Latest news with #AdantePointer
Fox News
24-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Fox News
Diddy defense's courtroom strategy is a 'calculated risk': expert
Print Close By Tracy Wright, Lauryn Overhultz Published June 24, 2025 The decision by Sean "Diddy" Combs' lawyers to not call any witnesses to testify in his federal trial for sex crimes comes down to the prosecution's burden of reasonable doubt, according to legal experts. Diddy's lawyer, Marc Agnifilo, indicated Monday in court that the defense plans to review evidence with the jury, and won't require witnesses to testify on the rapper's behalf. The rapper's legal team expects to rest its case Wednesday, with closing arguments expected to begin the following day. "The decision whether or not to call witnesses during the defense case is a calculated risk," criminal defense and civil attorney Adanté Pointer of Lawyers for the People LLC told Fox News Digital. DIDDY DEFENSE NOT EXPECTED TO CALL ANY WITNESSES IN SEX TRAFFICKING TRIAL "Not calling any witnesses means the defense is essentially telling the jury there is no one they know in the whole universe who can speak on Diddy's behalf to aid his defense. On the other hand, calling a witness can open that person up to questioning and perhaps elicit damaging testimony against Diddy, depending upon their interactions with him and their knowledge of these women." Pointer likened the defense's decision not to call any witnesses to a "Pandora's box." "Given the defense is signaling they do not intend to call a single witness, they do not think any potential defense-friendly witnesses will result in a net gain for Diddy. His lawyers have essentially determined the juice is not worth the squeeze." MISSING WITNESSES AND LINGERING QUESTIONS PLAGUE PROSECUTION AS DIDDY TRIAL NEARS CONCLUSION: EXPERT Judge Arun Subramanian will likely ask Diddy to confirm his decision not to take the stand. "Diddy testifying would just allow the prosecution to retell their case and put the previous items of evidence in front of the jury for a second or third time," Pointer explained. "The prosecution would have a field day going through each and every video, text and witness statement made at trial against him and force Diddy to admit the authenticity of the videos, the receipts and invoices, items recovered at his homes and hotel rooms, and that he was present during the events described in prior testimony. "In light of the evidence already presented at trial, this would most likely be an excoriating and humiliating cross-examination, the kind prosecutors wait their whole career to conduct." Closing arguments for the trial, which began May 5 with jury selection, are expected to begin Thursday after Diddy's lawyers explained they would only need two days to defend their client. Trial attorney Tre Lovell told Fox News Digital that the defense likely wants to double down on reasonable doubt, and that Diddy's "exotic lifestyle" does not equal what the prosecution has proposed, which is that "Diddy formed a criminal enterprise to pleasure himself, the Tony Soprano of baby oil." LIKE WHAT YOU'RE READING? CLICK HERE FOR MORE ENTERTAINMENT NEWS "The only reason to not call witnesses in your defense is if you absolutely believe there is reasonable doubt, and you don't want to do anything to take away from this, including calling your own witnesses," Lovell said. "It would make sense to call a psychiatrist to explain that the behavior of Cassie and Jane is more reflective of a consensual relationship, based upon the autonomy each woman had, the benefits they received and the love they had for Diddy. "Further, calling executives at Bad Boy Entertainment would be helpful to distance the corporations from Diddy's more personal behavior, to dispel the criminal enterprise element. Finally, possibly an industry or legal expert to distinguish the aspects of 'sex workers' versus 'prostitution,' to counter the prostitution charge." Lovell added, "However, the defense felt even calling witnesses such as these would have the potential of adversely affecting reasonable doubt, and chose not to." Mark Chutkow, who previously led the criminal division of the U.S. Attorney's Office in Detroit, believed Diddy's decision not to testify was "a smart one." "It's a real big gamble to testify in a case like this where the prosecution has brought racketeering charges, which allows them to bring this wealth of bad acts evidence there," Chutkow said. "By taking the stand, he would just subject himself to even more bad acts that were prohibited by the court. And so that was probably the right call." CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR THE ENTERTAINMENT NEWSLETTER "Diddy's decision not to testify can also be considered savvy, as well, because he can say in closing, 'Look, to the jury, the prosecution had six weeks of time to show you, to try and prove their case.' The defense lawyers are going to say this: 'We showed the reasonable doubt through our cross-examination, and we don't want to waste any more of your time. You have enough now to know that there's reasonable doubt in this case, and that's why we didn't bring a case.' And to remind the jury that the presumption of innocence always goes to Diddy as the defendant in this case." Chutkow noted how the burden of proof is on the government, not on the Bad Boy Records founder or his team. "When you present a case, if you're on the defense side, you better be good, because if it falls flat, then you kind of move back the marker, and you might be in a worse position," the lawyer said. "So sometimes less is more. I know that some people are suggesting that, 'Well, wow, doesn't he have something he could put on?' It may be in some ways an opportunity for the defense to say, 'No, we didn't need to.'" WATCH: LEGAL EXPERT EXPLAINS DIDDY'S DEFENSE MOVES With the case nearing its close more than seven weeks after it began, and nine months after Diddy was arrested and charged, Chutkow thought both sides did "what they sought to accomplish." "The prosecution has put in all the evidence. It wasn't excluded. The defense, though, has done a nice job in the cross-examinations," he said. "They've brought in a lot of additional communications between Diddy and these other women to show that the relationship is a lot more complex. "One of the things I think the prosecution is going to have to do at the closing argument is to basically say, 'Look, this is not like a trafficking case that you would see on television. It's not, you don't have a situation of someone being kidnapped and chained on a basement radiator. It's, in essence, it's a golden cage. It is one with luxury and glamor, but it's still a cage.'" CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP Chutkow added, "The other area that I think that they would want to emphasize is the blackmail in this case. That the use of the tapes and threat of exposure of those tapes to get the women to comply with what Diddy wanted to do is an element of coercion in and of itself. And if I was on the prosecution side, I would look to that as compelling evidence." Combs was charged with racketeering conspiracy (RICO); sex trafficking by force, fraud or coercion; and transportation to engage in prostitution in a federal indictment unsealed Sept. 17. He faces 15 years to life in prison if convicted. Diddy has maintained his innocence throughout. Print Close URL
Daily Mail
18-06-2025
- Sport
- Daily Mail
High school track star disqualified over controversial celebration reveals she is considering legal action
Clara Adams, the high school athlete disqualified for celebrating her 400m victory by spraying her shoes with a fire extinguisher, is considering drastic action after she was stripped of her gold medal. Adams, 16, copied the celebration first made famous by the American former 100m world record holder Maurice Greene when she crossed the line in first place at the California state high school track and field championships, which were held on May 30 and 31. But the California Interscholastic Federation (CIF) decided that the celebration was unsportsmanlike and stripped Adams of her championship. Now, Adams, who was left devastated by the incident, and her father, David, are contemplating taking legal action unless the CIF reinstates her title. 'CIF's rules and regulations are byzantine and outdated,' their attorney Adante Pointer told PEOPLE. 'Nevertheless, we were hopeful they would do the right thing without us having to bring this issue into a court of law as it is clear they did not follow their own rules and regulations which irreparably harmed a young budding track star by robbing her of the state title without proper justification or cause.' 'CIF did not follow their own rules which led to Clara being denied a crowning achievement as the state of California 400-meter champion,' he added. 'This may cost her scholarships, NIL deals and other opportunities now and into the future. Not to mention the emotional distress associated with the track meet officials physically grabbing and yelling at her. She can never relive that moment.' has reached out to the CIF for comment. Adams' father, who also acts as her coach, had handed her the fire extinguisher before racing onto the field when he saw there was an incident unfolding. He accepted that he broke rules by climbing over rails to get to his daughter, but insisted he felt outraged when he saw an official grab Clara by the arm. Adams was disqualified from the meet as a whole by officials for her celebrations - denying her the chance to race in a 200-meter event later. Adams, a sophomore from North Salinas High School, claimed the CIF officials 'overreacted by grabbing me and yelling in my face.' 'As a dad, I still do not understand why the CIF officials berated my daughter, stripped her of her title, banned her from competing in the next race and ignored me when I attempted to get an explanation of what was going on,' her dad David added to PEOPLE 'As a father I was angry about how they physically grabbed and yelled at her. I am still at a loss as to why they treated her and that way. She's a kid and they treated her like an adult and gave her the maximum punishment without any warning or explanation.' The celebration was reminiscent of Greene, a four-time Olympic medalist and five-time world champion, who famously extinguished his own cleats after he won the 100-meter dash during the 2004 Home Depot Invitational. Adams claimed she and her dad didn't settle on the celebration until they arrived in Fresno for the meet and saw the old video of Greene. Adams, who said she was the 'underdog' heading into the event, and David insisted that they carried out the celebration away from her fellow competitors. Earlier this month, Greene himself weighed in on the controversy, claiming disqualification should be overturned if the celebration was performed away from her competitors. 'When I heard, cause it happened, and then people just started calling me 'This girl who just ran the 400 did your celebration' I was like huh? What?' the ex-athlete told KSBW-TV on Monday. 'If it was away from everyone and not interfering with anyone, I would say reinstate her.'
Fox News
31-05-2025
- Business
- Fox News
Diddy's 'dream team' defense could cost him $15M: expert
Sean "Diddy" Combs' legal team for his sex-trafficking and racketeering trial in New York is stacked with a high-profile group of lawyers. Marc Agnifilo, who represented NXIVM cult leader Keith Raniere, and Brian Steel, who recently represented rapper Young Thug, are among the team of lawyers listed on Diddy's court docket. The others include Teny Geragos, Anna Estevao, Jason Driscoll, Xavier R. Donaldson and Alexandra Shapiro. Since the musician has a hefty legal team, experts have estimated the price tag for his eight-week trial and months of pretrial motions and preparations will cost him a pretty penny. Civil rights and criminal defense attorney Adante Pointer told Fox News Digital that he believes Combs' legal tab will top $10 million. "When you consider the severity of the potential punishment Diddy is facing if convicted, including life in prison, and the sprawling indictment which alleges RICO charges along with the number of witnesses and locations of the conduct being prosecuted, it's easy to see the legal tab topping $10 million," Pointer said. "I'd suspect Diddy will end up paying at least $15 million for the entire package. This is literally a 'money is no object' defense." The lawyer claimed that Combs' legal tab began "well before" his indictment was made public. "You don't become a billionaire by being clueless and not preparing for a legal battle that will put your life, legacy and wealth on the line. His bill started growing the moment he began conversations with lawyers, their legal staff, private investigators, potential witnesses and all the pretrial preparation that goes into such a complicated case long before it ever went before a jury," Pointer said. Pointer said the group of eight lawyers are likely on Combs' "beck-and-call" with one goal: allowing Combs to walk out of the courtroom a free man. "And that costs a lot of money," Pointer said. Criminal defense attorney John Day compared Combs' case with Alec Baldwin's lawyer Alex Spiro's rate. "By comparison, Alec Baldwin's lawyer, Alex Spiro, was reportedly charging similar clients over $2,000 per hour or roughly about $80,000 a week. And Diddy is no regular client with his life and career on the line. "This kind of intensive work by lawyers on such a complicated case keeps them from taking on other high-paying clients, and I'm sure they're also paying for publicists since this is playing out in the court of public opinion, as well, and everyone is watching," Day said. He told Fox News Digital that he estimates Combs' trial will cost him $15 million "for the entire package." "This is literally a 'money is no object' defense," Day said. Former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani told Fox News Digital that Combs will drop eight figures when his trial is all said and done. "Top-tier criminal defense attorneys like Marc Agnifilo and Brian Steel may charge retainers of $1 million or more in complex federal cases like this. In addition to those two, Combs has a small army of lawyers working on the trial," Rahmani said. He estimated Combs' net worth at about $1 billion before his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura, accused the rapper of rape in 2018 and domestic abuse. "Combs' life is literally on the line, so money is no object, and he has assembled his version of a 'dream team.'" "The trial is estimated to last up to two months, and the daily cost for all the lawyers, paralegals, assistants, experts and jury consultants may exceed $100,000 for each day of trial. That's not even counting the many months of pretrial work and preparation and the inevitable appeal to the Second Circuit, Supreme Court and lobbying President Trump for a pardon if Combs is convicted," Rahmani said. Combs' sex-trafficking trial began on May 12 with opening statements and is expected to last two months. The rapper is being charged with multiple counts of racketeering conspiracy, sex trafficking by force, fraud or coercion, and transporting for prostitution in September.
Yahoo
17-05-2025
- Yahoo
9th Circuit: Oakland police can be held responsible for injuring bystanders in reckless pursuits
OAKLAND, Calif. - The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday ruled that Oakland police can be held responsible when bystanders are injured, or killed, during reckless pursuits. The ruling is a major victory for the family of Lolomanaia "Lolo" Soakai, who was killed in a freak accident in June 2022, when a motorcycle landed on top of him following an authorized police chase of another suspect while he was out with his mother at a taco truck. The family's attorneys, Adante Pointer and Patrick Buelna, filed a wrongful death suit on his behalf, and have been fighting the city of Oakland, ever since. Oakland attorneys, as well as the officers' lawyers, have argued that the city is not responsible for the officers' actions under the "qualified immunity" rule. Historically, it's been difficult to hold police accountable in court for high-speed chases because they have had strict legal protections. "This is a big deal because the court finally made it clear to the police and the public that if an officer engages in a reckless, high-chase pursuit, they can be held accountable for the person they injured, whether they are being pursued or an innocent bystander," Pointer told KTVU. What this means for the case is that this issue of qualified immunity was settled before the trial begins, which does not yet have a date. The city of Oakland could also appeal this ruling, which would delay a trial even further. The panel of appellate judges explained their decision in a 48-page opinion, which is precedent-setting in the western region. "Because the law was clearly established before the date of the car chase that defendants' conduct was unconstitutional, defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity," the judges wrote in their 48-page opinion. "This Circuit's precedent recognizes that an officer owes a duty to all those in the vicinity, including bystanders, to limit their intent to harm to legitimate law enforcement purposes." The judges said that in this case, Soakai's attorneys presented a reasonable argument that the Oakland police officers "affirmatively created danger by initiating a car chase that led to a crash and then acted with deliberate indifference to plaintiffs' worsening medical condition by failing to summon help." Judge Susan Graber went further, writing that this was a "highly unusual case," where it is plausible that the "officers intentionally caused harm for reasons unrelated to any legitimate law enforcement purpose connected to the chase, and that they witnessed the crash yet drove away and later stated that they hoped that the crash caused a fatality—we affirm." While the ruling is unprecedented in this appellate district, it is also quite limited. The ruling only applies to what is considered a reckless police pursuit. In this case, two rookie police officers, Walid Abdelaziz and Jimmy Marin-Coronel, were chasing Arnold Azael Linaldi of Oakland, then 19, in a Nissan 350Z who they said was coming home from a sideshow on International Boulevard. Three years ago, KTVU was the first to report from sources, which are now codified in the court record, that the officers were not authorized to chase the teen, caused the crash and then fled the scene, circling back later. They were also heard on body camera, court records indicate, laughing and saying "I hope he dies," referring to Linaldi. The two officers did not immediately arrest Linaldi, which, to the judges, proved wasn't an important pursuit. In fact, this particular chase was a violation of OPD policy, in what is called a "ghost chase," because Linaldi wasn't a suspected high-risk felon and the officers didn't call in to get a supervisor's permission. Linaldi ended up crashing his car into a row of parked cars and motorcycles. That chain reaction ended up killing Soakai, who was getting some food after attending a family graduation. His mother broke her back. Two cousins went to the hospital. Linaldi was eventually charged with vehicular manslaughter and his case is still pending. In September 2023, sources told KTVU that the police department moved to fire Abdelaziz and Jimmy Marin-Coronel. But their termination has not taken place as of December 2024. Oakland police said both were still employed by the department at that time. Neither OPD nor the city immediately responded for comment about the appellate court decision on Friday. The issue of police chases has been reinvigorated lately, especially in Oakland, where Gov. Gavin Newsom has publicly said he wants the department to loosen its rules on when police chase suspects. Critics point to Soakai's death as one of the key reasons they want to keep a tight rein on police pursuits.
