Diddy arrested in a Manhattan hotel.

[anon1]

 

[jalimon]

This is what has always bothered me about these discussions on John message boards, especially after the U.S. prosecution of guys attending meet & greets organized by The Other Board in Seattle, and a similar activity at a Christmas Mingle in Texas organized by aspd (the predecessor of ECCIE).

Especially in the U.S., and of course Diddy’s is a U.S. case, many ordinary folks would view the collective discussion and review of escorts having sex for money as an organized criminal activity. Canadian law enforcement doesn’t view it that way, fortunately. But that stems from more of a police prioritization policy rather than legislative drafting. People here will say, no, the ladies advertise and do posts about how much they love their jobs. Well, the party ladies of Diddy weren’t marched there in chains. Many came from the exact same sources of contact that individual Johns in North America use. And many moralistic people would view sex work message boards as evidence of male depravity and coercion of female sex workers. We say no, that is ridiculous. What goes on here is absolutely nothing like these high-profile cases. Is Everyone really sure about that? Canada has been known to have John/Hooker parties, most everyone has been with a sex worker they thought was drunk or high, and those Sugar Daddies take some ladies far away from home on long trips. The fly-me-to-you escorts get travel arranged for them from the funds of wealthy men. The ladies working with agencies have arrangements made for them and are given transportation to customers.

Careful of the throwing stones in a glass house. Legally, most of the elements of a crime that will be argued against Diddy can be argued against an ordinary John, and police prioritization policies can change on a whim. In the U.S., we are going through a Lions Eating Prey in a Coliseum phase, with the Lion Food being the wealthy and famous. Presumably the legal precedent will not extend to the common person, but one never knows. I say be careful here, and ask yourself if the women were really coerced? And are you sure you never had a session yourself with any of them?

Nice read, I agree with you.

My only concern are we sure all girls that went there to be 'offered' were fully aware of it? And were they paid? And worst were they all legally aged? If proven not Diddy can go to jail and I am fine with it (and ideally others who were fully aware of the situation).

 

[Patron]

Nice read, I agree with you.

My only concern are we sure all girls that went there to be 'offered' were fully aware of it? And were they paid? And worst were they all legally aged? If proven not Diddy can go to jail and I am fine with it (and ideally others who were fully aware of the situation).

This is the problem with wealth and organized anything.

You are going to find women who say no to one, two or three of the questions you raise. According to the lawyer representing the first set of litigants, he already has clients in all three categories.

Federal law in the U.S. (as opposed to state law) is all about combatting organized activities. The public eats this stuff up. He is a dead man walking, whether he is a bad guy or not. I don’t know whether he is or not. He may be, but he and his lawyer offering evidence to the contrary is irrelevant at this point. He has been tried and convicted.

This is, like it or not, a solitary activity. For what it is worth, plenty of rich, famous people do it. But most simply refuse to do it in a way that members of society, even in the U.S. choose to ignore. When you do it the way Diddy did, it is just a matter of time till They Come To The Door. Happens in Canada, too. There were two wealthy executives who were taken down for mixing business/power with fun.

It is pretty fucking simple how this is done. We all do it.

The sex worker, who advertises in a venue where she has had to demonstrate she is of legal age, makes the solicitation.

The individual customer accepts her offer, does the consensual act with her, and pays her for her time.

But the more wealthy and powerful someone is, the less he wants to do it that time-honored way. He has to stretch the boundaries for some strange reason, even though he has plenty of money to purchase all of the consensual sex he wants from adults offering sex.

 

[jalimon]

This is the problem with wealth and organized anything.

You are going to find women who say no to one, two or three of the questions you raise. According to the lawyer representing the first set of litigants, he already has clients in all three categories.

Federal law in the U.S. (as opposed to state law) is all about combatting organized activities. The public eats this stuff up. He is a dead man walking, whether he is a bad guy or not. I don’t know whether he is or not. He may be, but he and his lawyer offering evidence to the contrary is irrelevant at this point. He has been tried and convicted.

This is, like it or not, a solitary activity. For what it is worth, plenty of rich, famous people do it. But most simply refuse to do it in a way that members of society, even in the U.S. choose to ignore. When you do it the way Diddy did, it is just a matter of time till They Come To The Door. Happens in Canada, too. There were two wealthy executives who were taken down for mixing business/power with fun.

It is pretty fucking simple how this is done. We all do it.

The sex worker, who advertises in a venue where she has had to demonstrate she is of legal age, makes the solicitation.

The individual customer accepts her offer, does the consensual act with her, and pays her for her time.

But the more wealthy and powerful someone is, the less he wants to do it that time-honored way. He has to stretch the boundaries for some strange reason, even though he has plenty of money to purchase all of the consensual sex he wants from adults offering sex.

Eminem and 50cents have been talking for years that Diddy was bad. They even have lyrics in some of their song about it. I agree with you he is cooked.

Canada did had plenty... The owner of Just for Laugh Festival for example. And one that I won't name but he was the founder of Cirque du Soleil. This guy will get busted one day. He used to throw a huge party at his mansion south of Montreal (on the Sunday of Formula 1 Grand Prix). There was no concept of 'offered' girl. But about past 1 am things were getting nasty. Many actresses and other celebrity that were invited complained but it never got to nothing.

Playboy would have never been the same today There used to be some crazy stuff happening there haha

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

This is what has always bothered me about these discussions on John message boards, especially after the U.S. prosecution of guys attending meet & greets organized by The Other Board in Seattle, and a similar activity at a Christmas Mingle in Texas organized by aspd (the predecessor of ECCIE).

Especially in the U.S., and of course Diddy’s is a U.S. case, many ordinary folks would view the collective discussion and review of escorts having sex for money as an organized criminal activity. Canadian law enforcement doesn’t view it that way, fortunately. But that stems from more of a police prioritization policy rather than legislative drafting. People here will say, no, the ladies advertise and do posts about how much they love their jobs. Well, the party ladies of Diddy weren’t marched there in chains. Many came from the exact same sources of contact that individual Johns in North America use. And many moralistic people would view sex work message boards as evidence of male depravity and coercion of female sex workers. We say no, that is ridiculous. What goes on here is absolutely nothing like these high-profile cases. Is Everyone really sure about that? Canada has been known to have John/Hooker parties, most everyone has been with a sex worker they thought was drunk or high, and those Sugar Daddies take some ladies far away from home on long trips. The fly-me-to-you escorts get travel arranged for them from the funds of wealthy men. The ladies working with agencies have arrangements made for them and are given transportation to customers.

Careful of the throwing stones in a glass house. Legally, most of the elements of a crime that will be argued against Diddy can be argued against an ordinary John, and police prioritization policies can change on a whim. In the U.S., we are going through a Lions Eating Prey in a Coliseum phase, with the Lion Food being the wealthy and famous. Presumably the legal precedent will not extend to the common person, but one never knows. I say be careful here, and ask yourself if the women were really coerced? And are you sure you never had a session yourself with any of them?

If the women came along to the freak offs voluntarily, then I agree with you.
But what about the alleged:

- underage boys and girls
- drugging of women
- raping of women
- beating of women

Surely you dont condone that??

 

[Patron]

If the women came along to the freak offs voluntarily, then I agree with you.
But what about the alleged:

- underage boys and girls
- drugging of women
- raping of women
- beating of women

Surely you dont condone that??

Nope, but only a prosecutor, a member of the media, or an Internet Message Board Poster can draw that black and white line.

This is why there can’t be orgy-type parties any more.

There is too much possibility of differing interpretations of coercion and abuse, particularly when hindsight and money is involved.

Much more of life is now a solo pursuit. Look what happened in corporate America starting after Anita Hill and escalating after Harvey Weinstein. There was an interesting chart I saw that a huge percentages of relationships started in the workforce in the 1950s - 1980s. Now most companies essentially prohibit most, if not all, relationships among co-workers.

The days of the Diddy-style parties are certainly over now.

Keep in mind that I don’t know for a fact what occurred at the Diddy parties, and neither does any other poster, unless he/she was actually there.

 

[Ceiling Cat]

I'm thinking of filing my own lawsuit.
Your honour, back in 2005 when Diddy attended Caribana he rubbed his erect penis against me in a Tim Horton's as we passed each other in the doorway.
I am still traumatized and suing for $20 million, but I'll settle for $10 million

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

Keep in mind that I don’t know for a fact what occurred at the Diddy parties, and neither does any other poster, unless he/she was actually there

Thats what the thousands of hours of video tape evidence will determine once its shown in court. Video tapes dont lie

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Baby oil laced with GHB

Diddy used baby oil laced with date rape drug, court docs claim

A lawsuit which accuses Sean 'Diddy' Combs of child sexual assault could shed light on why more than 1,000 bottles of baby oil were found at his home.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

Diddy accused of raping a woman as 'payback' for claims about Tupac Shakur's murder

The star is accused of "violently" assaulting a woman after she linked him to Tupac Shakur's murder.

www.bbc.com

 

[Toronto Passions]

Ok I read the details behind this one and I have to say of all of the lawsuits so far this one sounds the most fabricated. It sounds like a scene from a really bad B movie, down to the woman getting a knife and holding it on diddy but deciding to spare him and run away. The whole thing just sounds....fugaze

I just finished reading the article. It doesn’t sound real.

With the way charges have been mounting up, and with the way different accusers have been stepping forward, it’s very similar to Harvey Weinstein and Bill Cosby. Almost like once the floodgates open people feel courage to step up. However, this situation does seem like it’s a lie.

Philip

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

Jeff Pearlman's theory on who killed Tupac, and why

https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMh5a1jmS/

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

5 more lawsuits. One plaintiff was 13-years old at the time

Seven new lawsuits filed against Sean 'Diddy' Combs

Four men and three women accuse the hip-hop mogul of sexually assaulting them at various parties in the US.

www.bbc.com

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

Pro athlete allegedly stopped ‘intoxicated’ Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs from sexually assaulting man at celeb-filled Ciroc vodka party

Pro athlete allegedly stopped ‘intoxicated’ Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs from sexually assaulting man at celeb-filled Ciroc vodka party

A professional athlete allegedly stopped a drunk Sean “Diddy” Combs from sexually assaulting a luxury car businessman at one of his parties, a new lawsuit claims.

nypost.com

 

[Jenesis]

Tubi is featuring a TMZ special “The downfall of Diddy”

Tubi is a free app so anyone can watch if interested.

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

This is getting juicy, folks. The New York Post claims to have seen hours long video of Diddy's freak off parties. Many A-listers were caught on tape, although that doesn't automatically mean they were guilty of any crimes

Exclusive | Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs mixed star-studded bashes with raucous ‘Freak Off’ sex parties after VMAs and Super Bowl, videos reveal

The videos reviewed by The Post are part of the same archive that includes footage that appears to show Diddy having sex with a much younger male A-list star.

nypost.com

 

[Patron]

This is getting juicy, folks. The New York Post claims to have seen hours long video of Diddy's freak off parties. Many A-listers were caught on tape, although that doesn't automatically mean they were guilty of any crimes

Exclusive | Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs mixed star-studded bashes with raucous ‘Freak Off’ sex parties after VMAs and Super Bowl, videos reveal

The videos reviewed by The Post are part of the same archive that includes footage that appears to show Diddy having sex with a much younger male A-list star.

nypost.com

From the article:

“These are consistent with the videos we have,” a federal law enforcement source who is involved in the investigation said after hearing descriptions of the scenes in the videos that The Post viewed.
“Just about everything you can imagine was happening at his parties. Now our job is to determine whether this was consensual for everyone involved, if anyone has been trafficked, and what laws have been broken.”
In the videos viewed by The Post, the identities of most of the participants are unknown, but the feds believe that at least some of the victims in videos they obtained were coerced to perform.”

This is what concerns me. Who in their right mind would throw a party if he/she has deep pockets, including and perhaps especially, when a company is involved?

Have a thousand people over and some of them have sex, and it is a federal crime if any of them have regrets later. Hell, that happens all the time, especially if Money Damages occur if they decide they have regrets. If it happens, it might also be a federal crime if any of them crossed state lines or is underaged.

I know many would argue that Diddy damn well knew, and in fact made money by singing about the things he did, but the precedent that is getting set in these situation is troubling to me.

Of course, this has been the case with alcohol for years. Let someone drive drunk after a party, and the company or party organizer can be held partially liable.

The U.S. has gradually become more tame as a result of actions like these. I guess that is the goal of federal law enforcement here.

If one watched the tape, I suspect everyone involved appeared to be an active and happy participant in the orgy.

 

[onomatopoeia]

I've been starting to think that this is going to play out the same way as the Epstein case. Everything is going to get buried to protect the powerful people involved and we will be left speculating. It's been a few weeks since these tapes have surfaced and the fact that nothing has leaked leads me to believe that celebs are buying the tapes and destroying them to protect themselves.

They can't buy the copies possessed by the FBI. I think sleazy news outlets like The Daily Mail and The New York Post will name names after the video evidence is presented in court.

From Phil C McNasty's link in post #415:

“These are consistent with the videos we have,” a federal law enforcement source who is involved in the investigation said after hearing descriptions of the scenes in the videos that The Post viewed.

It's rare that an FBI insider would confirm something printed by The New York Post.

It's really difficult to suppress digital video when multiple people already have copies, and any one of them can generate and distribute an unlimited number of identical copies.

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

They can't buy the copies possessed by the FBI. I think sleazy news outlets like The Daily Mail and The New York Post will name names after the video evidence is presented in court.

From Phil C McNasty's link in post #415:

“These are consistent with the videos we have,” a federal law enforcement source who is involved in the investigation said after hearing descriptions of the scenes in the videos that The Post viewed.

It's rare that an FBI insider would confirm something printed by The New York Post.

It's really difficult to suppress digital video when multiple people already have copies, and any one of them can generate and distribute an unlimited number of identical copies.

But there's a catch 22, if the person on the video is underage it automatically becomes child porn.
So whomever is holding that tape could be in big trouble if they sell it, or even possess it

 

[onomatopoeia]

But there's a catch 22, if the person on the video is underage it automatically becomes child porn.
So whomever is holding that tape could be in big trouble if they sell it, or even possess it

Distribution of copies to the general public for the purpose of generating revenue could cause big trouble for someone in possession of the material. Private distribution to individuals with no direct nor indirect connection to Diddy would be very difficult, if not impossible to trace.

I possess a lot of digital video. None of it is illegal to own. Some of it cannot be overtly shared with the general public, because copyright holders would have it removed from an upload location. I could, however, misname the material with titles that would not appeal to anyone who was curious, and I might store the material in a location which isn't connected to the Internet. No one would find it unless they knew what to look for, and where. The point of this is that the powerful people who appear in the videos cannot possibly make every copy disappear to save their reputations. Even if they could find and delete all copies in private hands, they have no chance of suppressing the copies possessed by the FBI and other Federal authorities. You can't use money to bribe the people who print money.

 

[Insidious Von]

Charged with RICO crimes, you don't have many options. Puffy will die in jail.

Hollywood takes its time but it always takes out the garbage.