Anoushka Mutanda-Dougherty

And that wasn't the only ruining because we have Victim One again. Now, we've said before the testimony of Victim One or the allegations from Victim One closely align with those made by Cassie Ventura, the longtime romantic partner of Diddy. It says Victim One's motion to quash is denied as to prior drafts of the memoir that was provided to the government and otherwise granted.

And that wasn't the only ruining because we have Victim One again. Now, we've said before the testimony of Victim One or the allegations from Victim One closely align with those made by Cassie Ventura, the longtime romantic partner of Diddy. It says Victim One's motion to quash is denied as to prior drafts of the memoir that was provided to the government and otherwise granted.

And that wasn't the only ruining because we have Victim One again. Now, we've said before the testimony of Victim One or the allegations from Victim One closely align with those made by Cassie Ventura, the longtime romantic partner of Diddy. It says Victim One's motion to quash is denied as to prior drafts of the memoir that was provided to the government and otherwise granted.

The prior drafts should be produced by April 25th, 2025. So the judge has said you need to produce the previous drafts of the memoir and give them to the defence? Yes.

The prior drafts should be produced by April 25th, 2025. So the judge has said you need to produce the previous drafts of the memoir and give them to the defence? Yes.

The prior drafts should be produced by April 25th, 2025. So the judge has said you need to produce the previous drafts of the memoir and give them to the defence? Yes.

And you mentioned there briefly another motion that was granted for Diddy to see the outtakes of a documentary that was made by Warner Brothers, Discovery Inc., the downfall of Diddy. We covered it on the podcast. He was asking to see the outtakes of TV interviews that they did with two people, person A and person B. One of them is a chef of Diddy's and one of them was a previous romantic partner.

And you mentioned there briefly another motion that was granted for Diddy to see the outtakes of a documentary that was made by Warner Brothers, Discovery Inc., the downfall of Diddy. We covered it on the podcast. He was asking to see the outtakes of TV interviews that they did with two people, person A and person B. One of them is a chef of Diddy's and one of them was a previous romantic partner.

And you mentioned there briefly another motion that was granted for Diddy to see the outtakes of a documentary that was made by Warner Brothers, Discovery Inc., the downfall of Diddy. We covered it on the podcast. He was asking to see the outtakes of TV interviews that they did with two people, person A and person B. One of them is a chef of Diddy's and one of them was a previous romantic partner.

The judge has granted that he is now allowed to see those outtakes.

The judge has granted that he is now allowed to see those outtakes.

The judge has granted that he is now allowed to see those outtakes.

Well, so these are kind of in his favor. So he's had a few little wins.

Well, so these are kind of in his favor. So he's had a few little wins.

Well, so these are kind of in his favor. So he's had a few little wins.

It's a weird thing as a journalist, that ruling, because when you have witness testimony and someone is alleging that terrible things have happened to them and you're trying to provide a space for them to tell their story, to hold potentially somebody in a position of power to account, the idea that that space you create could then be used as evidence in a trial, it almost damages that process and makes people more reluctant to use the press as an arm of interrogating.

It's a weird thing as a journalist, that ruling, because when you have witness testimony and someone is alleging that terrible things have happened to them and you're trying to provide a space for them to tell their story, to hold potentially somebody in a position of power to account, the idea that that space you create could then be used as evidence in a trial, it almost damages that process and makes people more reluctant to use the press as an arm of interrogating.

It's a weird thing as a journalist, that ruling, because when you have witness testimony and someone is alleging that terrible things have happened to them and you're trying to provide a space for them to tell their story, to hold potentially somebody in a position of power to account, the idea that that space you create could then be used as evidence in a trial, it almost damages that process and makes people more reluctant to use the press as an arm of interrogating.

Yeah.

Yeah.