The trial of hip hop mogul Sean “Diddy” Combs is entering its third week of testimony this week with prosecutors from the Southern District of New York well into presenting their case about alleged sex trafficking and racketeering. Combs was arrested by federal agents in September 2024 on charges that for over two decades he abused, threatened, and coerced women into sex, and led a racketeering conspiracy that engaged in a whole host of crimes: sex trafficking, forced labor, kidnapping, arson, witness tampering, and bribery. In simpler terms, Combs is accused of being a serial abuser who orchestrated “drug-fueled coercive sex marathons” (what he called “freak-offs”) with male prostitutes (the sex trafficking—that is, “the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, obtaining, patronizing, or soliciting of a person for the purpose of a commercial sex act”) through physical violence and threats about the women’s careers and reputation (force, fraud, or coercion). Prosecutors allege that Combs used his business empire’s employees and resources to help make all of this happen by setting up hotel rooms, procuring drugs, arranging for male prostitutes, and managing the aftermath of his violent outbursts through cover-ups (the enterprise and obstruction crimes). 

For its part, the defense made their strategy clear from opening statements, acknowledging some of the most shocking allegations about Combs’ violent conduct. However, the defense argues, his misconduct toward the main victim-witness (the indictment alleges sex trafficking as to three victims; victim 2 is expected to testify in the coming days, but prosecutors have reportedly said “victim-3” will not be testifying), Casandra “Cassie” Ventura, was only domestic violence and not sex trafficking—as if the two are mutually exclusive. The defense conceded during opening statements that the violence on display was “indefensible,” “horrible,” and “dehumanizing,” ​​but then argued that—violence notwithstanding—Combs never coerced Ventura to engage in their freak-offs. Under this theory, which some commentators have credited, Combs didn’t specifically threaten or use violence to compel Ventura into the sex acts and so, while he may be a bad guy, he isn’t guilty of the crimes charged. 

That theory won’t work. First, the government’s evidence specifically contradicts it. The physical beatings are at this point almost indisputable—there is, for example, the infamous video admitted into evidence on day 1 (and played numerous times) of Combs viciously beating Ventura in the elevator lobby of the InterContinental Hotel in 2016. Does it link to the sexual activity at the heart of the sex trafficking? Well, Ventura testified that it happened as a result of her trying to leave a “freak-off.” She has been corroborated on this point by the testimony of Israel Flores, the hotel security guard who witnessed and interrupted this beating, who testified that Combs told Ventura, “You’re not leaving,” and that there was another man in the hotel room she had just fled. If the jury believes this testimony, it would be direct proof that Combs did, in fact, use violence and coercion to  force Ventura to participate in sex acts against her will and would go a long way to proving that part of the case (namely, the coercion and force part of the sex trafficking charges).

Another example of the direct link between Combs’ coercion and the sex trafficking came from Ventura’s testimony that Combs kicked her off a boat they were staying on to attend the Cannes Film Festival in 2013. She left the boat barefoot without any of her belongings, and later that night at an event he painfully pressed her beaded dress onto her bare skin. When they flew back to the United States, she had her seat reassigned to avoid him, but he worked his way into the seat next to her and then played “freak-off” videos she thought he had deleted and told her that he would release the videos to further humiliate her. That Ventura lived under fear of these videos being released was corroborated by, amongst others, her mother. When they landed after the plane incident, Combs told Ventura he wanted another freak-off and, unsurprisingly, she acquiesced. If jurors credit Ventura on this point, they could reasonably conclude she did so because she understood Combs’ message: Do what I want or face serious harm—physical and otherwise.