dictionary

Greta Van Susteren on the "Puffy" Combs verdict

Greta Van Susteren

Q: Sean "Puffy" Combs has been found not guilty of all charges; co-defendant Jamal "Shyne" Barrow was found guilty on assault and reckless endangerment and weapons charges, but acquitted of attempted murder. What does this verdict say about the jury’s evaluation of the evidence?

Greta: This is a criminal case. The prosecution had an obligation to present evidence. If the evidence presented proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Combs had committed the crimes with which he was charged, the jury would have been obligated to return a verdict of guilty.

The jury listened to 60 witnesses. I assume they carefully evaluated the evidence and concluded that in the case of Combs and Jones, the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. In the case of Barrow, the jury found that the prosecution did meet its burden of proof, thus the guilty verdict.

The jury's job is always to evaluate each piece of evidence and consider each count of the indictment individually and determine if the state has met its burden of proof.

Q: You had said that the prosecution had a thin case against Combs. Is there anything the prosecution could have done differently in the case that might have brought in a different verdict?

ALSO Combs feels 'blessed' after not guilty verdict  AUDIO Sean "Puffy" Combs: "I give all the glory to God" (449K/40 sec AIFF or WAV sound.)   Sean "Puffy" Combs: "I'm just really emotional. I feel blessed" (322K/30 sec AIFF or WAV sound.) CNN's Michael Okwu reports on reaction in the courtroom after the verdict was announced (157K/14 sec AIFF or WAV sound.)  VIDEO CNN's Michael Okwu on closing arguments in the Puffy Combs trial Play video (QuickTime, Real or Windows Media)

LEGAL RESOURCES Latest Legal News Law Library FindLaw Consumer Center Select a topic Bankruptcy Discrimination Divorce Estate Planning Landlord-Tenant Personal Injury Taxes

Greta: No. It is not the prosecution’s fault that a not guilty verdict was return for Combs. The evidence is what the evidence is. The prosecution just didn’t have a strong case going into the trial, and I don’t think they could have had a stronger case by doing anything differently. They did the best job they could.

Q: He is still facing several civil suits resulting from December 1999 incident. Can anything from the criminal trial be used to help or hurt Combs in the civil suits?

Greta: No. It will be tried anew. In civil cases, the burden of proof is lower. Rather than "beyond reasonable doubt," the standard is "a preponderance of the evidence." However, both the plaintiffs and the defendants will be using some of the same witnesses in the civil cases as they did in the criminal cases.

Witness says he saw Combs fire gun in club
March 7, 2001
Witness for Puffy's co-defendant says he saw gun, can't ID holder
March 2, 2001
Defense rests in Puffy Combs trial
March 1, 2001
Prosecutor says Puffy violated gag order
February 28, 2001
Defense witnesses say they did not see Combs with gun
February 22, 2001
Driver testifies he saw Puffy with gun
February 15, 2001
Driver says Puffy could not open secret safe
February 14, 2001
Prosecution witness says gun was found in Combs' vehicle
February 8, 2001

Puff Daddy
New York City Police Department
New York State Unified Court System

Note: Pages will open in a new browser window

External sites are not endorsed by CNN Interactive.