Sean “Diddy” Combs’ federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial is set to begin on Monday in Manhattan.
In the time since the mogul’s arrest last September, observers have gotten some idea of the evidence against him, as well as the ways his constant-expanding team of lawyers is likely to defend him.
While we can’t say with certainty everything that will happen once Judge Arun Subramanian brings the gavel down, here’s what we know for sure—and our best guesses about the rest.
How long will the trial take?
The trial is expected to last around eight weeks. Judge Subramanian said more than once during the jury selection process that he anticipates it wrapping up before the July 4 holiday.
Will the trial be televised or live-streamed?
No, it will not be.
What are the actual charges?
Diddy faces five counts in total. The major one is racketeering conspiracy.
Then there are two different crimes he’s charged with committing twice: one tied to Cassie and one tied to an unnamed “Victim-2” (more on her below).
The first is sex trafficking by fraud, force, or coercion. The second is transportation to engage in prostitution—that one applies to each woman and commercial sex workers.
How much prison time is he facing?
Racketeering alone, the most serious charge, can mean life in prison.
Who are Diddy’s lawyers?
Diddy’s legal team has changed a bit since we told you about it back in October, with one subtraction and a number of additions. Back then, it consisted of lead attorney Marc Agnifilo, Teny Geragos (young and TikTok savvy, and the daughter of a celebrity defense attorney), and Anthony Ricco.
Anna Maria Estevao and Alexandra Shapiro joined in October, shortly after our roundup was published. Shapiro had previously been handling Diddy’s bail appeal. Jason Anthony Driscoll, who works at Shaprio’s firm, hopped on in January of this year.
Ricco left the team in February. Xavier R. Donaldson joined last week, and Nicole Westmoreland was added earlier this week.
Teny’s father Mark Geragos is not officially part of the squad, but he was present during jury selection, and often conferred with the other attorneys—sometimes to the annoyance of the judge.
Who are the prosecutors?
The prosecutors in court are all women. The lead ADA on the case is Maureen Comey, daughter of former FBI head James Comey. She is not new to high-profile sex trafficking cases, having been one of the lead prosecutors of Ghislaine Maxwell. She also worked on the prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein.
Who is the judge?
Arun Subramanian is the first South Asian judge to serve in the Southern District of New York. He clerked for the Notorious R.B.G., former Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. He’s from Pittsburgh. He went to Case Western for undergrad and Columbia for law school. No word yet on what music he’s listening to on his way to court.
Who will testify?
Alleged Victims
When it comes to alleged victims testifying, the only one we know for sure is Cassie Ventura.
After that, it gets complicated. Prosecutors’ original plan was to have, including Cassie, four alleged victims, all female, of Diddy’s sexual abuse taking the stand. Two of them, referred to as “Victim-2” and “Victim-4” in legal documents, were to remain anonymous.
Victim-2 is a woman who was around Diddy for about three years. Victim-4 was in his orbit for much longer.
Victim-3 is a bit more complicated. She, like Victim-4, was around Diddy for years. It was hinted in some court hearings that she was reluctant to testify. But all seemed to be proceeding according to plan when she agreed to testify under her own (still unknown as of this writing) name. But this week, prosecutors said they have been unable to contact Victim-3, and are unsure if she’ll show up in court.
All we know about Victim-3 is that her attorney is Lisa Bloom, and that, per one of Bloom’s recent interviews, she is not another Bloom client, singer Dawn Richard.
As if that wasn’t complicated enough, a Victim-5, briefly mentioned in a court hearing last month, may testify. The victim will not be allowed to remain anonymous. If he or she testifies, it will be about conduct that Diddy is not being charged for in this case. This is why the mogul’s lawyers (unsuccessfully) argued for the testimony to be excluded.
Dueling Experts
Aside from victims, we know the identities of a few expert witnesses, and more or less what they will say to the jury—in large part because each side fought hard to exclude the other’s experts.
Diddy will introduce Dr. Elie Aoun. Aoun is an assistant professor of clinical psychiatry at Columbia University and forensic psychiatrist in New York City. He is expected to talk about drugs. Specifically, he will, per Combs’ defense team, talk about “expected and unexpected effects of various drugs” and what the “predictable result of certain combinations of drugs might be.”
This is meant to tie back to Diddy’s own drug use, and perhaps ultimately to whether the Bad Boy founder can be held responsible for his actions. Aoun is not allowed to talk about Diddy, who he has not examined. But he can talk about drug use in general. Diddy’s lawyers, who have access to the mogul’s drug history, prescription and otherwise, can be expected to draw the necessary connections to their client.
Diddy’s side is also bringing up Conor McCourt, a former NYPD cop who helped develop a forensic video program in the department. After leaving, he started his own company, McCourt Video Analysis. He will testify about the Cassie video, attempting to downgrade its importance in the minds of the jurors by pointing out technical questions or flaws. McCourt is under strict instructions from the judge not to characterize the video with colorful or biased language, and instead strictly to facts and technical details.
In addition, Diddy will be introducing a forensic psychiatrist, Dr. Alexander Bardey, who is there primarily to rebut testimony from a government expert, Dr. Dawn Hughes. He is set to argue that, per Diddy’s team, “there is no typical response” to sexual abuse. This is meant to rebut Hughes’ arguments, which will concern the typical ways abuse victims respond.
On the government’s side will be, as mentioned, Dr. Dawn Hughes. She is a clinical psychologist and a board-certified forensic psychologist, and a professor at Weill Cornell Medical College.
Prosecutors are presenting her as “a leading expert on sexual abuse, interpersonal violence, victimization, and traumatic stress.” Hughes has not examined Diddy, so she cannot talk about him directly. Her job will be to introduce the psychological concept of “coercive control” (basically the ways abusers can maintain control over victims) and to discuss different coping strategies that victims of sexual abuse may use. Dr. Hughes will be allowed to testify that people remain in abusive relationships; and that just because people stay, that doesn’t mean that abuse didn’t occur.
To make a complicated case even more convoluted, while explaining “coercive control,” Dr. Hughes will not be allowed to use the word “coercive,” for fear that jurors will confuse it with coercion, which has a different legal meaning in this context.
What role will the Cassie video play?
Many of the jurors have seen at least parts of the infamous Cassie hallway video. It is being set up as a major piece of evidence in the case. The version of the video that was broadcast on CNN will not be shown. Instead, jurors will view the surveillance footage as it was recorded on a cellphone. They have argued that Diddy ordered the original surveillance footage destroyed, so this is the closest they can get.
Diddy will, as mentioned, call his own video expert, Conor McCourt, in an attempt to discredit the footage. For the prosecution, witnesses (including, many assume, Cassie herself) will talk about the events shown in the video.
Who are the jurors?
That part…isn’t finished yet. As of this writing, a massive group of over 700 potential jurors has been narrowed down to just 45 contenders. On Monday morning, that crew will be narrowed down to 12 jurors and six alternates. That will be done by each side using their peremptory strikes, which is when they can eliminate someone without giving a reason. The government has nine of these strikes, and Diddy’s side has 13.
What arguments will each side make?
The crux of the government’s argument is that Diddy “abused, threatened, and coerced” people around him to “fulfill his sexual desires, protect his reputation, and conceal his conduct.”
To do that, they argue, he did a bunch of terrible and illegal acts: sex trafficking, forced labor, kidnapping, arson, bribery, and more.
Diddy’s defense has raised several arguments throughout the process. Primarily, they’ve said from the beginning that his relationship with Cassie did not involve any coercion. Instead, they’ve painted it as a “long-term loving relationship that became strained by mutual infidelity and jealousy.” Similarly, he is likely to say that any alleged sex act, involving anyone including commercial sex workers, was consensual.
One additional argument that Diddy’s attorneys and supporters have repeatedly brought up in court and elsewhere (and that the government has tried to keep out of the courtroom) is the idea that the case against Diddy is racist. His lawyers argued outright earlier this year that Diddy was “consciously singled out and selectively prosecuted because of his race.”
Unless the judge bars mention of that argument—which prosecutors have asked him to do—that line of thought will likely be brought up during opening arguments.
Will other celebrities be brought up?
Almost definitely. Potential jurors were presented with a list of hundreds of names of people and places that may come up during trial. No context for any of the names was mentioned. They range from comedian Mike Myers to actor Michael B. Jordan, from Kid Cudi to Kanye West. Choreographer Laurieann Gibson was on the list. So were two ex-Danity Kane members, Lauren London, former Bad Boy exec Harve Pierre, D’Angelo, producer Dallas Austin, and Michelle Williams (the Destiny’s Child one, not the Dawson’s Creek one).
Again, the reason for a person’s inclusion on this list was not given. Additionally, inclusion on the list is not a guarantee that their name will be mentioned during the trial, simply that it might be — important to know for a potential juror who may be a friend, relative, or co-worker.
