstein was actually closed, and then you have him at the Metropolitan Detention Center. If you read about it, it is not a place you want to be. There's a lot of problems there. But I think they transferred a bunch of those people. Yeah, I think you might be right. So it's the same personnel.

Hopefully they've learned their lesson and they're going to be a little more diligent. You know, assuming that, you know, Epstein, that the authorities are right, that it was a suicide. You know, I don't know. Yeah, no, I hear you. I hear you. Look, there are a lot of comparisons that could be made, a lot of disturbing allegations. And like you said, we'll see where this case progresses. but I can tell you what everybody can do right now,

they can pick up the Book of Murder by Matt Murphy. Thank you so much for coming on, sir. I really enjoyed it. Really appreciate it. Thank you. You got it. All right, everybody, that's all we have for you right now here on Sidebar. Thank you so much for joining us.

And as always, please subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Jesse Weber. I'll speak to you next time. You can binge all episodes of this Law and Crime series ad free right now on Wondery Plus. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify.