Daniel Bates

And, you know, given the high profile of the case, I wouldn't be surprised if there were a few hiccups as well. But it seems that we're going to get weeks of jury selection before the trial even starts, you know, sometime in mid-May.

And, you know, given the high profile of the case, I wouldn't be surprised if there were a few hiccups as well. But it seems that we're going to get weeks of jury selection before the trial even starts, you know, sometime in mid-May.

Well, again, it wasn't quite clear. I think it was just during voir dire. I mean, I don't think the jury are going to be sequestered for the whole trial, but it's possible it may be for voir dire. So, I mean, it's an unusual move for a judge to do that, if indeed that is what happens. I mean, but I think it reflects the... the extremely, you know, high profile nature of this case.

Well, again, it wasn't quite clear. I think it was just during voir dire. I mean, I don't think the jury are going to be sequestered for the whole trial, but it's possible it may be for voir dire. So, I mean, it's an unusual move for a judge to do that, if indeed that is what happens. I mean, but I think it reflects the... the extremely, you know, high profile nature of this case.

I mean, I've seen plenty of juries who are anonymous. I remember, you know, multiple Trump cases and, you know, so it's not unusual. But if the jury is indeed sequestered, then that would be quite unusual.

I mean, I've seen plenty of juries who are anonymous. I remember, you know, multiple Trump cases and, you know, so it's not unusual. But if the jury is indeed sequestered, then that would be quite unusual.

Yeah, like I said, I think it sort of remains to be seen what has actually decided on that. But, you know, it would indeed be unusual.

Yeah, like I said, I think it sort of remains to be seen what has actually decided on that. But, you know, it would indeed be unusual.

Yeah, I think right at the end, Mark Agnifilo talked about, you know, voluminous amount of medical records that they'd obtained. And that's something they're going to be working through. And there was also a discussion about the... You know, the recording obtained by CNN of Didi attacking Cassie Ventura, his ex-girlfriend, in 2016 at a hotel.

Yeah, I think right at the end, Mark Agnifilo talked about, you know, voluminous amount of medical records that they'd obtained. And that's something they're going to be working through. And there was also a discussion about the... You know, the recording obtained by CNN of Didi attacking Cassie Ventura, his ex-girlfriend, in 2016 at a hotel.

You know, the judge didn't make a decision as to sort of whether or not that's going to be admitted. But Agnifilo said that the recording was deceptive and that it had been manipulated by CNN. He said that it had been made to look faster than it actually was and it was out of sequence. The prosecution described it as a critical piece of evidence.

You know, the judge didn't make a decision as to sort of whether or not that's going to be admitted. But Agnifilo said that the recording was deceptive and that it had been manipulated by CNN. He said that it had been made to look faster than it actually was and it was out of sequence. The prosecution described it as a critical piece of evidence.

Both sides said that they're going to try and work things out as to whether or not it's admitted. But, I mean, you know, what's clear is that it's a much disputed piece of evidence that is central to the case. Prosecutors said that they're going to have witnesses testifying about it. You know, we may see Cassie herself give evidence. That's not clear yet.

Both sides said that they're going to try and work things out as to whether or not it's admitted. But, I mean, you know, what's clear is that it's a much disputed piece of evidence that is central to the case. Prosecutors said that they're going to have witnesses testifying about it. You know, we may see Cassie herself give evidence. That's not clear yet.

But it seems like there's going to have to be a major ruling from the judge at some point as to whether or not that comes in. The other thing that caught my ear was a mention by the prosecutor of disclosing witnesses' names to the prosecution, sorry, to the defense, which they haven't done yet. And the prosecutor said that these witnesses are understandably terrified of

But it seems like there's going to have to be a major ruling from the judge at some point as to whether or not that comes in. The other thing that caught my ear was a mention by the prosecutor of disclosing witnesses' names to the prosecution, sorry, to the defense, which they haven't done yet. And the prosecutor said that these witnesses are understandably terrified of

about the prospect of their name becoming public or being disclosed to the defense. So it seems that those names are going to go over to the defense, but for attorney's eyes only and not for the public at this stage.

about the prospect of their name becoming public or being disclosed to the defense. So it seems that those names are going to go over to the defense, but for attorney's eyes only and not for the public at this stage.

Yeah, I mean, I think it's, I don't even know if anything's going to be entered, anything that will be entered onto the docket would be sealed. And attorney's eyes only is a sort of special category that judges can impose to add an extra layer of security to ensure that these things don't leak out.

Yeah, I mean, I think it's, I don't even know if anything's going to be entered, anything that will be entered onto the docket would be sealed. And attorney's eyes only is a sort of special category that judges can impose to add an extra layer of security to ensure that these things don't leak out.