Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Bryan Kohberger Appears in Court; Sean 'Diddy' Combs Acquitted of Most Serious Charges. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired July 02, 2025 - 13:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[13:00:00]

LISA RESPERS FRANCE, CNN ENTERTAINMENT REPORTER: I know what it's like. These women try to bring these powerful men down.

And, unfortunately, that's the sentiment among some people. Some people support Cassie and they hail her, because we know and it's very clear that there would have probably been no trial had she not come forward.

So there are still people that -- this was a difficult case and there are still people who are divided even now that we have a verdict.

DANA BASH, CNN HOST: Yes, that victim shaming is really unfortunate.

Lisa, thank you so much. Appreciate your perspective.

And thank you for joining INSIDE POLITICS.

"CNN NEWS CENTRAL" starts after a quick break.

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: We're following breaking news in the Sean "Diddy" Combs trial.

We're standing by to see if, after being acquitted of the most serious charges he faced, a judge will soon allow Combs to walk out of federal court. The prosecution and defense had a 1:00 p.m. deadline to submit written questions on where Combs should wait for his sentencing. The prosecution wants Combs to go back to the Manhattan Detention Center, where he's been held for nearly 300 days, the defense asking he be able to go home to Miami. We're also awaiting his sentencing day.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: And just hours ago, a jury finding Combs not guilty on those most serious charges against him, racketeering and sex trafficking, each of those carrying up to life in prison, Combs acquitted on all three counts.

He was found guilty on two counts of prostitution, each of these charges carrying up to 10 years in prison. Combs was seen beaming in court, his lawyer telling the judge -- quote -- "Mr. Combs has been given his life by this jury."

Let's go live now to New York and see an anchor and chief legal analyst Laura Coates, who's there outside the courthouse.

Laura, first, how quickly could the judge's decision come on whether Combs goes home or stays in jail pending sentencing?

LAURA COATES, CNN CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: Brianna, any moment now, we could learn whether Sean "Diddy" Combs walks out of the front door of the federal courthouse right here in Manhattan, the same place where he has been for a better part of almost two months hearing testimony against him where he stood accused of those five felony counts, including one RICO that could have left him with life in prison.

His family arriving at the courthouse a few moments ago. Here is the timeline. He has been found guilty of the prostitution-related charges, the so-called Mann Act cases, transportation to engage in prostitution. They carry about 10 years each.

The prosecution does want jail time. It could run consecutively, meaning back to back, because these events that were actually in question and now proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, according to this jury, were distant in time enough to have consecutive sentences possibly, but a first-time offender, according to the guidelines, could see as little as two years in prison in this.

And the judge could essentially construct whatever sentence he wants. The judge will consider whether there is a safety risk that is posed to the community or a threat in any way. And one of the big questions he asked in that courtroom when he gave the prosecution and the defense until 1:00 p.m. to give him letters to make their positions clear was, tell me, have there been other instances when someone has been found guilty of this type of charge and prostitution and held pending sentencing?

That may have been one of the biggest and most significant indications of what to come. Also, around me, you had the NYPD come with different barricades. You have got a lot of police presence around here and the judge to decide this. Diddy could walk out of the courthouse and he would still have sentencing ahead of him, but I remind the public that these are federal charges.

There had been talk about potential pardon from the president of the United States. I suppose that is indeed a possibility, that a president could pardon a federal charge. There's been no indication he would have been charged with this case, but he did posthumously pardon Jack Johnson for related Mann Act charges during his first term in office.

This obviously a very different case, a very different time period that we are currently in, but this has been seven weeks and now we finally have a verdict. And I remind you, yesterday, not even 24 hours ago, the jury was hung on that first count, and the defense and the prosecution wanted them to continue.

Well, continue, they did for little more than an hour today for a total of 13 hours, and now not guilty on RICO, not guilty on both counts of sex trafficking, but guilty on the transportation for prostitution. SANCHEZ: Laura, you have been there throughout this case. Take us

inside the courtroom as this all unfolded and then what the scene has been like outside the courthouse since this verdict was announced.

COATES: Well, federal courthouses are notoriously prim and proper. They have the gravitas all around them and the federal marshals at every single instance ensuring that there is no big reactions or gasps or shouting in a federal courthouse. That was held true throughout the entire trial, save a few examples.

[13:05:08]

But, today, when there was the guilty verdicts and the not guilty verdicts that were read in this courtroom, the family reacted, at times woo-hooing. Kara Scannell was there and she was seeing the emotion pouring out of the family, also the emotion pouring out of the defense team.

Listen, guys, the SDNY is known for a very high conviction rate. I'm talking well over 90 percent, 9-0 percent, at the very least. So this might be viewed as a bit of a black eye that they were not able to secure the most serious convictions.

However, they believe in and trust in the justice system and will allow this jury, of course, to make the decision. I have to say, watching the prosecution and this team, they were phenomenal. They were skilled. They were compelling. They were professional. The defense, the same reaction.

And yet the emotion was pouring out of the defense because of what was at stake. Now, outside of the courthouse, you don't have the marshals regulating the behavior. You don't have the marshals upholding that prim and proper and etiquette that is happening inside of the courtroom.

No, instead, I kid you not, people are pouring baby oil on one another outside this courthouse, baby oil having a very big play in the freak- offs we heard about. You have people saying it's not RICO. It's FRICO. You have got applause coming when the mother of Sean "Diddy" Combs, Ms. Janice, got out of the vehicle just a few moments ago, really, behind us and walked inside to elated cheers and her reading the crowd.

Every time the family, the children, the six adult children come in, three boys and three girls, they are met by cheers, and also at times throughout the course of trial meant by scathing and disrespectful comments as well, a lot of profanity.

But, today, they had smiles on their faces that they were trying to, I think, subdue a little bit. But their father is not going to go to prison for the rest of his life. That was not lost on them. We are continuing to wait. But let me tell you, the crowds are accumulating.

Boris, Brianna, NYPD has a heck of a presence right now outside of this courthouse. In the world of trialtainment, the last even comparable trial of this scale was probably for a lot of the people who were out here their parents' generation were my younger self in the O.J. trial. You had a high-profile celebrity case. You had a dream team, all-star team of defense attorneys who hoped they could get their client off.

And you have moments of compelling testimony and sayings that will undoubtedly identify and describe this trial. And here we are today, very different circumstances, very different outcome, obviously. However, it remains this high-profile matter. Look at this.

If you could look around, you have got a huge NYPD presence. You have got barricades that are being set out, the type you would use to line a parade route, the ones you see behind me over here. You have got also shouting matches that are breaking out at different pockets of the crowd, because the court of public opinion is deeply invested in this and has been.

You have got one of the first major post-MeToo trials happening right now. This has been a trial about sex trafficking, about sex, drugs and rock 'n' roll, about free will or the lack thereof, about power dynamics and the influence of money and power in our entire system. And here we are watching that play out.

I saw people shouting at one another, one person in the pro-Diddy camp, another in the pro-Cassie Ventura camp and otherwise. And you can't help but wonder, you guys, Cassie Ventura, the other victims who have testified here, what are they thinking today?

SANCHEZ: Yes, clearly not the outcome that they were hoping for. We imagine that that scene outside will likely get more intense if Combs is granted his freedom and comes out of those doors.

Laura Coates, please stand by.

With us now to discuss is criminal defense attorney Mark O'Mara and former federal prosecutor Alyse Adamson.

Thank you both for being with us.

Let's first start out with the verdict that the jury reached, Alyse. What's your reaction to these acquittals? Were you surprised?

ALYSE ADAMSON, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Yes, well, in the totality, I actually was not surprised, because, from day one, a lot of us in the legal community were asking ourselves, was this an overcharge?

And this was a very novel use of the RICO statute, this RICO conspiracy. It's a very technically complicated statute and the underlying facts could be perceived as confusing to the jurors. And so wondering whether or not it would resonate with a jury. Similarly, with the sex trafficking, these were individuals who had been in longstanding relationships with Combs.

So, there was a thin line between consent and coercion, a thin line that, of course, the defense exploited very effectively on cross. So, not surprised by this outcome, because there were always questions. A little bit surprised in light of the deadlock note we saw last night. [13:10:15]

We know that at least some jurors were still considering convicting on the RICO as late as last evening. So much of the corrupt enterprise under the government's theory of the case really was threaded or intertwined with this concept of sex trafficking. So I found it surprising that the jury had already voted to acquit him on both charges of sex trafficking while still considering the RICO.

So I found the sequencing of this surprising, but not the overall outcome.

KEILAR: Yes. No, that's a really interesting point, Alyse.

And, Mark, we spoke throughout the last several weeks, and the question we would ask you every week was, how is the prosecution doing on proving racketeering? So I wonder if there were any surprises to you and what you thought about the defense's strategy and calculations here and what worked for them.

MARK O'MARA, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Sure.

As to the RICO prosecution, again, I remember talking and I said they have got to start putting the pieces together. Where are the pieces of the RICO prosecution that they're doing? It just seemed weak. It seemed almost scattered. And as it turns out, the jury seemed to feel the same way.

Because, again, we hope that the juries do what we want them to do, look at every count individually, make sure that the state or government has proven it, each element, beyond a reasonable doubt, and then conviction or not, and move on to the next.

But we also have to remember that this jury is now a team, right? They are friends of sorts. They spend a lot of time together. They don't talk about the case, but they talk about family and friends and whatnot. So they have this commonality. And I think what happened here was what we sometimes call a compromise verdict.

They were not going to convict Combs of these serious charges, even though some of the facts might have been sensational for a lot of us to watch. But what I do think happened with this jury, is, they decided to find him guilty of a couple of counts, make him responsible criminally for some of it, and I think, again, sort of a compromise verdict that we say -- or the jury said, we didn't like what you did.

We didn't like a lot of what you did. Here's a couple of convictions, even though they did not convict him of the RICO. And I agree with Alyse. It was interesting, because no one knew what the four were when they said they already decided on four. It was interesting that what happened was they waited after non-convictions of the sex trafficking, but still really wrestling with the main count.

So, again, I think it was a compromise verdict, just a way to give him some responsibility. SANCHEZ: Yes, I want to give a context to our viewers. We just

watched a number of people jump out of a sprinter van and walk into court. Those are actually Diddy's sons. As you can see here, we're replaying this from moments ago.

And, again, at any moment, we're set to hear from the judge in this case as to whether Mr. Combs can walk free today and go back home to Miami to wait for sentencing or if he's going to remain in the custody of the government.

Mark, what are your thoughts on that? What is the likelihood that we're going to see Sean Combs emerge from this courthouse?

O'MARA: I think he should, and not just because I'm a dyed-in-the- wool criminal defense attorney.

When he was facing very serious charges, including life sentences, the decision to keep him, to detain him was appropriate, I think. However, now that we know what he is facing, which is just the two counts, not only are they 10-year counts each, but the sentencing guidelines will really suggest much or less, maybe as little as two years, and maybe actually less than accurate, because the judge has a lot of discretion.

Realizing, that he's nowhere near as much of a flight risk, there's nowhere near as much danger because he was not convicted of those, I think the judge should release him with conditions, GPS monitoring, maybe even house arrest, but he should not be behind bars until a judge sentences him from today forward.

KEILAR: Back to you, Laura, there at the courthouse, I would love to pick the brain of the jurors.

And I wonder. Sometimes, jurors do come out and speak, and I wonder if that will be the case. Are there any limitations on what they can say publicly?

COATES: The second I'm able to interview a juror, you know that I'm going to try to do so. It is up to them to do so. Sometimes, these very high-profile matters, they want to come together and discuss as a group. We have seen that in some other high-profile matters in the last five or so years, but their civic duty was done.

They entered that verdict, and they were dismissed. Their job is -- they didn't wait around to figure out whether or not Diddy was going to walk out the front door. Their job is done here. And, just yesterday, there was a hung jury on these matters.

[13:15:00]

Now, I want to remind people, just think about this. Why this may have been a very difficult matter in terms of the RICO, RICO is already a notoriously complex charge, normally associated with the mob. But, here, the verdict form gives you some insight into what these jurors had to wrestle with. They had to find whether he was guilty or not of RICO, but then they had to go through a list of different so-called predicate crimes.

And they had to answer for every single one, had the government proven or not proven their case, with respect to kidnapping and arson and bribery, and witness tampering, and forced labor, and prostitution, and sex trafficking, just to name a few.

And so those predicate crimes had kind of mini-trials during the course of this trial, where the government had to prove those cases, even if some of them were not stand-alone. You can imagine that flowchart of analysis, but yesterday they were hung. I want to know what happened between yesterday and today that made a previously hung jury say, we know what we want to do, it's acquit.

KEILAR: All right, Laura, Alyse, and Mark, if you can stand by for us, we would appreciate that. We will have much more on our breaking news, Sean "Diddy" Combs found not guilty on the most serious charges in his criminal case.

A judge will now decide whether to release him as he awaits sentencing. And letters from the prosecution and the defense have just been entered as they both make their cases with opposing positions on that matter.

SANCHEZ: And across the country, we're keeping a close eye on another major court case in another courtroom, this one in Idaho, where the man accused of murdering four college students is facing a judge, expected to enter a guilty plea, a plea that was reached over the objections of the family members of his victims.

A live update is straight ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:21:08]

SANCHEZ: Let's go straight to Idaho and listen to the judge addressing Bryan Kohberger and his plea deal.

JUDGE STEVEN HIPPLER, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, JUDICIAL COURT: It was -- once I learned of the defendant's decision to change his plea in this case, it was important that I take the plea as soon as possible because of the extraordinary administrative efforts that were otherwise attendant to the process of this -- getting this trial potentially under way on time, and including the significant process of bringing, again, potentially up to 10,000 jurors to come in and fill out juror questionnaires prior to the beginning of the voir dire process.

And so it was important that we -- if we're going to go down this road, do so expeditiously, so that we can avoid those costs and expenses associated with that, otherwise, if it was not going to result in a plea or for some reason the plea were to fall through today, that we could continue diligently towards trial at the time specified.

And so that obviously required that we act quickly. And so some folks may have not had the amount of time that we would otherwise allow for, for them to travel here. And so, again, I apologize for that.

I want to make people aware that, during the hearing, if you are to leave the courtroom for any reason, you will not be readmitted during the hearing.

Also, when we finish the hearing this morning, I ask that the public and media wait in their seats until the victims' families and the defendants' families and others are escorted out of the courtroom before you start to leave.

Finally, I want to acknowledge the trial court administrator and her staff, the Ada County sheriff, and Ada County Fourth District Marshals Service for the huge lift that they have accomplished in preparing for and orchestrating this hearing today, as well as to all the security attendant today that you see and some of whom you -- many of whom you don't see, with less than 48 hours' notice.

And so I appreciate the hard work that they have been doing, frankly, some of them while they were on some vacation prior to the trial starting and had to call that short. And so I appreciate very much their professionalism and dedication.

All right, that said, let's move to the business of today. I understand the state and the defense have reached a plea agreement in this case. For the record, I have a written plea agreement which indicates, in sum, the defendant will plead guilty to all five counts in the indictment, burglary, felony, and first degree murder of four counts.

The state and the defendant stipulate, that is, that the defense is not free to argue for a lesser sentence at sentencing, to the following. The defendant on the burglary charge will be sentenced to 10 years fixed, and that the defendant on counts two through five, the four counts of first degree homicide, on each count would receive a fixed life sentence, all five of those counts to run consecutive to one another.

Defendant, as part of the plea agreement, waives his right to appeal, as well as his right to appeal the sentence, and his right to seek leniency or reconsideration of the sentence under Idaho Criminal Rule 35. This is not a Rule 11 agreement, meaning the court is not bound by the plea agreement and could impose a different lawful sentence at sentencing.

[13:25:26]

The stipulated agreement in the parties is the maximum on each count. So, theoretically, the only thing the court could do would be a lesser sentence at sentencing. But the defendant is not free to ask the court to do so under the plea agreement.

Are there any other material terms of the plea agreement that the parties would like to make? Obviously, the plea agreement, the written plea agreement will speak for itself and be part of the court record.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Not from the state, Your Honor. Thank you. ANNE TAYLOR, ATTORNEY FOR BRYAN KOHBERGER: No, Your Honor. Thank you.

HIPPLER: All right, very well.

All right, Ms. Taylor, have you had sufficient time to discuss this case and all of its ramifications with your client?

TAYLOR: I have, Your Honor.

HIPPLER: Have you discussed fully with him his rights, defenses, and possible consequences to him of the guilty plea?

TAYLOR: Yes, Your Honor.

HIPPLER: Have you been able to do all the discovery you feel necessary?

TAYLOR: Yes, Your Honor.

HIPPLER: And have you informed your client of the importance of providing the court truthful and accurate answers in taking this plea today?

TAYLOR: I have.

HIPPLER: Have you apprised your client of any and all offers and counteroffers and answered his questions about those?

TAYLOR: Yes.

HIPPLER: Do you consent to the entry of the plea today?

TAYLOR: I do.

HIPPLER: All right, Mr. Kohberger, I need to ask you some questions this afternoon, or I guess it's this morning still. I do this to ensure that you under -- that I am ensured that you understand the nature of the charges to which I understand you're going to plead guilty, as well as the possible consequences to you of your guilty pleas.

I want to make sure your plea is given voluntarily. And I want to make sure that you actually committed the crimes to which you're pleading guilty, because I don't want you to plead guilty to a crime you didn't commit. If you attempt to plead guilty today, but for some reason I don't accept your plea, then it is possible that your statements today could be used against you later at trial. Do you understand that?

BRYAN KOHBERGER, DEFENDANT: Yes.

HIPPLER: All right, thank you.

And now, while you're standing, actually, why don't you take the oath from the clerk?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Please raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you shall give in the matter (INAUDIBLE) before this court shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

KOHBERGER: Yes.

HIPPLER: All right.

And, Mr. Kohberger, just to make it easier, you don't need to stand when you speak to me. I appreciate the sign of respect, but for convenience you can remain seated, all right?

Before I start asking questions today, have you consumed -- substantive questions, let me ask you, have you consumed any alcohol, drug, or other intoxicating substance that would impair your ability to understand or exercise reasonable judgment?

KOHBERGER: No.

HIPPLER: You feel like you are thinking clearly today?

KOHBERGER: Yes.

HIPPLER: All right, I want you to understand what the possible penalties are for each of the crimes, to which I understand you're going to offer a guilty plea today.

They include, on count one, the burglary, a fine of up to $50 000 and a period of incarceration of up to 10 years in the state penitentiary. You may be required to pay restitution to any victims of the crime. Count two, three, four, and five for first-degree murder, the consequences include a fine of up to $50,000, a period of incarceration of life imprisonment, which is a requirement of a sentence, that it be a life sentence, with a mandatory minimum sentence of at least 10 years on each of those counts.

In addition, you would be potentially responsible for a fine of up to $5,000 to each of the victims of your crime, to be enforced in the form of a civil judgment, to operate as additional punishment. This is in excess of any restitution or fines that the court could order. And, again, you may be required to pay restitution to the victims of the crime.

You would be required to provide as to counts one, two, three, four, and five a DNA sample and a right thumbprint impression and potentially pay for analysis of those samples. You would lose any right to possess, purchase, or carry a firearm, the right to serve on jury duty, the right to hold public office, and the right to vote.

Do you understand the charges and all those possible consequences?

KOHBERGER: Yes.

HIPPLER: You have heard the plea agreement that I talked about today. Do you agree with that plea agreement?