The jury in Sean “Diddy” Combs’ federal sex trafficking trial began deliberations after receiving extensive legal directions from Judge Arun Subramanian. Over seven weeks, jurors heard harrowing testimonies detailing Combs’ alleged violent behaviour and sexual activities, including substance-fuelled sex parties referred to as “freak-offs” and “hotel nights”. The jury is working with a laptop containing all court exhibits, such as text messages, photographs, and videos related to the case.
Shortly into their deliberations, jurors informed the court that they had elected a foreperson. Family and supporters of Combs were present in the courtroom, engaged in prayer as the trial reached this pivotal juncture. The 55-year-old music mogul has pleaded not guilty to multiple charges including racketeering conspiracy, sex trafficking relating to two former partners, and transporting individuals across state lines for prostitution.
In their closing statements, both the prosecution and defence made their final arguments. Prosecutors portrayed Combs as an individual who exploited his status for personal gain, using threats and violence to control his victims. Assistant U.S. Attorney Christy Slavik stated that Combs thought his fame and fortune placed him above the law, augmenting his influence through a dedicated personal staff that prioritised his desires.
Conversely, defence attorney Marc Agnifilo argued that the case is more about financial interests than criminal activity, highlighting that one accuser has also pursued civil legal action against Combs. Agnifilo insisted that Combs is innocent and urged the jury to return him to his family.
The court heard testimony from 34 witnesses, including Combs’ former girlfriends, Cassie Ventura and another witness known as “Jane”, who testified about Combs’ violence. Notably, jurors viewed surveillance footage of Combs allegedly assaulting Cassie in a Los Angeles hotel. Throughout the trial, Combs refrained from testifying and his legal team chose not to present any witnesses, focusing instead on questioning the credibility of the accusers.
While the defence acknowledged that Combs had exhibited violence, they strongly maintained that any sexual encounters were consensual and accused the prosecution of encroaching on his private life. As the jury deliberates, the outcome hangs in the balance, with potential life-altering consequences for Combs if convicted.