Sean “Diddy” Combs accused of gang rape of teen girl in new lawsuit

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Am I the only one who thinks that Cassie was a grown ass woman who could've walked away at any time? I can't imagine myself, even as a 19-year-old, booking the prostitutes to have sex with me, letting them pee on me, and taking drugs knowing that I was going to be having sex for days on end- and then doing it over and over for years. I am honestly confused why people are feeling so sorry for her. I would've walked away. But the money and what she was getting in return were obviously enough to convince her to stay in the relationship. I'm sorry, I don't see women as children and so I see her as perfectly capable of saying no.

I don't think you are the only one who thinks this. I think you are unempathetic and lack an understanding of human psychology and emotional and physical abuse cycles and how all that impacts a person, which is definitely nice for you.

Whenever I see people defending the kink community, I think this is the other side of it. Maybe they are consenting adults. Or maybe they are people who have been groomed and have a lot of trauma that are caught in a cycle where they can’t meaningfully consent.

In college I personally witnessed female peers in that 18 to 22 year old range willing sleep with groups of male athletes and male fraternity brothers and random boys from our dorm halls. They were consenting young adults regularly having unprotected group sex. Most of them are married with kids and I assume their spouses have no clue what they did 25 years ago.

Honestly, after seeing that in college the Diddy details really don’t shock me at all. Diddy is an obvious lifelong homosexual who displaces self hate onto women.

Not to mention Cassie was upwards of 30 years old while this continued. If she's the key witness, this is a joke. It's all detestable and gross but what felony crimes is she detailing? I want him to go to prison because he's a monster but it almost seems like the fix is in if this is all the gov presents.

With Cassie, he paid large amounts to hire two male escorts to urinate into her mouth while Combs watched and masterbated.

There is nothing wrong with that, criminally, as they were all consenting adults. In most of the developed world, being an escort is not criminalized; why should it be here? Besides, what Diddy wanted them to do in front of him would not even be considered sexual by the average person. It’s not even unsafe since urine is sterile.

Hiring 2 male escorts is illegal, consent is not the issue with that. Whether you think it should be legal is irrelevant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Am I the only one who thinks that Cassie was a grown ass woman who could've walked away at any time? I can't imagine myself, even as a 19-year-old, booking the prostitutes to have sex with me, letting them pee on me, and taking drugs knowing that I was going to be having sex for days on end- and then doing it over and over for years. I am honestly confused why people are feeling so sorry for her. I would've walked away. But the money and what she was getting in return were obviously enough to convince her to stay in the relationship. I'm sorry, I don't see women as children and so I see her as perfectly capable of saying no.

I don't think you are the only one who thinks this. I think you are unempathetic and lack an understanding of human psychology and emotional and physical abuse cycles and how all that impacts a person, which is definitely nice for you.

Whenever I see people defending the kink community, I think this is the other side of it. Maybe they are consenting adults. Or maybe they are people who have been groomed and have a lot of trauma that are caught in a cycle where they can’t meaningfully consent.

In college I personally witnessed female peers in that 18 to 22 year old range willing sleep with groups of male athletes and male fraternity brothers and random boys from our dorm halls. They were consenting young adults regularly having unprotected group sex. Most of them are married with kids and I assume their spouses have no clue what they did 25 years ago.

Honestly, after seeing that in college the Diddy details really don’t shock me at all. Diddy is an obvious lifelong homosexual who displaces self hate onto women.

Not to mention Cassie was upwards of 30 years old while this continued. If she's the key witness, this is a joke. It's all detestable and gross but what felony crimes is she detailing? I want him to go to prison because he's a monster but it almost seems like the fix is in if this is all the gov presents.

With Cassie, he paid large amounts to hire two male escorts to urinate into her mouth while Combs watched and masterbated.

There is nothing wrong with that, criminally, as they were all consenting adults. In most of the developed world, being an escort is not criminalized; why should it be here? Besides, what Diddy wanted them to do in front of him would not even be considered sexual by the average person. It’s not even unsafe since urine is sterile.

Pretty darn gross...

Many people think keeping the lights on is pretty darn gross. But in Cassie’s case, the prosecution is doing a poor job of proving something criminal.

I do believe Combs coerced young people (possibly underage people) to submit to sex with him. And that was likely rape, in many cases; possibly statutory rape of minors.

It certainly seems to fit the pattern of all the many , many, disgusting sexual assaults Harvey Weinstein , and many other Hollywood producers, committed against young people just trying to get ahead in show business.

I wish this prosecution would collaborate with the team prosecuting Weinstein to develop a playbook against Hollywood and recording-industry types.

Hollywood and big-music are both putrid to the core; the vast majority of them belong not on award show stages or the big screen, but in prison for very long sentences.

You don’t seem very intelligent to not understand how Cassie’s testimony is relevant in showing Combs was the head of a racketeering conspiracy to sex traffick. Having a consensual orgy, not illegal, hiring escorts for the orgy, illegal. Is that plain enough for you to understand?

[Anonymous]

I'm so glad a bright light is shining on the disgusting, depraved Hollywood and music and entertainment industry. These despicable people call themselves artists and have been influencing our vulnerable youth with their vile behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm so glad a bright light is shining on the disgusting, depraved Hollywood and music and entertainment industry. These despicable people call themselves artists and have been influencing our vulnerable youth with their vile behavior.

+1

When you act on your basest and most perverted sexual instincts, you end up debasing yourself and killing your soul.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm so glad a bright light is shining on the disgusting, depraved Hollywood and music and entertainment industry. These despicable people call themselves artists and have been influencing our vulnerable youth with their vile behavior.

+1

When you act on your basest and most perverted sexual instincts, you end up debasing yourself and killing your soul.

+1 Exactly right

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Am I the only one who thinks that Cassie was a grown ass woman who could've walked away at any time? I can't imagine myself, even as a 19-year-old, booking the prostitutes to have sex with me, letting them pee on me, and taking drugs knowing that I was going to be having sex for days on end- and then doing it over and over for years. I am honestly confused why people are feeling so sorry for her. I would've walked away. But the money and what she was getting in return were obviously enough to convince her to stay in the relationship. I'm sorry, I don't see women as children and so I see her as perfectly capable of saying no.

I don't think you are the only one who thinks this. I think you are unempathetic and lack an understanding of human psychology and emotional and physical abuse cycles and how all that impacts a person, which is definitely nice for you.

Whenever I see people defending the kink community, I think this is the other side of it. Maybe they are consenting adults. Or maybe they are people who have been groomed and have a lot of trauma that are caught in a cycle where they can’t meaningfully consent.

In college I personally witnessed female peers in that 18 to 22 year old range willing sleep with groups of male athletes and male fraternity brothers and random boys from our dorm halls. They were consenting young adults regularly having unprotected group sex. Most of them are married with kids and I assume their spouses have no clue what they did 25 years ago.

Honestly, after seeing that in college the Diddy details really don’t shock me at all. Diddy is an obvious lifelong homosexual who displaces self hate onto women.

Not to mention Cassie was upwards of 30 years old while this continued. If she's the key witness, this is a joke. It's all detestable and gross but what felony crimes is she detailing? I want him to go to prison because he's a monster but it almost seems like the fix is in if this is all the gov presents.

With Cassie, he paid large amounts to hire two male escorts to urinate into her mouth while Combs watched and masterbated.

There is nothing wrong with that, criminally, as they were all consenting adults. In most of the developed world, being an escort is not criminalized; why should it be here? Besides, what Diddy wanted them to do in front of him would not even be considered sexual by the average person. It’s not even unsafe since urine is sterile.

Hiring 2 male escorts is illegal, consent is not the issue with that. Whether you think it should be legal is irrelevant.

This made me think of how "ignorance of the law is no excuse."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The judge is not happy with the defense.

U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian called for a lunchtime recess and asked jurors to return to the courtroom at 1 p.m. ET.

Subramanian told lawyers he wasn't happy with the pace of Ventura's examination because he wants the eight-months-pregnant woman to be done sooner rather than later.

When the defense said they would need all day today and all day tomorrow, Subramanian angrily responded, "That is the exact opposite of what I was told."

"This witness needed to be off the stand by the end of the week so what happened?" the clearly perturbed judge said.

This seems poorly planned. Good crosses are tight and much shorter than direct. Plus dragging out the cross of a very pregnancy witness has a higher chance of making the jury feel for her.

And this also from the judge:
U.S. District Court Judge Arun Subramanian appears to still be agitated from the back and forth he had with Combs' attorneys prior to the break.

Subramanian's agitation stems from the speed with which the defense is questioning Cassie Ventura.

The judge sternly reminded the defense it was given a day and a half to cross examine Cassie, who is eight months pregnant, and that she would be done by the end of the week.

Combs' attorney, Marc Agnifilo, argued that Ventura should be able to come back Monday morning if needed.

The judge shot back: "In what universe did you not understand this is what was going to happen ... you’re not telling me this wasn't everyone’s understanding that this witness was going to be done this week?"

Cassie was reviewing exhibits in a side room while the exchange took place.

Is this in front of the jury?

(To the people who want us to all be educated, sorry if this question offends. Really.)

I wonder too, I'm not sure. There is a concern that Cassie could go into labor, even as soon as this weekend. That would lead to a mistrial, which would be a huge win for the defense team. If they were to re-try the case, the defense would know exactly what Cassie was going to say. And they would have her locked into certain testimony. It appears that the defense is stalling a bit with their line of questioning to draw things out. I think that's pissing off the judge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The judge is not happy with the defense.

U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian called for a lunchtime recess and asked jurors to return to the courtroom at 1 p.m. ET.

Subramanian told lawyers he wasn't happy with the pace of Ventura's examination because he wants the eight-months-pregnant woman to be done sooner rather than later.

When the defense said they would need all day today and all day tomorrow, Subramanian angrily responded, "That is the exact opposite of what I was told."

"This witness needed to be off the stand by the end of the week so what happened?" the clearly perturbed judge said.

This seems poorly planned. Good crosses are tight and much shorter than direct. Plus dragging out the cross of a very pregnancy witness has a higher chance of making the jury feel for her.

And this also from the judge:
U.S. District Court Judge Arun Subramanian appears to still be agitated from the back and forth he had with Combs' attorneys prior to the break.

Subramanian's agitation stems from the speed with which the defense is questioning Cassie Ventura.

The judge sternly reminded the defense it was given a day and a half to cross examine Cassie, who is eight months pregnant, and that she would be done by the end of the week.

Combs' attorney, Marc Agnifilo, argued that Ventura should be able to come back Monday morning if needed.

The judge shot back: "In what universe did you not understand this is what was going to happen ... you’re not telling me this wasn't everyone’s understanding that this witness was going to be done this week?"

Cassie was reviewing exhibits in a side room while the exchange took place.

Is this in front of the jury?

(To the people who want us to all be educated, sorry if this question offends. Really.)

I wonder too, I'm not sure. There is a concern that Cassie could go into labor, even as soon as this weekend. That would lead to a mistrial, which would be a huge win for the defense team. If they were to re-try the case, the defense would know exactly what Cassie was going to say. And they would have her locked into certain testimony. It appears that the defense is stalling a bit with their line of questioning to draw things out. I think that's pissing off the judge.

Imagine that! Sleazy attorneys doing anything to get their disgusting client off the hook.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the left to the left, to the right, to the right.

Wonder why she just didn't just sucker punch of that Tootsie roll

It was too small of a target!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the left to the left, to the right, to the right.

What does "To the left," etc., mean? I don't get the reference.

The thing that struck me when reading about the freak-offs is that he is a voyeur and masturbates. He set them up so this is his preference. I wonder if he gets off on beating them up too. Probably.

How old are you out of curiousity? Song from the 90s "Tootsie Roll" that is often played at parties, clubs, weddings, etc even now.

I'm old!

But now I get the joke and it's a good comeback.

[Anonymous]

Day 1- needs to pee pee
Day 2- reads a bible in view of the jury
Day 3- supposedly unknowingly in front of a hot mic, tells lawyer questioning Cassie how amazing she is
Any guesses what they’re going to do next?!?!

All of this makes the defense look desperate. And they need to be careful about grilling Cassie too hard, the jury may view this unfavorably seeing that she due to deliver any day now.

[Anonymous]

From the live tweets of the testimony, the cross sounds kind of scattered and not drilling down on issues (the way, for example, Karen Read's lawyers do about every little thing).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:From the live tweets of the testimony, the cross sounds kind of scattered and not drilling down on issues (the way, for example, Karen Read's lawyers do about every little thing).

I've been following too and noticed. They are all over the place with the questioning. They caught her up in two inaccuracies, but I keep waiting for a big blow, so to speak. But the topics change from question to question, and I'm unsure what they are trying to achieve. The defense said they had to change their strategy at the last minute. So I think that's not good for them, and they did not predict the questioning and revelations that came out during the questioning from the prosecution. Which is good. Anything salacious or bad should be brought out by the prosecution, not by the defense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the live tweets of the testimony, the cross sounds kind of scattered and not drilling down on issues (the way, for example, Karen Read's lawyers do about every little thing).

I've been following too and noticed. They are all over the place with the questioning. They caught her up in two inaccuracies, but I keep waiting for a big blow, so to speak. But the topics change from question to question, and I'm unsure what they are trying to achieve. The defense said they had to change their strategy at the last minute. So I think that's not good for them, and they did not predict the questioning and revelations that came out during the questioning from the prosecution. Which is good. Anything salacious or bad should be brought out by the prosecution, not by the defense.

PP. Yeah, I don't feel like they're emphasizing anything. They'll bring up a text that looks ostensibly bad like her planning a freak out session on her own or proclaiming how safe she felt with Diddy and she'll just be like "yeah" or "that's how I felt at the time" or even laugh, and they just move on. Most lawyers would really push, like "So did you fear for your life, or did you feel safe?" "Why were planning sessions if you hated them?" and so she actually comes off pretty good. It's pretty bad for the defense. The judge is also pissed because they ended early yesterday on assurances they'd be done this week and now the defense is like why can't she come in Monday.

[Anonymous]

Much of this case was highly exaggerated. Maybe it’s me but I don’t see the criminality in baby oil and putting his arm around Justin Bieber. where exactly is the crime here?