Whelp, Sean “Diddy” Combs has been dealt another major legal blow after Judge Arun Subramanian denied his request for a new trial or an acquittal ahead of sentencing. The decision, issued Tuesday, September 30, dismissed arguments from Combs’ legal team that his convictions violated constitutional rights.
His lawyers, which TBH are an all star team, claimed prosecutors had persuaded jurors to convict solely because Combs arranged for women or paid escorts to cross state lines for sex. They argued that such encounters, including the infamous “freak-off” gatherings, should be considered protected under the First Amendment, comparing them to consensual voyeurism rather than prostitution.
Get this, Judge Subramanian strongly rejected that line of defense. In his written opinion, he acknowledged that film can be a protected medium but drew a clear boundary. “At some point, otherwise illegal conduct is not made legal simply because it is filmed,” he wrote. He added that viewing pornographic performances cannot be used to shield criminal activity, stressing that the evidence showed Combs’ actions went far beyond any protected activity.
The firm ruling cited testimony from Cassie Ventura, additional Jane Doe witnesses, escorts involved in the incidents, as well as digital evidence including texts and emails. The judge noted that prosecutors had presented “overwhelming evidence” of Combs’ violations under the Mann Act. He also highlighted testimony indicating Combs often filmed without consent and for his immediate gratification, underscoring the criminal nature of his conduct.
With sentencing scheduled for October 3, like in two days, Combs now faces the reality of federal prison time without the possibility of a retrial to lessen or overturn his conviction.