Sean “Diddy” Combs Denied New Trial Before Sentencing

Sean “Diddy” Combs has suffered another legal setback in his long-running federal case. Just days before his sentencing hearing, a federal judge denied his request for both an acquittal and a new trial, ruling that the jury’s conviction on prostitution-related charges was well supported by the evidence.

Judge Cites “Overwhelming Evidence”

On September 30, U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian issued a written decision rejecting the defense’s motion. In his ruling, Subramanian emphasized that prosecutors had presented “overwhelming evidence of Combs’ guilt” under the Mann Act, which prohibits transporting individuals across state lines for prostitution.

The evidence, the judge noted, included detailed testimony from two women—singer Cassie Ventura and another witness identified only as “Jane”—as well as corroborating accounts from escorts and digital records such as text messages and emails.

“The government proved its case many times over,” Subramanian wrote, underscoring the credibility of the testimony and the breadth of supporting evidence.

Charges and Convictions

Combs, 55, was acquitted earlier this year of the most serious allegations in the case, including sex trafficking and racketeering. However, in July, a jury found him guilty on two counts of transporting individuals for prostitution. Each charge carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison.

Prosecutors have asked that Combs serve 11 years in total, arguing that the conduct involved in the crimes—though not rising to the level of the acquitted charges—was violent and coercive. “The defendant will not be punished for any crimes of which he was acquitted,” the government wrote in its September 30 filing, “but punishment for his crimes of conviction must take into account the manner in which he committed them.”

Federal sentencing guidelines allow judges discretion, but the request highlights the seriousness with which the prosecution continues to view the case.

Testimony From Cassie Ventura

A central figure in the trial was Ventura, who dated Combs on and off for more than a decade. She described being coerced into participating in multi-day “freak offs” that involved sex workers and illicit substances.

According to her testimony, Combs often filmed the encounters and used them as leverage. “He would mention them when he was upset about something. It was just a pretty common thing,” Ventura told jurors. “I feared for my career. I feared for my family. Just embarrassing, all of it. It’s horrible and disgusting. No one should do that to anyone.”

Ventura also said Combs controlled every part of her life, from her career decisions to her personal relationships. “Whether it was career, sex, everything—I didn’t have much of a say,” she testified. “I was super young. I didn’t know if he would be upset enough to be violent or not want to be with me at all… It was always in the back of my mind that I would somehow be hurt by him.”

Her testimony was bolstered by Jane, who told a similar story of coercion and control.

The Trial and Broader Allegations

The seven-week trial laid bare the extensive network of staff and resources Combs allegedly used to facilitate his conduct. Prosecutors argued that employees were enlisted to secure venues, substances, and escorts, allowing Combs to orchestrate elaborate gatherings across the country.

While the jury did not convict him on the sex trafficking charges, the guilty verdicts on the Mann Act counts affirmed the government’s argument that Combs had repeatedly transported women for illegal purposes.

What Comes Next

Combs’ sentencing is scheduled for October 3. The outcome will determine how long the Bad Boy Records founder spends behind bars. His attorneys had argued that the convictions should be overturned due to insufficient evidence, but Judge Subramanian’s ruling makes clear that the court views the jury’s verdict as well supported.

For Combs, once celebrated as one of the most influential figures in music and business, the ruling marks another dramatic turn in a legal battle that has already reshaped his legacy.

As he prepares to learn his fate, the case remains a high-profile reminder of the growing scrutiny on powerful figures accused of exploiting their positions for personal gain.