In a mixed verdict, jurors in Sean “Diddy” Combs’ federal criminal trial acquitted him of the most serious charges — racketeering conspiracy and sex trafficking — but found him guilty of two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution.
• Sentencing outlook: Combs could receive a prison sentence of up to 20 years — the maximum is 10 for each of the transportation convictions. If he had been convicted of any of the other counts, the 55-year-old could have faced up to life in prison.
• Possible interim release: The defense has asked that Combs be released while he awaits sentencing — a request the prosecution opposed. The judge said he’ll make a decision after the sides submit formal arguments at 1 p.m. ET.
• Combs’ reaction: After the verdict, Combs faced the courtroom gallery and clapped, and his family and friends erupted into applause.
The 55-year-old hip-hop mogul was accused by prosecutors of abusing and coercing three alleged victims, including his former long-term partner, singer and model Cassie Ventura, and other crimes including kidnapping, arson and blackmail.
Combs now faces up to 10 years in prison after being found guilty of transporting male escorts for sex sessions with former girlfriends.
Videos of “freak off” sex sessions with male escorts were shown to jurors only during the seven-week trial, with the footage kept private from members of the public and media in court.
Former employees, along with escorts, hotel staff and police officers were among those to give evidence.
Cassie, who was heavily pregnant at the time, along with another former girlfriend, who used the pseudonym Jane, also testified. They told the court they were coerced into drug-fuelled freak offs – which were also referred to as “hotel nights” or “wild king nights” – with male escorts, and abused throughout their relationships.
Combs’s defence team painted a very different picture in their attempts to show that all sexual acts, including freak offs, were consensual.
They conceded the music star could be violent, had a bad temper, and used drugs. He also had multiple relationships at the same time. But crucially, they said, while he was “not proud” of some of his behaviour, none of it made him guilty of the charges against him.
After hearing evidence of flights and travel for escorts and Cassie and Jane, paid for by Combs, as well as hotel bookings across the US and the Caribbean, jurors have found him guilty of the transportation to engage in prostitution charge. However, they agreed with the defence that the allegations against the rapper did not amount to sex-trafficking or racketeering.
The Cassie hotel tape
Combs, known variously as Puff Daddy, P Diddy, and Diddy over the years, was once one of the most influential figures in hip-hop – famous as a producer, founder of Bad Boy Records and manager of the late Notorious BIG in the 1990s, as well as a rapper in his own right.
As an artist, he won three Grammys during his career, and had hits including I’ll Be Missing You, Come With Me, and Bad Boy For Life.
In September 2023, he received the “global icon” award from MTV and was given the key to New York City at a ceremony in Times Square, just a few miles away from the streets in Harlem where he spent his first years.
Allegations first came to prominence in November 2023, when Cassie, his girlfriend from 2007 to 2018, filed a bombshell lawsuit accusing him of coercing her into unwanted sex sessions, as well as blackmail and several incidences of violence.
The suit was settled in 24 hours – for $20m, it emerged during the trial – but months later CNN aired hotel security footage showing Combs punching and kicking Cassie and throwing her to the floor in 2016.
He apologised after the video aired, saying: “I was disgusted when I did it.”
Footage from the hotel incident was shown during the trial.
Following the verdict, the rapper now awaits sentencing. He also still faces several civil lawsuits, most of which were filed in the wake of his arrest in September 2024.
Sources: CNN/SkyNews
The legal system can be complex, and verdicts like this often spark intense debate. What are your thoughts on the implications of this case?