(At the sidebar)
MS. SMYSER: Your Honor, this is from an exhibit you ruled was not coming into evidence, yet Mr. Steel is reading every line of the text message conversation, so I think that is inappropriate.
THE COURT: These are in the exhibit. These are statements by?
MS. SMYSER: By Mia to Ms. Ventura.
THE COURT: Why wouldn't he be able to ask the witness whether she made those statements? What's the objection?
MS. SMYSER: Because the objection is --
THE COURT: Which rule?
MS. SMYSER: -- one on personal knowledge and --
THE COURT: How would she not have person knowledge of her own statements?
MS. SMYSER: She would have personal knowledge of her own statements. The statements go to whether she's speculating about what is in Mr. Combs' mind at that time, your Honor.
THE COURT: Right now Mr. Steel only asked her if she made those statements and she said she doesn't know, then he's moved on. So what's the objection?
MS. SMYSER: I think it's an end run around your prior ruling that this particular exhibit was not coming into evidence.
THE COURT: It is not coming into evidence, if we made a ruling on it.
MS. SMYSER: OK.
THE COURT: Then what's the nature of the objection?
MS. SMYSER: Your Honor, it's 403 objection and --
THE COURT: OK.
MS. SMYSER: -- a hearsay objection because he's reading from something that is not in evidence that you already ruled was not coming into evidence.
THE COURT: All right. Well, Mr. Steel, I don't know if you had this exhibit up there, but it should not be -- that's not how you ask the witness if they made prior statements, even if you're planning to try to impeach with a prior inconsistent statement. If you're reading up there from something, you're not supposed to do that.
MR. STEEL: I'm not reading from anything. This is my memory what she told Mr. Combs -- I'm sorry -- Ms. Ventura. She said, I'm taking up for Mr. Combs. Obviously, I'm going to ask a series of questions.
THE COURT: You're moving on from this, at this point, now that we've asked a few questions.
MR. STEEL: There might a couple more questions.
THE COURT: All right. Let's do that and move on.
MR. STEEL: All right. Can we step back?
THE COURT: All right.
(Continued on next page)
(In open court)
THE COURT: All right. Mr. Steel, you may proceed.
BY MR. STEEL:
MR. STEEL: Do you remember telling your sister, Ms. Ventura, while sticking up for Mr. Combs, that Mr. Combs --
THE COURT: You need to rephrase the question.
MR. STEEL: OK.
MR. STEEL: Do you remember telling Ms. Ventura that Mr. Combs just throws a tantrum and kicks and screams like to a mother, the one person who loves the child the most, and the child loves the most? Do you remember saying that?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: That's sustained.
MR. STEEL: Do you remember telling Ms. Ventura, don't listen to any negativity --
THE COURT: Let's move on.
MR. STEEL: Why would you stick up for Mr. Combs, knowing what you are saying you have knowledge of, this brutality? Why would you do that when Ms. Ventura said he's being jerky?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: That's sustained. You can rephrase that series of questions to try to ask one question.
MR. STEEL: OK.
MR. STEEL: At the time of telling Ms. Ventura, or I think your word -- let me rephrase. You said to the jury a short while ago, you were sticking up for Mr. Combs, or something to that effect. Do you remember that?
MR. STEEL: Whatever word you used, do you remember that?
MR. STEEL: Why would you go to bat for Mr. Combs to your friend Ms. Ventura?
MIA: I wouldn't call it going for bat, but -- going to bat for him, but I was required, which I believe I testified about the other day, about one of the worst parts was being put in the middle and having to cover up or cover up for Puff to Cass, which he forced me to do constantly.
MR. STEEL: Are you done?
MR. STEEL: Mia, my question is -- this is nothing in the middle. Ms. Ventura, you remember, came to you and your response is, you are telling her that Mr. Combs is just misunderstood. Do you remember saying that?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: Hold on. You've got to rephrase that question, Mr. Steel.
MR. STEEL: Why would you ever say something to lead Ms. Ventura to believe that you think it's OK the way Mr. Combs acts?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: You've got to rephrase that question. We've got to take a step back before you can ask a question of that nature.
MR. STEEL: Did you tell Ms. Ventura that she needs to stay with Mr. Combs?
MR. STEEL: Do you remember words to that effect?
MR. STEEL: Do you remember sticking up for Mr. Combs to Ms. Ventura?
MIA: I remember covering for him when he forced me to and feeling terrible about it. However, if I didn't, he would have taken me away from her.
MR. STEEL: How would Mr. Combs have even known about this communication between you and your friend?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: That's sustained.
MR. STEEL: How do you believe Mr. Combs would ever find out about a private communication between you and Ms. Ventura?
MS. SMYSER: Objection, your Honor.
THE COURT: This question needs to be rephrased. I think there is a threshold problem with the way you've asked this problem.
BY MR. STEEL:
MR. STEEL: Was Mr. Combs present when Ms. Ventura confided in you that she didn't like the way that he was acting?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: That's sustained.
MR. STEEL: Ma'am, when you say that Mr. Combs would find out what you said to Ms. Ventura, explain to the jury how he would ever find out?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: That's overruled.
MIA: He has stolen my phone many times. He's stolen Cassie's phone many times. He's put tracking devices on her car. I'm not sure what he is capable of. I was terrified.
MR. STEEL: Haven't you been alone with Ms. Ventura where you both can speak without Mr. Combs present or anyone else?
MR. STEEL: Now, you were discharged or separated or no longer working with Mr. Combs and his company clearly in March 2017, right?
MR. STEEL: And do you remember, during that time of parting ways, that you actually obtained a lawyer?
MR. STEEL: And that would be almost immediately in the beginning of 2017, true?
MIA: I'm not sure when I -- it wasn't immediately after the initial conversation. But yes, I did get a lawyer. I just don't remember the dates.
MR. STEEL: Do you remember having a lawyer before you left the employment of Combs Enterprises, Revolt, or anything to do with Mr. Combs in March 2017?
MIA: Oh, yes, because they were supposed to negotiate my severance. So yes, it would have been before.
MR. STEEL: So with all of these parameters that Mr. Combs put on you, you went to a lawyer in the beginning of 2017 and you end working there 2017 March, right?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: Why don't you ask the question without the preamble.
MR. STEEL: You end up using that lawyer, very fine lawyer, and you bring a suit against Mr. Combs and the company, is that true?
MR. STEEL: Yes. You spoke about your lawyer -- I don't know want to know what you discussed. You spoke with the lawyer, and the upshot of that, there was a lawsuit, right?
MR. STEEL: OK. And that's a claim that you were making, true?
MR. STEEL: And you asked for, you told the jury, or your lawyer asked for $10 million, right?
MIA: I think -- I believe my lawyer started that as the negotiation, the start of the negotiation.
MR. STEEL: And the negotiations happened and mediation happened, right?
MR. STEEL: And during that time you had to articulate through your lawyer why you were owed this money, right?
MR. STEEL: And it included anything dealing with Mr. Combs or his businesses, why you were wronged, right?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: That's sustained.
MR. STEEL: You never mentioned at that mediation anything about sexual assault, is that true?
MR. STEEL: Or any part of it?
MIA: I'm sorry. Well, the answer is no. I just don't know if I'm talking about something privileged. I'm not a lawyer. I want to make sure ...
MR. STEEL: You mentioned, when the prosecutor asked you questions, that you never mentioned anything about sexual assault when you had your lawyer during the mediation and you're suing Mr. Combs or wanted money from Mr. Combs and the enterprise, and his businesses, right?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: That's sustained. Mr. Steel, I think you need to clean that question up.
MR. STEEL: Is it true that you never mentioned, as part of this seeking of $10 million, that you were sexually assaulted?
MR. STEEL: Now, by the time that this mediation ended, were you aware of the #MeToo movement?
MR. STEEL: Did this mediation end, if you remember, October 2017?
MIA: I believe the mediation was before that, because I remember specifically, it was a few months after that, that the catalyst, the article had came out about the person who the #MeToo movement was from.
MR. STEEL: All right. I would like to show you -- Oh, you mentioned already, you received about a $400,000 settlement with Mr. Combs and the companies, right?
MR. STEEL: And that was the upshot of making you whole from your time with Sean Combs?
MR. STEEL: That was the settlement agreement, right?
MR. STEEL: Correct?
MR. STEEL: I'm asking you.
MR. STEEL: Correct.
MR. STEEL: All right. Now, I would like you -- I would like to ask you about and like you to turn to in your book, if you could, just for you and the parties, tab number 37. Tell me if you recognize that.
MR. STEEL: Do you recognize the posting and what you wrote?
MR. STEEL: Is this your social media account?
MR. STEEL: Are you look at 1737?
MR. STEEL: I think we're looking at different items.
MR. STEEL: Can you look at the screen? It will be for you.
MR. STEEL: OK. Is it your text message?
MR. STEEL: OK. Your Honor, I'll move for the admission of 1737 under seal, but 1737R for the court.
THE COURT: All right. They will be admitted on that basis.
(Defendant's Exhibit DX 1737 (Sealed) received in evidence)
(Defendant's Exhibit DX 1737R received in evidence)
MR. STEEL: Can it be shown, your Honor?
BY MR. STEEL:
MR. STEEL: Do you see 1737 in your booklet?
MR. STEEL: OK. And this is your message to Mr. Combs, right?
MR. STEEL: Dated November 4, 2023, right?
MR. STEEL: And what is written on it?
MR. STEEL: And that is Mr. Combs' birthday?
MR. STEEL: And this --
MR. STEEL: I'm sorry. Go ahead.
MR. STEEL: And this is consistent with other birthdays where you did send on birthdays, you testified before the jury, happy birthday to Mr. Combs, true?
MIA: Other birthdays, 1000 percent, it's on brand. But, again, I don't remember this specific one.
MR. STEEL: Now, this is a picture that the jurors have seen before, right?
MR. STEEL: That's you on the left with the tutu?
MR. STEEL: That's Mr. Combs, presumably, appearing as if he's holding his private part, true?
MR. STEEL: Now, 12 days after November 4, 2023, do you remember November 16, 2023, Ms. Ventura's lawsuit was made public?
MR. STEEL: And do you remember in that lawsuit that Ms. Ventura alleged sexual abuse at the hands of Mr. Combs?
MR. STEEL: And by the 16th day of November of 2023, you were aware of the #MeToo movement, true?
MR. STEEL: And by November 16, 2023, social media had billions of users, true?
MR. STEEL: And by November 16 of 2023, you are no longer with Mr. Combs in any type of everyday or even casual relationship where you would see him, true?
MR. STEEL: And you've already sued Mr. Combs six years earlier?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
MR. STEEL: Is that true?
THE COURT: Sustained. If you can rephrase the question.
MR. STEEL: You already went to mediation with Mr. Combs approximately six years and one month earlier, right?
MR. STEEL: And there is strength in numbers for people who have been truly victimized of sexual assault?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. STEEL: Did you tell your sister, Ms. Ventura, after reading the lawsuit and her claims of sexual assault, me too?
THE COURT: That's sustained. You've got to rephrase the question.
MR. STEEL: Did you call Ms. Ventura after reading her allegations against Mr. Combs of being sexually abused?
MR. STEEL: Correct.
MR. STEEL: Or communicate with her?
MR. STEEL: Did you advise Ms. Ventura in November of 2023 what you allege Mr. Combs supposedly did to you?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. STEEL: That's my question.
MR. STEEL: Why?
MIA: Just because you find out something doesn't mean you just immediately snap out of it. I was still deeply ashamed and wanted to die with this. I never wanted to tell anybody ever.
MR. STEEL: You were so deeply ashamed and, God forbid, wanted to die, why didn't you -- why did you, with all of these messages that the jurors have seen, still communicate with Mr. Combs?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: Sustained. Let's rephrase the question, please.
MR. STEEL: December 2023, did you learn that the United States Attorney's office and federal agents were looking into an investigation concerning Mr. Combs, which included sexual assault?
MIA: I'm not sure when I learned about the investigation, but I did learn about the investigation.
MR. STEEL: And do you remember meeting with the prosecutors, some of them are here, as well as federal agents, on January 5 of 2024?
MR. STEEL: Let me just show you something that, with the court's permission, may refresh your memory on the date. OK?
MR. STEEL: Your Honor, may we show to, with the court's permission, the witness and the parties only, 3504 002. First line. No, 002. Should be page two of eight. Sorry, the very first.
MR. STEEL: Could you do me a favor and read that to yourself and tell me if you remember meeting with members of the federal authorities, agents for the federal government, as well as United States Attorney's office on January 5, 2024, approximately 4:00 o'clock in the afternoon?
MIA: I definitely remember meeting with them at 4:00 o'clock in the afternoon. That could be the date, I just don't remember the date, but I definitely remember meeting with them.
MR. STEEL: Now, when you met with the U.S. Attorney's office in January 5, 2024, you never -- or you told them -- excuse me -- about this supposed sexual assault, right?
MR. STEEL: I asked, did you?
MR. STEEL: I would like you to tell the ladies and gentlemen of the jury whether you remember, just three days later, again discussing with members of the United States Attorney's office of the Southern District of New York, as well as federal agents, on January of 2024, at approximately 12:30 p.m., their investigation and your knowledge of same?
MR. STEEL: Do you remember meeting on the same topic three days later with the federal agents aunt the federal prosecutors?
MIA: I don't remember the timing of things or the dates, but I do remember meeting with them again.
MR. STEEL: Can you please, with the court's permission, look at 3504-004, first paragraph, page two of five. Can you read that to yourself.
THE COURT: Hold on, Mia. Let's take this down. Mr. Steel, your next question.
MR. STEEL: You remember meeting, three days later, January 8, 2024, with the same agents and prosecutors about Mr. Combs and their investigation?
MIA: I definitely remember meeting with them again. I'm so sorry. I just don't know the exact timing, but I 1000 percent remember meeting with them again.
MR. STEEL: Did you tell, on the second occasion that you met with the prosecutors, that Mr. Combs sexually assaulted you?
MIA: I don't remember when that happened. I don't remember when I told, but I know it wasn't the first time, and it could also not have been the second time. I just don't remember when.
MR. STEEL: Would it refresh your memory to look at notes from that meeting that you had the second time, whether you told anything about Mr. Combs' supposedly sexual assaulting you?
THE COURT: Hold on.
THE COURT: First of all, that's not the right way to ask the question. So do you want to show the witness something?
MR. STEEL: If needed, sure.
THE COURT: Well, let's ask a new question, and then if you want to show the witness something, then you can show it to the witness. Next question.
BY MR. STEEL:
MR. STEEL: In your mind right now, can you tell the jury whether you mentioned anything about a supposed sexual assault at the hands of Mr. Combs when you met with the prosecutors the second time on January 2024?
MIA: I don't remember when I disclosed. I remember -- I don't remember how many times I met with them before I had legal representation. So I don't know. I don't remember the contents of those meetings. I do remember meeting with them. I definitely did not tell them before I had representation.
MR. STEEL: All right. Well, at the second meeting, you didn't have representation, or you don't remember? We could show you a document, with the court's permission, to refresh your memory if you don't know.
MIA: Oh, yeah. I'm just saying I don't remember. I'm not, like, trying to be argumentative at all.
MR. STEEL: Do you remember meeting with the prosecution March 19, 2024?
MR. STEEL: Do you remember for the first time on that third meeting that you had a lawyer?
MR. STEEL: Let me show you -- Once you had a lawyer, your lawyer went with you to these meetings, is that fair to say?
MR. STEEL: Let me show you what you've already looked at, with the court's permission, 3504-004, page two, first paragraph. Do you see any mention of a lawyer with you at that meeting?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. STEEL: Well, read it to yourself.
THE COURT: Hold on. Let's take it down. Mr. Steel.
MR. STEEL: Does that refresh your memory whether you do not have a lawyer at that second meeting?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: That's sustained. The jury should disregard the witness's last answer. Mr. Steel.
(Continued on next page)
BY MR. STEEL:
MR. STEEL: On March 19, 2024, do you remember meeting with the U.S. Attorney's Office officials, as well as the federal agents, along with your lawyer, Shawn Crowley, C-r-o-w-l-e-y?
MR. STEEL: Let me show you, with the Court's permission, the document, to see if it refreshes your memory, 3504-008, page 2, the first paragraph. Can you read that to yourself.
MR. STEEL: Does this refresh your memory that -- did you read it?
MR. STEEL: Does that refresh your memory the first time that you were ever represented on this case by Shawn Crowley or another lawyer?
MIA: I remember the meeting. Again, I'm just not good with dates. So, yes, I remember the meeting a thousand percent. I just don't want to say I remember exact dates if I don't. That's all.
MR. STEEL: Now, when you brought your lawyer, Shawn Crowley, that was your lawyer of choice, right?
MR. STEEL: She represented you, right?
MR. STEEL: And were you aware that just 45 days earlier, she obtained a gigantic 83 --
MS. SMYSER: Objection, objection.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. STEEL: -- that she represented?
THE COURT: Hold on. When it's sustained, that means you move on to the next question. It doesn't mean you keep asking the same question.
BY MR. STEEL:
MR. STEEL: Were you aware, when you hired her, that she had just finished a trial?
MS. SMYSER: Objection, your Honor.
THE COURT: Hold on. That's sustained. Let's move on. Next question.
BY MR. STEEL:
MR. STEEL: Why did you hire Ms. Crowley?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: That's sustained, as well. Let's move on.
BY MR. STEEL:
MR. STEEL: Do you realize, or do you remember, the first time you ever made a claim that Mr. Combs ever sexual assaulted you was on June 18th of 2024?
MR. STEEL: And June of 2024 — and if you need anything to refresh your memory, let us know — that is seven months after Ms. Ventura's lawsuit went viral, right?
MR. STEEL: Why did it take seven or eight months for you to tell the U.S. Attorney's Office and the federal government --
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
MR. STEEL: -- that Mr. Combs supposedly sexual assaulted you?
THE COURT: You've got to rephrase these questions, please.
BY MR. STEEL:
MR. STEEL: You didn't tell the U.S. Attorney's Office before June 2024 anything about Sean Combs supposedly violating you in a sexual manner, did you?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: That's overruled.
MIA: Sir, once again, I don't remember the timing of things, but I absolutely remember I did not tell them, the government, anything until I had representation. And I can't go into why because, apparently, that's privileged.
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: All right. Let's move on to the next question.
BY MR. STEEL:
MR. STEEL: Ma'am, you had representation in March of 2024, and you did not mention anything about sexual assault --
MS. SMYSER: Objection, your Honor.
THE COURT: That's sustained.
BY MR. STEEL:
MR. STEEL: -- to the United States Attorney's Office?
THE COURT: Hold on. Let's have a brief sidebar.
(Continued on next page)
(At sidebar)
THE COURT: So, this is exactly what I was talking about before we brought the witness back in — that the questions are being asked using an improper form. And I am getting the sense that they are being asked not so much to elicit any answer, but merely to have you, Mr. Steel, testify for the jury. So that's going to end right now or I will end this cross-examination. There are ways to ask these questions that you are asking in a proper way that does not violate the rules. You can do it that way, and I know you know how, but you're not doing it that way. Instead, you're re-asking the same questions so that the jury hears your questions, and then there's an objection, which I sustain, and then you try to keep re-asking the same question in the same improper way. So what's going on?
MR. STEEL: I would not do that, and I did not do that. My questions go to the fact that Mia does not outcry at all. She then hires a lawyer 45 days after a gigantic verdict was reached by the lawyer. That goes --
THE COURT: Put that last part to the side, but the first part, you can inquire about. It's just that you are not actually inquiring about that in a proper way. So why don't you try to do it in a proper way, and please do not introduce any kind of situation where it appears — and it might not be your intent — but it appears as if you're trying to abuse the questioning format in order to testify yourself in front of the jury. That would be improper, you'd agree, right?
MR. STEEL: I'm not doing that, and, yes, I would agree that it would be improper. But to exclude the lawyer and what the lawyer just did prior — receiving an $83 million verdict — it goes to this witness' motive, interest, and bias, and that she will be receiving money. That's why I'd like to ask her questions, why did you hire that lawyer. I'm not asking her any attorney-client privilege. Why did you hire this lawyer.
THE COURT: That's a separate line of questioning. If you want to ask the witness whether she has retained an attorney with the intent of obtaining any kind of civil judgment or settlement from Mr. Combs, you can ask those questions, but that is not presently what you are asking about.
MR. STEEL: I want to ask about this lawyer, and that this lawyer, she knows her reputation, and they just got a judgment in this city for $83 million 45 days --
THE COURT: We can pick that particular issue up, which I imagine the government will have some pointed objections to, at the break, but, right now, we're just going to go through what should be a fairly routine effort — we've done it countless times in this case — establishing the chronology of when particular witnesses told particular things to the government. And we've done that, and there haven't been any objections from either side in terms of doing that. This particular effort to do it seems like we're running into some problems that we don't need to run into. So let's try to do it the right way, and let's proceed. All right?
MR. STEEL: Yes, sir.
MS. COMEY: Your Honor, may I ask that we have a shorter lunch today, given the delays we had with this witness' cross?
THE COURT: We're going to do that.
MS. COMEY: Thank you, your Honor.
THE COURT: Let's go.
(Continued on next page)
(In open court)
THE COURT: All right, Mr. Steel. You may proceed.
BY MR. STEEL:
MR. STEEL: Do you remember stating that you never told anyone that Sean Combs supposedly sexual assaulted you before you did so in June of 2024?
MR. STEEL: And that includes, you said, you didn't tell any family members, right?
MR. STEEL: Roommate?
MR. STEEL: Friends?
MR. STEEL: Therapist?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
MR. STEEL: That was said. Excuse me.
THE COURT: That's overruled.
BY MR. STEEL:
MR. STEEL: Do you remember your lawyers, as your agent, being asked whether you would release your therapy notes?
THE COURT: Sustained. Let's move on.
MR. STEEL: Do you remember telling --
MR. STEEL: Well --
THE COURT: That's sustained. Let's move on to the next question.
BY MR. STEEL:
MR. STEEL: I want to ask you about the Prince party that you talked about.
MR. STEEL: Now, you explained that you and Ms. Ventura wrestled with the idea whether you can go out to the party. Do you remember that?
MR. STEEL: The reason for that is you had no permission to attend that party, that's what you said, right?
MR. STEEL: Is that true?
MR. STEEL: And you and Ms. Ventura decided, well, we will go to the party, right?
MR. STEEL: And it's a Prince, the performer, party, and, presumably, you knew that Mr. Combs would know people there, true?
MR. STEEL: Yet you're telling the jury that you and Ms. Ventura went to this party even knowing that you'd be uncovered, true?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: That's sustained. It needs to be rephrased.
BY MR. STEEL:
MR. STEEL: Did you go in any type of disguise to this party?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: That's overruled.
BY MR. STEEL:
MR. STEEL: And then Mr. Combs comes to the party, right?
MR. STEEL: And you talked to the jurors about this big chase that occurred, and violence, right?
MR. STEEL: Is there any photograph of that big chase --
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
MR. STEEL: -- or violence that you know about?
THE COURT: It's overruled.
BY MR. STEEL:
MR. STEEL: Do you know if there's any video of that big chase and violence that you can tell us about?
MR. STEEL: You told the jurors that on one occasion, you and Ms. Ventura were so scared of Mr. Combs, that you got into a pedal boat and went out into a storm, or something to that effect. Do you remember that?
MR. STEEL: And while, as you say, out there, it was your decision, you told the jurors, do I continue to dare Mother Nature or go back to the shore to dare Sean Combs. Do you remember that type of testimony?
MR. STEEL: Is there any reporting of that, that you're aware of?
MR. STEEL: Any type of note or text message or anything of that effect to prove that that happened?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: That needs to be rephrased.
BY MR. STEEL:
MR. STEEL: Are you aware of any type of text message or email or other recording that that incident happened?
MR. STEEL: Any photographs?
MR. STEEL: Mia, was that just made up by you?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: That's overruled.
BY MR. STEEL:
MR. STEEL: How is it that all of these events have no photograph or text message or email from you? Can you explain that, please?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: Sustained.
BY MR. STEEL:
MR. STEEL: With regards to you having no time with friends or family while working with Mr. Combs so you could speak with them meaningfully -- do you remember that type of testimony?
MR. STEEL: -- did you ever go to events with your family or friends during the time that you were working with Mr. Combs that was outside of people who worked with Mr. Combs?
MIA: Over the course of eight years, I definitely got to go every sporadic times to see -- yeah, I definitely saw people every once in a while, but, like, very, very few and far between.
MR. STEEL: Did you go to weddings?
MIA: I was permitted to go to a few weddings of my sister and best friend, I believe, over eight years, yeah.
MR. STEEL: Did you go to birthday parties of friends and family?
MR. STEEL: Halloween celebrations with friends and family?
MIA: I don't -- I don't really remember. I mean, I did a lot of Halloweens with Puff. I don't think so, but I could be wrong.
MR. STEEL: Vacations with friends and family?
MR. STEEL: You had time outside of the grip of Mr. Combs to be with people that you trusted and you could open to; is that true?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: It's overruled.
MIA: Did I have time? I wasn't outside of his grip because I still had to be in constant communication 24/7. In fact, one time -- I won't tell that story, never mind. But I was never outside of his grip.
BY MR. STEEL:
MR. STEEL: When you were with your family or friends outside of Mr. Combs' presence and outside of your work environment, why wasn't that time to explain the horror that you're describing to this jury?
MIA: Because it's way more complex than that. Again, the highs were super high, the lows were super low, the dynamics shifted all the time. I was completely entrenched in his world. It wasn't -- I mean, if it was horrible all the time, like, of course. I mean, there's so many reasons.
MR. STEEL: Is one of the reasons because Mr. Combs actually was pleasant for you to be around?
MIA: All the time? No, absolutely not. Was there a version -- was there one of his personalities? Yes, of course. The rest of them? No.
MR. STEEL: Isn't it true that, except on the rare occasion that Mr. Combs was violent to Ms. Ventura, which is not ever fair or accurate or correct to do, you enjoyed being around Mr. Combs?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: That's sustained. The question needs to be rephrased.
BY MR. STEEL:
MR. STEEL: Isn't it true that Mr. Combs, on rare occasions, was violent towards Ms. Ventura?
MR. STEEL: And you never said to Ms. Ventura, this is crazy, we gotta go? That never occurred to you?
MR. STEEL: Support her in what way?
MR. STEEL: All of these times that Mr. Combs -- there is nothing, until you get a lawyer, to say that Mr. Combs was ever, in any way, sexually violent to you; is that true?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: That needs to be rephrased.
BY MR. STEEL:
MR. STEEL: Until you get a lawyer, in 2024, you never ever claimed, to anyone, that Mr. Combs was sexually violent to you; is that true?
MR. STEEL: When you say your privileged therapist, could you waive that privilege --
THE COURT: Let's move on.
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: Let's move on to the next question.
BY MR. STEEL:
MR. STEEL: With regards to you being here today, you're still represented by counsel, true?
MR. STEEL: And isn't it true that you sought a lawyer because you wanted to sue Mr. Combs for money?
MR. STEEL: And that you joined the #MeToo money grab against Sean Combs; is that true?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: Sustained.
BY MR. STEEL:
MR. STEEL: Is it true that you knew that Ms. Ventura, by making this claim against Mr. Combs in November 2023, you knew that she received money?
MR. STEEL: I'm sorry, are you finished?
MR. STEEL: My question to you is: You were aware, before you got a lawyer, and before you made any claim that Mr. Sean Combs in any way sexually assaulted you, that Ms. Ventura received money from her lawsuit, true?
MR. STEEL: Well, you know that because you speak with her, right?
MR. STEEL: And it was public and you speak with her, right?
MR. STEEL: Now, when you would meet with the government, is it true that you were still speaking with Ms. Ventura, in 2023 going into 2024?
MR. STEEL: How would we know that?
MS. SMYSER: Objection.
THE COURT: That's sustained.
BY MR. STEEL:
MR. STEEL: Did Ms. Ventura discuss with you her meetings with the government?
MR. STEEL: The times that you met with the government, was it 27 times?
MR. STEEL: Well, I'm going to show you some documents that may refresh your memory how many times you met with them. Okay?
MR. STEEL: Look on your screen and tell me if this refreshes your memory. 2304-002, I'd like you to look at that document, and I'd like you to read it to yourself, and tell me if you remember the date and the topics discussed. Just read it to yourself.
(Pause)
MR. STEEL: Your Honor, while she's doing that, can we have a sidebar?
THE COURT: You may.
(Continued on next page)
(At sidebar)
MR. STEEL: Your Honor, in the interests of time, with the Court's permission and the U.S. Attorney's Office nonobjection, can we just give a hard copy of the 3500s to the witness during a break?
THE COURT: That's what I was going to suggest. I think that's a better way to do this.
MS. SMYSER: Your Honor, I have a proposal that may help short-circuit this. I need to check the number of meetings, but we'd probably be willing to stipulate to the number, to not have to read all of them.
THE COURT: Perfect.
MR. STEEL: I'd also like to have her read for when she first alerted of any sexual assault. I know when it is, the government knows when it is, but she needs to read the document, or stipulate, whatever you want.
THE COURT: All right. During the break, if she wants to just review those documents to refresh her recollection, then you can ask her questions about that after that.
MR. STEEL: How do we -- okay. We'll figure out a way to get to it.
THE COURT: All right. Anything further?
MR. STEEL: I would like to ask a series of questions, but I'd like her to --
THE COURT: Is this a good time for us to take our lunch break?
MR. STEEL: Yes, because then I can ask her questions.
THE COURT: All right. Very good.
(Continued on next page)