Return to Transcripts main page

Laura Coates Live

Laura Coates and Guests Discuss the Latest in the Federal Trial of Sean "Diddy" Combs. Aired 11p-12a ET

Aired May 14, 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 AND SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: A shock moment in court. The jury viscerally reacts to the photographic evidence. This is star witness, Cassie Ventura, delivers new and dramatic testimony tonight on a special edition of "Laura Coates Live: Diddy on Trial."

Good evening and welcome. I'm Laura Coates right here in New York City tonight. Today, I was in court for Cassie Ventura's second day of disturbing testimony against Sean "Diddy" Combs. And inside Courtroom 26A in Lower Manhattan, the jury saw for the first time direct material from these so-called "freak-offs" that she says she was forced to endure. In just a moment, we'll go through everything that happened with my team of legal experts and court insiders.

But first, let me bring you inside of this courthouse. You know what it feels like. I mean, the jury had a whole night to process the disturbing details of these "freak-offs" that were laid out yesterday with the eyes of Cassie Ventura. The graphic details, the alleged abuse, the drug abuse.

Today, they didn't have to use their imagination, though. It got real in that courtroom today when the jurors, not the public, not the press, when the jurors saw still screenshots from these "freak-offs." There was something so uncomfortable about the moment.

Watching the jurors, she said things so raw and so personal in a courtroom full of eyes and full of opinions. Cassie was the most emotional we've seen her. At times even reflecting when she heard the words come out of her mouth saying things like, I can't believe I dealt with that.

And you got to understand, these aren't gigantic courtrooms. Cassie and Diddy are not at opposite ends of a football field. They are feet from one another. And the only thing between them, really, are their lawyers.

And even though all eyes were on each of them, I don't think they ever looked directly at each other. Not when she walked by him. Not when she was testifying. Not when at times she broke down sobbing, remembering how she loved him and just wanted him to say sorry for the things that he had done. Now when she talked about not wanting to live anymore or her opioid addiction or lying to her mother about the abuse or when it started or the extent of it, the audience was shifting uncomfortably. And sometimes, so did she. Sometimes, so did Diddy.

Much of Cassie's testimony today described the extent of the view she went through. She testified about having to hide under a toilet to get away from Diddy. She revealed getting a gash by her eyebrow after he threw it into a bed frame in front of her friends. She said she got stomped in the face on the floor of Diddy's Escalade for the duration of a ride home. And she claimed throughout their time together that she felt, well, powerless to make the choice to escape.

Now to make her point, Cassie talked about going to a hotel when Diddy beat her after a party in Los Angeles. She said she didn't want to stay, but felt she couldn't leave. She testified -- quote -- "It was not safe. I didn't have the resources I needed to get out and move, to get out and not have anybody stop me." You know, Cassie went on to say, I understand -- I understood Sean's capabilities, his access to guns, and the threats that he made prior to that.

Cassie clarified her testimony from yesterday as well, saying that there were times that she did try to fight back or even initiated violence. She testified she did so earlier on in their relationship, but she quickly found out it could backfire, telling the prosecutors -- quote -- "I learned that it could escalate the fight more and make it worse for myself." When the prosecutor asked what she meant by that, Cassie said -- quote -- "just make him more violent, make him stronger, want to push me harder in that situation."

Now Cassie also described the leverage, that's the word she used, leverage Diddy had over her. She said that leverage came in the form of blackmail. Those videos, specifically, of the "freak-offs." She testified that Diddy threatened to release them when he got angry. Cassie said -- quote -- "One time I dated someone else and that it was -- and that is what it was all about. I'm going to put out two embarrassing videos of you. He just wanted to hurt me."

[23:04:58]

Now Cassie's direct testimony is actually now over. The defense, though, they're going to get their chance to cross-examine her and go into the details again tomorrow morning.

I'll begin with CNN entertainment correspondent, Elizabeth Wagmeister, who -- you and I have been bosom buddies in this court. We've been sitting back to each other, watching it all go down. And you have a unique perspective on all this in the coverage you've been doing. Talk to me, though, about the -- the scope and the -- of the violence and the intimidation that she laid out in court today.

ELIZABETH WAGMEISTER, CNN ENTERTAINMENT CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, Laura. So, as you said, her first day of testimony yesterday really focused on these "freak-offs." Today focused on the physical abuse, the domestic violence. This was the first time that the jury saw photographic evidence of the injuries. You mentioned this gash on her eyebrow. We saw bruises all over her body, a black eye, a fat lip.

I want to walk you through just some of the instances that Cassie brought up when she testified today. One time, she said that she and her girlfriends, they went to Prince's party. Yes, the musician, Prince. Diddy was there. He didn't know she was going to be there. He got angry. And she said -- quote -- "He beat me up."

She said that after they broke up in 2018, that he raped her in her living room at her home. She also said that it wasn't just her. That one time, he held one of her friends over the balcony on the 17th floor of her apartment in Los Angeles and hit another one of her friends with a wooden hanger.

COATES: And she lost that friendship. That was a best friend of what, 17 years, she described, and then they don't communicate any longer. I'm curious to see how the prosecution might develop those connections a little bit more fulsomely.

But also, she was dating someone. Somebody we know, you know, in the music world as Kid Cudi. He came up today.

WAGMEISTER: He did. So, Kid Cudi, he is a rapper, and him and Cassie dated about 15 years ago. It's when her and Diddy were in a rough patch of their long-term relationship.

Now this actually first came up in Cassie's lawsuit. You remember, she filed back in November 2023. That's what started this domino effect of the civil allegations against Sean Combs.

Now in her lawsuit, she alleged this, you know, incident that she said where Sean Combs found out that she was dating Kid Cudi. He got jealous, told her that he was not happy about it, said he wanted to hurt both of them, and that he wanted to blow up Kid Cudi's car.

Well, according to the lawsuit and now according to her testimony today, we heard it from her for the first time, his car did blow up. And I have to tell you, around the time that our lawsuit came out, Kid Cudi actually confirmed this to "The New York Times," saying it's all true.

COATES: I mean, this -- the expanse of what we heard today, what the jury is hearing today, this is before the cross-examination.

WAGMEISTER: Uh-hmm.

COATES: But one thing that they ended on in her testimony and direct, of course, the prosecution wanted to get out, why she was choosing to testify. And I tell you, people were leaning in at that moment to see what she would say.

WAGMEISTER: Uh-hmm.

COATES: Why?

WAGMEISTER: This was a really powerful moment, Laura. As you said, she cried today more than she ever had. Cassie revealed towards the end of her testimony that she was suicidal, that years after her breakup with Sean Combs, that the relationship was just clouding her mind. She got flashbacks, and she wanted to take her own life. Thankfully, her husband stepped in and helped her. She said in February of 2023, she went to trauma therapy.

And this is what she said about why she chose to take part in the criminal trial. I want to read to you her exact testimony, Laura. She -- she said -- quote -- "I can't carry this anymore. I can't carry the shame, the guilt. The way we -- well, I was guided to treat people like they were disposable." She's referring to the male escorts there, Laura. She continued to say, "What's right is right and what's wrong is wrong. And I'm here to do the right thing."

That's how her testimony ended today. So, a very powerful note. And to your point, you said this just a few moments ago, now the jury went home. They are sleeping on that final note before cross-examination starts tomorrow.

COATES: You know, we have to talk about this more. Come with me. I want to go to the table. Elizabeth, come on. Because I want to pick the brains of our wonderful panel of legal experts, of lawyers, because I need to unpack even more.

We've got here today Joey Jackson, we've got Mimi Rocah, and we've got Jeremy Saland. All right, we got a law firm. Let's go.

(LAUGHTER)

We got to talk about this. Mimi, let me begin with you. I mean, we heard about car bombings, we heard about the violence, we heard about the years of abuse that was alleged towards Cassie. How does this fit in to the specific claims that they have to prove, including sex trafficking?

MIMI ROCAH, FORMER WESTCHESTER COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY, FORMER ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY FOR SDNY: So, it's the element of elements of force, fraud, and coercion. That's an essential part of what the government needs to prove in terms of sex trafficking, and then will also relate to the RICO because remember, the racketeering conspiracy, it encompasses everything, including the sex trafficking.

[23:10:02]

And so, what you're hearing or what we've heard so far from Cassie and through exhibits, the videos, photographs and other testimony I'm sure we will hear about --

COATES: Uh-hmm.

ROCAH: -- is not only that he used violence on her, which I'm sure we'll discuss, they're saying, well, that's domestic violence.

COATES: He missed it.

ROCAH: Right. He's already -- he's out of it.

COATES: -- that point in the opening statement.

ROCAH: But not only is it violence against her, but it's not just in that moment --

COATES: Uh-hmm.

ROCAH: -- that the violence has an effect. It has a lasting impact on her will, her ability, her -- to -- to -- to -- her free will, essentially.

COATES: Uh-hmm.

ROCAH: It -- it cabins her. It keeps her from feeling like she can act for herself and escape.

COATES: I'm glad you mentioned feeling because it's going to come down really for the jurors to think about this. And -- and I wonder always what a jury is thinking. Is the prosecutor in me? Right? I know it's a fool's errand to predict. And yet the jury has to buy those things that Mimi has said. She has to -- they have to receive that in the same way. Are -- are feelings of potential violence and feelings that they're being blackmailed, is that enough?

JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: So, I think Mimi lays it out like the exceptional prosecutor that she was. Right? But the reality is --

COATES: Once a prosecutor always a prosecutor.

JACKSON: Right.

COATES: There you go, Mimi.

JACKSON: As we can see.

(LAUGHTER)

But the reality, I think, from the defense perspective is far different. I think that we have to really com --

COATES: Compartmentalize.

JACKSON: Thank you.

(LAUGHTER)

We have to do that as it relates to the fraud, the coercion, right, etcetera. And why do I say that? It's not just about the acts of violence themselves. It's just not about that. It's about how they related to you engaging in the activity.

Now the defense has its opportunity to highlight the significance here. And what that means is that you have to match the fact to the elements of the crime.

Let's talk about the sex trafficking. When we talk about the coercion, did the coercion relate to you engaging in the actual activity or were you guys just in a really tumultuous relationship? Can you tie that to you actually performing sexual intercourse or was it the fact that you were on board with it?

It was a natural part of your relationship. It was the essence of what you did. It's not about what he expected. It's not about I was making him happy. Did you say no? Did he, otherwise, use drugs or guns of any of that to compel you to do that? And so that needs to be tied to that. It just can't be, well, I thought he might hit me --

COATES: Hmm.

JACKSON: -- because I didn't engage in. I didn't hear that. I heard a lot about all of these, you know, things but not --

COATES: Wait, wait. How about the repeated threats of releasing the video? That's -- that was part -- that -- that cloud of fear, almost this sword hanging over her head all the time.

JEREMY SALAND, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY, FORMER MANHATTAN PROSECUTOR: I mean, that blackmail material, that coercion, is incredibly powerful evidence, and -- and they're seeing the stills from some of these videos that could have been used to really manipulate and hurt her.

COATES: By the way, once, he -- he threatened to release it on Christmas Day as she was going home to her mother's home in Connecticut. That was one of the threats.

SALAND: Yeah. And they're very real threats. But I think, to Joey's point, I'm going to concede and say, Joey, you pulled me over to the defense side better. Good job, Joey. Is that to a certain extent, I think they can overplay their hand in terms of the violence against her.

There was a reference to Ike -- pardon me, I'm having problems now -- Ike Turner and Tina Turner. And that was not certainly a sexual coercion trafficking-type of a situation. It was an ugly, violent, disgusting man who did horrible things to a woman.

And if that's the case, which they're conceding that he may be, that does not mean that he's involved in a conspiracy with this criminal enterprise, that the goal was to traffic people across state lines, among other things, to commit this fraud -- pardon me, to commit these offenses.

COATES: You know, as you describe it and thinking about -- we're talking about this balance. Right? Because the prosecution is trying to find that balance between what will be persuasive and then what is overkill. And on the other side, the defense is going to try to figure out what -- what are the avenues and doors they can get into to plant those seeds of reasonable doubt.

Mimi, when you looked at this and heard the testimony and, of course, those graphic images as we saw in court today were shown to the jury alone, not the press, not the public, is there a risk that it gets to be too much for the jurors in your overplaying grand?

ROCAH: This is where I get to rebut.

(LAUGHTER)

So, in fairness, yes, I -- there's always that risk of going too far. And I think, though, that it is -- they're showing those images to the jury. The reaction that apparently the jury had of -- is -- being kind of overwhelmed by the images, I think, is actually why they need to show them to the jury.

[23:14:45]

Because what -- what they're saying is that this ongoing -- the threat of releasing the videos, the constant threat and actual violence that occurred and the fear of it, the knowing he had guns, all of that and more is what compels her, what makes her feel like she needs to keep doing what he wants her to do, and that includes these sex fuel -- sex parties or whatever we're going to call them that are so disgusting that a jury can't even look at it.

Why would any sane person, and she comes off as a sane, rational person, you know, in her testimony --

WAGMEISTER: She is.

ROCAH: -- why would she do that voluntarily?

(CROSSTALK)

COATES: But hold on. I want you -- because you mentioned the jurors. Elizabeth, those jurors did react. I mean, they -- they saw the images that everyone had been talking about, what these "freak-offs" were. They actually saw the screenshots of the video footage.

WAGMEISTER: They did. And something that we have talked about is all of these allegations are disturbing, to say the least. They are horrific allegations. You know, I've covered everything from the Harvey Weinstein trials to Danny Masterson. Those had nothing on this. These allegations are really hard to hear.

Laura and I have been looking at each other and saying, the jury is not reacting. I mean, they really haven't been. But they did today when they saw those still images of the "freak-offs." So --

COATES: One woman almost touched her chest for a second, and then almost gasped, and then looked and looked away. I mean, that was something.

WAGMEISTER: Yes. So, they definitely reacted to that. And I agree with you that that is having an impact on them. And you could only imagine that's exactly what the prosecutors want to happen to say this isn't normal. This is not just a relationship where they're maybe choosing to do these things together. This seems very atypical.

And I agree with you, Laura, that the -- the conversation about --

COATES: Right. WAGMEISTER: -- threats today was something new and very compelling.

COATES: You know what was there? I want us to talk about this briefly. She talked a lot about her feelings and love.

SALAND: Yeah.

COATES: I mean, she sent loving text messages to him.

SALAND: On Father's Day.

COATES: A Father's Day text message that she sent as well. I mean, here's what she said in the Father's Day text message back in 2018. Thank you for always showing me love and happiness the way it's supposed to be. Can't wait until we have a baby of our own to celebrate Father's Day. I love you with all my heart. Happy Father's Day again.

She's rubbing her belly while she says it in the court today. How do you balance that if you're a defense counsel or prosecution and try to convince the jury that she indeed was engaged in an abusive sex trafficking relationship?

JACKSON: Look, there is no question about the fact that this was a very degrading and complicated relationship. There's no question that he engaged in some despicable behavior. That needs to be conceded off the bat.

COATES: Uh-hmm.

JACKSON: The issue is that it was a relationship of longstanding. And can we now have a jury infer that she didn't want to participate? Did she ever explicitly indicate, I'm not on board? That she explicitly --

COATES: Mimi, you don't like that part.

ROCAH: Well, because I don't think you have to say those words out loud.

JACKSON: But then it's not a matter of saying them out loud. It's a matter of engaging a course of conduct to the person, Sean Combs, where you indicate explicitly that you're not with it.

(CROSSTALK)

ROCAH: What do you think happened --

JACKSON: Hold on. Hold on. I don't know. But in year two -- hold on. This is a 10-year relationship. In year two, he comes to her and says, look, yhis is how I want to live our life. Right? And she lives the life with him in year three, year four, five, six, seven, all the way to 10.

And so, what I'm saying is at any point, right, beyond testimony of, well, I loved him, beyond testimony of, well, I thought he'd be upset with me, beyond testimony, if this is what he wanted, like, you need to make yourself clear in some specific way. You just can't, as a prosecutor, rely upon the fact that he would have hurt me otherwise

SALAND: And to Joe --

JACKSON: I just don't think that's --

SALAND: To Joe's point, she -- she came back. She left and came back. She had an opportunity to have music, life, and career. She flew on planes. She went to the Ibiza. She went to Miami. She flew around the world. She got some benefits. And she was a young woman.

The -- the -- the image of a pregnant Cassie, who the prosecution wanted to walk up in front of that jury as opposed to the defense wanted her sitting there in advance so that the jury didn't see her go up, there's a different person. It's a -- they're -- they're prosecuting -- pardon me, cross-examining the 19-year-old, 20-year- old, 21-year-old Cassie, who had different views than the current woman you see there today. I -- I -- you know, I think it's difficult.

COATES: Hold on, everyone. Stand by because we have a lot more to unpack. This -- I can't give this short a stretch. I may have to fast forward to 2025 when -- why did she stay is not the tip of the moment for all of them. We'll talk more about it. Much more to get to tonight.

The criminal case mirroring a lot of the allegations we've seen in civil lawsuits against Diddy. So, could they offer a road map of what we might see in court next? My next guest knows all about it. Famed attorney, Gloria Allred, who reps two of Diddy's accusers, is standing by.

Plus, more on that shock moment in court that had some jurors reacting. What was Diddy like when it happened? Our sketch artist will tell you.

And later, the legal panel is answering your questions about this case. Send them over me. Send them over to X, send them over to Instagram, @thelauracoates.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:20:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNKNOWN (voice-over): Sir, how do you think she did?

DOUGLAS WIGDOR, ATTORNEY FOR CASSIE VENTURA: Powerful testimony today.

UNKNOWN (voice-over): What was the most powerful part of it?

WIGDOR: Just the whole thing was powerful. And she told her truth. I wouldn't want to be doing that cross-examination. That's for sure.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Cassie Ventura's attorney appearing confident after a second day of explosive testimony as the defense prepares to launch their cross-examination tomorrow.

With me now, victim rights attorney, the famed Gloria Allred, who represents two of the more than 60 -- yes, 6-0 -- alleged victims who have filed civil lawsuits against Sean "Diddy" Combs, accusing him of sexual assault or other wrongdoing, allegations that Diddy denies.

[23:25:09]

Gloria, I'm so glad you're here. I saw you in the courtroom. You were watching intently as everything unfolded. I could not help but wonder how you assessed Cassie's testimony.

GLORIA ALLRED, ATTORNEY FOR DIDDY ACCUSERS: Well, Laura, I thought she was very compelling. She came across as very authentic.

COATES: Hmm.

ALLRED: She had an excellent memory of the details of what happened. I thought she came across as very credible because, you know, she didn't try to hide any flaws or -- you know, she was taking responsibility for what happened and sometimes, I think, too much responsibility for what happened because the wrongdoer is -- is the one who's accused in the indictment.

So, I -- I thought she did very well. I mean, after all, she is, what, a little more than eight months pregnant.

COATES: Uh-hmm.

ALLRED: That's a very stressful situation for anyone. And she had talked about how it was very embarrassing and humiliating when it happened --

COATES: Uh-hmm.

ALLRED: -- to her, when she was victimized. And -- but she told her truth, as her attorney said.

COATES: You know, Gloria, we were just talking before you and I had a chance to speak just now with our -- our panel. And one of the things that the attorney thought was the jurors are going to be asking, well, why did she stay? It's different if it's year one or two versus year 10 or 11. Now we've heard this question more frequently probably decades ago. But there's a span of jurors on this -- on this actual jury panel. How do you think that factors in? Will people question that?

ALLRED: Well, of course, I think it's a fair question on the part of the jury and in the court of public opinion --

COATES: Uh-hmm.

ALLRED: -- the viewers of your show. But I also wish they would ask why did he do it.

COATES: Hmm.

ALLRED: And -- but having said that, she said she was in love with him. She testified to that in the beginning. But then, as she testified, it became a job. And she did try to leave on a number of occasions. And sometimes, she didn't want to talk to him. But his associates, and this is where the conspiracy to commit racketeering comes in, would, you know --

COATES: Track her down.

ALLRED: Not only check her up but -- I mean, they, you know, according to the testimony and according to the indictment, actually participated in, like, bringing -- you know, bringing people in travel agents, providing cash occasionally, bringing baby oil, bringing Astroglide to the "freak-offs," going to her, talking to her sometimes when she didn't want to talk to Mr. Combs --

COATES: Hmm.

ALLRED: -- and suggesting that she should talk to Mr. Combs.

COATES: Yeah.

ALLRED: In other words, they were, in many ways, facilitating. This is what is alleged in the indictment. This in order to keep their boss happy, but in order to help him to sexually abuse, to exploit his -- his goals with her. And that's what happened, according to the indictment.

COATES: Yeah. And they -- we're in, what, day -- almost day three really fully of this trial. And that racketeering charge carries a possible life sentence if convicted of it.

But the defense in their opening statement, and you heard it firsthand, they used the phrase money grab.

ALLRED: Uh-hmm.

COATES: Today, the testimony and the direct ended with her talking, confirming a settlement with Sean "Diddy" Combs to the tune of $20 million. The jurors are going to reflect on probably that tonight along with those graphic photographs and everything else that she has said.

The impact of the civil lawsuits and this allegation of this all being a money grab, how do you see it?

ALLRED: Well, that's a typical defense line. And that's going to be their spin. That is going to be their characterization of the settlement.

But I think that all people who are victims, who perceive that they were wronged, have the right to seek compensation in a civil lawsuit. By the way, she has already received that or there was a settlement. COATES: Hmm.

ALLRED: And also, victims should also understand that despite that, they have the right to report to law enforcement. They have a right to cooperate with law enforcement. And it's my understanding that they would not be subpoenaed to testify if they didn't want to testify. If they were not willing to testify, they wouldn't be compelled to do so.

COATES: An NDA, if it's existing as a part of the settlement, that would not override a criminal subpoena, though.

ALLRED: Absolutely not.

[23:29:58]

But also, even if there were no subpoena, Laura, a person who believes she was a victim has a right, despite any settlement, whether it's a confidential settlement or not, to testify if there is a prosecution. As a matter of fact, they could also testify if they were subpoenaed to testify in someone else's civil lawsuit.

So, even if there's a confidential settlement, they can do that. And some want to and some don't. They want to have their privacy, some of them. They don't want to testify publicly. And she's very, very brave to do so, but nobody is required to do so if they are a victim.

COATES: A really important point, and she explained she couldn't carry the weight of this any longer.

ALLRED: Yes.

COATES: A lot more ahead. Gloria Allred, thank you so much for joining.

ALLRED: Thank you, Laura.

COATES: Still ahead tonight, it's kinky, not criminal. It's domestic abuse, not sex trafficking. The defense looking to make those points. But my next guest, well, he says it actually may not matter at all to the men and women in the jury box. One of the top jury consultants in New York City is here to explain exactly why.

Plus, behind the sketches of day three, what the courtroom artist witnessed today as the emotional and at times shocking testimony was revealed.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:35:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: Another tense and emotional day inside of a courtroom here in Lower Manhattan where the -- for the first time, the jury saw pictures from Diddy's "freak-offs," triggering some strong reactions from several jurors. Earlier today, I caught up with Christine Cornell, the sketch artist behind the images that you're looking at right now. She told me what it was like inside of that room from that front row position as those pictures were shown.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

COATES: We have Christine Cornell here, of course, who has been inside of the courthouse, in the courtroom, with a front row seat to all that's going on inside of there. Today was an emotional day. Today was a day where they -- the jurors actually saw these graphic images that really had been the nightmare of Cassie Ventura, as she has said, that threat of those being exposed. What were you seeing the moment that the jurors were able to see those graphic images?

CHRISTINE CORNELL, COURTROOM SKETCH ARTIST: They looked very distressed. The jurors looked distressed. Mr. Combs seemed to be interested in looking at maybe the first couple. After that, he didn't even bother. You -- you know, we knew what was being shown, but we weren't allowed to see it either.

COATES: Uh-hmm.

CORNELL: Yeah, it was -- it was a sort of a culmination --

COATES: Uh-hmm.

CORNELL: -- of -- of her. Just a real graphic --

COATES: Yeah.

CORNELL: -- you know, demonstration of what exactly it was.

COATES: They were trying to corroborate, of course, these so-called "freak-offs." When you were watching Cassie Ventura on the stand day two --

CORNELL: Yeah.

COATES: -- was her demeanor different than it was the first day when she was in the same room with Sean "Diddy" Combs?

CORNELL: You know, I think that I've just been watching her wilt a little bit, that this has been really hard for her. And today, she was starting to get kind of mushy, as you saw. She -- she wept a couple times.

COATES: She described a suicide attempt, an opioid addiction. At that moment --

CORNELL: She said she didn't want to live anymore.

COATES: What was she doing in that moment? Give us the -- the -- the front row view.

CORNELL: When she -- when she was explaining -- COATES: Uh-hmm.

CORNELL: -- that she was telling her then husband, and I think they already had two kids, you don't need me, you -- you got this, you can take care of this. And, you know, she -- she desperately needed therapy and rehab. She --

COATES: What was her body doing when she described that? You said that she was wilting of sorts.

CORNELL: Both her hands went up to her face. She -- she -- she crumpled a bit. You know, this was terrible, hard stuff.

COATES: What was Diddy doing?

CORNELL: Oh, god. That man, you could figure out what -- what he's thinking and feeling because he -- you know, he just -- just looking like this, but he's -- COATES: At her or just towards --

CORNELL: At her. At her. But he's -- you don't see him -- no expressions of -- you know, any kind of compassion.

COATES: Even when she was crying, he didn't seem to react?

CORNELL: No.

COATES: How about when he looked at those graphic still images contained in the binder that only the jurors and the parties could see?

CORNELL: I think that, you know, his -- his strategy is going to just say that her entire approach is B.S., essentially. That he doesn't buy it in the slightest that he caused this woman anguish. I mean, that's really what was getting her emotional today. She said, I wanted him to see how much he hurt me.

COATES: She described writing a book and sending over several chapters to him only to find that they had not been taken seriously with the praise.

CORNELL: Right.

COATES: And she really said she wanted to just let him know how she felt. And that's when she seemed to sob.

CORNELL: Right. That was it. That was a breakdown moment.

COATES: How did the jurors react, though, to the next set of questions about that $20 million settlement?

CORNELL: You know, I wasn't looking at them.

COATES: How did Diddy respect -- respond?

CORNELL: Ah, you know, I'm sure just he thinks that's an ace up his sleeve.

COATES: Did his body language tell you anything?

CORNELL: No. No. I got to sit right in front of his mother today.

[23:40:00]

COATES: What was that like?

CORNELL: She complimented my drawing of Diddy.

COATES: Oh, did she?

CORNELL: I asked for her permission to draw her. And she, of course, wanted to be drawn. So, it's really hard to draw somebody who's sitting behind you. Something gets messed up in the, you know, in the balance of things. You have to be really, really mindful.

COATES: What was she like when you spoke to her in the courtroom, Diddy's mother? What -- what emotion were you reading on her face?

CORNELL: You know, she loves her son. I was really happy she liked the drawing I did of him because that's scary territory. A mother can tell you, you know, you've messed up. So, I was really glad I was in the right turf. I didn't think I was going to do her justice. I swear that woman gets younger every year.

(LAUGHTER)

COATES: Right space, right time, right sketch artist. Christine Cornell, always a pleasure talking to you.

CORNELL: Thank you, dear.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COATES: Joining me now to dissect some of the behavior we saw from jurors today, jury consultant Josh Dubin. Josh, everyone knows that this case is going to come down to what these jurors think. Not you and me, not the court of public opinion, but how these specific jurors are receiving it. And I wonder what you make first of that composition of the dynamic of the male and female jurors who are sitting today.

JOSH DUBIN, JURY CONSULTANT: You know, in my experience, both as a jury, an alleged jury expert and a criminal defense attorney in cases involving allegations of sexual misconduct, sex abuse, women can be the toughest jurors on alleged victims. Oftentimes, they -- I've seen it where -- this dynamic where they say, how could they put themselves in that situation? How could they put themselves in that position?

So, I think that, you know, I've heard some, you know, folks opining whether they've been jury consultants, criminal defense attorneys, former prosecutors about whether women are better or worse for the defense. It depends on the woman. It depends on their life experiences. It depends if they, you know, used to party and they felt like, you know, there's some accountability that goes along with that. So, I don't put too much stock into whether or not females are better or worse with the defense. One of the women is a massage therapist. She may find, you know, the line between consensual touch and something that is more objectionable. Her view on that may be different than, you know, the other female jurors that are in different industry.

COATES: Is the same for men on the jury? I mean, obviously, these are all generalizations, and I know trying to predict how a juror or juries will find can be a fool's errand at times. But are there certain strategies that defense counsel will want to employ in a case that involves such graphic nature, such discussions about explicit sex?

DUBIN: Yeah, I think that you -- there's a scientist on the jury, for instance. Let's use that juror as an example. If there's ever any hope -- and I heard some of the other panelists earlier talking about separating conduct that is morally objection -- objectively morally reprehensible, ethically reprehensible, and saying put that in this box, and then let's look at this box, which is the alleged criminal conduct, and that box is empty.

If -- if people thought that efficiently, the conviction rate in the Southern District Of New York would not be upwards of 98%. Unfortunately, for criminal defense attorneys, they're fighting, they're -- they're looking at a steep uphill climb in the first place. There's no presumption of innocence. We kid ourselves about that. There's an assumption of guilt in all of these federal cases.

COATES: But the compartmentalization aspect of it, and certainly I hope that there is a presumption of innocence, but that compartmentalization, you're saying the jurors can't separate. If they think the person has done something wrong, then they've done everything wrong?

DUBIN: No. What I'm saying is that if you take the scientist, if you take the investment analyst, they're much more likely to be able to separate out because they're analytical thinkers that have to do that every day.

But people that are a former social worker, a massage therapist, the way their brains work is not going to be sort of accustomed to saying, out of this entire mosaic, let me somehow tease out what fits in the RICO statute. Those jury instructions are mindlessly confusing in a RICO case, and they're going to look at the whole mosaic.

COATES: So, wait, how do you win them over then?

DUBIN: You win them over by being able to deconstruct the elements of the crime and taking the testimony on direct.

[23:44:56]

This is not something that I'm adopting, but one of the things that I would do if I was the defense is say, by her own admission, she's saying that she took the drugs. There was never an allegation that he said you must take these drugs. That, you know, she was helping vet some of these male escorts and calling them. Yes, he was giving her the money, according to her.

And, you know, you start to try to blur the line between was this consensual? Abusive? Yes. Domestic violence? Yes. But was she consenting to being a part of this? Was he taking advantage of it? Yes. But is that criminal? And you start to try to say, well, let's take the law and say, does it fit these facts? And when you apply the facts to the specific elements of these crimes, you know, there's a disconnect.

I don't know that they're going to be able to win over any jurors that -- even the scientists and the more analytical thinkers, when you have just what seems like it's going to be an avalanche of negative evidence. You know, we're just seeing, you know, the tip of the iceberg right now.

COATES: We're day three, of course. And, you know, we're talking hypothetically, obviously, about jurors because we want to preserve the anonymity as -- as we hope justice to be administered and thinking about what it will take from the prosecution side, from the defense to figure it out. Thank you so much, Josh Dubin.

DUBIN: My pleasure.

COATES: We're only at down day three of a trial expected to span several weeks, and we already got a huge amount of questions from you. I'll go through them with our legal experts. Stand by.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:50:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: You've got tons of questions about the case. So tonight, it's time for "America Asks," Diddy on trial edition. My legal experts are back with me. Let's get to it so you all can answer a little bit as well.

First question, starting with a question about Ventura's testimony. Jeremy, I'll ask you this one. This viewer wants to know how much can Cassie talk and whether the settlement came with an NDA.

SALAND: She can talk about everything and anything in that courtroom, not necessarily outside that courtroom, because she's doing so under subpoena. So, she's complying with a lawful order. So, she has that ability and right to do so. Can't be discussing it outside just because she wants to. But in that courtroom, wide, wide scope.

COATES: And you could subpoena even cooperative witnesses, too.

SALAND: Absolutely.

COATES: That's right. Joey, I'll ask you this question. Another viewer asked this question. Where did the sex trafficking and RICO, also known as racketeering, charges come from?

JACKSON: So, sex trafficking deals with the force and the fraud and the coercion involved in having sex, right, which is distinguishable from regular prostitution where everyone is consenting. Right? So that's what sex trafficking is.

As it relates to RICO, defense attorneys always believe that it's an overcharge. Right? What they're essentially saying, they being prosecutors, are that you ran this business organization not to produce records, not to enhance your brand, but for the purpose of sexually exploiting, degrading and, otherwise, getting, whatever you were doing, by virtue of having these "freak- offs," etcetera. And so, the RICO allows them to bring in all these other acts and all the other beatings and all the other instances of his misconduct and criminality alleged.

COATES: All right. Let's go to another question from a viewer. Mimi, I'll ask you this one. This viewer wants to know, are there others in Diddy's circle that are charged with racketeering? And how can a conspiracy involve only one person?

ROCAH: So, a conspiracy cannot only involve one person, but the other conspirators do not have to be charged. You can have unnamed coconspirators or you can have named ones who don't actually get charged with a crime because the prosecution in its discretion decides that they're going to give them a non-prosecution agreement or a cooperation agreement or deferred some kind of agreement probably because they need some kind of immunity.

So, I would expect that we're going to see some of the other witnesses who testify, people who were involved in the enterprise, the racketeering acts, meaning people who, you know, got Cassie when she needed to be pulled back, you know, from trying to get away, or people who procured the baby oil or the drugs or got money to pay the prostitutes, the people involved in the "freak-offs."

All of those people are, I think, under this, you know, indictment, these charges, could be considered coconspirators since not charged with the crimes, but I bet we'll see some kind of agreement with them.

COATES: Interesting. Jeremy, here's one more for you. Someone else asks, how are they, meaning the prosecutors, how are you going to connect the dots and connect Combs to the charges? That's the million- dollar question.

SALAND: Yeah. Certainly. And a lot of it is going to fall on Cassie's shoulders. But I think you can hear a lot more. It's not just a person. And you don't want to just rely on a person, especially someone with the prosecution -- pardon me, the defense is going to try to repeatedly poke holes in.

So, what are you going to see? You've got text messages. You have this whole list of books of prostitutes, these male -- prostitutes that are allegedly involved. You're going to see transactions showing that they were flowing in to wherever the location was from a different state. You're building this pyramid of evidence, and it's building brick by brick. You're going to get up to Sean Combs, allegedly, and this alleged conspiracy and this alleged enterprise that exists.

But it's not going to just be on Cassie's shoulder. She may be the most exciting one. I hate to use that term. I don't mean that in a negative way, but salacious one. But there's going to be a lot more, a lot more.

COATES: The lawyer drinking game every time you heard the word allegedly.

SALAND: Oh, you got to say allegedly.

COATES: There you go. We said it 26 times during the show. There you go. Let me ask each of you this last question, and that is, how difficult do you think the cross needs to be or will be for Cassie Ventura tomorrow? Rapid.

JACKSON: Listen, I think that they have to be very careful with defense. She's a pregnant woman. I think she's sympathetic, and she has gone through a heck of a lot. That's corroborated by virtue of the photos and everything else.

[23:55:00]

At the same time, they have to get out without question issues regarding consent, issues regarding whether it was explicit to Sean "Diddy" Combs, whether, you know, she was on board, or whether she just led a freaky lifestyle, which she enjoyed.

COATES: Mimi?

ROCAH: In addition to all that, they also need to walk that line of getting the jury to believe some of her testimony about some of the things she did because it helps their theory of the case. She engaged in this -- you know, these sex parties. She took drugs, she paid prostitutes, but also disbelieve the central part of her testimony about her feeling like she couldn't leave.

COATES: Wow. That's a good line. Go ahead.

SALAND: They've all answered the most important pieces, and I'll take it from a different angle. I think the way it has to be done is very gentle and very easy. You have to get your points and you have to drive them home. But if they proverbially beat her up, it'll look no better than their client, and that will go really sideways really quickly. That's going to be the difficult piece for them. I think that's going to be a huge task to make sure they do not alienate a jury that has seen some of the most ugly things that a person can see.

COATES: Cutting off your nose to spite your face. Thank you, everyone. Much more on all things Diddy on my brand-new CNN podcast, "Trial by Jury." It's available everywhere and wherever you get your podcasts.

Hey, thanks for watching. "Anderson Cooper 360" is next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)