Diddy appeared in Manhattan federal court on Thursday (October 10) as he attempted his third plea for bail. As the hearing got underway, the judge offered him a trial date of May 5, 2025, which Diddy’s attorneys accepted.
“Judge: May 5, the trial will start. Or I’ll give you April if you want,” Inner City Press tweeted. “[Attorney Marc] Agnifilo: We’ll take May 5 – there is a lot of discovery. Judge: How long will the government’s case be? AUSA Emily Johnson: Three weeks, but…”
Judge: May 5, the trial will start. Or I’ll give you April if you want.
Agnifilo: We’ll take May 5 – there is a lot of discovery.
Judge: How long will the government’s case be?
AUSA Emily Johnson: Three weeks, but…— Inner City Press (@innercitypress) October 10, 2024
The judge also set the discovery hearing for December 18, while Agnifilo asked for a gag order.
“Judge: Let’s have a next [discovery] conference on December 18 at 2 pm. Let’s turn to the defendant’s motion,” Inner City Press tweeted. “Agnifilo: We are asking for a gag order. The concern is that the agents have been leaking grand jury information and making other prejudicial statements.”
Federal prosecutors revealed their investigation is ongoing and they are looking at potentially adding more criminal charges to the original indictment.
The disgraced Bad Boy Records mogul was arrested at a posh Manhattan hotel on September 16 after a months-long investigation and charged with three felonies: sex trafficking, racketeering conspiracy and transporting individuals for prostitution. Diddy has been denied bail multiple times, but on Wednesday (October 9), his team accused the federal government of leaking the 2016 tape of Cassie Ventura to CNN. They released a lengthy statement, which can be found below.
Defendant Sean Combs moves for four forms of relief related to what the defense believes was a series of unlawful government leaks, which have led to damaging, highly prejudicial pre- trial publicity that can only taint the jury pool and deprive Mr. Combs of his right to a fair trial. Mr. Combs requests: (1) an evidentiary hearing to examine government misconduct in connection with the leaks; (2) discovery of emails, documents and records in the possession of the government (including DHS) related to these leaks; (3) a gag order prohibiting government personnel from disclosing any evidence or investigative material related to this case to any member of the media; and (4) suppression of any evidence leaked by government employees in violation of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e) or any other law, rule, or regulation.
The available evidence makes a prima facie showing that the government, primarily through DHS, has engaged in a seven-month campaign with three objects: (i) preventing Mr. Combs from getting fair consideration by the grand jury; (ii) preventing him from getting a fair trial; and (iii) strategically leaking confidential grand jury material and information, including the 2016 Intercontinental videotape, in order to prejudice the public and potential jurors against Mr. Combs.
The government’s scheme to undermine Mr. Combs’ rights to a fair proceeding has several methods and means. First, there has been a steady stream of false and prejudicial statements made by DHS agents to various press outlets over the last seven months. Second, the agents engaged in a particularly brutal and public search of Mr. Combs’ homes, during which they handcuffed Mr. Combs’ innocent sons and then marched them before a news helicopter and the press. This was an apparent effort to convey that they had overwhelming evidence against Mr. Combs, justifying the public and brutal treatment of even his children, who were handcuffed and manhandled by federal agents armed with assault rifles. Third, government employees have repeatedly leaked grand jury information and materials to the press to raise public hostility against Mr. Combs in advance of trial.The most egregious example of this is the leak to CNN of the 2016 videotape from the Intercontinental Hotel in Los Angeles. As detailed below, the CNN leak was but one of a long and documented history of leaks and false statements made with one purpose: to savage Mr. Combs’ reputation prior to trial. While the government’s misconduct in this case is particularly egregious, it is unfortunately part of a trend in this District—the government has learned that it can strategically leak information with impunity. This Court should exercise its authority to prohibit these underhanded tactics, which severely undermine a criminal defendant’s right to a fair trial.
At the outset, the defense wants to be clear with the Court as to what our theory is and is not. We do not contend that the leaks were orchestrated by the U.S. Attorney’s Office. Rather, we contend that the false media statements and the grand jury leaks complained of below were planned and executed by DHS. As the parties develop more information in this regard, the Court will see that the defense repeatedly contacted the prosecutors and stated, in substance, that their agents were leaking information to the press. Yet regardless of what, if any, action the U.S. Attorney’s Office took, the leaks continued, even until after the arrest. The reason a hearing is needed is to determine exactly what the DHS did, and did not do regarding these leaks, and what the U.S. Attorney’s Office did and did not do to stop them.
The evidence of government misconduct is clear enough already that this Court is justified in using its authority to craft appropriate remedies. Mr. Combs requests that this Court order discovery and an evidentiary hearing to investigate the government’s misconduct. The abuse here is clear, but “without a hearing,” it would remain “unknown how far or where the abuse reached.” United States v. Walters, 910 F.3d 11, 32 (2d Cir. 2018) (Jacobs, J., concurring). An evidentiary hearing is thus necessary. In addition, if the hearing demonstrates that the violation of grand jury secrecy was intentional, as we expect it will, the Court should order the suppression of the videotape and/or any other illegally disclosed evidence, as well as other potential sanctions.”
This is a developing story. Check back with AllHipHop soon on a decision about Diddy’s bail.