Stefon Diggs Found Not Guilty In Assault, Strangulation Case Involving Personal Chef

Former New England Patriots receiver Stefon Diggs was found not guilty Tuesday of assaulting his personal chef in a case marked by conflicting accounts of what happened inside his home after disputes over money and their relationship.

His trial lasted two days and the jury deliberated for less than two hours.

The charges stemmed from a Dec. 2 incident at his house in Dedham, where Jamila Adams, a former live-in personal chef known as Mila, testified that Diggs slapped and choked her during an argument. He had pleaded not guilty to a felony strangulation charge and a misdemeanor assault and battery charge.

Diggs’ attorneys said the alleged assault never happened and challenged Adams’ credibility, arguing the dispute was about money or relationship tensions — including a disagreement over a planned trip to Miami — rather than a violent attack.

They pointed to financial demands she made and testimony from friends and employees who said she did not appear injured in the days after the encounter, while prosecutors argued the case rests on her account of what happened inside the home.

Defense attorney Andrew Kettlewell told jurors during closing arguments that prosecutors had not presented “a single shred of credible evidence” that an assault occurred. He said Adams made the accusation to “leverage and humiliate and to punish” Diggs.

“There was no assault, no strangulation, no incident at all on that day or any other day,” he said.

Assistant District Attorney Drew Virtue said Adams’ behavior should be viewed in the context of her relationship with Diggs, whom he described as “a sometimes lover, a boss, landlord,” pointing to the imbalance in that relationship as a factor in how she responded afterward.

“He was an athlete, a celebrity, financially powerful, surrounded by people that were all on his payroll that liked him,” Virtue said. “And when you put that all in consideration, her behavior does make sense.”

He urged jurors not to dismiss Adams’ testimony because she was not “a perfect witness.”

“She was argumentative, avoidant, difficult. But does that mean you should throw away everything she said? No,” he said, adding that jurors should give her testimony “the attention, the scrutiny, the weight it deserves.”

Money Vs Motive

Earlier in the trial, Adams became emotional on the stand while describing an alleged encounter with Diggs on in which she said he entered her room following an argument over text.

Adams, who said she lived in the NFL star’s home and prepared all of his meals, testified that Diggs “smacked me with an open hand” before wrapping his arm around her neck and choking her, leaving her struggling to breathe. She described what she called a “complicated” relationship, saying it had previously been sexual but was not at the time of the alleged assault.

Adams said she met Diggs in 2022 on Instagram and that the two became friends — at times “friends with benefits,” as one of his attorneys described it — before she was later hired to live in his home and prepare his meals during the football season.

Defense attorneys pressed Adams about money she said she was owed after working as a live-in chef. She testified she was paid about $2,000 a week and believed she had not been fully compensated after being sent home. They pointed to a $19,000 demand and said the amount increased over time, with her attorney later seeking $5.5 million.

When asked about the $5.5 million claim, Adams said, “I can’t speak on that,” and at other points told jurors, “I don’t understand the question” and “I don’t know how to answer the question.”

At one point, Adams said Diggs had offered her $100,000 to recant her statement to the police, but that remark was struck from the record after the judge called the attorneys to a sidebar.

At times during her second day on the stand, Adams was instructed by the judge to answer questions directly and not include additional details beyond what was asked. Portions of her responses were struck from the record as nonresponsive, with jurors told to disregard them.

“This is not an opportunity for you to interject your own narrative and evade answering questions,” Judge Jeanmarie Carroll told her at one point, warning that continued nonresponsive answers could result in her testimony being stricken.

Witnesses Describe Accuser’s Appearance After Alleged Attack

Kenneth Ellis, the Dedham police officer who took Adams’ initial report, testified that she arrived at the station visibly upset, telling jurors she “sat down on the bench and she was crying.” He said Adams initially asked to speak with a female officer before later agreeing to give a statement and identifying Diggs as the person involved.

Under cross-examination, Ellis said he did not observe visible injuries, collect photographs or speak with other witnesses, and that his investigation relied largely on Adams’ account and text messages she provided.

Defense attorneys also sought to challenge Adams’ account through testimony from people in Diggs’ orbit and evidence they said reflected her demeanor in the days after the alleged incident.

His chief of staff, massage therapist, a nurse who provided IV treatments and his hairstylist all testified that they saw her around the time of the attack and that she said nothing about being assaulted.

His hairstylist, Xia Charles, testified that she spent time with Adams in New York in the days after the alleged incident and did not notice any injuries. She said Adams appeared normal and that she did not see marks on her neck or elsewhere.

Defense attorneys also showed jurors cellphone videos of Adams socializing, including clips of her in a car listening to music and dancing, which they suggested showed her demeanor in the days following the incident.

Jeanelle Sales, Diggs’ chief of staff, who also goes by “Sunni,” testified she saw Adams at the home on the day she alleged she was assaulted and did not see visible marks, redness or swelling on her neck or face. She said Adams appeared to be in normal spirits.

“She was walking around looking for a piece of paper and a pen to write a card — I guess, write a note to him for his birthday gift,” Sales said.

Prosecutors pushed back on that testimony, suggesting the witnesses’ livelihoods were tied to Diggs and that they had a financial interest in the outcome of the case.