Sean “Diddy” La Défense de Combs dit “Everything is a question of money” in the fence
Sean Combs’ main lawyer has not lost time today in his closing argument in the sex trafficking trial of the founder of Bad Boy Records, trying to sweep the claims of rape and racketeering, and to reduce everything in cold cold species.
“This is not a crime, this is the money,” Marc Agnifilo told the jury on Friday, showing the trial quickly settled ($ 20 million) of November 2023 against Diddy de Cassie Ventura, a former girlfriend in the long term (and star control of the pursuit).
“Cassie Ventura continued Sean Combs for $ 30 million because Sean Combs has $ 30 million,” the prosecutor said this morning Everything about the youngest interpreter. “This very investigation is out of this civil affair. No 30 million dollars, no legal proceedings. No $ 30 million, no prosecution, no criminal case. This is why we are here. We are here because of money. ”
Initially to avoid many vices and less attractive character traits that the defense raised preventively in its declaration of opening last month, Agnifilo rather congratulated its customer winning a Grammy for having built “the wonderful and sophisticated companies that passed the test of time”, without apparent irony, the accommodation of the seasoned defense called Combs a man who “takes care of people”. ».
On the other hand, Ventura (which testified very very pregnant during the first week of the starting test of May 12) is a “gangster”, according to the increasingly hyperbolic agnifilo. In the lawyer’s field, as presented to the jury on Friday, Me and you The rue de Singer credit has just had a burner phone to get in touch with the short -term kid Cudi without a snack. “She also played it well,” said Agnifilo, referring to the rapper of testimony Cudi presented in May. . “She played them both.”
Dressed in his usual average man’s sweater, Diddy sat down today with his 10-Lawyer defense team in the Lower Manhattan courtroom today, because he has been at almost all audiences since his arrest last fall and since the start of this criminal trial.
Against a constantly increased file of cases of civilian violence and aggression as well as this criminal affair, the very accused combed concluded a non -guilty advocacy, reprimanded an agreement with the federal authorities and however did not testify on his behalf during this trial. The 55 -year -old combs is considering life behind bars if it is found guilty of racketeering, sex trafficking, transportation to engage in prostitution and more, accusations.
To start at 9 a.m., today’s procedures were delayed due to a late juror. Surprisingly, such a delay has only occurred a few times in a trial that has lasted more than six weeks so far.
As expected, making money in a very different way, the accusation meticulously exceeded the case against Combs in their own closing argument on Thursday.
Quoting violence, manipulation, blackmail threats and tight strings and of course the “freak-off” sex sessions focused on June 26, returned to alleged mistreatment and sexual attacks suffered by employees of Birlfriend and “Jane” and “Jane” and “Jane” and “Jane”. In a full day to speak directly to the jury, Slavik alternated between reading notes on the desk in front of her and directly looking at the four women and eight men from the panel. “It is time to hold him responsible,” said the prosecutor about “renown, wealth and power” protected the combs. “It is time for justice. It’s time to declare the guilty defendant. “
“The accused does not deny abuse,” said Ausa Slavik, adding “but during this trial, his crimes were exposed” and listing sexual abuses, “physical, emotional, psychological” abuses. “They just want you to call it” domestic violence “and believe that it has nothing to do with the crimes accused here,” she said.
“Until today, the accused was able to get away with these crimes,” said Slavik, “but during this trial, his crimes were exposed.”
The American lawyer’s office for the South New York district will have another kick in the judiciary later today, when they have the opportunity to refute the defense closing argument.
