Stefon Diggs Trial Resumes Tuesday After Day One of Testimony and Jury Selection

The criminal trial of free-agent NFL receiver Stefon Diggs began on Monday and will continue on Tuesday morning. The first day included jury selection, opening statements, and the testimony of the alleged victim, Mila Adams.

According to Adams, Diggs slapped her and choked her by placing his arm around her neck in December 2025. The prosecution alleges that Diggs assaulted and strangled Adams, while his legal team denies the claims.

Key Moments from Day One

• Jury Selection: The process of selecting jurors was completed.
• Opening Statements: Both sides presented brief and unremarkable opening statements.
• Direct Examination: Adams testified about the alleged incident, completing her direct examination by Monday afternoon.
• Cross-Examination: The trial paused during Adams’ cross-examination by Diggs’s lawyers.

Analysis of Adams’ Testimony

Based on legal experience, several observations emerged from Adams’ testimony:

1. Plausibility of the Account: Adams’ version of the incident included the detail that she urinated during the alleged assault. This specific detail suggests a genuine reaction rather than a fabricated story.
2. Judge’s Admonishments: Adams frequently attempted to introduce extraneous information. The presiding judge repeatedly instructed her to answer only the questions asked, which may have raised skepticism among jurors.
3. Combative Approach: During cross-examination, Adams often resisted simple, closed-ended questions by adding extra commentary. This combative stance could undermine her credibility and shift her role from a fact-based witness to an advocate against Diggs.
4. Disorganized Cross-Examination: The defense’s cross-examination of Adams appeared unfocused, covering too much ground without clearly challenging her version of the alleged assault.

Strategic Considerations for the Defense

One critical question remains: Will Stefon Diggs testify? He is not obligated to do so, and taking the stand exposes him to rigorous cross-examination. A single misstep under prosecution questioning could severely damage his defense.

Diggs and his legal team must assess whether the inconsistencies in Adams’ testimony are sufficient to support a defense strategy arguing that she fabricated the allegations. For now, the focus seems to be on identifying inconsistencies in Adams’ account, though many appear irrelevant to the core allegation of physical assault in December 2025.