Law&Crime Sidebar - P. Diddy Grand Jury Probe Confirmed as New Sexual Assault Allegations Exposed

Episode Date: July 5, 2024

As rapper Sean “Diddy” Combs faces his tenth lawsuit that alleges sexual misconduct, multiple sources are confirming that a federal grand jury in New York is hearing evidence about the music mogul. Law&Crime’s Jesse Weber is analyzes each new detail with renowned celebrity attorney Bradford Cohen.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW: If you’ve ever been 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/YouTubeTakeoverHOST:Jesse Weber: https://twitter.com/jessecordweberLAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokeVideo Editing - Michael DeiningerScript 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. Agent Nate Russo returns in Oracle 3, Murder at the Grandview, the latest installment of the gripping Audible Original series. When a reunion at an abandoned island hotel turns deadly, Russo must untangle accident from murder. But beware, something sinister lurks in the grand. View Shadows. Joshua Jackson delivers a bone-chilling performance in this supernatural thriller that will

keep you on the edge of your seat. Don't let your fears take hold of you as you dive into this addictive series. Love thrillers with a paranormal twist? The entire Oracle trilogy is available on Audible. Listen now on Audible. Sean Diddy Combs is now the subject of a federal criminal investigation and he was just hit with another lawsuit and he's planning to sell his massive mansion. Well, we're going to discuss some massive new developments in the ongoing legal saga of the music producer, all with renowned celebrity attorney Bradford Cohen. Welcome to Sidebar, presented by law and crime. I'm Jesse Weber. All right, there are some more interesting things happening right now in the Sean Diddy Combs story that we want to talk to you about. Is it that, I don't know, Combs is reportedly now the subject

of a federal investigation? Or how about the fact that there's a new lawsuit that has been filed against the rapper or that it's being reported he's trying to sell his house for 70 million dollars in the middle of all this or how about the fact that a key figure seemingly wants to testify against him obviously a lot to talk about we're going to get into it all but this is an interesting time for sean diddy combs and we have discussed this extensively here on sidebar he's currently facing multiple multiple lawsuits since november 2023 alleging sexual assault sex trafficking harassment illegal drugs and firearms possession, violence, intimidation. The lawsuit we're going to talk about today is just another one of those.

His homes in L.A. and Miami were raided by federal agents, reportedly pursuant to an ongoing human trafficking investigation by the Southern District of New York. Now, no arrests have been made, no charges have been filed, but it has been reported that a grand jury out in New York has been impaneled. And we know one of the reasons prosecutors use a grand jury is to seek an independent. indictment. Now, what else has happened with Combs? We know that CNN published a video purportedly of Combs in 2016, savagely beating his ex-girlfriend Cassandra Ventura in a hotel elevator bank. He issued an apology on Instagram two days after the release. He since deleted all of the post from his

Instagram account, including that apology video. His longtime entertainment law firm Grubman, Shire, Masalis, and Sacks has dropped him as a client. This is a firm of high-powered attorney Alan Grubman, We talked about that on a previous sidebar. Howard University, the private historically black university out of Washington, D.C., has rescinded its honorary degree that it awarded Combs back in 2014. Combs reportedly stepped down as chairman and sold his shares of Revolt TV. CNN has reported that the Fitness Powerhouse Peloton has removed Combs' music from its platform. Playing of his songs has gone significantly down across airwaves. He returned the key to New York City that was presented to him by Mayor Eric Adams last year.

Miami Beach has revoked its Sean Diddy Combs Day after a vote by the city commissioners. This was an annual holiday in effect since October 2016. So clearly a lot of fallout and happenings. But now, we have to talk about some new developments. And for these new developments, let me bring in criminal defense attorney and civil trial lawyer, Bradford Cohen, who knows a thing or two about representing celebrities. His roster includes Drake, Kodak Black, Lil Wayne. He's been talking about the Diddy case with us since the beginning.

Bradford, so good to see you. A lot to talk about here. I want to start with what I think is arguably one of the biggest developments. And that is that it's being reported that Sean Combs' attorneys were notified last week that he is the subject of that federal investigation by the Southern District of New York. What does it mean to be the subject of a federal criminal investigation? So there's several levels to federal criminal investigations. One of them is being a subject.

That means that they're looking into criminal allegations against an individual, but it's not as high level as, say, a target. A target is essentially they're very close to getting an indictment. They're going to get an indictment. And they invite you to come in to speak to them before they get the indictment or to work out a deal before they arrest you. When you know that you're a target, and they don't necessarily always tell people, hey, you're a target or a subject.

They usually send those letters out to see if they want to come in and cooperate or they have any evidence they want to present or they want to have a discussion. I think the fact that they sent the letter saying that he's a subject, I think they already knew that. Once your house gets raided by the feds, you are either a subject or a target, more likely a target than a subject. It's interesting that they sent out this letter saying that he's a subject. But I think that his lawyers are already speaking to the Southern District.

District of New York and they know kind of what's going on and that there's a federal indictment that could be on the horizon. And it can sway. You can be, you can be a subject and it could be upgraded to a target. Do you notify Combs as a legal team because the idea, as you say, they bring them in, that they want to work out a deal or is it because, hey, listen, we've been looking at some things we'd like to give you an opportunity to explain yourself. Is that more what we're looking at?

Yeah, usually the latter. When you're a subject, it's like they're not asking you to come in and give them. you know, a reason to charge you with the lesser crime or things of that nature. That's more of a target. When you're a subject, usually what happens is they're saying, hey, we're looking at these things. Do you have any evidence to give us to the other side of this? And generally, they don't do that a lot.

I think they're doing it in this case because it's a high profile case. They don't want to say they never gave him an opportunity to present any evidence that they could present to a grand jury to vitiate these allegations. there's these allegations that he's done X, Y, and Z. If he says, hey, listen, I wasn't even in the state of California at the time this girl said that I was here or I wasn't in the state of New York at the time the girl said I was here.

That gives them an opportunity to present that. And then the government can take a look at it and see if they're going to incorporate that into their grand jury testimony. Very interesting you talk about that because now I'm wondering about timing, right? It's no surprise. We've talked about it here on Sidebar before

that it wouldn't be. a shocker if he's ultimately hit with charges. Not a definite. We don't know for sure. We clearly do not know what's happening behind the scenes, but we see all these lawsuits. We know his houses were raided months ago. We talked about the possible being reported a grand jury has been impaneled. Does this give you any insight into the potential timing of criminal charges in this case? Yeah, I mean, listen, after a raid, generally, I say there's like a 90-day period where they meet. They discuss the charges. They go in front of a grand jury. They discuss charges in front of a grand jury, present evidence, present witnesses. And usually there's this

90-day window, maybe 120-day window. But it's usually within three, anywhere from three to five months that they put together an indictment, depending on how vast it is. I mean, I've seen it closer to 60 days. It just depends on what they're investigating. But I had a client whose house was rated about, you know, 45 days ago, and they're asking, hey, do you have any information that can assist us in what charges we think we may file, what charges we may not? So my guess is if I was just putting money down, I would say towards the end of the summer, I think they're going to have an indictment. I don't see how any evidence that he has is going to sway them to the contrary, especially where they have this grand jury that has been meeting. My

guesstimate is for at least 45 days and they've been providing evidence they usually don't waste their time on a grand jury meeting and presenting evidence and then not file any charges whatsoever now i will say in his defense right he is innocent until proven guilty he hasn't been 100% used by anything but i will say we've covered a number of cases where his defense team has raised a number of really good legal defenses on the civil front you know one of them was that the fact is he's being hit with certain causes of action claims that are invalid, he says, because the statute you're suing me under wasn't even in existence when these allegations happen. So his legal team will, like you said, it kind of hit me if he's going to say, I can prove

to you I wasn't in this location when I'm accused of doing X, Y, and Z. And by the way, before I get into the lawsuit, it reminds me, how much do they share with him or his attorneys of the potential charges of the case they have against him? everything or do they share just bits and pieces so generally speaking and i've dealt with the southern district in new york quite a few times um usually they share bits and pieces if they share anything at all uh they'll say this is what we're looking at sometimes x y and z they might not give you details i mean it's not hard to figure out these lawsuits that are coming at him fast and furious and the type of incidents that he's had in the past and the type of trouble that he's had in the past i think

It's pretty easy to figure out where they're going with it. And my guess is they're going to put together some sort of very long, encompassing indictment where it encompasses crimes that have taken place over a period of time in a sort of ongoing criminal conspiracy type situation. That's my guess. Again, you know, and like I always say, everybody's innocent until proven guilty. Even if they indict him, he still has the right to a trial. And so long story short is that's usually where it goes. That's kind of my feeling on this case is that they're going to try and incorporate everything they can from his past.

I wouldn't be surprised if they go back to, you know, prior shootings that he's been accused of, prior gun possessions that he's been accused of. You know, there was some incidences of violence with other rappers that they may say he had something, some kind of hand in those other incidences. So that's what I think they're going to do is put together an encompassing. indictment that throws everything at the wall. So for them to tell them, hey, this is what we're going to do. This is what we're looking at. I don't think that's the case in this matter. Hey, everybody, I want to take a minute to thank Morgan and Morgan for sponsoring today's Law and Crime YouTube Takeover. If you've seen our videos, you know Morgan and Morgan is a proud sponsor of law and crime and that our content proves the world isn't always the safest place.

And when you're hurt, that can be very confusing. It can be scary. You don't really know where to turn. But Morgan and Morgan, America's large. injury law firm can help. They're the largest injury law firm because they win a lot. Verdicts and settlements in the multi-millions. They also make it super easy for their clients because uploading documents, signing contracts, starting your claim can all be done on your smartphone. Also, there's zero upfront fee. You only pay them if you win. So if you've ever been injured in an accident, you can check out Morgan and Morgan. You can start a claim in eight clicks or less without even having to leave your couch. To start your claim, visit for thepeople.com

over. So now I want to get your thoughts and opinion on this major, major development, another development. And that is that Combs was just hit with another lawsuit. This is now, I think, the 10th lawsuit within the past year. And this one is from former adult film star Andrea English. And she filed a 114-page federal lawsuit in the Southern District of New York. So, again, the same district where we're seeing this federal investigation, reportedly this federal investigation, and she's filed this lawsuit against Sean Combs, she's filed against other defendants, and she's basically making claims of sex trafficking and sexual assault, that she was, quote, used as a sexual pawn for the pleasure and financial benefit of others during Combs' infamous white parties, these parties that happened in the Hamptons and New York and Miami, where everybody dressed up in white. attire and she claims that Combs forced her into prostitution for years. She said that Combs forced her to take drugs before she was, quote, passed off to others. And she claims that she was demanded to have sex. For instance, with celebrity jeweler Jacob the Jeweler Arabo, who is listed

as a defendant in this complaint. And she claims that Combs threatened to blackmail her and her boyfriend from the entertainment industry if she didn't do what he wanted. Combs' attorney, by the way, Jonathan Davis released a statement saying no matter how many lawsuits are filed, it won't change the fact that Mr. Combs has never sexually assaulted or sex trafficked anyone. We live in a world where anyone can file a lawsuit for any reason without any proof. Fortunately, a fair and impartial judicial process exists to find the truth. Mr. Combs is confident he will prevail against these and other baseless claims in court. Now, she is suing under various causes of action, such as violation of the federal racketeering statute,

sexual assault, sexual harassment, violation of the New York City Victims of Gender Motivated Violence Protection Act, Violation of Trafficking and Victims Protection Act, aiding and abetting a sex trafficking enterprise, negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress. It's a massive, massive lawsuit, Bradford, but again, very consistent with the other lawsuits that have been filed. What are your thoughts? You know, when I read some of these lawsuits, it's very hard. to differentiate the lawsuits that have value to them and the lawsuits that are being just piggybacked onto everything else. When you read this lawsuit, it seems to me, when I look at the

individual that's filing it and be it right or wrong, the industry that that individual was involved in, and then I look at the allegations and whether or not those allegations would be able to be proven through other individuals. This is one of those lawsuits that I think is a piggyback onto everything else. I think that, and his lawyer is right, when you open up the floodgates, and I say this to my clients quite often, you know, a lot of my clients say, hey, I got hit, you know, this person's threatening with a lawsuit. If they file this lawsuit, it's total BS, we should fight it, blah, blah, blah. I said, listen, there's a couple different ways to go about this. There's either one way to go about it, even on the BS lawsuits, is to settle it out for, you know,

what you would be paying a lawyer, 100 grand, 50 grand, 75 grand, whatever you think that you would be paying a lawyer to answer that complaint. But then you have to look at the things that aren't a cost. When that lawsuit gets filed, are you going to lose, you know, is everyone going to ditch you? Are you going to lose, you know, your Adidas, you're going to lose your Nike sponsorship, all these different sponsorships. They're just going to walk away from you, not because the lawsuit is true, but because of the allegations in the lawsuit. So those are things to consider. Then if a lawsuit actually gets filed, you have no choice but to go to war over the lawsuit

because if you settle that lawsuit and you settle it quickly, there is blood in the water and all the sharks come to feed. And that's what you saw with the Diddy lawsuit. He said, no, I'm not going to settle with her. I'm not going to settle with her, which I believe that he should have, especially with Cassie. You're talking about to Sandra Ventaro. He said because he settled that lawsuit the day after it was filed back in November of 2023. Which was just idiotic at that point because you don't settle it the day after it gets filed.

At that point, you're at war. And really, if you settle something within a day of filing, it signals to all the wolves that I am weak and it's now to time to attack. And that's what you saw. You saw a lot of lawsuits being filed. Some of them were just outrageously fantastic. in terms of the accusations. Some of them could be true. Some of them might not be true.

We just don't know, right, until you get into the heart of it. But I think that opened the floodgates to allow everyone else to start suing him. And I think, like I said, this is one of those lawsuits that I think he's going to have another three or four before this is over. Why this lawsuit do you think that? Is it because, and I'll throw out, I was looking at the lawsuit and as a lawyer, I was looking at some ways that you might be able to attack this. Obviously, these are very, very serious allegations, but there's a part of the lawsuit where

it says defendant Combs frightened in place plaintiff in apprehension of harm when he forced and coerced plaintiff to engage in sex work for him during his white parties. From 2004 to 2009, do you think one thing could be, is it realistic to believe that she was forced to do this for years? Is that something that you say, you know, that might be hard to prove? But then again, I mean, how many cases, sexual assault cases have we covered where people are consistently abused for years and maybe it takes them time to realize that they were abused or they were in legitimate fear and felt they had no choice.

But you tell me, is that one of the areas that you're looking? I mean, why do you think that this is a case that maybe is piggybacking? I think that's one of the reasons. You know, when I look at a lawsuit and I see that it's over a term of years, it doesn't mean that it's not true. It raises my radar. A lot of things raise my radar when I read, you know, different complaints and I say to myself, like, I've dealt with victims of sex abuse. I've dealt with victims that have been trafficked.

I don't just represent defendants. I've represented civil claims where this same kind of thing might have occurred. It becomes more unusual as you pile on facts such as that it's over a period of five years and then nothing happens between 0.9. to 2024 until all these other lawsuits are filed. And then suddenly it's like, hey, you know what, ding, ding, I'm going to file a lawsuit too because I can. I'm going to file a lawsuit too and jump on the jump on this kind of ditty train and see if I can get my lawsuit settled.

Or it could be a situation where, you know, someone said, hey, you should talk to this young lady. The Southern District of New York talks to her. And they're like, hey, I don't know if she is a sex worker or if she was. was abused and trafficked and it could be on that wall and to make sure that the Southern District understands I shouldn't be involved in this. I shouldn't be charged. I wasn't a sex worker. I was abused. She files this lawsuit to kind of put that over the top and say like, look, you know, me, let's explore that a little bit. Let's explore that. But so obviously, right,

you make it a great point that there could be people who piggyback. They come out after all this years. Another way of looking out of its course, if somebody, begins the lawsuits. If somebody comes out against a high-powered figure like a Diddy or a Harvey Weinstein or R. Kelly, and obviously Sean Diddy Combs is not in the same realm as then. He hasn't been criminally charged. But it could give somebody the strength to come forward. But putting that to aside, I was curious of the timing because do you think that she files this lawsuit because she is one of the witnesses who's going to testify in this grand jury or again assuming there is a grand jury investigating combs or he's the subject of the investigation

do you think she's testified do you think she's spoken to them and that is why we're now seeing this lawsuit i think that's really interesting when you talked about i i believe so i that's what i think that's what i think that individuals that are going to be called on by the southern district of new york to come in and testify in front of a grand jury i think as they are speaking to them they say oh wait a minute yeah i was trafficked i was this i was that and then all of a sudden it kind of leads to another lawsuit that's why i think there's going to be more lawsuits to follow so i don't know if that happened in this case but you see that happening in many cases where they're called in as a witness they start going through all the things and the and the uh you know the u.s government the they start saying

hey you know sounds to me like you were you know you were trafficked this doesn't sound like you were sex worker. This doesn't sound like you were just getting paid to have sex or whatever. This sounds like he was he was doing this to you or this to you or this to you. Bells and whistles go off in those individuals' heads and then they hire a civil attorney to file a civil lawsuit. That happens quite often as well. So you just don't know, but like I said, it just, it raises your radar when you read these lawsuits and you start kind of questioning why it took over a period of time, why it took so long to come forward. And you're right. There's always arguments on the other side. Oh, this person was very powerful. But it wasn't like she was,

she wasn't a rapper. She wasn't a singer. She wasn't in that realm of, okay, I'm at this level of fame. And if I don't do this, he's going to blackball me. It's a very strange dynamic in that lawsuit that she's discussing, especially like that she, that he forced to have sex with Jacob, the jeweler, like these individuals that they're bringing in. It's very unusual. The counterargument to that would be if you're somebody who's not very prominent and doesn't have the power, it's easier to blackball you and make sure you don't get the career or your boyfriend doesn't get the career that they were looking for. I do want your opinion about this, though, because there are a lot of people who are named in this lawsuit, a lot of companies, there are people,

Jacob the jeweler. But she's also suing, I give everybody an idea, she's also suing Combs associate, Tamiko Thomas, and I want everybody to listen to this description, defendant Thomas, was to defend in Combs as Galane Maxwell was to Jeffrey Epstein. Without Defendant Thomas, a woman using her inherent goodwill as a woman to gain the trust of another woman, coordinating and acting as an avatar for defending Combs, defending Combs would be unable to execute his corrupt sex trafficking organization. So when you hear something like that, right, is that give you, again, an allegation, but there seems to be, if we're talking about what kind of case the feds might,

be building here, this is not the first time that someone has made a comparison to Jeffrey Epstein, right? I mean, that's a big allegation to make. Correct. And the thing is, like I said, the other thing about this lawsuit is, I always look at who the lawyer is on the lawsuit as well. Sure. And the lawyer on this lawsuit, it's not some fly-by-night lawyer. He's a real guy. And there's, you know, some of these lawsuits are filed by lawyers that might be newer lawyers that might be fresh out of law school that might be under, you know, a certain amount of years in practice. And I look at those lawsuits differently, be it right or wrong, when a high-powered attorney or someone that you have a lot of respect for takes one of these cases, you'd hope and you usually find that they do

their research before filing a federal lawsuit like this. So that's the thing that weighs against everything that I'm saying is that, you know, there's a high-powered attorney and a respected attorney that took this case on and you would imagine that he did some investigation prior to filing the lawsuit. So as I mentioned, there's other people that she's suing. She's doing Vibe Magazine and its parent company Penske because she claims that they helped him, helped Combs throw these parties where she was allegedly abused and trafficked and that they allegedly exploited her in this sex trafficking conspiracy by using her likeness without her consent in a 2006 magazine issue about these parties. Bradford, I want to get into some more developments, but if you have

had a quick thought about that one suing those companies as well i think that they kind of threw everything at the wall i think a lot of these things um will be very difficult to prove especially like when there's sponsorship for these parties so a lot of times you find that uh individual liquor companies or magazines maxim any of these magazines that throw kind of like their support behind a behind a party or support the party in a different way monetarily or just by covering it often you find that plaintiffs will sue those individuals saying that they have some sort of liability for it. Very difficult case to prove against those corporations and those individuals that work for those corporations because you have to establish some sort of duty to protect and some sort of

duty that they breached, especially like when they're saying, oh, she, you know, she was used by them to promote these parties and things of that nature. Generally, they get releases signed. And I would imagine that if they did some sort of story on her personally, that she probably would have partook in that story willingly. And it wasn't something that she did or they did behind their back. And again, you're going to run into statute of limitations issues. You're going to run into some problems here. Even though she may have claims on some things, you're going to run into some issues, especially with some of the claims against the corporations. Okay.

So we'll see which way that lawsuit works out. But I did want to get your perspective on two other developments happening in the middle of all of this. And one, to be frank with everybody, we were planning on talking to Bradford about this initially. And then the lawsuit happened and then the subject of the investigation happened. But the first thing that we wanted to talk to you about was that it's being reported that Diddy is trying to sell his estimated multi-million dollar Los Angeles mansion, the property that was rated by the feds. It's in the homely hills area of Los Angeles. TMZ reported that sources say did he paid $40 million for this back in 2014. He's trying to sell it for $70 million for it, trying to sell it off market.

It's reportedly 17,000 square feet, eight bedrooms, 11 bathrooms, 35-seat theater, swimming pool, swimming tunnel, basketball court. Why try to do this now, Bradford? Could it be he spends most of his time in Miami? Could it be he needs the money right now? Could it be its bad memories from the raids? I mean, he's selling or allegedly selling this property right now in the middle of all this? Do you find it interesting?

Yeah, I mean, it could be a combination of all three, right? It could be that he spends more time in Miami than L.A. That one, I think it would be at the bottom of the list. I think more likely than not the lawyers have told him, hey, listen, you have these 10 lawsuits. 10 lawsuits with lawyers billing on 10 lawsuits, not to mention whatever. the criminal case is you're billing out at two thousand bucks an hour it's very easily you're you're reaching a million or a million five a month in just lawsuit costs right so if he can trim the fat i think he's looking to trim the fat if he can make a little money on a house that he

doesn't use that often i think that's why he's selling that would be my guess i think liquidating assets when you're facing what he's looking at right now is probably a pretty good idea no matter how it looks to the public, you have to do what's right for you at the time. And I think what's right for him is, like I said, to trim the fat, get rid of things that he doesn't necessarily need to have and need the expense of so he can concentrate all his effort on the resolution of these cases. From an outward point of view, I mean, you couldn't tell that he's troubled, that he's been out and about. He just, TMZ reported that he was just in Wyoming. There's pictures of him water rafting or river rafting with his family.

I am curious, now that we know that, or at least it's been reported that he's the subject of the investigation and all this is happening, you know what question I keep getting asked all the time, Bradford? Why doesn't he just run? Why does he just pick up and go to a country where there's no extradition? People say, why didn't Harvey Weinstein do that? Why didn't somebody, well, what would your answer be to that? It's a multitude. It's very funny because it's not one answer is the right answer for that. Sometimes it's ego. Sometimes it's, you know, I'm not guilty, so I'm sticking where I'm sticking. A lot of times it's the government's going to find out that he's making a run for it because a guy like that's very difficult to get out of the country without

everyone and anyone finding out. It's not like he's, you know, Bob Smith and he can just put a mustache on and some glasses and go hit, you know, a cruise ship and take off. So it's very difficult. Is it impossible? No. But if he gets caught doing it, I think the government is, is prepared to just file a complaint and arrest him on the spot as and no one likes that that is not a good look uh so i think that it's a it's probably multifaceted but i think the biggest part of that is the government probably already let his attorneys know if he tries to make a run for it we're prepared to just file a complaint arrest him under a complaint and then just hold him no bond as opposed to if they actually file the charges towards the end of the summer he might be eligible

for a bond because he knew that these charges were coming and he he never made a run for it. Speaking Bond, I have one final question for you. And I know I've hit you with a lot of different things that are happening in the digi saga, but clearly a lot is happening. So Roger Bonds, this is Combs, former bodyguard, appeared on this program called Vlad TV and said, quote, if I get subpoenaed, I'm not going to jail, I'm not going to jail for nobody. And then he doubled down on that, that he would testify, even if he were promised he wouldn't

get in trouble. I can't say that I'm going to be an advocate for one thing and then not standing. up for another thing. So if I say that he's evil and I say all these things about him, if I was just one of those people that went back in my corner and sat down, then I'm continuing for this to keep going on and on. I'm showing this person that they're just as powerful as they think they was. Anything I can do to help these women, I would do. That's quite a statement. What do you make of it? I think that, you know, again, when you look at ex-employees, and I'm looking at this from the defense perspective. When you look at ex-employees, a lot of times they have a bone to

pick with an individual. They weren't paid enough. They weren't paid the right thing. Who knows? But that being said, I think it's very dangerous when if there's someone who is your right-hand man, bodyguard, and if they've witnessed things and they've seen things, and now they're willing to come in and testify, especially when you speak, if you're speaking freely in a car and you have your bodyguard there and he's overhearing things, that's always dangerous. because he could testify to a lot of different things. And it's hard to say that didn't happen. It's hard to say, hey, listen, even though he was in the car,

that wasn't said. What is the flip side to that is that, you know, these bodyguards that see things or witness things, and they don't come forward at the time, but now they want to come forward. Now they want to protect women. Now they want to do all these things. That's the other side of that coin.

But again, you could say he was so powerful. he wouldn't this guy would have never worked in the business again you know there's defenses to everything but it's not good it's not good when a bodyguard wants to come forward and assuming the allegations against the all the allegations are true and if he was a part of this if he was a participant then i would imagine he'd have to work out some sort of deal an immunity deal correct to testify because then he'd be he'd be just as guilty right right and i think that's why he's saying i'm not going to go to jail for anybody right right right because i think that most of the people that are involved and most of the people that were around him at the time, I think are all

very nervous that somehow, some way the Southern District of New York would put them involved and everything else. And I think that's why they sent him a subject letter, not a target letter. Right. Because it could be that there's multiple subjects. That's, I think that's a very fair assessment. Again, he's innocent until proven guilty. These are allegations. He hasn't been arrested, hasn't been criminally charged, hasn't been found liable in a court of law, but fascinating. updates nonetheless and how great is bradford cohen breaking down everything about what's going on here i threw so much adam uh bradford thank you so much for your expertise your insight and your time really appreciate it thank you so much thanks for having me 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 podcast spotify youtube wherever you get your podcasts i'm jesse webber 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.