Cross-examination of ex-assistant ‘Mia’ ends

Prosecutor Maurene Comey told the court that — hours earlier — the face of “Mia“ was mistakenly shown on video piped into the courthouse overflow room.

Judge Subramanian asked if something went wrong with the redacted footage that should’ve been aired or the incorrect version was used.

The prosecution didn’t have an answer.

Sylvia Oken, area director of sales and marketing at the Beverly Hills Hotel, is on the stand now as the prosecution’s next witness.

Oken told jurors that Sean Combs used the aliases “Phillip Pines and “Frank Black” for hotel reservations.

She said it’s not uncommon for entertainment industry guests to stay at the hotel under an alias.

The witness said she has no choice but to testify against Combs because she doesn’t want her younger, female loved ones to turn a blind eye to the issue of sexual assault.

“Because I can’t look my niece or my goddaughters in the eyes … in the future if they happen to be in this situation.”

The prosecution had Mia reiterate her feelings of fear in talking about Combs, with her testifying that her terror and difficulty understanding what allegedly happened was partly why she met with the government so much.

Prosecutor Madison Smyser asked Mia if she has ever been able to speak about her allegations that Combs sexually assaulted her without looking down.

“No, it’s the worst thing I have ever had to talk about in my life,” Mia said.

On redirect, “Mia” said she had a good reason to keep working hard and ensuring that Combs was pleased.

“Because when he was happy, I was safe,” the prosecution witness said.

The defense repeatedly asked Mia why she stayed with Combs despite the alleged assaults she says she endured. Mia didn’t distance herself from previous statements of admiration for Combs, saying that high highs — at that point of her career and life — seemed to make up for the low lows.

Combs’ defense ended its cross-examination, allowing prosecutors to redirect Mia’s testimony.

Mia was asked about her work with Combs, which included managing all of his social media presence. She testified that if Combs did not feel as if she was doing her job, Mia would be punished and her job would have been threatened.

This apparently included posting for Combs’ birthday, as Mia told the court she would’ve been in trouble if she didn’t post.

Defense attorney Brian Steel revisited Mia’s prior testimony of the violence she said she endured while working for Combs, noting that in 14 years all she ever wrote about Combs were statements of admiration.

Mia testified that there was a time where Combs slammed a door on her arm and continued to apply pressure, leaving her bruised. She said that her only interaction with Combs’ human resources was for them to enforce a punishment he wanted.

Steel recalled her prior testimony saying she was scared of being killed, asking Mia if there were times she felt she could die at Combs’ hands.

Mia told the court that he had threatened her life and physically assaulted her.

The cross-examination of “Mia” moved into the former assistant’s observations of Combs’ relationship with Ventura, specifically whether Ventura was jealous of other women.

She testified that in her experience, she only recalls Ventura being upset that she saw Combs with another woman while Ventura was filming in South Africa. Mia testified that the relationship was presented to Ventura as one of exclusivity between her and Combs.

When defense attorney Brian Steel noted that clearly wasn’t true, Mia told the court “it was not clear to her.”

Steel revisited the “kill myself” text message by Mia, echoing what might be the defense’s strongest point of this cross-examination.

But like in previous instances of Steele asking Mia about her praising Combs, the witness owned it and explained her mindset of wanting to remain employed by the defendant.

“My entire world was ripped away from me, immediately,” she said. “And even if, in hindsight, that world was awful, I didn’t know it at the time. That’s why it felt like everything was ending.”

“Mia” was asked several questions about Ventura’s working life during her years with Combs, as the defense apparently tried to undermine prior witnesses’ implications that he stunted Ventura’s career.

Defense attorney Brian Steel asked Mia questions about Ventura obtaining modeling jobs, movie work and even music she worked on with other artists, such as Wiz Khalifa. Mia testified that all of this was done with Combs’ knowledge and consent.

Prior witnesses have said that while Ventura recorded music while dating Combs, she was unable to release new albums as part of her 10-album deal with Combs’ record company. Ventura has one studio album, which was released in 2006, and a mixtape, which dropped in 2013.

The witness said she went on to work for Madonna after being let go from her job with Combs, refuting insinuations that she has not been employed and could be bitter with the defendant.

In an eight-month stint with the “Material Girl,” Mia said she worked as an assistant in addition to the icon’s film division.

Mia said she secured the Madonna gig independently, without Combs’ help. The witness also accused Combs of reneging on helping her with a TV show she had developed.

One female juror was seen smiling, seemingly enjoying defense attorney Brian Steel’s cross-examination of “Mia.”

Sometimes, the juror widened her eyes and furrowed her brow, appearing skeptical of some of Mia’s testimony.

Court has reconvened from its lunch break, and “Mia” will return to the witness stand to continue cross-examination.

Prosecutors said “Mia” will stipulate that she has met with their team 28 times since 2023.

Judge Arun Subramanian emptied the courtroom for the daily lunch break, telling everyone to be ready to return at 12:50 p.m. ET.

During the break, Subramanian said “Mia” will be given documents to refresh her memory about the numerous meetings she had with the government prior to trial.

Combs’ defense pushed “Mia” about why she waited to tell the government her allegations of sexual assaults against Combs, saying it took about seven or eight months until she revealed the information to prosecutors.

Mia told the court that she doesn’t remember the exact conversations, but that she did not tell the government until she had retained legal representation. The reasons are “privileged,” she said.

Attorney-client privilege protects the confidentiality of communications between a lawyer and the client.

After her departure from Combs’ employment, “Mia” said she went to mediation and originally asked for $10 million.

Steel, the defense lawyer, asked Mia if she’d demanded that eight-digit sum from a lawsuit. She responded that her claim against Combs went to mediation, and that’s where $10 million emerged as an opening position in negotiations.

They eventually settled for $400,000, with her lawyers retaining about half of that, Mia said.

“Mia” spoke to Cassie Ventura after Combs’ former girlfriend filed her November 2023 lawsuit detailing sexual abuse allegations against him.

But Mia testified that she didn’t tell Ventura about her own experiences of sexual abuse from Combs during that conversation.

“I was still deeply shamed and wanted to die with this,” Mia told the court.

“Mia” told the court that she felt terrible about covering for Combs with Ventura, his former girlfriend, but felt that if she didn’t, he would have taken away his access to her.

Mia testified that Combs would find out because he stole their phones and put tracking devices on Ventura’s car.

She added that she wasn’t sure what Combs was capable of and reiterated that she was terrified.

The witness said she was very close to Cassie Ventura but admitted not telling Combs’ girlfriend everything she could have.

“Mia” conceded that she didn’t tell Ventura about Combs’ alleged sexual assault on her. She also said she would keep the music mogul’s whereabouts from Ventura, under his orders.

“I remember covering for him and feeling terrible about it,” Mia said.

Prosecutor Maurene Comey alerted Subramanian that she felt Combs’ defense was mistreating “Mia,” accusing Brian Steele of humiliating her on the witness stand.

Comey laid out concerns that Steele’s sarcasm and suggestions that Mia is lying are bordering on harassment and that Steele is adding to Mia’s trauma. Subramanian did not agree that Steele was mistreating Mia, but he did agree that the questions had been argumentative and cumulative in nature.

The judge said he heard Comey’s concerns and would be on the lookout for offensive conduct. He added that the government would alert the court if it found any.

Subramanian warned Steele that he can ask a question and move on, but that if he believes that Steele is asking something just to get it out there, he will step in.

The witness’s face was briefly shown on an internal courthouse feed, though the error didn’t elicit an immediate reaction in the courtroom.

For about 30 seconds, a camera showed “Mia,” who was testifying under a pseudonym, despite a judge’s order that her face not be shown or even drawn by courtroom sketch artists.

When her face was shown in a feed to an overflow room, the prosecution didn’t lodge an immediate objection.

“Mia” is still getting pushed by the defense for years of friendly communications with Combs, despite her testimony that she feared him.

Another text from Mia, this time from December 2022, in which she wishes Combs a happy holiday season, was shown to the courtroom. The defense pointed out that Mia has told the jury she didn’t want to see Combs because she feared him.

Mia was asked whether she was scared of Combs the entire time she knew him, including from 2019 to 2022.

“I was scared of him when he was scary, yes,” Mia said.

The witness said she was “terrified and brainwashed,” preventing her from coming forward earlier with allegations of sexual assault against Combs.

When defense attorney Brian Steel asked “Mia” if she had a moral obligation to report Combs immediately, she said she didn’t: “Because I was terrified and brainwashed.”

It was only when others came forward publicly that Mia said she elected to do so too.

“It’s been a long process,” she said. “I’m still untangling these things. I’m in therapy. ”

Judge Subramanian sustained a government objection, thus preventing Mia from answering why her alleged attacker, Combs, was framed as a savior in her dream. However, the defense still made its point to jurors that, despite the allegations Mia has made against Combs, there were times when she held him in the highest esteem.

Capricorn Clark, a former assistant to the music mogul, said Combs was on a revenge mission in December 2011 after learning rapper Kid Cudi was also dating his girlfriend, R&B singer Cassie.

Clark testified last week that Combs, armed with a gun, commanded her to go with him to Cudi’s Hollywood Hills estate.

Another accuser, who used the pseudonym “Mia“ on the witness stand, testified that she worked as Combs’ personal assistant for several years, and alleged that he sexually assaulted her on multiple occasions during that time.

Combs was never charged in the firebombing or the alleged sexual assaults.

Read the full article here

“Mia” struck a respectful but defiant tone during her time on the stand Friday.

She readily acknowledged that she lavished praise and adoration on Combs in emails, texts and photo captions over the years, even after he allegedly abused her. On the stand, Mia came across as confident and far less subdued than she was during pivotal parts of Thursday’s testimony.

Combs seemed interested as his defense lawyer led Mia through various Instagram posts during cross-examination. At one point, he put on his glasses and leaned toward the monitor to get a closer look.