Kim Kardashian tells court she thought she might die
Kim Kardashian arrives at the courthouse for the trial of 10 people accused of stealing millions of dollars worth of jewellery from her, who was held at gunpoint in her apartment during Paris fashion week in 2016, a trial known as the "Rue Tronchet" affair, in Paris, France, May 13, 2025. (Reuters: Piroschka van de Wouw)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
2 hours ago
- ABC News
Sean 'Diddy' Combs's sobbing ex-girlfriend testifies at trial
Warning: This story contains details that may be distressing to some readers. A woman who was dating Sean "Diddy" Combs at the time of his arrest last year has broken down in tears in his trial while giving testimony about their many drug-fuelled sexual encounters. She told the New York court Mr Combs ignored her signals to stop and scolded her for crying after another encounter. Appearing under the pseudonym "Jane", the woman began her testimony in the Manhattan federal court on Thursday, local time. Jane continued her testimony on Friday, when she recounted how Mr Combs pushed her to continue having sex with men while he watched. She said this was even after she gave "subtle cues" — saying she was tired and hungry, making faces and gestures — that she wanted to stop. Instead, she said, he told her to "finish strong". Asked why she did not tell him outright, Jane sobbed: "I just, I don't know." Later, she said Mr Combs would shut her down when she tried to talk about ending the encounters, which she called "dark" and "sleazy". The 55-year-old has pleaded not guilty to running his business empire as a racketeering enterprise that enabled and concealed the abuse of women over two decades. The prosecution says he used his power to coerce victims into participating in marathon, drug-fuelled orgies known as "freak-offs". If convicted, he faces 15 years to life in prison. His legal team has asserted the sexual activities were all consensual and nothing Mr Combs did amounted to a criminal enterprise. Mr Combs, who was arrested on September 16 last year, has been denied bail, meaning he is in prison while the trial happens. He is being held in the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn. Mr Combs's trial in began on May 12 and it is expected to continue for another few weeks. Recordings of the trial are not allowed, which is why the only images from inside the court are drawings from courtroom artists. R&B singer Casandra "Cassie" Ventura, one of Mr Combs's ex-girlfriends has already testified, as has rapper Kid Cudi, whose legal name is Scott Mescudi. This article is a recap of the past two days of the trial. Jane's account has closely mirrored that of Ms Ventura's. Ms Ventura testified Mr Combs assaulted her and forced her into "hundreds" of encounters with male sex workers, encounters which have been referred to as "freak-offs". In court, Jane called them "hotel nights" and the men "entertainers". Prosecutor Maurene Comey sought to show that Mr Combs used his wealth to manipulate women into submitting to his sexual demands and make them reliant on him and his needs. By September 2023, Jane said, Mr Combs had been paying her rent for about five months. When asked what she feared would happen if she stopped doing hotel nights, Jane replied: "That Sean would take the house away." Mr Combs was still paying her rent, Jane said. If you need help immediately call emergency services on triple-0 After one hotel encounter, Jane said she cried and Mr Combs told her, "Don't do that right now," and, "I can't do this right now. I'm too high." She testified she had blacked out earlier from using the drug ecstasy, which Mr Combs gave her. During another encounter, she tried to remain sober but vomited in a bathroom after having sex with two men in a row. Mr Combs told her: "That's good. You'll feel better now that you've thrown up. So let's go." She then had sex with a third man, she said, describing herself as "repulsed". Jane said she endured the encounters because she valued time alone with Mr Combs afterwards. "I would really fight to block out how sad I was after," she said. In messages to him, she wrote: "My heart is really in this and it's breaking." Jane wiped away tears as she recounted the many ill effects of hotel nights, including constant back pain, frequent urinary tract infections (UTIs) and soreness in her genitals and pelvic areas. Jane dated Mr Combs from 2021 to 2024. On Thursday, she testified their relationship began as loving and passionate but soon veered into having her engage in sex with other men. The longest sessions lasted three and a half days, while most went on for about 24 to 30 hours. On Friday, she told the court she poured her thoughts into the Notes app on her phone in November 2021, drafting a message to Mr Combs but never sending it. "I don't know what you're calling me for, but I'm sorry I don't want to do drugs for days and days and have you use me to fulfil your freaky, wild desires in hotel rooms," Jane wrote in the unsent message. In 2023, she said she texted Mr Combs to say she longed to return to the early days of their relationship. She said regretted ever getting involved in the sexual encounters but felt obligated. Mr Combs responded: "Girl, stop," she told the court. Jane said the encounters continued into 2024 and she participated in one at Mr Combs's Miami-area estate as late as August — just weeks before his arrest at a Manhattan hotel. Jurors on Friday heard the first audio from inside one of those encounters. In the recording, Jane asked a man to wear a condom during her first hotel night, but Mr Combs "guilt tripped me out of it", she said. "It wasn't something he wanted to see," she said. Jane also said Mr Combs had her act as his drug mule at least twice, nervously smuggling pills in her checked luggage on commercial flights from Los Angeles to Miami. She said he divvied up in the coloured pills into bottles, and she ended up using some of the drugs with him. Her identity is being kept secret. To protect Jane's anonymity, the judge has barred courtroom observers from describing or sketching her appearance in a way that would reveal her identity. Ms Ventura's name and photos are being reported in this trial because she has chosen to go public with her story. Mr Combs's lawyers have tried to sew doubt among jurors about the credibility of the prosecution's witnesses. In opening arguments, lawyer Teny Geragos acknowledged Mr Combs had a "bad temper" and violent outbursts, but argued his sexual habits were part of a consensual swinger lifestyle. The defence painted Ms Ventura, for example, as an eager participant in the so-called freak-offs. When Ms Ventura was on the stand, Mr Combs's lawyers had her read texts and emails in which she expressed willingness to engage in the encounters. Before Jane began testifying, the defence cross-examined Bryana "Bana" Bongolan, a friend of Ms Ventura and a graphic designer, who is suing Mr Combs. Ms Bongolan testified that in 2016, Mr Combs held her over the edge of a balcony at a Los Angeles high-rise for 10 to 15 seconds. It was an episode that traumatised her and left her with lasting night terrors, she said. Mr Combs's lawyer Nicole Westmoreland suggested that Ms Bongolan lied or exaggerated. She noted Mr Combs was on tour for much of September 2016, including for shows on the east coast of the US — which is on the opposite side of the country to the Californian city of Los Angeles — at about the time of the alleged balcony incident. Ms Bongolan later testified she did not recall the exact date of the incident but had no doubt it occurred. AP
News.com.au
4 hours ago
- News.com.au
Rugby league player Tyson Alexander Ellul appeals conviction for raping woman on car bonnet in Kingaroy, Qld
A football player who was just 18 at the time he raped an intoxicated woman on a car bonnet has appealed his conviction, arguing a key witness at trial may have in fact been responsible for the assault. Tyson Alexander Ellul, now 23, was last year sentenced to five years in prison, suspended after two years and three months, after a jury found him guilty of rape following a four-day trial in the Kingaroy District Court. But on Friday, his defence team appeared before the Brisbane Supreme Court, challenging the jury's verdict and the way the trial was conducted. The appeal was heard by three justices, who have reserved their decision. The appeal focused largely on the identity of the offender, with Ellul's barrister submitting that the credibility and reliability of a key witness had not been properly scrutinised during the trial. 'There was a real possibility it was in fact (the witness) who was responsible for committing the offence,' the court was told. Despite this central argument, Ellul's legal team also put forward an alternative submission, that if he was in fact the one who committed the act, it may have been consensual, even though the victim had no memory of the event. The victim, who met Ellul while drinking at the Kingaroy Hotel in 2020, was described during the original trial as being too intoxicated to consent. She later woke up in hospital with injuries and no recollection of what had occurred. A major hurdle for the defence was Ellul's own conduct after the incident, which included multiple lies to police during their investigation, something the original sentencing judge described as 'strong' evidence against him. In court on Friday, his barrister acknowledged the damage these lies caused to his case but argued that the jury directions around Ellul's false statements may have unfairly influenced their deliberations. At trial, the court was told Ellul led the heavily intoxicated woman to a secluded area near a service station, placed her on the bonnet of a car and anally raped her, causing tearing and bleeding. Medical evidence, including a doctor's report, supported this. During sentencing, Judge Smith described the offence as predatory, stating Ellul preyed on the woman's vulnerability and only stopped when a passer-by interrupted the assault. 'You formed a plan to have sex with her regardless of her consent. You took her to the car in King Street, put her on the bonnet, pulled down her jeans, and anally penetrated her with your penis,' Judge Smith said. DNA evidence also linked Ellul to the crime, with his genetic material found on the victim's underwear and jeans. A date for the decision has not been set.
ABC News
8 hours ago
- ABC News
Erin Patterson's week on the stand in her mushroom murder trial
For weeks, the trial of Erin Patterson has moved carefully through vast expanses of at-times highly technical evidence. It's included contested data from mobile phone towers, reports of digital analysis carried out on seized electronic devices and tables tracking the movement of SIM cards between phones. It's even included a run-through from a fungi expert on how to distinguish the deadly Amanita phalloides (or death cap) mushroom variety from its more benign relatives. But it was in the sixth week of the Supreme Court trial that a packed courtroom in Morwell heard hours of evidence directly from the person who organised the 2023 beef Wellington meal that led to three deaths. The trial of Erin Patterson, who stands accused of using a poisoned meal to murder three relatives, continues. Look back at how Friday's hearing unfolded in our live blog. To stay up to date with this story, subscribe to ABC News. In her evidence, Erin Patterson told the jury she never intended to harm the four relatives she invited to Saturday lunch at her Leongatha home. She said she now believed foraged mushrooms had accidentally made their way into the meal in a mix-up that had seen them blended with other dried mushrooms purchased from an Asian grocer in Melbourne's south-east. The 50-year-old, who has pleaded not guilty to three charges of murder and one of attempted murder, admitted several times she had used lies and exaggeration in the past. But she maintained she was telling the truth when she rejected one of the prosecution's central claims: that her lie to her lunch guests about possibly requiring cancer treatment in the future was part of a carefully laid plot to murder them. "I suggest that you never thought you would have to account for this lie of having cancer, because you thought that the lunch guests would die and your lie would never be found out," Dr Rogers said to Ms Patterson. "That's not true," she replied. She also said while she may have indicated cancer treatment lay ahead, she never told them a diagnosis had been made. This week, Ms Patterson gave deeply personal evidence as she discussed the context in which the lunch had taken place. The evidence went as far back as her childhood, when Ms Patterson told the court her mother would weigh her "weekly". She said she had grown up with significant body image issues, engaged in binge eating and by the time of the lunch, she was planning to undergo gastric-band surgery as a way to control her weight. Ms Patterson said she was too embarrassed to tell her relatives about this, so instead she fed her parents-in-law Gail and Don Patterson a lie. The court heard Ms Patterson told them in several messages sent before the lunch that she was undergoing a biopsy and MRI for a lump on her elbow. "I remember thinking I didn't want to tell anybody what I was going to have done, I was really embarrassed about it, so I thought perhaps letting them believe I had some serious issue that needed treatment might mean they would be able to help me with the logistics around the kids and I wouldn't have to tell them the real reason," Ms Patterson said. It was a lie she expanded on at the lunch, although Ms Patterson told the court while she had indicated she may need ovarian cancer treatment, she did not believe she had told them a diagnosis was made. Her history with illnesses and the medical system was also explored in evidence. The court heard several traumatic experiences with her children's health and hospital staff had built a sense of distrust. "I just lost so much faith in the medical system that I decided that, anything to do with my health and the children's health, I'm going to have to solve that problem myself," she said. Earlier in the trial, the court heard from medical staff who said Ms Patterson needed to be persuaded to bring her children (who had eaten leftover meat from the meal) in to be tested for death cap mushroom poisoning. Ms Patterson said any perceived reluctance wasn't because she did not want her children to be treated, but because she was wary of the "drastic step" of hospital admission. "I wanted to understand that that was really necessary, because of their anxieties about being in hospital," Ms Patterson said. But she said ultimately, she understood "the logic" of that course of action. Ms Patterson also gave detailed evidence on the family dynamics at the time of the lunch. Tensions over financial matters had flared between her and her estranged husband in late 2022 and she had feared it was damaging her relationship with the Patterson family. In a bid to bring them closer, Ms Patterson had organised a lunch in June, 2023, with Gail and Don Patterson and the children, where she served up shepherd's pie. "The kids and I had such a good time seeing nanna and papa," she said. Ms Patterson said the positive engagement with her in-laws had inspired her to organise another lunch, this time with Gail's sister Heather Wilkinson and her husband Ian. "Her and Ian have been really good to me over the years, I wanted to have some more connection with them," she said. It was against this backdrop that Ms Patterson said she approached Gail and Heather after a church service in Korumburra one Sunday. "Would you like to come to lunch at my house?" Erin said she asked them. "They said 'we'd love to'." Ms Patterson told the court she decided a "special" dish was required for the event, and so decided to attempt beef Wellington for the first time. A few "deviations" were made to the RecipeTin Eats cookbook method, she said. Due to meat availability, Ms Patterson said she made individual pastry parcels rather than the one log called for in the recipe. A prosciutto layer was dropped because Don Patterson didn't eat pork, the mustard was left out and a crepe layer was swapped for the simpler option of filo pastry. Crucially, Ms Patterson told the court she believed the deadly addition to the meal likely came during the preparation of the mushroom paste, or duxelle, that coats the meat. She said on the morning of the lunch, she had cooked down Woolworths-bought mushrooms when she tasted the duxelle. "It seemed a little bland, to me," she said. "So I decided to put in the dried mushrooms that I'd bought from the grocer that I still had in the pantry. "So I put them in, like a little … strainer with a handle … and just roughly poured water over them to get the crispness out of them. "I chopped them up and I, like, sprinkled them over the duxelle and pushed them in with an egg flip." She said at the time, she had believed the dried mushrooms were the ones she'd bought from an Asian grocer in Melbourne's south-east. "Now I think that there was a possibility that there were foraged ones in there as well," she said, closing her eyes and blinking as her voice cracked. After guests arrived, Ms Patterson said the individual Wellingtons were plated up and put on the table with no great thought as to who ended up with which portion. "I said, you know, 'grab a plate guys, I'm just going to finish off the gravy.' I turned around," she said. Ms Patterson told the court she only had part of her meal and shortly after the guests had left, she binged on two-thirds of an orange cake her mother-in-law had brought, before vomiting it all up. The events after the guests left the dining table have been raked over in hours of court evidence and detailed in briefs running into tens of thousands of pages. On Friday, lead prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC questioned the "love" Ms Patterson has maintained she held for her in-laws: Rogers: You agree that you told police in your record of interview that you loved Don and Gail? Patterson: Correct. Rogers: Surely if you had loved them .. You would have immediately notified the medical authorities that there was a possibility that the foraged mushrooms had ended up in the meal. Patterson: Well I didn't. I had been told that … people were getting treatment for possible death cap mushroom poisoning. So that was already happening. The prosecution noted that these questions related to Ms Patterson's mindset on the Tuesday after the lunch, days before anyone had died. But, Dr Rogers told the court, Erin didn't tell "a single person" that foraged mushrooms may have been in the meal. "Correct," Ms Patterson replied. Further, Dr Rogers put to Ms Patterson that she had "two faces" when it came to her relationship with her in-laws. A public face of loving them, and a private face shared with her Facebook friends, where she shared anger and mocked her relatives' religious views. Ms Patterson denied it, telling the court she had "a good relationship with Don and Gail" and sobbed as she recounted how she had invited Heather Wilkinson to the lunch to thank her for the kindness she had shown her over the years. This week in court the prosecution also alleged that in the lead-up to the lunch, Ms Patterson had seen iNaturalist listings of death cap mushrooms at nearby Loch and Outtrim, and knowingly foraged the poisonous fungi. They alleged that photos taken from devices seized at her home showed she had been weighing dehydrated death cap mushrooms in the lead-up to the lunch, to determine what the lethal dosage would be for her guests. The prosecution said that her elaborate cancer lie was carefully constructed to create a pretence for a lunch without her children, and that had her estranged husband Simon attended the lunch, she would have knowingly fed him a sixth beef Wellington laced with death cap mushrooms. And they alleged her decision to dump the dehydrator and lie to police about it was done because she knew admitting to the dehydrator would have revealed her murderous plot. Ms Patterson denies it all. And the trial's not over yet. This week, Justice Christopher Beale told jurors the hearings could stretch towards the end of June, before they would be asked to deliberate and return a verdict. How long the jury will need to weigh the mountain of evidence and arrive at a verdict is impossible to know. "None of you can tell me how long you will be in deliberations … how long is a piece of string?" Justice Beale said.
