Sean “Diddy” Combs’s legal team will present their closing arguments in his defense, following a nearly five-hour prosecution presentation detailing a “climate of fear” that they claim he fostered as the alleged leader of a longstanding criminal enterprise.
Defense attorney Marc Agnifilo is anticipated to address the jury on behalf of Mr. Combs, the 55-year-old music mogul facing the possibility of life in prison on charges that include racketeering and sex trafficking.
Mr. Combs, who once held significant influence in the music and entertainment industry, maintains his innocence regarding all charges.
He chose not to testify in his own defense, a common tactic used by defense teams who are not obligated to demonstrate innocence, but only to instill doubt regarding the government’s assertions of guilt.
The prosecution argued that Mr. Combs “counted on silence and shame to keep his crimes concealed.”
“Until this point, the defendant managed to evade accountability for these crimes due to his wealth, power, and influence. That ends today,” she stated.
In outlining the primary charge of racketeering, the prosecution claimed that Combs led a criminal organization of “loyal lieutenants” and “foot soldiers” whose purpose was to fulfill his demands.
A key component of the prosecution’s racketeering case is the assertion that high-ranking employees, including his chief-of-staff and security personnel—who did not testify—were fully aware of his criminal activities and aided in their execution.
“His power and danger increased with the backing of his inner circle and business associates,” Ms. Slavik stated.
Consent or coercion?
As in their opening statements, the defense is expected to argue that while some of Mr. Combs’s relationships involved instances of domestic violence, they did not entail the sex trafficking he is accused of.
The prosecution presented what they call “crystal clear” evidence of trafficking, which included accounts of coerced drug-fueled sexual encounters with paid escorts under threats of reputational, physical, or financial harm.
However, the defense is anticipated to contend that the alleged victims were merely adult women making conscious choices.
Both women involved in the sex trafficking allegations—the singer Casandra Ventura and a woman testifying under the pseudonym Jane—had long-term relationships with Mr. Combs. The defense claimed in opening statements that the sexual encounters were consensual, albeit unconventional.
Jurors were presented with numerous phone records containing messages of affection and desire from both women, but prosecutor Ms. Slavik argued that taking these words literally, and in isolation, does not provide a complete picture.
Throughout her arguments, she alluded to testimony from a forensic psychologist who explained how victims can become entrapped by their abusers.
In a particularly impactful moment, she urged jurors to empathize with Ventura, who recounted years of harrowing physical abuse at the hands of Mr. Combs.
“Imagine the fear of never knowing when the next blow might come,” Ms. Slavik implored. “Now picture trying to refuse that individual.”
Government witnesses included former assistants, other employees, escorts, and friends and family of Ventura, as well as a hotel security guard who claimed he was bribed with $100,000 in a paper bag.
The defense chose not to call witnesses, including Mr. Combs himself, which is a strategy often employed.
The burden of proving guilt rests with the prosecutors, and unless the jurors believe they have satisfied this burden, the defendant is presumed innocent.
The defense may feel they have effectively cast enough doubt on the prosecution’s claims during their thorough questioning of the 34 individuals presented by US attorneys.
Following the closing arguments, Judge Arun Subramanian will guide jurors on how to apply the law to the evidence during their deliberations.
