David Patrick Caracos (Promo Speaker)
speaker
368 appearances
22 recordings
1 series
first heard Nov 2024
last heard May 2025
David Patrick Caracos (Promo Speaker)’s voice in public audio — every appearance, attributed to the second.
Trend
recordings per month · last 12 monthsNo recordings in the last 12 months.Older appearances are listed below; set an alert to hear about the next one.
Appearances
exclusive sex parties involving group sexual activities directed by and involving Combs. The woman claimed that when she tried to leave, she was ordered to stay before being taken with her friends to the Trump Hotel penthouse, where she claimed she was drugged and forced to participate in group sex activities during which she was sexually assaulted over a number of hours.
The suit goes on to say that both women were forced to engage in a group sex activity that she did not want to participate in. But Combs had made it clear that they had no choice and that they were not allowed to leave. Diddy and his legal team have denied the claims.
Yeah, that's right, Kayla, and that the suit covers a time when the plaintiff gained an opportunity to perform at an L.A. club where Combs was in attendance. Now, the man alleges that he was informed that if he performed well, Diddy might be interested in discussing a deal with his bad boy record label.
After what he says was, quote, an excellent performance, the claimant alleges that he was taken to an after party where the VIP section contained, quote, countless bottles of Combs' vodka, as well as, quoted, substances such as marijuana, cocaine, and ecstasy.
And if that's not enough for this week... It's also been announced that Diddy now faces three other sexual assault lawsuits, including one that claims he, quote, effectively imprisoned a male adult entertainer, which it seems safe to assume is a polite way of saying stripper or possibly a porn star.
So yesterday, Tuesday, an anonymous John Doe filing in New York Southern District Court made the allegation that Diddy coerced him into sex acts over a number of years. The claimant, who had worked as an adult entertainer in Las Vegas, alleges he was hired by Combs in 2007 to perform a strip show and was later booked on a number of other occasions up until 2012.
All of the bookings were for hotel rooms or private combs residences across the U.S.
As ever with this case, there is more. On the same day, two other women also filed their lawsuits anonymously, have alleged that they were drugged and sexually assaulted on multiple occasions at Diddy's parties during the 1990s. One of the women alleges that an assault against her was filmed and that Diddy refused her request to delete the footage.
Combs' lawyers have since denied these allegations in a statement that his legal team provided to us. And as we have said multiple times, it's important to remember Diddy and his legal team have always denied these allegations, stating, quote, As we have said before, Mr. Combs cannot respond to every publicity stunt or factually ridiculous claim.
He has full confidence in the facts and the judicial process where the truth will prevail. The accusations against him are pure fiction.
As we all know by now, the start date for Diddy's trial is set for three months today. We record this May 5th.
So we'll see in three months if we're there. But, you know, someone who's always loudly cast out on the date being realistic is our guest this week. New Jersey criminal defense attorney and longtime friend of the show, David Gelman.
Yes, David, can you talk a little bit about that? From our understanding, there's two additional female victims included in the superseding indictment. And I was just wondering, obviously, from a legal standpoint, what that means for Diddy. Will he have to reappear in court on these new allegations?
So, Marjorie, yeah, he'll probably have to be rearranged again. It doesn't stop the clock, per se. So it doesn't mean like, all right, well, now they're going to have to reset everything and that they're going to have more motions and the trial date will be pushed back, although it will be pushed back. So don't go with that one. And this superseding indictment, it doesn't really have any teeth.
It just has other individuals. There's no more charges that they're charging him with. It's just more allegations. And it's very interesting because normally when you do have a superseding indictment, there's additional charges. Here, it's just two more individuals coming forward that they have that they are going to potentially testify. But just like the other ones, we don't know who they are.
They just say Jane Doe. So we don't know who they are, where this happened, what the actual specificity of the allegations. So it's just more firepower, if you will, for the U.S. Attorney's Office against Diddy.
You know, Kayla, that's a great question. I don't know. Either they are witnesses who can't really provide much. That would be my inclination. Again, when you're a prosecutor and a U.S. attorney, you load everything up. You throw the kitchen sink against the defendant and you do it for one reason, one reason only. You want them to try to plead to something.
Now, you don't know what it's going to be that they're going to plead to, but you want them to plead something. And by having all these charges against them, that is just it makes it more difficult for them to potentially fight. And that just gives the prosecutor another advantage in the fight. So that's where they'll typically be able to get a plea.
You know, Diddy is not the typical defendant, though, as we've discussed multiple times. So I don't know if this is really going to move the needle that much.
You know, they're civil. So the burden of proof is much lower than it would be in a criminal court. That's number one. I don't know the credibility of these individuals. I know one was a male. He was a stripper, I want to say. And the allegation is that Diddy made him perform all these sexual acts that was outside of the scope of what he originally contracted to do.
Showing 161–180 of 368 · page 9 of 19
← Previous
Next →