Sean 'Diddy' Combs case includes a charge steeped in racist history, attorneys argue
Combs is awaiting trial, tentatively scheduled to begin in May, on racketeering conspiracy, sex trafficking, and violating the Mann Act, which prohibits transporting someone across state lines for the purpose of prostitution.
On Tuesday evening, his legal team filed a motion casting the prosecution under the Mann Act as racist — something prosecutors have denied in previous hearings. "Mr. Combs has been singled out because he is powerful, Black, and he is being prosecuted for conduct that regularly goes unpunished," his lawyers argued in their motion.
The Mann Act was once called the White-Slave Traffic Act and was put into law in 1910 to prohibit the transportation of women for prostitution or other "immoral" purposes.
Combs' lawyers, however, argued to the court that the law's historic purpose has been to "target Black men and supposedly protect white women from them," pointing to the prosecution of Jack Johnson and Chuck Berry as past examples. Johnson was pardoned posthumously in 2018.
"High-profile white men, including former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, have engaged in similar conduct but were never charged under the Act," the motion said.
Read more: How Sean 'Diddy' Combs allegedly used his empire and employees to 'get his way' with women
Combs is accused of hiring escorts and having them cross state lines for sex in a federal indictment unsealed last year.
According to the motion, the escort service, which the motion does not name, is "not some secretive underground operation that was previously unknown. It has been operating in the open for over a decade. It has a website and over 10,000 followers on X [formerly Twitter]. As the company's own press page states, its operations have been featured in Playgirl, Glamour, Sheen, Hustler, Cosmopolitan, and Esquire."
Combs, who is being held in a federal correctional facility in Brooklyn, N.Y., has pleaded not guilty and maintained that he is innocent of any wrongdoing.
In a recently filed superseding indictment in Manhattan, federal prosecutors increased the number of alleged sex trafficking victims from one to three but does not identify them. The allegations of "Victim-1" mirror those made by singer and Combs' former girlfriend Casandra "Cassie" Ventura, in a lawsuit filed in 2023. That suit was eventually settled. The expanded indictment also extended the duration of the alleged conspiracy, saying it began in 2004 instead of 2008 and lasted until 2024.
Read more: A wall of secrets may crumble as feds call out enablers of Sean 'Diddy' Combs' alleged sex crimes
The indictment alleges the Bad Boy Entertainment founder used his empire to coerce victims into sex in gatherings known as "freak-offs."
It alleges Combs 'used force, threats of force, and coercion to cause victims, including but not limited to three female victims,' to engage in commercial sex acts.
Combs was arrested in September after nearly a yearlong federal investigation.
Prosecutors allege that, as part of a sex trafficking scheme, Combs and his entourage engaged in violence, abuse, arson, and kidnapping and, during one abduction, brandished a firearm.
Combs' attorneys have unsuccessfully sought to exclude evidence they say was leaked, including a 2016 video, which shows Combs and Ventura in a hallway of the Intercontinental Hotel in Los Angeles.
The video, obtained and published by CNN last year, shows Combs chasing Ventura down the hallway, kicking her, striking her and throwing a vase at her before dragging her back to the door of a room. The video, which quickly went viral, confirmed at least some of the physical abuse allegations against the singer detailed in the 2023 lawsuit.
Since the first indictment, a growing number of people have sued Combs, accusing him of sexual abuse, some of them minors at the time of the alleged acts. None of the federal allegations involve minors.
Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week.
This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
2 hours ago
- USA Today
Trump addresses pardon decision for Sean 'Diddy' Combs, but questions remain
President Donald Trump is breaking his silence on pardoning Sean "Diddy" Combs for the first time since he was acquitted of the most serious charges in a federal sex-crimes trial last month. In an interview that aired Friday, Aug. 1 on Newsmax with host Rob Finnerty, Trump discussed the possibility of presidential pardons for convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell, Combs and former Rep. George Santos. After Finnerty asked, "Sean 'Diddy' Combs. Would you consider pardoning him?" Trump responded: "Well he was essentially, I guess sort of, half-innocent. I don't know what they do, he's still in jail or something. He was celebrating a victory but I guess it wasn't as good of a victory." Trump 'should not pardon' Sean 'Diddy' 'Diddy' Combs, Megyn Kelly says On July 2, jurors found Combs not guilty of racketeering and sex trafficking ex-girlfriends Casandra "Cassie" Ventura Fine and a woman known as "Jane" in his sweeping trial that nearly lasted two months. He was convicted July 2 on two of the five counts against him for transporting those same women for prostitution, which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years per count. During the interview, Trump said "probably..." before pausing and revealing to Finnerty, "You know, I was very friendly with him, I got along with him great, seemed like a nice guy. I didn't know him well, but when I ran for office he was very hostile." The Newsmax host noted then that "he said some not so nice things about you, sir." "Yeah, and it's hard. You know, like you, we're human beings and we don't like to have things cloud our judgement, right?" the president continued. "But when you knew someone and you were fine and then you run for office and he made some terrible statements… so I don't know... it makes it more difficult to do." Then, Trump replied, "I'd say so," when Finnerty clarified by asking if it was "more likely a no for (pardoning) Combs?" In the interview, Trump was seemingly referencing Combs' expletive-filled 2017 comments in The Daily Beast, essentially saying that "(Black people) don't really" care about Trump. "The tomfoolery that's going on in D.C., that's just regular everyday business to Black folks," Combs told the left-leaning outlet in-part, adding later in the interview that he had to "keep it focused on that self-love that we need to give our race." Trump first weighed in on the possibility of pardoning Combs on May 30 in the Oval Office. "Nobody's asked" about a pardon, the president said. "But I know people are thinking about it. I know they're thinking about it. I think some people have been very close to asking." Trump added, "I haven't spoken to him in years. He really liked me a lot." Despite last month's verdict, Combs' legal saga continues. On Wednesday, July 31, lawyers for Combs requested his acquittal, or a new trial altogether, in court documents reviewed by USA TODAY. A day earlier, conservative host Megyn Kelly urged Trump against potentially pardoning Combs. Kelly said in an X post on July 30 that "Trump should not pardon Diddy" because "he doesn't deserve it." "He's a Trump hater. He's a woman abuser. MAGA is already upset over elites seeming to cover for each other. This would not help. GOP struggling w/young female voters, most of whom will HATE a Diddy pardon," Kelly wrote. Contributing: Taijuan Moorman
Atlantic
2 hours ago
- Atlantic
The ‘Slacker' Teen Who Was More Than Just a Punch Line
In the first episode of The Cosby Show, Cliff Huxtable (played by Bill Cosby) walks into his only son's messy room with a mission: getting him to care about improving his straight-D report card. But the teenager proves difficult to rattle. After his father makes a big show of giving him Monopoly money and then taking it all away bill by bill for hypothetical expenses, Theo (Malcolm-Jamal Warner) holds firm in his assertion that he doesn't need to emulate his parents in order to be happy. 'If you weren't a doctor,' he tells his father, 'I wouldn't love you less, because you're my dad.' Can't the same be true in reverse? For a moment, it seems as if Theo has gotten through. But instead, Cliff goes off, scolding his son for being 'afraid to try, because you're afraid that your brain is going to explode, and it's gonna ooze out of your ears.' The genius of the scene is that both characters are right. Theo is afraid to try, but he also recognizes one of his father's limitations: Cliff has a very specific idea of what success looks like, which can burden his children as they try to live up to it. It's a testament to Warner's skill as a performer that even when Theo isn't winning an argument with his dad, he evinces a complex vulnerability. Warner, who died last week, at the age of 54, struck a delicate balance while playing Theo: He's hubristic but not smug, clueless but not buffoonish. Nailing these nuances was key. Although today Cosby's name is inextricable from his tarnished legacy, The Cosby Show was nonetheless groundbreaking in its portrayal of a well-educated, middle-class Black family—and Theo's story bookends the series, starting with the Monopoly lesson and ending with his graduation from college. Cliff uses tough love to teach his son that hard work is instrumental to prospering in life. But Warner played Theo as the house jester, balancing the dramatic tension of his character's uncertain future with his impeccable ability to deliver a one-liner. Ultimately, Theo's development does not amount to simple 'success' or 'failure.' His arc comes into focus when he finds his sense of purpose—in part by challenging his parents' judgments and assumptions. As a high-school freshman at the start of the series, Theo isn't much for studying. Instead, he hopes to skate by on charisma alone—which rarely works—and aspires to land a variety of improbable dream jobs, such as tennis pro, pilot, and model. Theo's apathy serves as a counterpoint to Cliff's moralizing about the importance of education and family values to one's social mobility, which echoed Cosby's own. In retrospect, Cliff's fears about his son's future foreshadowed the comedian's public excoriations of Black youth, which drew national attention in the early 2000s—mainly, his charge that they were ' going nowhere.' The harshness that sometimes emerges in Cliff's approach to parenting lands with a more punitive thud in that context. And with Theo, we eventually see that the slacker persona his father has projected onto him is not the full picture. Theo's apparent lack of motivation occasionally drives his father to theatrical extremes. In one episode, Cliff enlists the entire family to simulate the 'real world' for his son; the exercise walks Theo through getting a job, renting an apartment, and surviving life's unpleasant realities for a day. Like the earlier Monopoly gambit, it doesn't really work. When his mother, Clair (Phylicia Rashad), suggests afterward that he's learned an important lesson, Theo clarifies for her. 'I learned that when I go into the real world,' he says, 'I don't want to do business with anyone in my family.' The episode's punch line reflects a common parent-child dynamic: Rather than attempting to find common ground, both sides put up a wall—in the Huxtables' case, through humor. The Cosby Show indulges in this again and again, as Theo's parents invent dramatic ways to school their son; they even go so far as to stage a mock trial to catch Theo in a lie. Their son, meanwhile, typically shrugs it all off with a joke. The show's early years often played the chasm between Theo's overconfidence and the outcomes of his actions for laughs too. For example, take a scene in which he tries to impress his older sister Denise's (Lisa Bonet) study buddy: Theo adopts a baritone voice, and then Denise manhandles him out the door. As with many adolescent boys, Theo's bravado is a mask for his still-developing identity. The relatability of his 'fake it 'til you make it' attitude renders him endearing, even when he's the butt of a joke. Still, Theo's self-mythology suggests a latent sadness, perhaps stemming from a suspicion that he might live out his adult life as a regular person, rather than the educated professional his parents expect him to become. But for as often as the show points out the teen's foibles, Warner never lets viewers dismiss Theo outright. For a while, he animates his character's puppyish demeanor with perfectly timed voice cracks and awkward body language. Yet the actor slowly recalibrates as both he and Theo age, shifting the fumbling swagger toward a more mature kind of self-assurance. Some of the show's most rewarding scenes arrive when Theo, as an older teen, earns his father's respect by showing up as his full self. On two separate occasions, Theo and his best friend, who goes by the nickname 'Cockroach' (Carl Anthony Payne II), write a rap for a class assignment. Both iterations include catchy lyrics that demonstrate an understanding of the material; teens like Theo and Cockroach can do great work, the show suggests, when they have room to be creative. It feels fitting, then, that Theo's emotional turning point comes from a diagnosis that upends his parents' skepticism about him. After he enrolls in college, Theo learns that he's dyslexic, which reframes his academic challenges, flighty aspirations, and self-doubts. (Charting a clear path forward is hard when you believe that you aren't smart enough to advance.) The revelation frees Theo from the 'failure' narrative that the adults in his life have pinned on him; he begins performing better academically as a result. More important, he invests his downtime in a meaningful, altruistic pursuit. As a volunteer at the local community center, Theo lights up while mentoring tweens who have struggles similar to his own, and not just because he's good at it. Working with a younger generation gives Theo a platform to draw upon his life experiences and learn as he goes, affirming his newfound sense of accomplishment. When one of his advisers tells him he's doing well but isn't 'there' yet, Theo agrees—a moment Warner underscores by smiling to himself as he murmurs, 'But I'm growing.' The pleasure Warner brings to the exchange reflects just how much his character has transformed from an aimless teen afraid to fail into an adult who recognizes that trial and error are part of life. The Cosby Show closes with the whole family gathering. Although Cliff reflects on the long, hard road his son faced to get here, Theo's real triumph is different, and more significant. He's no longer feigning confidence or struggling to understand why the things that come easily to others are so difficult for him. He won't become a doctor or a lawyer. After years of effort, he's defined what personal success means to him. A sense of direction is what his parents have wanted for him all along. And now he's found it for himself.
NBC Sports
2 hours ago
- NBC Sports
Tony Buzbee responds to Shannon Sharpe's claim that he targets Black men
Anyone who has been following the NFL since 2021 knows the name Tony Buzbee. He arrived on the scene as the lawyer representing the first plaintiff who sued then-Texans quarterback Deshaun Watson for misconduct during massage-therapy sessions. Eventually, Buzbee represented more than 20 plaintiffs against Watson. Most recently, Buzbee settled a lawsuit on behalf of a woman who claimed that Hall of Fame tight end Shannon Sharpe committed sexual assault. After the lawsuit was filed in April, Sharpe attacked Buzbee personally, claiming among other things that he 'targets Black men.' In a new Esquire profile, Buzbee responded to that claim. 'I didn't wake up one morning and say, 'I want to sue Shannon Sharpe.' He has no relevance in my life,' Buzbee said, via Sean Keeley of 'I actually think he's very entertaining when he yells and screams and talks about sports that he's not involved in. But if I think it's a legitimate case, then I pursue it. And I think this is worth my time.' Buzbee's business model, if he's doing it properly (and the results would suggest he is), doesn't discriminate. He told Esquire that he receives as a fee roughly 40 percent of any recovery his clients get. That's how the American civil justice system works. Individuals who have grievances and who can't afford to pay lawyers by the hour hire them based on a contingency fee. This creates a strong business incentive for those lawyers to take good cases, not weak ones. The question of whether a case is worth pursuing has three prongs: clarity of liability, amount of damages, and the ability to collect on a settlement or verdict. Beyond that, nothing else should matter. And given that Sharpe's lawyer immediately admitted that at least $10 million was offered to settle the case before it was filed and that the case was eventually settled without Sharpe ever responding to the civil complaint, chances are that Buzbee walked away from the Sharpe case with at least $4 million in fees. That's how it works. Find strong cases, pursue strong cases, settle or try strong cases. Buzbee did that after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in 2010, generating more than $500 million for more than 10 thousand clients who pursued claims against BP. 'I guess a bunch of old white men could say I'm targeting them, and a bunch of multinational corporations could say I'm targeting them as well,' Buzbee said. 'I guess you could say I was targeting BP. . . . Well, I probably was targeting BP.' That's how it works. For anyone who represents individuals on a contingency fee. For Buzbee, the Watson case made him a go-to choice for anyone with valid claims against current or former NFL players. Without the Watson cases, there's a good chance the plaintiff in the Sharpe case wouldn't have known Buzbee's name. That also explains Buzbee's publicity-driven style. At a time when plenty of lawyers advertise their services with gigantic billboards and goofy TV commercials, the best advertisement remains free advertisement from news coverage. Buzbee knows that. His business thrives on that. And there's no reason to pursue a weak case simply to harass someone. That said, a case that seemed strong can turn out to be weak, if the lawyer mistakenly believed a client whose story didn't hold up under scrutiny. That's what may have happened in Buzbee's misadventures with Jay-Z, which resulted in the plaintiff acknowledging inconsistencies in the story she was telling about allegations of rape when she was 13 and the case eventually being dismissed without a settlement. The Esquire profile contains this curious statement: 'Buzbee later withdrew from the case because he has not been admitted to practice law in the Southern District of New York.' The presence of that assertion in the final product, frankly, shows that whoever wrote and/or edited the story has no idea how the legal system works. Lawyers licensed in one jurisdiction routinely seek and receive what's known as pro hac vice (Latin, 'for this occasion') admission in other jurisdictions in a specific case. As long as a local lawyer who is licensed to practice in that court is personally involved in the case, pro hac vice admission is routinely granted. Actually, that's how Buzbee pursued Sharpe. The primary lawyer on the complaint filed in Las Vegas was Nevada lawyer Micah D. Nash. Buzbee's name appears on the document below Nash's, with this designation: 'Pro Hac [Vice] Forthcoming.' This doesn't mean Buzbee was targeting Jay-Z because of his race. The more plausible explanation is that Buzbee took on a case that ended up being far weaker than he thought it was, so he found a way to retreat. Of course, he's now facing a lawsuit from Jay-Z claiming that the lawsuit sparked $190 million in business losses. Unfortunately for Buzbee, he's got the money that would make him a target for a lawyer who represents plaintiffs on a contingency fee. That's the primary motivation in this specific form of legal practice. It's good business to take strong cases with significant damages against defendants who have money. The personal characteristics of the defendants do not matter. All that matters is: (1) did they do something they shouldn't have done?; (2) did those actions cause tangible and significant harm?; and (3) can they easily write a check to make things right?
