Expert Reveals Diddy Faces Very Long Prison Sentence Due To Hint From Judge
The music mogul, whose case has attracted national attention, was found guilty of transportation to engage in prostitution and not guilty of the sex trafficking and racketeering charges.
According to the legal expert, the possibility of a lengthy sentence was hinted at by the trial judge, who also denied Sean "Diddy" Combs' bail following the verdict.
After several weeks of trial, the jury recently reached a decision on the charges against Diddy. They acquitted him of racketeering and sex trafficking charges that could have resulted in a life sentence if he had been convicted.
What remained were the lesser charges of transportation to engage in prostitution, which many viewed as a legal victory for Diddy.
However, a former federal prosecutor, Jennifer Beidel, has warned that despite the reduced severity of the charges, Judge Arun Subramanian may still "throw the book" at the rapper during sentencing.
According to Beidel, Subramanian, referring to Diddy's propensity for violence while denying his request for a $1 million bail bond, hinted at this possibility.
"He is saying he thinks that Diddy poses a danger to society," Beidel told the Daily Mail.
She added, "In the bond hearing, both sides did a guidelines calculation, and the government's was higher. I think the judge is probably signaling that he's gonna be receptive to some of those additions to the guidelines range, and when the guidelines range goes up, the sentence usually goes up."
For now, it remains unclear how many years could be added if Judge Subramanian chooses to throw the book at Diddy.
However, what is known is that the prosecutors will seek a 20-year maximum sentence for the rapper.
On the other hand, Diddy's lawyers have argued that, under federal sentencing guidelines, he should face about two years in prison.
If that turns out to be the case, Diddy could be released in just over a year, as he has already spent nine months in jail since his arrest in September last year.
In the meantime, with his bail bond denied, Diddy remains in jail until his sentencing.
A sentencing date has been set for October 3, but it may be rescheduled for an earlier date during a hearing scheduled for next week.
Beyond the possibility of facing a long sentence, Diddy also has to contend with the numerous civil suits he is embroiled in.
Since his arrest in September, he has been hit with over 60 lawsuits from both men and women, including allegations of sexual assault, rape, and abuse.
Some of his accusers have chosen to remain anonymous while filing their lawsuits, while others have been publicly named.
Most recently, a male escort named Clayton Howard, who Diddy allegedly hired for "freak offs," filed a lawsuit against the rapper and his ex, Cassandra "Cassie" Ventura.
In the recent lawsuit filed by Howard, he claimed Diddy and Cassie trafficked him for the purposes of commercial sex, which he described as "entertainment to satisfy their sexual fetishes and personal ambitions."
Even worse, he alleged that he was drugged, manipulated, and traumatized by the duo, whom he described as being involved in a toxic and abusive relationship, as supported by reports from Diddy's trial.
He also claimed to have suffered physical and psychological injury, lost wages and benefits, medical expenses, pain and suffering, emotional distress, and mental anguish, as well as loss of enjoyment of life.
Despite the barrage of civil lawsuits, the rapper is prepared to fight for his innocence in the coming days.
His lawyer, Erica Wolff, stated in a press release following the verdict that Diddy "will not back down" and intends to fight all the civil cases to achieve his "full vindication," according to The New York Times.
She also claimed that the jury's decision in the sex crimes trial is proof that the rapper is innocent of the allegations in his numerous civil suits.
The outcome helped prove "what we have been saying about the civil cases since day one: they are all fabricated attempts to extort windfall payments from an innocent man," the attorney emphasized.
"Mr. Combs never sexually assaulted or trafficked anyone," she added. "From the beginning, we have vigorously defended against the civil plaintiffs' made-up claims with full confidence that Mr. Combs would prevail in the criminal case, and he did."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
7 minutes ago
- Fox News
Trump White House calls out Smithsonian for pushing 'one-sided, divisive political narratives'
EXCLUSIVE: The Trump administration is turning its attention to the Smithsonian Institution, accusing the taxpayer-funded museum complex of using federal dollars to promote what it calls "one-sided, divisive political narratives" that fail to honor the greatness of the American story. White House official Lindsey Halligan blasted content currently on display at the National Museum of American History's Entertainment Nation exhibit in an exclusive email to Fox News exhibit, which explores American pop culture, has drawn internal and external criticism for what some see as a politically loaded interpretation of cultural milestones. "American taxpayers should not be funding institutions that undermine our country or promote one-sided, divisive political narratives," Halligan said. "The Smithsonian Institution should present history in a way that is accurate, balanced, and consistent with the values that make the United States of America exceptional."DONALD TRUMP FIRES NATIONAL PORTRAIT GALLERY DIRECTOR FOR BEING 'STRONG SUPPORTER' OF DEI The White House statement comes on the heels of several striking examples from the exhibit. One placard, featured alongside a 1923 circus poster, reads: "Under the big top, circuses expressed the colonial impulse to claim dominion over the world." Another, describing early American entertainment, declares: "One of the earliest defining traits of entertainment in the United States was extraordinary violence." The exhibit reframes iconic American characters through a critical, politically-charged lens. On The Lone Ranger, the display states: "The White title character's relationship with Tonto resembled how the U.S. government imagined itself the world's Lone Ranger." Mickey Mouse, a beloved American cultural icon, is not spared either. A display for the 1928 cartoon Steamboat Willie states, "Mickey challenged authority, but not everyone was in on the joke." It continues: "Mickey Mouse debuted as the deckhand 'Steamboat Willie' in 1928, amidst a rising anxiety felt by many that modern living and city life were eroding family and community ties and loosening moral codes… But the new character's outsized facial features, white gloves, and trickster temperament were vestiges of longstanding traditions of blackface minstrelsy." In reference to the Indiana Jones film series, another panel reads: "His character embodied a confident righteousness that, in many ways, captured the essence of the 1980s" above another subhead referencing President Ronald Reagan's famous speech, asking, "Are you better off?"KENT STATE STUDENT'S VIOLENT ANTI-TRUMP ART DISPLAY SPURS OUTRAGE One panel calls Magnum, P.I. a challenge to the "popular perceptions of Vietnam veterans as damaged misfits." A section on Jon Stewart's Daily Show refers to it as "the go-to for viewers who mistrusted politicians and the reporting process." Another panel highlights the late pop star Selena Quintanilla-Pérez and frames her cultural impact through identity politics. "Selena got us talking about identity," with a quote from the late singer reading, "I feel very proud to be Mexican." The text goes on to say her work "cast a light on the longstanding cultural and growing political influence of Mexican American and Latinx communities within the United States." "The examples [Fox News Digital] highlighted from the National Museum of American History are part of the problem the Trump Administration aims to fix," Halligan said. "Framing American culture as inherently violent, imperialist, or racist does not reflect the greatness of our nation or the millions of Americans who have contributed to its progress." Halligan confirmed that a top-to-bottom content review is already underway, with input from senior Smithsonian leaders and the Board of Regents. "We are working with leadership at the Smithsonian to audit and review all content at the museums," she said, "and we are committed to ensuring that such content honors our country's founding principles, tells the stories of American heroes, and does not promote fringe or activist ideologies masquerading as history." She added, "We will provide updates on this audit as our progress unfolds." The Smithsonian Institution responded to Fox News Digital with the following brief written statement: "The museum is committed to continuous and rigorous scholarship and research and unbiased presentation of facts and history. As such, and as previously announced, we are assessing content in Smithsonian museums and will make any necessary changes to ensure our content meets our standards." The Institution did not answer specific questions regarding who authored the Entertainment Nation exhibit, whether outside academic consultants or activist organizations were involved, or who made the decision to present all exhibit text bilingually in English and Spanish. The controversy comes amid a broader push by President Donald Trump to reshape cultural institutions he says have veered too far left. In March, Trump issued an executive order directing the Board of Regents to eliminate "improper, divisive or anti-American ideology" from Smithsonian museums. He accused the institution of embracing what he called "a revisionist movement" aimed at "undermining the remarkable achievements of the United States by casting its founding principles and historical milestones in a negative light." The Board of Regents includes the vice president, the chief justice of the United States, six members of Congress, and nine citizen regents. Vice President J.D. Vance and Congressman Carlos Giménez, both recent appointees, have advocated for an expedited review of Smithsonian content. Giménez, in a prior interview with The Wall Street Journal, confirmed tensions at the board's June meeting over how quickly to proceed, though ultimately a compromise was reached. The Smithsonian receives approximately two-thirds of its $1 billion annual budget from federal appropriations. The Entertainment Nation exhibit opened in December 2022 and was billed as a permanent exhibition to "celebrate the power of popular culture to shape and reflect history." It is housed in a prime space on the museum's west wing and features artifacts and media from movies, television, sports, and music. While the museum's stated goal is to explore how entertainment intersects with American identity, the Trump administration argues that it instead uses culture to smuggle in ideology often at odds with the values most Americans hold. "Americans deserve a Smithsonian that inspires national pride, tells the truth, and reflects the greatness of this country," Halligan said. "Not one that serves as an agent for social change and cultural subversion."
CNET
22 minutes ago
- CNET
I Put a Fraud Alert on My Credit Reports. Here's Why You Should, Too
If deleting and reporting scam texts and phone calls has become part of your daily routine, there's another simple way to protect yourself from fraud -- and it may be more effective. Placing a fraud alert on your credit reports can prevent scammers from inflicting financial harm, and it's easier to do than you think. A recent CNET survey showed that as many as 96% of Americans are targeted by scammers each week, either by email, a phone call or text. And data from the Federal Trade Commission shows that financial losses due to fraud reached $12.5 billion in 2024 -- a 25% increase from the year prior. Reporting fraud is important for helping law enforcement catch criminals and inform the public about popular scams, but may not help as much on a personal level. Fraud alerts are specific to you and your credit reports, and they can warn you quickly that someone is using your personal info. I placed fraud alerts on my credit reports with all three of the major credit reporting bureaus, and it only took about 10 minutes. Here's how you can, too. What can a fraud alert do? Placing fraud alerts on your credit reports can prevent criminals from opening new accounts in your name. By setting up alerts with the three major credit bureaus (Experian, Equifax and TransUnion), you can add an extra layer of protection if a thief tries to open an account in your name. The actual fraud alert is a message that appears on your credit reports that lenders can see. It lets them know that your sensitive information could be compromised, and to take extra steps to verify your identity. It's important to alert all of the credit bureaus -- not just one -- since a new account may not necessarily be reported to all three. How credit report fraud alerts work depends on the type you set up, and there are three types to choose from. All three types of fraud alerts are free to set up, and the process only takes a few minutes from start to finish. Initial fraud alert Initial fraud alerts last for one year and alert businesses to check with you before a new account is opened in your name. For example, if you or someone else tried to open a new credit card account, the card issuer would reach out to you to verify before approval. You can renew an initial fraud alert after the first year. Anyone can set up an initial fraud alert for any reason, even if they just worry they'll be a victim of fraud. Extended fraud alert An extended fraud alert also ensures that businesses have to contact you before opening any new accounts in your name. However, these fraud alerts last for seven years instead of one, and they're only available to people who have experienced identity theft and completed an FTC identity theft report at or filed a police report. These alerts can also be renewed once the initial seven-year period ends. Active duty alert Active duty service members can use an active duty alert to protect their credit while they're away. This type of alert lasts for one year automatically, but members can renew it for the length of their deployment after year one. How to set up a fraud alert on your credit reports You'll need to set up fraud alerts with all three of the credit bureaus using the contact information below: How to contact credit bureaus Credit bureau Phone number Website Equifax 800-685-1111 Experian 888-397-3742 TransUnion 888-909-8872 When you visit each of these pages, you'll see the steps you can take to protect your credit and personal information. For example, you'll see options that let you freeze your credit reports completely or dispute incorrect information on your credit reports. You can also place a fraud alert on your credit reports. From there, the process is fairly simple. Here's what the Experian website looks like when you visit its credit help page: Step 1: Select 'fraud alerts,' then create an account When you click on "fraud alerts" on the Experian page, you'll be prompted to create an account or sign into an existing Experian account. If you create a new account, you'll need to share personal information like your full name, address, employment, date of birth and Social Security number (SSN). Step 2: Choose the type of fraud alert Once you log into your account, you can choose the type of fraud alert you want: an initial fraud alert, an extended fraud alert or an active duty alert. Since I hadn't been a victim of identity theft so far, I opted to open initial fraud alerts that last for one year on my credit reports. Step 3: Confirm your phone number This step requires you to verify your phone number, which should match the number they have on file from when you created your account. Step 4: Place the fraud alert Once you verify your phone number, the fraud alert is placed on your credit report automatically in seconds. Experian also says it will notify the other credit bureaus when a fraud alert is placed, but just in case, it's a good idea to contact Equifax and TransUnion yourself. Experian will also automatically remove your name and address from pre-screened offer lists for six months. You can remove a fraud alert with any of the credit bureaus using the same process. You'll simply head to the bureau's credit help page, navigate to the fraud alerts section, and choose the option to manage your alerts. From there, you can remove the fraud alert with just a few clicks. How to act on a fraud alert If you set up a fraud alert on your credit reports and you're notified someone else is trying to open an account in your name, this is a sign someone may have your sensitive personal information. This could be the result of a phishing scam or a criminal hacking into your accounts. Criminals getting hold of your sensitive personal details can also be the result of a major data breach. Maintain the fraud alert and renew as needed . If you were notified someone else was trying to open an account in your name and had the chance to stop it due to your fraud alert, the process worked. You can continue protecting yourself by renewing your fraud alert each time it is set to expire. . If you were notified someone else was trying to open an account in your name and had the chance to stop it due to your fraud alert, the process worked. You can continue protecting yourself by renewing your fraud alert each time it is set to expire. Freeze your credit reports . Another more drastic step involves freezing your credit reports with all three credit bureaus. A freeze prevents new accounts, full stop. If you want to open a new credit card or take out a loan and your credit is frozen, you'll need to temporarily unfreeze your credit reports first. . Another more drastic step involves freezing your credit reports with all three credit bureaus. A freeze prevents new accounts, full stop. If you want to open a new credit card or take out a loan and your credit is frozen, you'll need to temporarily unfreeze your credit reports first. Sign up for identity theft monitoring . You can also sign up for identity theft protection services, which can notify you if someone tries to open an account in your name and about other changes to your credit. These services tend to offer up to $1 million in identity theft insurance as well as other perks. . You can also sign up for identity theft protection services, which can notify you if someone tries to open an account in your name and about other changes to your credit. These services tend to offer up to $1 million in identity theft insurance as well as other perks. Report the attempted fraud. You can also report attempted credit card and loan fraud to the authorities, including the Internet Crime Complaint Center and Reach out to the U.S. Postal Inspection Service (USPIS) to report mail-related scams. Can you add a fraud alert if your credit is frozen? You can set up a fraud alert on your credit reports if your credit is already frozen, but you don't need to. Freezing your credit is more severe than setting up a fraud alert since it prevents anyone from opening a new account in your name (including you). Freezes are also indefinite, compared to fraud alerts that typically last a year. When you freeze your credit reports, you have to take steps to temporarily unfreeze your reports if you want to apply for a credit card or a loan. Fortunately, all three credit bureaus let you set a specific time for your credit to be unfrozen, such as 24 or 36 hours, so you can apply for new credit before your reports are frozen again.
Fox News
22 minutes ago
- Fox News
Christie Brinkley admits she's a 'fool for love' despite four failed marriages
Christie Brinkley is no stranger to love. The legendary supermodel, who has been married four times, admitted she's a "fool for love" in a candid new interview with the New York Times. In her conversation with the outlet, she spoke in detail about her divorces, and whether she's willing to open her heart again. "I'm too trusting," she admitted when asked about what she's learned from her marriages. "I'm a fool for love. That love takes work. Sometimes you need to rely on experts. I wish I could have found ways to save some; I wish I hadn't married others." Brinkley's first husband was artist Jean-François Allaux – the two wed in 1975, when she was 21 years old. They divorced in 1981, and four years later she married Billy Joel. Brinkley and Joel divorced in 1994, and that same year she married real estate developer Richard Taubman. She divorced him a year later, and a year after that she married architect Peter Cook. She was with him until their contentious divorce was finalized in 2008. She told the New York Times, "I always believed in soul mates. I thought I had four of them. Now I'm not sure. Maybe I had my two soul mates with Jean and Billy. Maybe I rushed out of my marriage to Jean. Maybe I should have tried to make it work longer with Billy. I did start to wonder if maybe it's me – if I was unlovable." When asked, she clarified, "I'm not unlovable, but the relationships I was in made me feel unloved. I have enough self-esteem to know that in the right arms, I'm lovable. And I wasn't loved correctly. One loved my money more than me. Another loved his drink more than me. Another loved young women more than me. And in my first one, I loved my freedom more than him." Her first husband, Allaux, was the one she said she left for her "freedom." She said that with him, it was "love at first sight," and while their marriage was successful for years, it was a "slow dissolve." "I got married too young. I started to feel constrained and regretted being tied down," she admitted. In her recently released memoir, "Uptown Girl," Brinkley explained that she'd met Allaux when she was just 19 years old. She'd moved to Paris to become an artist and met him soon after, and after six years of marriage, she wrote, "I started to wonder what else – and who else – might be out there." In the time since she'd met him, she'd "changed considerably, transforming from a girl from Malibu bound for Paris with only a backpack, paints and bohemian ideals to a top model with two mortgages, an endless zeal for adventure, and one big career." Joel is the ex-husband she claimed "loved his drink more than me" – the singer has been open about his past struggles with addiction, and Brinkley wrote in her memoir that "booze was the other woman." She said of their marriage, "When you become the bad cop, it's over. If we had been older when it happened, maybe we could have figured it out." In an April interview with Brinkley explained that her relationship with Joel was the most difficult to write about in her memoir because they're still friends, but she said he gave her his blessing. "He said, 'Just say what you need to say,'" Brinkley said. "And I think that's part of his healing, so I applaud him for all of that. It takes a lot of courage." As for the ex who "loved my money more than me," Brinkley referred to third husband Taubman. "Ricky was a larger-than-life character who married me for my money," she claimed. "Our relationship was complicated by the fact that I was pregnant, and I wanted to make the right decisions. The relationship came on the heels of my divorce from Billy, which I was devastated about." In "Uptown Girl," she wrote that after their son Jack was born, she had a session with her therapist and made the choice to give their marriage one more shot. She took Jack from New York, where she'd delivered the baby, back home to Taubman in Colorado, and she claimed that when she arrived, he asked her for money. "That's when I knew that this was not nor could it ever be love or even a real relationship: it was usership, manipulation, and at its worst, emotional torture," she wrote. "I booked a flight back to New York." When she arrived, she said Taubman called her and told her "I'm going to walk away from you and the baby" just like her biological father did to her. After that phone call, she filed for divorce. Finally, the one who "loved young women more than me" refers to Cook, who had an affair while married to Brinkley. "I was married to a stranger who had other lives. I had three children. I wanted to protect them from the fallout and from their life being blown apart. The divorce lasted for years. It was agonizing." Brinkley filed for divorce from Cook in 2006 after finding out that he'd been having an affair with his teenage assistant. The divorce proceedings took place in open court, and at one point in her testimony, she sobbed, saying, "I felt like the man who I was living with, I just didn't know who he was... anymore. Who is he? Who is this man who comes down and sits at the dining room table and acts like he's been at work?" per ABC News. In her memoir, she called her relationship with Cook "one of the most tormented experiences I've ever had." Brinkley is a mother of three: daughters Alexa Ray, who she shares with Joel, and Sailor, who she shares with Cook, as well as son Jack, who she had with Taubman but who was later adopted by Cook. The model confessed the thing she regrets most is "Not being able to sit with an open photo album with my husband and go, 'Look, remember this? Remember the kids?'" Despite everything, Brinkley admitted to the New York Times that she's still open to the idea of finding a partner. "Everything I've been through, all the pain, the stupidity, I would do it again because I believe in love," she shared. "I think it would be sad not to. I'm not sure I want to give up the freedom I have now. It gets harder to meet people and harder to trust. It would take a special person to get me to want to share my life. I have made peace without having it. I have been making it through without a man for a lot of years. I don't need a person to make me happy. I'm happy." She added, "But I have so much happiness in me, I would love to share it with someone I love."
