Now let's get to the latest on the federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial of Seawan Diddy Combs, a Diddy ex girlfriend. The latest using the pseudonym Jane, was back on the stand today. She described the drug fueled sexual parties called hotel nights she endured during her relationship with Seawan Diddy Combs. Jane says she felt pressure to have sex with other men. Chosho broke down in sobs as she recalled getting to spend time alone with Combs.

Now let's get to the latest on the federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial of Seawan Diddy Combs, a Diddy ex girlfriend. The latest using the pseudonym Jane, was back on the stand today. She described the drug fueled sexual parties called hotel nights she endured during her relationship with Seawan Diddy Combs. Jane says she felt pressure to have sex with other men. Chosho broke down in sobs as she recalled getting to spend time alone with Combs.

Afterwards, and just yesterday, the judge.

Afterwards, and just yesterday, the judge.

Threatened to exclude Combs from court if he kept trying to interact with the jury. Combs was seen nodding in the jury's direction during the testimony of a woman who said Combs dangled her over a balcony railing in twenty sixteen. During that testimony, it was revealed that Combs was actually in New York during the Bad Boy Reunion tour at the time she claimed the incident happened. Joining me to discuss the latest the Diddy trials is one of the best legal minds in America as far as I'm concerned. Legal analysts Destraordan there for ABC News obviously host sports and on ESPN as well.

Threatened to exclude Combs from court if he kept trying to interact with the jury. Combs was seen nodding in the jury's direction during the testimony of a woman who said Combs dangled her over a balcony railing in twenty sixteen. During that testimony, it was revealed that Combs was actually in New York during the Bad Boy Reunion tour at the time she claimed the incident happened. Joining me to discuss the latest the Diddy trials is one of the best legal minds in America as far as I'm concerned. Legal analysts Destraordan there for ABC News obviously host sports and on ESPN as well.

My buddy, the one and only, Ryan Smith. What's up, man? How are you? Hey?

My buddy, the one and only, Ryan Smith. What's up, man? How are you? Hey?

Man, good to talk to you. How you doing.

Man, good to talk to you. How you doing.

Let's get right to it. I'm good man.

Let's get right to it. I'm good man.

It's just that, it's it's just crazy to meet all of this Didney stuff. We just keep hearing more and more stuff. It's hard to listen to, to be honest with you, but what do you make of the testimony of the witnesses who says she was dangled over the balcony of her apartment. How incriminating is that against Diddy?

It's just that, it's it's just crazy to meet all of this Didney stuff. We just keep hearing more and more stuff. It's hard to listen to, to be honest with you, but what do you make of the testimony of the witnesses who says she was dangled over the balcony of her apartment. How incriminating is that against Diddy?

Yeah, Banna, that's really important for the prosecution's case. Why even though she wasn't somebody who said she was assaulted by him sexually?

Yeah, Banna, that's really important for the prosecution's case. Why even though she wasn't somebody who said she was assaulted by him sexually?

This shows the.

This shows the.

Four the violent endencies that the prosecution is saying Diddy has that this is what women were afraid of, that this is why people had that he had this threat of violence held over people. Because when you look at it from the prosecution's eyes, if he could dangle somebody off a balcony, imagine him what he might have threatened to do the Cassie if she didn't engage in the free costs or to Jane with what she's talking about with the hotel nights. Showing that and showing what happened for the prosecution is like saying, this is how dangerous this man is.

Four the violent endencies that the prosecution is saying Diddy has that this is what women were afraid of, that this is why people had that he had this threat of violence held over people. Because when you look at it from the prosecution's eyes, if he could dangle somebody off a balcony, imagine him what he might have threatened to do the Cassie if she didn't engage in the free costs or to Jane with what she's talking about with the hotel nights. Showing that and showing what happened for the prosecution is like saying, this is how dangerous this man is.

When you judge threatened to remove him and exclude him from trial because he thought his facial expressions and whatever you were influencing the jury. How big of a deal is that, if it is a big deal at all.

When you judge threatened to remove him and exclude him from trial because he thought his facial expressions and whatever you were influencing the jury. How big of a deal is that, if it is a big deal at all.

Yeah, I think that's huge because if the jury walks in one day and they don't see Diddy there, they wonder why, and they can't necessarily be told why, or the judge will give them an instruction but won't maybe not tell them all the details. But it goes to if you're on that jury, you're thinking, wait, why is there a change here? And any change I think in this case involving Diddy is bad for the defense. So with Diddy, the accusation is that he's nodding to the jury. And here's the thing. When you're a defendant, you cannot interact with the jury why because that makes it seem like you're trying to influence them in some way. Here's Diddy with this power, people know him of him, and if he's looking straight at you during number twelve, and he's not don't.

Yeah, I think that's huge because if the jury walks in one day and they don't see Diddy there, they wonder why, and they can't necessarily be told why, or the judge will give them an instruction but won't maybe not tell them all the details. But it goes to if you're on that jury, you're thinking, wait, why is there a change here? And any change I think in this case involving Diddy is bad for the defense. So with Diddy, the accusation is that he's nodding to the jury. And here's the thing. When you're a defendant, you cannot interact with the jury why because that makes it seem like you're trying to influence them in some way. Here's Diddy with this power, people know him of him, and if he's looking straight at you during number twelve, and he's not don't.

Believe that, don't I'm not saying I know that he did that, per se.

Believe that, don't I'm not saying I know that he did that, per se.

But when you talk about nodding for judges and for courtroom watchers, that's somebody trying to send an indication to somebody on the jury saying believe this or don't believe this, which could influence their decision.

But when you talk about nodding for judges and for courtroom watchers, that's somebody trying to send an indication to somebody on the jury saying believe this or don't believe this, which could influence their decision.

So in a way, the judge has to clamp down on the damn right.

So in a way, the judge has to clamp down on the damn right.

But damn right. I mean he got to sit there for weeks. He can't smile, he can't smirk, he can't nod his head. I mean for weeks at a time. Isn't that an.

But damn right. I mean he got to sit there for weeks. He can't smile, he can't smirk, he can't nod his head. I mean for weeks at a time. Isn't that an.

Impossible task to expect from a defendant where you can't have any kind of bodily communication whatsoever, affirming or denying anything.

Impossible task to expect from a defendant where you can't have any kind of bodily communication whatsoever, affirming or denying anything.

Is that not a bit unreasonable.

Is that not a bit unreasonable.

It's reasonable to be able to have a reaction to things, but to be turning to the jury and reacting to them is borderline influencing them.

It's reasonable to be able to have a reaction to things, but to be turning to the jury and reacting to them is borderline influencing them.

And that's the last thing you want.

And that's the last thing you want.

You want these juries jurors to be able to make any decision they want to make based on the evidence they're hearing, not based on the defendant looking at them telling them believe that, don't believe that. The thing here is Stephen A. We don't know exactly what he was doing in that courtroom. If he's turning and nodding and making indications to them, that's off limits.

You want these juries jurors to be able to make any decision they want to make based on the evidence they're hearing, not based on the defendant looking at them telling them believe that, don't believe that. The thing here is Stephen A. We don't know exactly what he was doing in that courtroom. If he's turning and nodding and making indications to them, that's off limits.

You can't do that.

You can't do that.

And before trial his defense team would have told him, hey, you can't make statements or do things to the jury or have loud out first, because they know that the judge will clamp down, because the judge doesn't want the jury being influenced. But having reactions being upset or being mad or crying or scribbling a note to your lawyer, that kind of stuff is affected eat that though, away from turning to the jury and trying to send an indication to them. And again we don't know what did he was actually doing.

And before trial his defense team would have told him, hey, you can't make statements or do things to the jury or have loud out first, because they know that the judge will clamp down, because the judge doesn't want the jury being influenced. But having reactions being upset or being mad or crying or scribbling a note to your lawyer, that kind of stuff is affected eat that though, away from turning to the jury and trying to send an indication to them. And again we don't know what did he was actually doing.

In that courtroom or what he might have been trying to do.

In that courtroom or what he might have been trying to do.

But the judge has to look at that and say any way in which you are reacting turning to them and making emotion is potentially trying to say to them, don't believe this, believe that, and possibly influencing their decision.

But the judge has to look at that and say any way in which you are reacting turning to them and making emotion is potentially trying to say to them, don't believe this, believe that, and possibly influencing their decision.

It can't have that.

It can't have that.

My next question is going to be in you know, just as a treat to to Diddy supporters out there, because just like R.

My next question is going to be in you know, just as a treat to to Diddy supporters out there, because just like R.

Kelly had his supporters, Diddy's got his.

Kelly had his supporters, Diddy's got his.

And you have a lot of people that's been listening to you and others talk about what's going on during this trial, reporting accurately on what's actually transpiring in the courtroom and in the case itself. It says, I am everybody's pointing the finger at Diddy. I mean, what about these other witnesses, what are they saying, How do we.

And you have a lot of people that's been listening to you and others talk about what's going on during this trial, reporting accurately on what's actually transpiring in the courtroom and in the case itself. It says, I am everybody's pointing the finger at Diddy. I mean, what about these other witnesses, what are they saying, How do we.

Know they're telling the truth? Et cetera, et cetera. I'll give you the latest example.

Know they're telling the truth? Et cetera, et cetera. I'll give you the latest example.

Diddy's defense team said proved that Diddy wasn't there. The defense actually provided receipts and asked a woman if he could be in two places at once once. They proved that he wasn't even in attendance at the time that she said this ordeal happened with them, and when they asked her that question, she said, theoretically, I mean, what does that mean?

Diddy's defense team said proved that Diddy wasn't there. The defense actually provided receipts and asked a woman if he could be in two places at once once. They proved that he wasn't even in attendance at the time that she said this ordeal happened with them, and when they asked her that question, she said, theoretically, I mean, what does that mean?

How incriminating is that against her?

How incriminating is that against her?

Yeah, that damages her testimony completely.

Yeah, that damages her testimony completely.

He can't be in two places at once, And the defense even said that can he be in LA and be in New York at the same time, no, and that kind of opens and shuts the door on her.

He can't be in two places at once, And the defense even said that can he be in LA and be in New York at the same time, no, and that kind of opens and shuts the door on her.

So that is you PHO for the defense. That's a big thing for the defense.

So that is you PHO for the defense. That's a big thing for the defense.

And you have to believe the jurors whether they think the outright made that up or they think, hey, your story's got to be dubious, mate, you had your dates.

And you have to believe the jurors whether they think the outright made that up or they think, hey, your story's got to be dubious, mate, you had your dates.

Different, something done that up here.

Different, something done that up here.

You never want a witness on the stand saying one thing happened and then the other team getting up and saying, well, I can prove he was somewhere else.

You never want a witness on the stand saying one thing happened and then the other team getting up and saying, well, I can prove he was somewhere else.

So yes, it's damaging for prosecutors. But here's the thing.

So yes, it's damaging for prosecutors. But here's the thing.

She was there to offer testimony about how he uses violence to intimidate people.

She was there to offer testimony about how he uses violence to intimidate people.

Other people have offered that evidence.

Other people have offered that evidence.

So for Diddy supporters out there who might say, hey, well this is proof that he was never violent, I don't know if it's proved that he was never violent. I think maybe it's proof that he wasn't violent in the way this person described on that date. But did he still has a whole lot of things to push back on to say that he didn't use threats and coercion to get people to do the things that he wanted them to do.

So for Diddy supporters out there who might say, hey, well this is proof that he was never violent, I don't know if it's proved that he was never violent. I think maybe it's proof that he wasn't violent in the way this person described on that date. But did he still has a whole lot of things to push back on to say that he didn't use threats and coercion to get people to do the things that he wanted them to do.

Today, the jury heard from Jane. Jane is the name.

Today, the jury heard from Jane. Jane is the name.

Who testified that Cole's threatened stop paying for her apartment if she didn't continue the hotel nights sleeping with other men.

Who testified that Cole's threatened stop paying for her apartment if she didn't continue the hotel nights sleeping with other men.

For his pleasure. However, it was revealed like you.

For his pleasure. However, it was revealed like you.

Said that Colmes was going to break up with her, and she continued with the hotel nights. What do you make of that she's gonna break up with her but she continued with the hotel nights.

Said that Colmes was going to break up with her, and she continued with the hotel nights. What do you make of that she's gonna break up with her but she continued with the hotel nights.

Anyway, does that help his case at all?

Anyway, does that help his case at all?

It does in some ways, but it also helps the prosecution. Let me back up, for everybody who hears James's testimony and starts reading it, what is important for prosecutors to prove here is a Rico conspiracy. That's a pattern that basically saying in a nutshell that Diddy is either assisting in or operating this sort of criminal enterprise, that other people are involved, and it's this pattern of criminal activity. Now, I want people to hang on to the word pattern. We saw Cassie up there for days talking about these tenant what she did with her. He started dating her, they start going out, he offers her the recording contracts, they start working together, and then he starts engaging her in these freak offs according to her, and starts using these threats and coercion, according to her, in terms of hey, you got to keep doing this or I'm going to take things away. Now we see Jane talking about the same thing. Even this is why I believe James's testimony is some of the most impactful testimony we're going to see in this trial, because she now is talking about exactly what Cassie was talking about, which makes it a pattern. So I know that people are gonna say, well, look, she could have withdrawn herself from the free cost, but look at what she's saying as to why she's saying, Well, he started dating me and then we had this relationship. Then part of the relationship became these other things that I had to do, these hotel nights, and then he would say, well, I'm going to take according to her, I'm going to take this housing away, I'm gonna take these things away.

It does in some ways, but it also helps the prosecution. Let me back up, for everybody who hears James's testimony and starts reading it, what is important for prosecutors to prove here is a Rico conspiracy. That's a pattern that basically saying in a nutshell that Diddy is either assisting in or operating this sort of criminal enterprise, that other people are involved, and it's this pattern of criminal activity. Now, I want people to hang on to the word pattern. We saw Cassie up there for days talking about these tenant what she did with her. He started dating her, they start going out, he offers her the recording contracts, they start working together, and then he starts engaging her in these freak offs according to her, and starts using these threats and coercion, according to her, in terms of hey, you got to keep doing this or I'm going to take things away. Now we see Jane talking about the same thing. Even this is why I believe James's testimony is some of the most impactful testimony we're going to see in this trial, because she now is talking about exactly what Cassie was talking about, which makes it a pattern. So I know that people are gonna say, well, look, she could have withdrawn herself from the free cost, but look at what she's saying as to why she's saying, Well, he started dating me and then we had this relationship. Then part of the relationship became these other things that I had to do, these hotel nights, and then he would say, well, I'm going to take according to her, I'm going to take this housing away, I'm gonna take these things away.

It's the same kind of thing.

It's the same kind of thing.

It's a pattern, and in a way, it requires jurors to look at this and say, these women were in a position where they didn't feel like they had a way out, and Steven, hey, let me touch on one other thing related to this. I think twenty thirty years ago, we might look at this case and say, well, why didn't someone just leave? Now, we tend to look at these cases differently. We look at cases like r. Kelly and we see grooming. We see how people are conditioned into certain behavior and then they start feeling like they can't leave situations.

It's a pattern, and in a way, it requires jurors to look at this and say, these women were in a position where they didn't feel like they had a way out, and Steven, hey, let me touch on one other thing related to this. I think twenty thirty years ago, we might look at this case and say, well, why didn't someone just leave? Now, we tend to look at these cases differently. We look at cases like r. Kelly and we see grooming. We see how people are conditioned into certain behavior and then they start feeling like they can't leave situations.

That's the case the prosecution is trying to build here.

That's the case the prosecution is trying to build here.

They're trying to show that Diddy is a person who strings people along, gets them in these relationships, gives them things, and then gets them in a situation that they feel they can't get out of, either by violence or coercion, financially or otherwise, and puts them in this untenable situation.

They're trying to show that Diddy is a person who strings people along, gets them in these relationships, gives them things, and then gets them in a situation that they feel they can't get out of, either by violence or coercion, financially or otherwise, and puts them in this untenable situation.

So is it possible, before I'll let you get on out of here, that the real thing that's incriminating with him is the age of these ladies at the time he started their relationships with them.

So is it possible, before I'll let you get on out of here, that the real thing that's incriminating with him is the age of these ladies at the time he started their relationships with them.

I'm guessing that, based on what you alluded.

I'm guessing that, based on what you alluded.

To in terms of how society was in the past, they would say it was consensual. Why couldn't you just walk away from this situation? And then you bring in the grooming element. Well, if you're somebody in your thirties and your forties. Somebody might not want to hear that. But if you're somebody in your teens and you started dating this gentleman, then obviously you're going to be perceived as being a bit more vulnerable, and as a result, he's going to be the person in a position of power who manipulated that power.

To in terms of how society was in the past, they would say it was consensual. Why couldn't you just walk away from this situation? And then you bring in the grooming element. Well, if you're somebody in your thirties and your forties. Somebody might not want to hear that. But if you're somebody in your teens and you started dating this gentleman, then obviously you're going to be perceived as being a bit more vulnerable, and as a result, he's going to be the person in a position of power who manipulated that power.

To take advantage of you.

To take advantage of you.

Is that a good way of, you know, basically drawing a synopsis of all of this and really crystallizing this for the viewers out there.

Is that a good way of, you know, basically drawing a synopsis of all of this and really crystallizing this for the viewers out there.

I think it's part of it, but I don't think it's all of it.

I think it's part of it, but I don't think it's all of it.

I think the fact that they were younger women may have made them a little bit more susceptible to his influence.

I think the fact that they were younger women may have made them a little bit more susceptible to his influence.

I think his power dynamic plays into part of.

I think his power dynamic plays into part of.

This, that a woman who's older could have also been swept into this power dynamic. And I think the way he conducted himself, at least according to the prosecution, but making a mistake, Stephen, As you watch these people testify, like Jane when she's talking about he had me take drugs across from LA to Miami. Now they're building the case of drug trafficking. When he talks about having her and then her later calling people escorts to come in from different places to do these hotel nights.

This, that a woman who's older could have also been swept into this power dynamic. And I think the way he conducted himself, at least according to the prosecution, but making a mistake, Stephen, As you watch these people testify, like Jane when she's talking about he had me take drugs across from LA to Miami. Now they're building the case of drug trafficking. When he talks about having her and then her later calling people escorts to come in from different places to do these hotel nights.

Now we're talking about the sex trafficking element.

Now we're talking about the sex trafficking element.

What you're seeing here When I talk about grooming, I'm talking about his mo O.

What you're seeing here When I talk about grooming, I'm talking about his mo O.

And they're trying to describe how did this.

And they're trying to describe how did this.

But I think age, while being a part of it, is not all of it. I think what it is is they're trying to describe how he got his hands into them and then in their mind, put them in a position where they couldn't get out, and that's how they're trying to build the Rico case, the sex trafficking case, the drug trafficking case, all of it is all based on him and his associates getting these people in a world that they couldn't get out of, and age is a part of that, But I don't think it's all of it.

But I think age, while being a part of it, is not all of it. I think what it is is they're trying to describe how he got his hands into them and then in their mind, put them in a position where they couldn't get out, and that's how they're trying to build the Rico case, the sex trafficking case, the drug trafficking case, all of it is all based on him and his associates getting these people in a world that they couldn't get out of, and age is a part of that, But I don't think it's all of it.

Last question, We've seen so much and we hear so much, and it just appears to be getting more and more incriminating for showing Dinny Combs by the day. But that's through the lens of the prosecution. When are we going to start seeing things through the lens of the defense team.

Last question, We've seen so much and we hear so much, and it just appears to be getting more and more incriminating for showing Dinny Combs by the day. But that's through the lens of the prosecution. When are we going to start seeing things through the lens of the defense team.

I think it's going to be at least a week.

I think it's going to be at least a week.

I think you can expect Jane to be on the stand for another couple of days. And when you talk about the lens of the defense team, just like we saw with Cassie, we saw Cassie getting grilled on the stand by the defense. We hear we heard about Mia getting grilled on the stand by the defense wanting to be the same with Jane, because Jane has a lot of text messages going back and forth talking about their relationships. Jane talks about how she over time started booking the escort herself. According to her, that was so she control at least know the men that she would be kind of coerced into engaging in these hotel nights with The defense is gonna turn that and they're gonna say, look, but you're calling these experts.

I think you can expect Jane to be on the stand for another couple of days. And when you talk about the lens of the defense team, just like we saw with Cassie, we saw Cassie getting grilled on the stand by the defense. We hear we heard about Mia getting grilled on the stand by the defense wanting to be the same with Jane, because Jane has a lot of text messages going back and forth talking about their relationships. Jane talks about how she over time started booking the escort herself. According to her, that was so she control at least know the men that she would be kind of coerced into engaging in these hotel nights with The defense is gonna turn that and they're gonna say, look, but you're calling these experts.

You're saying, are we doing this?

You're saying, are we doing this?

And you can't later come back and say it was non consensual because you were in this relationship with him for three years, as you said, Steven, why didn't she get out?

And you can't later come back and say it was non consensual because you were in this relationship with him for three years, as you said, Steven, why didn't she get out?

They're gonna be questions like that.

They're gonna be questions like that.

The defense is gonna press on, and they're gonna press hard because the defense knows what's getting out there, the impression that Sean Dittycombs controls these people, that he has a whole pattern of doing these things, that he uses all these associates to do these things, and that's the recal conspiracy. They have to knock that down by essentially hitting on one key point all of this was consensual, that he strongly denies all of this, and that all of this was what the women wanted to do and wanted to do with him.

The defense is gonna press on, and they're gonna press hard because the defense knows what's getting out there, the impression that Sean Dittycombs controls these people, that he has a whole pattern of doing these things, that he uses all these associates to do these things, and that's the recal conspiracy. They have to knock that down by essentially hitting on one key point all of this was consensual, that he strongly denies all of this, and that all of this was what the women wanted to do and wanted to do with him.

So the defense is going to get that chance when they cross examine her.

So the defense is going to get that chance when they cross examine her.

And I would say, if that doesn't happen today, it's gonna happen early next week. But it's gonna be aggressive, it's gonna be strong, because that's exactly what they did with Cassie.

And I would say, if that doesn't happen today, it's gonna happen early next week. But it's gonna be aggressive, it's gonna be strong, because that's exactly what they did with Cassie.

Ryan Smith, legal analysts extraorda there.

Ryan Smith, legal analysts extraorda there.

For ABC News and of course Sports Center anchor for ESPN. Appreciate you as always, have a wonderful week, and man, look forward to talking to you next week.

For ABC News and of course Sports Center anchor for ESPN. Appreciate you as always, have a wonderful week, and man, look forward to talking to you next week.

You take care yourself, you too, man, Take care

You take care yourself, you too, man, Take care