A juror in the Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs case has hit back at the “insulting” public response to the verdict. The high-profile case has divided public opinion and sparked widespread debate across social media platforms.
The 55-year-old rapper was found guilty of two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution relating to ex-girlfriend Cassie Ventura and a woman who testified under the name ‘Jane’ but was acquitted on the more serious charges of sex trafficking and racketeering and a jury member has denied claims that Diddy’s celebrity status influenced their decision. The mixed verdict reflects the complexity of the case and the strength of evidence presented for different charges.
“We spent over two days deliberating. Our decision was based solely on the evidence presented and how the law is stated,” the unnamed juror told ABC News. “We would have treated any defendant in the same manner regardless of who they are. I have nothing else to say.” Celebrity trials often face scrutiny regarding potential jury bias, with studies showing that fame can influence legal proceedings in unpredictable ways.
“This is a reminder to everyone I hope of the flaws in the criminal justice system and for everybody to take a second look when the government charges people with crimes,” Diddy’s attorney Anna Estevao described Wednesday’s (02.07.25) verdict as a “huge win” for the I’ll Be Missing You hitmaker as he avoided the possibility of life in prison, although he was denied bail by US District Judge Arun Subramanian. She said outside the courtroom in Manhattan. The Manhattan federal courthouse has been the venue for numerous high-profile celebrity cases over the years.
“This is a huge win. He was acquitted of sex trafficking, acquitted of RICO conspiracy and he will sleep well at night knowing that,” she continued. RICO charges, originally designed to combat organized crime, carry severe penalties and have been increasingly used in celebrity cases involving alleged criminal enterprises.
Diddy – who has been in custody in Brooklyn since his arrest last September – was convinced of flying people around the US to engage in sexual encounters and Judge Subramanian denied bail as he noted the prosecution’s argument that a Mann Act violation means the detention is “mandatory”. The Brooklyn Metropolitan Detention Center, where Diddy has been held, houses federal inmates and has faced criticism for its conditions.
The original 1919 law prohibited interstate or foreign commerce transport of a woman or girl “or prostitution, debauchery or for any other immoral purpose”. The Mann Act was initially known as the White Slave Traffic Act and was created during the Progressive Era to combat perceived moral decay.
In 1986, the law was made gender-neutral, and the wording altered to change “debauchery” and “immoral purpose” to “any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offence”. This modernization reflected changing social attitudes and legal understanding of gender equality in criminal law.
“For present purposes, the defendant is unable to meet his burden” to show “lack of danger to any person or the community” with clear and convincing evidence, Judge Subramanian said. Federal bail decisions require defendants to prove they pose no flight risk or danger to the community.
“Prior to the trial, the court denied bail, and sees no reason to reverse that now,” he added. Diddy’s substantial wealth was considered a significant flight risk factor during bail considerations throughout the proceedings.
Diddy could now face a combined sentence of up to 20 years in federal prison, with Judge Subramanian scheduling a sentencing hearing for October 3. Federal sentencing guidelines will consider factors including criminal history, cooperation with authorities, and the specific circumstances of the crimes. The case represents a significant moment in the ongoing conversation about accountability in the entertainment industry, particularly regarding powerful figures who have long operated without scrutiny.
