Federal prosecutors in New York are expected to rest their case on Tuesday against Sean “Diddy” Combs, while the music magnate team intends not to offer own witnesses, carrying the expansion of conspiracy and the trial of sexual trafficking of sexual trafficking with an end of what is expected.
That the combs defense team would decide to call anyone was unexpected but far from being unusual, legal experts say.
“It is more likely that it is not in a trial that the defense does not call any witness,” said Mitchell Epner, former federal prosecutor of the New Jersey district who now practices criminal defense in New York. “Then, what can listen to the defense lawyer during the closing arguments is that the witnesses of the Prosecutor’s Office made our case. We did not have a burden to prove our case, and the interrogation of their witnesses makes it clear that we are fine and that they are wrong.”
Register for “Diddy in trial“Bulletin for developments and key analysis
Since the trial began more than six weeks ago, the jurors listened to 34 witnesses who testified the government’s statement that combs, the founder, rapper and businessman of Bad Boy records, took advantage of their businesses as a “criminal company” to sexually abuse and exploit women for decades. A jury of eight men and four women reviewed evidence, including text messages, videos and receipts, meant involving combs.
His lawyers had said last week that they had about three witnesses who could call, including a former vice president of operations at Bad Boy Entertainment. But the main defense lawyer Marc Agnifilo clarified on Monday to the American district judge Arun Subramanian that his team will present his own evidence and stipulate several problems before closing the arguments, which could begin as soon as Thursday.
After the Prosecutor’s Office rests, the defense is also expected to ask Subramanian to dismiss the case completely, a typical request at that time of the trial, but that is rarely successful.
Legal experts say that Subramanian should instruct jurors who do not give less weight to the defense for not witnessing witnesses beyond a reasonable doubt still falls in the Prosecutor’s Office.
While Epner said the jurors “should not pay attention to the number of witnesses that each side” are also “human beings, and they will pay attention and feel curious why they did not listen to certain people testifying.”
What the Prosecutor’s Office must prove
Comink, 55, declared himself innocent of an extortion conspiracy; two positions of sex trafficking by force, fraud or coercion; and two transport positions to participate in prostitution. He faces a long prison sentence if he is guilty of even a position.
Federal prosecutors have successfully used extortion charges, more commonly associated with organized crimes rings, in recent years against high profile figures accused of sexual crimes, including the singer of R & B R. Kelly and the cult leader of NXIVM, Keith Raniere. (Agnifilo represented Raniere in his 2019 trial).
The federal accusation against combs specifically refers to four women who accuse him of sexual abuse and allege a conspiracy of extortion in which a variety of crimes predicate or crimes was committed, including sexual trafficking, forced labor, narcotics crimes, kidnapping, fire, bribery and obstruction of justice.
At the beginning of the trial, the R&B Cassie singer, the former combs girlfriend, testified for several days on marathon marathon sessions, known as “extravagant”, who said that Comink orchestrated him with male companions.
His career suffered as the “fans,” he testified, “became a job.”
Some legal experts who were initially not convinced that Cassie’s testimony, whose real name is Casandra Ventura, is equivalent to an extortion conspiracy, say the Prosecutor’s Office has a high -reaching case.
“I understood why there was a reaction at the beginning of ‘Where is the evidence of the conspiracy?’ – I didn’t see him either, ”said Jennifer Beidel, former American prosecutor’s assistant in the Southern District of New York. “If the jury were called to deliberate after the second week or week three, would they have convicted of organized crime? Probably not. Now, it could happen.”
And while three women testified against combs, Ventura, a former assistant who uses the pseudonym “Mia” and an ex -girlfriend who goes for “Jane”, the charges are not linked to the accusers as individuals, so the jurors can evaluate their claims separately or as a whole.
“One might think that Cassie is credible, but decides that Jane is not convincing,” said Beidel. “But even if they don’t find a convincing one, there could still be enough to condemn with the way this is charged.”
The Federal Organized Crime Statute requires that the Government demonstrate that at least two acts of predicates occurred, but the jurors do not agree on what they are, said Beidel. If some jury members do not believe in accusations of sexual trafficking because they believe that sexual relations between combs and women were consensual, as the defense suggested, the Prosecutor’s Office presented “many alternative forms in which each jury could reach the necessary predicate act” for the accumulation criteria, he added.
The key testimony may have advanced the case of the Prosecutor’s Office, legal experts say.
Grammy’s winning rapper, Kid Cudi, who was a romantic rival of the combs, testified about the fire pump of his Porsche in 2012. Cudi, whose real name is Scott Mescudi, said that combs broke into his house in the neighborhood of Hollywood Hills in Los Angeles in the weeks before the happy act of Arson in his car.
A former combs personal assistant, Capricorn Clark, said combs was armed with a gun when he kidnapped her to go with him to face Cudi while threatening to kill him.
Another former combs employee, George Kaplan, testified about acting as a drug messenger and storing hotel rooms where “fonsffs” were maintained with the necessary oil and baby candles.
Meanwhile, the testimony of Eddy García, a security supervisor at a Los Angeles hotel, where ComBs was seen in the security video to overcome Ventura in 2016, focused on an accusation that Comps was desperate to obtain the only copy of the video. Garcia said that combs paid $ 100,000 in cash, which was divided among the members of the hotel security team, and signed a non -dissemination agreement that requested its silence in what could be examples of bribery and obstruction of justice, according to legal experts.
The government began to reduce its case with a special agent of the United States prosecutor’s office, Delassa Penland, who exceeded flight records belonging to Jules Theodore. Prosecutors say that Theodore, a male escort, was often hired to participate in “fontanes” with combs and ventura and traveled between New York and Los Angeles. Penland testified that credit card charges were paid for a signature bank account held by Bad Boy Entertainment worldwide.
The prosecution’s interrogation line seemed to try to strengthen the two transport positions to participate in the prostitution that combs also faces, legal experts say.
Defense can sow doubts during closures
During the interrogation, defense lawyers led some government witnesses to say that they still admire combs, enjoyed working for him and testifying just because they were summoned.
Ventura said during his interrogation that he does not hate combs: “I have love for the past and what it was.”
Mark Zauderer, a veteran trial and appeal lawyer in New York, said that the defense decision not to call anyone at the stand indicates that “concluded that the testimony of additional witnesses will not help combs.”
“In this circumstance, the defense will place all its eggs in a basket, arguing to the jury that the government has not been able to prove the elements of its [racketeering] Case beyond a reasonable doubt, ”said Zauderer.
He added that not calling combs is a strategy that his defense is betting.
“He cannot testify without being subject to a withered interrogation about other bad acts, all of which could expose him to civil liability in the demands brought by others,” said Zauderer.
Epner said the defense can use their final arguments to suggest not only that government witnesses were useful for combs, but also that key witnesses were simply not reliable.
“The defense will be on attacking the credibility of the prosecution’s witnesses,” Epner said. “What is absolutely clear to me is that Mia and Jane were subjected to more interrogation and, from press reports, more harmful against the interrogation than Cassie.”
The defending lawyer Nicole Blank Becker, who helped represent R. Kelly in her 2021 sexual trafficking trial, said it will also be important for the defense to distance the combs of some of the decisions that led to the alleged crimes.
“If it looks like a king,” said Blank Becker, “is very easy for a jury to check the guilt box.”
Comps has had a “uphill battle” since before the trial, he added, while facing a series of demands that have included accusations of sexual violation and aggression. He has strongly denied such accusations and accused several claimants to pursue “days of paid”.
“The Prosecutor’s Office witnessed after witness, that can be a difficult challenge for the defense to refute, and the letters are stacked against them,” said Blank Becker. “That is the way the federals roll. They don’t come after you unless they believe they have you.”
