Diddy’s legal team questioned an accuser’s emotional ties, prompting prosecutors to push for Dr. Dawn Hughes’ return to explain trauma responses.
Diddy’s lawyers drove a “battering ram through the door” to expert testimony, federal prosecutors have told Judge Arun Subramanian, after his defense team questioned a key accuser’s emotional ties to the Hip-Hop mogul during cross-examination.
Prosecutors are now asking Judge Arun Subramanian to allow psychologist Dr. Dawn Hughes to return to the witness stand to explain what they call “misleading and prejudicial” claims made by Diddy’s legal team.
The government says Hughes’ testimony is essential to help jurors understand why a sexual abuse victim might still express affection or loyalty toward their alleged abuser after diddy’s assistant using the pseudonym “Mia,” testified and made a series of startling statements.
“After strenuously objecting to any expert testimony on these issues, the defense’s cross examination of Mia drove a battering ram through the door to additional testimony from Dr. Hughes to provide necessary context to its misleading and prejudicial assertions,” U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton wrote in a court filing.
During cross-examination, Diddy’s attorneys repeatedly highlighted messages, social media posts and even a scrapbook that Mia made for Diddy.
They suggested her behavior contradicted her claims of abuse.
The defense asked pointed questions like, “Why would you make a scrapbook for Mr. Combs?” and “How were you best friends with someone who abused you?”
Prosecutors say this strategy wrongly implies that real victims wouldn’t maintain contact or show affection toward their abuser.
They argue that Hughes should be allowed to explain how trauma bonding, emotional manipulation and fear can lead victims to act in ways that may seem contradictory.
“Throughout its cross-examination, the defense asserted time and again that Mia’s actions—such as sending loving messages to the defendant and describing positive moments in their relationship—were inconsistent with her testimony about being sexually abused by the defendant,” Clayton said. “The defense expressly and impliedly stated that someone who was a victim of sexual abuse would not have engaged in such behavior, thereby impugning Mia’s credibility before the jury.”
The government says Hughes would offer limited testimony focused on four areas: definitions of emotional and sexual abuse, how abuse is used to control victims, the emotional effects of abuse and how affection is often used to create psychological dependency.
The court had previously restricted Hughes’ testimony, but prosecutors argue that the defense’s line of questioning has now made her insights necessary to ensure the jury receives a fair and complete picture of the alleged victim’s experience.
Expert testimony in abuse cases has become more common and Hughes has testified in blockbuster trials involving Johnny Depp and Amber Heard, Harvey Weinstein and R Kelly.
The judge has not yet ruled on whether Hughes will be allowed to testify again.
Related
