Return to Transcripts main page
Laura Coates Live
Laura Coates Reports On The Latest In The Federal Trial Of Sean "Diddy" Combs. Aired 11p-12a ET
Aired May 12, 2025 - 23:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[23:00:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
LAURA COATES, CNN HOST: The jury is seated, the testimony begins, and the fate of Sean "Diddy" Combs hangs in the balance. Tonight, on a special edition of "Laura Coates Live," Diddy on trial.
Good evening and welcome. I'm Laura Coates here in New York City tonight, where I spent nearly nine hours inside of a courtroom, witnessing every moment of this dramatic and high-stakes trial against Sean "Diddy Combs."
In just moments, my team of legal experts and court insiders are standing by to unpack the web of testimony and argument that we heard just today.
But first, let me bring you inside Courtroom 26A in Lower Manhattan. The drama really got underway with the prosecution's opening statement. It started by pointing at Diddy at the defense table. This is Sean Combs, they said.
And they began to argue there was a dark side to the cultural hip-hop icon the public had no idea about and did not see. They mentioned alleged crimes of sex trafficking, Diddy's drug-fueled "freak offs," and his alleged abuse of women, including his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. They tried to hammer home the most critical point of their case, their claim that Diddy was at the very top of a criminal enterprise that not only committed crimes, but tried to cover it all up.
Prosecutor Emily Johnson telling the jury -- quote -- "He called himself the king and expected to be treated like one. He expected his inner circle to cater to his every desire, including his sexual desire. And his inner circle made sure he got everything he wanted."
Now, the defense took a very different tactic. They did not sugarcoat their client, telling the jury outright they may not think Diddy is a good guy. They -- quote, unquote -- "owned the domestic violence." They talked about his drug use. He said his sexual preferences may not be what you prefer in your bedroom. But they think the key is not what he is charged with, but what he is not charged with, arguing it was all consensual choices by adults with agency, driven by love and jealousy. Judge -- Attorney Teny Geragos goes -- put it this way: You may know of his love of baby oil. Is that a federal crime? No. She went on to argue there was no criminal enterprise or sex trafficking, saying -- quote -- "The evidence is going to show you a very flawed individual, but it will not show you a racketeer, a sex trafficker or somebody transporting for prostitution."
Now, we heard from two witnesses today, both who saw interacting between Diddy and also Cassie. Remember that now infamous video showing Diddy assaulting Cassie at a California hotel in 2016? Well, the first witness worked there as a security officer. He was actually the first person to arrive on that hotel floor after getting a call for a woman in distress on that floor. He testified that Diddy had a devilish stare after he saw him in the assault. He also claims Diddy offered him a wad of cash that he took to have mean a bribe, as long as you keep your mouth shut.
The second witness was a man who says he was paid to have sex with Cassie while Diddy watched. Happened on multiple occasions. He testified that Diddy sometimes recorded these encounters and also recalled one incident that turned violent.
Coming up tomorrow, we are expecting to hear testimony from a star witness. Yes, Cassie Ventura herself.
And starting us off tonight, the reporter who broke the story of the now infamous Cassie surveillance footage, CNN entertainment correspondent Elizabeth Wagmeister.
Elizabeth, what a day in court today. Talk to me about that first witness, the security guard who responded to the -- quote, unquote -- "woman in distress." It was quite a moment.
ELIZABETH WAGMEISTER, CNN ENTERTAINMENT CORRESPONDENT: It was. And look, many people have seen that horrific footage that our team first revealed here at CNN.
[23:05:00]
But to see it in the courtroom and how it was going to play out was something that everybody was wondering, what the prosecution was going to do with it?
So, this first witness, as you said, he said the second he got off the elevator, that he saw Diddy with a devilish stare. That's the exact phrase that he used. He also said that then he gave him cash, which he said on the stand was a bribe to basically keep this quiet. He said in his report that he filed that night that Diddy said, basically, that he knows that this can ruin me. And last point I want to make, he also said that he saw Cassie with the purple eye.
COATES: And, of course, they tried to undermine that testimony, and say with the cross examination, we'll see how effective it was for that jury.
But there's a second witness. Before you had a chance to cut your breath, there was a second person, somebody who said that they were actually paid to have sex with Cassie Ventura. He described that Diddy took a copy of his license for -- quote, unquote -- insurance.
WAGMEISTER: That's right. And he said that he was scared for his life. Now, the defense challenged that, but the judge allowed that testimony to continue. He said a few times, we both heard it, sitting next to each other in court, that he was scared for his life.
Now, I have reported before this first day of court that we were going to hear from a male sex worker. I reported that over a week ago. And now, we understand why. He said that he was paid by Diddy and Cassie. It's not exactly clear where the money came from, but his insinuation was it came from Diddy, and he was paid to have sex with Cassie while Diddy sat in the corner and watched for his own pleasure.
COATES: The cross will focus as well on whether she, in fact, was drugged or was able to give consent. That's what's becoming as well. But tomorrow is going to be the day that we might hear in person from Cassie Ventura. This is a star witness.
WAGMEISTER: She is the star witness. And she is absolutely the key focus of the defense.
Now, this is such a big deal. You remember that Cassie was the first one to file a lawsuit, a civil lawsuit, back a year and a half ago, November 2023. This trial would not be happening without Cassie Ventura. Well, they settled it within a day. What does that settlement mean? It means she cannot talk. So, we have not heard from her. This is the only time we can hear from her, when she testifies in a court of law.
Now, we did catch her attorney, Douglas Wigdor, on the way out of court, and let's take a look at what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WAGMEISTER: How is she feeling? I know it's like almost the last trimester. Is she --
DOUGLAS WIGDOR, ATTORNEY FOR CASSIE VENTURA: She's brave and she's courageous.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WAGMEISTER: Much more to come tomorrow. But all eyes are on Cassie.
COATES: Again, a pregnant Cassie.
WAGMEISTER: Right.
COATES: How will that play in terms of all that? She's very -- she's due soon.
WAGMEISTER: She's due soon, I hear from sources. When I say soon, very soon. That can have a huge impact on the jury. People typically like pregnant women. Right? That's something that is a happy moment in your life.
COATES: Hmm.
WAGMEISTER: So, to see the stark contrast from what she'll be testifying about with this cycle of a decade of abuse that she has alleged, and then to see her happy, moved on, and pregnant, I think that can definitely garner some sympathy from jurors. We'll see.
COATES: I'm going to pick the brains of some really great legal minds. Walk with me. We got the great panel of people. Elizabeth, come over with me here.
We've got -- not only do we have Joey Jackson, a noted defense counsel, to get break it all down for us and how it all plays out, we've also got Stacy Schneider as well here to (INAUDIBLE) all these works. And Jeremy Saland also is here with us today.
Wow! We have got so much information that we were all waiting to hear about. The day is finally here. It's the first day. The jury is in front of them. Let me tell you, being inside that courtroom to finally see how did he look and how he'd respond to the jury, it was something really to see.
Joey, prosecutors are focusing heavily on Cassie Ventura. Also, some of the -- with a pseudonym as well they refer to as Jane. But she is the linchpin of this case.
JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: No question about it. And there's a number of ways to look at that. Right? From a defense perspective, remember that this was a long-term relationship. And so, from the perspective of a long-term relationship, the wild card is, does she come in there motivated to hurt him or does she have feelings for him? And that becomes apparent in her testimony, and it's not as aggressive and vehement as to him being this monster that the prosecution is pointing him out to be.
The other issue, right, that we're looking at is this whole big question about consent versus coercion. That's what they need. And so, to the extent that, yes, I agree, she's pregnant, and as a result of that, you know, yeah, as a defense attorney, don't want to be too severe on her because there's some sensitivities, but there's certainly information to elicit.
And one of the bits of information is, as we've heard today, whether she was consenting to this and seemingly enjoying the encounter, whether she was a full participant in it, whether she was doing so because she was having a good time and that was their lifestyle.
Final point, I think the defense is going to argue that, we're here because a person's sex life is on trial. This is not about the issue of immorality or judgments or how people or what they do in their bedroom. This is about criminality.
[23:10:00]
Was he really building an empire, being an icon to a community simply to satisfy himself sexually, or was this just a byproduct of consenting people who lived freaky lives? And that'll be the narrative, I think, propagated by the defense.
COATES: In fact, their defense really is that this was a relationship, and that you, as a juror, are not supposed to sit in judgment of his -- of his moral character, but instead of the crimes that he was charged with.
And one of the things we saw is that video, Jeremy. They didn't just play it, like, once in court, and then walked away from it. It was played. They stopped it. They restarted it again and again and again. Diddy was looking forward, not looking at the video that was being shown him. His kids looked away at different times. Is the prosecution making a smart choice to really hone in and play that?
JEREMY SALAND, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY, FORMER MANHATTAN PROSECUTOR: They're leading out with a huge hit. I mean, that's really shooting off right out of the gate. And it's important that they do that because they're not only sort of, for lack of better term, dirtying up Diddy, but they're really establishing the theme of this, which is this is not about consent, this is about control.
And they can say what they want, meaning the defense, that this is about domestic violence. You may not want him to date your daughter or your sister, you may not like him as a person, but he's not on trial for being your best friend, he's not on trial for being a great partner.
But they're leading with a theme that this is control. And if you're going to hear from her and you're going to hear from these other women, you're going to find out that it was the same theme time and time again. I've got the power, I'll use my fist, I'll use my money, I'll throw things at you, I'll call you names, I will take you down, you do what I want you to do.
And you later heard from one of those witnesses about how urinating in her mouth while -- while -- while Diddy was there allegedly masturbating. I mean, you're talking some pretty heinous and serious things, and they came out of the gate with it.
And I think what's also important, last but not least on this point, is the defense can't run from it. They have to embrace it for lack of a better term. I may be a bad guy in these ways, but I did not commit these crimes.
COATES: They didn't just run from it. I mean, they -- they almost came out of the gate. I mean, they took the wind really out of the sail. Anyone being able to say, oh, they don't want you to know about this.
I mean, Stacy, Teny Geragos, who did the opening statement in this, by the way -- and I thought it was really fluid, almost a defense self- aware moment of "I can't run from this." This is what she said: What Combs did to Cassie on this videotape is indefensible. It's horrible, it's dehumanizing, it's violent, it's virtually every bad word you can think of. But it is not evidence of sex trafficking. They even said they're going to own this. And they're saying they will defend him as long as no one else tries not to own or take accountability for what their part was. That's powerful.
STACY SCHNEIDER, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR, U.S. NEWS AND WORLD REPORT: It is powerful because they're basically -- the defense is adopting that he's an alleged domestic abuser.
And the only charges in this case, these are -- there are federal charges. It's sex trafficking, it's transporting prostitutes across state lines, and it -- there's -- and racketeering, which is the biggest one. And they're saying that --
COATES: It's life, if that's --
SCHNEIDER: Yes, yes. And if convicted of all those charges, a minimum of 15 years up to life in prison. The racketeering throws us over the top. But they're -- they're alleging that he's running a criminal enterprise through all of his businesses. Bad Boy Entertainment -- they've named all the companies in the indictment. Bad Boy, his spirits line, his clothing lines, his recording companies. And they're saying he's using the resources and the employees of these businesses to coerce women into these sexual acts.
So, when we see that video which, as Jeremy mentioned, they came out, hard hitting the prosecution. The first witness in this case, they bring it out that video through the witness. And once the jury sees that, they cannot unsee that type of violence. So, they have this image of -- of Combs being this violent offender just from that video.
So, the defense needs to own every morsel of that, but also drive home throughout the entire trial. He's charged with racketeering. This is a mafia type of charge. This is not a domestic violence case.
COATES: Well, you know, they made the point that he's not charged with that in federal court, obviously. Right? But they also have these witnesses. The first one was the former security guard, who was the first to respond to a woman in distress.
They tried to under -- undercut his testimony at the cross examination, suggesting that in that incident report that he filed alongside of it, did not involve law enforcement, and excluded some facts that nine years later, he remembered with specificity. That's the tactic?
JACKSON: Well, that's a big deal. You're going to talk about he had this devilish look on his face. Well, if he did, why not put it in your incident report at the time? But now, nine years later, you remember that?
And, by the way, what about the purple eye? That would be a significant thing. You want to be fair. You want to be accurate. You want to be truthful. That's not there either.
And, by the way, this was so alarming to you. You're an officer now, but you didn't call the officers then? And with respect to the videotape, here's my concern for prosecutors, quite frankly.
[23:14:59]
When you play something over and over, you desensitize people to it. Right? And so, the reality is keep playing it, keep playing it. The more you play it, the more you desensitize.
Now, does it make what he did right? Does it make it just? Does it make it appropriate? But does it make him running a criminal enterprise? Is there evidence on there? Please show me where it talks about the tape itself, sex trafficking. Does it say on the tape, prostitution? Does it suggest that you're running a criminal enterprise?
So, you take the desensitization of the video and you take what it establishes, that he's a bad dude. We're not here to talk about him being bad. We're here to talk about him being a criminal.
COATES: Yeah.
JACKSON: That's what they have to show.
COATES: Jeremy, I'll bring you back here in a second. But Elizabeth, you know, you and I were sitting there. I was watching to figure out how many children were going to view this. I mean, we've all been very familiar with this video, as you are as -- as well. He had his children in the room. He had about 14 family members. His mother was there as well at different points during the testimony of Daniel Phillip. His daughters left the courtroom during the discussion about sexual activity and the allegation that their father was watching.
WAGMEISTER: Look, no matter what anyone is accused of, they're still a human being. And I think by seeing his entire family in the courtroom, I'm not a defense attorney, but I'm sure that Joey Jackson would say that was a very smart tactic, to have his family there.
I spoke to a source yesterday who told me they are all going to be there. They're putting on a united front. They're all holding on to faith. Sean Combs is holding on to faith. He's excited to finally tell his side of the story in court.
But you remember that he is a father. He has seven children. His youngest child is a two-year-old daughter. She was the only one not there because she'd be crying in court. But his three teenage daughters, they all left when that male sex worker was testifying.
And you could understand why. Even if the defense is saying this is not criminal behavior, who wants to listen to allegations of their father hiring, paying a sex worker to have sex with his then girlfriend while he's watching in the corner and pleasuring himself? I mean, that is just a bridge too far for any child.
COATES: A woman they've known for a large part of their life. Right? Because they had a more than decade-long relationship. Stay with me, everyone. We've got so much more to unpack, including what you could see inside that courtroom. The tension at times palpable. Looking from side to side, from the defendant to the jurors and back and forth, you got it all. He did not do this alone, though. He alleges -- he says -- well, he had help, according to prosecution.
My next guest used to work for Diddy as his personal assistant, and she is standing by with her inside perspective next.
Plus, it may be the most important part of the trial. The jurors tonight, the allegation of bias that was made about who was being left out.
Plus, more on how Diddy behaved in the courtroom today, including him walking in and getting his Bible out of a bag. The sex sketch artist who had her eyes trained on him all day long is going to join me tonight.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:20:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: Make no mistake. The prosecution's message today was loud and clear: Diddy couldn't have done this by himself. The government painting a very dark conspiracy behind the facade of the music mogul, saying -- quote -- "To the public, he was Puff Daddy, or Diddy, a cultural icon, a businessman, larger than life. But there was another side to him, a side that ran a criminal enterprise. But he didn't do it alone."
With me now, someone who knows Combs personally, Suzi Siegel, Diddy's former assistant during the time he began dating Cassie Ventura. Suzi, this was quite a day in court, I'm sure. Knowing him the way you did as a personal assistant, I have to ask you. They are saying that the inner circle, high-ranking executives, chiefs of staff, bodyguards, that they were so helpful in aiding him in committing whatever acts he was doing, but also covering it up. Do you believe that's possible?
SUZANNE "SUZI" SIEGEL, DIDDY'S FORMER ASSISTANT: I believe that he couldn't have done any of this without that type of organization. I mean, I was his personal assistant. I was doing things like booking flights and jets and getting his barber. Right? He couldn't wake up without at least four of us somehow involved in the logistics of his day. Right? Between security, drivers, all this kind of stuff.
So, when you think about what some of these allegations are in court and how nefarious they are and how secretive they would have had to be and how many details had to be tended to, it's impossible. Nobody could do this alone.
COATES: Did you ever witness violence or him committing violence of any kind?
SIEGEL: Never. COATES: I know you saw them when they first began dating. You rode in the limos with Cassie and Diddy.
SIEGEL: I did.
COATES: When you saw this surveillance video in that hotel, what was your reaction?
SIEGEL: My reaction was like, I think, any other woman who would see a man beating a woman like that. I felt sick and disgusted. Such a beautiful woman, such an incredible talent. And I felt not surprised.
COATES: Not surprised?
SIEGEL: Not surprised.
COATES: Why wouldn't you be surprised by that?
SIEGEL: You know, I never saw any violence between them or he never did anything to me. I never saw him do anything. I don't know how to say it other than, like, bad vibes. Not a good guy. Not a nice person.
COATES: How did he treat his staff or those in his inner circle? They -- they referred to him today in court that he was calling himself a king and wanted to be treated as such.
SIEGEL: So interesting because -- I mean, the first word that came to mind today was I saw so much degradation.
[23:25:02]
There was so much degradation to her and to, apparently, some of these other victims who are going to come forward. And I thought -- you know, oddly enough, I went on a reality show, which was ridiculous, and we were all watching it across America. And the whole reality show was based on degrading all of the competitors. Right?
So, you think about this, you know, that he's taking -- he came and woke us up in our bedroom, he hit on one of the girls on the show, you know, he -- he took a meeting with me in a robe. You know, you think about this now when you think like H.R. violation out the kazoo. Right?
So, all I could think was, you know, this was just the tip of the iceberg, that somehow degradation and fear and loyalty is sort of what was happening to us in -- in a -- in a completely noncriminal way. But I can see how all of this permeated across anybody who worked for him. We all knew that if we weren't -- if we didn't fall into line, we were going to be out.
COATES: Would you be threatened or intimidated if you were on the outs with Diddy?
SIEGEL: I mean, he's a scary guy. And we know that he's got a long track record of, you know, having brushes with the law. And he definitely seemed -- I'm from the Bronx. I grew up there in the 70s and the 80s. Like, I -- you know, I'm not from an easy place and you sort of know when somebody, you know, could -- could potentially be violent. And I think that's probably what we're hearing and finding out about.
COATES: Diddy's family was in the courtroom today. His mother, I think six of his children were there as well. He was all gray. He was dressed not as people normally would have seen, the more sort of debonair dapper Dan, but in a gray sweater and a -- and a white button-down shirt to match the gray hair.
SIEGEL: Hmm.
COATES: How do you see him as handling himself so far in in this trial?
SIEGEL: I mean, all of this is obviously staged. Right? His entire defense team is saying, we want you to seem like maybe an old, harmless guy. Maybe, you know, you don't want to look as slick and as powerful as you are. So, to me, all of that is just staged to get the jury to think, had this guy actually done that? You know?
COATES: When you see and hear about the violence or the idea of bodyguards, he's being accused of bodyguards coming to help in the kidnapping and threatening people, did you ever get the impression that Diddy used his inner circle or his bodyguards in a way to threaten and intimidate people who defied him?
SIEGEL: You know, it's funny because when I got let go from that job, I was definitely escorted out by two giant bodyguards, you know, with sunglasses on. And so, there was this sense, and we never moved him without security ever. So -- and I know some of his security sometimes couldn't travel. Some of them had criminal records. And so, we knew we couldn't send across state lines.
So, like, it was clear that probably some people in his inner circle might have been a little bit thuggish. You know, I didn't know them personally, but there was always a sort of menacing sense.
COATES: Wow. Suzi Siegel, thank you so much. Really insightful to think about what it was like to work with him day-to-day.
SIEGEL: Thank you.
COATES: My legal team is coming back to dive deeper into the prosecution's case and the so-called criminal enterprise they say Diddy ran. What's it going to take to prove that in court, though?
Plus, there's no cameras allowed. But we have the next best thing, the courtroom sketch artist who drew those pictures of Diddy today. She's standing by with her perspective, including the interaction, she spotted the Diddy's family on the special edition of "Laura Coates Live: Diddy on Trial."
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:30:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: When you're in the room where it happens, you get a glimpse at all the little details that get lost in all the reporting. One thing I couldn't help but notice, Diddy had a Bible. I saw him holding it in court along with reading with a pair of bifocals. It's small things like this that a jury might pick up on during those hours of testimony.
For more on what unfolded in that courtroom, I want to bring in one of those people whose eyes were trained right on Diddy during the entirety of today's proceedings, sketch artist Christine Cornell. I had the pleasure of watching you work today.
Christine, walk us through what you noticed when that surveillance footage of Diddy physically assaulting Cassie was placed. How was he behaving to you in those moments?
CHRISTINE CORNELL, COURTROOM SKETCH ARTIST: He wasn't -- I was not on his radar today. I think he was very focused. Of course, we've all seen that thing by now. And I was a little alarmed. It's alarming every single time you see it. He -- he -- the how angry he looked, you know, what a -- what a crazy moment it was.
His lawyers have done a good job. They've -- you know, he's pretty unfazed, Mr. Diddy, because they are saying this was domestic abuse, this was ugly, this was unconscionable, this was unforgivable, but it wasn't what he's being charged with here. This isn't what he's on trial for.
And, you know, maybe it will just be a bump, but it's -- you know, it's a pretty dang memorable bump. You can just see that he's got a real, you know, mean streak.
[23:34:57]
COATES: What we're seeing from on the screen right now, I want to point out, everyone is looking at, the blonde woman who we saw through one of your drawings. That was the prosecutor who did the opening statement, where she laid out their theory of the case. Then you had the longer brunette who was the person doing the defense opening statement.
And I was really trained myself, looking at Diddy and his children, who were in the courtroom, to see how they would react to that video being played. I noticed he was looking right ahead. And his kids practically would look over at the video. But it was a very difficult moment for everyone in the room to center on.
And, in fact, Christine, he greeted his family as he entered the courtroom. His mother was there. At least six of his kids were in the courtroom. How was he interacting with them from your vantage point?
CORNELL: You know, at the very end of the day, the judge took a small break while, you know, the sex worker, Phillip, was still on the stand. But they were switching over to cross. And Diddy's mom was leaning over the rail just trying so hard to have a conversation with him. He kept signaling to her that he loved her, but he couldn't have a conversation with her. But she was really worked up over watching that.
COATES: You know, that was really what I was looking at, to see the reaction, because they were very difficult videos, even with people who are strangers to the defendant, let alone his family members.
How did Diddy and his lawyers react when the jury was selected? I saw him sort of take a deep breath for a second and look over at the people who would decided his fate. But you were in such a good position. What was he like at that moment?
CORNELL: What was Diddy like?
COATES: Yes.
CORNELL: You couldn't read a dang thing off of that man's face. He's just very --
COATES: He did have the stoicism.
CORNELL: Yeah. And he has put on quite the collegiate look. You know, little bit professorial. None of that razzle dazzle. It made me wonder why was -- he couldn't even try a little harder to have a mother conversation because I felt it was almost like he needed -- he loved her, but he needed to keep a little distance from her angst over it.
COATES: Well, you know, that was out of earshot inside of the jurors, so they did not witness that interaction. And yet, there is something about the real gravitas here. I mean, he was in a federal court in his own hometown of New York City, his mother trying to get his attention, and the weight of these charges was obvious.
Christine Cornell, thank you so much.
CORNELL: Thank you, ma'am.
COATES: My panel is back with me. And Joey, I got to ask about this enterprise because, for many people, a racketeering and RICO case is all about -- well, they think about the mob. They got to prove that there is a group of people who were conspiring together for a common goal. They're saying it's the inner circle and the chiefs of staff. Is that going to be enough?
JACKSON: Defense hat. Look, the reality is that this is a music mogul and icon. He had an organization for purposes of developing what was a brand. That brand was extraordinarily successful. So, you mean to tell me that he created this organization as a cover so that he could gratify his sexual desires? Defense point? Ridiculous.
The reality is that this is his sex life on trial. Everyone may have their own proclivities. Everyone may think something is good, bad or indifferent. Does it make it criminal? So, at the end of the day, you do look at criminal enterprises, mobsters, etcetera. Is this that?
COATES: But how do they -- how do they go from the idea of running my business to that?
SALAND: Well, Joey and I come from the same place. Both former prosecutors. So, I'm going to wear the prosecutor hat now. I'll steal that one back on.
JACKSON: It happened.
SALAND: That's right. That's right. So, anyway, it's -- there's a structure here, and it's a criminal purpose. It's not just, you know, some legitimate business selling clothes and making business. The argument is that the structure here is with P. Diddy Sean Combs at the top. It's structured down at different levels with different people with that criminal objective and goal, and all, collectively, they shared that goal.
What was that goal? That goal was to provide him, among other things, these drugs to get women in the place, in a position to bring them across state lines, to engage them in sex, against the world, to force them and coerce them. Now, is that going to sell? To your point, with your hat back on, that's not an easy lift.
But the reason why the prosecution is doing this, in part, is whatever evidence you may not otherwise have been able to bring in, you're bringing this whole umbrella and you're scooping it all into the case. And now you have that.
And to a certain extent, you could say, even if you don't believe that this is a criminal enterprise, it was still an organization or P. Diddy still blocking --
(CROSSTALK)
COATES: Hold on.
[23:40:00]
It's a bit of an umbrella or kitchen sink. That's the risk, though. Right? You have -- you have the jurors thinking, you're just throwing everything in here. Stacy?
SCHNEIDER: Yeah, it's a big stretch. He clearly didn't invent this big music empire and clothing empire so he could run around Hollywood like, you know, like Joey was saying and allegedly assault women.
What -- what this really is, a sexual abuse trial disguised as a racketeering trial because the federal government is really not able to bring sex abuse charges. There's no federal statute for that. The only statute that's really federal here is transporting individuals over interstate -- commerce interstate lines to engage in prostitution. But the sex trafficking may not be federal.
So, they've taken things that are prosecuted on a state level, all these underlying acts that we're going to hear about. We've started hearing about the alleged sex abuse. We're going to hear about arson. We're going to hear about bribery, coercion, kidnapping, all these things. He's not charged with any of those things. And this is a very creative and I would say a little bit bizarre prosecution coming from the Southern District Of New York, to go to this extent to prosecute Sean Combs. There are other ways to do it.
And one more thing I want to say, I know you're going to disagree with me, but not one of the civil alleged victims who filed lawsuits against him, and now we're over 65 people who have filed some type of monetary damages case against Sean Combs for something he has done to them. Not one person has gone to the police and pressed charges against him.
COATES: Well, Elizabeth, you know, Cassie Ventura is going to be there to testify tomorrow. She is probably the creme de la creme in terms of who we're talking about of civil lawsuits there.
WAGMEISTER: She is. And as I said before, this trial, this case would not exist without Cassie Ventura. Now, I do want to make the point, as everybody knows here but some of our viewers may not know, this case is completely separate from the 60 plus civil claims that Sean Combs is facing.
Now, of course, the jury is instructed every single morning, do not read about this, do not watch the news, they're not supposed to be watching us right now, but I think the defense knows that it's pretty hard to find a completely unbiased jury --
SCHNEIDER: Yeah.
WAGMEISTER: -- when you're defending a Sean Combs, a world-famous superstar who has been in the headlines. All of these civil claims did -- I shouldn't say all, but many, the majority, had different allegations that some of Sean Combs's team, whether it was bodyguards, assistant, chief of staff, that they were assisting in this alleged activity.
So, I just want to point that civil cases, even though it is completely separate from this criminal trial, there is some mirroring in there with the allegations.
JACKSON: Excellent point, Elizabeth. But my issue is, defense point, you're running this organization, which has transformed you into a superhuman person who has had an impact upon a generation. And the very reason you did that and organized your staff and became, you know, inter -- all that he did, he did that because he wanted to exploit women sexually.
SALAND: Is it mutual?
JACKSON: That is a major --
COATES: Oh, wait, answer that question.
JACKSON: Well, well, let me answer the question, and the question is, if it's the defense -- if it's the prosecution's theory that the nature and purpose of this criminal enterprise was to satisfy his sexual desires, my view from the defense perspective is that is ridiculous.
Were there instances where it was transformed and he had this freaky lifestyle and freaky relationship? Great. Maybe he did. Is that and does that make him a racketeer? Does that make him a person who organized this for the sole purpose, 20 something years ago, so that he can do just what we're talking about now? Does not make sense.
And does the tape -- let's come back to it. Right? Let them play, the prosecution, every day and every night. Does that demonstrate that he, A, engaged in racketeering? B, that he engaged in sex trafficking? And C, that he engaged in prostitution?
COATES: Well, listen. You know, watching the jurors today in the courtroom, I was watching to see how they were reacting to these videos. Were they leaning in? Were they leaning out? Were they shaking their heads I got to tell you, some were visibly responding to what they saw. Even though the "what do you hear" questions, fancy way of saying the question they ask you again on the jury, they'd already admitted to having seen that. But they were still a little bit taken aback because they saw it multiple times and beyond.
But there was a moment, Elizabeth, in their courtroom today when we were looking to see if the family of Diddy would actually view the video as well. And they were watching it. They had a reaction as well to seeing this because, again, they know at least one of the victims, and there's one more under a pseudonym, who we're going to hear more about.
WAGMEISTER: That's right. And there was one point where Sean Combs' mother, Janice, she was actually -- her -- her face was covered, so she wasn't watching that. And you have to assume that she has seen this tape before. It has been playing over and over across social media, on the news.
[23:45:01]
But that -- again, the human element. The family is there. That's got to be hard. But aside from the family, just something interesting about the tape that I've been thinking about, Laura. As you remember, last week during jury selection, Combs's lead defense attorney, Marc Agnifilo, he said, this is the video, the most important piece of evidence in this entire trial. We know his team had numerous attempts to eject that from evidence.
Now, of course, the tables have turned, the story has changed a bit. Now, it's, oh no, this doesn't show any criminal activity, this just shows jealousy. In fact, Teny Geragos said during her opening statement, jealousy was on full display during this night.
So, of course, they have to have a defense for that. They've said from day one, when our team broke that tape, they said that this was domestic violence, this was essentially a relationship gone wrong.
COATES: And notice, guys, look for this in the trial, they're going to focus on the phone in Diddy's hand in that hallway at the hotel more than the violence had ensued. Stay tuned on why. Thank you so much, everyone.
Look, it wasn't that long ago that Diddy was at the pinnacle of hip- hop. Now, he's a criminal defendant in federal court, of all places. What does his downfall mean for the music industry and the legacy that he had? And what does it say that so few people are coming to his defense publicly? Toure joins the conversation next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:50:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: The prosecution gave a strong opening statement today. And the defense tried to rebut. Yes, Diddy was an icon. And yes, he was wealthy and famous. And today, the defense is arguing that's exactly why victims chose to get close to him in the first place, to stay in his orbit and climb the proverbial ladder.
That's Attorney Teny Geragos saying, if you had any interest in climbing the social ladder at the time and being involved in the music industry, the apparel industry, spirits industry, attending his legendary parties, you wanted to be around Sean Combs. Try to remember why people stayed around him and why it matters.
That was then. Now, the man who, at one point, was one of the most influential names in music is facing life in prison.
Elizabeth Wagmeister is here with us again along with Toure, host of "Rap Latte" on YouTube. Toure, I mean, this was quite a moment in court today, to hear the prosecution go after him and to lay the foundation for the case they want to make against him. He was one of the most influential names in hip-hop and the entire music industry. What do you make of this moment?
TOURE, YOUTUBE HOST: I make that it's a very difficult moment for him. I mean, look, I -- I'm not a lawyer. I listened to the lawyers before. I think that the prosecution has a fantastic case here. SDNY is going to win what? Ninety-five, 98% of the cases, anyway. But they're saying it's racketeering. What does that mean? He was committing crimes. Right? The sexual crimes that we talk about with Cassie and others.
And these people, Kristina Khorram and his chief of security and others, were helping him do those things. They would set up the hotel. If there was blood or a body or something to clean up afterwards, they're cleaning that up. They're facilitating the crimes that he's doing. And they work for him. They do it because he told them to do it as a course of their employment.
Cassie is going to be a very important witness. But when Kristina Khorram, his chief of staff, testifies that I did X, Y, and Z, which are illegal because he told me to, that's the racketeering case.
COATES: But what does that tell you, if true, about the industry itself? That there were so many people to facilitate, and to use and manipulate and exploit the alleged victims because they wanted desperately to be a part of the industry.
TOURE: Well, sure, this is something that Puff or a Harvey Weinstein or others can manipulate, that you have young people who have basically one talent in life. I can sing, I can rap, I can dance, I can produce. Please, help me, I want to do this for my life. Let's talk about Lil Rod.
All he can do is produce. He's got six kids and he promised his mother, I will retire you. So, there's nothing else that he can do in life. So, when Puff is saying, you can produce for me, he's, like, this is amazing.
You also have to endure me touching you on the butt sometimes. Okay, fine. You also have to take a drink when I say, and I'm telling you to take shots all the time. Like, okay, like, you also have to endure, like, you took a shot, you woke up, you didn't know where you were, and your butt hurts. And you have a sense of, like, you don't know, but you know what happened.
And you got to put up with that. And if you can't put up with what the gatekeepers like Puff or other people want you to do, the hurdles they want you, then you can't be in the industry. So, you're kind of stuck with that.
COATES: I want to be really clear as you -- as you lay out some of the statements. Kristina Khorram has not been charged with any crime, and she has publicly denied any involvement in criminal activity. And I'll leave it at that because we -- because we --
TOURE: That's how we know that she's going to have to testify. They're not charging her because they're going to immunize her.
COATES: I'll be curious to see if that is indeed the case because I've been waiting with baby breaths (ph) to figure out all the witness testimony. But you make a really important point about the circle of and the -- and the sphere of influence here. And I wonder, do you see this case as analogous to, say, the R. Kelly trials, the Harvey Weinstein's, or is this in and of itself a separate case?
TOURE: I think it's analogous to Weinstein, perhaps not to R. Kelly, in that they're both about the casting couch.
[23:54:58]
And people who want to be in the industry, presenting themselves to a gatekeeper and say, you know, can I have some shine? And he's, like, sure, you can, if you do this thing that I want you to do.
I mean, Cassie stayed with him for 10 years because she thought she was making an album. This was the prime of her life. She had one of the great record men of the -- of her time leading her. We're going to make an album.
Well, no, you're not. That's just a pacifier so that we can have you ready for the freak-offs whenever I want. That's what you're really here for. But you don't know that. Why would she leave? I -- I will put up with this crap so that I can get to do the thing that I dream of doing.
COATES: Well, that's exactly what the prosecution is suggesting. And the defense countering that in a different way in terms of -- that she was gaining something beneficial. We'll see how the jury plays that out. But the music industry, Elizabeth, they are leaning in because the scope of influence here is that wide.
WAGMEISTER: Look, I'm glad that you brought up Harvey Weinstein. I covered both of those trials in L.A. and in New York. And the common theme here is the power differential. Right? So, what the prosecutors have said is that Diddy wielded all the power. And as you just said, he signed Cassie Ventura to his label, Bad Boy, when she was just 19 years old. She had a hit song at the time, and then nothing ever again. So, she is sitting there saying, when am I going to get a hit? When am I going to get a hit?
TOURE: And she's working all this time.
WAGMEISTER: And he's paying for her entire life.
TOURE: Yeah.
WAGMEISTER: So, she's just thinking, if I go, what happens to my life, to my career?
COATES: We're going to hear about it tomorrow. She'll be in court tomorrow, expectedly. Toure, Elizabeth, thank you both so much. Listen to much more of my conversation with Toure, Elizabeth's reporting, on our brand-new CNN podcast, "Trial by Jury." First episode is out now wherever you get your podcast.
Hey, thank you all for watching. "Anderson Cooper 360" is next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
