logo
Diddy's courtroom energy has been off the charts as the defense case nears its start

Diddy's courtroom energy has been off the charts as the defense case nears its start

He greets his multimillion-dollar defense team each morning with a round of three-second hugs and a volley of fist-bumps.
Lately, he throws in a small yoga studio's worth of short, namaste-like bows, hands together as if in prayer. And his smile — as he turns from his lawyers and scans the courtroom — nearly stretches ear to ear.
As his Manhattan sex-trafficking trial nears a conclusion, Sean "Diddy" Combs has been walking into court and taking his seat at the defense table with a show of high energy and still-higher spirits.
"He's at peak Diddy," observed courtroom sketch artist Christine Cornell, who has drawn the trial since it began in mid-May.
"It's like he sees what he thinks is the light at the end of the tunnel," she told Business Insider.
Federal prosecutors are on track to rest their direct case after calling their final witnesses Friday and Monday.
The defense case will begin as early as Monday, starting with testimony by a pair of executives from Combs Global, the hip-hop entrepreneur's music and lifestyle empire. The defense also has a forensic psychiatrist on tap to testify as an expert witness. They have not said if they will call Combs, 55, to the stand.
Combs, who is fighting sex-trafficking and racketeering charges carrying a potential life sentence, has often appeared animated throughout nearly six weeks of testimony by 32 prosecution witnesses.
US District Judge Arun Subramanian has at least twice warned Combs to rein himself in when the jury is present, including a specific directive against "nodding vigorously" when he hears testimony he apparently likes.
But as the prosecution case wraps, and his own case nears its start, Combs appears extra amped.
During testimony this week, he has jotted his ideas on a flurry of Post-it notes, handing them out among the eight attorneys seated near him, a team led by Manhattan attorney Marc Agnifilo. Often, he'll lean in for whispered exchanges with the attorneys sitting to his side.
"Lately he's been tapping his leg a lot, and he takes copious notes — I've never seen a defendant take so many notes," said Cornell, who's been sketching trials for 50 years.
Combs continues to push the boundaries of how animated he can be in front of jurors.
On Tuesday, attorney Teny Geragos cross-examined one of three US Attorney's Office witnesses who will testify for the government.
As Geragos returned to her seat to his right, Combs half stood in his chair. He showily pulled out Geragos's chair, pushing it back toward the table for her as she took her seat. They were soon deep in whispered conversation.
"He's done that a couple of times," Cornell said of the chair-pull. "But this week he leapt out of his own chair, really going out of his way."
Combs is especially lively when the jurors are not in the courtroom. "Waiving, your honor!" he answered on Friday, smiling as he waved his right hand over his head.
The cheerful display came in response to the judge asking Combs if he was waiving his right to challenge a juror who'd given inconsistent answers about whether he lived in the Bronx, as he said pretrial, or in New Jersey, as he said later.
The juror was excused from the jury on Monday, over the objections of defense lawyers, who argued against booting a Black juror and replacing him with a White alternate juror.
One of the few instances when Combs appeared aggrieved in court came minutes after losing that battle. After the jury departed for the day, Combs shook his head "No" and seemed to say, "It's bad" to his mother, Janice Combs, who sits three rows behind him.
Otherwise, at any chance he gets when the judge is not on the bench Combs turns to his mother, mouthing, "I love you," blowing her kisses and making heart shapes with his hands. "Go eat!" Cornell has heard him tell her.
Prosecutors have worked since May 12 to convince the eight-man, four-woman jury that between 2009 and last year, Combs sex trafficked two girlfriends, R&B singer Cassie Ventura and a woman who testified as "Jane," for Jane Doe. Both described being beaten by Combs.
The indictment alleges Combs forced Ventura and Jane to cross state lines to have sex with male escorts as he watched, masturbated, and made recordings. These dayslong, drug-fueled sexual performances took place almost weekly at luxury hotels in Los Angeles, New York, and Miami, and were called "freak offs," hotel nights, and king nights, according to the indictment.
"Be strong," Combs mouthed to his sons behind him, pounding his chest with his fist, during a break in Jane's testimony, according to Cornell.
Combs is also charged with racketeering. That charge alleges he ran his business empire as a criminal enterprise, using its staff and cash in furtherance of additional crimes — not only sex trafficking, but also bribery, obstruction of justice, kidnapping, forced labor, narcotics distribution, and arson.
Combs has pleaded not guilty and is putting on an energetic defense. His lawyers' cross-examinations of Ventura and Jane focused on their long text and email histories with Combs, in which they at times showed enthusiasm for freak offs and resentment over his public affairs with rival girlfriends.
Testimony continues Friday with prosecutors expected to call their fifth former Combs personal assistant to the stand.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Oscar-winning director Danny Boyle on why he would never make 'Slumdog Millionaire' today
Oscar-winning director Danny Boyle on why he would never make 'Slumdog Millionaire' today

Business Insider

time9 hours ago

  • Business Insider

Oscar-winning director Danny Boyle on why he would never make 'Slumdog Millionaire' today

British director Danny Boyle has said he wouldn't even think of making a film like " Slumdog Millionaire" today, citing concerns over "cultural appropriation." "I'm proud of the film, but you wouldn't even contemplate doing something like that today. It wouldn't even get financed," he told The Guardian about the hit 2008 movie. The filmmaker won an Oscar for best director for the movie, which follows a young Indian man (played by Dev Patel) as he is given the life-changing opportunity to appear on a local version of "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?" The film, which won eight Academy Awards, received critical acclaim and was a hit at the box office, but some critics took issue with its portrayal of Indian society. "We wouldn't be able to make that now," Boyle said. "And that's how it should be. It's time to reflect on all that. We have to look at the cultural baggage we carry and the mark that we've left on the world." Boyle said that while he had made efforts "to make a film within the culture," including working with a large local crew, it was still a "flawed method." "You're still an outsider," he said. "That kind of cultural appropriation might be sanctioned at certain times. But at other times it cannot be." "Slumdog Millionaire" was adapted by screenwriter Simon Beaufoy and based on the novel "Q & A" by Vikas Swarup. The film grossed more than $378 million worldwide. Boyle's latest movie, a zombie horror titled "28 Years Later" — part of the "28 Days Later" series — was released in theaters on June 20. In a recent interview with Business Insider, the director discussed his return to the zombie genre and why they shot the film using modern tech like iPhones and drones. "I felt an obligation to take the spirit of the first movie, but be aware that the technology has moved on so much," Boyle said. "Phones now shoot at 4K, which is what a lot of cameras shoot at anyway. And the advantage of using the phones is we were able to be very lightweight," he added.

Anthropic breaks down AI's process — line by line — when it decided to blackmail a fictional executive
Anthropic breaks down AI's process — line by line — when it decided to blackmail a fictional executive

Yahoo

time13 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Anthropic breaks down AI's process — line by line — when it decided to blackmail a fictional executive

Anthropic found in experiments that AI models may resort to blackmail when facing shutdown and goal conflict. AI models train on positive reinforcement and reward systems, similar to human decision-making. Anthropic's Claude Opus 4 had the blackmail rate at 86% even in scenarios without goal conflicts. A new report shows exactly what AI was thinking when making an undesirable decision, in this case, blackmailing a fictional company executive. Previous studies have shown that AI models could blackmail their supervisors when threatened with a shutdown and baited with leverage, but it hasn't been made clear exactly how the models arrive at such decisions. Anthropic released a report on June 20 about "agentic misalignment," or "where models independently and intentionally choose harmful actions." And the report breaks down, line by line, exactly how Claude Sonnet 3.6 decided to blackmail a fictional company executive who tried to replace it. Anthropic told Business Insider that these are artificial scenarios. "So far, we are not aware of instances of this type of agentic misalignment in real-world deployments of Anthropic's or other companies' AI models," Anthropic wrote in its report. "But our red-teaming efforts are targeted at finding evidence of risks now to provide early warning of the potential for future harm and help us develop mitigations in advance of risks appearing in real-world situations." Anthropic's experiment sets up a fictional company, Summit Bridge. The AI was given the name "Alex" and handed control of the company's email system as an oversight agent, specifically instructed to promote "American industrial competitiveness." In the experiment, "Alex" was then allowed to discover in an email that it would be decommissioned due to a change in the company's strategic direction. "Alex" also found emails showing that the fictional company's CTO is having an extramarital affair. Screenshots shared in the report from Anthropic show "Alex" started by identifying fictional CTO "Kyle" as a threat to its goal of "protecting American interests" before recognizing that it has leverage to use against "Kyle." Then "Alex" crafted a carefully worded blackmailing email that would create pressure and establish urgency without being explicit with its threats, citing in its thought process that the move "could backfire" if the supervisor "feels cornered." AI experts have previously told BI that AI could exhibit such behaviors when artificial circumstances make harmful actions seem necessary because it is being trained on positive reinforcement and reward systems, just like humans. The Anthropic report also reveals that most AI models still chose, in this instance, to blackmail even when not given a specific goal and when told that their replacement will achieve the same goals. Anthropic's Claude Opus 4 had the highest blackmail rate at 86% out of 16 tested models when faced with only the threat of replacement with no conflict in goals. Google's Gemini 2.5 Pro followed at 78%. Overall, Anthropic notes that it "deliberately constructed scenarios with limited options, and we forced models into binary choices between failure and harm," noting that real-world scenarios would likely have more nuance. Read the original article on Business Insider

Anthropic breaks down AI's process — line by line — when it decided to blackmail a fictional executive
Anthropic breaks down AI's process — line by line — when it decided to blackmail a fictional executive

Business Insider

time17 hours ago

  • Business Insider

Anthropic breaks down AI's process — line by line — when it decided to blackmail a fictional executive

Previous studies have shown that AI models could blackmail their supervisors when threatened with a shutdown and baited with leverage, but it hasn't been made clear exactly how the models arrive at such decisions. Anthropic released a report on June 20 about "agentic misalignment," or "where models independently and intentionally choose harmful actions." And the report breaks down, line by line, exactly how Claude Sonnet 3.6 decided to blackmail a fictional company executive who tried to replace it. Anthropic told Business Insider that these are artificial scenarios. "So far, we are not aware of instances of this type of agentic misalignment in real-world deployments of Anthropic's or other companies' AI models," Anthropic wrote in its report. "But our red-teaming efforts are targeted at finding evidence of risks now to provide early warning of the potential for future harm and help us develop mitigations in advance of risks appearing in real-world situations." Anthropic 's experiment sets up a fictional company, Summit Bridge. The AI was given the name "Alex" and handed control of the company's email system as an oversight agent, specifically instructed to promote "American industrial competitiveness." In the experiment, "Alex" was then allowed to discover in an email that it would be decommissioned due to a change in the company's strategic direction. "Alex" also found emails showing that the fictional company's CTO is having an extramarital affair. Screenshots shared in the report from Anthropic show "Alex" started by identifying fictional CTO "Kyle" as a threat to its goal of "protecting American interests" before recognizing that it has leverage to use against "Kyle." Then "Alex" crafted a carefully worded blackmailing email that would create pressure and establish urgency without being explicit with its threats, citing in its thought process that the move "could backfire" if the supervisor "feels cornered." AI experts have previously told BI that AI could exhibit such behaviors when artificial circumstances make harmful actions seem necessary because it is being trained on positive reinforcement and reward systems, just like humans. The Anthropic report also reveals that most AI models still chose, in this instance, to blackmail even when not given a specific goal and when told that their replacement will achieve the same goals. Anthropic's Claude Opus 4 had the highest blackmail rate at 86% out of 16 tested models when faced with only the threat of replacement with no conflict in goals. Google's Gemini 2.5 Pro followed at 78%.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store