The Moscow Murders and More

Sean "Diddy" Combs has assembled a formidable legal team to defend him against federal charges of sex trafficking, racketeering, and related offenses. Leading the defense is Marc Agnifilo, a seasoned attorney known for representing high-profile clients such as NXIVM leader Keith Raniere and "Pharma Bro" Martin Shkreli. Joining him is Teny Geragos, daughter of renowned defense lawyer Mark Geragos, bringing experience from complex federal cases. Brian Steel, recognized for his defense of rapper Young Thug in a lengthy racketeering trial, adds his expertise to the team. Xavier Donaldson, a respected New York-based attorney with a strong background in criminal defense, also plays a key role. Additionally, Alexandra Shapiro, known for her appellate work, contributes her skills to the defense strategy. The team is further supported by jury consultant Linda Moreno, who assists in selecting an impartial jury. This high-powered legal team reflects the seriousness of the charges Combs faces and his commitment to mounting a robust defense. Legal experts estimate that Combs may spend over $10 million on his defense, considering the caliber of attorneys involved and the complexity of the case. Each lawyer brings a unique set of skills and experience, aiming to challenge the prosecution's narrative and protect Combs' interests throughout the trial. The defense is expected to scrutinize the credibility of witnesses and question the interpretation of evidence, including surveillance footage and testimonies from alleged victims. As the trial unfolds, this legal team will be instrumental in navigating the intricate legal landscape and advocating on behalf of Combs. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Sean 'Diddy' Combs legal team: Here are the lawyers defending hip-hop mogul - ABC News Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Sean “Diddy” Combs is facing near-certain conviction in his federal criminal trial, where he's charged with a sweeping racketeering conspiracy that includes arson, kidnapping, drug trafficking, and multiple sex-trafficking offenses. The case is being prosecuted by the Southern District of New York, and the evidence is stacked heavily against him—featuring surveillance footage of a brutal assault and testimony from four women who allege years of sexual abuse and coercion. Given the strength of the case and the fact that over 80 percent of federal prosecutions result in guilty verdicts, the odds are decisively not in Combs’ favor. His defense, despite being backed by elite attorneys, has little room to maneuver. The phrase “baby-oil defense” is used to underscore the perceived absurdity of any attempt to explain away the damning evidence—particularly claims that recorded acts of violence were somehow consensual or misunderstood. The courtroom strategy will likely try to blur intent or context, but with such severe allegations and extensive corroboration, that approach is unlikely to resonate with a jury. The prosecution appears well-prepared to dismantle any narrative of innocence Combs tries to offer. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Diddy’s Baby-Oil Defense Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On the fourth day of jury selection for Sean "Diddy" Combs' federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial, the process focused on narrowing down the remaining pool of 45 prospective jurors. Judge Arun Subramanian, along with prosecutors and defense attorneys, conducted in-depth interviews to assess potential biases, particularly concerning jurors' exposure to a 2016 video showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. Several candidates were dismissed due to their familiarity with the footage or personal experiences with sexual assault, which could affect their impartiality. The defense and prosecution utilized their peremptory strikes—ten for the defense and six for the prosecution—to finalize a panel of 12 jurors and six alternates. The selection process concluded on Friday, May 9, setting the stage for opening statements scheduled for Monday, May 12 Throughout the selection process, the court encountered a mix of serious and unexpected moments. Some prospective jurors shared personal traumas, including experiences with sexual assault, leading to their dismissal. Conversely, lighter moments emerged, such as a juror admitting to stealing a Harry Potter wand during their youth and another confessing to falling asleep while binge-watching a television series. Judge Subramanian even joked about the extensive list of names involved in the case, comparing it to a Tolkien novel. These instances highlighted the challenges of assembling an impartial jury for a high-profile case involving a celebrity defendant. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Diddy trial delayed as judge makes shock ruling on witnesses | Daily Mail Online Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On Day 12 of Karen Read’s murder retrial, Massachusetts State Police Sgt. Yuriy Bukhenik, the supervising investigator in the case, took the stand. He recounted arriving at Canton police headquarters approximately three hours after John O’Keefe’s body was discovered, where he and former Trooper Michael Proctor were shown evidence collected at the scene, including a broken cocktail glass, O’Keefe’s cellphone, and blood samples stored in Solo cups within a Stop & Shop bag. Bukhenik testified that upon learning O’Keefe was missing a shoe, he theorized that O’Keefe had been struck by a vehicle, a hypothesis he later demonstrated to the jury by presenting the missing shoe and the shirt O’Keefe was wearing at the time of his death During cross-examination, defense attorney Alan Jackson scrutinized Bukhenik’s oversight of the investigation, particularly focusing on his supervision of Proctor, who was later dismissed for sending inappropriate texts about Read. Jackson questioned Bukhenik about potential conflicts of interest, including the involvement of Canton Police Chief Ken Berkowitz, who had recused his department from the investigation due to familial ties to individuals connected to the case. Bukhenik defended the integrity of the investigation, asserting that it was conducted professionally and without bias, despite acknowledging that all individuals possess inherent biases to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Key investigator in Karen Read case questioned about cocktail glass theory | Fox News Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Document 315 in the case of United States v. Sean Combs is a juror questionnaire issued by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. This document is designed to screen and evaluate prospective jurors in advance of in-person voir dire. It includes detailed preliminary instructions reminding potential jurors not to include their names—only their juror numbers—and to answer all questions truthfully and thoroughly. The court emphasizes that some questions have multiple parts and must be fully completed. These instructions aim to preserve anonymity while allowing the court and attorneys to assess potential biases, prior knowledge, media exposure, and suitability for a trial expected to involve graphic allegations and significant media attention. The questionnaire likely includes sections on jurors’ personal backgrounds, experiences with law enforcement or the legal system, opinions on celebrity, exposure to the case through media, and potential conflicts that could prevent impartiality. Such documents are routine in high-profile federal cases, especially those involving allegations as serious as racketeering and sex trafficking. The responses help attorneys for both the prosecution and defense to determine which individuals may harbor biases—positive or negative—toward the defendant, the justice system, or the nature of the charges. In this case, the questionnaire is a critical step in selecting the panel that will ultimately decide the fate of Sean Combs. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.315.0.pdf Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The relationship between Usher and Sean "Diddy" Combs has come under scrutiny following Combs' recent arrest on charges of conspiracy and sex trafficking. Usher, who has had a professional relationship with Diddy since his teenage years, quickly made headlines when he deleted all of his posts on X (formerly Twitter) shortly after Combs' arrest. This sparked rumors that the move might be related to the scandal, given their close ties. However, Usher later claimed that his account was hacked and denied any connection between the deletions and Combs' legal troubles.. Usher has not been implicated in any crimes, but his past experiences living with Diddy as a young artist have resurfaced in discussions about the mogul's controversial history. He has previously spoken about witnessing wild parties and "curious things" during his time with Diddy in the 1990s, though he has maintained a distance from the current allegations. The controversy surrounding the alleged deleted Usher tweets stems from claims that the R&B singer posted a series of controversial messages on social media, which were quickly deleted. While specific details about the content of these alleged tweets vary, the general narrative suggests that they may have been offensive or insensitive in nature, sparking backlash and prompting Usher or his team to remove them. Afterward, rumors and discussions circulated about what was actually posted, leading to debates on social media. Some argued that screenshots of the tweets were fabricated or taken out of context, while others expressed disappointment or criticism of Usher based on the claims. So the question is, was content hidden or was Usher hacked like he says? to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Sean "Diddy" Combs was recently arrested on serious charges including sex trafficking, racketeering, and conspiracy, linked to his infamous "Freak Off" parties. According to the federal indictment, these parties involved transporting commercial sex workers across state lines and coercing victims into sexual acts, often under the influence of drugs. These events were reportedly elaborate, sometimes lasting several days, and involved extreme physical exertion and substance abuse, with some victims requiring IV fluids afterward. Diddy allegedly directed and recorded many of these acts without the knowledge of the participants. The fallout from these allegations has placed a spotlight on various high-profile individuals who have been associated with Diddy over the years. Some celebrities and politicians are now facing scrutiny for their connections to him. Among those mentioned are Kamala Harris, Hillary Clinton, and Donald Trump, who have all interacted with or publicly supported Diddy at different points in his career. Additionally, celebrities like Jennifer Lopez and Joe Budden have been linked to these parties, with some reports suggesting they may be subpoenaed for further testimony. While Diddy has denied the charges and is preparing to fight the case, the scandal is already having significant consequences in the entertainment and political worlds. The investigation continues to unfold, with more details likely to emerge about the extent of his connections and the involvement of others in his circle​. (commercial at 8:38) to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Did Diddy use the rich and famous to hide in plain sight? Star enjoyed A-list endorsements from Obama to Oprah Winfrey and British royals | Daily Mail Online Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene. Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.ecl Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene. Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.ecl Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene. Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.ecl Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene. Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.ecl Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene. Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.ecl Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Prosecutors in Sean "Diddy" Combs' federal sex trafficking trial have encountered a significant challenge: they are unable to locate a key witness, identified as "Victim-3." This witness was expected to provide crucial testimony regarding allegations that Combs coerced her into sexual acts. During court proceedings on May 7, 2025, Assistant U.S. Attorney Maurene Comey informed the judge that both the witness and her attorney have been unresponsive, and there's uncertainty about her appearance even if subpoenaed. This development raises concerns about the prosecution's ability to present a comprehensive case. Despite this setback, the prosecution plans to proceed with testimonies from other accusers, including Combs' ex-girlfriend Cassie Ventura. The absence of Victim-3's testimony could impact the prosecution's strategy, but they remain committed to presenting the available evidence. Combs faces serious charges, including sex trafficking and racketeering, and has pleaded not guilty. The trial continues as both sides prepare for opening statements scheduled for May 12. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Sean 'Diddy' Combs' prosecutors admit they may go to trial without key witness Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

This Friday, May 9, 2025, at 9 p.m. ET/8 p.m. CT, Dateline NBC will air a two-hour special titled “The Terrible Night on King Road”, offering exclusive new insights into the investigation of the 2022 murders of four University of Idaho students. The episode will feature never-before-seen evidence, including video, photographic, and digital materials that investigators say track the movements of the accused, Bryan Kohberger. Additionally, the special will include interviews with friends of the victims and in-depth analysis from criminology and genetics experts. A preview of the special is set to air on TODAY on Thursday, May 8 Correspondent Keith Morrison will also present interviews with former students who interacted with Kohberger. One such interview includes a former graduate student named Holly, who recounts meeting Kohberger at a pool party and receiving a text from him the next day with "peculiar" wording. The special aims to provide a comprehensive look into the case as Kohberger's trial approaches. He has pleaded not guilty to the charges. Dateline NBC has been covering this case extensively, and this upcoming episode promises to shed new light on the events leading up to the trial. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Video shows car resembling Bryan Kohberger’s around time of Idaho student murders Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On Day 11 of Karen Read’s murder retrial, the courtroom focused on digital forensic evidence, particularly the timing of a controversial Google search made by Jennifer McCabe, a key prosecution witness and former friend of Read. Digital forensics expert Jessica Hyde testified that the search query, “hos long to die in cold,” was conducted at approximately 6:24 a.m. on January 29, 2022. This timing aligns with the prosecution's timeline, suggesting the search occurred after John O'Keefe's body was discovered. Hyde clarified that earlier timestamps on McCabe's phone, such as 2:27 a.m., indicated when a browser tab was opened or moved to the background, not when the search was executed. The defense had previously argued that the search occurred earlier, implying foreknowledge of O'Keefe's death. Additionally, Massachusetts State Trooper Connor Keefe testified about evidence collected from the scene, including red plastic shards believed to be from Read's SUV taillight and a black Nike sneaker. Keefe's testimony aimed to support the prosecution's claim that Read struck O'Keefe with her vehicle. The defense questioned the integrity of the evidence collection process, noting inconsistencies such as the late discovery of taillight fragments and the lack of a thorough search of the house where O'Keefe was found. The day's proceedings highlighted the ongoing debate over digital evidence interpretation and the handling of physical evidence at the crime scene. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Forensic expert Jessica Hyde testifies at Karen Read trial about Jennifer McCabe's disputed Google search - CBS Boston Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On the third day of jury selection in Sean "Diddy" Combs' federal sex trafficking trial, the court progressed toward finalizing a pool of 45 qualified jurors. Judge Arun Subramanian conducted individual and group questioning, focusing on potential biases and jurors' ability to remain impartial despite extensive media coverage. Notably, several prospective jurors acknowledged familiarity with a 2016 surveillance video allegedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. While some jurors claimed they could remain unbiased, others were dismissed due to concerns about their impartiality. The court aims to seat 12 jurors and six alternates, with opening statements scheduled for May 12 . The day's proceedings also included unexpected moments. One potential juror revealed he worked at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, where Combs is currently held, leading to his dismissal. Another juror admitted to reposting a meme about Combs on social media, explaining he was "doomscrolling" at the time. Despite these revelations, the court completed the initial qualification phase, setting the stage for peremptory challenges to be exercised on Friday. Combs, who has been in custody since September 2024, faces charges including sex trafficking, racketeering, and transportation for purposes of prostitution. He has pleaded not guilty and could face life in prison if convicted . to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Diddy trial: When will jury selection in Sean Combs' case finalize? Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

During a closed-door meeting on Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian sternly reprimanded attorney Mark Geragos for comments made on his podcast, "2 Angry Men," regarding the prosecution team in Sean "Diddy" Combs' federal sex trafficking trial. Geragos, who represents Combs' mother and has been observed consulting with the defense team, referred to the all-female group of federal prosecutors as "a six-pack of white women." Judge Subramanian condemned the remark as "outrageous" and emphasized that such language would not be tolerated in any courtroom. He further warned Geragos that he would be monitoring future episodes of the podcast to ensure compliance with court decorum and to prevent any potential influence on the jury pool . Geragos attempted to justify his comments by suggesting that Combs feels targeted due to his race, stating that his observation was rooted in the client's perspective. However, the judge dismissed this rationale, reiterating the importance of maintaining professionalism and impartiality in legal proceedings. Prosecutors expressed concern over Geragos' public commentary, highlighting the podcast's substantial audience and the risk of prejudicing the jury. They also noted that Geragos discussed key evidence, including a surveillance video allegedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura, and criticized the prosecution's strategy. In response, the judge underscored the necessity for all legal representatives to refrain from extrajudicial statements that could compromise the fairness of the trial to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Diddy Trial Judge Snaps at Lawyer Who Discussed Prosecutors on TMZ - Business Insider Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The East Coast-West Coast hip-hop feud of the 1990s, primarily involving Tupac Shakur, Sean "Diddy" Combs, and The Notorious B.I.G., remains one of the most infamous sagas in music history. What began as a personal falling-out between former friends Tupac and Biggie after a 1994 shooting at Quad Studios in New York escalated into a deadly rivalry. Tupac believed Diddy and Biggie were involved in the ambush, fueling his anger and intensifying the conflict. After being bailed out of prison by Death Row Records' CEO Suge Knight, Tupac fully aligned himself with the West Coast and released the infamous diss track "Hit 'Em Up," publicly attacking Biggie and Bad Boy Records. As the feud gained national attention, gang affiliations on both sides deepened the animosity. Suge Knight’s provocations and media sensationalism only fueled the escalating tension between Death Row and Bad Boy. The rivalry ultimately culminated in the tragic murders of both Tupac and Biggie. Tupac was shot in Las Vegas on September 7, 1996, after a violent altercation with Orlando Anderson, a known gang member, and died six days later. Less than six months later, on March 9, 1997, Biggie was gunned down in Los Angeles after attending a party. Both murders remain officially unsolved, although recent developments, including the indictment of Duane "Keefe D" Davis in connection with Tupac’s death, have revived hope of uncovering the truth. The legacies of Tupac and Biggie continue to influence hip-hop, serving as stark reminders of the violent cost of fame and the dangerous intersection of music, street life, and power. Tupac Shakur's family has taken a significant step in seeking justice for the legendary rapper's 1996 death by hiring high-profile attorney Alex Spiro to dig deeper into the case. Despite decades of speculation, multiple conspiracy theories, and false leads, Tupac's murder remains officially unsolved. Recent developments, including new evidence and arrests, have prompted the family to bring in Spiro, known for his expertise in handling high-profile cases involving celebrities. His reputation as a sharp, tenacious attorney makes him an ideal choice for re-examining Tupac's murder, and the family hopes his involvement will help uncover details that the original investigation could not provide. The decision to hire Spiro follows the 2023 Las Vegas police search of Duane "Keffe D" Davis's home, which reignited interest in the case. Spiro is expected to work closely with the family and potentially collaborate with authorities to re-evaluate evidence, witness statements, and new leads. He may focus on challenging existing narratives and investigating overlooked connections to uncover fresh insights into the events that led to Tupac's fatal shooting in Las Vegas on September 7, 1996. The Shakur family's decision to hire Spiro highlights their determination to find answers and achieve closure in a case that has long remained unsolved, hoping that his involvement will bring long-awaited accountability to those responsible for Tupac's untimely death. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Tupac's family hires attorney Alex Spiro to find Diddy murder link | Daily Mail Online Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) is a United States federal law enacted in 1970 that provides for extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization. The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) is a United States federal law enacted in 1970 that provides for extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization.Under RICO, individuals and organizations can be charged with racketeering if they are found to have engaged in a pattern of illegal activity, such as bribery, extortion, fraud, or trafficking. A "pattern of racketeering activity" requires at least two acts of racketeering within a ten-year period. To take down a human trafficking network using RICO, law enforcement agencies would typically investigate the network's operations, identify key individuals involved, gather evidence of their illegal activities, and establish a pattern of racketeering. This evidence could include financial transactions, communications, witness testimony, and physical evidence linking the individuals to the trafficking activities. Once the evidence is compiled, prosecutors can bring RICO charges against the leaders and members of the trafficking network. If convicted, they could face significant criminal penalties, including imprisonment and forfeiture of assets. Additionally, RICO allows victims of the trafficking network to file civil lawsuits against the perpetrators, seeking damages for the harm they have suffered. This can provide victims with a means of seeking justice and compensation for their ordeal. In this episode we get some confirmation that there are witnesses cooperating with the federal government as far as their RICO investigation goes, and we also get more evidence that the timeline of the Lil Rod suit and the eventual raid was not coincidence, but in fact, connected. We also get a look at the list of allegations against Puffy over the past few years. Amidst Sean "Diddy" Combs' ongoing legal troubles, Ariel Mitchell-Kidd, the lawyer representing one of his accusers, disclosed that a "high-profile" individual was unknowingly recorded in a pornographic video at Combs' home. This revelation is part of a broader case involving multiple accusations of sexual assault and sex trafficking against Combs. The video, which is allegedly being offered for sale, has sparked interest due to the unknown identity of the prominent figure captured in it. The lawyer refrained from naming the individual but hinted at their higher profile than Combs. The case also includes disturbing allegations involving Combs' violent behavior, with reports suggesting that he assaulted one of his accusers with an inanimate object and directed others to commit further sexual acts against her. The incident is said to have occurred in 2018 but came to light only recently. Combs' defense team, while preparing for his sex trafficking and racketeering trial, is grappling with these additional accusations, complicating the legal landscape for the music mogul. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Diddy accuser's lawyer claims 'high-profile person' was present while 'pornographic' acts were performed at rapper's house | Daily Mail Online source: Sean 'Diddy' Combs' alleged victims 'talking a lot,' feds claim 'concrete, detailed, explicit allegations of sex trafficking' (nypost.com) Diddy raided: Here are all the allegations made against Sean Combs | The Independent Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene. Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.ecl Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.