By The General Justice Lawyer, June 27
New York, USA — In a forceful and meticulously constructed rebuttal, Assistant U.S. Attorney Maurene Comey dismantled the defense’s narrative in Sean “Diddy” Combs’ federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial. After defense attorney Marc Agnifilo urged jurors to see Combs as misunderstood and unjustly targeted, Comey offered a stark counter: the abuse was real, the coercion undeniable, and the defense’s arguments irrelevant in the face of the law.
Comey began by addressing the core of the defense’s strategy that the accusers were motivated by fame, money, or bitterness. She challenged this claim by reminding the jury that women like Cassie Ventura and “Mia” had already settled lawsuits or asked to testify anonymously, undermining the notion that they were seeking attention.
Ventura, Comey noted, secured a $30 million settlement before she ever took the stand, and Mia testified under a pseudonym with no prospect of financial gain. “You know why she came here. She told you why: Because she felt like it was the right thing to do,” Comey said.
The prosecutor emphasized that “Jane,” who testified under a pseudonym, was still financially dependent on Combs at the time of her testimony, he was paying her rent and legal fees. “Jane does have a financial incentive,” Comey argued, “but it’s to lie in favor of the defendant.”
Comey tackled the legal standard for sex trafficking head-on. The jury doesn’t need to find that every “Freak Off” or “hotel night” was criminal.
Just one incident involving force, fraud, or coercion would be enough to convict. She painted a vivid picture of what those nights entailed: drug-fueled sexual performances, women in pain and fear, wearing 8-inch heels for hours, dealing with untreated infections, and enduring repeated acts of violence.
“These are not beautiful evenings,” she said. “They are the same things over and over set up for one man’s pleasure.”
Addressing the June 2024 altercation between Combs and Jane, Comey called it the clearest instance of trafficking. She acknowledged the defense’s claim that Jane instigated the fight, but firmly rejected the implication that it justified Combs’ response.
“He finished it—with a vengeance,” Comey said. “And he made her pay by making her perform with Anton.”
Comey then shifted to the enterprise charge, reminding jurors that even a legal company can be part of an illegal enterprise if it furthers criminal activity.
She pointed out that Combs’ employees were not simply loyal workers; they were tools used to exert control. Kristina Khorram and D-Roc, she said, “played both sides” to help keep women like Ventura within Combs’ sphere of influence.
On the matter of transporting individuals for prostitution, Comey was blunt.
“Common sense alone shows you that when the defendant flew those escorts out, it was not for their scintillating conversation. It was for sex.”
Finally, she delivered the prosecution’s last words before deliberations.
“The defendant is not a god. He is a person. And in this courtroom, he stands equal before the law. Overwhelming evidence proves his guilt. It is time to hold him accountable. Find him guilty.”
With that, the prosecution rested, leaving the fate of Sean Combs in the hands of the jury.
Author
Latest entries
US2025-07-19Madeline Soto Murder — Will He Plead Guilty ? All Eyes on Stephan Sterns Ahead of Monday’s Hearing
US2025-07-19Tragedy on Crawford Pond: 17 YO Teen Arrested in Brutal Killing of Sunshine Stewart
한글 기사2025-07-19권력 설계도: 구윤철 후보자의 경제 비전과 법적 과제
South Korea2025-07-19Blueprint for Power: Koo Yoon Chul’s Economic Vision Under Legal Scrutiny
