Moira Penza

So there can be additional nuances to that as well, but I think the government's going to want to make it easy for the jury and say, here are all these instances where the crime that... Mr. Combs committed required other people's involvement. So that's, I think, the way that the government is going to lay it out. And in terms of whether they're there yet, I think they're getting there.

So there can be additional nuances to that as well, but I think the government's going to want to make it easy for the jury and say, here are all these instances where the crime that... Mr. Combs committed required other people's involvement. So that's, I think, the way that the government is going to lay it out. And in terms of whether they're there yet, I think they're getting there.

So there can be additional nuances to that as well, but I think the government's going to want to make it easy for the jury and say, here are all these instances where the crime that... Mr. Combs committed required other people's involvement. So that's, I think, the way that the government is going to lay it out. And in terms of whether they're there yet, I think they're getting there.

I think we've heard testimony. that showed the involvement of other individuals. We also had testimony from one of Mr. Combs' assistants, and he was going to take a fifth, so he was not going to testify, saying that he would be incriminating himself if he took the stand. And so he was actually granted immunity so that he would, in fact, testify.

I think we've heard testimony. that showed the involvement of other individuals. We also had testimony from one of Mr. Combs' assistants, and he was going to take a fifth, so he was not going to testify, saying that he would be incriminating himself if he took the stand. And so he was actually granted immunity so that he would, in fact, testify.

I think we've heard testimony. that showed the involvement of other individuals. We also had testimony from one of Mr. Combs' assistants, and he was going to take a fifth, so he was not going to testify, saying that he would be incriminating himself if he took the stand. And so he was actually granted immunity so that he would, in fact, testify.

And so having individuals who the government is actually saying were were part of this conspiracy testify about what they saw, what they did, that's going to be powerful evidence. And we still have weeks of trial to go.

And so having individuals who the government is actually saying were were part of this conspiracy testify about what they saw, what they did, that's going to be powerful evidence. And we still have weeks of trial to go.

And so having individuals who the government is actually saying were were part of this conspiracy testify about what they saw, what they did, that's going to be powerful evidence. And we still have weeks of trial to go.

Well, I think this is one of the toughest parts of the job as a prosecutor is really exercising that prosecutorial discretion. So just because somebody did engage in criminal conduct, just because somebody may have been a lower ranking member of a criminal conspiracy, you may choose not to charge them with crimes, right?

Well, I think this is one of the toughest parts of the job as a prosecutor is really exercising that prosecutorial discretion. So just because somebody did engage in criminal conduct, just because somebody may have been a lower ranking member of a criminal conspiracy, you may choose not to charge them with crimes, right?

Well, I think this is one of the toughest parts of the job as a prosecutor is really exercising that prosecutorial discretion. So just because somebody did engage in criminal conduct, just because somebody may have been a lower ranking member of a criminal conspiracy, you may choose not to charge them with crimes, right?

In other situations, you might actually charge somebody with a crime and then they cooperate with the government and testify in exchange for the government eventually seeking leniency on their behalf. In other situations, and I can't speak to the exact specifics of how the government made the decision that they made, but in other situations,

In other situations, you might actually charge somebody with a crime and then they cooperate with the government and testify in exchange for the government eventually seeking leniency on their behalf. In other situations, and I can't speak to the exact specifics of how the government made the decision that they made, but in other situations,

In other situations, you might actually charge somebody with a crime and then they cooperate with the government and testify in exchange for the government eventually seeking leniency on their behalf. In other situations, and I can't speak to the exact specifics of how the government made the decision that they made, but in other situations,

what you're going to say is, this isn't necessarily somebody who I think should be charged for a crime, or there may be other reasons why you don't want to charge them with a crime. But they themselves might say, or through their lawyers, I'm not going to testify because what you want me to say is going to incriminate me.

what you're going to say is, this isn't necessarily somebody who I think should be charged for a crime, or there may be other reasons why you don't want to charge them with a crime. But they themselves might say, or through their lawyers, I'm not going to testify because what you want me to say is going to incriminate me.

what you're going to say is, this isn't necessarily somebody who I think should be charged for a crime, or there may be other reasons why you don't want to charge them with a crime. But they themselves might say, or through their lawyers, I'm not going to testify because what you want me to say is going to incriminate me.

And so in that situation, the government makes a calculus that you don't want to prosecute the person, but it is also worth having them testify. And you always want to be doing that when it is helping you get the person who is significantly more culpable. And here, there's clearly no dispute that the defendant, Mr. Combs, was the head of this organization.

And so in that situation, the government makes a calculus that you don't want to prosecute the person, but it is also worth having them testify. And you always want to be doing that when it is helping you get the person who is significantly more culpable. And here, there's clearly no dispute that the defendant, Mr. Combs, was the head of this organization.