The panel of eight men and four women reached their decision following extensive deliberations over testimony that included graphic accounts from Combs' former longtime partner, Cassie Ventura, who described a violent and abusive relationship that drove her to contemplate suicide, according to the Financial Times. The verdict marked a significant moment in the music industry's reckoning with sexual misconduct allegations.

Supporters of the 55-year-old rapper-entrepreneur erupted in celebration outside the courthouse, with approximately 100 spectators and bloggers gathered near the entrance shouting "free Diddy" as news of the partial acquittal spread. The crowd's reaction highlighted the polarized public opinion surrounding the case against the hip-hop icon.

Central to the prosecution's case was security footage showing Combs wearing only a bath towel while violently assaulting Ventura at a hotel – an incident that even his own legal team characterized as "dehumanising violence," the outlet noted. This evidence became a cornerstone of the government's argument against the music executive.

The indictment against Combs, who during his career's peak socialized with prominent figures including Bill Clinton and Leonardo DiCaprio, encompassed two counts each of sex trafficking and transportation to engage in prostitution, plus one count of racketeering conspiracy. His conviction represents one of the most significant legal reckonings in the music business in recent years.

This case, alongside the 2021 conviction of singer R Kelly, stands among the most prominent confrontations with sexual misconduct allegations in the music industry, which largely avoided scrutiny during Hollywood's #MeToo movement despite widespread reports of abuse and harassment.

Federal prosecutors argued that Combs coerced multiple women into consuming drugs and engaging in sexual acts with hired male escorts during events he termed "freak-offs." The government alleged these activities constituted a criminal enterprise spanning from 2004 to 2024, utilizing his employees and business operations.

The prosecution painted Combs as an influential figure who leveraged his entertainment industry power to silence women through intimidation, while providing them with substances including ketamine and ecstasy and offering financial incentives and career opportunities for their silence, according to the Financial Times. Prosecutors claimed he recorded these sexual encounters as "collateral" for future manipulation.

Combs maintained his innocence throughout the proceedings, with his legal team arguing the sexual activities were consensual and represented a "swinger's lifestyle." His defense attorneys contended that while evidence existed of domestic violence, such behavior did not constitute sex trafficking.

Combs, widely recognized for bringing hip-hop into mainstream culture during the 1990s and 2000s, established Bad Boy Records in 1993 through a partnership with Arista Records. He earned three Grammy awards and achieved commercial success with "I'll Be Missing You," a tribute to rapper Notorious B.I.G. following his murder in a drive-by shooting.

Combs gained recognition primarily for his promotional abilities and showmanship, with his celebrity status eventually overshadowing his musical career as he expanded into ventures including clothing and alcohol businesses. His brand became synonymous with luxury and success in entertainment circles.

As recently as 2022, Combs continued receiving industry recognition, with Paramount's BET channel presenting him with a "lifetime achievement" award. This trajectory changed dramatically when Ventura filed a lawsuit against him in November 2023 alleging rape and sexual assault, which settled within 24 hours but encouraged other accusers to come forward.

Combs faced arrest last September following charges from the Manhattan US attorney's office related to sex trafficking, with FBI agents conducting raids on his Miami, Florida, and Los Angeles residences, seizing narcotics and over 1,000 bottles of baby oil and lubricant, the Financial Times reported. He has remained detained at a Brooklyn jail facility throughout the legal proceedings.

The post Sean 'Diddy' Combs convicted on prostitution charges appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

In a historic first for a child of a sitting US president, Hunter Biden is facing federal charges, including three gun-related counts currently being tried in court in Delaware. His father, President Joe Biden, has made it clear that he will not use his presidential power to pardon his son if he is convicted.

During an interview with ABC News anchor David Muir in Normandy, France, where Biden was commemorating the 80th anniversary of D-Day, the president was asked if he would rule out a pardon for Hunter. Biden's response was simple: "Yes." When asked if he would accept the outcome of the jury trial, he again replied, "Yes."

The White House had previously stated that Biden would not pardon his son. "I've been very clear; the president is not going to pardon his son," White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters in December.

The criminal trial of President Joe Biden's son is heading into its final stretch as the defense tries to chip away at the prosecutors' case laying bare some of the darkest moments of Hunter Biden's drug-fueled past. | Click on the image to read the ful... https://t.co/7VZvM6UpCw

— WISN 12 NEWS (@WISN12News) June 10, 2024

 In a statement when Hunter's trial started on Monday, Biden said: "As the President, I don't and won't comment on pending federal cases, but as a Dad, I have boundless love for my son, confidence in him, and respect for his strength. Our family has been through a lot together, and Jill and I are going to continue to be there for Hunter and our family with our love and support." First Lady Jill Biden has attended the trial most of this week, along with Hunter Biden's wife, Melissa Cohen-Biden, and various other family members.

Hunter Biden is also facing a separate trial in September on federal tax charges. While presidents have the power to grant pardons in federal cases, they cannot pardon state cases.

The post Biden rules out pardoning his son if convicted  appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Hunter Biden, the son of US President Joe Biden, begins his trial on June 3 in Delaware on charges of violating federal gun laws in 2018 when he purchased a firearm. Hunter Biden has pleaded not guilty.

Hunter Biden was charged in September by US Special Counsel David Weiss with three felonies stemming from his purchase and possession of a Colt Cobra .38 revolver in October 2018. He is accused of making a false statement material to a firearms sale and making a false statement in a firearms transaction record. Prosecutors contend he committed a crime when he ticked a box indicating "no" next to a question asking if he was an unlawful user of a controlled substance or addicted to a controlled substance. The third charge is that Hunter Biden violated a law that bars users of illegal drugs or drug addicts from possessing a firearm.

For the first two charges, the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Hunter Biden knowingly made a false statement. For the possession charge, the government must prove the following elements: that Biden was either an unlawful user of a controlled substance or was a drug addict; that he knowingly possessed a firearm; and that when he knowingly possessed the firearm he also knew he was an unlawful user of a controlled substance or a drug addict.

The government said it has videos and photographs of Hunter Biden smoking crack or with drug paraphernalia as well as messages sent to purported street dealers arranging drug purchases. The evidence was collected from Biden's iCloud account, laptop, and phone messages, prosecutors have said.

The government said it may call Hunter Biden's ex-wife, Kathleen Buhle, and other romantic partners to describe his addiction around the time of the gun purchase and possession. Prosecutors said they plan to introduce excerpts from Biden's 2021 book, "Beautiful Things," in which he described himself as a "crack addict" with no plans beyond "the moment-to-moment demands of the crack pipe."

The government rarely charges someone for false statements on gun purchase forms unless the accused is also charged with a violent crime, according to a Government Accountability Office report cited by Hunter Biden's legal team. More than 80 million American adults own a firearm, but only about 1,000 a year are investigated for false statements on a gun purchase form, and even fewer are charged, according to the GAO.

Maryellen Noreika, who was nominated by President Donald Trump and joined the court in 2018, is the judge for this case. If the jury finds Hunter Biden guilty, he faces up to 25 years in prison, although sentences are typically shorter than the maximum, according to the Department of Justice. As in all US federal criminal cases, the jury of 12 must unanimously agree on a conviction.

The post Hunter Biden trial begins as election looms appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

As the high-profile criminal trial of former President Donald Trump in New York nears its conclusion, a potential guilty verdict could unleash a cascade of historic legal and political consequences.

Trump, the frontrunner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, stands accused of 34 felony counts related to allegations that he falsified business records to conceal hush-money payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels ahead of the 2016 election. While Trump faces several other criminal investigations, this Manhattan case represents the first to reach a jury verdict and could be the sole legal matter resolved before voters head to the polls.

The trial has featured testimony from Trump's former confidant Michael Cohen, who claims the former president personally approved the reimbursement scheme at the heart of the charges. However, Cohen's credibility has been called into question due to his own history of dishonesty and criminal conduct.

Regardless of the outcome, Trump has preemptively framed the case as a political witch hunt, sowing the seeds for his response – be it claiming vindication or perpetuating a narrative of victimhood. Yet a conviction would mark an unprecedented blemish on a presidential campaign and could further complicate Trump's legal jeopardy if he reclaims the White House.

As this uncharted territory looms, several critical questions arise – here is everything you need to know: 

Could Trump still run if convicted?

Yes. The Constitution's requirements for presidential eligibility do not explicitly prohibit candidates with felony convictions from running or holding office. Legal experts assert that states cannot impose additional qualifications beyond the federal criteria.

Would Trump face incarceration?

 It's possible but not guaranteed. While the charges carry potential prison terms of up to four years each, judges often opt for probation and fines over jail time for first-time, non-violent offenders. Trump's advanced age, lack of prior record, and status as a former and potential future president could factor into the sentencing judge's calculations.

Could Trump appeal?

Almost certainly. Trump would likely pursue appeals through New York's state court system, a process that could easily extend past the 2024 election.

Would Trump retain the right to vote? 

Potentially. Under New York law, incarcerated individuals cannot vote, but those on probation maintain their voting privileges. If Trump avoids jail time through either a non-custodial sentence or a protracted appeal, he would likely be eligible to cast a ballot.

How might this impact Trump's other cases?

 While a conviction would not directly affect Trump's separate indictments in Florida, Georgia, and Washington, D.C., it could shape public perception, influence potential juries, and factor into future sentencing decisions. Prosecutors may also wield a guilty verdict to challenge Trump's credibility.

As this legal imbroglio unfolds, the ramifications of the imminent verdict could fundamentally reshape the frontiers of presidential politics for years to come.

The post Will Trump be convicted or acquitted: This is how it could shape the 2024 election appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Former president and current presumptive presidential nominee Donald Trump has been indicted by a Manhattan grand jury on charges related to hush money payments made in 2017 to an adult film actress who claimed to have had an affair with the former president years earlier. The historic indictment marks the first time a former US president has faced criminal charges. We answered some of the most FAQs:

Q: What is the background of this case?

A: In the final days of the 2016 presidential campaign, Trump's former personal lawyer Michael Cohen paid $130,000 to adult film star Stormy Daniels, who claimed to have had an affair with Trump years earlier. The payment was meant to prevent Daniels from going public with her story before the election.

Q: What has Donald Trump been charged with?

A: Former President Trump has been indicted by a New York grand jury on 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree, in violation of Penal Law §175.10," according to the indictment, related to the Stormy Daniels hush money payment.  

Q: What are the specific allegations?  

A: "The defendant… on or about February 14, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an entry in the Detail General Ledger for the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust… and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization," the indictment states, essentially accusing Trump of falsifying records at the Trump Organization to conceal reimbursements made to Cohen for facilitating the hush money payment to Daniels.

Q: Why is falsifying business records considered a crime in this case?

A: Prosecutors allege the falsified records were an effort to cover up a violation of federal campaign finance laws by failing to properly disclose the reimbursements as a campaign expense. Thus, according to prosecutors, Trump violated New York's financial laws in order to commit a federal felony by not reporting funds that were serving his election bid. 

Q: Is this an unprecedented case? 

A: Yes, Trump is the first former US president to face criminal charges.

Q: What are the potential consequences if convicted?

A: In New York, falsifying business records carries a maximum sentence of 4 years in prison. However, defendants without prior records rarely get maximum sentences for this low-level felony.

Q: What potential outcomes could arise from the indictment?

A: Possible outcomes include an acquittal if convicted, a plea deal with lesser charges, or a conviction that could jeopardize Trump's future political ambitions and ability to run for president again in 2024. The case could also face appeals and protracted legal battles.

In summary, the indictment stems from the 2017 hush money payment to Stormy Daniels and charges Trump with falsifying business records at the Trump Organization to cover up the reimbursements to his lawyer for that payment. While unprecedented for a former president, the charges are low-level felonies, but a conviction could carry significant political and legal consequences for Trump.

The post The Trump trial – this is what you need to know appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Judges of the Jerusalem District Court recommended the prosecution drop the bribery charge from the Case 4000 corruption trial against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

According to the summary of the meeting between the judges, prosecutors and Netanyahu's defense, that took place on June 20, "it was suggested that the state consider retracting the accusation of bribery."

The parties were informed that "there are difficulties in establishing the offense."

Nevertheless, the State Attorney's Office said that it had further evidence to prove the bribery charge, which is considered the most serious one against Netanyahu.

According to the prosecution, a bigger picture would be created when the defense presented its case.

This article was first published by i24NEWS.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories! 

The post Court recommends prosecution drop bribery charge against Netanyahu appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

The trial in Case 4,000 against former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu continued in the Jerusalem District Court on Monday, with state witness Nir Hefetz, Netanyahu's former media consultant, testifying.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

Case 4,000 entails the most serious charges against Netanyahu, including one of bribery. The former PM is accused of allegedly offering Shaul Elovitch, the controlling shareholder in the Bezeq telecom giant, legislative benefits potentially worth millions in exchange for positive coverage for himself and his family on the then-Bezeq-owned Walla news site.

Hefetz was asked about one instance from 2016 in which Walla ran an item about Netanyahu and his wife, Sara, visiting an IDF unit. After the item was published, the Netanyahu's allegedly asked that the images included be edited, a request that was reportedly handed on through Elovitch and his wife.

When asked by the prosecution to characterize the alleged incident, Hefetz called it "unusual."

The prosecutor also asked Hefetz about another instance in which he submitted a press release titled "An event with Sara [Netanyahu] today at Tel Aviv University." Walla CEO Ilan Yeshua reportedly responded "I'm putting it up right away on the homepage and adding a nice video."

The prosecutor asked Hefetz to what extent concern about personal information concerning himself being made public played a role in his decision to turn state's witness.

"There were physical and other pressures that increased to monstrous proportions," Hefetz described.

"There's no doubt that the collected conditions I was living under in the first few weeks [of the case] had an influence. It's like an operation and general anesthetic. You exercise your judgment and do what your lawyer tells you to. I felt weak in the head and in my body. Toward the end of the 15^th day I felt able to think for myself and I started to consider it," Hefetz said.

After returning from recess, Hefetz began testifying in Case 2,000, at the center of which are alleged negotiations between Netanyahu and Yedioth Ahronoth owner Arnon (Noni) Mozes for more flattering coverage of Netanyahu in that newspaper in exchange for him promoting a law that would limit the distribution of Israel Hayom as a free daily.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post On witness stand, former Netanyahu aide describes 'monstrous' pressure appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

On April 4, attorney Liat Ben-Ari, chief prosecutor in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's trial, gave the prosecution's opening argument at the beginning of the evidentiary stage of the proceedings. Preparations for the argument were covered by bells and whistles by legal affairs reports, some of whom actually betray their roles and serve as mouthpieces for the prosecution. They treated it as if it were King George VI's speech at the start of World War II.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

On the morning of Ben-Ari's opening argument, I published an article that focused on the huge holes in the prosecution's basic thesis that Netanyahu had asked for unusual coverage on the Walla news site in exchange for regulatory benefits for controlling shareowner of Bezeq – which owns Walla – Shaul Elovitch. Supposedly, this was a legal precedent – the first instance of media coverage comprising an element of charges of bribery against a politician.

If you missed it, the word on which the case will survive or fail is "unusual" – whether the tradeoffs between Netanyahu and Elovitch were so unusual as to be criminal enough to be bribery. Amazingly, even before the evidentiary stage of the trial began, it was already known that the prosecution had not troubled itself to create any criteria that would determine a norm, deviation from which would cross into the area of criminality.

The prosecution and its mouthpieces in the media could always release a particularly thick smokescreen: Every time it was proven that Netanyahu had been the subject of hostile coverage on Walla (according to checks by outlets Mida, Globes, and the Seventh Eye), pundits in the studios said "It could have been worse," and that the problem  was "opening the prime minister a door to a 'leading' news site." In other words, "thanks" to the benefits that were supposedly given to Elovitch, Netanyahu had a privilege that was not limited to other politicians.

On Tuesday, during the cross examination of former Walla CEO Ilan Yeshua, it turned out that the prosecution had gone so far as to hide evidence proving the close contact between Yeshua and other prominent politicians, in a way that pulled the rug out from under the thesis that Netanyahu made "unusual requests," and also exposing Yeshua's blatant lie to the court that he had supposedly not intervened in the site content when it came to other politicians.

Correspondence between Yeshua and former Zionist Union leader Isaac Herzog – Netanyahu's main rival in the 2015 election – was presented, which showed that Yeshua had gone out of his way to assist Herzog. According to the material, even while he was on vacation in Hawaii, Yeshua instructed Walla's lead editor to post a headline dictated by Herzog against his then-rival in the Labor primaries, Shelly Yachimovich.

Astonishingly, by a "mistake," this correspondence arrived at the defense team only a month ago, during Yeshua's initial questioning. Judges were amazed that such dramatic evidence could have been categorized as "irrelevant" and asked the prosecution if there was any other material that had not been delivered to the defense. The prosecutor in Case 4,000, Yehudit Tirosh, responded, "I don't know how to answer." Incredible.

And that's not all: It turned out that Yeshua had held at least 14 meetings with various politicians (including Moshe Kahlon, Naftali Bennett, Avigdor Lieberman, Dalia Itzik, and others), but not a single meeting with Netanyahu. In other words, the "unusual" request lean toward the other side of the equation – against Netanyahu. Yeshua also confirmed that Elovitch and his wife prevented the publication of negative items about Kahlon, fearing retribution from the former minister.

Another "unusual" issue has to do with publishing tycoon Ilan Shiloah. Yeshua admitted that he had taken care to provide positive coverage of Shiloah because the latter had made hefty ad purchases on the Walla site, and was a friend of Elovitch's son. But Yeshua also had a personal reason to help him out – his son worked for Shiloah, and on Tuesday it turned out that Yeshua and his son had earned $400,000 from the IPO of Shiloh's company. In other words, flattering coverage in exchange for jobs for family and a nice sum of money.

The broader picture is becoming clear. The prosecution prided itself on having set up a battery of 40 attorneys to file the indictment against Netanyahu – but reasonable thinking by a single person would have prevented it from making a mockery of its flagship case, in what could be the most important trial in the history of Israel. The Netanyahu trail is just starting, but even now, when a major witness for the prosecution falls apart on the witness stand, along with the prosecution's basic thesis – the question arises of whether the judges will find the courage to admit that the case before them was stitched together carelessly, and continues to fray.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post Case 4,000 falling apart, makes mockery of prosecution   appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Attorney General Avichai Mendelblit on Monday night reiterated his opposition to forcing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to take a leave of absence.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

Mendelblit repeated his position on the matter in a response to a High Court petition filed by the Movement for Quality Government in Israel, which argued that Netanyahu's corruption trial and focus on defending himself in court impeded his ability to properly perform his duties as prime minister.

"The prime minister will find the way to combine his commitments as long as that is required… The petition does not present a reason for legal intervention in this matter and is certain to be rejected," the attorney general wrote.

The post AG: No legal justification for forcing PM to take leave of absence appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Attorney General Avichai Mendelblit is considering indicting Bezeq, Walla News, and a number of companies form the Eurocom group for their alleged involvement in Case 4,000 against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the State Attorney's Office informed the communications giants on Wednesday.

Pending a hearing, the companies could face charges of offering bribes, money laundering, and faulty reports due to the alleged actions of controlling Bezeq shareholder Shaul Elovitch.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

Case 4,000 is considered one of the most serious cases involving Netanyahu and saw the prime minister charged with bribery for allegedly approving, while communications minister, millions of shekels worth of benefits for the Bezeq telecommunications corporation and other companies controlled by Elovitch in exchange for favorable coverage on the Walla

The State Attorney's Office also on Wednesday informed the Yedioth Ahronoth Group that Mendelblit was considering trying the organization under the auspices of Case 2,000, in which Netanyahu and Yedioth Ahronoth publisher Arnon "Noni" Mozes are suspected of colluding to limit the activity of Israel Hayom, Yedioth's main competitor, in exchange for positive coverage of Netanyahu in Mozes' paper.

Sources close to Netanyahu responded to Wednesday's decision to indict the communications companies involved in the cases in which he is facing trial by saying, "Mendelblit realized that Case 4,000 is dying and is trying to artificially resuscitate it through a major bluff.

"It's clear to everyone that Mendelblit does not intend to try the corporations, and the only reason for his announcement is an attempt to distract attention from his selective enforcement against the prime minister," the sources said.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post Attorney general to go after corporations in Netanyahu cases appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.