Craig Boardman

So whether CNN doctored it, edited it, did whatever, Cassie can say it happened. Now, maybe their defense is Cassie's exaggerating and CNN edited it. I think they're doing what lawyers do. And what we all do is they're throwing every motion they can think of to make sure they can protect their client as much as possible.

Well, their theory, it has a tie-in to the evidence, and their theory has got to be that that video is related to the sex trafficking charge somehow, that that was a portion and part, and Cheyenne can probably talk about it more, but that video is directly related, that was one of the freak-off parties or something of that nature, or that shows the pattern of abuse that made her feel as though she had to participate in these sex-off.

Well, their theory, it has a tie-in to the evidence, and their theory has got to be that that video is related to the sex trafficking charge somehow, that that was a portion and part, and Cheyenne can probably talk about it more, but that video is directly related, that was one of the freak-off parties or something of that nature, or that shows the pattern of abuse that made her feel as though she had to participate in these sex-off.

Well, their theory, it has a tie-in to the evidence, and their theory has got to be that that video is related to the sex trafficking charge somehow, that that was a portion and part, and Cheyenne can probably talk about it more, but that video is directly related, that was one of the freak-off parties or something of that nature, or that shows the pattern of abuse that made her feel as though she had to participate in these sex-off.

It has the tie-in to the underlying charge. Generally, you cannot just bring in somebody's prior bad acts, bad conduct to try to show that they're a bad person. So some people could be arguing, oh, they're just bringing this bitty video to show he's a bad person. Normally, you can't do that. It's called a 404B evidence. And what that is...

It has the tie-in to the underlying charge. Generally, you cannot just bring in somebody's prior bad acts, bad conduct to try to show that they're a bad person. So some people could be arguing, oh, they're just bringing this bitty video to show he's a bad person. Normally, you can't do that. It's called a 404B evidence. And what that is...

It has the tie-in to the underlying charge. Generally, you cannot just bring in somebody's prior bad acts, bad conduct to try to show that they're a bad person. So some people could be arguing, oh, they're just bringing this bitty video to show he's a bad person. Normally, you can't do that. It's called a 404B evidence. And what that is...

As I mentioned, normally in trial, you cannot bring in somebody's prior bad acts, meaning prior dumb stuff that they have done, to make somebody convicted. Easiest way to think about it, if I have a client currently on trial for drug trafficking, they've sold crack, cocaine, marijuana, and let's say they've done it seven times in the past,

As I mentioned, normally in trial, you cannot bring in somebody's prior bad acts, meaning prior dumb stuff that they have done, to make somebody convicted. Easiest way to think about it, if I have a client currently on trial for drug trafficking, they've sold crack, cocaine, marijuana, and let's say they've done it seven times in the past,

As I mentioned, normally in trial, you cannot bring in somebody's prior bad acts, meaning prior dumb stuff that they have done, to make somebody convicted. Easiest way to think about it, if I have a client currently on trial for drug trafficking, they've sold crack, cocaine, marijuana, and let's say they've done it seven times in the past,

Well, if you're sitting on the jury and the prosecutor is able to say, well, he sold drugs six times in the past, stands the reason he probably did it again. The jury is more likely to be like, yeah, he's been doing this a long time. I think he did it this time. So the courts have said, normally, make sure you understand, state courts say, normally, you can't get into those prior bad acts at all.

Well, if you're sitting on the jury and the prosecutor is able to say, well, he sold drugs six times in the past, stands the reason he probably did it again. The jury is more likely to be like, yeah, he's been doing this a long time. I think he did it this time. So the courts have said, normally, make sure you understand, state courts say, normally, you can't get into those prior bad acts at all.

Well, if you're sitting on the jury and the prosecutor is able to say, well, he sold drugs six times in the past, stands the reason he probably did it again. The jury is more likely to be like, yeah, he's been doing this a long time. I think he did it this time. So the courts have said, normally, make sure you understand, state courts say, normally, you can't get into those prior bad acts at all.

Unless you have a reason to show that you're not trying to show somebody's bad character. And that's what 404b evidence. So if a prosecutor can say, we're not trying to show that Diddy's a bad person. We're trying to show motive, intent, that this wasn't an accident, absence of mistake. Those are the reasons.

Unless you have a reason to show that you're not trying to show somebody's bad character. And that's what 404b evidence. So if a prosecutor can say, we're not trying to show that Diddy's a bad person. We're trying to show motive, intent, that this wasn't an accident, absence of mistake. Those are the reasons.

Unless you have a reason to show that you're not trying to show somebody's bad character. And that's what 404b evidence. So if a prosecutor can say, we're not trying to show that Diddy's a bad person. We're trying to show motive, intent, that this wasn't an accident, absence of mistake. Those are the reasons.

So they say, prosecutors, give us a reason, a good reason, other than you're trying to show that he's a bad person for this to come in. This is why everybody says the strength of the federal system is scary. What I've just described to you was the state law system. You probably have heard them talking about another rule called 413, and I want to make sure I read this.

So they say, prosecutors, give us a reason, a good reason, other than you're trying to show that he's a bad person for this to come in. This is why everybody says the strength of the federal system is scary. What I've just described to you was the state law system. You probably have heard them talking about another rule called 413, and I want to make sure I read this.

So they say, prosecutors, give us a reason, a good reason, other than you're trying to show that he's a bad person for this to come in. This is why everybody says the strength of the federal system is scary. What I've just described to you was the state law system. You probably have heard them talking about another rule called 413, and I want to make sure I read this.

But rule 413 in the federal system, and remember I told you, normally you cannot get into someone's prior bad acts. 413. Similar crimes in sexual assault cases. In a criminal case in which a defendant is accused of sexual assault, the court may admit evidence that the defendant committed another sexual assault. The evidence may be considered on any matter of which it is relevant.