Piers Morgan Uncensored - “You Are Flat Out WRONG!” Diddy - DJ Vlad vs Tony Buzbee | + Elisabeth Oveson: ‘I Was Gifted To Him’

Episode Date: July 8, 2025

Diddy could still face up to 20 years in a federal prison - but his sentence is likely to be much shorter than that, with the defense asking for less than two years. Federal prosecutors are facing criticism that they overreached with charges of sex trafficking and racketeering in a RICO case that never looked strong enough. There’s competing claims of victim-shaming - and that the Diddy trial is a definitive end for the MeToo era. So, what went wrong - and what happens next? Piers Morgan speaks to Elisabeth Ovesen, formerly known as Karrine Steffans and the author of ‘Confessions of a Video Vixen', who claims she was gifted to Diddy in 2001. Uncensored is then joined by hip hop commentator DJ Vlad and lawyer Tony Buzbee, who is representing alleged Diddy victims in civil suits. Piers Morgan Uncensored is proudly independent and supported by: Pique: Get 20% off your order plus a FREE frother & glass beaker with this exclusive link: https://piquelife.com/PIERS Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is not what the trial was about. The trial is about Rico. The trial is about sex trafficking. The trial is about prostitution. In fact, the only reason did he got convicted was because it was interstate commerce. All the other male escorts that I've talked to, like, for example, I talked to Don the dealer, who also had multiple sessions with Cassie. She said she was loving it. She was into it.

She was setting the direction. This is really about the domestic violence. But the domestic violence goes back past the statute of limitations. You just made this grand conclusion that, oh, the U.S. attorney talked to. a few of these folks and decided they had no credibility. You were flat out wrong in that respect. I went wrong if they made it decided is that there was nothing that happened. If you won a single lawsuit with any of these people you've represented, a single lawsuit.

Literally 30 days ago for 640 million, pales. So don't be telling me about winning lawsuit. How many losses do you want to get Diddy and Jay-Z? None of went to trial yet, knucklehead. First came the verdict. Now the fallout. Diddy could still face up to 20 years in a federal prison. but his sentence is likely to be much shorter than that.

Defense is asking for less than two years. Federal prosecutors are facing criticism that they overreach with charges of sex trafficking and racketeering in a RICO case that never looks strong enough as competing claims, victim-shaming. And the Ditty trial is a definitive end for the Me Too era.

So what went wrong? What happens next? And how will the hip-hop world be reshaped by a case that gripped the world? Just a moment, we're here from DJ Vlad, Tony Busby and Esther Cracker. But first, I'm joined by Elizabeth Overson, known to many by her pseudonym of Karen Steffens, author of Video Vixen, who claimed she was gifted to Diddy in 2001 by a music executive. Well, welcome to Unsensored Elizabeth.

Thank you very much, indeed, for joining me. Thank you for having me. A lot of people are kind of aware of your history with Diddy, but for those who know nothing about it, how would you categorize your time with him? My time with Sean was honestly pleasant in the beginning. To my recollection, and the first time we met, we spent the night together, but he was a consummate gentleman with me in that evening. Again, to my recollection, and every other time I saw him after that was in a. a group setting, so it was fine. The last time I saw him, however, things had taken a bit of a turn.

It was after Confessions of a Video Vixen, my first book had been published, and he was seething when he saw me at Prince had a party at his house, and we were there, you know, of course, before Prince died, and he was scowling at me the whole night, and I just, I found it amusing. He was obviously very angry with me by that point in our relationship. Why was he so angry with him? Well, four months before Confessions was published in 2005, we got a call from Sean's attorney, my attorney did, and Sean's attorney wanted to see the book before the book came out.

Confessions of a video vixen was an embargoed book, so no one could see it. No one would even get it until the day, the publication date, which is June 5th of that year. And so my attorney told his attorney that he could not get the book and that they would have to wait into the book came out like everyone else. And if they saw a problem in the book that they were free to reach back out to us, sue us, whatever they felt was necessary. We knew that wouldn't happen because Harper Collins is the publisher of that book, as you know, is a News Corp entity. And those attorneys made sure it was vetted to the fullest so Sean could never sue. he could never raise any objection to it.

And I think he always hated me after that because I left enough... I post questions in that book that I think sent certain people down the direction that leads us to where we are now. Just explain that a little more. What were the questions you think that you're talking about? Well, honestly, I'm just now getting context on a lot of the questions that I had then after the trial.

The trial gave me way more context. But just about, I think, his sexual proclivities in what we saw in hanging out with him, the kind of clubs he took us to, even conversations he and I had. One in particular where he, I didn't understand it at the time. And honestly, Pierce, I'm getting new understanding about this line of questions. I wrote about this in confessions where my boyfriend and I at the time had gone to his home for New Year's Eve, you know, Christmas, New Year's Eve kind of festivities. And he pulled me to the side and was just like, we're friends, right? You know, we're friends. And I was like, yeah, yeah, we're friends.

And like, we're good. And I'm like, yeah, we're good. And I couldn't figure out what he meant. And I wrote about this where I just didn't know what he was talking about. And he just kind of went on to say, you know, I have kids. I have a mom, and if anything got out, it would really hurt them. And I honestly, at that point in stage, did not know or remember what he was talking about. And so we just kind of laughed it off, like, what's going on with him, you know?

And things like he said to my boyfriend, like, don't trust her. You know, she might have her on video with, you know, in precarious positions. And this is back before cell phone cameras. So I was just like, what video? I didn't understand any of it. Now after the trial and the things that have come out from the trial, this gives these conversations a lot more context, but at the time when confessions came out,

it did make us all wonder, what was he so afraid of? I didn't even know what I had seen or didn't see or if there's something happened that I didn't remember from our time together, but he was very afraid that I would say something. in the book. And honestly, I don't think, I think he never contacted us back because what he thought I was going to say, I did not say. Possibly because I didn't remember it. What do you think he was fearful of you saying? I have to be honest, Pierce, you know, in booking this time with you today and your producer asked me to kind of send over some pages from the book, I hadn't read confessions since I wrote it. And I read it for the audio version. And that was 2005. It's been 20 years since I've read

this book. And in reading what I sent over, which is what I just described to you right now, I wonder if, I wonder a lot of things. He was so afraid that I knew something. And I was confused because the only time that we had had together prior to this conversation was a lone time at his home wherein I felt it was it we had a good time. I didn't know, you know, we had never, he didn't come on to me. He was, he just seemed very, he was just, it was very platonic, I thought. So I was confused as to why, what, you know, what was it? And so I have to admit my mind kind of races now that I have more context of his proclivities

and what he's capable of, of what he was so afraid of what he thought I knew or what he thought I remembered. I mean, in the book, you talk about the first time you met Diddy, nightclub at 3am. You say right there in front of me, Diddy and Gotti, who was the murder in records boss of Gotti, made arrangements to send me to Diddy's house in one hour. It was four in the morning. I turned up to Diddy's home in my SUV. There was security guards in the driveway, all dressed in dark suits with their hands in front of them. They have been expecting me. The things that went on when Gotti and I were together are almost unimaginable to me now, but in the haze of drugs and liquor, it all seemed all right. I was.

as being used over and over again, man after man, all friends and acquaintances of Gotti's. I quickly became Gotti's showpiece. He would turn other people in the industry onto me. I was his party favour. Whenever there was anyone Gotti wanted to impress, he would send them to me and I'd take care of them. I mean, could it be what Sean Combs is worried about was that he facilitated this very transactional relationship that you had with, of Goss? Is that part of this? I don't think that was it.

And honestly, I think it was more insidious than that. The fear, the fright that he had during that conversation at his Miami home, you know, back in whatever year that was, he seemed terrified that I had known something. And I just don't know what he thought I knew or remembered. The transactional nature of how we met, and which is why, you know, I said in various interviews before that I was gifted to him. It was because no one asked me if I wanted to go. No one asked me, they talked about me as if I wasn't there. I was property to cart around.

And that's what they did. If they would have asked me, I still would have gone. So I didn't hold any objection at the time because I would have still done it. Being 21 and it's Diddy and we're having fun and it's just a Saturday night out in L.A. Now, everybody knows how much I enjoy my tea, and I'm very happy to say that today's show is sponsored by Peaks Pure fermented teas. These are not your average brews. They're sourced from 250-year-old wild trees in the Himalayan foothills, which are untouched by modern farming. No pesticides, no fertilizers, just nature at its best.

Pure delivers a full spectrum of prebiotics, probiotics, and postbiotics, just like the fermented foods found in longevity hotspots. It comes in crystal form. There was no messing around. Just dissolve, sit and feel the difference. It's trusted by health experts, including Casey Means and Dr. Mark Hyman. There's teas for all occasions, and they all support your gut health, metabolism, and cellular renewal. The next time you put the kettle on, ask yourself, is my tea working as hard as me? Peaks pure fermented teas for the gut of a Brit and the longevity of a Himalayan monk.

You're 20% off for life. plus a free frother and glass beaker with the pure bundle. Visit piquelife.com slash peers. That's peak, P-I-Q-U-E-Life.com slash peers. Did you actually ever have any kind of sexual relationship at all with him? I'm sorry, what was that? Did you actually have any kind of sexual relationship with Diddy at all? No, Did he and I did not know.

Well, not to my knowledge. So what do you mean by that? Not to my knowledge. I don't. Honestly, I'm questioning a lot of things right now. So not to my knowledge. I have, no, I don't think anything right now. I just not to my knowledge because honestly...

That's a very strange response, though, to not remember whether you did or not. Yeah, isn't it? It is. Yeah, it is. Because honestly, Pierce, before now, again, before I went through my text, again, I hadn't read confessions in 20 years. I wrote it. It was painful to write. So I never wanted to re-traumatize myself and go through those years again. And think about this. I'm a middle-aged woman at this point. I don't want to go back into my 20s and

see what happened. But in gathering information for this interview here, reading that passage again for the first time in 20 years, I questioned a lot of things like, well, why was he so afraid? And why did he try to, you know, make my boyfriend feel as if I wasn't trustworthy? And when he and I only spent... Do you think he took advantage of you when you were under the influence of alcohol and drugs? I don't know. Honestly, I don't know. And I never thought that before.

I've never thought that before. I've never thought... Everything you've read. Honestly, yes. Given the context, now that I know, because again, I never knew any of these things about him before. So the things that I learned in the trial, I did not know. I never saw that side of him. I did not know. I never understood. And again, in 2005, when I published confessions, it says, I didn't never, it says I don't, I didn't understand why he was so fearful of me because our time

together was pleasant. And I was like, wait, what is he so afraid of? What does he not want me to tell? I didn't see anything at that point. At that point, I hadn't seen anything. At that point, we had had, I thought, just a friendly platonic night together. So I was confused then, and 20 years later, I'm confused now. So to my knowledge, I've never had sex with Sean Combs. We never had that kind of relationship. But you can't be sure. Given what we know now, I can't be sure.

And how does that make you feel? And that saddens me. Yeah, I was going to ask you. Yeah, it saddens me. Honestly, yeah, because honestly, during this entire process, I've been shying away from publicity and just letting the trial unfold. You know, I knew things from just being around and people talking, but I didn't know what was going to come out. There was a few things that I saw that without contacts were strange to me, but I didn't understand them until the trial.

And so I've been quiet this whole time, and I disappeared off of social. I just disappeared for the past year waiting for this thing to unfold. In the unfolding of what I believe to be facts and definitely the testimonies of Cassie and Jane and even some of the men, and then looking back at the text, I'm like, wait a minute, okay,

when he said, if anything got out, and I remember at the time being so confused, like anything like what got out? Like, we, nothing happened. We hung out. You were kind. At some point I went to sleep. I don't know when, but I woke up.

And then we had breakfast, and you were kind. And I left. Nothing happened. I don't know, Pierce. It just, I feel, just in the last 24 hours, I question what I thought I knew about my time with him. You detailed in your books, romantic relationships with a lot of famous people from that world.

J-Z. DMX, Van Diesel, Lil Wayne, Methodman, even Bill Maher, L.L. Cool J, Mr. Mr. Carl, and others. You had a lot of famous guys you dated. And who knows what the nature of what happened with Dilley was about. But do you feel that this whole world has now changed irrevocably as a result of what happened to Dizzy? No. No, because nothing has happened to Diddy. Nothing has happened to Sean at all.

What has happened here is that here's the deal. It's not a Diddy issue. Like, Diddy is a problem, but he's not the problem. Okay, he's not the problem. From Cosby to Combs, Weinstein to Epstein, and everything in between, they're all different tentacles of the same beast. And this is a story as old as time. The abuses of men, men in power, especially, men with money.

And I think it only increases over time as women become more free and more liberated, being able to make our own money, being able to buy our own homes, being able to start our own businesses. I think it only enrages the men who hold power that they're losing power. And so I felt that over time, you know, in my experience, over the last 20-something years that I've been in this town, that the men are increasingly more aggressive and more so wanting to keep women under control and in power because they are losing power, even legally so. I don't think that the Ditty trial has changed anything other than it probably fuels this issue more than anything because here's a deal.

Two of the toughest charges have been dropped. He's facing up to 20 with time served. Yeah, he's denied bail, but how much time is he really going to get? Probably maybe what three years? Might be out on probation. might have to wear an ankle bracelet like Martha Stewart and everything's going to be fine.

And then what happens is that no one's paying attention to the fact that there are a lot of men who aren't saying anything, who are very quiet, as well as men who are, men especially, and women who are supporting him. And I fear, even with everything that we've heard, let's say none of that was true.

We saw something, however, that tells us something about this person. We saw a videotape of him brutalizing Cassie, and that tells me everything I need to know about this person's character. So even if nothing else was true, that alone is enough reason for him to be canceled indefinitely. But I fear that's not what's going to happen. I think this is just emboldening more men to do the same thing

because guess what they're going to do? They're going to get away with it. There are men in this industry who have left this country, who are now living on islands, and in different countries, you know, to escape persecution from things like this. There are men that I know personally who are involved in this, who have done things similar to this, who have parties like this. Dity's not the only one.

This is not a Sean Combs problem. This is not, this is a societal community issue here in this town, and it's not just the artist. It's also their attorneys, their publicists. It's the hotels. I was brutalized in a hotel, and guess what happened? That tape disappeared. When I went to get my police report from the police station, it was destroyed all within 48 hours to protect the person who had brutalized me.

It is systemic. So it doesn't matter, you know, if Dedy gets off or not in the sense that it won't stop anything. I think if anything, it makes it all worse. Well, that is a sobering way to end. But thank you very much indeed, Elizabeth Overson. I appreciate it. Thank you so much. Well, to debate all this, I'm joined by Tony Busby,

the attorney representing dilly victims in civil suits, DJ Vlad, commentator and host of Vlad TV, and our very own, our sensitive contributor, Esther Cracko. Estes, we listened to that. What were you thinking? I think, I mean, what she said at the end there was very poignant. This is not a ditty problem. This is an industry problem.

I do find it quite telling that she said she was brutalized as well in the similar fashion that Cassie was. And then within 48 hours, the tape vanished. And I think a lot of the fault has to be laid at the, the nature of the system. We used to say that all you need is consent, whether it's signed consent or yes, we're good to go. But actually, when you contextualize that these women,

that, okay, yes, they are drawn in by the glamour of being with someone like PDD or a high-profile person, you can choose the names. They are drawn into the system, but nothing means that they deserve to be beaten up and treated like ragdolls in the way that Cassie and argue with this lady said. And so we need to be looking at the cultural issue as well.

That's the fundamental issue. It's not just about you sign a piece of paper and you can make an NDA, keep you quiet or whatever. The culture is telling women that actually you can be treated this way because you happen to be in this space and all that keeps everything above board is the legality. And unfortunately, the culture is our problem. It's not the problem of the federal prosecutors.

It's the problem of us as a society. The PAs, the people that are handling, their press releases, the lawyers, everyone, they are part of the culture, that culture of subservience and allowing these people to do things that are legal, above board, but are horrible and just quite vile. I feel sorry for Cassie, because I do think the prosecutors misled her. The case was very, very shoddy on many levels. You can't have a conspiracy with just one person.

That's not a conspiracy. That's a thought. And so I think in many ways, that case was always going to fall through. But I do think that these girls have been let down by a culture that has boiled down appropriate behavior to just, you know, legality and consent. Okay, DJ Vlad, you posted on X after the verdicts, came in. Cassie is guilty of the same prostitution charges Diddy was just convicted of. I interviewed three of the male escorts. All three of them said the same thing. Cassie picked them, contacted them for free costs, enjoyed the experiences and paid them. Meanwhile,

she's sitting on $30 million and writing letters to the judge asking him not to give Diddy bail. So I'm pretty clear what your view is of Cassie Ventura there. What do you think should happen to her? I mean, personally, I think she should be charged for the same thing that Diddy he was charged with. Ultimately, he was convicted of prostitution. She was involved in the prostitution. Every male escort that I talked to said that she was the one picking the actual male prostitutes. She would book them. She enjoyed every experience. She was sort of guiding the whole thing while they were together, and she was the one that actually paid them. Ultimately, this is a domestic violence case that's ballooned into a RICO and sex trafficking and so forth. What did he did to casting that hallway

was absolutely horrible, but that is not what the trial was about. It was about RICO. It was about sex trafficking. Neither of which made sense in this particular trial. And if you want to actually convict him for prostitution, Cassie is just as liable for that same prostitution that Diddy got convicted of,

but she was given immunity in the whole situation. So I just feel it's really just a messed up situation. That's a completely ridiculous stance, because you know what the consequences of her... You know what the consequences of her not booking those prostitutes? We saw it in that hallway in the hotel. And in an international change... hotel that were happy to take $50,000 to wipe it off the face of the earth.

Those are the consequences. If she hadn't done that, it is very likely that she would have been manhandled in that way, even in the street, and someone would have been able to wipe the footage of that. I appreciate the fact that she, hold on, I appreciate the fact that she was the face of this. You're talking about a totally different situation. I guess the question, Vlad, I guess the question that Esther's posing there really is did she go along so apparently consensually with all the freak-off stuff, with all these escorts, because she... Wait a minute to that.

Well, hang on, my question, did she go along with it in the apparently consensual way because she was in fear of retribution from Diddy in a way we saw with the beating? No, I don't think so. At the end of the day, this was an artist that had one hit song 20-something years ago. She had the ability to leave at any point.

She was signed to a label, but labels leave artists that don't react constantly. She could have win. She stayed because she wanted to be in that particular situation. Now, people are going to argue with me and so forth. But at the end of the day, she stayed because there's no one else that was offering her a record deal. There's no one else that was spending millions of dollars on it. There's no one else that was showering her with gifts.

So she decided to stay. And ultimately, at the end of the day, when the money ran out, when she married a broke, you know, fitness trainer and had to go move back in with her parents. And the money completely ran out. Then it's like, okay, let's sue Diddy and let's get $20 million out of him. That is my take on it. That's always been my take. That always will be my take. Okay.

Tony Buzzby, let me bring you in here. First off, what do we think is going to happen to Diddy here? What sentence are you anticipating? I'm expecting two to four years, I would expect. I mean, he's not going to be, he's not going to get 20 years, obviously. He's already has time served. There's going to be some mitigating factors. He doesn't have a prior record.

However, there are some issues within the case that might be reasons for the judge to go a little bit higher than perhaps normal, but I would expect two to four years. What is your feeling? You've obviously represented many giddy victims in civil actions. You had over 100 people come to you with various allegations.

What impact does this verdict have on the suits that you want to proceed with? Zero. I mean, I was listening to Vlad there for a minute, and I'm sure that same kind of argument took place in the jury room. I mean, people have a hard argument. time putting their head around a situation where somebody might consent one day and not consent

the next. And there are people in this world that believe, well, you've consented once, so therefore you're consenting for life. That is not what the law says. And I can understand why there may have been people on that jury that had the same point of view. And I'm not criticizing. I'm just saying that there's a lot of psychological issues here that people really don't understand about trauma bonding and how somebody might feel compelled to do something that they really don't want to do. But even if they said no, one time, that is not consent. And I think in this trial, and we didn't have the benefit, or at least I didn't have the benefit of watching it day to day and seeing each witness and hearing how they said the things they said, all I was able to see was

the transcript that I would receive on a daily basis. Obviously, the jury thought that the RICO situation was complete baloney. They thought, apparently, that this was not a RICO situation. There was no conspiracy and they were trying to put a round peg into a square hold or vice versa. I did think that given the testimony that I saw that there were instances where Cassie and Jane were forced to do things either through financial pressure or through extortion type pressure or through force things that they did not want to do. But the interesting thing on that, Tony, is that the jury clearly did not believe either woman when he came to any issue about consensuality.

They just didn't believe any of it. I think pretty much across the board, it was clear they had not bought in to the suggestion that any of this was non-consensual. No question. I mean, I think you're right. And, you know, sometimes juries do things that we don't expect. You know, I go back to whether, you know, each instance that this happened, did he have consent each time?

Now, I see, I see Blatt's point. There were times when it looks like that Cassie was involved in setting some of these events. Well, there's no question of that. I interviewed the Punisher, you know, the guy who gave evidence. He gave very powerful, eloquent evidence. And I've interviewed him several times. He's a very good talker. And he had no real kind of skin in the game.

In fact, he was brought from the prosecution to give evidence, but actually ended up being a pretty powerful witness for the defense, it turned out. Because what he said was everything was done through Cassie Ventura and seemed very consensual. Went on for over two years. You know, a dozen or so encounters in hotels where Diddy just sat in the corner saying nothing? She booked him, she paid him, she organized it,

everything was different by her. She seemed to have a good time. Everyone was happy. I thought that was very powerful evidence, actually, for Diddy, because it seemed to contradict everything that they were trying to position it as, which was this was all coercion. Let me offer this up.

You know, the government settled in on using two alleged victims. They used Cassie and they used Jane. Early on, when this all started, we were contacted by the U.S. attorney and they asked us, can we speak to some of your clients? So we went to, and they told us, these are the ones we want to speak to. We made those people available. They talked to a couple of those people. But I think by that point, they had decided, their team had decided that they had what they needed.

they had the goods, if you will, to proceed with Jane and with Cassie. I think that was a mistake. I will say as I watched the trial, at least learned about the trial daily as it went on, I thought the government was doing what they needed to do to get a conviction. Obviously, that wasn't the case. Obviously, they believe that they believe that Diddy had consent, and they didn't believe there was a conspiracy. And obviously, the transportation to commit prostitution,

that was pretty cut and dried. and I think everybody, no matter which side you fall out on, believe that there would be a conviction there. But there is a point, isn't there, which Vlad made, I thought pretty compellingly, that if you're going to convict Diddy and you don't believe that it was non-consensual, and Cassie did all the booking,

why is she not being charged? And could it be that the reason that she turned on Diddy was to preempt potentially some legal exposure herself? Who knows? We'll never know that. They gave her immunity early on, and that's the horse they rode with, and we see what happened. Well, I don't think it's that cut and dry.

I think consent without fear of consequences, is not, with fear of consequences, it's not actually consent. So if you were going against Cassie, for example, and you're going to try her, all she has to do is show you that video and just say, look at what happens if I didn't do that. Now, I don't think it reached the threshold

for the jury for RICO, which I completely understand. Like I said, a conspiracy that involves one is a thought. But this is why I say this is not a problem for the courts. It's a problem for culture and society. Cassie met P. Didy when she was 17 years old. She signed a 10-album deal with P. Diddy by the age of 20 or 21, which is virtually unheard of in this industry. I mean, I'm sorry, she wasn't Beethoven.

She didn't have the kind of talent that would warrant that kind of record deal. She was clearly groomed. Now, amongst all of that, could you say she could have got up and left? Okay, arguably, yes. She was within 10 years. Yes. But the thing is, he had so many. She was within 10 years, and the punisher was very clear. Yes.

She did not give any impression to him of being anything but a very enthusiastic, and willing participant. It's quite a kinky stuff. Look at what happened when she tried to break up with him and date what's his name, the rapper, who had his car blown up. I mean, it's not that cut and dry. This, I feel like Cassie's...

But Esther, we have lots of chats through the Me Too era and stuff. And obviously, one of the things people are saying about this is that in a way, it signals the beginning of the end of that Me Too movement. Because for a long time, you know, everyone was encouraged to believe women accusers the moment they made allegations, they had to be believed.

That was always, to me, a very dangerous proposition. It should always be they should be taken seriously. The allegations should be investigated properly and then decisions should be made about whether there had been a crime. Very dangerous to believe accusers before you actually know whether they're telling the truth. But here we've got a situation, I think, where if he'd been in this case three, four years ago,

he would have gone down. I don't. I don't think that's a case. The jury, I suspect, has moved with the times. I think the whole Me Too issue was a separate kind of beast. P. Diddy and the environment that he existed, the hip-hop industry, is a completely different kind of sleaze. And also, it was very cut and dry from that video. Is it though? Is it any different to Harvey Weinstein who claimed that a lot of what, his stuff was transactional? I mean, he was convicted of rape and sexual abuse and so on. So obviously, again, juries didn't agree.

But he painted a picture of a lot of kind of transactional relationships with people, right, where he believed this was all part of the sort of casting couch deal. That, again, is a mini-beast. That's dinosaur stuff and was outrageous and wrong and everything else, and it turned out to be criminal as well. But I don't think there's much difference in the attitudes here. There is a difference. I think hip-hop has always come under fire for being quite sleazy.

I mean, you can't listen to a hip-hop track from 20 years ago without hearing the N-word or bitch. it's always been quite sleazy. They've always been quite actually vocal about the fact that they treat women like pieces of meat. And the women, a lot of the time, are happy to be treated that way because they get a lot from it.

So that's interesting, isn't it, Vlad? Because that is part of that hip-pop culture. There's no doubt. A lot of women have embraced that kind of, you know, very misogynist language, the lyrics and so on and so on. Is your feeling about what happened here with Cassie Ventura and Didy?

that she was notwithstanding the violence which would erupt, more than once, we know there were other occasions when he was violent to her, that she enjoyed her life around this superstar rapper, notwithstanding that. I don't understand the question. Can you explain what she said? Well, that she accepted the violence

and was prepared to stay in the relationship because she enjoyed everything else? I think there was a very violent relationship. I think it was a drug-fueled relationship. I think that was a drug-fueled relationship. There's lots of money and fame and jet sitting involved. At the end of the day, I think what happened to her was horrible. I think that tape showed just how bad the domestic violence was.

But at the end of the day, this is not what the trial was about. The trial is about RICO. The trial is about sex trafficking. The trial is about prostitution. In fact, the only reason that he got convicted was because it was interstate commerce. All the other male escorts that I've talked to, like, for example, I talked to Don the dealer, who also had multiple sessions with Cassie. She said she was loving it.

She was into it. She was setting the direction. At the end of the day, you could stay in a bad relationship, but you decide to stay in that bad relationship. This is really about the domestic violence, but the domestic violence goes back past the statute of limitations. So if you think about it, in this whole case, all the escorts I talked to were not, you know,

sent to a different state or a different country. They were all local, like Don the dealer was in Miami. Punisher was in New York. If all these guys didn't travel, across state lines. There would be no case at all. Done whatsoever. And with Tony Busby, at the end of the day, like he said, that the feds

talked to multiple people that he's representing that were suing, but they decided not to use any of them, which makes me think that there wasn't any real credible, real evidence that they actually did anything wrong in the whole situation. Therefore, there's only two people

that were actually used. The only person that was actually filed a lawsuit that was used in this case was Cassie. And there's over 100 lawsuits. So what does that say? That's where you're wrong. You know, I listen to you. Which of your clients was used in this case? Let's be clear about something. What if your client was using this case? Hey, listen very carefully. If the alleged assault happened in L.A., there was nobody flown in. There was nobody coerced and trafficked across state lines. They wouldn't use the client, obviously. These cases that we have filed in New York are filed under a New York statute for

sexual assault and sexual abuse. That's completely different than transportation for prostitution or for sexual trafficking and certainly has nothing to do with Rico. So you just made this grand conclusion that, oh, the U.S. attorney talked to a few of these folks and decided they had no credibility. You were flat out wrong in that respect. I'm wrong. None of them were used. They were used. I'm not wrong if none of them were goose. But they had decided is that there was nothing that happened across state lines,

and there was no sexual trafficking, which is what the case was all about. So it has nothing to do with whether these people were credible or not. Their case is a civil case alleging state law claims of assault after being drug. That was not the case that was brought by the U.S. attorney. And frankly, that's not a case that could be brought by the U.S. attorney. And which is the point that you did not. cried accused Jayzie and Diddy of raping her when she was 13 and we all saw it was all nonsense.

It was absolutely fault. It was absolutely false. That good Charlotte was there. They weren't there. You're like the male man. Her old father said it was all nonsense. Jayzie sued you over that. Come on.

Like you have a long history. Give you a little bit of information. A long history. All these broad people. I don't even know what you're talking about. You want a single lawsuit with any of these people you've represented. A single lawsuit. Literally.

30 days ago for 640 million, pal, so don't be telling me about winning lawsuits. I had more lawsuits than any here in the United States. So I don't hear of you. How many losses to be won against Diddy and JZ? How many lawsuits to be won't against

Denny and Jayzee? None of went to trial yet, knucklehead. Think about it. Zero lawsuits. They don't just follow a case for trial. Wait and see. You won nothing. Okay. Let me just jump.

All right. Look, the only, the reality is we're going to going to find out, right? Well, we're going to find out, Vlad. We're going to find out, Vlad, whether any of these civil cases do end up. None of them will be one. Maybe one or two will be settled because of their headaches. Well, there's a hundred people.

The one thing, the one thing I do think is, the one thing I do find very distasteful is there are reports that Diddy got a standing ovation in prison when he returned from this verdict. Because his lawyer said that they love the idea of him beating the feds. And, you know, when you watch that video, when you watch the video of him beating up Cassie Ventura, the idea that guy becomes any kind of hero, I think, would stick in all our gut it. Can we agree on that? He's not exactly in a steamed company. He's in a prison.

But he shouldn't be treated as a hero. Of course not. And I mean, some of the comments you've been reading online, I just, I do think the prosecution failed Cassie in a way, in a way, because now we're having a debate about, you know, her motivations, were she actually just, you know, in on all of this and just trying to get in my... But when I interviewed the Punisher, I really did change my view about this whole case. She was nine months pregnant testifying about the most grotesque things. I know, I know, but she also had taken a massive payout before.

Which she deserved. She deserved it. Okay, but according to the Punisher, over two years, it was all driven by her, all consensual, and she was completely happy. And when he said that under oath and then repeated it all to me, and I've got to be honest with you, I slightly changed my view. about the whole case based on his testimony. I thought that if that was indicative of what these were, what was really going on,

then how much of a victim was she? She was a victim of domestic violence. But as Vlad said, that was not what Diddy was on trial for. Anyway, look, it's a fascinating case. I've got to leave it there. Thank you all very much. I shall await the civil actions with great interest, Tony Busby,

and probably not as great as interest as DJ Vlad is going to await them. But we shall see. Thank you all very much. Peers Morgan Unscensored is proudly independent. The only boss around here is me. If you enjoy our show, we ask only one simple thing. Hit subscribe on YouTube and follow Pierce Morgan Unsensored on Spotify and Apple Podcast. And in return, we will continue our mission to inform, irritate and entertain.

And we'll do it all for free. Independent Uncensored Media has never been more critical, and we couldn't do it without you.