Diddy’s authorized group moved to strike skilled testimony from his ongoing trial over the weekend after his attorneys accused the federal government’s witness of repeatedly ignoring court-imposed limits.
His protection filed an emergency movement to Decide Arun Subramanian asking that your complete testimony of Dr. Daybreak Hughes be eliminated, arguing that her statements have been “unfairly prejudicial” and went far past what the courtroom had permitted.
Dr. Hughes, a board-certified forensic psychologist recognized for her work in high-profile instances like Johnny Depp vs. Amber Heard and R. Kelly’s federal trial, was known as by prosecutors as a “blind skilled.”
She didn’t study any people within the case however provided normal insights into trauma, reminiscence and abuse dynamics.
The courtroom had dominated that Hughes might solely converse on “coping methods, delayed disclosure, and reminiscence” and supply restricted context on why abuse victims could keep in relationships.
Hughes was explicitly barred from discussing “coercive management” or speculating on the motivations of alleged abusers.
Regardless of that, Diddy’s attorneys say Hughes repeatedly referenced banned phrases like “interpersonal violence” and “coercive management” and that prosecutors inspired her to take action by their questioning.
“Hughes…frequently used the prosecutors’ questions as merely prompts to start speeches that shortly veered into outright advocacy,” protection lawyer Alexandra A.E. Shapiro mentioned.
Shapiro argued that Hughes’ responses usually went past the scope of the questions, making it tough for the protection to object in real-time.
“Proper off the bat, the federal government confirmed that it had no intention of abiding by the Court docket’s ruling and that no matter directions it gave Hughes in regards to the permitted scope of her testimony have been woefully insufficient,” Shapiro mentioned.
The protection additionally took problem with Hughes’ tone and supply, accusing her of making an attempt to emotionally sway jurors by utilizing inclusive language like “we” and “you.”
“Hughes additionally repeatedly personalised her testimony for the jury, looking for to enlist the jurors’ empathy in her marketing campaign…None of this was unintentional. Hughes is a extremely skilled witness and knew precisely what she was doing,” Shapiro acknowledged.
One other level of competition was Hughes’ rationalization of reminiscence. She informed jurors that reminiscence is subjective and that inconsistencies shouldn’t be interpreted as dishonesty.
The protection labeled that “junk science” and mentioned it might mislead the jury.
“The federal government selected to placed on an skilled witness understanding that the testimony it elicited would violate the Court docket’s ruling—understanding that if it and its witness pushed exhausting sufficient, the protection wouldn’t have the ability to hold out all the improper and unfairly prejudicial testimony,” Shapiro added.
Diddy’s group needs to strike all of Hughes’ testimony, arguing that the federal government’s conduct might taint the trial.
The trial is scheduled to renew on Tuesday (Could 27).
Associated