- Joined
- May 8, 2002
- Posts
- 1,129,469
- Reaction score
- 59
You must be registered for see images attach
DEDHAM — The trial of former New England Patriots wide receiver Stefon Diggs is set to resume Tuesday morning with continued cross-examination of the woman who accused him of assaulting her last December.
Diggs, 32, is charged with strangulation or suffocation, a felony, and a misdemeanor count of assault and battery. Judge Jeanmarie Carroll is overseeing the trial in district court here.
Prosecutors say Diggs hit a woman working for him as a private chef across the face and wrapped his arm around her neck from behind, choking her, on Dec. 2. The woman reported the incident on Dec. 16. Diggs’ defense says the incident never happened.
Assistant Norfolk District Attorney Drew Virtue is prosecuting the case, and attorneys Andrew Kettlewell and Sara Silva are representing Diggs. The jury comprises six women and one man.
Follow live updates from the trial’s second day:
10:11 a.m. - Accuser’s testimony concludes
On a brief re-direct, Virtue had the woman read more texts between her and Diggs leading up to the alleged assault.
Diggs told her, “I won’t be paying you” and “tell them to come take the money.” The woman responded by calling him an expletive.
She told Virtue it was “common practice” when private chefs are sent away for a week, they still get paid.
He concluded by asking the woman if when she said she hadn’t sought money to settle the case, she was referring to the criminal case. She said that was true.
Silva’s re-cross-examination focused mostly on the issue of payment, as she tried to get the woman to concede she wanted Diggs to give her money to open her own restaurant.
“You wanted him to pay you to open your restaurant, right?” Silva asked. “I wanted him to pay me past wages,” the woman countered.
10:02 a.m. - Cross-examination concludes
With the woman back on the stand, Silva returned to the $5.5 million demand that the woman’s lawyer sent to Diggs.
The woman said she couldn’t answer the question, then claimed that the subject was covered by attorney-client privilege. When Silva pushed further, the woman said she was pursuing a workers’ compensation claim — an answer Carroll struck from the record.
Silva eventually concluded her questioning. Virtue’s re-direct examination was interrupted by several quick objections and a sidebar.
9:58 a.m. - Judge warns accuser: ‘Your entire testimony may be stricken.’
Without the jury in the room, Carroll again warned the woman that she must only answer the questions that are asked of her.
“If you don’t understand, you can say that,” Carroll told her, explaining that trials function in a question-and-answer format. “This is not an opportunity for you to interject your own narrative.”
“If you continue to do so your entire testimony may be stricken,” she said.
When the jury returned, Carroll emphasized to them that any answers that are stricken by her can’t be considered evidence in the case.
“When an answer is stricken, it does not exist,” she said. “You’re sworn to determine those facts solely and exclusively from the evidence presented.”
9:28 a.m. - Woman questioned about demands for money
Silva moved on to questions about requests for money the woman had made through a mediator, then through a lawyer.
She suggested to the woman that a mediator made a money demand on Dec. 29 — the same day the criminal complaint was issued in Diggs’ case. The woman said she hadn’t seen the demand and then that she couldn’t answer the question.
The woman did confirm the mediator asked for $19,000, a claim she said was for “wages owed.”
Silva then turned to questions about the lawyer the woman hired to represent her.
She asked if the lawyer helped prepare her to testify, but the woman replied, “I don’t know how to answer that question.”
The woman followed up that she hired a lawyer because “I was injured on the job and I needed to file a workers’ comp case.”
The questioning was frequently interrupted by Silva asking Carroll to strike the answer and sidebar conversations. Carroll also had to instruct the woman to let Silva finish her questions and to only answer the question she had been asked.
Silva asked the woman whether her lawyer demanded $5.5 milion from Diggs. The woman replied that Diggs had offered her $100,000 to recant her statement, a response Carroll quickly told the jury to disregard.
The lawyers then went to sidebar. After the conversation, jurors were ushered out of the courtroom and Carroll stepped off the bench.
During the break, Diggs huddled with his lawyers at the defense table.
9:18 a.m. - Cross-examination resumes
Silva restarted her examination of the woman with questions about texts she exchanged with Diggs’ girlfriend on Jan. 1, 2026.
That day, the woman texted Diggs’ girlfriend, “I didn’t say that,” which Silva suggested was a reference to the statements she gave to Dedham Police.
The woman told Silva she couldn’t answer the question.
“Did you or did you not write those words?” Silva pressed on. “I don’t understand the question without further explaining,” the woman replied.
More stories about Stefon Diggs
- Stefon Diggs’ accuser testified at ex-Patriots wide receiver’s trial | Day 1 recap
- Trial for ex-Patriots wide receiver Stefon Diggs begins Monday
- Stefon Diggs gets a trial date in assault and strangulation case
Read the original article on MassLive. Add MassLive as a Preferred Source by clicking here.
Continue reading...
