USA Diddy Declines to Testify as Defense Rests Without Witnesses in Sex-Trafficking Trial

[Social Media]

 

Diddy Declines to Testify as Defense Rests Without Witnesses in Explosive Sex-Trafficking Trial

 

Sean “Diddy” Combs will not testify in his own defense during his high-stakes federal sex-trafficking trial in Manhattan — a dramatic shift in strategy revealed by his legal team on Monday. In a surprise move, Combs’ attorneys also announced they will not call any witnesses at all, opting instead to rely on existing evidence that has already been admitted into the trial record.

 

The revelation came from Combs’ lead attorney, Marc Agnifilo, who told the judge the defense would present jurors with materials the prosecution has already agreed to. The decision reverses earlier plans to bring in at least three witnesses, including two Combs Enterprises employees and a psychological expert. More notably, it confirms that the 55-year-old music mogul — once a towering figure in hip-hop — will not testify on his own behalf, unlike in a 2001 trial where he famously took the stand and was later acquitted.

 

The burden of proof remains entirely on federal prosecutors, and the jury will be reminded by Judge Arun Subramanian that Combs’ choice not to testify or call witnesses cannot legally be held against him. That instruction is expected before deliberations, which could begin by the end of this week.

 

Over the past six weeks, prosecutors have laid out a damning portrait of Combs, calling more than 30 witnesses — including three women who alleged they were beaten, raped, or forced into “freak-offs” orchestrated by Combs himself. According to their testimony, these sessions involved Combs allegedly compelling women to have sex with male prostitutes while he watched, masturbated, and recorded the encounters.

 

On Monday, jurors were shown graphic footage of these events — videos previously ruled too explicit for public release — including “hotel night” recordings involving a woman identified only as “Jane,” one of the three primary accusers. These clips were presented while Homeland Security special agent Joseph Cerciello, the prosecution’s final witness, was on the stand. Cerciello is expected to finish testifying by Tuesday morning.

 

The trial is now racing toward its conclusion, with closing arguments scheduled for Thursday. Each side is expected to have at least four hours to present their final cases.

 

Combs is facing life in prison if convicted on multiple charges including sex trafficking, racketeering, and prostitution-related crimes. He has pleaded not guilty. Prosecutors allege that for more than a decade, Combs weaponized his wealth, fame, and employees to support an empire of abuse,

criminality, and control.

 

These accusations include everything from ordering the firebombing of rapper Kid Cudi’s Porsche to organizing cross-country drug smuggling by his staff. According to prosecutors, Combs had his assistants stockpile hotel rooms with cash, drugs, baby oil, and lubricant for drug-fueled sexual sessions with women he allegedly coerced.

 

Combs has consistently maintained that the women involved were his romantic partners and that all encounters were consensual.

 

His decision not to testify stands in sharp contrast to his 2001 state court trial, when he faced charges related to a nightclub shooting. At the time, Combs took the stand to argue self-defense, telling jurors, “I thought I was being shot at.” He was acquitted of all charges after 22 hours of jury deliberation, though his co-defendant was convicted of assault for shooting two bystanders.

 

This time, Combs is remaining silent — and leaving his fate in the hands of his legal team, the evidence already submitted, and ultimately, the jury.

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from NYP  2025-06-25

 

 

[Card]

Guilty as charged the.

[KhunLA]

Haven't followed it at all, but just now read a couple statements, and can't see him being convicted, as they seemed quite willing to participate.  That part anyway, as don't know or care what the actual charges are.

[pacovl46]

So he's "pleading the 5th" because testifying would open him up to cross examination and he doesn't want that because then he'd actually have to plead the 5th. Obviously a shady move on his part. 

[mogandave]

He walks 

 

 

[KhunLA]

1 hour ago, pacovl46 said:

So he's "pleading the 5th" because testifying would open him up to cross examination and he doesn't want that because then he'd actually have to plead the 5th. Obviously a shady move on his part. 

Defendant would only take the stand, if he/she and or lawyers thought they were going to lose.   Obviously that's not the case.

[TheFishman1]

I think guilty is charged

[Yellowtail]

I think he gets convicted on the "transportation to engage in prostitution" charges and walks on racketeering conspiracy and sex trafficking. 

 

 

[BangkokReady]

7 hours ago, KhunLA said:

Haven't followed it at all, but just now read a couple statements, and can't see him being convicted, as they seemed quite willing to participate.  That part anyway, as don't know or care what the actual charges are.

 

Yeah, it's got a real, "I was OK with it at the time, as I felt like I was getting something from [insert rich/famous/powerful person], but now that I'm not getting anything, I suddenly want to say that it was criminal" feel to it.  As these things so often seem to have.

[Chomper Higgot]

25 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

 

Yeah, it's got a real, "I was OK with it at the time, as I felt like I was getting something from [insert rich/famous/powerful person], but now that I'm not getting anything, I suddenly want to say that it was criminal" feel to it.  As these things so often seem to have.

You mean the victim blaming kind of feel?

[KhunLA]

1 hour ago, BangkokReady said:

 

Yeah, it's got a real, "I was OK with it at the time, as I felt like I was getting something from [insert rich/famous/powerful person], but now that I'm not getting anything, I suddenly want to say that it was criminal" feel to it.  As these things so often seem to have.

The gals didn't seem to be forced to do anything, and quite the opposite, according to text msgs presented.    As far as pimping, prostitution, crossing state lines or what ever, yea, he may be in a bit of trouble for that.  Again, haven't a clue what charged with.

 

Only read this news blip, shows consensual sex of the 2 gals, that are now crying the blues 

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/sean-diddy-combs-trial-the-prosecution-and-defense-rest-combs-confirms-decision-not-to-testify-183306526.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAEEV2LNXAhDT28hZbZBCSvHjisZtYa29cO8pUfkoGI2XCozV9bDBjcWwaJqPRAD61rqUT7veWHefD-98aM1Ly5BR52sW0lrjMbGMjvDhWpUfc46gFpO2ZxNB10BSg5eeuEFHC92hPtQ7gciviqbi70AkLbFe_Z6Qh48pu39Yp_Sk

 

[BangkokReady]

40 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You mean the victim blaming kind of feel?

 

That's not even slightly what I said. 

 

Gee, I have no idea why you would completely lie about what I said just because you don't like it.  Oh wait, yes I do!  🤦‍♂️

[KhunLA]

4 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

 

That's not even slightly what I said. 

 

Gee, I have no idea why you would completely lie about what I said just because you don't like it.  Oh wait, yes I do!  🤦‍♂️

Victim blaming ... 

 

There are no victims, just hookers & customers.   The business end is illegal, but not seeing any victims.  High profile case, so he'll do a long stretch, but doubt if any conviction concerning forced sex or related charges.  

[RayC]

4 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

I think he gets convicted on the "transportation to engage in prostitution" charges and walks on racketeering conspiracy and sex trafficking. 

 

 

 

I don't understand the US legal system so would be grateful for some clarification.

 

What's the difference between "transportation to engage in prostitution" and sex trafficking? (My interpretation would be that the former is contained within the latter) Also how is it racketeering? Wouldn't that mean that Combs would have to have benefitted financially (directly or indirectly)?

[KhunLA]

4 hours ago, RayC said:

 

I don't understand the US legal system so would be grateful for some clarification.

 

What's the difference between "transportation to engage in prostitution" and sex trafficking? (My interpretation would be that the former is contained within the latter) Also how is it racketeering? Wouldn't that mean that Combs would have to have benefitted financially (directly or indirectly)?

https://www.burnhamgorokhov.com/federal-criminal-defense-for-sex-trafficking-racketeering-conspiracy-and-transportation-for-prostitution/

 

https://versustexas.com/blog/what-did-diddy-do/