I believe all the survivors. I believe the fact that the defense is using a lot of different tactics to discredit them, and I think it's unfair. I'm bouncing back and forth, but now somewhere in the middle, and we're going to see what goes on in the next couple of weeks.
Just being inside the courtroom and seeing... somebody's testimony that you think oh wow yeah that happened and she's telling the truth to then that the next minute you can be like wait is she lying
It is anyone's guess how these jurors are feeling thus far about the dozens of witnesses they've heard from over the last four weeks. And speaking of four, welcome to the fourth episode of my podcast, I Am That Reporter, The Diddy Trial. My name is Jerika Duncan, and I'm a CBS News national correspondent and anchor of the CBS Weekend News. I want to start off talking about the very important people who could decide Combs' fate.
I say could because we now know, based on comments made by President Trump last week, that a pardon is not off the table for Combs. But moving right along, I'm constantly observing the body language from the jury. One person looks annoyed at times, another tired, others writing down information quickly. During a break, I noticed a juror sort of cover his mouth and speak to the juror next to him.
And every once in a while, when testimony drags on and an expert takes a stand, I can see some of the jurors usually after lunch, nodding off and struggling to stay awake. But someone who noticed body language this week, the federal judge, Arun Submaranian, he threatened to remove Sean Combs from the courtroom for nodding and making faces at members of the jury. He called Combs' actions, quote, absolutely unacceptable.
He noted this after the testimony of Breonna Bongolin, who also goes by Bonna. Now, I was there in the courtroom about 20 feet away from Combs, and he was shaking his head up and down a lot. But keep in mind, the lectern where one of his attorneys, Nicole Westmoreland in this case, was making her arguments from is directly in front of where the jurors sit. So from my vantage point, it's hard to see if he was looking at his attorney or directly at the jury.
Part of the reason I think Combs was more expressive than most days on this particular day is because Westmoreland proved Combs was not in the same state as Bongolin on September 26, 2016, when Bongolin said Combs dangled her over Cassie Ventura's 17-story apartment balcony and left bruises on Bongolin's body.
Abangalan testified that the injury she took cell phone pictures of from September 26, 2016 of her bandaged back and bruised leg, that those pictures shown to the jury with the metadata timestamp were from Combs. When that was revealed, it was almost like Combs was nodding to say, see, she's not telling the truth. I wasn't even there exactly. Either way, the judge did not like it, so we expect to see less of that as we enter into week five.
Today, we are going to speak with clinical psychologist Dr. Tama Bryant. She will break down the testimony of Mia, a former Sean Combs employee who said she was sexually assaulted by Combs but remained friends with him.
The way she describes the situation, from the beginning, he was framing her and threatening to present it as consensual. So this would be something she would be embarrassed about. The violation is something she would be embarrassed about and not want people to know because of the very judgment that we're experiencing and also because of what their relationship was supposed to be in
the house. But before we get into that conversation, a quick reminder. Combs, of course, as you know, if you've been following this, is facing five felony counts, which include racketeering, conspiracy, two counts of sex trafficking by force, fraud or coercion, and two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution.
According to the government, Combs abused, threatened and coerced women and others around him for decades to fulfill his sexual desires, protect his reputation and conceal his conduct.
The government says Combs relied on employees, resources and influence from his multifaceted business empire that he led and controlled, creating a criminal enterprise whose members and associates engaged in and attempted to engage in, among other crimes, sex trafficking, forced labor, kidnapping, arson, bribery, and obstruction of justice. Combs has denied any wrongdoing and has pleaded not guilty to all charges.
To give us a better sense of what is happening on the legal front, let's check in with political reporter and CBS News legal analyst Katrina Kaufman and excuse some of the noise you might hear. I did do this interview in front of the courthouse. So Katrina, remind people of what the government needs to prove beyond a reasonable doubt to convict.
With racketeering, they have to show that Sean Combs was guiding people who worked for him that they were in agreement to commit certain criminal activity, and they have to prove that there were at least two underlying crimes. Those could be kidnapping, arson, bribery, obstruction of justice. For sex trafficking, there are elements of force, fraud, and coercion that they have to show, and that it was for a commercial sex act.
And then with transportation for prostitution, they have to show that there was the transporting for the purpose of commercial sex across state lines. When it comes to Eddie
Garcia's testimony, I thought he was very easy to follow. He says that he received $100,000 in cash from Combs, basically in exchange for a copy of the Intercontinental Hotel video of Combs dragging and hitting Cassie Ventura back in 2016, which many people have seen by now.
Describe the strategy of the defense, because they spend a lot of time showcasing this NDA that Garcia signed and focused on this kind of small language that basically said he doesn't have to be quiet about this if he was asked questions by the government. But it seemed when I looked around the court, people seemed a bit confused in terms of What is this mean and why are they doing this?
They were trying to show that there was a clause in the contract that would allow him, if there was a valid court order, to talk about what had happened. But then on redirect, what the government brought up is that there was another part of that. It said he had to give prior notice to Combs' company before he did that. So one that ties Combs' company to this alleged bribery exchange and potential instance of obstruction of justice before he could actually speak to law enforcement about this.
Let's talk about Breonna Bongolin. It seems like her testimony played big because of the inconsistency. And then there was this moment in court where we saw a document that contradicts her testimony.
Yes. Combs' team brought up this bill from the Trump International Hotel and evidence that they say showed that he was not in Los Angeles when Breonna Bongolin claims that he dangled her over a balcony. In fact, he had a concert in New Jersey and he was staying at the Trump International Hotel in New York. And we From
September 24th to the 29th, she testified that the balcony incident happened September 26th. I do have to make sure the prosecution then says, but wait a minute. Let me just be clear. You don't know the exact date. So they sort of wrap all of that up by letting the jurors know, well, wait a minute. She may not have the date right, but she doesn't deny that this thing happened to her.
Yeah. Yeah. And then they also brought in a new exhibit that showed that there was a text from Cassie to Christina Coram. That is Combs' former chief of staff and a close assistant of his. And in it, Cassie Ventura was saying to Christina Coram that he went at Bonna and choked her and dangled her feet off a balcony and she said, I have to stay away. This was sent on September 30th of 2016.
So it does corroborate Bonna's testimony, but there were a lot of holes, inconsistencies in the story and the date of when this actually happened. And very quickly, because I know you have a
quick live shot to do. Jane's testimony sounds almost identical to Cassie Ventura's, where she talks about being in love with Combs and being charming and wanting to just be with him. But being put in this situation, she says in which she was forced to have sex with men that she didn't want to have sex with.
Yeah, it's almost like we're hearing Cassie's testimony echoed, except for this time they called them hotel nights. But we're hearing more about how she was brought to different states and places to Turks and Caicos. He paid for her commercial flights. There's very strong evidence of this transportation for the purpose of prostitution charge here. Also, in terms of sex trafficking, she talked about how she really didn't want to participate in these nights, how she tried to tell calm know.
She tried to stop them. Very, very similar testimony from what we've heard from Cassie.
So Katrina, if you could predict, if the jury had to deliberate today, what
do you think would
happen?
I mean, I would say in a lot of ways, Vonna was maybe a stronger witness for the defense almost. She was, there were so many holes in that story. The prosecution did bring it back. And this is again, just
reminding the listeners, the woman who said it happened on September 26th, the balcony incident, but then later we saw documents that sort of contradicts that.
Yeah, one almost wonders why the prosecution even brought her in as a witness, because she doesn't seem crucial to this case, and there were so many inconsistencies. But there is a lot of strong evidence between Cassie Ventura and this woman. Hold on, let the bus go by. Gotta let that nat sound go. So much traffic out here, people. And this witness, Jane, of these freak-offs, these hotel nights, of these women who are testifying that they felt forced into sex by Sean Combs.
But one thing I noted, too, was at first Jane said that she thought she was just engaging in something that was sort of taboo. And she sort of enjoyed this first sexual experience she had with Sean Combs and another man. And I noticed Combs nodding during this, kind of looking towards the jury. He kept checking in with them. So at first it was something, you know, she was interested in trying to make him happy. But as it continued, same with Cassie. She said that she kept trying to stop it.
Well, we will see what
happens as we enter. Can you believe it's going to be week five? Week five of the Sean Combs federal trial. Thank you so much. Thank you, Jerika. Again, that was political reporter and CBS News legal analyst Katrina Kaufman. As I mentioned earlier, I want to delve into the testimony of Mia. She goes by this pseudonym in court to protect her identity. And just to give you a sense of her, she was very soft-spoken.
She kept her head down, and even the court artists were not allowed to draw her face. So if you look at any of the sketches, it just is a face and you see hair, but there's no distinct features. Now, she says she worked for Combs from 2009 to 2017 as his personal assistant. She testified that Combs sexually assaulted her first in 2009, and then she says in around or about 2009 or 2010, he raped her.
When she was fired in 2017, Mia says she did obtain a lawyer with the intent to sue Combs for $10 million, but settled for $400,000 in mediation. She told jurors that her testimony in this case is not about seeking money or fame, but she felt it was her moral obligation to speak up. To help us understand the complex nature of this testimony is clinical psychologist, Dr. Tama Bryant. Dr. Bryant, thank you so much for joining us today.
Thank you so much for having me.
So when I think about this case, we know how important the jurors are. And just to start off, what are some of the things that jurors should really consider When dealing with this testimony from people who say that they were psychologically, sexually, or even physically abused by Combs, what are some of those key things that these jurors should keep front of mind?
Well, the first thing I want for jurors to think about and potential future jurors to consider is that we all respond to trauma differently. And so you may see one witness showing distress with tearfulness and another witness who feels very contained, might even seem like to be disconnected from their emotions.
And so to not judge the display as the determination of if they are valid in what they're saying might By personality, by culture, by gender, by life experience, we all learn to sometimes mute our distress. And if we feel more safe or comfortable or overwhelmed, we may show it more. So when trauma has happened over an extended time, there are first three major categories of distress that we can see. One is a disruption in people's identity, the ways they think about themselves.
So the person may seem like they lack confidence. They may seem insecure. They may carry or display a lot of shame, embarrassment, feeling humiliated by what they have experienced. We also see people having difficulty regulating their emotions. So that just means that I might seem very calm and contained one moment and then suddenly become very tearful. So we want to be mindful of the ways in which that trauma can just overwhelm our capacity to cope.
And then a third category is difficulty trusting new people. So you can develop a hypervigilance, become very guarded. And you may have also, along with having trouble trusting others, you may have trouble trusting yourself because maybe you thought this person was a good person. And so then if they mistreat you, then you can start to doubt your ability to read people or to predict what is safe and what is not safe. Many people who experience trauma can develop post-traumatic stress disorder.
So they might start avoiding things that remind them of the trauma. They might have intrusive thoughts, which means they think about it even when they don't want to think about it. And again, that hypervigilance. We might also have depression where nothing is real enjoyable anymore, where they lack energy and motivation. Some people might engage in self-destructive behaviors and also anxiety.
And some of that we have heard from the testimony of Mia and others. Mia talked about not being able to get back into the workforce in the same way and being paranoid. I want to touch on something you said in reference to, you know, Sometimes it not surfacing in terms of what people are feeling or how they're dealing with it until much later.
Because with Mia's story, when you hear that she says she was raped in around 2009 or 2010, so this is the beginning of working with Combs, and then worked with him until 2017. And we'll get to some other things that happened later, even after that time period.
But when you hear that, for people that don't understand, how surprising is it for you as a clinical psychologist to hear that someone stayed working with someone for so long, even after they were sexually assaulted by them, according to Mia?
Yes. Unfortunately, it is quite surprising. I want to say quite common for some people as a way of surviving. So one way of thinking about it is for a certain group of people, they may try to convince themselves that it was a misunderstanding or the person was drunk or high, that somehow they didn't mean it. And if I can convince myself that this person was is a good person, or this person does care about me, or this person will be kind to me.
Because often in these situations, the person doesn't act like a monster every day, all day. So then there may be moments where they're acting like, you know, you all have this great working relationship, or, you know, they confide in you in particular ways.
And so sometimes people are hoping it will be a corrective experience, meaning that if I am around them this time, it won't happen again or that they'll be sorry or they may regret it or things will go back to the way they were before the violation. So that hope for a different outcome can cause a person to try to pretend like it didn't happen. They may also be taking the cues of the person who did the offensive behavior, who was also pretending nothing happened.
I want to also name the issue of fear. There can be the recognition, if we consider it an abusive relationship, even though it's an abusive work relationship, often when you are trying to exit or escape, people escalate in their violence or in their attempt to control you. So there can be this desire to communicate to the person, like, I'm not mad, everything's okay, as a mechanism or a tool to protect yourself.
That if I don't complain and we just go back to the way things were before, I'm less likely to be harmed.
So I want to read you some of the excerpts from court. This is when the defense attorney, Brian Steele, is questioning Mia about why she continues to keep in touch with her alleged abuser. The defense says, and can you read to the jury what you wrote to Mr. Combs? Mia says, just thinking of you today and every day. Also, no lie. Last night I had a nightmare. I was trapped in an elevator with R. Kelly and I screamed for you and you came to rescue me. So thank you for that too. Sending you love.
The defense. Now at that time, it's 2019, and you wrote that you had a nightmare concerning the person, the artist known as R. Kelly, right? Mia says yes. The defense. And the person who sexually assaulted you in your dream, or nightmare rather, came to your rescue? That's what you wrote? Mia says yes. The defense says. And you not only had the vision in your mind, but then you express it to Mr. Combs? Mia says yes. The defense.
So the person who you told the ladies and gentlemen of the jury terrorized you and caused you PTSD, you wrote to that person and explained how that person saved you from the other person named there, right? Then the prosecutor says, objection, which is sustained. How common is that behavior when someone who says they were abused, keep in touch, keep a connection with the person who allegedly hurt them?
So in this example, what it makes me think about is people who are trying to appeal to a person's, let's say, higher good, meaning that there are some people, this is like the subtext of what she's saying. There are some people who are monsters and you're not a monster, meaning or you could choose not to be.
And so if I can convince myself and if I can get the confirmation from you that given a dangerous situation, you would intervene and protect me, then it helps the survivor to re-narrate the story, the story of what has actually happened to think, oh, yes, like all these years of my life haven't been wasted, that I wasn't totally wrong in my read of this person, that there were these blips on the screen where bad things happen, but in general, this person wants something good for me.
This person desires a good outcome. This person would help me if I was in danger. So this hunger to believe that the worst of what you have experienced is not the truth of how they see you. So sometimes for survivors, as I said, there is a disruption in your sense of yourself. So you're looking for this outside validation. So what more freeing than to have the person who I think did not see my humanity to now tell me, not only do they see me, but they would rescue me.
So that's what she's seeking in this interaction for the one who harmed her to now provide some healing by saying you're worthy of protection.
There's another excerpt that I want to pull from from Mia's testimony. This is in reference to the proof, I guess, that she was assaulted and the amount of time that went by in reference to not putting it on record somewhere. The defense says, do you have anything where you contemporaneously wrote to a friend, a family member, police officer, anybody, and said, this is what's going on, I'm being assaulted, berated, anything?
Mia, no. The only time I reached out for help was very subtly to people in the office, but not disclosing things that other people hadn't witnessed. No, I would never. Now, in the case of Ventura, we've heard testimony from others who have seen the marks on her body after she says comb hit her. Ventura even emailed her mother at one point and copied an assistant.
So do you find a lot of people don't speak about the violence or make some sort of notes somewhere in case they need it as proof for later? I
find that most people are not thinking about gathering evidence. They're just thinking about trying to survive another day, trying to get through it. And if we wonder why people don't talk about it, all you have to do is look on social media on what people are saying now.
Even if you report immediately, it's not like the community or society rallies around you you could say that it happened the very next morning and you would still have a large number of people saying you're a liar, you're out to get money, judging you, dismissing you, degrading you. So we have not, as a society, created a culture that would be welcoming or inviting for people to feel they will be believed and supported. So that's one piece.
A second piece is, if you're not sure that you're going to leave the job, then you would be fearful to tell certain people because their immediate piece would be like, you need to go to the police or you need to go to the media or you need to get out of there. And so if you're not certain that you can do that for a number of reasons, then you would not go and speak to those persons. Also, This case in particular has a high level of surveillance and disparity in power.
So with the level of power and surveillance and monitoring he had, people would understandably and justifiably be very anxious about telling anyone or documenting anything. Because if you tell, she knew she was sent to be a spy, right? she was sent to be a part of the surveillance. So it would not be far-fetched to think there are people watching me, or if people find out I have talked to someone, then I could be brutalized. So most people are not actually gathering evidence.
They're trying to think of how to make it stop or how to endure it, or at the most, how to escape.
According to the defense, Mia met with prosecutors a total of 28 times and she did not disclose the sexual abuse until June 18th of 2024. I've had a lot of people on my Instagram posts ask me why did she wait so long and have even claimed that this sounds like someone who is piling on in hopes of getting money. Can you address that?
Yes. So the way she describes the situation from the beginning is he was framing her and threatening to present it as consensual. So this would be something she would be embarrassed about. The violation is something she would be embarrassed about and not want people to know because of the very judgment that we're experiencing and also because of what their relationship was supposed to be in the house.
So even for me as a therapist, some people will more quickly share if there has been physical abuse in a relationship. But I often have to ask a very explicit question as it relates to the sexual violence. And we have to have the therapeutic relationship for people to start talking about that part of it because of the high level of victim blaming, especially when the offender is known to you. When people are usually believing and supportive, as if it's a stranger, right?
That you got attacked by a stranger in an alley. Then people are like, well, yeah, that wasn't your fault. But in most cases, it's people you know, right? Exactly. Which means in most cases, we're not believed. In most cases, it is not believed. And so that's why a person would be hesitant to share that either you're going to believe this powerful person or presenting it as consensual. And I will say, in a court situation, they will often say it's inconclusive.
If it's their word against your word and you don't have physical evidence, then usually there's not going to be a conviction. So the idea that one, I'm not likely going to be believed by the larger society. And two, this person with a lot of power is going to present it as if I was consenting.
Now, it was important for the jurors to hear when an expert on sexual abuse and assault was brought in early on in this trial, for her to acknowledge, you know, I have not looked at medical records of Cassie Ventura. I have not looked at medical records of, you know, Capricorn Clark or some of these people that have played big in terms of witnesses.
So, When you think about witnesses who have not had someone, specifically an expert, look at their medical records or treated them in any way, testifying to sort of the generalizations, help people understand, too, who will go, well, any type of psychologist will make an excuse for someone and their behavior. They'll find any way to say, oh, well, it was this and what they meant to do or what they're trying to say.
I feel like in a lot of these cases, because there's so much judgment that goes out before you even hear what someone has to say, and then of course you hear what they have to say, and because maybe you wouldn't have responded in that way, it's hard to fathom that somebody would put themselves, quote, in a situation where these things might occur.
But for those who will look at these stories and listen to them and think there's no way he did this, or why would you put yourself in that situation, is the first step, Just hearing people out and then assessing, as even a clinical psychologist, the truth, where the truth lies.
I would encourage people to reflect on their own tendencies to put victims on trial instead of accused offenders. So in other words, some people listen to the story, and as you have said, before the person has even shared their story, have already decided, based on talent... that they like him, they like his music, so because he is gifted, he must be innocent.
So in psychology, we call that a halo effect, where if you have one positive attribute, then people can overgeneralize and think they know you. Like, because you're great in videos, then I'm going to make an assumption that you would never do something terrible. So instead of wondering why, would she stay for us to think about why would someone with power abuse it? Why would someone violate someone who works for them? Why would someone threaten and engage in violent behavior?
So those who are quick to believe that people must be lying I encourage you to recognize that sexual assault is actually underreported. So the idea people have is all these people are crying rape to get attention and money. People are not treated well when they say they have been sexually assaulted. They don't get a parade. They don't get wonderful treatment that would warrant just making up stories.
What we have more often is people not coming forward, people not trusting the police or not feeling comfortable with the court system, or if it's someone within your own community, not wanting to engage in these criminal systems.
So we can think about as a society or even as an individual, The way I'm writing in a post and the way I'm talking about this, if I do know someone who's been assaulted, what have I said or done that has created an atmosphere for that person to feel comfortable telling me? So people say these shaming, blaming things and then wonder why their own daughters or sisters have never confided in them. when they have already revealed that they will not believe them.
What has this case done for people around the country? What are clients telling you? Because I know having covered the Me Too movement and some of the big celebrities that we were focused on at that time, be it Harvey Weinstein or Jeffrey Epstein, there was a group of folks, you know, everyday Americans, if you will, who I remember hearing from that were triggered by the different cases.
So how do you think this sort of shapes the narrative once again, because it's so well-known and people are talking about this particular trial throughout the country and around the world?
Yes. So it can be very triggering because especially if we're on social media or just watching the news, the story comes up. And it doesn't just come up in generalities. It comes up very specific, very graphic details, which can be overwhelming to hear, especially if it pulls up people's own memories.
But I will also say some people feel empowered of seeing that even after, you know, if we believe what is being reported, that even after years of abuse, or years of misuse that you can claim your voice again, that you could find love or relationship or a healthy dynamic in the aftermath. And that even when the person is very powerful and has done very abusive things that your story doesn't have to end there.
And so while it can be triggering, There are also people who are cheering for the survivors and seeing a part of them in the stories that are being told.
Is there redemption ever for people who are accused of such horrible crimes? You know, beating up someone, raping someone. I feel like psychological abuse is far too prevalent in just about any relationship. And sometimes you even need to call it out within yourself to change the behavior. But is there redemption? So I
would say there's the issue of systemic justice or redemption and then like the personal or the psychological piece of that. So what I mean is if he is not convicted, it won't cause a lot of people to, I think people will dig into what they already believe. So people who have always thought he was innocent will say, see, we told you, you know, another brother set up by these liars.
For people who believe he did it, they will say another example of the system failing women the system bending down to power. And there have already been talks about the president of the United States directly being asked, would he intervene if there is a conviction? So there can be a heightened sense of hopelessness, powerlessness, and not feeling protected. So that is...
You know, often the case for people who come forward, you know, a smaller percentage get a conviction, a smaller percentage, you know, is actually ending up doing time. But then in terms of personal redemption, I would like to say, you know, if the question is, is transformation possible? It is, you know, yeah. Harming people, hurting people, mistreating people, even assaulting people is a choice. It is a series of decisions.
And so I would encourage anyone who has ever violated someone or been verbally abusive to know at any moment, I can make another choice. At any moment, I can get help and choose to show up differently for myself and for the people that I claim to love.
How important is forgiveness in all of this? I was on the airplane because I'm in LA right now doing this podcast and I watched the movie Exhibiting Forgiveness. And if you haven't seen it, it's a touching story about just how hard it is, especially for those who, again, feel as though they've been harmed by someone important to them. Don't want to give away the movie in case you want to check it out. But it really forces you to go deep.
And I think when you hear some of the testimony, you wonder how that sort of healing journey is going realistically. Because for Cassie Ventura, for instance, she says, I don't hate combs. You know, I like what we had in terms of the good things. But she has clearly moved on. She's married now, three children. But how important is that element in this case? Yeah,
I wanna say that systems, society, religion, culture often presses victims to forgive, but never emphasizes accountability or change behavior. The onus is put on victims to first prove that something happened to them. And then even once it's proved, that's usually the question. Even when we look at collective trauma or shooting of unarmed persons, there's often this messaging to the community, we need to forgive and just move forward.
So we really want to interrogate our tendency to tell people who didn't have power that they need to get over it. And those who abuse their power, that we just need to turn the page and pretend it didn't happen. So I would encourage people to separate forgiveness from reconciliation. So I may choose to forgive someone who is or isn't sorry. I may choose to release that so that I'm not carrying the emotional burden psychological weight of that.
But in order for there to be reconciliation, there has to be a transformation. Sometimes people are forgiving persons, as may have been happening in this case, who aren't sorry and who continue to harm you. So that's a very dangerous situation. And it's a dangerous message to tell people just keep forgiving. Meanwhile, the violence is escalating.
So I would say for real reconciliation, we can put a pause on what's the path for victims to take you back and put a focus on what is the responsibility of those who have done harm to make it right.
Well said. Dr. Tama Bryant, everyone, we thank you so much for guiding us through that conversation. For more on Dr. Tama, you can check out the Homecoming podcast and her latest book, Matters of the Heart, Healing Relationships with Yourself and Those You Love. Thank you, Dr. Bryant. Thank you so much for having me. And one more thing. A lot of people are asking me about this trial, about who I believe, what I think will be the outcome.
And with any case, I am all about leaving it in the hands of the jury. For those who are tired of hearing about Combs at this point or wondering why the coverage is so nonstop, if you will, on a lot of platforms, I challenge you to look at the layers involved and also think about this person that so many people have gotten to know over the course of 20, 25 years.
I do want to say thank you to all of you who've been concerned about my own mental health and covering this, but it has been a talker and it's something that clearly it seems everyone is talking about, including my 11-year-old daughter who told me that some of her friends are following this case. And I have to remind her she is not to follow this case. It's a lot. It's heavy and it's definitely not for children. I thank you so much for listening. Please follow me on Instagram and TikTok.
I am that reporter JD. Again, I am that reporter JD. DM me if you have any questions and maybe we can address them on the next one. Until then, have a blessed day. Hopefully we'll see you back here once again. If you enjoy this podcast and want to help, please, please, please spread the word. Tell your friends, tell your family, encourage them to listen. You can also follow Rate and Review on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. And just like Uber, five-star reviews are very much appreciated.