The Moscow Murders and More

On Day 13 of Karen Read’s retrial, Massachusetts State Police Sgt. Yuri Bukhenik resumed his testimony, facing rigorous cross-examination by defense attorney Alan Jackson. Bukhenik, who supervised the investigation into the death of Boston police officer John O’Keefe, was questioned about the conduct of former Trooper Michael Proctor, who was dismissed for sending derogatory texts about Read during the investigation. Jackson challenged Bukhenik on his oversight responsibilities, highlighting that Bukhenik had not reprimanded Proctor at the time. Bukhenik defended the investigation's integrity, asserting that all evidence pointed in one direction, but acknowledged that failure to supervise could lead to investigative errors. The court also delved into the nature of Read's relationship with ATF agent Brian Higgins. Sgt. Bukhenik read aloud flirtatious text messages exchanged between Read and Higgins, which the defense presented to suggest a motive for a potential third-party culprit. The prosecution, however, argued that these messages indicated a strained relationship between Read and O’Keefe, supporting their theory that Read acted out of jealousy. Additionally, the defense questioned the timeline and discovery of taillight fragments from Read’s SUV, suggesting they were found only after the vehicle was impounded and snow had melted, casting doubt on the thoroughness of the initial investigation. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: The complete texts between Karen Read and Brian Higgins Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Opening statements in Sean "Diddy" Combs' federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial are set to commence today in Manhattan. Prosecutors allege that over two decades, Combs operated a criminal enterprise through his music and business ventures, coercing women into drug-fueled sexual encounters, some of which were filmed without consent. Key evidence includes a 2016 hotel surveillance video purportedly showing Combs assaulting his former partner, Cassie Ventura, who is expected to testify. The prosecution aims to establish a pattern of abuse and manipulation, highlighting events referred to as "Freak Offs," where victims were allegedly exploited and subjected to violence and intimidation. The defense, led by attorney Marc Agnifilo, is anticipated to argue that Combs' relationships and lifestyle choices were consensual, portraying him as a participant in mutual activities rather than a perpetrator of coercion. They may also contend that any violence in his relationships was reciprocal, framing it as domestic disputes rather than criminal acts. The trial, expected to last approximately eight weeks, will feature testimony from multiple witnesses, some under pseudonyms, and could involve the mention of various celebrities during proceedings. Combs has pleaded not guilty to all charges and faces a potential life sentence if convicted.. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Attorneys in Sean Combs' case set to present dueling narratives in trial openings Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Federal prosecutors have filed a motion to exclude testimony from Dr. Elie Aoun, a forensic psychiatrist and assistant professor at Columbia University, whom Sean "Diddy" Combs' defense team intends to call as an expert witness. The defense aims to have Dr. Aoun testify regarding Combs' mental state during the period of the alleged offenses, suggesting that Combs may have had diminished mental capacity. However, the government argues that Dr. Aoun's proposed testimony is inadmissible under the Insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984 and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 12.2, which govern the introduction of expert testimony related to a defendant's mental condition. Prosecutors contend that Dr. Aoun's opinions lack a reliable scientific basis and appear to be speculative, rendering them unsuitable for presentation to the jury. Additionally, the government asserts that allowing Dr. Aoun's testimony would effectively permit the defense to introduce a mental health defense without adhering to the procedural requirements mandated by law. They argue that the defense has not provided sufficient notice or evidence to support such a defense, and that Dr. Aoun's testimony would serve as a substitute for calling actual witnesses, thereby circumventing the rules of evidence. The prosecution maintains that admitting this testimony could mislead the jury and prejudice the government's case, and therefore, they urge the court to preclude Dr. Aoun from testifying at trial. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.276.0_1.pdf Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Federal prosecutors have filed a motion to exclude testimony from Dr. Elie Aoun, a forensic psychiatrist and assistant professor at Columbia University, whom Sean "Diddy" Combs' defense team intends to call as an expert witness. The defense aims to have Dr. Aoun testify regarding Combs' mental state during the period of the alleged offenses, suggesting that Combs may have had diminished mental capacity. However, the government argues that Dr. Aoun's proposed testimony is inadmissible under the Insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984 and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 12.2, which govern the introduction of expert testimony related to a defendant's mental condition. Prosecutors contend that Dr. Aoun's opinions lack a reliable scientific basis and appear to be speculative, rendering them unsuitable for presentation to the jury. Additionally, the government asserts that allowing Dr. Aoun's testimony would effectively permit the defense to introduce a mental health defense without adhering to the procedural requirements mandated by law. They argue that the defense has not provided sufficient notice or evidence to support such a defense, and that Dr. Aoun's testimony would serve as a substitute for calling actual witnesses, thereby circumventing the rules of evidence. The prosecution maintains that admitting this testimony could mislead the jury and prejudice the government's case, and therefore, they urge the court to preclude Dr. Aoun from testifying at trial. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.276.0_1.pdf Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On April 18, 2025, U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian denied Sean "Diddy" Combs' request to delay his upcoming sex trafficking and racketeering trial, which is scheduled to begin on May 5 in Manhattan. Combs' legal team had sought a two-month postponement, citing the need for additional time to prepare due to new charges and evidence introduced in a recent superseding indictment. However, Judge Subramanian rejected the request, stating that the defense, which includes multiple attorneys, has sufficient time to prepare and that the court would not permit a "fishing expedition" for more evidence. During the same hearing, Judge Subramanian made several other rulings affecting the trial proceedings. He allowed three alleged victims to testify under pseudonyms to protect their identities, while noting that Cassie Ventura, Combs' former girlfriend and a key accuser, will testify under her real name. The judge also denied the defense's motion to dismiss certain charges and ruled that outtakes from the documentary "The Fall of Diddy" are admissible as evidence. Combs, who has been held without bail since his arrest in September 2024, has pleaded not guilty to the charges, which include sex trafficking, transportation to engage in prostitution, and racketeering conspiracy. ​In April 2025, Cassie Ventura, identified as "Victim-1" in Sean "Diddy" Combs' upcoming federal trial, filed a motion to quash a subpoena issued by Combs' legal team. The subpoena demanded access to all drafts of her memoir, personal diaries, journals, notes, and ten months of her bank statements from 2023. Ventura's attorney, Douglas Wigdor, argued that the subpoena was overly broad and lacked specificity, asserting that Combs' team failed to demonstrate the admissibility or relevance of the requested materials. Wigdor emphasized that the defense did not specify what information they expected to find in these documents, making the request an unjustified intrusion into Ventura's private life. ​ to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Sean "Diddy" Combs back in court as judge denies bid to delay trial by two months - CBS New York Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

From the archives: 1-18-23 According to sources who are allegedly close to the investigation in some capacity, Bryan Kohberger sent DM's on instagram to one of the roommates numerous times in the weeks before the murders. Could this be the connection that investigators are looking for? Let's dive in and take a look! (commercial at 8:43) to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Idaho suspect Bryan Kohberger 'repeatedly messaged victim on INSTAGRAM before killings' | Daily Mail Online Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

From the archives: 5-9-23 News surrounding the trial of Bryan Kohberger has been sparse due to the gag order but the court filings made by both sides have given us a bit of a glimpse of what is happening behind the scenes. In this episode, we are taking a dive into Bryan Kohberger's new discovery request and what it could tell us about the strategy he hopes to deploy in his defense come trial time. (commercial at 8:28) to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Bryan Kohberger Claims State Withholding Evidence of His Innocence | Inside Edition Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In the initial hours after Bryan Kohberger's arrest, there was a frantic dash to try to find out as much information about him as possible. During that dash, those of us who were following along were able to get a glimpse of an instagram account that allegedly belonged to Bryan Kohberger. That same account was also following and interacting with Madison's account. A few hours later and that account was purged. In this episode, we hear from the Goncalves family who also saw that account and not only saw it, but they took screenshots as well. With many questions surrounding the motive in this case and the connection between the victims and the alleged murderer still in the air, could this be the glue that binds Bryan Kohberger? Let's dive in and give it a look. (commercial at 7:18) to contact me: bobycapucci@protonmail.com source: Idaho student murders suspect Bryan Kohberger followed victims on Instagram, says family - CBS News Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

From the archives: 1-12-23 Bryan Kohberger, the 28 year old man suspected of murdering four college students in their home in Moscow made an appearance in court today. While he didn't enter a plea, things were put into motion that will his next court appearance happen on June 26th, setting up a trial for the summer. (commercial at 6:58) to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Bryan Kohberger Court Appearance: No Bail for Idaho Suspect (lawandcrime.com) Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

When a prosecutor seeks to limit the alibi of a suspect, it means they are attempting to challenge or restrict the evidence or testimony that supports the suspect's claim of innocence. An alibi is a defense strategy in which the accused asserts that they were somewhere else at the time the crime was committed, thus making it impossible for them to have committed the offense.Here's a breakdown of what it typically entails: In this episode, we head back up to Idaho to check in on the Bryan Kohberger trial and the battle over his alibi that continues to rage inside of the courtroom. (commercial at 8:41) to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Attorneys in Idaho student homicides argue for pretrial wins | Idaho Statesman Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In his charging requests submitted to the court, Sean “Diddy” Combs and his legal team are seeking to shape the jury instructions in a way that narrows the scope of the government’s accusations and emphasizes the burden of proof required for a conviction. Central to the requests is the insistence that jurors be explicitly instructed not to infer guilt based on Diddy's celebrity status, past lifestyle, or media portrayals. The defense wants the judge to highlight that fame and wealth are not indicators of criminality, and that allegations alone—no matter how salacious or repeated—do not amount to evidence. Furthermore, they ask that any references to other alleged “bad acts” not directly charged in the indictment be carefully limited to prevent undue prejudice. The defense is also pushing for jury instructions that stress the presumption of innocence and the government’s obligation to prove each element of every charge beyond a reasonable doubt. They are particularly focused on the RICO charges, asking that the court clarify the complex nature of racketeering law and caution jurors not to convict based merely on association with others accused of wrongdoing. By parsing the instructions this way, Combs’ team is attempting to preemptively insulate him from the cumulative weight of the government’s broader narrative, which alleges years of systemic abuse, coercion, and criminal enterprise. Ultimately, these requests are a tactical maneuver to keep the trial tightly focused on the evidence at hand—and to limit the emotional or cultural weight the prosecution hopes to bring into the courtroom. to contact me: bobbycapucci source: gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.273.0.pdf Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In his charging requests submitted to the court, Sean “Diddy” Combs and his legal team are seeking to shape the jury instructions in a way that narrows the scope of the government’s accusations and emphasizes the burden of proof required for a conviction. Central to the requests is the insistence that jurors be explicitly instructed not to infer guilt based on Diddy's celebrity status, past lifestyle, or media portrayals. The defense wants the judge to highlight that fame and wealth are not indicators of criminality, and that allegations alone—no matter how salacious or repeated—do not amount to evidence. Furthermore, they ask that any references to other alleged “bad acts” not directly charged in the indictment be carefully limited to prevent undue prejudice. The defense is also pushing for jury instructions that stress the presumption of innocence and the government’s obligation to prove each element of every charge beyond a reasonable doubt. They are particularly focused on the RICO charges, asking that the court clarify the complex nature of racketeering law and caution jurors not to convict based merely on association with others accused of wrongdoing. By parsing the instructions this way, Combs’ team is attempting to preemptively insulate him from the cumulative weight of the government’s broader narrative, which alleges years of systemic abuse, coercion, and criminal enterprise. Ultimately, these requests are a tactical maneuver to keep the trial tightly focused on the evidence at hand—and to limit the emotional or cultural weight the prosecution hopes to bring into the courtroom. to contact me: bobbycapucci source: gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.273.0.pdf Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In his charging requests submitted to the court, Sean “Diddy” Combs and his legal team are seeking to shape the jury instructions in a way that narrows the scope of the government’s accusations and emphasizes the burden of proof required for a conviction. Central to the requests is the insistence that jurors be explicitly instructed not to infer guilt based on Diddy's celebrity status, past lifestyle, or media portrayals. The defense wants the judge to highlight that fame and wealth are not indicators of criminality, and that allegations alone—no matter how salacious or repeated—do not amount to evidence. Furthermore, they ask that any references to other alleged “bad acts” not directly charged in the indictment be carefully limited to prevent undue prejudice. The defense is also pushing for jury instructions that stress the presumption of innocence and the government’s obligation to prove each element of every charge beyond a reasonable doubt. They are particularly focused on the RICO charges, asking that the court clarify the complex nature of racketeering law and caution jurors not to convict based merely on association with others accused of wrongdoing. By parsing the instructions this way, Combs’ team is attempting to preemptively insulate him from the cumulative weight of the government’s broader narrative, which alleges years of systemic abuse, coercion, and criminal enterprise. Ultimately, these requests are a tactical maneuver to keep the trial tightly focused on the evidence at hand—and to limit the emotional or cultural weight the prosecution hopes to bring into the courtroom. to contact me: bobbycapucci source: gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.273.0.pdf Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In his charging requests submitted to the court, Sean “Diddy” Combs and his legal team are seeking to shape the jury instructions in a way that narrows the scope of the government’s accusations and emphasizes the burden of proof required for a conviction. Central to the requests is the insistence that jurors be explicitly instructed not to infer guilt based on Diddy's celebrity status, past lifestyle, or media portrayals. The defense wants the judge to highlight that fame and wealth are not indicators of criminality, and that allegations alone—no matter how salacious or repeated—do not amount to evidence. Furthermore, they ask that any references to other alleged “bad acts” not directly charged in the indictment be carefully limited to prevent undue prejudice. The defense is also pushing for jury instructions that stress the presumption of innocence and the government’s obligation to prove each element of every charge beyond a reasonable doubt. They are particularly focused on the RICO charges, asking that the court clarify the complex nature of racketeering law and caution jurors not to convict based merely on association with others accused of wrongdoing. By parsing the instructions this way, Combs’ team is attempting to preemptively insulate him from the cumulative weight of the government’s broader narrative, which alleges years of systemic abuse, coercion, and criminal enterprise. Ultimately, these requests are a tactical maneuver to keep the trial tightly focused on the evidence at hand—and to limit the emotional or cultural weight the prosecution hopes to bring into the courtroom. to contact me: bobbycapucci source: gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.273.0.pdf Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In his charging requests submitted to the court, Sean “Diddy” Combs and his legal team are seeking to shape the jury instructions in a way that narrows the scope of the government’s accusations and emphasizes the burden of proof required for a conviction. Central to the requests is the insistence that jurors be explicitly instructed not to infer guilt based on Diddy's celebrity status, past lifestyle, or media portrayals. The defense wants the judge to highlight that fame and wealth are not indicators of criminality, and that allegations alone—no matter how salacious or repeated—do not amount to evidence. Furthermore, they ask that any references to other alleged “bad acts” not directly charged in the indictment be carefully limited to prevent undue prejudice. The defense is also pushing for jury instructions that stress the presumption of innocence and the government’s obligation to prove each element of every charge beyond a reasonable doubt. They are particularly focused on the RICO charges, asking that the court clarify the complex nature of racketeering law and caution jurors not to convict based merely on association with others accused of wrongdoing. By parsing the instructions this way, Combs’ team is attempting to preemptively insulate him from the cumulative weight of the government’s broader narrative, which alleges years of systemic abuse, coercion, and criminal enterprise. Ultimately, these requests are a tactical maneuver to keep the trial tightly focused on the evidence at hand—and to limit the emotional or cultural weight the prosecution hopes to bring into the courtroom. to contact me: bobbycapucci source: gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.273.0.pdf Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

​In the motion filed on April 17, 2025, Sean Combs' legal team seeks to exclude video evidence related to a March 5, 2016 incident at the InterContinental Hotel in Los Angeles. The defense argues that the CNN footage presented by the government is inadmissible due to alterations, manipulations, and being out of sequence. They assert that CNN paid for, copied, and presented the footage in unknown ways, ultimately destroying the original, rendering it inaccurate. Additionally, the defense challenges two iPhone videos, claiming they are re-recordings of surveillance footage that differ materially from the CNN compilation. The defense contends that these videos cannot be authenticated under Federal Rule of Evidence 901, violate the "Best Evidence" Rule (Rule 1002) due to the absence of original footage, and should be excluded under Rule 403 as their prejudicial impact outweighs any probative value. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.243.0.pdf Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In a memorandum dated April 17, 2025, Sean "Diddy" Combs' legal team opposed a motion to quash a subpoena directed at Cassie Ventura, a key accuser in his upcoming federal trial. The defense argued that the subpoena, which sought drafts of Ventura's memoir, personal diaries, journals, and bank statements, was justified under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 17(c). They contended that these materials could contain information pertinent to Combs' defense, asserting that the requests were specific, relevant, and not oppressive. The defense emphasized that the subpoena aimed to uncover evidence that might challenge Ventura's credibility or provide context to her allegations.​ Furthermore, Combs' attorneys addressed concerns about the breadth of the subpoena, arguing that it did not constitute a "fishing expedition" but was a targeted effort to obtain materials directly related to the case. They maintained that the requested documents could reveal inconsistencies or motivations behind Ventura's claims, thereby playing a crucial role in ensuring a fair trial. The memorandum cited legal precedents supporting the admissibility of such evidence when it bears directly on the issues at hand. Ultimately, the defense sought to demonstrate that the subpoena was a legitimate tool for gathering evidence essential to Combs' defense strategy.​ to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.256.0.pdf Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The dive into the court documents continues in this episode as we once again discussing the gag order. This time, we are taking a look at Kohberger's response to the AP's attempt to act as an Intervenor. (commercial at 7:17) to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF (amazonaws.com) Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The dive into the court documents continues in this episode as we once again discussing the gag order. This time, we are taking a look at Kohberger's response to the AP's attempt to act as an Intervenor. (commercial at 7:17) to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF (amazonaws.com) Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The dive into the court documents continues in this episode as we once again discussing the gag order. This time, we are taking a look at Kohberger's response to the AP's attempt to act as an Intervenor. (commercial at 7:17) to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF (amazonaws.com) Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.