WARNING: This story contains allegations of sexual violence and may affect those who have experienced it or know someone affected by it.
Jury deliberations got underway on Monday in Sean “Diddy” Combs’s federal sex trafficking trial and hit a snag almost as soon as they started. But, by the end of the day, jurors indicated they were making progress weighing complex charges that could put the hip-hop mogul in prison for life.
The first day of deliberations saw a flurry of notes from the jury and Combs and his supporters bowing their heads in prayer in the courtroom — but no verdict.
The jury of eight men and four women are sifting through seven weeks of sometimes graphic and emotional testimony about the rap, fashion and reality TV impresario’s propensity for violence and his sexual predilections, including drug-fuelled sex marathons dubbed “freak-offs ” or “hotel nights.”
About an hour in, the foreperson alerted the court that a juror was having trouble following the judge’s instructions. That prompted the judge to send a note back reminding jurors that they must abide by what he said.
“We are concerned [the juror] cannot follow your honour’s instructions,” the foreperson wrote in a note just after 12:30 p.m. local time.
Judge Arun Subramanian sent his note to the jury after 2 p.m. local time, reminding jurors to deliberate and to follow his instructions on the law.
After the judge originally proposed asking the jury foreperson the nature of concerns about the fellow juror, defence lawyer Marc Agnifilo suggested caution and that less be said rather than more.
Combs’s lawyers proposed that the judge remind the jury that they’ve only just begun deliberating and to resume doing so. If there are further problems, defence lawyer Marc Agnifilo suggested, the jury can have the foreperson send another note.
“We can always ratchet it up. We can’t ratchet it down,” Agnifilo said.
The jury sent another note about three hours later asking for clarification on the part of the instructions addressing drug distribution — an allegation included in the racketeering conspiracy charge Combs faces.
Combs, 55, has pleaded not guilty to federal charges of racketeering conspiracy, two counts of sex trafficking — relating to two of his ex-girlfriends — and two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution, for allegedly arranging to fly sex workers across state lines.
In closing arguments last week, federal prosecutors and Combs’s defence team took their last shots at convincing jurors to convict or acquit the Grammy Award-winning founder of Bad Boy Records.
Front Burner34:11Diddy on trial
“The defendant used power, violence and fear to get what he wanted,” assistant U.S. attorney Christy Slavik said. “He thought that his fame, wealth and power put him above the law.”
She said that he used his “close inner circle and a small army of personal staff, who made it their mission to meet the defendant’s every desire, promote his power and protect his reputation at all costs.”
Defence lawyer Marc Agnifilo countered: “This isn’t about crime. It’s about money.” He noted that one of Combs’s accusers in the criminal case also sued him in civil court.
“He is not a racketeer. He is not a conspirator to commit racketeering. He is none of these things. He is innocent. He sits there, innocent. Return him to his family, who have been waiting for him,” the lawyer told jurors.
In all, 34 witnesses testified, headlined by Combs’s former girlfriends Cassie — the R&B singer born Casandra Ventura — and “Jane,” who testified under a pseudonym. Both women said he often was violent toward them. Cassie said he forced her into hundreds of sexual encounters with paid male sex workers while Jane recounted numerous “hotel nights.”
The sex trafficking trial of Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs is nearing an end without the famed rapper/producer taking the stand in his defence.
Jurors also saw now-infamous security camera video of Combs beating, kicking and dragging Cassie at a Los Angeles hotel in 2016, and clips from videos of sexual encounters.
Combs chose not to testify, and his lawyers didn’t call any witnesses in their defence case. His lawyers elected instead to challenge the accusers’ credibility during lengthy cross-examinations.
The defence has acknowledged that Combs veered into violence, but his lawyers maintain that the sex acts were consensual. They contend that prosecutors are intruding in Combs’s personal life and that he’s done nothing to warrant the charges against him.