Sean Kent

And that's a publicist team who came to his rescue. Nobody believed the statement. Nobody believed what he said. And as the criminal defense lawyer, If he chooses to take the stand that now can be used against him, you have lied. You lied to the public. You lied to everybody about your involvement. And had the video not came out, you would have kept lying. What else are you going to lie about?

That's one of the major reasons. I just don't like clients saying anything whatsoever.

That's one of the major reasons. I just don't like clients saying anything whatsoever.

That's one of the major reasons. I just don't like clients saying anything whatsoever.

My gut reaction is no. For this reason, one, because these are still judges, they are still humans. And so for the judge to say yes, he basically would have to say that the other two judges were wrong, who said no. I thought the best argument that the defense team made was referencing the Michael Jeffries case and the Bail Reform Act. I thought that was the best argument they made.

My gut reaction is no. For this reason, one, because these are still judges, they are still humans. And so for the judge to say yes, he basically would have to say that the other two judges were wrong, who said no. I thought the best argument that the defense team made was referencing the Michael Jeffries case and the Bail Reform Act. I thought that was the best argument they made.

My gut reaction is no. For this reason, one, because these are still judges, they are still humans. And so for the judge to say yes, he basically would have to say that the other two judges were wrong, who said no. I thought the best argument that the defense team made was referencing the Michael Jeffries case and the Bail Reform Act. I thought that was the best argument they made.

In our United States, it's very simple. All defendants are to be treated the same. Period. Whether you like him, whether you don't like him. If you looked at the Michael Jeffries Abercrombie case, he was given a $10 million bond and they agreed to it right down the road in New York and allowed him to turn himself in. And we can nitpick it all we want, but the allegations are strikingly similar.

In our United States, it's very simple. All defendants are to be treated the same. Period. Whether you like him, whether you don't like him. If you looked at the Michael Jeffries Abercrombie case, he was given a $10 million bond and they agreed to it right down the road in New York and allowed him to turn himself in. And we can nitpick it all we want, but the allegations are strikingly similar.

In our United States, it's very simple. All defendants are to be treated the same. Period. Whether you like him, whether you don't like him. If you looked at the Michael Jeffries Abercrombie case, he was given a $10 million bond and they agreed to it right down the road in New York and allowed him to turn himself in. And we can nitpick it all we want, but the allegations are strikingly similar.

The big difference is this. The 80-year-old Mike Jeffrey, former CEO of Abercrombie & Fitch, was accused of sex trafficking or being currently accused of sex trafficking much in the similar way that Mr. Combs is. They're saying that he used his money and coercion to coerce young models to come across the seas and go into all of these shoots to engage in for his sexual appetite.

The big difference is this. The 80-year-old Mike Jeffrey, former CEO of Abercrombie & Fitch, was accused of sex trafficking or being currently accused of sex trafficking much in the similar way that Mr. Combs is. They're saying that he used his money and coercion to coerce young models to come across the seas and go into all of these shoots to engage in for his sexual appetite.

The big difference is this. The 80-year-old Mike Jeffrey, former CEO of Abercrombie & Fitch, was accused of sex trafficking or being currently accused of sex trafficking much in the similar way that Mr. Combs is. They're saying that he used his money and coercion to coerce young models to come across the seas and go into all of these shoots to engage in for his sexual appetite.

Basically the same exact thing they're alleging against Combs. which is going to be the central defense in both of these cases, coercion. Were these people actually coerced, or was it more of a quid pro quo saying, I got something for something, and now I'm upset about it 20 years down the road?

Basically the same exact thing they're alleging against Combs. which is going to be the central defense in both of these cases, coercion. Were these people actually coerced, or was it more of a quid pro quo saying, I got something for something, and now I'm upset about it 20 years down the road?

Basically the same exact thing they're alleging against Combs. which is going to be the central defense in both of these cases, coercion. Were these people actually coerced, or was it more of a quid pro quo saying, I got something for something, and now I'm upset about it 20 years down the road?

The difference is, one, they're saying the allegations against Mr. Jeffries were quite some time ago, and he hasn't been engaged in this criminal enterprise for some years. They're saying Mr. Combs was still engaged in it earlier this year. Two, they're saying he did not resort to violence or threats or anything of that nature.

The difference is, one, they're saying the allegations against Mr. Jeffries were quite some time ago, and he hasn't been engaged in this criminal enterprise for some years. They're saying Mr. Combs was still engaged in it earlier this year. Two, they're saying he did not resort to violence or threats or anything of that nature.

The difference is, one, they're saying the allegations against Mr. Jeffries were quite some time ago, and he hasn't been engaged in this criminal enterprise for some years. They're saying Mr. Combs was still engaged in it earlier this year. Two, they're saying he did not resort to violence or threats or anything of that nature.

They're saying Mr. Combs and all of this stuff he does with violence and threats and intimidating people. And probably the scarier part is when they raided Combs' house, they found a bunch of guns with obliterated serial numbers. And they're saying this guy just wants to be a gangster. So, yes, the cases are similar, but the underlying background facts are much different.