Artwork

Content provided by Bobby Capucci. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Bobby Capucci or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://ppacc.player.fm/legal.
Player FM - Podcast App
Go offline with the Player FM app!

Legacy Media Outlets Demand More Access To Graphic Evidence Introduced At The Diddy Trial (6/6/25)

8:53
 
Share
 

Manage episode 487204102 series 3380507
Content provided by Bobby Capucci. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Bobby Capucci or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://ppacc.player.fm/legal.
In a June 5, 2025 letter addressed to Judge Subramanian in the case United States v. Combs, a coalition of major media outlets—collectively referred to as the “News Organizations”—formally objected to the government’s request to bar public and press access to exhibits during the live testimony of a key pseudonymous witness identified only as “Jane.” These organizations include The Associated Press, ABC News, The New York Times, Business Insider, CBS News, and others. Their argument centers on First Amendment concerns, specifically emphasizing the public’s right to access court proceedings and evidence in real time. They contend that restricting contemporaneous viewing of exhibits, especially in a trial of high public interest, constitutes an unconstitutional prior restraint on press freedoms and undermines the transparency of the judicial process.
The letter criticizes the government’s June 3 request as overly broad and lacking sufficient justification, particularly since it would apply not just to explicit materials but to any exhibits shown while Jane testifies. The media organizations argue that redactions or protective protocols—such as sealed portions or visual obfuscation—could adequately shield the witness’s identity and privacy without resorting to full suppression of evidence from public view. They stress that the court has an obligation to balance the witness’s safety with the constitutional rights of the press and public, and warn that blanket restrictions set a dangerous precedent, especially in a federal criminal case involving allegations of high-profile abuse and trafficking.
to contact me:
[email protected]
source:
Combs Trial - Access Letter re Jane Doe Exhibits 4929-3441-5946 v.2
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.
  continue reading

1038 episodes

Artwork
iconShare
 
Manage episode 487204102 series 3380507
Content provided by Bobby Capucci. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Bobby Capucci or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://ppacc.player.fm/legal.
In a June 5, 2025 letter addressed to Judge Subramanian in the case United States v. Combs, a coalition of major media outlets—collectively referred to as the “News Organizations”—formally objected to the government’s request to bar public and press access to exhibits during the live testimony of a key pseudonymous witness identified only as “Jane.” These organizations include The Associated Press, ABC News, The New York Times, Business Insider, CBS News, and others. Their argument centers on First Amendment concerns, specifically emphasizing the public’s right to access court proceedings and evidence in real time. They contend that restricting contemporaneous viewing of exhibits, especially in a trial of high public interest, constitutes an unconstitutional prior restraint on press freedoms and undermines the transparency of the judicial process.
The letter criticizes the government’s June 3 request as overly broad and lacking sufficient justification, particularly since it would apply not just to explicit materials but to any exhibits shown while Jane testifies. The media organizations argue that redactions or protective protocols—such as sealed portions or visual obfuscation—could adequately shield the witness’s identity and privacy without resorting to full suppression of evidence from public view. They stress that the court has an obligation to balance the witness’s safety with the constitutional rights of the press and public, and warn that blanket restrictions set a dangerous precedent, especially in a federal criminal case involving allegations of high-profile abuse and trafficking.
to contact me:
[email protected]
source:
Combs Trial - Access Letter re Jane Doe Exhibits 4929-3441-5946 v.2
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.
  continue reading

1038 episodes

All episodes

×
 
Loading …

Welcome to Player FM!

Player FM is scanning the web for high-quality podcasts for you to enjoy right now. It's the best podcast app and works on Android, iPhone, and the web. Signup to sync subscriptions across devices.

 

Quick Reference Guide

Copyright 2025 | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | | Copyright
Listen to this show while you explore
Play