Additional Coverage:
- What will Diddy’s sentence be? Guns, drugs, and brutality could still plague him — despite an acquittal. (businessinsider.com)
Sean “Diddy” Combs Faces Sentencing Friday; Judge to Weigh Unproven Allegations
New York, NY – Sean “Diddy” Combs is set to learn his fate Friday in a Manhattan federal court, where a judge will determine his sentence for two Mann Act violations. Despite being acquitted last July of far more serious charges including sex trafficking and racketeering, the hip-hop mogul faces a stark divide in sentencing recommendations from prosecutors and his defense team.
Prosecutors are pushing for a substantial 11-year prison sentence, arguing that Combs remains a danger to society and left his two former girlfriends “broken and beaten.” Defense lawyers, conversely, are seeking a 14-month sentence, which would amount to largely time served, contending that Combs has already endured significant hardship during his year in federal jail and was cleared of all major misconduct.
The central legal conundrum facing U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian is how much weight, if any, to give to what is known as “acquitted conduct.”
Throughout Combs’ seven-week trial, jurors heard extensive testimony regarding allegations of guns, drugs, and violence. The critical question now is whether the judge can consider these details, even though they did not lead to convictions.
Combs was visibly relieved last July when a jury found him not guilty of sex trafficking and racketeering conspiracy. He celebrated the verdict, telling his family, “I’m gonna be home soon!” On Friday, he will discover if that promise holds true.
The convictions stem from jurors finding that Combs caused two girlfriends and at least eight male escorts to cross state lines for “freak offs” — hotel sex sessions that were a key focus of the trial.
In nearly 400 pages of pre-sentencing submissions, both sides have laid out their arguments. Combs’ lawyers maintain that while he had drug and “domestic violence problems,” he regrets these and is committed to change.
They argue the judge should not consider acquitted conduct, including violent acts, as the jury explicitly rejected charges of sex trafficking and racketeering. “The jury’s verdict spoke loud and clear,” the defense wrote, adding that increasing the sentence based on rejected evidence would “trivialize the jury’s work.”
Prosecutors, however, contend that a November rule change regarding acquitted conduct does not completely tie the judge’s hands. They argue that sentencing guidelines are just that—guidelines—and judges often disregard them.
Furthermore, they assert that acquittals are not definitive findings of fact, and judges can consider relevant acquitted conduct if it is proven by a preponderance of the evidence, meaning it’s more likely true than not. They argue that Combs’ punishment for the Mann Act convictions “must take into account the manner in which he committed them.”
The potential sentencing ranges vary dramatically based on whether acquitted conduct is factored in: defense calculations suggest six to 12 months, probation recommends 70 to 87 months, while federal prosecutors propose a hefty 360 months to life imprisonment.
Several “wild cards” could influence Friday’s outcome. Defense lawyers have submitted sealed comments from escorts who did not testify, claiming they were never paid for sex and witnessed no violence. Combs’ mental health submissions are also sealed.
Conversely, some trial witnesses who described negative experiences with Combs have written letters to Judge Subramanian, urging a severe sentence. Notably absent from such submissions or plans to speak is “Jane,” one of the prosecution’s key witnesses, who testified under a pseudonym.
It remains unclear if Combs is still paying rent for her Los Angeles home. Another key accuser, “Mia,” a former Combs employee, may or may not be permitted to give a victim impact statement.
Two pivotal witnesses are expected to make public remarks: Cassie Ventura, Combs’ former girlfriend and star witness, and Combs himself. Ventura, in a letter to the judge, expressed hope that Subramanian “considers the truths at hand that the jury failed to see” and imposes a sentence reflecting “the strength it took for victims of Sean Combs to come forward.” She wrote, “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.”
Judge Subramanian’s decision will ultimately reveal how he weighs these complex legal arguments and the full scope of evidence presented during the high-profile trial.