(Witness excused)
THE COURT: This will be a good time for a break. Thank you, members of the jury. We'll be back in 15 minutes. We'll come back at 11:30.
(Jury not present)
THE COURT: Please be seated. Ms. Geragos, did you have a chance to look at the exhibit we were previously discussing or would you like to pick that up before the lunch break?
MS. GERAGOS: I'm happy to do it now, your Honor. I do think, though, if I can speak to Ms. Foster, we may be able to confer about specific redactions, but I'm happy to also address it on the record now. So either way.
THE COURT: I'm always happy for the parties to meet and confer if you think it can resolve the objection. But a general issue has been raised where multiple bases for admission of the conversation were offered by the government. And so if you're saying you don't have a general objection, but you have some redactions that you would propose, then that's fine. But if you are still objecting to the entirety of the conversation, then I'd like to hear the conversation either now or at the beginning of the lunch break.
MS. GERAGOS: I will tell your Honor that I have an objection to many text messages within the exhibits as hearsay within hearsay. So if those specific parts are redacted, I think it would give the ability -- the point of the exhibit, I think it's important for the government to have this conversation with Mr. Combs and this other individual about Ms. Ventura to be in there, and I think those parts of the conversation we don't have the hearsay within hearsay problems that we do in other parts of the conversation. So I think redacting the hearsay within hearsay parts of the conversation about this other individual allows the jury to -- they won't be confused, it will give the government what it needs in terms of Mr. Combs's part of the conversation and then we don't have the hearsay concerns.
THE COURT: In particular, are you talking about the particular text concerning telling two other individuals that what transpired happened at the club as opposed to some other explanation, is that what you're referring to or something else?
MS. GERAGOS: No, I'm referring to when D-Roc talks about what another individual says. I think that's hearsay within hearsay. But I think that the parts of the conversation where Mr. Combs is saying --
THE COURT: Let me make this simple. Any time Mr. Combs is speaking or D-Roc is speaking, you're saying that may be fine, but we would need to redact instances where other individuals' statements are referenced in these text messages, and perhaps the government would say, well, we don't care about those anyway?
MS. GERAGOS: I think, although I'd have to talk to Ms. Foster, I think because the parts that D-Roc would be talking about what another individual is saying doesn't take away from the Ventura part of the conversation, which is I think the import of the conversation, why they --
THE COURT: Why don't you speak with Ms. Foster and we can pick this up at the beginning or end of the lunch break, assuming this will not come up before then. And Ms. Smyser, Mr. Piazza will be our next witness?
MS. SMYSER: That's what I wanted to address with the Court. So given the conversation this morning, Mr. Piazza has been doing a little work on the compilations to ensure that essentially no time is dropped from the compilation to address the defense's concerns that were raised this morning. I will just note for the record that we have turned over this compilation two weeks ago, but we're trying to address those issues now while Mr. Piazza is here. Because of that, we are going to call Derek Ferguson before Mr. Piazza in order to give him a little bit more time to address the compilations, in order to give the defense time to review after he is done so we can hopefully finish this up today. I would just, if we can have an extra five minutes on this break so Ms. Slavik can be prepared to put on Mr. Ferguson right after.
THE COURT: That's fine. So we'll come back at 11:35.
(Recess)
(Continued on next page)
THE COURT: Please be seated. Anything to address before we bring the jury back out?
MS. STEINER: Your Honor, I'll just note that the government intends to put up a few exhibits for the jury before its next witness.
THE COURT: Understood. Let's bring our jury back out.
(Continued on next page)
(Jury present)
THE COURT: Please be seated. Ms. Steiner.
MS. STEINER: Thank you, your Honor. Ms. Gavin, could you please bring up what's in evidence as Government Exhibit 1301, which is a stipulation. I'm going to read portions of this into the record. If you could please highlight paragraph 1 and subpart (b). "On or about March 25 of 2024, at the Miami Opa-Locka Airport in Opa-Locka, Florida, law enforcement agents from Homeland Security Investigations ('HSI') seized the following devices; "(b) Government Exhibit C200 and Government Exhibit C300, two cell phones from Kristina Khorram's person." And if we could put up, next to page 1, page 2. If we could please highlight paragraph 4: "Government Exhibits C300A through C364, including the subdivisions thereof, are true and accurate excerpts of data extracted from GXC300," which is Kristina Khorram's device. At this time the government offers Government Exhibit C360.
THE COURT: Any objection? All right. Hearing nothing, exhibit 360 will be admitted.
(Government Exhibit C360 received in evidence)
MS. STEINER: Thank you. If we could please publish that for the jury. Ms. Gavin, if you could turn to page 2 of Government Exhibit 360 and just highlight the top. I'm going to read portions of this document into the record. It reads: "Contents and contacts." There are 24 contacts. And if we could turn now to page 3, and if we could highlight line 7 and line 8. And I'll read these into the record: "Contact Eddy, my angel, phone number 323-246-5240. "Contact Eddy (InterContinental) phone number 323-246-5240." I want to bring up a few additional exhibits from this device. Ms. Gavin, can you please bring up what's in evidence as Government Exhibits C-364-5A. And 5B. And 6A. You can take that down and keep up the stipulation. And if we could turn to the second page of the stipulation and highlight the top of the page. "(d) Government Exhibit C100 is a laptop from Khorram's suitcase." And if we could now also bring up Government Exhibit 111, and I'll read also from paragraph 6 in the stipulation: "Government Exhibits C101 through C113, including the subdivisions thereof, are true and accurate excerpts extracted from Government Exhibit C100, which is the laptop from Khorram's suitcase." And under that we have Government Exhibit C111. And if we could replace that with Government Exhibit 106 -- C106. And if we could highlight the top of that document. Thank you, Ms. Gavin.
THE COURT: All right. The government may call its next witness.
MS. SLAVIK: Your Honor, before the government calls its next witness, the government will offer business records from Signature Bank pursuant to the stipulation between the parties at Government Exhibit 1304. So let me read those exhibits that the government is offering: Government Exhibits 4G110, 4G111, 4G120, 4G121, 4G122, 4G130, 4G140, 4G141, 4G150, 4G151, 4G160, 4G161, 4G170, 4G171, 4G180, and 4G190, 191 and 192. The government also offers Government Exhibit 4G131.
THE COURT: Any objections?
MR. AGNIFILO: No, Judge.
THE COURT: All right. Those exhibits will be admitted.
(Government Exhibits 4G110, 4G111, 4G120, 4G121, 4G122, 4G130, 4G140, 4G141, 4G150, 4G151, 4G160, 4G161, 4G170, 4G171, 4G180, and 4G190, 4G191, 4G192 and 4G131 received in evidence)
MS. SLAVIK: With that, the government calls Derek Ferguson. DEREK FERGUSON, called as a witness by the government, having been duly sworn, testified as follows:
THE COURT: Ms. Slavik, you may proceed.