Diddy trial
'Victim 3' never cooperate with the federals …
I never wanted to testify
Published
Federal prosecutors make a big bet with one of their star witnesses DiddyThe sexual traffic trial, because the woman they call “victim 3” has always indicated that she did not want to testify … TMZ learned.
When selecting the jury this week, the main prosecutor Maurene Comey Admitted that the authorities do not know if the alleged victim – one of Diddy's ex -girlfriends – intends to appear in court to testify against him. Comey said that the woman does not live locally, there is a problem in contact with her lawyer … and she may not even appear in court despite a summons.
Our sources with direct knowledge say that women have never cooperated with prosecutors and never gave them an indication that she would be willing to take a stand during the trial.
This raises the question-Why did the prosecutors add it to the indictment of Diddy and will they address his absence next week during the opening declarations?
At this stage, we still do not know who prosecutors call to testify at the start of the trial.
Tmz.com
The prosecutors have big decisions to make with “victim 3” … will they refer to her in their declaration of opening? If they do, then she ghosts, the jury will wonder what's going on … and that could be a blow for the accusation.
As we reported, Comey said that on Monday, prosecutors would not accumulate in the history of women before the Second part of the trial … and during declarations of openness, the woman would be described as one of the many women who would have been abused and sexually exploited by Diddy.
The indictment made him an alleged victim of sexual trafficking.
CassieAnother ex-ex has been known for a long time to be “victim 1”, and it should testify under its own name … although it is not clear when it takes the position.
She is already in New York, with a Huge baby bump – Some fans believe that it is about 9 months pregnant.
Three of the 4 alleged victims in the case are old friends of Diddy … and in court documents, the prosecutors declared that “victim 2” should pronounce an anonymous testimony on “financial losses, the dependence and the social isolation that it lived during their relationship … which made it more vulnerable to its coercion”.
