Sean “Diddy” Combs was visibly elated when a jury cleared him of sex trafficking and racketeering charges in a Manhattan courtroom last July.
He slid from his chair to the floor at the defense table, kneeling as if in prayer, then rose to his feet, beaming.
“Love you! Love you! Love you!” the rap entrepreneur yelled, turning to face his cheering children and his sobbing mother. “I’m gonna be home soon!”
On Friday, he’ll find out if he can keep that promise.
Combs is set to be sentenced for what the jury did convict him of: two violations of the Mann Act, in which two girlfriends and at least eight male escorts crossed state lines for “freak offs” — the hotel sex sessions at the center of the trial.
In nearly 400 pages of pre-sentencing submissions, Combs’ lawyers and prosecutors from the US Attorney’s Office of the Southern District of New York made their recommendations for the amount of time he should serve, and the gulf between the prosecution and defense teams’ recommendations is enormous.
Combs’ lawyers are seeking a 14-month sentence — essentially time served — arguing that he has suffered enough during his past year in a Brooklyn federal jail and that he was acquitted of all serious misconduct.
The feds have asked for an 11-year sentence. Prosecutors want Combs behind bars for the next decade, arguing he remains a threat to society and left his two girlfriends “broken and beaten.”
Underlying this great divide is a single legal question: How does the judge address all the guns, drugs, and brutality the jury heard about — from dozens of witnesses — throughout Combs’ seven-week trial?
That is the “acquitted conduct” that US District Judge Arun Subramanian will likely consider.
What weight to give ‘acquitted conduct ‘?
The defense conceded in pre-sentencing arguments that, sure, the Bad Boy Records founder had drug problems.
And over the years, these drug problems spilled over into what they call “a domestic violence problem,” all of which, they argue, he regrets and is committed to never repeating.
Combs was cleared of sex trafficking, his lawyers argue, because jurors found he was not someone who used force, fraud, or coercion to make his victims engage in commercial sex acts, as the law defines that crime.
The jury also found he was not a racketeer; they argue, rejecting the prosecution’s claim that he ran a criminal enterprise infested with violence, guns, drugs, and bribery.
“The jury’s verdict spoke loud and clear,” the defense wrote in pre-sentencing arguments. “To now increase Mr. Combs’s sentence based on evidence the jury rejected at trial would be to trivialize the jury’s work.”
Both Mann Act victims — R&B artist and star witness Cassie Ventura, Combs’ girlfriend from 2008 to 2018, and “Jane,” who testified under a pseudonym and dated Combs from 2021 to 2024 — told the jury they were brutally beaten by the powerful and wealthy hip-hop mogul.
Still, during sentencing, defense lawyers say, the judge must not consider acquitted conduct. They want him to ignore all trial testimony and evidence alleging that Combs not only was violent and used drugs, but also distributed drugs, kept and brandished firearms, and paid bribes to hide his wrongdoing.
Considering acquitted conduct “would raise serious Sixth Amendment, Fifth Amendment, Double Jeopardy, and fairness concerns,” they wrote to Subramanian, foreshadowing a potential appeal on Constitutional grounds.
But what if acquitted conduct is also ‘relevant conduct ‘?
In their own pre-sentencing submissions, federal prosecutors argued that they don’t buy the defense’s arguments.
They agreed that ever since a rule change from November, acquitted conduct — in this case, guns, drugs, violence, and the like — can no longer count against a defendant in calculating sentencing-range recommendations for the judge.
Still, that November rule change doesn’t tie the judge’s hands at all, prosecutors argued: Sentencing guidelines are only guidelines, they note — judges can disregard them, and they often do.
Acquittals are not findings of fact, prosecutors also argue. Judges can’t know what happened in deliberations, and what evidence involving violence, drugs, or firearms the jury may have accepted or rejected.
Finally, prosecutors argue that there is ample caselaw that says a sentencing judge can consider acquitted conduct. The judge just needs to find said conduct relevant to the sentencing and proven at trial by a preponderance of the evidence — meaning that it was more likely true than not.
“Acquitted conduct can be considered where it establishes in whole or in part the offense of conviction,” prosecutors argued.
Combs’ punishment for those two Mann Act convictions “must take into account the manner in which he committed them,” prosecutors wrote the judge.
Subramanian — the judge — will likely demonstrate his own math at sentencing, revealing whether he took acquitted conduct into account or not.
Wild cards remain — including ‘Jane’ and some pro-Diddy escorts
Many more wild cards remain in Friday’s sentencing.
Combs’ lawyers have shared with the judge supporting comments from escorts who did not testify at trial, and who now say they were never paid for sex and saw no sign of violence. Their comments are sealed, as are defense submissions involving Combs’ mental health.
Several trial witnesses who had terrible experiences with Combs wrote letters urging Subramanian to bring down the hammer.
However, there is a glaring absence: “Jane,” one of the most important prosecution witnesses, who didn’t supply a letter, doesn’t plan to speak at the sentencing hearing, and isn’t seeking restitution.
She testified in June that Combs is paying the $10,000 rent for the Los Angeles home she shares with her young son; it is unclear if he continues to pay for her housing.
The defense and prosecution are fighting over whether another key sex-assault accuser, a former Combs employee who testified as “Mia,” will be allowed to give a victim impact statement. It remains unclear if the judge will allow her to speak.
Friday’s sentencing will also likely include public remarks by the trial’s two most pivotal witnesses: Ventura and Combs himself.
Ventura, in a letter to the judge on Tuesday, said she hoped Subramanian “considers the truths at hand that the jury failed to see” and imposes a sentence that “reflects the strength it took for victims of Sean Combs to come forward.”
“For over a decade, Sean Combs made me feel powerless and unimportant, but my experience was real, horrific, and deserves to be considered,” she wrote the judge in a letter made public Tuesday.
“While the jury did not seem to understand or believe that I engaged in freak offs because of the force and coercion the defendant used against me, I know that is the truth, and his sentence should reflect the reality of the evidence and my lived experience as a victim.”
Read the full article here
