How $10m case against Diddy collapsed after prosecutors got greedy in botched attempt to treat ‘freak' like a mob boss

The Sun

6 hours ago

SEAN "Diddy" Combs spent 10 months behind bars as he waited to hear his fate inside a Manhattan courtroom on Wednesday.
Many believed the disgraced music mogul was set to get life in prison over racketeering and sex trafficking charges but when the verdicts were read out Combs fell to his knees in glee.
8
8
8
He managed to escape the most serious charges as he was acquitted on the worst cases after the $10million case against him proved unsuccessful.
The New York jury did find the Bad Boy rapper, 55, guilty on two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution.
But with each count carrying just a maximum 10-year prison sentence and no minimum, Combs' legal team sighed a breath of relief in the courtroom.
His final sentence is yet to be announced but he is likely to spend a minimal number of years locked up giving his first time offender status.
As arguably the trial of the century kicked off earlier this year many had thought Combs had next to no chance of getting off so lightly.
The majority of federal cases end in a conviction and with "freak off" revelations, baby oil hauls and disturbing claims all being made public at trial the case seemed simple to most.
But as the final judgments were made and Combs mouthed to his family he'll be "home soon", questions emerged around how he escaped a severe punishment.
Many now believe the fault lies with the prosecution for aiming too high with their charges.
They lobbied for a complicated racketeering case that is typically reserved for the most high profile mob bosses.
The burden of proof needed to convict a criminal on such charges will always be tough to reach due to the repercussions of life behind bars.
Diddy's $61.5m mansion where feds seized 1,000 bottles of baby oil during raid lies silent in new pics as trial starts-
And as the prosecution scrambled to keep the music producer locked up with a myriad of witnesses and claims, the defence simply played down the seriousness of Combs' crimes.
Combs' defence had always remained firm in their admission of some form of guilt from the very start of the trial.
His lawyer Teny Geragos made an extraordinary admission in her opening statement in court.
She described Combs as a domestic abuser with a vicious temper.
One of the most shocking pieces of evidence was presented right at the start of the trial.
Combs' assault on ex-girlfriend Cassie Ventura at the InterContinental hotel in Los Angeles presented a damning case.
He was seen kicking her on the ground in vile CCTV footage which even Geragos labelled 'indefensible, horrible, dehumanising and violent'.
But it did little to help the prosecution prove Combs was the ringleader of a sex trafficking operation.
8
8
8
As Geragos put it on the first day: "It is evidence of domestic violence.
"But it is not evidence of sex trafficking."
As the trial continued, the defence remained adamant that all the pieces of evidence were simply painting a picture of a disturbed individual rather than a calculated criminal.
Marc Agnifilo, the mogul's attorney, even said in his eyes Combs was simply living a "swinger's lifestyle".
They even managed to twist some of the trial's key pieces of information to benefit their main argument.
When images of the countless bottles of baby oil and sexual lubricant were shown in court after a raid on Comb's home Agnifilo remarked that there is nothing illegal about owning such a stash.
Another key defensive point was around consent.
In order to get a guilty verdict over sex trafficking under US law, a person must have used force, fraud, or coercion in order to traffic a victim for sexual explosion purposes.
So for Combs to be found guilty on both charges, the prosecution had to prove both Cassie and second victim known as "Jane" did not give their consent.
They had attempted to say Combs compelled both women to take part in orgies through the threats of violence and financial manipulation.
Will Diddy go to prison and how much time could he get?
By Senior News Reporter, Forrest McFarland
SEAN "Diddy" Combs' future still hangs in the balance as the court continues to argue whether he should walk free after dodging his most serious federal charges.
After seven weeks of emotional testimony, a jury found the rapper guilty of two lesser charges but acquitted him of the three counts that each could have landed him a life sentence.
Combs was found guilty of two counts of transportation for purposes of prostitution, and each charge has a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison.
However, legal experts have warned that he shouldn't celebrate too soon, as they speculate that the rapper will likely have to spend some time behind bars.
"He's looking at 15 plus years under the sentencing guideline on each count, and he gets a multiplier for multiple victims," former federal prosecutor David Weinstein told NewsNation.
'The judge can run them consecutive, and he might, with an additional multiplying factor, find himself bumping up against 10 on each count.
'So, for people to say or think that he's going to get credit time served and walk out of here, I think that's a pipe dream for the defense.'
In a submission made after the verdict was announced, Diddy's defense argued that a prison term of 21 to 27 months would be reasonable, and pointed out that he's already served 10 months.
But prosecutors believe that he should be punished with a minimum of 51 to 63 months behind bars because of aggravating circumstances, like claims that Diddy was physically abusive.
But Mr Agnifilo said the women always had the chance to leave.
Speaking on Cassie after she bravely took to the stand while pregnant, the attorney stated: "No one's forcing her to do this.
"She's a woman who actually likes sex – good for her."
For a racketeering conspiracy charge to stick, prosecutors needed to show Combs had knowing co-conspirators.
It was argued that he co-opted his loyal employees - including chief of staff, Kristina Khorram.
Several names of alleged accomplices cropped up across the trial but the prosecution never subpoenaed them.
Due to them not being called as a witness or ever being questioned, this may have confused the jury and contributed to them finding Combs not guilty.
Michael Bachner, a New York-based criminal defence lawyer and former District Attorney, told The Telegraph racketeering is notoriously hard to prove.
He said: "There was evidence of people helping him, but I think it was still a stretch for them to prove that this was part of some concerted conspiracy to do it as opposed to just telling people what to do.
"It just didn't smell like a RICO case to a lot of people, so that's what I think the government's problem was with it."
Mr Agnifilo repeated his bashing of the prosecution as he labelled the case as a "badly, badly exaggerated story" during closing arguments.
Another major issue was due to Cassie and Jane both being long term partners of Combs.
Tony Buzbee, a US lawyer familiar with Combs' case, said the nature of the relationships may have been a major issue for the jury.
He said: "I think the jury struggled with the difficult issue of consent and more broadly whether Mr Combs's conduct appropriately fit within the racketeering statute."
8
8